diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:00:35 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:00:35 -0700 |
| commit | eefa794fb5b589c8cf59f3c11fc3d328bc96bdc3 (patch) | |
| tree | ae212733588b0c897665492ab1b21ebca503448f /19612-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '19612-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 19612-h/19612-h.htm | 17383 |
1 files changed, 17383 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/19612-h/19612-h.htm b/19612-h/19612-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7c851fc --- /dev/null +++ b/19612-h/19612-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,17383 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> +<head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" /> + + <title>Harnack's History of Dogma, Vol. I.</title> + + <style type="text/css"> + <!-- + body {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + p {text-align: justify;} + blockquote {text-align: justify;} + h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {text-align: center;} + + hr {text-align: center; width: 50%;} + html>body hr {margin-right: 25%; margin-left: 25%; width: 50%;} + hr.full {width: 100%;} + html>body hr.full {margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 0%; width: 100%;} + hr.short {text-align: center; width: 20%;} + html>body hr.short {margin-right: 40%; margin-left: 40%; width: 20%;} + + .note, .footnote + {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + + span.pagenum + {position: absolute; left: 1%; right: 91%; font-size: 8pt;} + + --> + </style> +</head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +Project Gutenberg's History of Dogma, Volume 1 (of 7), by Adolph Harnack + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: History of Dogma, Volume 1 (of 7) + +Author: Adolph Harnack + +Translator: Neil Buchanan + +Release Date: October 24, 2006 [EBook #19612] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF DOGMA, VOLUME 1 (OF 7) *** + + + + +Produced by Dave Maddock, David King, and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + +</pre> + + <hr class="full" /> + +<h2>THEOLOGICAL TRANSLATION LIBRARY</h2> + +<h2>EDITED BY THE REV. T. K. CHEYNE MA DD, ORIET PROFESSOR +OF INTERPRETATION OXFORD AND THE REV. A. B. BRUCE, DD +PROFESSOR OF APOLOGETICS AND NEW TESTAMENT: EXEGESIS, FREE CHURCH +COLLEGE GLASGOW</h2> + + +<h2>VOL II</h2> +<h1>HARNACKS HISTORY OF DOGMA. VOL. I</h1> + +<center>Το δογματος ονομα της ανθρωπινης εχεται βουλης +τε και γνωμης. 'Οτι δε τουθ' 'ουτος εχει, μαρτυρει +μεν 'ικανως 'η δογματικη των ιατρων τεχνη, +μαρτυρει δε και τα των φιλοσοφων καλουμενα +δογματα. 'Οτι δε και τα συνκλητο δοξαντα +ετι και νυν δογματα συνκλητου λεγεται, ουδενα +αγνοειν οιμαι. +</center> +<center>MARCELLUS OF ANCYRA.</center> + + +<center>Die Christliche Religion hat nichts in der Philosophie +zu thun, Sie ist ein machtiges Wesen für sich, woran +die gesunkene und leidende Menschheit von Zeit zu +Zeit sich immer wieder emporgearbeitet hat, und +indem man ihr diese Wirkung zugesteht, ist sie über +aller Philosophie erhaben und bedarf von ihr keine +Stütze.</center> + +<center>Gesprache mit GOETHE von ECKERMANN,</center> +<center>2 Th p 39.</center> + + + +<h1>HISTORY OF DOGMA</h1> + +<h3>BY</h3> + +<h2>DR. ADOLPH HARNACK</h2> + +<h3>ORDINARY PROF. OF CHURCH HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY, AND FELLOW OF +THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, BERLIN</h3> + +<h3><i>TRANSLATED FROM THE THIRD GERMAN +EDITION</i></h3> + +<h3>BY</h3> + +<h2>NEIL BUCHANAN</h2> + +<h2>VOL. I.</h2> + + +<center>BOSTON<br/> +LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY<br/> +1901</center> + + + + +<h2>VORWORT ZUR ENGLISCHEN AUSGABE.</h2> + +<p>Ein theologisches Buch erhält erst dadurch einen Platz in +der Weltlitteratur, dass es Deutsch und Englisch gelesen werden +kann. Diese beiden Sprachen zusammen haben auf dem +Gebiete der Wissenschaft vom Christenthum das Lateinische +abgelöst. Es ist mir daher eine grosse Freude, dass mein Lehrbuch +der Dogmengeschichte in das Englische übersetzt worden +ist, und ich sage dem Uebersetzer sowie den Verlegern meinen +besten Dank.</p> + +<p>Der schwierigste Theil der Dogmengeschichte ist ihr Anfang, +nicht nur weil in dem Anfang die Keime für alle späteren Entwickelungen +liegen, und daher ein Beobachtungsfehler beim +Beginn die Richtigkeit der ganzen folgenden Darstellung bedroht, +sondern auch desshalb, weil die Auswahl des wichtigsten Stoffs +aus der Geschichte des Urchristenthums und der biblischen +Theologie ein schweres Problem ist. Der Eine wird finden, dass +ich zu viel in das Buch aufgenommen habe, und der Andere +zu wenig—vielleicht haben Beide recht; ich kann dagegen nur +anführen, dass sich mir die getroffene Auswahl nach wiederholtem +Nachdenken und Experimentiren auf's Neue erprobt hat.</p> + +<p>Wer ein theologisches Buch aufschlägt, fragt gewöhnlich zuerst +nach dem "Standpunkt" des Verfassers. Bei geschichtlichen +Darstellungen sollte man so nicht fragen. Hier handelt +es sich darum, ob der Verfasser einen Sinn hat für den Gegenstand +den er darstellt, ob er Originales und Abgeleitetes zu +unterscheiden versteht, ob er seinen Stoff volkommen kennt, +ob er sich der Grenzen des geschichtlichen Wissens bewusst +ist, und ob er wahrhaftig ist. Diese Forderungen enthalten den +kategorischen Imperativ für den Historiker; aber nur indem +man rastlos an sich selber arbeitet, sind sie zu erfullen,—so +ist jede geschichtliche Darstellung eine ethische Aufgabe. Der +Historiker soll in jedem Sinn <i>treu</i> sein: ob er das gewesen ist, +darnach soll mann fragen.</p> + +<p><i>Berlin</i>, am 1. Mai, 1894.</p> + +<p>ADOLF HARNACK.</p> + + + + +<h2>THE AUTHOR'S +PREFACE TO THE ENGLISH EDITION.</h2> + + +<p>No theological book can obtain a place in the literature of +the world unless it can be read both in German and in English. +These two languages combined have taken the place of Latin +in the sphere of Christian Science. I am therefore greatly +pleased to learn that my "History of Dogma" has been translated +into English, and I offer my warmest thanks both to the +translator and to the publishers.</p> + +<p>The most difficult part of the history of dogma is the beginning, +not only because it contains the germs of all later +developments, and therefore an error in observation here endangers +the correctness of the whole following account, but also because +the selection of the most important material from the history +of primitive Christianity and biblical theology is a hard problem. +Some will think that I have admitted too much into the book, +others too little. Perhaps both are right. I can only reply that +after repeated consideration and experiment I continue to be +satisfied with my selection.</p> + +<p>In taking up a theological book we are in the habit of enquiring +first of all as to the "stand-point" of the Author. In +a historical work there is no room for such enquiry. The +question here is, whether the Author is in sympathy with the +subject about which he writes, whether he can distinguish +original elements from those that are derived, whether he has +a thorough acquaintance with his material, whether he is conscious +of the limits of historical knowledge, and whether he is +truthful. These requirements constitute the categorical imperative +for the historian: but they can only be fulfilled by an +unwearied self-discipline. Hence every historical study is an +ethical task. The historian ought to be faithful in every sense +of the word; whether he has been so or not is the question +on which his readers have to decide.</p> + +<p><i>Berlin</i>, 1st May, 1894.</p> + +<p>ADOLF HARNACK.</p> + + + + +<h2>FROM THE +AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.</h2> + + +<p>The task of describing the genesis of ecclesiastical dogma +which I have attempted to perform in the following pages, +has hitherto been proposed by very few scholars, and, properly +speaking, undertaken by one only. I must therefore crave the +indulgence of those acquainted with the subject for an attempt +which no future historian of dogma can avoid.</p> + +<p>At first I meant to confine myself to narrower limits, but +I was unable to carry out that intention, because the new +arrangement of the material required a more detailed justification. +Yet no one will find in the book, which presupposes +the knowledge of Church history so far as it is given in the +ordinary manuals, any repertory of the theological thought of +Christian antiquity. The diversity of Christian ideas, or of ideas +closely related to Christianity, was very great in the first centuries. +For that very reason a selection was necessary; but +it was required, above all, by the aim of the work. The history +of dogma has to give an account, only of those doctrines of +Christian writers which were authoritative in wide circles, or +which furthered the advance of the development; otherwise +it would become a collection of monographs, and thereby lose +its proper value. I have endeavoured to subordinate everything +to the aim of exhibiting the development which led to +the ecclesiastical dogmas, and therefore have neither, for example, +communicated the details of the gnostic systems, nor brought +forward in detail the theological ideas of Clemens Romanus, +Ignatius, etc. Even a history of Paulinism will be sought for +in the book in vain. It is a task by itself, to trace the aftereffects +of the theology of Paul in the post-Apostolic age. The +History of Dogma can only furnish fragments here; for it is +not consistent with its task to give an accurate account of the +history of a theology the effects of which were at first very +limited. It is certainly no easy matter to determine what was +authoritative in wide circles at the time when dogma was first +being developed, and I may confess that I have found the +working out of the third chapter of the first book very difficult. +But I hope that the severe limitation in the material +will be of service to the subject. If the result of this limitation +should be to lead students to read connectedly the manual +which has grown out of my lectures, my highest wish will be +gratified.</p> + +<p>There can be no great objection to the appearance of a +text-book on the history of dogma at the present time. We +now know in what direction we have to work; but we still +want a history of Christian theological ideas in their relation +to contemporary philosophy. Above all, we have not got an +exact knowledge of the Hellenistic philosophical terminologies +in their development up to the fourth century. I have keenly +felt this want, which can only be remedied by well-directed +common labour. I have made a plentiful use of the controversial +treatise of Celsus against Christianity, of which little +use has hitherto been made for the history of dogma. On +the other hand, except in a few cases, I have deemed it inadmissible +to adduce parallel passages, easy to be got, from +Philo, Seneca, Plutarch, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, Porphyry, +etc.; for only a comparison strictly carried out would have +been of value here. I have been able neither to borrow such +from others, nor to furnish it myself. Yet I have ventured +to submit my work, because, in my opinion, it is possible to +prove the dependence of dogma on the Greek spirit, without +being compelled to enter into a discussion of all the details.</p> + +<p>The Publishers of the Encyclopædia Britannica have allowed +me to print here, in a form but slightly altered, the articles +on Neoplatonism and Manichæism which I wrote for their +work, and for this I beg to thank them.</p> + +<p>It is now eighty-three years since my grandfather, Gustav +Ewers, edited in German the excellent manual on the earliest +history of dogma by Münter, and thereby got his name associated +with the history of the founding of the new study. May +the work of the grandson be found not unworthy of the clear +and disciplined mind which presided over the beginnings of +the young science.</p> + +<p><i>Giessen</i>, 1st August, 1885.</p> + + + + +<h2>AUTHOR'S +PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.</h2> + + +<p>In the two years that have passed since the appearance of +the first edition I have steadily kept in view the improvement of +this work, and have endeavoured to learn from the reviews +of it that have appeared. I owe most to the study of Weizsäcker's +work, on the Apostolic Age, and his notice of the first +edition of this volume in the Göttinger gelehrte Anzeigen, +1886, No. 21. The latter, in several decisive passages concerning +the general conception, drew my attention to the fact +that I had emphasised certain points too strongly, but had +not given due prominence to others of equal importance, while +not entirely overlooking them. I have convinced myself that +these hints were, almost throughout, well founded, and have +taken pains to meet them in the new edition. I have also +learned from Heinrici's commentary on the Second Epistle to +the Corinthians, and from Bigg's "Lectures on the Christian +Platonists of Alexandria." Apart from these works there has +appeared very little that could be of significance for my historical +account; but I have once more independently considered +the main problems, and in some cases, after repeated reading +of the sources, checked my statements, removed mistakes and +explained what had been too briefly stated. Thus, in particular, +Chapter II. §§ 1-3 of the "Presuppositions", also the Third +Chapter of the First Book (especially Section 6), also in the +Second Book, Chapter I. and Chapter II. (under B), the Third +Chapter (Supplement 3 and excursus on "Catholic and Romish"), +the Fifth Chapter (under 1 and 3) and the Sixth Chapter (under +2) have been subjected to changes and greater additions. +Finally, a new excursus has been added on the various modes +of conceiving pre-existence, and in other respects many things +have been improved in detail. The size of the book has thereby +been increased by about fifty pages. As I have been misrepresented +by some as one who knew not how to appreciate the +uniqueness of the Gospel history and the evangelic faith, while +others have conversely reproached me with making the history +of dogma proceed from an "apostasy" from the Gospel to +Hellenism, I have taken pains to state my opinions on both +these points as clearly as possible. In doing so I have only +wrought out the hints which were given in the first edition, +and which, as I supposed, were sufficient for readers. But it +is surely a reasonable desire when I request the critics in +reading the paragraphs which treat of the "Presuppositions", +not to forget how difficult the questions there dealt with are, +both in themselves and from the nature of the sources, and +how exposed to criticism the historian is who attempts to +unfold his position towards them in a few pages. As is self-evident, +the centre of gravity of the book lies in that which +forms its subject proper, in the account of the origin of dogma +within the Græco-Roman empire. But one should not on that +account, as many have done, pass over the beginning which +lies before the beginning, or arbitrarily adopt a starting-point +of his own; for everything here depends on where and how +one begins. I have not therefore been able to follow the well-meant +counsel to simply strike out the "Presuppositions."</p> + +<p>I would gladly have responded to another advice to work +up the notes into the text; but I would then have been +compelled to double the size of some chapters. The form of +this book, in many respects awkward, may continue as it is +so long as it represents the difficulties by which the subject +is still pressed. When they have been removed—and the +smallest number of them lie in the subject matter—I will +gladly break up this form of the book and try to give it +another shape. For the friendly reception given to it I have +to offer my heartiest thanks. But against those who, believing +themselves in possession of a richer view of the history here +related, have called my conception meagre, I appeal to the +beautiful words of Tertullian; "Malumus in scripturis minus, +si forte, sapere quam contra."</p> + +<p><i>Marburg</i>, 24th December, 1887.</p> + + + + +<h2>AUTHOR'S +PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.</h2> + + +<p>In the six years that have passed since the appearance of +the second edition I have continued to work at the book, and +have made use of the new sources and investigations that have +appeared during this period, as well as corrected and extended +my account in many passages. Yet I have not found it necessary +to make many changes in the second half of the +work. The increase of about sixty pages is almost entirely in +the first half.</p> + +<p><i>Berlin</i>, 31st December, 1893</p> + + + + +<h2>CONTENTS</h2> + + +<p>INTRODUCTORY DIVISION.</p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_0_I">CHAPTER I.—PROLEGOMENA TO THE STUDY OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I">§ 1. The Idea and Task of the History of Dogma</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I_DEF">Definition</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I_LIMITS">Limits and Divisions</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I_DOGMA">Dogma and Theology</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I_FACTORS">Factors in the formation of Dogma</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_I_CONCEPTION">Explanation as to the conception and +task of the History of Dogma</a></p> + + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II">§ 2. History of the History of Dogma</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II_EARLY">The Early, the Mediæval, and the Roman Catholic Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II_REFORMERS">The Reformers and the 17<sup>th</sup> Century</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II_MOSHEIM">Mosheim, Walch, Ernesti</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II_LESSING">Lessing, Semler, Lange, Münscher, Baumgarten-Crusius, Meier</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_I_II_BAUR">Baur, Neander, Kliefoth, Thomasius, +Nitzsch, Ritschl, Renan, Loofs</a></p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_0_II">CHAPTER II.—THE PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE +HISTORY OF DOGMA</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I">§ 1. Introductory</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_GOSPEL">The Gospel and the Old Testament</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_DETACHMENT">The Detachment of the Christians from +the Jewish Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_ROMAN">The Church and the Græco-Roman World</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_SPIRIT">The Greek spirit an element of the Ecclesiastical +Doctrine of Faith</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_ELEMENTS">The Elements connecting Primitive Christianity +and the growing Catholic +Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_I_PRESUPPOSITIONS">The Presuppositions of the origin of +the Apostolic Catholic Doctrine of +Faith</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_II">§ 2. The Gospel of Jesus Christ according to +His own Testimony concerning Himself</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_II_FUNDAMENTAL">Fundamental Features</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_II_DETAILS">Details</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_II_SUPPLEMENTS">Supplements</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_II_LITERATURE">Literature</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III">§ 3. The Common Preaching concerning Jesus +Christ in the first generation of believers.</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_OUTLINE">General Outline</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_FIRST">The faith of the first Disciples</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_BEGINNINGS">The beginnings of Christology</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_WORK">Conceptions of the Work of Jesus</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_BELIEF">Belief in the Resurrection</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_RIGHTEOUSNESS">Righteousness and the Law, Paul</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_CONSCIOUSNESS">The Self-consciousness of being the +Church of God</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_1">Supplement 1. Universalism</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_2">Supplement 2. Questions as to the value +of the Law; the four main +tendencies at the close of the Apostolic +Age</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_3">Supplement 3. The Pauline Theology.</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_4">Supplement 4. The Johannine Writings</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_5">Supplement 5. The Authorities in the Church</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV">§ 4. The current Exposition of the Old Testament +and the Jewish hopes of the future +in their significance for the Earliest types +of Christian preaching</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV_METHODS">The Rabbinical and Exegetical Methods</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV_APOCALYPTIC">The Jewish Apocalyptic literature</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV_MYTHOLOGIES">Mythologies and poetical ideas, notions +of pre-existence and their application +to Messiah</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV_LIMITS">The limits of the explicable</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_IV_LITERATURE">Literature</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_V">§ 5. The Religious Conceptions and the Religious +Philosophy of the Hellenistic Jews +in their significance for the later formulation +of the Gospel</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_V_SPIRITUALISING">Spiritualising and Moralising of the +Jewish Religion</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_V_PHILO">Philo</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_V_PRINCIPLES">The Hermeneutic principles of Philo</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI">§ 6. The religious dispositions of the Greeks +and Romans in the first two centuries, +and the current Græco-Roman philosophy +of religion</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_NEEDS">The new religious needs and the old +worship (Excursus on θεος)</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_ASSOCIATIONS">The System of associations, and the +Empire</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_ACQUISITIONS">Philosophy and its acquisitions</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_PLATONIC">Platonic and Stoic Elements in the +philosophy of religion</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_CULTURE">Greek culture and Roman ideas in the +Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_CYNICS">The Empire and philosophic schools +(the Cynics)</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_VI_LITERATURE">Literature</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY">SUPPLEMENTARY.</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_TWOFOLD">(1) The twofold conception of the blessing of +Salvation in its significance for the following +period</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_OBSCURITY">(2) Obscurity in the origin of the most important +Christian ideas and Ecclesiastical +forms</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_PAULINE">(3) Significance of the Pauline theology for +the legitimising and reformation of the +doctrine of the Church in the following +period</a></p> + +<p><a href="#DIV_I">DIVISION I.—THE GENESIS OF ECCLESIASTICAL +DOGMA, OR THE GENESIS OF THE CATHOLIC +APOSTOLIC DOGMATIC THEOLOGY, AND THE +FIRST SCIENTIFIC ECCLESIASTICAL SYSTEM OF +DOCTRINE.</a></p> + +<p><a href="#BOOK_I">BOOK I. THE PREPARATION.</a></p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_I">CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL SURVEY</a></p> +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_II">CHAPTER II.—THE ELEMENT COMMON TO ALL +CHRISTIANS AND THE BREACH WITH JUDAISM</a></p> +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_III">CHAPTER III. THE COMMON FAITH AND +THE BEGINNINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN GENTILE +CHRISTIANITY AS IT WAS BEING DEVELOPED +INTO CATHOLICISM</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_I">(1) The Communities and the Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_II">(2) The Foundations of the Faith; the Old +Testament, and the traditions about Jesus +(sayings of Jesus, the <i>Kerygma</i> about +Jesus), the significance of the "Apostolic"</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_III">(3) The main articles of Christianity and the +conceptions of salvation. The new law. +Eschatology.</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_IV">(4) The Old Testament as source of the knowledge +of faith</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_V">(5) The knowledge of God and of the world, +estimate of the world (Demons)</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI">(6) Faith in Jesus Christ</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_LORD">Jesus the Lord.</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_CHRIST">Jesus the Christ</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_THEOLOGIA">Jesus the Son of God, the <i>Theologia +Christi</i></a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_ADOPTIAN">The Adoptian and the Pneumatic Christology</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_WORK">Ideas of Christ's work</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VII">(7) The Worship, the sacred actions, and the +organisation of the Churches</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VII_WORSHIP">The Worship and Sacrifice</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VII_BAPTISM">Baptism and the Lord's Supper</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VII_ORGANISATION">The organisation</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VIII">SUPPLEMENTARY.</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VIII_PREMISES">The premises of Catholicism</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VIII_DIVERSITIES">Doctrinal diversities of the Apostolical +Fathers</a></p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_IV">CHAPTER IV.—THE ATTEMPTS OF THE +GNOSTICS TO CREATE AN APOSTOLIC DOGMATIC, +AND A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY; OR THE +ACUTE SECULARISING OF CHRISTIANITY</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_IV_I">(1) The conditions for the rise of Gnosticism.</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_IV_II">(2) The nature of Gnosticism</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_IV_III">(3) History of Gnosticism and the forms in +which it appeared</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_IV_IV">(4) The most important Gnostic doctrines</a></p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_V">CHAPTER V.—THE ATTEMPT OF MARCION +TO SET ASIDE THE OLD TESTAMENT FOUNDATION +OF CHRISTIANITY, TO PURIFY THE TRADITION +AND REFORM CHRISTENDOM ON THE +BASIS OF THE PAULINE GOSPEL</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_0">Characterisation of Marcion's attempt</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_I">(1) His estimate of the Old Testament and the +god of the Jews</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_II">(2) The God of the Gospel</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_III">(3) The relation of the two Gods according +to Marcion</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_IV">(4) The Christology</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_V">(5) Eschatology and Ethics</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_VI">(6) Criticism of the Christian tradition, the +Marcionite Church</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_V_REMARKS">Remarks</a></p> + +<p><a href="#CHAP_I_VI">CHAPTER VI.—THE CHRISTIANITY OF JEWISH +CHRISTIANS, DEFINITION OF THE NOTION JEWISH +CHRISTIANITY</a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_I">(1) General conditions for the development of +Jewish Christianity</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_II">(2) Jewish Christianity and the Catholic Church, +insignificance of Jewish Christianity, +"Judaising" in Catholicism</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_III">Alleged documents of Jewish Christianity +(Apocalypse of John, Acts of the Apostles, +Epistle to the Hebrews, Hegesippus)</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_IV">History of Jewish Christianity</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_V">The witness of Justin</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_VI">The witness of Celsus</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_VII">The Elkesaites and Ebionites of Epiphanius</a></p> +<p><a href="#SEC_I_VI_VIII">Estimate of the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions +and Homilies, their want of significance +for the question as to the genesis +of Catholicism and its doctrine</a></p> + +<p>APPENDICES.</p> + +<p><a href="#APPENDIX_I">I. On the different notions of Pre-existence.</a></p> +<p><a href="#APPENDIX_II">II. On Liturgies and the genesis of Dogma.</a></p> +<p><a href="#APPENDIX_III">III. On Neoplatonism</a></p> + + +<h3>I</h3> + +<h2>PROLEGOMENA TO THE DISCIPLINE OF +THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.</h2> + +<h3>II</h3> + +<h2>THE PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE +HISTORY OF DOGMA.</h2> + +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page1" id="page1"></a>[pg 1]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_0_I" id="CHAP_0_I"></a>CHAPTER I</h2> + +<h3>PROLEGOMENA TO THE DISCIPLINE OF THE HISTORY +OF DOGMA.</h3> + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_I_I" id="SEC_0_I_I"></a>§1. <i>The Idea and Task of the History of Dogma</i>.</h3> + + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_I_DEF" id="SEC_0_I_I_DEF"></a>1. The History of Dogma is a discipline of general Church +History, which has for its object the dogmas of the Church. +These dogmas are the doctrines of the Christian faith logically +formulated and expressed for scientific and apologetic +purposes, the contents of which are a knowledge of God, of the +world, and of the provisions made by God for man's salvation. +The Christian Churches teach them as the truths revealed in +Holy Scripture, the acknowledgment of which is the condition +of the salvation which religion promises. But as the adherents +of the Christian religion had not these dogmas from the beginning, +so far, at least, as they form a connected system, the +business of the history of dogma is, in the first place, to ascertain +the origin of Dogmas (of Dogma), and then secondly, +to describe their development (their variations).</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_I_LIMITS" id="SEC_0_I_I_LIMITS"></a>2. We cannot draw any hard and fast line between the +time of the origin and that of the development of dogma; +they rather shade off into one another. But we shall have to +look for the final point of division at the time when an article +of faith logically formulated and scientifically expressed, +was first raised to the <i>articulus constitutivus ecclesiæ</i>, and +as such was universally enforced by the Church. Now that +first happened when the doctrine of Christ, as the pre-existent +and personal Logos of God, had obtained acceptance +everywhere in the confederated Churches as the revealed and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page2" id="page2"></a>[pg 2]</span> +fundamental doctrine of faith, that is, about the end of the +third century or the beginning of the fourth. We must therefore, +in our account, take this as the final point of division.<a id="footnotetag1" name="footnotetag1"></a><a href="#footnote1"><sup>1</sup></a> +As to the development of dogma, it seems to have closed in +the Eastern Church with the seventh Œcumenical Council (787). +After that time no further dogmas were set up in the East as +revealed truths. As to the Western Catholic, that is, the +Romish Church, a new dogma was promulgated as late as the +year 1870, which claims to be, and in point of form really +is, equal in dignity to the old dogmas. Here, therefore, the +History of Dogma must extend to the present time. Finally, +as regards the Protestant Churches, they are a subject of special +difficulty in the sphere of the history of dogma; for at the +present moment there is no agreement within these Churches +as to whether, and in what sense, dogmas (as the word was +used in the ancient Church) are valid. But even if we leave +the present out of account and fix our attention on the Protestant +Churches of the 16<sup>th</sup> century, the decision is difficult. +For, on the one hand, the Protestant faith, the Lutheran as +well as the Reformed (and that of Luther no less), presents +itself as a doctrine of faith which, resting on the Catholic +canon of scripture, is, in point of form, quite analogous to the +Catholic doctrine of faith, has a series of dogmas in common +with it, and only differs in a few. On the other hand, Protestantism +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page3" id="page3"></a>[pg 3]</span> +has taken its stand in principle on the Gospel exclusively, +and declared its readiness at all times to test all +doctrines afresh by a true understanding of the Gospel. The +Reformers, however, in addition to this, began to unfold a +conception of Christianity which might be described, in contrast +with the Catholic type of religion, as a new conception, +and which indeed draws support from the old dogmas, but +changes their original significance materially and formally. +What this conception was may still be ascertained from those +writings received by the Church, the Protestant symbols of +the 16<sup>th</sup> century, in which the larger part of the traditionary +dogmas are recognised as the appropriate expression of the +Christian religion, nay, as the Christian religion itself.<a id="footnotetag2" name="footnotetag2"></a><a href="#footnote2"><sup>2</sup></a> Accordingly, +it can neither be maintained that the expression of +the Christian faith in the form of dogmas is abolished in the +Protestant Churches—the very acceptance of the Catholic +canon as the revealed record of faith is opposed to that view—nor +that its meaning has remained absolutely unchanged.<a id="footnotetag3" name="footnotetag3"></a><a href="#footnote3"><sup>3</sup></a> +The history of dogma has simply to recognise this state of +things, and to represent it exactly as it lies before us in the +documents.</p> + +<p>But the point to which the historian should advance here +still remains an open question. If we adhere strictly to the +definition of the idea of dogma given above, this much is +certain, that dogmas were no longer set up after the Formula +of Concord, or in the case of the Reformed Church, after the +decrees of the Synod of Dort. It cannot, however, be maintained +that they have been set aside in the centuries that +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page4" id="page4"></a>[pg 4]</span> +have passed since then; for apart from some Protestant National +and independent Churches, which are too insignificant and +whose future is too uncertain to be taken into account here, +the ecclesiastical tradition of the 16<sup>th</sup> century, and along +with it the tradition of the early Church, have not been abrogated +in authoritative form. Of course, changes of the greatest +importance with regard to doctrine have appeared everywhere +in Protestantism from the 17<sup>th</sup> century to the present day. +But these changes cannot in any sense be taken into account +in a history of dogma, because they have not as yet attained +a form valid for the Church. However we may judge of these +changes, whether we regard them as corruptions or improvements, +or explain the want of fixity in which the Protestant +Churches find themselves, as a situation that is forced on +them, or the situation that is agreeable to them and for which +they are adapted, in no sense is there here a development +which could be described as history of dogma.</p> + +<p>These facts would seem to justify those who, like Thomasius +and Schmid, carry the history of dogma in Protestantism to +the Formula of Concord, or, in the case of the Reformed Church, +to the decrees of the Synod of Dort. But it may be objected +to this boundary line; (1) That those symbols have at all times +attained only a partial authority in Protestantism; (2) That as +noted above, the dogmas, that is, the formulated doctrines of +faith have different meanings on different matters in the Protestant +and in the Catholic Churches. Accordingly, it seems +advisable within the frame-work of the history of dogma, to +examine Protestantism only so far as this is necessary for +obtaining a knowledge of its deviations from the Catholic dogma +materially and formally, that is, to ascertain the original +position of the Reformers with regard to the doctrine of the +Church, a position which is beset with contradictions. The more +accurately we determine the relation of the Reformers to +Catholicism, the more intelligible will be the developments +which Protestantism has passed through in the course of its +history. But these developments themselves (retrocession and +advance) do not belong to the sphere of the history of dogma, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page5" id="page5"></a>[pg 5]</span> +because they stand in no comparable relation to the course +of the history of dogma within the Catholic Church. As history +of Protestant doctrines they form a peculiar independent +province of Church history.</p> + +<p>As to the division of the history of dogma, it consists of +two main parts. The first has to describe the origin of dogma, +that is, of the Apostolic Catholic system of doctrine based on the +foundation of the tradition authoritatively embodied in the +creeds and Holy scripture, and extends to the beginning of +the fourth century. This may be conveniently divided into +two parts, the first of which will treat of the preparation, the +second of the establishment of the ecclesiastical doctrine of +faith. The second main part, which has to portray the development +of dogma, comprehends three stages. In the first stage +the doctrine of faith appears as Theology and Christology. +The Eastern Church has never got beyond this stage, although +it has to a large extent enriched dogma ritually and mystically +(see the decrees of the seventh council). We will have to shew +how the doctrines of faith formed in this stage have remained +for all time in the Church dogmas κατ' εξοχην. The second +stage was initiated by Augustine. The doctrine of faith appears +here on the one side completed, and on the other re-expressed +by new dogmas, which treat of the relation of sin and grace, +freedom and grace, grace and the means of grace. The number +and importance of the dogmas that were, in the middle ages, +really fixed after Augustine's time, had no relation to the range +and importance of the questions which they raised, and which +emerged in the course of centuries in consequence of advancing +knowledge, and not less in consequence of the growing power +of the Church. Accordingly, in this second stage which comprehends +the whole of the middle ages, the Church as an +institution kept believers together in a larger measure than +was possible to dogmas. These in their accepted form were +too poor to enable them to be the expression of religious +conviction and the regulator of Church life. On the other +hand, the new decisions of Theologians, Councils and Popes, +did not yet possess the authority which could have made them +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page6" id="page6"></a>[pg 6]</span> +incontestable truths of faith. The third stage begins with the +Reformation, which compelled the Church to fix its faith on +the basis of the theological work of the middle ages. Thus +arose the Roman Catholic dogma which has found in the Vatican +decrees its provisional settlement. This Roman Catholic dogma, +as it was formulated at Trent, was moulded in express opposition +to the Theses of the Reformers. But these Theses +themselves represent a peculiar conception of Christianity, which +has its root in the theology of Paul and Augustine, and includes +either explicitly or implicitly a revision of the whole ecclesiastical +tradition, and therefore of dogma also. The History of +Dogma in this last stage, therefore, has a twofold task. It +has, on the one hand, to present the Romish dogma as a product +of the ecclesiastical development of the middle ages under the +influence of the Reformation faith which was to be rejected, +and on the other hand, to portray the conservative new formation +which we have in original Protestantism, and determine +its relation to dogma. A closer examination, however, shews +that in none of the great confessions does religion live in +dogma, as of old. Dogma everywhere has fallen into the background; +in the Eastern Church it has given place to ritual, +in the Roman Church to ecclesiastical instructions, in the +Protestant Churches, so far as they are mindful of their origin, +to the Gospel. At the same time, however, the paradoxical +fact is unmistakable that dogma as such is nowhere at this +moment so powerful as in the Protestant Churches, though by +their history they are furthest removed from it. Here, however, +it comes into consideration as an object of immediate religious +interest, which, strictly speaking, in the Catholic Church is not +the case.<a id="footnotetag4" name="footnotetag4"></a><a href="#footnote4"><sup>4</sup></a> The Council of Trent was simply wrung from the +Romish Church, and she has made the dogmas of that council +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page7" id="page7"></a>[pg 7]</span> +in a certain sense innocuous by the Vatican decrees.<a id="footnotetag5" name="footnotetag5"></a><a href="#footnote5"><sup>5</sup></a> In this +sense, it may be said that the period of development of dogma +is altogether closed, and that therefore our discipline requires +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page8" id="page8"></a>[pg 8]</span> +a statement such as belongs to a series of historical phenomena +that has been completed.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_I_DOGMA" id="SEC_0_I_I_DOGMA"></a>3. The church has recognised her faith, that is religion +itself, in her dogmas. Accordingly, one very important business +of the History of Dogma is to exhibit the unity that exists +in the dogmas of a definite period, and to shew how the several +dogmas are connected with one another and what leading +ideas they express. But, as a matter of course, this undertaking +has its limits in the degree of unanimity which actually existed +in the dogmas of the particular period. It may be shewn without +much difficulty, that a strict though by no means absolute +unanimity is expressed only in the dogmas of the Greek Church. +The peculiar character of the western post-Augustinian ecclesiastical +conception of Christianity, no longer finds a clear +expression in dogma, and still less is this the case with the +conception of the Reformers. The reason of this is that +Augustine, as well as Luther, disclosed a new conception of +Christianity, but at the same time appropriated the old +dogmas.<a id="footnotetag6" name="footnotetag6"></a><a href="#footnote6"><sup>6</sup></a> But neither Baur's nor Kliefoth's method of writing +the history of dogma has done justice to this fact. Not +Baur's, because, notwithstanding the division into six periods, +it sees a uniform process in the development of dogma, a +process which begins with the origin of Christianity and has +run its course, as is alleged, in a strictly logical way. Not +Kliefoth's, because, in the dogmas of the Catholic Church +which the East has never got beyond, it only ascertains the +establishment of one portion of the Christian faith, to which +the parts still wanting have been successively added in later +times.<a id="footnotetag7" name="footnotetag7"></a><a href="#footnote7"><sup>7</sup></a> In contrast with this, we may refer to the fact that +we can clearly distinguish three styles of building in the +history of dogma, but only three; the style of Origen, that of +Augustine, and that of the Reformers. But the dogma of the +post-Augustinian Church, as well as that of Luther, does not +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page9" id="page9"></a>[pg 9]</span> +in any way represent itself as a new building, not even as +the mere extension of an old building, but as a complicated +rebuilding, and by no means in harmony with former styles, +because neither Augustine nor Luther ever dreamed of building +independently.<a id="footnotetag8" name="footnotetag8"></a><a href="#footnote8"><sup>8</sup></a> This perception leads us to the most peculiar +phenomenon which meets the historian of dogma, and which +must determine his method.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_I_FACTORS" id="SEC_0_I_I_FACTORS"></a>Dogmas arise, develop themselves and are made serviceable +to new aims; this in all cases takes place through Theology. +But Theology is dependent on innumerable factors, above all, +on the spirit of the time; for it lies in the nature of theology +that it desires to make its object intelligible. Dogmas are +the product of theology, not inversely; of a theology of course +which, as a rule, was in correspondence with the faith of the +time. The critical view of history teaches this: first we +have the Apologists and Origen, then the councils of Nice +and Chalcedon; first the Scholastics, then the Council of +Trent. In consequence of this, dogma bears the mark of all, +the factors on which the theology was dependent. That is +one point. But the moment in which the product of theology +became dogma, the way which led to it must be obscured; +for, according to the conception of the Church, dogma can be +nothing else than the revealed faith itself. Dogma is regarded +not as the exponent, but as the basis of theology, and therefore +the product of theology having passed into dogma limits, +and criticises the work of theology both past and future.<a id="footnotetag9" name="footnotetag9"></a><a href="#footnote9"><sup>9</sup></a> +That is the second point. It follows from this that the history +of the Christian religion embraces a very complicated +relation of ecclesiastical dogma and theology, and that the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page10" id="page10"></a>[pg 10]</span> +ecclesiastical conception of the significance of theology cannot +at all do justice to this significance. The ecclesiastical scheme +which is here formed and which denotes the utmost concession +that can be made to history, is to the effect that theology gives +expression only to the form of dogma, while so far as it is +ecclesiastical theology, it presupposes the unchanging dogma, +<i>i.e.</i>, the substance of dogma. But this scheme, which must +always leave uncertain what the form really is, and what the +substance, is in no way applicable to the actual circumstances. +So far, however, as it is itself an article of faith it is an object +of the history of dogma. Ecclesiastical dogma when put on +its defence must at all times take up an ambiguous position +towards theology, and ecclesiastical theology a corresponding +position towards dogma; for they are condemned to +perpetual uncertainty as to what they owe each other, and +what they have to fear from each other. The theological +Fathers of dogma have almost without exception failed to +escape being condemned by dogma, either because it went +beyond them, or lagged behind their theology. The Apologists, +Origen and Augustine may be cited in support of this; +and even in Protestantism, <i>mutatis mutandis</i>, the same thing +has been repeated, as is proved by the fate of Melanchthon +and Schleiermacher. On the other hand, there have been +few theologians who have not shaken some article of the +traditional dogma. We are wont to get rid of these fundamental +facts by hypostatising the ecclesiastical principle or +the common ecclesiastical spirit, and by this normal hypostasis, +measuring, approving or condemning the doctrines of +the theologians, unconcerned about the actual conditions and +frequently following a hysteron-proteron. But this is a view +of history which should in justice be left to the Catholic +Church, which indeed cannot dispense with it. The critical +history of dogma has, on the contrary, to shew above all how +an ecclesiastical theology has arisen; for it can only give +account of the origin of dogma in connection with this main +question. The horizon must be taken here as wide as possible; +for the question as to the origin of theology can only +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page11" id="page11"></a>[pg 11]</span> +be answered by surveying all the relations into which the +Christian religion has entered in naturalising itself in the +world and subduing it. When ecclesiastical dogma has once +been created and recognised as an immediate expression +of the Christian religion, the history of dogma has only to +take the history of theology into account so far as it has +been active in the formation of dogma. Yet it must always +keep in view the peculiar claim of dogma to be a criterion +and not a product of theology. But it will also be able to +shew how, partly by means of theology and partly by other +means—for dogma is also dependent on ritual, constitution, +and the practical ideals of life, as well as on the letter, +whether of Scripture, or of tradition no longer understood—dogma +in its development and re-expression has continually +changed, according to the conditions under which the Church +was placed. If dogma is originally the formulation of Christian +faith as Greek culture understood it and justified it to itself, +then dogma has never indeed lost this character, though it +has been radically modified in later times. It is quite as +important to keep in view the tenacity of dogma as its +changes, and in this respect the Protestant way of writing +history, which, here as elsewhere in the history of the Church, is +more disposed to attend to differences than to what is permanent, +has much to learn from the Catholic. But as the +Protestant historian, as far possible, judges of the progress +of development in so far as it agrees with the Gospel in its +documentary form, he is still able to shew, with all deference +to that tenacity, that dogma has been so modified and used +to the best advantage by Augustine and Luther, that its Christian +character has in many respects gained, though in other +respects it has become further and further alienated from that +character. In proportion as the traditional system of dogmas +lost its stringency it became richer. In proportion as it was +stripped by Augustine and Luther of its apologetic philosophic +tendency, it was more and more filled with Biblical ideas, +though, on the other hand, it became more full of contradictions +and less impressive.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page12" id="page12"></a>[pg 12]</span> + +<p>This outlook, however, has already gone beyond the limits +fixed for these introductory paragraphs and must not be pursued +further. To treat <i>in abstracto</i> of the method of the +history of dogma in relation to the discovery, grouping and +interpretation of the material is not to be recommended; for +general rules to preserve the ignorant and half instructed from +overlooking the important, and laying hold of what is not +important, cannot be laid down. Certainly everything depends +on the arrangement of the material; for the understanding of +history is to find the rules according to which the phenomena +should be grouped, and every advance in the knowledge of +history is inseparable from an accurate observance of these +rules. We must, above all, be on our guard against preferring +one principle at the expense of another in the interpretation +of the origin and aim of particular dogmas. The most diverse +factors have at all times been at work in the formation of +dogmas. Next to the effort to determine the doctrine of religion +according to the <i>finis religionis</i>, the blessing of salvation, +the following may have been the most important. (1) The +conceptions and sayings contained in the canonical scriptures. +(2) The doctrinal tradition originating in earlier epochs of the +church, and no longer understood. (3) The needs of worship +and organisation. (4) The effort to adjust the doctrine of +religion to the prevailing doctrinal opinions. (5) Political and +social circumstances. (6) The changing moral ideals of life. +(7) The so-called logical consistency, that is the abstract analogical +treatment of one dogma according to the form of another. +(8) The effort to adjust different tendencies and contradictions +in the church. (9) The endeavour to reject once for all a +doctrine regarded as erroneous. (10) The sanctifying power of +blind custom. The method of explaining everything wherever +possible by "the impulse of dogma to unfold itself," must be +given up as unscientific, just as all empty abstractions whatsoever +must be given up as scholastic and mythological. Dogma has +had its history in the individual living man and nowhere else. +As soon as one adopts this statement in real earnest, that +mediæval realism must vanish to which a man so often thinks +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page13" id="page13"></a>[pg 13]</span> +himself superior while imbedded in it all the time. Instead of +investigating the actual conditions in which believing and intelligent +men have been placed, a system of Christianity has been +constructed from which, as from a Pandora's box, all doctrines +which in course of time have been formed, are extracted, and +in this way legitimised as Christian. The simple fundamental +proposition that that only is Christian which can be established +authoritatively by the Gospel, has never yet received justice +in the history of dogma. Even the following account will in +all probability come short in this point; for in face of a prevailing +false tradition the application of a simple principle to +every detail can hardly succeed at the first attempt.</p> + + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_I_CONCEPTION" id="SEC_0_I_I_CONCEPTION"></a><i>Explanation as to the Conception and Task of the History of Dogma</i>.</p> + +<p>No agreement as yet prevails with regard to the conception +of the history of dogma. Münscher (Handbuch der Christl. +D.G. 3rd ed. I. p. 3 f.) declared that the business of the history +of dogma is "To represent all the changes which the theoretic +part of the Christian doctrine of religion has gone through +from its origin up to the present, both in form and substance," +and this definition held sway for a long time. Then it came +to be noted that the question was not about changes that +were accidental, but about those that were historically necessary, +that dogma has a relation to the church, and that it represents +a rational expression of the faith. Emphasis was put sometimes +on one of these elements and sometimes on the other. +Baur, in particular, insisted on the first; V. Hofmann, after the +example of Schleiermacher, on the second, and indeed exclusively +(Encyklop. der theol. p. 257 f.: "The history of dogma +is the history of the Church confessing the faith in words"). +Nitzsch (Grundriss der Christl. D.G. I. p. 1) insisted on the +third: "The history of dogma is the scientific account of the +origin and development of the Christian system of doctrine, +or that part of historical theology which presents the history +of the expression of the Christian faith in notions, doctrines +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page14" id="page14"></a>[pg 14]</span> +and doctrinal systems." Thomasius has combined the second +and third by conceiving the history of dogma as the history +of the development of the ecclesiastical system of doctrine. +But even this conception is not sufficiently definite, inasmuch +as it fails to do complete justice to the special peculiarity of +the subject.</p> + +<p>Ancient and modern usage does certainly seem to allow the +word dogma to be applied to particular doctrines, or to a +uniform system of doctrine, to fundamental truths, or to opinions, +to theoretical propositions or practical rules, to statements +of belief that have not been reached by a process of +reasoning, as well as to those that bear the marks of such a +process. But this uncertainty vanishes on closer examination. +We then see that there is always an authority at the basis of +dogma, which gives it to those who recognise that authority the +signification of a fundamental truth "<i>quæ sine scelere prodi non +poterit</i>" (Cicero Quæst. Acad. IV. 9). But therewith at the same +time is introduced into the idea of dogma a social element (see +Biedermann, Christl. Dogmatik. 2. Edit. I. p. 2 f.); the confessors +of one and the same dogma form a community.</p> + +<p>There can be no doubt that these two elements are also +demonstrable in Christian dogma, and therefore we must reject +all definitions of the history of dogma which do not take them +into account. If we define it as the history of the understanding +of Christianity by itself, or as the history of the changes +of the theoretic part of the doctrine of religion or the like, +we shall fail to do justice to the idea of dogma in its most +general acceptation. We cannot describe as dogmas, doctrines +such as the Apokatastasis, or the Kenosis of the Son of God, +without coming into conflict with the ordinary usage of language +and with ecclesiastical law.</p> + +<p>If we start, therefore, from the supposition that Christian +dogma is an ecclesiastical doctrine which presupposes revelation +as its authority, and therefore claims to be strictly binding, +we shall fail to bring out its real nature with anything +like completeness. That which Protestants and Catholics call +dogmas, are not only ecclesiastical doctrines, but they are +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page15" id="page15"></a>[pg 15]</span> +also: (1) theses expressed in abstract terms, forming together +a unity, and fixing the contents of the Christian religion as +a knowledge of God, of the world, and of the sacred history +under the aspect of a proof of the truth. But (2) they have +also emerged at a definite stage of the history of the Christian +religion; they show in their conception as such, and in many +details, the influence of that stage, viz., the Greek period, and +they have preserved this character in spite of all their reconstructions +and additions in after periods. This view of dogma +cannot be shaken by the fact that particular historical facts, +miraculous or not miraculous are described as dogmas; for +here they are regarded as such, only in so far as they have +got the value of doctrines which have been inserted in the +complete structure of doctrines and are, on the other hand, +members of a chain of proofs, viz., proofs from prophecy.</p> + +<p>But as soon as we perceive this, the parallel between the +ecclesiastical dogmas and those of ancient schools of philosophy +appears to be in point of form complete. The only difference +is that revelation is here put as authority in the place of +human knowledge, although the later philosophic schools appealed +to revelation also. The theoretical as well as the practical +doctrines which embraced the peculiar conception of the +world and the ethics of the school, together with their rationale, +were described in these schools as dogmas. Now, in so +far as the adherents of the Christian religion possess dogmas in +this sense, and form a community which has gained an understanding +of its religious faith by analysis and by scientific +definition and grounding, they appear as a great philosophic +school in the ancient sense of the word. But they differ +from such a school in so far as they have always eliminated +the process of thought which has led to the dogma, looking +upon the whole system of dogma as a revelation and therefore, +even in respect of the reception of the dogma, at least +at first, they have taken account not of the powers of human +understanding, but of the Divine enlightenment which is bestowed +on all the willing and the virtuous. In later times, +indeed, the analogy was far more complete, in so far as the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page16" id="page16"></a>[pg 16]</span> +Church reserved the full possession of dogma to a circle of +consecrated and initiated individuals. Dogmatic Christianity is +therefore a definite stage in the history of the development of +Christianity. It corresponds to the antique mode of thought, +but has nevertheless continued to a very great extent in the +following epochs, though subject to great transformations. Dogmatic +Christianity stands between Christianity as the religion +of the Gospel, presupposing a personal experience and dealing +with disposition and conduct, and Christianity as a religion +of cultus, sacraments, ceremonial and obedience, in short of superstition, +and it can be united with either the one or the +other. In itself and in spite of all its mysteries it is always +intellectual Christianity, and therefore there is always the danger +here that as knowledge it may supplant religious faith, or +connect it with a doctrine of religion, instead of with God and +a living experience.</p> + +<p>If then the discipline of the history of dogma is to be what +its name purports, its object is the very dogma which is so +formed, and its fundamental problem will be to discover how +it has arisen. In the history of the canon our method of procedure +has for long been to ask first of all, how the canon +originated, and then to examine the changes through which +it has passed. We must proceed in the same way with the +history of dogma, of which the history of the canon is simply +a part. Two objections will be raised against this. In the +first place, it will be said that from the very first the Christian +religion has included a definite religious faith as well as a +definite ethic, and that therefore Christian dogma is as original +as Christianity itself, so that there can be no question about +a genesis, but only as to a development or alteration of dogma +within the Church. Again it will be said, in the second place, +that dogma as defined above, has validity only for a definite +epoch in the history of the Church, and that it is therefore +quite impossible to write a comprehensive history of dogma +in the sense we have indicated.</p> + +<p>As to the first objection, there can of course be no doubt +that the Christian religion is founded on a message, the contents +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page17" id="page17"></a>[pg 17]</span> +of which are a definite belief in God and in Jesus Christ +whom he has sent, and that the promise of salvation is attached +to this belief. But faith in the Gospel and the later dogmas +of the Church are not related to each other as theme +and the way in which it is worked out, any more than the +dogma of the New Testament canon is only the explication +of the original reliance of Christians on the word of their +Lord and the continuous working of the Spirit; but in these +later dogmas an entirely new element has entered into the +conception of religion. The message of religion appears here +clothed in a knowledge of the world and of the ground of the +world which had already been obtained without any reference +to it, and therefore religion itself has here become a doctrine +which has, indeed, its certainty in the Gospel, but only in part +derives its contents from it, and which can also be appropriated +by such as are neither poor in spirit nor weary +and heavy laden. Now, it may of course be shewn that a +philosophic conception of the Christian religion is possible, +and began to make its appearance from the very first, as in +the case of Paul. But the Pauline gnosis has neither been +simply identified with the Gospel by Paul himself (1 Cor. III. +2 f.; XII. 3; Phil. I. 18) nor is it analogous to the later +dogma, not to speak of being identical with it. The characteristic +of this dogma is that it represents itself in no sense +as foolishness, but as wisdom, and at the same time desires to +be regarded as the contents of revelation itself. Dogma in its +conception and development is a work of the Greek spirit on +the soil of the Gospel. By comprehending in itself and giving +excellent expression to the religious conceptions contained in +Greek philosophy and the Gospel, together with its Old Testament +basis; by meeting the search for a revelation as well as +the desire for a universal knowledge; by subordinating itself +to the aim of the Christian religion to bring a Divine life to +humanity as well as to the aim of philosophy to know the +world: it became the instrument by which the Church conquered +the ancient world and educated the modern nations. +But this dogma—one cannot but admire its formation or +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page18" id="page18"></a>[pg 18]</span> +fail to regard it as a great achievement of the spirit, which +never again in the history of Christianity has made itself at +home with such freedom and boldness in religion—is the +product of a comparatively long history which needs to be +deciphered; for it is obscured by the completed dogma. The +Gospel itself is not dogma, for belief in the Gospel provides +room for knowledge only so far as it is a state of feeling and +course of action, that is a definite form of life. Between +practical faith in the Gospel and the historico-critical account +of the Christian religion and its history, a third element can +no longer be thrust in without its coming into conflict with +faith, or with the historical data—the only thing left is the +practical task of defending the faith. But a third element +has been thrust into the history of this religion, viz., dogma, +that is, the philosophical means which were used in early +times for the purpose of making the Gospel intelligible +have been fused with the contents of the Gospel and raised +to dogma. This dogma, next to the Church, has become a +real world power, the pivot in the history of the Christian +religion. The transformation of the Christian faith into dogma +is indeed no accident, but has its reason in the spiritual character +of the Christian religion, which at all times will feel the +need of a scientific apologetic.<a id="footnotetag10" name="footnotetag10"></a><a href="#footnote10"><sup>10</sup></a> But the question here is not +as to something indefinite and general, but as to the definite +dogma formed in the first centuries, and binding even yet.</p> + +<p>This already touches on the second objection which was +raised above, that dogma, in the given sense of the word, was +too narrowly conceived, and could not in this conception be +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page19" id="page19"></a>[pg 19]</span> +applied throughout the whole history of the Church. This +objection would only be justified, if our task were to carry +the history of the development of dogma through the whole +history of the Church. But the question is just whether we +are right in proposing such a task. The Greek Church has +no history of dogma after the seven great Councils, and it is +incomparably more important to recognise this fact than to +register the theologoumena which were later on introduced by +individual Bishops and scholars in the East, who were partly +influenced by the West. Roman Catholicism in its dogmas, +though, as noted above, these at present do not very clearly +characterise it, is to-day essentially—that is, so far as it is +religion—what it was 1500 years ago, viz., Christianity as +understood by the ancient world. The changes which dogma +has experienced in the course of its development in western +Catholicism are certainly deep and radical: they have, in +point of fact, as has been indicated in the text above, modified +the position of the Church towards Christianity as dogma. +But as the Catholic Church herself maintains that she adheres +to Christianity in the old dogmatic sense, this claim of hers +cannot be contested. She has embraced new things and +changed her relations to the old, but still preserved the old. +But she has further developed new dogmas according to the +scheme of the old. The decrees of Trent and of the Vatican +are formally analogous to the old dogmas. Here, then, a history +of dogma may really be carried forward to the present +day without thereby shewing that the definition of dogma +given above is too narrow to embrace the new doctrines. +Finally, as to Protestantism, it has been briefly explained +above why the changes in Protestant systems of doctrine are +not to be taken up into the history of dogma. Strictly speaking, +dogma, as dogma, has had no development in Protestantism, +inasmuch as a secret note of interrogation has been +here associated with it from the very beginning. But the old +dogma has continued to be a power in it, because of its tendency +to look back and to seek for authorities in the past, +and partly in the original unmodified form. The dogmas of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page20" id="page20"></a>[pg 20]</span> +the fourth and fifth centuries have more influence to-day in +wide circles of Protestant Churches than all the doctrines +which are concentrated around justification by faith. Deviations +from the latter are borne comparatively easy, while as a rule, +deviations from the former are followed by notice to quit the +Christian communion, that is, by excommunication. The historian +of to-day would have no difficulty in answering the +question whether the power of Protestantism as a Church lies +at present in the elements which it has in common with the +old dogmatic Christianity, or in that by which it is distinguished +from it. Dogma, that is to say, that type of Christianity +which was formed in ecclesiastical antiquity, has not been suppressed +even in Protestant Churches, has really not been +modified or replaced by a new conception of the Gospel. +But, on the other hand, who could deny that the Reformation +began to disclose such a conception, and that this new conception +was related in a very different way to the traditional +dogma from that of the new propositions of Augustine to the +dogmas handed down to him? Who could further call in +question that, in consequence of the reforming impulse in +Protestantism, the way was opened up for a conception which +does not identify Gospel and dogma, which does not disfigure +the latter by changing or paring down its meaning while +failing to come up to the former? But the historian who has +to describe the formation and changes of dogma can take no +part in these developments. It is a task by itself more +rich and comprehensive than that of the historian of dogma, +to portray the diverse conceptions that have been formed of +the Christian religion, to portray how strong men and weak +men, great and little minds have explained the Gospel outside +and inside the frame-work of dogma, and how under the +cloak, or in the province of dogma, the Gospel has had its +own peculiar history. But the more limited theme must not +be put aside. For it can in no way be conducive to historical +knowledge to regard as indifferent the peculiar character of +the expression of Christian faith as dogma, and allow the +history of dogma to be absorbed in a general history of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page21" id="page21"></a>[pg 21]</span> +various conceptions of Christianity. Such a "liberal" view +would not agree either with the teaching of history or with +the actual situation of the Protestant Churches of the present +day: for it is, above all, of crucial importance to perceive that +it is a peculiar stage in the development of the human spirit +which is described by dogma. On this stage, parallel with +dogma and inwardly united with it, stands a definite psychology, +metaphysic and natural philosophy, as well as a view +of history of a definite type. This is the conception of the +world obtained by antiquity after almost a thousand years' +labour, and it is the same connection of theoretic perceptions +and practical ideals which it accomplished. This stage on +which the Christian religion has also entered we have in no +way as yet transcended, though science has raised itself above +it.<a id="footnotetag11" name="footnotetag11"></a><a href="#footnote11"><sup>11</sup></a> But the Christian religion, as it was not born of the culture +of the ancient world, is not for ever chained to it. The +form and the new contents which the Gospel received when +it entered into that world have only the same guarantee of +endurance as that world itself. And that endurance is limited. +We must indeed be on our guard against taking episodes for +decisive crises. But every episode carries us forward, and +retrogressions are unable to undo that progress. The Gospel +since the Reformation, in spite of retrograde movements which +have not been wanting, is working itself out of the forms +which it was once compelled to assume, and a true comprehension +of its history will also contribute to hasten this process.</p> + +<p>1. The definition given above, p. 17: "Dogma in its conception +and development is a work of the Greek spirit on +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page22" id="page22"></a>[pg 22]</span> +the soil of the Gospel," has frequently been distorted by my +critics, as they have suppressed the words "on the soil of the +Gospel." But these words are decisive. The foolishness of +identifying dogma and Greek philosophy never entered my +mind; on the contrary, the peculiarity of ecclesiastical dogma +seemed to me to lie in the very fact that, on the one hand, +it gave expression to Christian Monotheism and the central +significance of the person of Christ, and, on the other hand, +comprehended this religious faith and the historical knowledge +connected with it in a philosophic system. I have given +quite as little ground for the accusation that I look upon +the whole development of the history of dogma as a pathological +process within the history of the Gospel. I do not +even look upon the history of the origin of the Papacy as +such a process, not to speak of the history of dogma. But +the perception that "everything must happen as it has happened" +does not absolve the historian from the task of ascertaining +the powers which have formed the history, and distinguishing +between original and later, permanent and transitory, nor from +the duty of stating his own opinion.</p> + +<p>2. Sabatier has published a thoughtful treatise on "Christian +Dogma: its Nature and its Development." I agree with the +author in this, that in dogma—rightly understood—two +elements are to be distinguished, the religious proceeding from +the experience of the individual or from the religious spirit +of the Church, and the intellectual or theoretic. But I regard +as false the statement which he makes, that the intellectual +element in dogma is only the symbolical expression of religious +experience. The intellectual element is itself again to +be differentiated. On the one hand, it certainly is the attempt +to give expression to religious feeling, and so far is symbolical; +but, on the other hand, within the Christian religion it +belongs to the essence of the thing itself, inasmuch as this +not only awakens feeling, but has a quite definite content +which determines and should determine the feeling. In this +sense Christianity without dogma, that is, without a clear +expression of its content, is inconceivable. But that does not +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page23" id="page23"></a>[pg 23]</span> +justify the unchangeable permanent significance of that dogma +which has once been formed under definite historical conditions.</p> + +<p>3. The word "dogmas" (Christian dogmas) is, if I see correctly, +used among us in three different senses, and hence spring +all manner of misconceptions and errors. By dogmas are denoted: +(1) The historical doctrines of the Church. (2) The +historical facts on which the Christian religion is reputedly or +actually founded. (3) Every definite exposition of the contents +of Christianity is described as dogmatic. In contrast with this +the attempt has been made in the following presentation to +use dogma only in the sense first stated. When I speak, therefore, +of the decomposition of dogma, I mean by that, neither the +historical facts which really establish the Christian religion, nor +do I call in question the necessity for the Christian and the +Church to have a creed. My criticism refers not to the general +genus dogma, but to the species, viz., the defined dogma, as +it was formed on the soil of the ancient world, and is still a +power, though under modifications.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_I_II" id="SEC_0_I_II"></a>2. <i>History of the History of Dogma.</i></h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_II_EARLY" id="SEC_0_I_II_EARLY"></a>The history of dogma as a historical and critical discipline +had its origin in the last century through the works of Mosheim, +C. W. F. Walch, Ernesti, Lessing and Semler. Lange gave +to the world in 1796 the first attempt at a history of dogma +as a special branch of theological study. The theologians of +the Early and Mediæval Churches have only transmitted histories +of Heretics and of Literature, regarding dogma as unchangeable.<a id="footnotetag12" name="footnotetag12"></a><a href="#footnote12"><sup>12</sup></a> +This presupposition is so much a part of the nature of Catholicism +that it has been maintained till the present day. It is therefore +impossible for a Catholic to make a free, impartial and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page24" id="page24"></a>[pg 24]</span> +scientific investigation of the history of dogma.<a id="footnotetag13" name="footnotetag13"></a><a href="#footnote13"><sup>13</sup></a> There have, +indeed, at almost all times before the Reformation, been critical +efforts in the domain of Christianity, especially of western +Christianity, efforts which in some cases have led to the proof +of the novelty and inadmissibility of particular dogmas. But, +as a rule, these efforts were of the nature of a polemic against +the dominant Church. They scarcely prepared the way for, +far less produced a historical view of, dogmatic tradition.<a id="footnotetag14" name="footnotetag14"></a><a href="#footnote14"><sup>14</sup></a> The +progress of the sciences<a id="footnotetag15" name="footnotetag15"></a><a href="#footnote15"><sup>15</sup></a> and the conflict with Protestantism +could here, for the Catholic Church, have no other effect than +that of leading to the collecting, with great learning, of material +for the history of dogma, the establishing of the <i>consensus patrum +et doctorum</i>, the exhibition of the necessity of a continuous +explication of dogma, and the description of the history of +heresies pressing in from without, regarded now as unheard-of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page25" id="page25"></a>[pg 25]</span> +novelties, and again as old enemies in new masks. The +modern Jesuit-Catholic historian indeed exhibits, in certain +circumstances, a manifest indifference to the task of establishing +the <i>semper idem</i> in the faith of the Church, but this indifference +is at present regarded with disfavour, and, besides, is +only an apparent one, as the continuous though inscrutable +guidance of the Church by the infallible teaching of the Pope +is the more emphatically maintained.<a id="footnotetag16" name="footnotetag16"></a><a href="#footnote16"><sup>16</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_II_REFORMERS" id="SEC_0_I_II_REFORMERS"></a>It may be maintained that the Reformation opened the way +for a critical treatment of the history of dogma.<a id="footnotetag17" name="footnotetag17"></a><a href="#footnote17"><sup>17</sup></a> But even +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page26" id="page26"></a>[pg 26]</span> +in Protestant Churches, at first, historical investigations remained +under the ban of the confessional system of doctrine and were +used only for polemics.<a id="footnotetag18" name="footnotetag18"></a><a href="#footnote18"><sup>18</sup></a> Church history itself up to the 18<sup>th</sup> +century was not regarded as a theological discipline in the +strict sense of the word, and the history of dogma existed only +within the sphere of dogmatics as a collection of testimonies +to the truth, <i>theologia patristica</i>. It was only after the material +had been prepared in the course of the 16<sup>th</sup> and 17<sup>th</sup> +centuries by scholars of the various Church parties, and, +above all, by excellent editions of the Fathers,<a id="footnotetag19" name="footnotetag19"></a><a href="#footnote19"><sup>19</sup></a> and after Pietism +had exhibited the difference between Christianity and Ecclesiasticism, +and had begun to treat the traditional confessional +structure of doctrine with indifference,<a id="footnotetag20" name="footnotetag20"></a><a href="#footnote20"><sup>20</sup></a> that a critical investigation +was entered on.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_II_MOSHEIM" id="SEC_0_I_II_MOSHEIM"></a>The man who was the Erasmus of the 18<sup>th</sup> century, neither +orthodox nor pietistic, nor rationalistic, but capable of appreciating +all these tendencies, familiar with English, French and +Italian literature, influenced by the spirit of the new English +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page27" id="page27"></a>[pg 27]</span> +Science,<a id="footnotetag21" name="footnotetag21"></a><a href="#footnote21"><sup>21</sup></a> while avoiding all statements of it that would endanger +positive Christianity. John Lorenz Mosheim, treated Church +history in the spirit of his great teacher Leibnitz,<a id="footnotetag22" name="footnotetag22"></a><a href="#footnote22"><sup>22</sup></a> and by +impartial analysis, living reproduction, and methodical artistic +form raised it for the first time to the rank of a science. In +his monographic works also, he endeavours to examine impartially +the history of dogma, and to acquire the historic stand-point +between the estimate of the orthodox dogmatists and +that of Gottfried Arnold Mosheim, averse to all fault-finding +and polemic, and abhorring theological crudity as much as +pietistic narrowness and undevout Illuminism, aimed at an +actual correct knowledge of history, in accordance with the +principle of Leibnitz, that the valuable elements which are +everywhere to be found in history must be sought out and +recognised. And the richness and many-sidedness of his mind +qualified him for gaining such a knowledge. But his latitudinarian +dogmatic stand-point as well as the anxiety to awaken +no controversy or endanger the gradual naturalising of a new +science and culture, caused him to put aside the most important +problems of the history of dogma and devote his attention +to political Church history as well as to the more indifferent +historical questions. The opposition of two periods which he +endeavoured peacefully to reconcile could not in this way be +permanently set aside.<a id="footnotetag23" name="footnotetag23"></a><a href="#footnote23"><sup>23</sup></a> In Mosheim's sense, but without the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page28" id="page28"></a>[pg 28]</span> +spirit of that great man, C.W.F. Walch taught on the subject +and described the religious controversies of the Church with +an effort to be impartial, and has thus made generally accessible +the abundant material collected by the diligence of earlier +scholars.<a id="footnotetag24" name="footnotetag24"></a><a href="#footnote24"><sup>24</sup></a> Walch, moreover, in the "Gedanken von der Geschichte +der Glaubenslehre," 1756, gave the impulse that was +needed to fix attention on the history of dogma as a special +discipline. The stand-point which he took up was still that +of subjection to ecclesiastical dogma, but without confessional +narrowness. Ernesti in his programme of the year 1759. "De +theologiae historicae et dogmaticae conjungendae necessitate," +gave eloquent expression to the idea that Dogmatic is a positive +science which has to take its material from history, but +that history itself requires a devoted and candid study, on +account of our being separated from the earlier epochs by a +complicated tradition.<a id="footnotetag25" name="footnotetag25"></a><a href="#footnote25"><sup>25</sup></a> He has also shewn in his celebrated +"Antimuratorius" that an impartial and critical investigation +of the problems of the history of dogma, might render the +most effectual service to the polemic against the errors of +Romanism. Besides, the greater part of the dogmas were already +unintelligible to Ernesti, and yet during his lifetime the way +was opened up for that tendency in theology, which prepared +in Germany by Chr. Thomasius, supported by English writers, +drew the sure principles of faith and life from what is called +reason, and therefore was not only indifferent to the system +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page29" id="page29"></a>[pg 29]</span> +of dogma, but felt it more and more to be the tradition of +unreason and of darkness. Of the three requisites of a historian, +knowledge of his subject, candid criticism, and a capacity for +finding himself at home in foreign interests and ideas, the +Rationalistic Theologians who had outgrown Pietism and passed +through the school of the English Deists and of Wolf, no longer +possessed the first, a knowledge of the subject, to the same +extent as some scholars of the earlier generation. The second, +free criticism, they possessed in the high degree guaranteed +by the conviction of having a rational religion; the third, the +power of comprehension, only in a very limited measure. They +had lost the idea of positive religion, and with it a living and +just conception of the history of religion.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_II_LESSING" id="SEC_0_I_II_LESSING"></a>In the history of thought there is always need for an apparently +disproportionate expenditure of power, in order to produce +an advance in the development. And it would appear as if a +certain self-satisfied narrow-mindedness within the progressing +ideas of the present, as well as a great measure of inability +even to understand the past and recognise its own dependence +on it, must make its appearance, in order that a whole generation +may be freed from the burden of the past. It needed +the absolute certainty which Rationalism had found in the +religious philosophy of the age, to give sufficient courage to +subject to historical criticism the central dogmas on which the +Protestant system as well as the Catholic finally rests, the +dogmas of the canon and inspiration on the one hand, and +of the Trinity and Christology on the other. The work of +Lessing in this respect had no great results. We to-day see in +his theological writings the most important contribution to the +understanding of the earliest history of dogma, which that +period supplies; but we also understand why its results were +then so trifling. This was due, not only to the fact that +Lessing was no theologian by profession, or that his historical +observations were couched in aphorisms, but because like +Leibnitz and Mosheim, he had a capacity for appreciating +the history of religion which forbade him to do violence to +that history or to sit in judgment on it, and because his +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page30" id="page30"></a>[pg 30]</span> +philosophy in its bearings on the case allowed him to seek no +more from his materials than an assured understanding of them, +in a word again, because he was no theologian. The Rationalists, +on the other hand, who within certain limits were no +less his opponents than the orthodox, derived the strength of +their opposition to the systems of dogma, as the Apologists +of the second century had already done with regard to polytheism, +from their religious belief and their inability to estimate +these systems historically. That, however, is only the first +impression which one gets here from the history, and it is +everywhere modified by other impressions. In the first place, +there is no mistaking a certain latitudinarianism in several +prominent theologians of the rationalistic tendency. Moreover, +the attitude to the canon was still frequently, in virtue of the +Protestant principle of scripture, an uncertain one, and it was +here chiefly that the different types of rational supernaturalism +were developed. Then, with all subjection to the dogmas of +Natural religion, the desire for a real true knowledge was +unfettered and powerfully excited. Finally, very significant +attempts were made by some rationalistic theologians to explain +in a real historical way the phenomena of the history of dogma, +and to put an authentic and historical view of that history in +the place of barren pragmatic or philosophic categories.</p> + +<p>The special zeal with which the older rationalism applied +itself to the investigation of the canon, either putting aside +the history of dogma, or treating it merely in the frame-work +of Church history, has only been of advantage for the treatment +of our subject. It first began to be treated with thoroughness +when the historical and critical interests had become +more powerful than the rationalistic. After the important +labours of Semler which here, above all, have wrought in the +interests of freedom,<a id="footnotetag26" name="footnotetag26"></a><a href="#footnote26"><sup>26</sup></a> and after some monographs on the history +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page31" id="page31"></a>[pg 31]</span> +of dogma,<a id="footnotetag27" name="footnotetag27"></a><a href="#footnote27"><sup>27</sup></a> S.G. Lange for the first time treated the history +of dogma as a special subject.<a id="footnotetag28" name="footnotetag28"></a><a href="#footnote28"><sup>28</sup></a> Unfortunately, his comprehensively +planned and carefully written work, which shews a +real understanding of the early history of dogma, remains incomplete. +Consequently, W. Münscher, in his learned manual, +which was soon followed by his compendium of the history +of dogma, was the first to produce a complete presentation +of our subject.<a id="footnotetag29" name="footnotetag29"></a><a href="#footnote29"><sup>29</sup></a> Münscher's compendium is a counterpart +to Giesler's Church history; it shares with that the merit of +drawing from the sources, intelligent criticism and impartiality, +but with a thorough knowledge of details it fails to impart +a real conception of the development of ecclesiastical dogma. +The division of the material into particular <i>loci</i>, which, in three +sections, is carried through the whole history of the Church, +makes insight into the whole Christian conception of the different +epochs impossible, and the prefixed "General History +of Dogma," is far too sketchily treated to make up for that +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page32" id="page32"></a>[pg 32]</span> +defect. Finally, the connection between the development of +dogma and the general ideas of the time is not sufficiently +attended to. A series of manuals followed the work of Münscher, +but did not materially advance the study.<a id="footnotetag30" name="footnotetag30"></a><a href="#footnote30"><sup>30</sup></a> The compendium +of Baumgarten Crusius,<a id="footnotetag31" name="footnotetag31"></a><a href="#footnote31"><sup>31</sup></a> and that of F.K. Meier,<a id="footnotetag32" name="footnotetag32"></a><a href="#footnote32"><sup>32</sup></a> +stand out prominently among them. The work of the former +is distinguished by its independent learning as well as by the +discernment of the author that the centre of gravity of the +subject lies in the so-called general history of dogma.<a id="footnotetag33" name="footnotetag33"></a><a href="#footnote33"><sup>33</sup></a> The +work of Meier goes still further, and accurately perceives that +the division into a general and special history of dogma must +be altogether given up, while it is also characterised by an +accurate setting and proportional arrangement of the facts.<a id="footnotetag34" name="footnotetag34"></a><a href="#footnote34"><sup>34</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_I_II_BAUR" id="SEC_0_I_II_BAUR"></a>The great spiritual revolution at the beginning of our century, +which must in every respect be regarded as a reaction +against the efforts of the rationalistic epoch, changed also the +conceptions of the Christian religion and its history. It appears +therefore plainly in the treatment of the history of dogma. +The advancement and deepening of Christian life, the zealous +study of the past, the new philosophy which no longer thrust +history aside, but endeavoured to appreciate it in all its phenomena +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page33" id="page33"></a>[pg 33]</span> +as the history of the spirit, all these factors co-operated +in begetting a new temper, and accordingly, a new +estimate of religion proper and of its history. There were +three tendencies in theology that broke up rationalism; that +which was identified with the names of Schleiermacher and +Neander, that of the Hegelians, and that of the Confessionalists. +The first two were soon divided into a right and a left, +in so far as they included conservative and critical interests +from their very commencement. The conservative elements +have been used for building up the modern confessionalism, +which in its endeavours to go back to the Reformers has never +actually got beyond the theology of the Formula of Concord, +the stringency of which it has no doubt abolished by new +theologoumena and concessions of all kinds. All these tendencies +have in common the effort to gain a real comprehension +of history and be taught by it, that is, to allow the idea +of development to obtain its proper place, and to comprehend +the power and sphere of the individual. In this and in the +deeper conception of the nature and significance of positive +religion, lay the advance beyond Rationalism. And yet the +wish to understand history, has in great measure checked the +effort to obtain a true knowledge of it, and the respect for +history as the greatest of teachers, has not resulted in that +supreme regard for facts which distinguished the critical rationalism. +The speculative pragmatism, which, in the Hegelian +School, was put against the "lower pragmatism," and was +rigorously carried out with the view of exhibiting the unity +of history, not only neutralised the historical material, in so +far as its concrete definiteness was opposed, as phenomenon, +to the essence of the matter, but also curtailed it in a suspicious +way, as may be seen, for example, in the works of +Baur. Moreover, the universal historical suggestions which the +older history of dogma had given were not at all, or only +very little regarded. The history of dogma was, as it were, +shut out by the watchword of the immanent development of +the spirit in Christianity. The disciples of Hegel, both of the +right and of the left, were, and still are, agreed in this watch-word,<a id="footnotetag35" name="footnotetag35"></a><a href="#footnote35"><sup>35</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page34" id="page34"></a>[pg 34]</span> +the working out of which, including an apology for the +course of the history of dogma, must be for the advancement +of conservative theology. But at the basis of the statement +that the history of Christianity is the history of the spirit, +there lay further a very one-sided conception of the nature +of religion, which confirmed the false idea that religion is +theology. It will always, however, be the imperishable merit +of Hegel's great disciple, F. Chr. Baur, in theology, that he +was the first who attempted to give a uniform general idea +of the history of dogma, and to live through the whole process +in himself, without renouncing the critical acquisitions of the +18<sup>th</sup> century.<a id="footnotetag36" name="footnotetag36"></a><a href="#footnote36"><sup>36</sup></a> His brilliantly written manual of the history of +dogma, in which the history of this branch of theological +science is relatively treated with the utmost detail, is, however, +in material very meagre, and shews in the very first proposition +of the historical presentation an abstract view of history.<a id="footnotetag37" name="footnotetag37"></a><a href="#footnote37"><sup>37</sup></a> +Neander, whose "Christliche Dogmengeschichte," 1857, is distinguished +by the variety of its points of view, and keen apprehension +of particular forms of doctrine, shews a far more lively +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page35" id="page35"></a>[pg 35]</span> +and therefore a far more just conception of the Christian religion. +But the general plan of the work, (General history of +dogma—<i>loci</i>, and these according to the established scheme), +proves that Neander has not succeeded in giving real expression +to the historical character of the study, and in attaining +a clear insight into the progress of the development.<a id="footnotetag38" name="footnotetag38"></a><a href="#footnote38"><sup>38</sup></a></p> + +<p>Kliefoth's thoughtful and instructive, "Einleitung in die Dogmengeschichte," +1839, contains the programme for the conception +of the history of dogma characteristic of the modern +confessional theology. In this work the Hegelian view of +history, not without being influenced by Schleiermacher, is +so represented as to legitimise a return to the theology of +the Fathers. In the successive great epochs of the Church +several circles of dogmas have been successively fixed, so +that the respective doctrines have each time been adequately +formulated.<a id="footnotetag39" name="footnotetag39"></a><a href="#footnote39"><sup>39</sup></a> Disturbances of the development are due +to the influence of sin. Apart from this, Kliefoth's conception +is in point of form equal to that of Baur and Strauss, in so +far as they also have considered the theology represented by +themselves as the goal of the whole historical development. +The only distinction is that, according to them, the next following +stage always cancels the preceding, while according to +Kliefoth, who, moreover, has no desire to give effect to mere +traditionalism, the new knowledge is added to the old. The +new edifice of true historical knowledge, according to Kliefoth, +is raised on the ruins of Traditionalism, Scholasticism, Pietism, +Rationalism and Mysticism. Thomasius (Das Bekenntniss der +evang-luth. Kirche in der Consequenz seines Princips, 1848) has, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page36" id="page36"></a>[pg 36]</span> +after the example of Sartorius, attempted to justify by history the +Lutheran confessional system of doctrine from another side, by +representing it as the true mean between Catholicism and the +Reformed Spiritualism. This conception has found much approbation +in the circles of Theologians related to Thomasius, as +against the Union Theology. But Thomasius is entitled to the +merit of having produced a Manual of the history of dogma which +represents in the most worthy manner,<a id="footnotetag40" name="footnotetag40"></a><a href="#footnote40"><sup>40</sup></a> the Lutheran confessional +view of the history of dogma. The introduction, as well as +the selection and arrangement of his material, shews that +Thomasius has learned much from Baur. The way in which +he distinguishes between central and peripheral dogmas is, +accordingly, not very appropriate, especially for the earliest +period. The question as to the origin of dogma and theology +is scarcely even touched by him. But he has an impression +that the central dogmas contain for every period the whole of +Christianity, and that they must therefore be apprehended in this +sense.<a id="footnotetag41" name="footnotetag41"></a><a href="#footnote41"><sup>41</sup></a> The presentation is dominated throughout by the idea +of the self-explication of dogma, though a malformation has +to be admitted for the middle ages;<a id="footnotetag42" name="footnotetag42"></a><a href="#footnote42"><sup>42</sup></a> and therefore the formation +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page37" id="page37"></a>[pg 37]</span> +of dogma is almost everywhere justified as the testimony +of the Church represented as completely hypostatised, +and the outlook on the history of the time is put into the +background. But narrow and insufficient as the complete view +here is, the excellences of the work in details are great, in +respect of exemplary clearness of presentation, and the discriminating +knowledge and keen comprehension of the author for +religious problems. The most important work done by Thomasius +is contained in his account of the history of Christology.</p> + +<p>In his outlines of the history of Christian dogma (Grundriss +der Christl. Dogmengesch. 1870), which unfortunately has not +been carried beyond the first part (Patristic period), F. +Nitzsch, marks an advance in the history of our subject. The +advance lies, on the one hand, in the extensive use he makes +of monographs on the history of dogma, and on the other +hand, in the arrangement. Nitzsch has advanced a long way +on the path that was first entered by F.K. Meier, and has +arranged his material in a way that far excels all earlier +attempts. The general and special aspects of the history of +dogma are here almost completely worked into one,<a id="footnotetag43" name="footnotetag43"></a><a href="#footnote43"><sup>43</sup></a> and in +the main divisions, "Grounding of the old Catholic Church doctrine," +and "Development of the old Catholic Church doctrine," +justice is at last done to the most important problem which +the history of dogma presents, though in my opinion the +division is not made at the right place, and the problem is +not so clearly kept in view in the execution as the arrangement +would lead one to expect.<a id="footnotetag44" name="footnotetag44"></a><a href="#footnote44"><sup>44</sup></a> Nitzsch has freed himself +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page38" id="page38"></a>[pg 38]</span> +from that speculative view of the history of dogma which +reads ideas into it. No doubt idea and motive on the one +hand, form and expression on the other, must be distinguished +for every period. But the historian falls into vagueness as +soon as he seeks and professes to find behind the demonstrable +ideas and aims which have moved a period, others of which, +as a matter of fact, that period itself knew nothing at all. +Besides, the invariable result of that procedure is to concentrate +the attention on the theological and philosophical points +of dogma, and either neglect or put a new construction on +the most concrete and important, the expression of the religious +faith itself. Rationalism has been reproached with +"throwing out the child with the bath," but this is really +worse, for here the child is thrown out while the bath is +retained. Every advance in the future treatment of our subject +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page39" id="page39"></a>[pg 39]</span> +will further depend on the effort to comprehend the +history of dogma without reference to the momentary opinions +of the present, and also on keeping it in closest connection +with the history of the Church, from which it can never be +separated without damage. We have something to learn on +this point from rationalistic historians of dogma.<a id="footnotetag45" name="footnotetag45"></a><a href="#footnote45"><sup>45</sup></a> But progress +is finally dependent on a true perception of what the Christian +religion originally was, for this perception alone enables us to +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page40" id="page40"></a>[pg 40]</span> +distinguish that which sprang out of the inherent power of +Christianity from that which it has assimilated in the course +of its history. For the historian, however, who does not wish +to serve a party, there are two standards in accordance with +which he may criticise the history of dogma. He may either, +as far as this is possible, compare it with the Gospel, or he may +judge it according to the historical conditions of the time and +the result. Both ways can exist side by side, if only they are +not mixed up with one another. Protestantism has in principle +expressly recognised the first, and it will also have the power +to bear its conclusions; for the saying of Tertullian still holds +good in it; "Nihil veritas erubescit nisi solummodo abscondi." +The historian who follows this maxim, and at the same time +has no desire to be wiser than the facts, will, while furthering +science, perform the best service also to every Christian community +that desires to build itself upon the Gospel.</p> + +<p>After the appearance of the first and second editions of this +Work, Loofs published, "Leitfaden für seine Vorlesungen +über Dogmengeschichte," Halle, 1889, and in the following +year, "Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmengeschichte, zunächst +für seine Vorlesungen," (second and enlarged edition of the first-named +book). The work in its conception of dogma and its +history comes pretty near that stated above, and it is distinguished +by independent investigation and excellent selection of +material. I myself have published a "Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte," +2 Edit, in one vol. 1893. (Outlines of the history +of dogma, English translation, Hodder and Stoughton). That +this has not been written in vain, I have the pleasure of seeing +from not a few notices of professional colleagues. I may +mention the Church history of Herzog in the new revision by +Koffmane, the first vol. of the Church history of Karl Müller, +the first vol. of the Symbolik of Kattenbusch, and Kaftan's +work, "The truth of the Christian religion." Wilhelm Schmidt, +"Der alte Glaube und die Wahrheit des Christenthums," 1891, +has attempted to furnish a refutation in principle of Kaftan's work.</p> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote1" name="footnote1"></a><b>Footnote 1:</b><a href="#footnotetag1"> (return) </a><p>Weizsäcker, Gött. Gel. Anz. 1886, p. 823 f., says, "It is a +question whether we should limit the account of the genesis of Dogma to +the Antenicene period and designate all else as a development of that. +This is undoubtedly correct so long as our view is limited to the +history of dogma of the Greek Church in the second period, and the +development of it by the Œcumenical Synods. On the other hand, the +Latin Church, in its own way and in its own province, becomes productive +from the days of Augustine onwards; the formal signification of dogma in +the narrower sense becomes different in the middle ages. Both are +repeated in a much greater measure through the Reformation. We may +therefore, in opposition to that division into genesis and development, +regard the whole as a continuous process, in which the contents as well +as the formal authority of dogma are in process of continuous +development." This view is certainly just, and I think is indicated by +myself in what follows. We have to decide here, as so often elsewhere in +our account, between rival points of view. The view favoured by me has +the advantage of making the nature of dogma clearly appear as a product +of the mode of thought of the early church, and that is what it has +remained, in spite of all changes both in form and substance, till the +present day.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote2" name="footnote2"></a><b>Footnote 2:</b><a href="#footnotetag2"> (return) </a><p>See Kattenbusch. Luther's Stellung zu den ökumenischen Symbolen, 1883.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote3" name="footnote3"></a><b>Footnote 3:</b><a href="#footnotetag3"> (return) </a><p>See Ritschl, Geschichte des Pietismus. I. p. 80 ff., 93 ff. +II. p. 60 f.: 88 f. "The Lutheran view of life did not remain pure and +undefiled, but was limited and obscured by the preponderance of dogmatic +interests. Protestantism was not delivered from the womb of the western +Church of the middle ages in full power and equipment, like Athene from +the head of Jupiter. The incompleteness of its ethical view, the +splitting up of its general conceptions into a series of particular +dogmas, the tendency to express its beliefs as a hard and fast whole; +are defects which soon made Protestantism appear to disadvantage in +comparison with the wealth of Mediæval theology and asceticism ... The +scholastic form of pure doctrine is really only the provisional, and not +the final form of Protestantism."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote4" name="footnote4"></a><b>Footnote 4:</b><a href="#footnotetag4"> (return) </a><p>It is very evident how the mediæval and old catholic dogmas were transformed +in the view which Luther originally took of them. In this view we must +remember that he did away with all the presuppositions of dogma, the infallible +Apostolic Canon of Scripture, the infallible teaching function of the Church, +and the infallible Apostolic doctrine and constitution. On this basis dogmas +can only be utterances which do not support faith, but are supported by it. +But, on the other hand, his opposition to all the Apocryphal saints which the +Church had created, compelled him to emphasise faith alone, and to give it a +firm basis in scripture, in order to free it from the burden of tradition. +Here then, very soon, first by Melanchthon, a summary of <i>articuli fidei</i> +was substituted for the faith, and the scriptures recovered their place +as a rule. Luther himself, however, is responsible for both, and so it +came about that very soon the new evangelic standpoint was explained +almost exclusively by the "abolition of abuses", and by no means so +surely by the transformation of the whole doctrinal tradition. The classic +authority for this is the Augsburg confession ("hæc fere summa est doctrina +apud suos, in qua cerni potest nihil inesse, quod discrepet a scripturis +vel ab ecclesia Catholica vel ab ecclesia Romana ... sed dissensio +est de quibusdam abusibus"). The purified catholic doctrine has since +then become the palladium of the Reformation Churches. The refuters +of the Augustana have justly been unwilling to admit the mere "purifying," +but have noted in addition that the Augustana does not say everything +that was urged by Luther and the Doctors (see Ficker, Die +Konfutation des Augsburgischen Bekenntnisse, 1891). At the same time, +however, the Lutheran Church, though not so strongly as the English, +retained the consciousness of being the true Catholics. But, as the history +of Protestantism proves, the original impulse has not remained inoperative. +Though Luther himself all his life measured his personal Christian standing +by an entirely different standard than subjection to a law of faith; +yet, however presumptuous the words may sound, we might say that in +the complicated struggle that was forced on him, he did not always +clearly understand his own faith.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote5" name="footnote5"></a><b>Footnote 5:</b><a href="#footnotetag5"> (return) </a><p>In the modern Romish Church, Dogma is, above all, a judicial regulation +which one has to submit to, and in certain circumstances submission +alone is sufficient, <i>fides implicita</i>. Dogma is thereby just as much +deprived of its original sense and its original authority as by the demand +of the Reformers, that every thing should be based upon a clear understanding +of the Gospel. Moreover, the changed position of the Romish +Church towards dogma is also shewn by the fact that it no longer gives +a plain answer to the question as to what dogma is. Instead of a series +of dogmas definitely defined, and of equal value, there is presented an +infinite multitude of whole and half dogmas, doctrinal directions, pious +opinions, probable theological propositions, etc. It is often a very difficult +question whether a solemn decision has or has not already been +taken on this or that statement, or whether such a decision is still +necessary. Everything that must be believed is nowhere stated, and so +one sometimes hears in Catholic circles the exemplary piety of a cleric +praised with the words that "he believes more than is necessary." The +great dogmatic conflicts within the Catholic Church, since the Council +of Trent, have been silenced by arbitrary Papal pronouncements and +doctrinal directions. Since one has simply to accommodate oneself to +these as laws, it once more appears clear that dogma has become a +judicial regulation, administered by the Pope, which is carried out in an +administrative way and loses itself in an endless casuistry. We do not +mean by this to deny that dogma has a decided value for the pious +Catholic as a Summary of the faith. But in the Catholic Church it is +no longer piety, but obedience that is decisive. The solidarity with the +orthodox Protestants may be explained by political reasons, in order +from political reasons again, to condemn, where it is necessary, all +Protestants as heretics and revolutionaries.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote6" name="footnote6"></a><b>Footnote 6:</b><a href="#footnotetag6"> (return) </a><p>See the discussions of Biedermann (Christliche Dogmatik. 2 Ed. p. 150 +f.) about what he calls the law of stability in the history of religion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote7" name="footnote7"></a><b>Footnote 7:</b><a href="#footnotetag7"> (return) </a><p>See Ritschl's discussion of the methods of the early histories of dogma +in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theologie. 1871, p. 181 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote8" name="footnote8"></a><b>Footnote 8:</b><a href="#footnotetag8"> (return) </a><p>In Catholicism, the impulse which proceeded from Augustine has finally +proved powerless to break the traditional conception of Christianity, as the +Council of Trent and the decrees of the Vatican have shewn. For that very +reason the development of the Roman Catholic Church doctrine belongs to +the history of dogma. Protestantism must, however, under all circumstances +be recognised as a new thing, which indeed in none of its phases has +been free from contradictions.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote9" name="footnote9"></a><b>Footnote 9:</b><a href="#footnotetag9"> (return) </a><p>Here then begins the ecclesiastical theology which takes as +its starting-point the finished dogma it strives to prove or harmonise, +but very soon, as experience has shewn, loses its firm footing in such +efforts and so occasions new crises.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote10" name="footnote10"></a><b>Footnote 10:</b><a href="#footnotetag10"> (return) </a><p>Weizsäcker, Apostolic Age, Vol. I. p. 123. "Christianity as religion is +absolutely inconceivable without theology; first of all, for the same +reasons which called forth the Pauline theology. As a religion it cannot +be separated from the religion of its founder, hence not from historical +knowledge. And as Monotheism and belief in a world purpose, it is the +religion of reason with the inextinguishable impulse of thought. The first +gentile Christians therewith gained the proud consciousness of a gnosis." +But of ecclesiastical Christianity which rests on dogma ready made, as +produced by an earlier epoch, this conception holds good only in a very +qualified way; and of the vigorous Christian piety of the earliest and of +every period, it may also be said that it no less feels the impulse to +think against reason than with reason.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote11" name="footnote11"></a><b>Footnote 11:</b><a href="#footnotetag11"> (return) </a><p>In this sense it is correct to class dogmatic theology as historical +theology, as Schleiermacher has done. If we maintain that for practical +reasons it must be taken out of the province of historical theology, then +we must make it part of practical theology. By dogmatic theology +here, we understand the exposition of Christianity in the form of Church +doctrine, as it has been shaped since the second century. As distinguished +from it, a branch of theological study must be conceived which +harmonises the historical exposition of the Gospel with the general state +of knowledge of the time. The Church can as little dispense with such +a discipline as there can be a Christianity which does not account to +itself for its basis and spiritual contents.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote12" name="footnote12"></a><b>Footnote 12:</b><a href="#footnotetag12"> (return) </a><p>See Eusebius' preface to his Church History. Eusebius in this work +set himself a comprehensive task, but in doing so he never in the remotest +sense thought of a history of dogma. In place of that we have a +history of men "who from generation to generation proclaimed the word +of God orally or by writing," and a history of those who by their +passion for novelties, plunged themselves into the greatest errors.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote13" name="footnote13"></a><b>Footnote 13:</b><a href="#footnotetag13"> (return) </a><p>See for example, B. Schwane, Dogmengesch. d. Vornicänischen Zeit, +1862, where the sense in which dogmas have no historical side is first +expounded, and then it is shewn that dogmas, "notwithstanding, present +a certain side which permits a historical consideration, because in point +of fact they have gone through historical developments." But these historical +developments present themselves simply either as solemn promulgations +and explications, or as private theological speculations.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote14" name="footnote14"></a><b>Footnote 14:</b><a href="#footnotetag14"> (return) </a><p>If we leave out of account the Marcionite gnostic +criticism of ecclesiastical Christianity, Paul of Samosata and Marcellus +of Ancyra may be mentioned as men who, in the earliest period, +criticised the apologetic Alexandrian theology which was being +naturalised (see the remarkable statement of Marcellus in Euseb. C. +Marc. I.4: το του +δογματος +ονομα της +ανθρωπινης +εχεται βουλης +τε και γνωμης +κ.τ.λ. which I have chosen as the motto of this +book). We know too little of Stephen Gobarus (VI. cent.) to enable us to +estimate his review of the doctrine of the Church and its development +(Photius Bibl. 232). With regard to the middle ages (Abelard "Sic et +Non"), see Reuter, Gesch. der relig. Aufklärung im MA., 1875. Hahn +Gesch, der Ketzer, especially in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries, 3 +vols., 1845. Keller, Die Reformation und die alteren Reform-Parteien, +1885.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote15" name="footnote15"></a><b>Footnote 15:</b><a href="#footnotetag15"> (return) </a><p>See Voigt, Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Alterthums. 2 vols., +1881, especially vol. II p. 1 ff. 363 ff. 494 ff. ("Humanism and the science of +history"). The direct importance of humanism for illuminating the history +of the middle ages is very little, and least of all for the history of the +Church and of dogma. The only prominent works here are those of +Saurentius Valla and Erasmus. The criticism of the scholastic dogmas +of the Church and the Pope began as early as the 12th century. For +the attitude of the Renaissance to religion, see Burckhardt, Die Cultur +der Renaissance. 2 vols., 1877.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote16" name="footnote16"></a><b>Footnote 16:</b><a href="#footnotetag16"> (return) </a><p>See Holtzmann, Kanon und Tradition, 1859, Hase, Handbuch der +protest. Polemik, 1878. Joh Delitszch, Das Lehrsystem der röm. Kirche, +1875. New revelations, however, are rejected, and bold assumptions +leading that way are not favoured: See Schwane, above work p. 11: +"The content of revelation is not enlarged by the decisions or teaching +of the Church, nor are new revelations added in course of time ... +Christian truth cannot therefore in its content be completed by the +Church, nor has she ever claimed the right of doing so, but always +where new designations or forms of dogma became necessary for the +putting down of error or the instruction of the faithful, she would always +teach what she had received in Holy scripture or in the oral tradition +of the Apostles." Recent Catholic accounts of the history of dogma are +Klee, Lehrbuch der D.G. 2 vols, 1837, (Speculative). Schwane, Dogmengesch. +der Vornicänischen Zeit, 1862, der patrist Zeit, 1869; der Mittleren +Zeit, 1882. Bach, Die D.G. des MA. 1873. There is a wealth of material +for the history of dogma in Kuhn's Dogmatîk, as well as in the great +controversial writings occasioned by the celebrated work of Bellarmin; +Disputationes de controversiis Christianæ fidei adversus hujus temporis +hæreticos, 1581-1593. It need not be said that, in spite of their inability +to treat the history of dogma historically and critically, much may be +learned from these works, and some other striking monographs of Roman +Catholic scholars. But everything in history that is fitted to shake the +high antiquity and unanimous attestation of the Catholic dogmas, becomes +here a problem, the solution of which is demanded, though indeed its +carrying out often requires a very exceptional intellectual subtlety.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote17" name="footnote17"></a><b>Footnote 17:</b><a href="#footnotetag17"> (return) </a><p>Historical interest in Protestantism has grown up around the questions +as to the power of the Pope, the significance of Councils, or the Scripturalness +of the doctrines set up by them, and about the meaning of +the Lord's supper, of the conception of it by the Church Fathers; (see +Œcolampadius and Melanchthon.) Protestants were too sure that the doctrine +of justification was taught in the scriptures to feel any need of seeking proofs +for it by studies in the history of dogma, and Luther also dispensed with the +testimony of history for the dogma of the Lord's supper. The task of +shewing how far and in what way Luther and the Reformers compounded +with history has not even yet been taken up. And yet there may be +found in Luther's writings surprising and excellent critical comments on +the history of dogma and the theology of the Fathers, as well as genial +conceptions which have certainly remained inoperative; see especially +the treatise "Von den Conciliis und Kirchen," and his judgment on +different Church Fathers. In the first edition of the <i>Loci</i> of Melanchthon we +have also critical material for estimating the old systems of dogma. Calvin's +depreciatory estimate of the Trinitarian and Christological Formula, which, +however, he retracted at a later period is well known.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote18" name="footnote18"></a><b>Footnote 18:</b><a href="#footnotetag18"> (return) </a><p>Protestant Church history was brought into being by the Interim, +Flacius being its father, see his Catalogus Testium Veritatis, and the +so called Magdeburg Centuries 1559-1574, also Jundt Les Centuries de +Magdebourg Paris, 1883 Von Engelhardt (Christenthum Justins, p. 9 ff.) +has drawn attention to the estimate of Justin in the Centuries, and +has justly insisted on the high importance of this first attempt at a +criticism of the Church Fathers Khefoth (Eml. in. d. D.G. 1839) has the +merit of pointing out the somewhat striking judgment of A. Hyperius on +the history of dogma Chemnitz, Examen concilii Tridentini, 1565 Forbesius +a Corse (a Scotsman) Instructiones historico-theologiæ de doctrina +Christiana 1645.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote19" name="footnote19"></a><b>Footnote 19:</b><a href="#footnotetag19"> (return) </a><p>The learning, the diligence in collecting, and the carefulness of the +Benedictines and Maurians, as well as of English Dutch and French +theologians, such as Casaubon, Vossius, Pearson, Dallaus Spanheim, +Grabe, Basnage, etc. have never since been equalled, far less surpassed. +Even in the literary historical and higher criticism these scholars have +done splendid work, so far as the confessional dogmas did not come +into question</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote20" name="footnote20"></a><b>Footnote 20:</b><a href="#footnotetag20"> (return) </a><p>See especially, G. Arnold, Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzerhistorie, +1699, also Baur, Epochen der kirchlichen Geschichtsschreibung p. +84 ff., Floring G. Arnold als Kirchenhistoriker Darmstadt, 1883. The +latter determines correctly the measure of Arnold's importance. His work +was the direct preparation for an impartial examination of the history of +dogma however partial it was in itself Pietism, here and there, after Spener, +declared war against scholastic dogmatics as a hindrance to piety, and in +doing so broke the ban under which the knowledge of history lay captive.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote21" name="footnote21"></a><b>Footnote 21:</b><a href="#footnotetag21"> (return) </a><p>The investigations of the so-called English Deists about the Christian +religion contain the first, and to some extent a very significant free-spirited +attempt at a critical view of the history of dogma (see Lechler, +History of English Deism, 1841). But the criticism is an abstract rarely +a historical one. Some very learned works bearing on the history of +dogma were written in England against the position of the Deists especially +by Lardner; see also at an earlier time Bull, Defensio fidei nic.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote22" name="footnote22"></a><b>Footnote 22:</b><a href="#footnotetag22"> (return) </a><p>Calixtus of Helmstadt was the forerunner of Leibnitz with regard +to Church history. But the merit of having recognised the main problem +of the history of dogma does not belong to Calixtus. By pointing out +what Protestantism and Catholicism had in common he did not in any +way clear up the historico-critical problem. On the other hand, the +<i>Consensus repetitus</i> of the Wittenberg theologians shews what fundamental +questions Calixtus had already stirred.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote23" name="footnote23"></a><b>Footnote 23:</b><a href="#footnotetag23"> (return) </a><p>Among the numerous historical writings of Mosheim may be mentioned +specially his Dissert ad hist Eccles pertinentes 2 vols. 1731-1741, as +well as the work "De rebus Christianorum ante Constantinum M Commentarii," +1753; see also "Institutiones hist Eccl" last Edition, 1755.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote24" name="footnote24"></a><b>Footnote 24:</b><a href="#footnotetag24"> (return) </a><p>Walch, "Entwurf einer vollständigen Historie der Ketzereien, Spaltungen +und Religionsstreitigkeiten bis auf die Zeiten der Reformation." +11 Thle (incomplete), 1762-1785. See also his "Entwurf einer vollständigen +Historie der Kirchenversammlungen" 1759, as well as numerous monographs +on the history of dogma. Such were already produced by the older +Walch, whose "Histor. theol Einleitung in die Religionsstreitigkeiten der +Ev. Luth. Kirche," 5 vols. 1730-1739, and "Histor.-theol. Einleit. in die +Religionsstreitigkeiten welche sonderlich ausser der Ev Luth. Kirche +entstanden sind 5 Thle", 1733-1736, had already put polemics behind the +knowledge of history (see Gass. "Gesch. der protest. Dogmatik," 3rd Vol. +p. 205 ff).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote25" name="footnote25"></a><b>Footnote 25:</b><a href="#footnotetag25"> (return) </a><p>Opusc. p. 576 f.: "Ex quo fit, ut nullo modo in theologicis, quæ omnia e +libris antiquis hebraicis, grascis, latinis ducuntur, possit aliquis bene in definiendo +versari et a peccatis multis et magnis sibi cavere, nisi litteras et historiam +assumat." The title of a programme of Crusius, Ernesti's opponent, +"De dogmatum Christianorum historia cum probatione dogmatum non confundenda," +1770, is significant of the new insight which was steadily +making way.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote26" name="footnote26"></a><b>Footnote 26:</b><a href="#footnotetag26"> (return) </a><p>Semler, Einleitung zu Baumgartens evang. Glaubenslehre, 1759: also +Geschichte der Glaubenslehre, zu Baumgartens Untersuch. theol. Streitigkeiten, +1762-1764. Semler paved the way for the view that dogmas have +arisen and been gradually developed under definite historical conditions. +He was the first to grasp the problem of the relation of Catholicism +to early Christianity, because he freed the early Christian documents +from the fetters of the Canon. Schröckh (Christl. Kirchengesch., 1786,) in +the spirit of Semler described with impartiality and care the changes +of the dogmas.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote27" name="footnote27"></a><b>Footnote 27:</b><a href="#footnotetag27"> (return) </a><p>Rössler, Lehrbegriff der Christlichen Kirche in den 3 ersten Jahrh. +1775; also, Arbeiten by Burscher, Heinrich, Stäudlin, etc., see especially, +Löffler's "Abhandlung welche eine kurze Darstellung der Entstehungsart +der Dreieinigkeit enthält," 1792, in the translation of Souverain's Le +Platonisme devoilé, 1700. The question as to the Platonism of the +Fathers, this fundamental question of the history of dogma, was raised +even by Luther and Flacius, and was very vigorously debated at the +end of the 17<sup>th</sup> and beginning of the 18<sup>th</sup> centuries, after the Socinians +had already affirmed it strongly. The question once more emerges on +German soil in the church history of G. Arnold, but cannot be said to +have received the attention it deserves in the 150 years that have +followed (see the literature of the controversy in Tzschirner, Fall des +Heidenthums, p. 580 f.). Yet the problem was first thrust aside by the +speculative view of the history of Christianity.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote28" name="footnote28"></a><b>Footnote 28:</b><a href="#footnotetag28"> (return) </a><p>Lange. Ausführ. Gesch. der Dogmen, oder der Glaubenslehre der +Christl. Kirche nach den Kirchenväter ausgearbeitet. 1796.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote29" name="footnote29"></a><b>Footnote 29:</b><a href="#footnotetag29"> (return) </a><p>Münscher, Handb. d. Christl. D.G. 4 vols. first 6 Centuries 1797-1809; +Lehrbuch, 1st Edit. 1811; 3rd. Edit. edited by v Cölln, Hupfeld +and Neudecker, 1832-1838. Planck's epoch-making work: Gesch. der +Veränderungen und der Bildung unseres protestantischen Lehrbegriffs. +6 vols. 1791-1800, had already for the most part appeared. Contemporary +with Münscher are Wundemann, Gesch. d. Christl. Glaubenslehren +vom Zeitalter des Athanasius bis auf Gregor. d. Gr. 2 Thle. 1789-1799; +Münter, Handbuch der alteren Christl. D.G. hrsg. von Ewers, 2 vols. +1802-1804; Stäudlin, Lehrbuch der Dogmatik und Dogmengeschichte, +1800, last Edition 1822, and Beck, Comment, hist. decretorum religionis +Christianæ, 1801.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote30" name="footnote30"></a><b>Footnote 30:</b><a href="#footnotetag30"> (return) </a><p>Augusti, Lehrb. d. Christl. D.G. 1805. 4 Edit. 1835. Berthold, Handb. +der D.G. 2 vols. 1822-1823. Schickedanz, Versuch einer Gesch. d. Christl. +Glaubenslehre etc. 1827. Ruperti, Geschichte der Dogmen, 1831. Lenz, +Gesch. der Christl. Dogmen. 2 parts. 1834-1835. J.G.V. Engelhardt, +Dogmengesch. 1839. See also Giesler, Dogmengesch. 2 vols. edited by +Redepenning, 1855: also Illgen, Ueber den Werth der Christl. D.G. 1817.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote31" name="footnote31"></a><b>Footnote 31:</b><a href="#footnotetag31"> (return) </a><p>Baumgarten Crusius, Lehrb. d. Christl. D.G. 1852: also compendium +d. Christl. D.G. 2 parts 1830-1846, the second part edited by Hase.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote32" name="footnote32"></a><b>Footnote 32:</b><a href="#footnotetag32"> (return) </a><p>Meier, Lehrb. d. D.G. 1840. 2nd Edit. revised by G. Baur 1854.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote33" name="footnote33"></a><b>Footnote 33:</b><a href="#footnotetag33"> (return) </a><p>The "Special History of Dogma" in Baumgarten Crusius, in which +every particular dogma is by itself pursued through the whole history +of the Church, is of course entirely unfruitful. But even the opinions +which are given in the "General History of Dogma," are frequently +very far from the mark, (Cf., <i>e.g.</i>, § 14 and p. 67), which is the more +surprising as no one can deny that he takes a scholarly view of history.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote34" name="footnote34"></a><b>Footnote 34:</b><a href="#footnotetag34"> (return) </a><p>Meier's Lehrbuch is formally and materially a very important piece +of work, the value of which has not been sufficiently recognised, because +the author followed neither the track of Neander nor of Baur. Besides +the excellences noted in the text, may be further mentioned, that almost +everywhere Meier has distinguished correctly between the history of +dogma and the history of theology, and has given an account only of +the former.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote35" name="footnote35"></a><b>Footnote 35:</b><a href="#footnotetag35"> (return) </a><p>Biedermann (Christl Dogmatik 2 Edit 1 vol. p. 332 f) says, "The history +of the development of the Dogma of the Person of Christ will bring before +us step by step the ascent of faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ to its metaphysical +basis in the nature of his person." This was the quite normal and necessary +way of actual faith and is not to be reckoned as a confused mixture of +heterogeneous philosophical opinions. The only thing taken from the ideas +of contemporary philosophy was the special material of consciousness in +which the doctrine of Christ's Divinity was at any time expressed. The process +of this doctrinal development was an inward necessary one.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote36" name="footnote36"></a><b>Footnote 36:</b><a href="#footnotetag36"> (return) </a><p>Baur, Lehrbuch der Christl D.G. 1847 3rd Edit. 1867, also Vorles +uber die Christl D.G. edited by F. Baur 1865-68. Further the Monographs, +"Ueber die Christl Lehre v.d. Versohnung in ihrergesch Entw. 1838." Ueber +die Christl Lehre v.d. Dreieinigkeit u.d. Menschwerdung, 1841, etc. D.F. +Strauss preceded him with his work Die Christl Glaubenslehre in ihrer +gesch Entw 2 vols 1840-41. From the stand-point of the Hegelian right we +have Marheineke Christl D.G. edited by Matthias and Vatke 1849. From the +same stand-point though at the same time influenced by Schleiermacher +Dorner wrote "The History of the Person of Christ."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote37" name="footnote37"></a><b>Footnote 37:</b><a href="#footnotetag37"> (return) </a><p>See p. 63: "As Christianity appeared in contrast with Judaism and +Heathenism, and could only represent a new and peculiar form of the religious +consciousness in distinction from both reducing the contrasts of both to a +unity in itself, so also the first difference of tendencies developing themselves +within Christianity, must be determined by the relation in which it stood to +Judaism on the one hand, and to Heathenism on the other." Compare also +the very characteristic introduction to the first volume of the Vorlesungen.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote38" name="footnote38"></a><b>Footnote 38:</b><a href="#footnotetag38"> (return) </a><p>Hagenbach's Manual of the history of dogma might be put alongside +of Neander's work. It agrees with it both in plan and spirit. But the +material of the history of dogma which it offers in superabundance, seems +far less connectedly worked out than by Neander. In Shedd's history of +Christian doctrine the Americans possess a presentation of the history +of dogma worth noting 2 vols 3 Edit 1883. The work of Fr. Bonifas +Hist des Dogmes 2 vols 1886 appeared after the death of the author +and is not important.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote39" name="footnote39"></a><b>Footnote 39:</b><a href="#footnotetag39"> (return) </a><p>No doubt Kliefoth also maintains for each period a stage of the +disintegration of dogma but this is not to be understood in the ordinary +sense of the word. Besides there are ideas in this introduction which +hardly obtain the approval of their author to-day.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote40" name="footnote40"></a><b>Footnote 40:</b><a href="#footnotetag40"> (return) </a><p>Thomasius' Die Christl. Dogmengesch. als Entwickel. Gesch. des +Kirchl. Lehrbegriffs. 2 vols. 1874-76. 2nd Edit intelligently and carefully +edited by Bonwetsch. and Seeberg, 1887. (Seeberg has produced almost +a new work in vol. II). From the same stand-point is the manual of the +history of dogma by H. Schmid, 1859, (in 4th Ed. revised and transformed +into an excellent collection of passages from the sources by Hauck, 1887), +as well as the Luther. Dogmatik (Vol. II 1864: Der Kirchenglaube) of +Kahnis, which, however, subjects particular dogmas to a freer criticism.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote41" name="footnote41"></a><b>Footnote 41:</b><a href="#footnotetag41"> (return) </a><p>See Vol. 1. p. 14.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote42" name="footnote42"></a><b>Footnote 42:</b><a href="#footnotetag42"> (return) </a><p>See Vol. 1. p. 11. "The first period treats of the development of the +great main dogmas which were to become the basis of the further development +(the Patristic age). The problem of the second period was, +partly to work up this material theologically, and partly to develop it. +But this development, under the influence of the Hierarchy, fell into false +paths, and became partly, at least, corrupt (the age of Scholasticism), +and therefore a reformation was necessary. It was reserved for this third +period to carry back the doctrinal formation which had become abnormal, +to the old sound paths, and on the other hand, in virtue of the regeneration +of the Church which followed, to deepen it and fashion it according +to that form which it got in the doctrinal systems of the Evangelic +Church, while the remaining part fixed its own doctrine in the decrees of +Trent (period of the Reformation)." This view of history, which, from +the Christian stand-point, will allow absolutely nothing to be said against +the doctrinal formation of the early Church, is a retrogression from the +view of Luther and the writers of the "Centuries," for these were well +aware that the corruption did not first begin in the middle ages.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote43" name="footnote43"></a><b>Footnote 43:</b><a href="#footnotetag43"> (return) </a><p>This fulfils a requirement urged by Weizsäcker (Jahrb. f. Deutsche +Theol 1866 p. 170 ff.)</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote44" name="footnote44"></a><b>Footnote 44:</b><a href="#footnotetag44"> (return) </a><p>See Ritschl's Essay, "Ueber die Methode der älteren Dogmengeschichte" +(Jahrb. f. deutsche Theol. 1871 p. 191 ff.) in which the advance +made by Nitzsch is estimated, and at the same time, an arrangement +proposed for the treatment of the earlier history of dogma which would +group the material more clearly and more suitably than has been done by +Nitzsch. After having laid the foundation for a correct historical estimate +of the development of early Christianity in his work "Entstehung der +Alt-Katholischen Kirche", 1857, Ritschl published an epoch-making study +in the history of dogma in his "History of the doctrine of justification +and reconciliation" 2 edit. 1883. We have no superabundance of good +monographs on the history of dogma. There are few that give such exact +information regarding the Patristic period as that of Von Engelhardt +"Ueber das Christenthum Justin's", 1878, and Zahn's work on Marcellus, +1867. Among the investigators of our age, Renan above all has clearly +recognised that there are only two main periods in the history of dogma, +and that the changes which Christianity experienced after the establishment +of the Catholic Church bear no proportion to the changes which +preceded. His words are as follows (Hist. des origin. du Christianisme +T. VII. p. 503 f.):—the division about the year 180 is certainly placed +too early, regard being had to what was then really authoritative in the +Church.—"Si nous comparons maintenant le Christianisme, tel qu'il existait +vers l'an 180, au Christianisme du IVe et du Ve, siècle, au Christianisme +du moyen âge, au Christianisme de nos jours, nous trouvons qu'en réalité il +s'est augmenté des très peu de chose dans les siècles qui ont suivis. En 180, le +Nouveau Testament est clos: il ne s'y ajoutera plus un seul livre nouveau(?). +Lentement, les Épitres de Paul out conquis leur place à la suite des +Evangiles, dans le code sacré et dans la liturgie. Quant aux dogmes, rien +n'est fixé; mais le germe de tout existe; presque aucune idée n'apparaitra +qui ne puisse faire valoir des autorités du 1er et du 2e siècles. Il y a +du trop, il y a des contradictions; le travail théologique consistera bien +plus à émonder, à écarter des superfluités qu'à inventer du nouveau. +L'Église laissera tomber une foule de choses mal commencées, elle sortira +de bien des impasses. Elle a encore deux coeurs, pour ainsi dire; elle a +plusieurs têtes; ces anomalies tomberont; mais aucun dogme vraiment +original ne se formera plus." Also the discussions in chapters 28-34, of +the same volume. H. Thiersch (Die Kirche im Apostolischen Zeitalter, +1852) reveals a deep insight into the difference between the spirit of the +New Testament writers and the post-Apostolic Fathers, but he has +overdone these differences and sought to explain them by the mythological +assumption of an Apostasy. A great amount of material for the +history of dogma may be found in the great work of Böhringer, Die +Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen, oder die Kirchengeschichte in Biographien. +2 Edit. 1864.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote45" name="footnote45"></a><b>Footnote 45:</b><a href="#footnotetag45"> (return) </a><p>By the connection with general church history we must, above all, understand, +a continuous regard to the world within which the church has been +developed. The most recent works on the history of the church and of +dogma, those of Renan, Overbeck (Anfänge der patristischen Litteratur), Aube, +Von Engelhardt (Justin), Kühn (Minucius Felix). Hatch ("Organization of the +early church," and especially his posthumous work "The influence of Greek +ideas and usages upon the Christian Church," 1890, in which may be found the +most ample proof for the conception of the early history of dogma which is +set forth in the following pages), are in this respect worthy of special note. +Deserving of mention also is R. Rothe, who, in his "Vorlesungen über Kirchengeschichte", +edited by Weingarten, 1875, 2 vols, gave most significant suggestions +towards a really historical conception of the history of the church +and of dogma. To Rothe belongs the undiminished merit of realising thoroughly +the significance of nationality in church history. But the theology of our +century is also indebted for the first scientific conception of Catholicism, not +to Marheineke or Winer, but to Rothe. (See Vol II. pp. 1-11 especially p. 7 f.). +"The development of the Christian Church in the Græco-Roman world was not +at the same time a development of that world by the Church and further by +Christianity. There remained, as the result of the process, nothing but the completed +Church. The world which had built it had made itself bankrupt in doing +so." With regard to the origin and development of the Catholic cultus and +constitution, nay, even of the Ethic (see Luthardt, Die antike Ethik, 1887, +preface), that has been recognised by Protestant scholars, which one always +hesitates to recognise with regard to catholic dogma: see the excellent remarks +of Schwegler, Nachapostolisches Zeitalter. Vol. 1. p. 3 ff. It may be hoped that +an intelligent consideration of early Christian literature will form the bridge to +a broad and intelligent view of the history of dogma. The essay of Overbeck +mentioned above (Histor. Zeitschrift. N. F. XII p. 417 ff.) may be most heartily +recommended in this respect. It is very gratifying to find an investigator so +conservative as Sohm, now fully admitting that "Christian theology grew up +in the second and third centuries, when its foundations were laid for all time (?), +the last great production of the Hellenic Spirit." (Kirchengeschichte im +Grundriss, 1888. p. 37). The same scholar in his very important Kirchenrecht. +Bd. I. 1892, has transferred to the history of the origin of Church law and Church +organization, the points of view which I have applied in the following account +to the consideration of dogma. He has thereby succeeded in correcting many +old errors and prejudices; but in my opinion he has obscured the truth by +exaggerations connected with a conception, not only of original Christianity, +but also of the Gospel in general, which is partly a narrow legal view, partly +an enthusiastic one. He has arrived <i>ex errore per veritatem ad errorem</i>; but +there are few books from which so much may be learned about early church +history as from this paradoxical "Kirchenrecht."</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page41" id="page41"></a>[pg 41]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_0_II" id="CHAP_0_II"></a>CHAPTER II</h2> + +<h3>THE PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA</h3> + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_I" id="SEC_0_II_I"></a>§ 1. <i>Introductory.</i></h3> + + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_GOSPEL" id="SEC_0_II_I_GOSPEL"></a>The Gospel presents itself as an Apocalyptic message on +the soil of the Old Testament, and as the fulfilment of the +law and the prophets, and yet is a new thing, the creation +of a universal religion on the basis of that of the Old Testament. +It appeared when the time was fulfilled, that is, it is +not without a connection with the stage of religious and spiritual +development which was brought about by the intercourse +of Jews and Greeks, and was established in the Roman +Empire; but still it is a new religion because it cannot be +separated from Jesus Christ. When the traditional religion +has become too narrow the new religion usually appears as +something of a very abstract nature; philosophy comes upon +the scene, and religion withdraws from social life and becomes +a private matter. But here an overpowering personality +has appeared—the Son of God. Word and deed coincide in +that personality, and as it leads men into a new communion +with God, it unites them at the same time inseparably with +itself, enables them to act on the world as light and leaven, +and joins them together in a spiritual unity and an active +confederacy.</p> + +<p>2. Jesus Christ brought no new doctrine, but he set forth +in his own person a holy life with God and before God, and +gave himself in virtue of this life to the service of his brethren +in order to win them for the Kingdom of God, that is, +to lead them out of selfishness and the world to God, out of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page42" id="page42"></a>[pg 42]</span> +the natural connections and contrasts to a union in love, and +prepare them for an eternal kingdom and an eternal life. +But while working for this Kingdom of God he did not withdraw +from the religious and political communion of his people, +nor did he induce his disciples to leave that communion. On +the contrary, he described the Kingdom of God as the fulfilment +of the promises given to the nation, and himself as the +Messiah whom that nation expected. By doing so he secured +for his new message, and with it his own person, a place in +the system of religious ideas and hopes, which by means of +the Old Testament were then, in diverse forms, current in the +Jewish nation. The origin of a doctrine concerning the Messianic +hope, in which the Messiah was no longer an unknown +being, but Jesus of Nazareth, along with the new temper and +disposition of believers was a direct result of the impression +made by the person of Jesus. The conception of the Old Testament +in accordance with the <i>analogia fidei</i>, that is, in accordance +with the conviction that this Jesus of Nazareth is the +Christ, was therewith given. Whatever sources of comfort and +strength Christianity, even in its New Testament, has possessed +or does possess up to the present, is for the most part taken +from the Old Testament, viewed from a Christian stand-point, +in virtue of the impression of the person of Jesus. Even its +dross was changed into gold; its hidden treasures were brought +forth, and while the earthly and transitory were recognised as +symbols of the heavenly and eternal, there rose up a world +of blessings, of holy ordinances, and of sure grace prepared +by God from eternity. One could joyfully make oneself at +home in it; for its long history guaranteed a sure future and +a blessed close, while it offered comfort and certainty in all +the changes of life to every individual heart that would only +raise itself to God. From the positive position which Jesus +took up towards the Old Testament, that is, towards the religious +traditions of his people, his Gospel gained a footing +which, later on, preserved it from dissolving in the glow of +enthusiasm, or melting away in the ensnaring dream of antiquity, +that dream of the indestructible Divine nature of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page43" id="page43"></a>[pg 43]</span> +human spirit, and the nothingness and baseness of all material +things.<a id="footnotetag46" name="footnotetag46"></a><a href="#footnote46"><sup>46</sup></a> But from the positive attitude of Jesus to the Jewish +tradition, there followed also, for a generation that had long +been accustomed to grope after the Divine active in the world, +the summons to think out a theory of the media of revelation, +and so put an end to the uncertainty with which speculation +had hitherto been afflicted. This, like every theory of religion, +concealed in itself the danger of crippling the power of faith; +for men are ever prone to compound with religion itself by a +religious theory.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_DETACHMENT" id="SEC_0_II_I_DETACHMENT"></a>3. The result of the preaching of Jesus, however, in the +case of the believing Jews, was not only the illumination of +the Old Testament by the Gospel and the confirmation of the +Gospel by the Old Testament, but not less, though indirectly, +the detachment of believers from the religious community of +the Jews from the Jewish Church. How this came about +cannot be discussed here: we may satisfy ourselves with the +fact that it was essentially accomplished in the first two +generations of believers. The Gospel was a message for humanity +even where there was no break with Judaism: but it +seemed impossible to bring this message home to men who +were not Jews in any other way than by leaving the Jewish +Church. But to leave that Church was to declare it to be +worthless, and that could only be done by conceiving it as a +malformation from its very commencement, or assuming that +it had temporarily or completely fulfilled its mission. In +either case it was necessary to put another in its place, for, +according to the Old Testament, it was unquestionable that +God had not only given revelations, but through these revelations +had founded a nation, a religious community. The +result, also, to which the conduct of the unbelieving Jews and +the social union of the disciples of Jesus required by that +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page44" id="page44"></a>[pg 44]</span> +conduct, led, was carried home with irresistible power: believers +in Christ are the community of God, they are the +true Israel, the εκκλησια +του θεου: +but the Jewish Church persisting +in its unbelief is the Synagogue of Satan. Out of this +consciousness sprang—first as a power in which one believed, +but which immediately began to be operative, though not as +a commonwealth—the christian church, a special communion +of hearts on the basis of a personal union with God, established +by Christ and mediated by the Spirit; a communion whose +essential mark was to claim as its own the Old Testament +and the idea of being the people of God, to sweep aside the +Jewish conception of the Old Testament and the Jewish Church, +and thereby gain the shape and power of a community that +is capable of a mission for the world.</p> + +<p>4. This independent Christian community could not have +been formed had not Judaism, in consequence of inner and +outer developments, then reached a point at which it must +either altogether cease to grow or burst its shell. This community +is the presupposition of the history of dogma, and the +position which it took up towards the Jewish tradition is, +strictly speaking, the point of departure for all further developments, +so far as with the removal of all national and ceremonial +peculiarities it proclaimed itself to be what the Jewish +Church wished to be. We find the Christian Church about the +middle of the third century, after severe crisis, in nearly the +same position to the Old Testament and to Judaism as it was +150 or 200 years earlier.<a id="footnotetag47" name="footnotetag47"></a><a href="#footnote47"><sup>47</sup></a> It makes the same claim to the +Old Testament, and builds its faith and hope upon its teaching. +It is also, as before, strictly anti-national; above all, anti-judaic, +and sentences the Jewish religious community to the +abyss of hell. It might appear, then, as though the basis for +the further development of Christianity as a church was completely +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page45" id="page45"></a>[pg 45]</span> +given from the moment in which the first breach of +believers with the synagogue and the formation of independent +Christian communities took place. The problem, the +solution of which will always exercise this church, so far as it +reflects upon its faith, will be to turn the Old Testament +more completely to account in its own sense, so as to condemn +the Jewish Church with its particular and national forms.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_ROMAN" id="SEC_0_II_I_ROMAN"></a>5. But the rule even for the Christian use of the Old Testament +lay originally in the living connection in which one +stood with the Jewish people and its traditions, and a new +religious community, a religious commonwealth, was not yet +realised, although it existed for faith and thought. If again +we compare the Church about the middle of the third century +with the condition of Christendom 150 or 200 years before, +we shall find that there is now a real religious commonwealth, +while at the earlier period there were only communities +who believed in a heavenly Church, whose earthly image +they were, endeavoured to give it expression with the simplest +means, and lived in the future as strangers and pilgrims +on the earth, hastening to meet the Kingdom of whose existence +they had the surest guarantee. We now really find a +new commonwealth, politically formed and equipped with +fixed forms of all kinds. We recognise in these forms few +Jewish, but many Græco-Roman features, and finally, we perceive +also in the doctrine of faith on which this commonwealth +is based, the philosophic spirit of the Greeks. We find +a Church as a political union and worship institute, a formulated +faith and a sacred learning; but one thing we no longer +find, the old enthusiasm and individualism which had not felt +itself fettered by subjection to the authority of the Old Testament. +Instead of enthusiastic independent Christians, we +find a new literature of revelation, the New Testament, and +Christian priests. When did these formations begin? How and +by what influence was the living faith transformed into the +creed to be believed, the surrender to Christ into a philosophic +Christology, the Holy Church into the <i>corpus permixtum</i>, +the glowing hope of the Kingdom of heaven into a doctrine +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page46" id="page46"></a>[pg 46]</span> +of immortality and deification, prophecy into a learned exegesis +and theological science, the bearers of the spirit into +clerics, the brethren into laity held in tutelage, miracles and +healings into nothing, or into priestcraft, the fervent prayers +into a solemn ritual, renunciation of the world into a jealous +dominion over the world, the "spirit" into constraint and law?</p> + +<p>There can be no doubt about the answer: these formations +are as old in their origin as the detachment of the Gospel +from the Jewish Church. A religious faith which seeks to +establish a communion of its own in opposition to another, +is compelled to borrow from that other what it needs. The religion +which is life and feeling of the heart cannot be converted +into a knowledge determining the motley multitude of men +without deferring to their wishes and opinions. Even the holiest +must clothe itself in the same existing earthly forms as +the profane if it wishes to found on earth a confederacy +which is to take the place of another, and if it does not +wish to enslave, but to determine the reason. When the Gospel +was rejected by the Jewish nation, and had disengaged itself +from all connection with that nation, it was already settled +whence it must take the material to form for itself a new +body and be transformed into a Church and a theology. National +and particular, in the ordinary sense of the word, these +forms could not be: the contents of the Gospel were too rich +for that; but separated from Judaism, nay, even before that +separation, the Christian religion came in contact with the Roman +world and with a culture which had already mastered +the world, viz., the Greek. The Christian Church and its doctrine +were developed within the Roman world and Greek culture +in opposition to the Jewish Church. This fact is just as +important for the history of dogma as the other stated above, +that this Church was continuously nourished on the Old Testament. +Christendom was of course conscious of being in +opposition to the empire and its culture, as well as to Judaism; +but this from the beginning—apart from a few exceptions—was +not without reservations. No man can serve +two masters; but in setting up a spiritual power in this world +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page47" id="page47"></a>[pg 47]</span> +one must serve an earthly master, even when he desires to +naturalise the spiritual in the world. As a consequence of +the complete break with the Jewish Church there followed +not only the strict necessity of quarrying the stones for the +building of the Church from the Græco-Roman world, but +also the idea that Christianity has a more positive relation +to that world than to the synagogue. And, as the Church +was being built, the original enthusiasm must needs vanish. +The separation from Judaism having taken place, it was necessary +that the spirit of another people should be admitted, +and should also materially determine the manner of turning +the Old Testament to advantage.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_SPIRIT" id="SEC_0_II_I_SPIRIT"></a>6. But an inner necessity was at work here no less than +an outer. Judaism and Hellenism in the age of Christ were +opposed to each other, not only as dissimilar powers of equal +value, but the latter having its origin among a small people, +became a universal spiritual power, which, severed from +its original nationality, had for that very reason penetrated +foreign nations. It had even laid hold of Judaism, and the +anxious care of her professional watchmen to hedge round +the national possession, is but a proof of the advancing decomposition +within the Jewish nation. Israel, no doubt, had a +sacred treasure which was of greater value than all the treasures +of the Greeks,—the living God—but in what miserable +vessels was this treasure preserved, and how much inferior +was all else possessed by this nation in comparison with the +riches, the power, the delicacy and freedom of the Greek +spirit and its intellectual possessions. A movement like that +of Christianity, which discovered to the Jew the soul whose +dignity was not dependent on its descent from Abraham, but +on its responsibility to God, could not continue in the framework +of Judaism however expanded, but must soon recognise +in that world which the Greek spirit had discovered and prepared, +the field which belonged to it: εικοτως +Ιουδαιοις μεν +νομος, 'Ελλεσι +δε φιλοσοφια +μεχρις της +παρουσιας +εντευθεν δε +'η κλησις 'η +καθολικη +[to the Jews the law, to the Greeks Philosophy, +up to the Parousia; from that time the catholic invitation.] +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page48" id="page48"></a>[pg 48]</span> +But the Gospel at first was preached exclusively to +the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and that which inwardly +united it with Hellenism did not yet appear in any doctrine +or definite form of knowledge.</p> + +<p>On the contrary, the Church doctrine of faith, in the preparatory +stage, from the Apologists up to the time of Origen, hardly +in any point shews the traces, scarcely even the remembrance +of a time in which the Gospel was not detached from Judaism. +For that very reason it is absolutely impossible to understand +this preparation and development solely from the writings that +remain to us as monuments of that short earliest period. The +attempts at deducing the genesis of the Church's doctrinal +system from the theology of Paul, or from compromises +between Apostolic doctrinal ideas, will always miscarry; +for they fail to note that to the most important premises +of the Catholic doctrine of faith belongs an element which +we cannot recognise as dominant in the New Testament,<a id="footnotetag48" name="footnotetag48"></a><a href="#footnote48"><sup>48</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page49" id="page49"></a>[pg 49]</span> +viz., the Hellenic spirit.<a id="footnotetag49" name="footnotetag49"></a><a href="#footnote49"><sup>49</sup></a> As far backwards as we can trace +the history of the propagation of the Church's doctrine of +faith, from the middle of the third century to the end of the +first, we nowhere perceive a leap, or the sudden influx of an +entirely new element. What we perceive is rather the gradual +disappearance of an original element, the Enthusiastic +and Apocalyptic, that is, of the sure consciousness of an immediate +possession of the Divine Spirit, and the hope of the +future conquering the present; individual piety conscious of +itself and sovereign, living in the future world, recognising no +external authority and no external barriers. This piety became +ever weaker and passed away: the utilising of the Codex of +Revelation, the Old Testament, proportionally increased with +the Hellenic influences which controlled the process, for the +two went always hand in hand. At an earlier period the +Churches made very little use of either, because they had in +individual religious inspiration on the basis of Christ's preaching +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page50" id="page50"></a>[pg 50]</span> +and the sure hope of his Kingdom which was near at hand, +much more than either could bestow. The factors whose +co-operation we observe in the second and third centuries, were +already operative among the earliest Gentile Christians. We +nowhere find a yawning gulf in the great development which +lies between the first Epistle of Clement and the work of +Origen, Περι αρχων. +Even the importance which the "Apostolic" +was to obtain, was already foreshadowed by the end of +the first century, and enthusiasm always had its limits.<a id="footnotetag50" name="footnotetag50"></a><a href="#footnote50"><sup>50</sup></a> The +most decisive division, therefore, falls before the end of the +first century; or more correctly, the relatively new element, +the Greek, which is of importance for the forming of the +Church as a commonwealth, and consequently for the formation +of its doctrine, is clearly present in the churches even +in the Apostolic age. Two hundred years, however, passed +before it made itself completely at home in the Gospel, +although there were points of connection inherent in the Gospel.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_ELEMENTS" id="SEC_0_II_I_ELEMENTS"></a>7. The cause of the great historical fact is clear. It is +given in the fact that the Gospel, rejected by the majority of +the Jews, was very soon proclaimed to those who were not +Jews, that after a few decades the greater number of its professors +were found among the Greeks, and that, consequently, +the development leading to the Catholic dogma took place +within Græco-Roman culture. But within this culture there +was lacking the power of understanding either the idea of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page51" id="page51"></a>[pg 51]</span> +completed Old Testament theocracy, or the idea of the Messiah. +Both of these essential elements of the original proclamation, +therefore, must either be neglected or remodelled.<a id="footnotetag51" name="footnotetag51"></a><a href="#footnote51"><sup>51</sup></a> +But it is hardly allowable to mention details however important, +where the whole aggregate of ideas, of religious historical +perceptions and presuppositions, which were based on the old +Testament, understood in a Christian sense, presented itself +as something new and strange. One can easily appropriate +words, but not practical ideas. Side by side with the Old +Testament religion as the presupposition of the Gospel, and +using its forms of thought, the moral and religious views and +ideals dominant in the world of Greek culture could not but +insinuate themselves into the communities consisting of Gentiles. +From the enormous material that was brought home +to the hearts of the Greeks, whether formulated by Paul +or by any other, only a few rudimentary ideas could at first +be appropriated. For that very reason, the Apostolic Catholic +doctrine of faith in its preparation and establishment, is no +mere continuation of that which, by uniting things that are +certainly very dissimilar, is wont to be described as "Biblical +Theology of the New Testament." Biblical Theology, even when +kept within reasonable limits, is not the presupposition of the +history of dogma. The Gentile Christians were little able to +comprehend the controversies which stirred the Apostolic age +within Jewish Christianity. The presuppositions of the history +of dogma are given in certain fundamental ideas, or rather +motives of the Gospel, (in the preaching concerning Jesus +Christ, in the teaching of Evangelic ethics and the future +life, in the Old Testament capable of any interpretation, but +to be interpreted with reference to Christ and the Evangelic +history), and in the Greek spirit.<a id="footnotetag52" name="footnotetag52"></a><a href="#footnote52"><sup>52</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page52" id="page52"></a>[pg 52]</span> + +<p>8. The foregoing statements involve that the difference +between the development which led to the Catholic doctrine +of religion and the original condition, was by no means a +total one. By recognising the Old Testament as a book of +Divine revelation, the Gentile Christians received along with +it the religious speech which was used by Jewish Christians, +were made dependent upon the interpretation which had been +used from the very beginning, and even received a great part +of the Jewish literature which accompanied the Old Testament. +But the possession of a common religious speech and literature +is never a mere outward bond of union, however strong +the impulse be to introduce the old familiar contents into the +newly acquired speech. The Jewish, that is, the Old Testament +element, divested of its national peculiarity, has remained +the basis of Christendom. It has saturated this element with the +Greek spirit, but has always clung to its main idea, faith in +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page53" id="page53"></a>[pg 53]</span> +God as the creator and ruler of the world. It has in the +course of its development rejected important parts of that +Jewish element, and has borrowed others at a later period +from the great treasure that was transmitted to it. It has +also been able to turn to account the least adaptable features, +if only for the external confirmation of its own ideas. The Old +Testament applied to Christ and his universal Church has +always remained the decisive document, and it was long ere +Christian writings received the same authority, long ere individual +doctrines and sayings of Apostolic writings obtained +an influence on the formation of ecclesiastical doctrine.</p> + +<p>9. From yet another side there makes its appearance an +agreement between the circles of Palestinian believers in Jesus +and the Gentile Christian communities, which endured for +more than a century, though it was of course gradually effaced. +It is the enthusiastic element which unites them, the consciousness +of standing in an immediate union with God through the Spirit, +and receiving directly from God's hand miraculous gifts, powers +and revelations, granted to the individual that he may turn +them to account in the service of the Church. The depotentiation +of the Christian religion, where one may believe in the +inspiration of another, but no longer feels his own, nay, dare +not feel it, is not altogether coincident with its settlement on +Greek soil. On the contrary, it was more than two centuries +ere weakness and reflection suppressed, or all but suppressed, +the forms in which the personal consciousness of God originally +expressed itself.<a id="footnotetag53" name="footnotetag53"></a><a href="#footnote53"><sup>53</sup></a> Now it certainly lies in the nature of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page54" id="page54"></a>[pg 54]</span> +enthusiasm, that it can assume the most diverse forms of expression, +and follow very different impulses, and so far it frequently +separates instead of uniting. But so long as criticism +and reflection are not yet awakened, and a uniform ideal hovers +before one, it does unite, and in this sense there existed +an identity of disposition between the earliest Jewish Christians +and the still enthusiastic Gentile Christian communities.</p> + +<p>10. But, finally, there is a still further uniting element +between the beginnings of the development to Catholicism, +and the original condition of the Christian religion as a movement +within Judaism, the importance of which cannot be overrated, +although we have every reason to complain here of the +obscurity of the tradition. Between the Græco-Roman world +which was in search of a spiritual religion, and the Jewish +commonwealth which already possessed such a religion as a national +property, though vitiated by exclusiveness, there had +long been a Judaism which, penetrated by the Greek spirit, was, +<i>ex professo</i>, devoting itself to the task of bringing a new religion +to the Greek world, the Jewish religion, but that religion +in its kernel Greek, that is, philosophically moulded, spiritualised +and secularised. Here then was already consummated +an intimate union of the Greek spirit with the Old Testament +religion, within the Empire and to a less degree in Palestine +itself. If everything is not to be dissolved into a grey mist, we +must clearly distinguish this union between Judaism and Hellenism +and the spiritualising of religion it produced, from the +powerful but indeterminable influences which the Greek spirit +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page55" id="page55"></a>[pg 55]</span> +exercised on all things Jewish, and which have been a historical +condition of the Gospel. The alliance, in my opinion, +was of no significance at all for the <i>origin</i> of the Gospel, but +was of the most decided importance, first, for the propagation +of Christianity, and then, for the development of Christianity +to Catholicism, and for the genesis of the Catholic doctrine of +faith.<a id="footnotetag54" name="footnotetag54"></a><a href="#footnote54"><sup>54</sup></a> We cannot certainly name any particular personality +who was specially active in this, but we can mention three +facts which prove more than individual references. (1) The +propaganda of Christianity in the Diaspora followed the Jewish +propaganda and partly took its place, that is, the Gospel was +at first preached to those Gentiles who were already acquainted +with the general outlines of the Jewish religion, and who +were even frequently viewed as a Judaism of a second order, +in which Jewish and Greek elements had been united in a +peculiar mixture. (2) The conception of the Old Testament, +as we find it even in the earliest Gentile Christian teachers, +the method of spiritualising it, etc., agrees in the most surprising +way with the methods which were used by the Alexandrian +Jews. (3) There are Christian documents in no small +number and of unknown origin, which completely agree in plan, +in form and contents with Græco-Jewish writings of the Diaspora, +as for example, the Christian Sibylline Oracles, and the pseudo-Justinian +treatise, "de Monarchia." There are numerous tractates +of which it is impossible to say with certainty whether +they are of Jewish or of Christian origin.</p> + +<p>The Alexandrian and non-Palestinian Judaism is still Judaism. +As the Gospel seized and moved the whole of Judaism, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page56" id="page56"></a>[pg 56]</span> +it must also have been operative in the non Palestinian Judaism. +But that already foreshadowed the transition of the Gospel to +the non-Jewish Greek region, and the fate which it was to +experience there. For that non-Palestinian Judaism formed +the bridge between the Jewish Church and the Roman Empire, +together with its culture.<a id="footnotetag55" name="footnotetag55"></a><a href="#footnote55"><sup>55</sup></a> The Gospel passed into the world +chiefly by this bridge. Paul indeed had a large share in this, +but his own Churches did not understand the way he led +them, and were not able on looking back to find it.<a id="footnotetag56" name="footnotetag56"></a><a href="#footnote56"><sup>56</sup></a> He indeed +became a Greek to the Greeks, and even began the undertaking +of placing the treasures of Greek knowledge at the service +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page57" id="page57"></a>[pg 57]</span> +of the Gospel. But the knowledge of Christ crucified, to +which he subordinated all other knowledge as only of preparatory +value, had nothing in common with Greek philosophy, +while the idea of justification and the doctrine of the Spirit +(Rom. VIII), which together formed the peculiar contents of +his Christianity, were irreconcilable with the moralism and the +religious ideals of Hellenism. But the great mass of the earliest +Gentile Christians became Christians because they perceived in +the Gospel the sure tidings of the benefits and obligations +which they had already sought in the fusion of Jewish and +Greek elements. It is only by discerning this that we can +grasp the preparation and genesis of the Catholic Church and +its dogma.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_I_PRESUPPOSITIONS" id="SEC_0_II_I_PRESUPPOSITIONS"></a>From the foregoing statements it appears that there fall to +be considered as presuppositions of the origin of the Catholic +Apostolic doctrine of faith, the following topics, though of +unequal importance as regards the extent of their influence:</p> + +<p>(<i>a</i>) The Gospel of Jesus Christ.</p> + +<p>(<i>b</i>) The common preaching of Jesus Christ in the first generation +of believers.</p> + +<p>(<i>c</i>) The current exposition of the Old Testament, the Jewish +speculations and hopes of the future, in their significance for +the earliest types of Christian preaching.<a id="footnotetag57" name="footnotetag57"></a><a href="#footnote57"><sup>57</sup></a></p> + +<p>(<i>d</i>) The religious conceptions, and the religious philosophy +of the Hellenistic Jews, in their significance for the later +restatement of the Gospel.</p> + +<p>(<i>e</i>) The religious dispositions of the Greeks and Romans of +the first two centuries, and the current Græco-Roman philosophy +of religion.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page58" id="page58"></a>[pg 58]</span> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_II" id="SEC_0_II_II"></a>§ 2. <i>The Gospel of Jesus Christ according to His own +testimony concerning Himself.</i></h3> + +<h4><a name="SEC_0_II_II_FUNDAMENTAL"></a>I. The Fundamental Features.</h4> + +<p>The Gospel entered into the world as an apocalyptic eschatological +message, apocalyptical and eschatological not only +in its form, but also in its contents. But Jesus announced that +the kingdom of God had already begun with his own work, +and those who received him in faith became sensible of this +beginning; for the "apocalyptical" was not merely the unveiling +of the future, but above all the revelation of God as the +Father, and the "eschatological" received its counterpoise in +the view of Jesus' work as Saviour, in the assurance of being +certainly called to the kingdom, and in the conviction that +life and future dominion is hid with God the Lord and preserved +for believers by him. Consequently, we are following +not only the indications of the succeeding history, but also +the requirement of the thing itself, when, in the presentation +of the Gospel, we place in the foreground, not that which +unites it with the contemporary disposition of Judaism, but +that which raises it above it. Instead of the hope of inheriting +the kingdom, Jesus had also spoken simply of preserving +the soul, or the life. In this one substitution lies already a +transformation of universal significance, of political religion +into a religion that is individual and therefore holy; for the +life is nourished by the word of God, but God is the Holy One.</p> + +<p>The Gospel is the glad message of the government of the +world and of every individual soul by the almighty and holy +God, the Father and Judge. In this dominion of God, which +frees men from the power of the Devil, makes them rulers in a +heavenly kingdom in contrast with the kingdoms of the world, +and which will also be sensibly realised in the future æon +just about to appear, is secured life for all men who yield +themselves to God, although they should lose the world and +the earthly life. That is, the soul which is pure and holy +in connection with God, and in imitation of the Divine +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page59" id="page59"></a>[pg 59]</span> +perfection is eternally preserved with God, while those who +would gain the world, and preserve their life, fall into the hands +of the Judge who sentences them to Hell. This dominion of +God imposes on men a law, an old and yet a new law, viz., +that of the Divine perfection and therefore of undivided love +to God and to our neighbour. In this love, where it sways +the inmost feeling, is presented the better righteousness (better +not only with respect to the Scribes and Pharisees, but also +with respect to Moses, see Matt. V.), which corresponds to the +perfection of God. The way to attain it is a change of mind, +that is, self-denial, humility before God, and heartfelt trust in +him. In this humility and trust in God there is contained +a recognition of one's own unworthiness; but the Gospel calls +to the kingdom of God those very sinners who are thus minded, +by promising the forgiveness of the sins which hitherto have +separated them from God. But the Gospel which appears in +these three elements, the dominion of God, a better righteousness +embodied in the law of love, and the forgiveness of +sin, is inseparably connected with Jesus Christ; for in preaching +this Gospel Jesus Christ everywhere calls men to himself. +In him the Gospel is word and deed; it has become his food, +and therefore his personal life, and into this life of his he +draws all others. He is the Son who knows the Father. In him +men are to perceive the kindness of the Lord; in him they +are to feel God's power and government of the world, and to +become certain of this consolation; they are to follow him the +meek and lowly, and while he, the pure and holy one, calls +sinners to himself, they are to receive the assurance that God +through him forgiveth sin.</p> + +<p>Jesus Christ has by no express statement thrust this connection +of his Gospel with his Person into the foreground. +No words could have certified it unless his life, the overpowering +impression of his Person, had created it. By living, +acting and speaking from the riches of that life which he lived +with his Father, he became for others the revelation of the +God of whom they formerly had heard, but whom they had +not known. He declared his Father to be their Father and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page60" id="page60"></a>[pg 60]</span> +they understood him. But he also declared himself to be +Messiah, and in so doing gave an intelligible expression to his +abiding significance for them and for his people. In a solemn +hour at the close of his life, as well as on special occasions +at an earlier period, he referred to the fact that the surrender +to his Person which induced them to leave all and follow him, +was no passing element in the new position they had gained +towards God the Father. He tells them, on the contrary, +that this surrender corresponds to the service which he will +perform for them and for the many, when he will give his +life a sacrifice for the sins of the world. By teaching them +to think of him and of his death in the breaking of bread +and the drinking of wine, and by saying of his death that +it takes place for the remission of sins, he has claimed as his +due from all future disciples what was a matter of course so +long as he sojourned with them, but what might fade away +after he was parted from them. He who in his preaching of +the kingdom of God raised the strictest self-examination and +humility to a law, and exhibited them to his followers in his +own life, has described with clear consciousness his life crowned +by death as the imperishable service by which men in all ages +will be cleansed from their sin and made joyful in their God. +By so doing he put himself far above all others, although +they were to become his brethren; and claimed a unique and +permanent importance as Redeemer and Judge. This permanent +importance as the Lord he secured, not by disclosures +about the mystery of his Person, but by the impression of +his life and the interpretation of his death. He interprets it, +like all his sufferings, as a victory, as the passing over to his +glory, and in spite of the cry of God-forsakenness upon the +cross, he has proved himself able to awaken in his followers +the real conviction that he lives and is Lord and Judge of +the living and the dead.</p> + +<p>The religion of the Gospel is based on this belief in Jesus +Christ, that is, by looking to him, this historical person, it +becomes certain to the believer that God rules heaven and +earth, and that God, the Judge, is also Father and Redeemer. +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page61" id="page61"></a>[pg 61]</span> +The religion of the Gospel is the religion which makes the +highest moral demands, the simplest and the most difficult, +and discloses the contradiction in which every man finds himself +towards them. But it also procures redemption from such +misery, by drawing the life of men into the inexhaustible and +blessed life of Jesus Christ, who has overcome the world and +called sinners to himself.</p> + +<p>In making this attempt to put together the fundamental +features of the Gospel, I have allowed myself to be guided by +the results of this Gospel in the case of the first disciples. I +do not know whether it is permissible to present such fundamental +features apart from this guidance. The preaching of +Jesus Christ was in the main so plain and simple, and in its +application so manifold and rich, that one shrinks from attempting +to systematise it, and would much rather merely +narrate according to the Gospel. Jesus searches for the point +in every man on which he can lay hold of him and lead him +to the Kingdom of God. The distinction of good and evil—for +God or against God—he would make a life question for +every man, in order to shew him for whom it has become +this, that he can depend upon the God whom he is to fear. +At the same time he did not by any means uniformly fall +back upon sin, or even the universal sinfulness, but laid hold +of individuals very diversely, and led them to God by different +paths. The doctrinal concentration of redemption on sin was +certainly not carried out by Paul alone; but, on the other +hand, it did not in any way become the prevailing form for +the preaching of the Gospel. On the contrary, the antitheses, +night, error, dominion of demons, death and light, truth, deliverance, +life, proved more telling in the Gentile Churches. The +consciousness of universal sinfulness was first made the negative +fundamental frame of mind of Christendom by Augustine.</p> + + +<h4><a name="SEC_0_II_II_DETAILS" id="SEC_0_II_II_DETAILS"></a>II. Details.</h4> + +<p>1. Jesus announced the Kingdom of God which stands in +opposition to the kingdom of the devil, and therefore also +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page62" id="page62"></a>[pg 62]</span> +to the kingdom of the world, as a future Kingdom, and yet +it is presented in his preaching as present; as an invisible, +and yet it was visible—for one actually saw it. He lived +and spoke within the circle of eschatological ideas which Judaism +had developed more than two hundred years before: +but he controlled them by giving them a new content and +forcing them into a new direction. Without abrogating the +law and the prophets he, on fitting occasions, broke through +the national, political and sensuous eudæmonistic forms in +which the nation was expecting the realisation of the dominion +of God, but turned their attention at the same time to a +future near at hand, in which believers would be delivered +from the oppression of evil and sin, and would enjoy blessedness +and dominion. Yet he declared that even now, every +individual who is called into the kingdom may call on God +as his Father, and be sure of the gracious will of God, the +hearing of his prayers, the forgiveness of sin, and the protection +of God even in this present life.<a id="footnotetag58" name="footnotetag58"></a><a href="#footnote58"><sup>58</sup></a> But everything +in this proclamation is directed to the life beyond: the certainty +of that life is the power and earnestness of the Gospel.</p> + +<p>2. The conditions of entrance to the kingdom are, in the +first place, a complete change of mind, in which a man renounces +the pleasures of this world, denies himself, and is +ready to surrender all that he has in order to save his soul; +then, a believing trust in God's grace which he grants to the +humble and the poor, and therefore hearty confidence in Jesus +as the Messiah chosen and called by God to realise his kingdom +on the earth. The announcement is therefore directed +to the poor, the suffering, those hungering and thirsting for +righteousness, not to those who live, but to those who wish +to be healed and redeemed, and finds them prepared for entrance +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page63" id="page63"></a>[pg 63]</span> +into, and reception of the blessings of the kingdom of +God,<a id="footnotetag59" name="footnotetag59"></a><a href="#footnote59"><sup>59</sup></a> while it brings down upon the self-satisfied, the rich +and those proud of their righteousness, the judgment of obduracy +and the damnation of Hell.</p> + +<p>3. The commandment of undivided love to God and the +brethren, as the main commandment, in the observance of which +righteousness is realised, and forming the antithesis to the selfish +mind, the lust of the world, and every arbitrary impulse,<a id="footnotetag60" name="footnotetag60"></a><a href="#footnote60"><sup>60</sup></a> +corresponds to the blessings of the Kingdom of God, viz., +forgiveness of sin, righteousness, dominion and blessedness. +The standard of personal worth for the members of the King +is self-sacrificing labour for others, not any technical +mode of worship or legal preciseness. Renunciation of the +world together with its goods, even of life itself in certain +circumstances, is the proof of a man's sincerity and earnest +in seeking the Kingdom of God; and the meekness which +renounces every right, bears wrong patiently, requiting it with +kindness, is the practical proof of love to God, the conduct +that answers to God's perfection.</p> + +<p>4. In the proclamation and founding of this kingdom, Jesus +summoned men to attach themselves to him, because he had +recognised himself to be the helper called by God, and therefore +also the Messiah who was promised.<a id="footnotetag61" name="footnotetag61"></a><a href="#footnote61"><sup>61</sup></a> He gradually declared +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page64" id="page64"></a>[pg 64]</span> +himself to the people as such by the names he assumed,<a id="footnotetag62" name="footnotetag62"></a><a href="#footnote62"><sup>62</sup></a> for +the names "Anointed," "King," "Lord," "Son of David," +"Son of Man," "Son of God," all denote the Messianic office, +and were familiar to the greater part of the people.<a id="footnotetag63" name="footnotetag63"></a><a href="#footnote63"><sup>63</sup></a> But +though, at first, they express only the call, office, and power +of the Messiah, yet by means of them and especially by the +designation Son of God, Jesus pointed to a relation to God +the Father, then and in its immediateness unique, as the +basis of the office with which he was entrusted. He has, +however, given no further explanation of the mystery of this +relation than the declaration that the Son alone knoweth the +Father, and that this knowledge of God and Sonship to God +are secured for all others by the sending of the Son.<a id="footnotetag64" name="footnotetag64"></a><a href="#footnote64"><sup>64</sup></a> In the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page65" id="page65"></a>[pg 65]</span> +proclamation of God as Father,<a id="footnotetag65" name="footnotetag65"></a><a href="#footnote65"><sup>65</sup></a> as well as in the other proclamation +that all the members of the kingdom following +the will of God in love, are to become one with the Son and +through him with the Father,<a id="footnotetag66" name="footnotetag66"></a><a href="#footnote66"><sup>66</sup></a> the message of the realised +kingdom of God receives its richest, inexhaustible content: the +Son of the Father will be the first-born among many brethren.</p> + +<p>5. Jesus as the Messiah chosen by God has definitely distinguished +himself from Moses and all the Prophets: as his +preaching and his work are the fulfilment of the law and the +prophets, so he himself is not a disciple of Moses, but corrects +that law-giver; he is not a Prophet, but Master and Lord. He +proves this Lordship during his earthly ministry in the accomplishment +of the mighty deeds given him to do, above all in +withstanding the Devil and his kingdom,<a id="footnotetag67" name="footnotetag67"></a><a href="#footnote67"><sup>67</sup></a> and—according +to the law of the Kingdom of God—for that very reason in +the service which he performs. In this service Jesus also +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page66" id="page66"></a>[pg 66]</span> +reckoned the sacrifice of his life, designating it as a +λυτρον which he offered for the +redemption of man.<a id="footnotetag68" name="footnotetag68"></a><a href="#footnote68"><sup>68</sup></a> But +he declared at the same time that his Messianic work +was not yet fulfilled in his subjection to death. On the contrary, +the close is merely initiated by his death; for the completion +of the kingdom will only appear when he returns in +glory in the clouds of heaven to judgment. Jesus seems to +have announced this speedy return a short time before his +death, and to have comforted his disciples at his departure, +with the assurance that he would immediately enter into a +supramundane position with God.<a id="footnotetag69" name="footnotetag69"></a><a href="#footnote69"><sup>69</sup></a></p> + +<p>6. The instructions of Jesus to his disciples are accordingly +dominated by the thought that the end, the day and hour +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page67" id="page67"></a>[pg 67]</span> +of which, however, no one knows, is at hand. In consequence +of this, also, the exhortation to renounce all earthly good takes +a prominent place. But Jesus does not impose ascetic commandments +as a new law, far less does he see in asceticism +as such, sanctification<a id="footnotetag70" name="footnotetag70"></a><a href="#footnote70"><sup>70</sup></a>—he himself did not live as an ascetic, +but was reproached as a wine-bibber—but he prescribed a +perfect simplicity and purity of disposition, and a singleness +of heart which remains invariably the same in trouble and +renunciation, in possession and use of earthly good. A uniform +equality of all in the conduct of life is not commanded: +"To whom much is given, of him much shall be required." +The disciples are kept as far from fanaticism and overrating +of spiritual results as from asceticism. "Rejoice not that the +spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are +written in heaven." When they besought him to teach them +to pray, he taught them the "Lord's prayer", a prayer which +demands such a collected mind, and such a tranquil, childlike +elevation of the heart to God, that it cannot be offered at all +by minds subject to passion or preoccupied by any daily cares.</p> + +<p>7. Jesus himself did not found a new religious community, +but gathered round him a circle of disciples, and chose Apostles +whom he commanded to preach the Gospel. His preaching +was universalistic inasmuch as it attributed no value to ceremonialism +as such, and placed the fulfilment of the Mosaic +law in the exhibition of its moral contents, partly against or +beyond the letter. He made the law perfect by harmonising +its particular requirements with the fundamental moral requirements +which were also expressed in the Mosaic law. He +emphasised the fundamental requirements more decidedly +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page68" id="page68"></a>[pg 68]</span> +than was done by the law itself, and taught that all details +should be referred to them and deduced from them. The +external righteousness of Pharisaism was thereby declared to +be not only an outer covering, but also a fraud, and the bond +which still united religion and nationality in Judaism was +sundered.<a id="footnotetag71" name="footnotetag71"></a><a href="#footnote71"><sup>71</sup></a> Political and national elements may probably have +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page69" id="page69"></a>[pg 69]</span> +been made prominent in the hopes of the future, as Jesus appropriated +them for his preaching. But from the conditions +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page70" id="page70"></a>[pg 70]</span> +to which the realising of the hopes for the individual was +attached, there already shone the clearer ray which was to +eclipse those elements, and one saying such as Matt. XXII. 21, +annulled at once political religion and religious politics.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_II_SUPPLEMENTS" id="SEC_0_II_II_SUPPLEMENTS"></a><i>Supplement</i> 1.—The idea of the inestimable inherent value +of every individual human soul, already dimly appearing in +several psalms, and discerned by Greek Philosophers, though +as a rule developed in contradiction to religion, stands out +plainly in the preaching of Jesus. It is united with the idea +of God as Father, and is the complement to the message of +the communion of brethren realising itself in love. In this +sense the Gospel is at once profoundly individualistic and +Socialistic. The prospect of gaining life, and preserving it +for ever, is therefore also the highest which Jesus has set +forth, it is not, however, to be a motive, but a reward of +grace. In the certainty of this prospect, which is the converse +of renouncing the world, he has proclaimed the sure +hope of the resurrection, and consequently the most abundant +compensation for the loss of the natural life. Jesus put an +end to the vacillation and uncertainty which in this respect +still prevailed among the Jewish people of his day. The +confession of the Psalmist, "Whom have I in heaven but thee, +and there is none upon the earth that I desire beside thee", +and the fulfilling of the Old Testament commandment, "Love +thy neighbour as thyself", were for the first time presented +in their connection in the person of Jesus. He himself therefore +is Christianity, for the "impression of his person convinced +the disciples of the facts of forgiveness of sin and the second +birth, and gave them courage to believe in and to lead a +new life." We cannot therefore state the "doctrine" of Jesus; +for it appears as a supramundane life which must be felt in +the person of Jesus, and its truth is guaranteed by the fact +that such a life can be lived.</p> + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 2.—The history of the Gospel contains two +great transitions, both of which, however, fall within the first +century; from Christ to the first generation of believers, including +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page71" id="page71"></a>[pg 71]</span> +Paul, and from the first, Jewish Christian, generation +of these believers to the Gentile Christians, in other words: +from Christ to the brotherhood of believers in Christ, and +from this to the incipient Catholic Church. No later transitions +in the Church can be compared with these in importance. +As to the first, the question has frequently been asked, Is +the Gospel of Christ to be the authority or the Gospel concerning +Christ? But the strict dilemma here is false. The +Gospel certainly is the Gospel of Christ. For it has only, in +the sense of Jesus, fulfilled its Mission when the Father has +been declared to men as he was known by the Son, and +where the life is swayed by the realities and principles which +ruled the life of Jesus Christ. But it is in accordance with +the mind of Jesus and at the same time a fact of history, +that this Gospel can only be appropriated and adhered to +in connection with a believing surrender to the person of +Jesus Christ. Yet every dogmatic formula is suspicious, because +it is fitted to wound the spirit of religion; it should +not at least be put before the living experience in order to +evoke it; for such a procedure is really the admission of the +half belief which thinks it necessary that the impression made +by the person must be supplemented. The essence of the matter +is a personal life which awakens life around it as the fire of +one torch kindles another. Early as weakness of faith is in +the Church of Christ, it is no earlier than the procedure of +making a formulated and ostensibly proved confession the +foundation of faith, and therefore demanding, above all, subjection +to this confession. Faith assuredly is propagated by the +testimony of faith, but dogma is not in itself that testimony.</p> + +<p>The peculiar character of the Christian religion is conditioned +by the fact that every reference to God is at the same time +a reference to Jesus Christ, and <i>vice versa</i>. In this sense the +Person of Christ is the central point of the religion, and inseparably +united with the substance of piety as a sure reliance +on God. Such a union does not, as is supposed, bring a +foreign element into the pure essence of religion. The pure +essence of religion rather demands such a union; for "the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page72" id="page72"></a>[pg 72]</span> +reverence for persons, the inner bowing before the manifestation +of moral power and goodness is the root of all true +religion" (W. Herrmann). But the Christian religion knows +and names only one name before which it bows. In this +rests its positive character, in all else, as piety, it is by its +strictly spiritual and inward attitude, not a positive religion +alongside of others, but religion itself. But just because +the Person of Christ has this significance is the knowledge +and understanding of the "historical Christ" required: for no +other comes within the sphere of our knowledge. "The historical +Christ" that, to be sure, is not the powerless Christ of +contemporary history shewn to us through a coloured biographical +medium, or dissipated in all sorts of controversies, but +Christ as a power and as a life which towers above our own +life, and enters into our life as God's Spirit and God's Word, +(see Herrmann, Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott. 2. Edit. +1892, (<i>i.e.</i>, "The Fellowship of the Christian with God", an +important work included in the present series of translations. +Ed.) Kähler, Der sog. historische Jesus und der geschichtliche +biblische Christus, 1892). But historical labour and investigation +are needed in order to grasp this Jesus Christ ever more +firmly and surely.</p> + +<p>As to the second transition, it brought with it the most +important changes, which, however, became clearly manifest +only after the lapse of some generations. They appear, first, +in the belief in holy consecrations, efficacious in themselves, +and administered by chosen persons; further, in the conviction, +that the relation of the individual to God and Christ is, above +all, conditioned on the acceptance of a definite divinely attested +law of faith and holy writings; further, in the opinion that +God has established Church arrangements, observance of which +is necessary and meritorious, as well as in the opinion that +a visible earthly community is the people of a new covenant. +These assumptions, which formally constitute the essence of +Catholicism as a religion, have no support in the teaching of +Jesus, nay, offend against that teaching.</p> + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 3.—The question as to what new thing Christ +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page73" id="page73"></a>[pg 73]</span> +has brought, answered by Paul in the words, "If any man be +in Christ he is a new creature, old things are passed away, +behold all things are become new", has again and again been +pointedly put since the middle of the second century by Apologists, +Theologians and religious Philosophers, within and +without the Church, and has received the most varied answers. +Few of the answers have reached the height of the Pauline +confession. But where one cannot attain to this confession, +one ought to make clear to oneself that every answer which +does not lie in the line of it is altogether unsatisfactory; for +it is not difficult to set over against every article from the +preaching of Jesus an observation which deprives it of its originality. +It is the Person, it is the fact of his life that is +new and creates the new. The way in which he called forth +and established a people of God on earth, which has become +sure of God and of eternal life; the way in which he set up +a new thing in the midst of the old and transformed the religion +of Israel into <i>the religion</i> that is the mystery of his +Person, in which lies his unique and permanent position in +the history of humanity.</p> + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 4.—The conservative position of Jesus towards +the religious traditions of his people had the necessary result +that his preaching and his Person were placed by believers +in the frame-work of this tradition, which was thereby very +soon greatly expanded. But, though this way of understanding +the Gospel was certainly at first the only possible way, +and though the Gospel itself could only be preserved by such +means (see § 1), yet it cannot be mistaken that a displacement +in the conception of the Person and preaching of Jesus, +and a burdening of religious faith, could not but forthwith +set in, from which developments followed, the premises of which +would be vainly sought for in the words of the Lord (see +§§ 3, 4). But here the question arises as to whether the Gospel +is not inseparably connected with the eschatological world-renouncing +element with which it entered into the world, so +that its being is destroyed where this is omitted. A few words may +be devoted to this question. The Gospel possesses properties +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page74" id="page74"></a>[pg 74]</span> +which oppose every positive religion, because they +depreciate it, and these properties form the kernel of the +Gospel. The disposition which is devoted to God, humble, +ardent and sincere in its love to God and to the brethren, +is, as an abiding habit, law, and at the same time, a gift of the +Gospel, and also finally exhausts it. This quiet, peaceful +element was at the beginning strong and vigorous, even in +those who lived in the world of ecstasy and expected the +world to come. One may be named for all, Paul. He who +wrote 1 Cor. XIII. and Rom. VIII. should not, in spite of +all that he has said elsewhere, be called upon to witness that +the nature of the Gospel is exhausted in its world-renouncing, +ecstatic and eschatological elements, or at least, that it is so +inseparably united with these as to fall along with them. He +who wrote those chapters, and the greater than he who promised +the kingdom of heaven to children, and to those who +were hungering and thirsting for righteousness, he to whom +tradition ascribes the words: "Rejoice not that the spirits +are subject to you, but rather rejoice that your names +are written in heaven"—both attest that the Gospel lies +above the antagonisms between this world and the next, work +and retirement from the world, reason and ecstasy, Judaism +and Hellenism. And because it lies above them it may be +united with either, as it originally unfolded its powers under +the ruins of the Jewish religion. But still more; it not only +can enter into union with them, it must do so if it is otherwise +the religion of the living and is itself living. It has +only one aim; that man may find God and have him as his +own God, in order to gain in him humility and patience, peace, +joy and love. How it reaches this goal through the advancing +centuries, whether with the co-efficients of Judaism or +Hellenism, of renunciation of the world or of culture, of mysticism +or the doctrine of predestination, of Gnosticism or +Agnosticism, and whatever other incrustations there may yet +be which can defend the kernel, and under which alone living +elements can grow—all that belongs to the centuries. However +each individual Christian may reckon to the treasure +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page75" id="page75"></a>[pg 75]</span> +itself the earthly vessel in which he hides his treasure; it is +the duty and the right, not only of the religious, but also of +the historical estimate to distinguish between the vessel and +the treasure; for the Gospel did not enter into the world as +a positive statutory religion, and cannot therefore have its classic +manifestation in any form of its intellectual or social types, +not even in the first. It is therefore the duty of the historian +of the first century of the Church, as well as that of +those which follow, not to be content with fixing the changes +of the Christian religion, but to examine how far the new forms +were capable of defending, propagating and impressing the +Gospel itself. It would probably have perished if the forms +of primitive Christianity had been scrupulously maintained in +the Church; but now primitive Christianity has perished in +order that the Gospel might be preserved. To study this progress +of the development, and fix the significance of the newly +received forms for the kernel of the matter, is the last +and highest task of the historian who himself lives in his subject. +He who approaches from without must be satisfied with +the general view that in the history of the Church some things +have always remained, and other things have always been +changing.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_II_LITERATURE" id="SEC_0_II_II_LITERATURE"></a><i>Literature.</i>—Weiss. Biblical Theology of the New Testament. +T. and T. Clark. Wittichen. Beitr. z. bibl. Theol. 3. Thle. +1864-72.</p> + +<p>Schüreer. Die Predigt Jesu in ihrem Verhaltniss z. A.T.u. +z. Judenthum, 1882.</p> + +<p>Wellhausen. Abriss der Gesch. Israels u. Juda's (Skizzen u. +Vorarbeiten) I. Heft. 1884.</p> + +<p>Baldensperger. Das Selbstbewusstsein Jesu im Licht der Messianischen +Hoffnungen seiner Zeit, 1888, (2 Aufl. 1891). The +prize essays of Schmoller and Issel, Ueber die Lehre vom Reiche +Gottes im N. Test. 1891 (besides Gunkel in d. Theol. Lit. +Ztg. 1893. N°. 2).</p> + +<p>Wendt. Die Lehre Jesu. (The teaching of Jesus. T. and +T. Clark. English translation.)</p> + +<p>Joh. Weiss. Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes, 1892.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page76" id="page76"></a>[pg 76]</span> + +<p>Bousset. Jesu Predigt in ihrem Gegensatz zum Judenthum, 1892.</p> + +<p>C. Holtzman. Die Offenbarung durch Christus und das Neue +Testament (Zeitschr. f. Theol. und Kirche I. p. 367 ff.) The +special literature in the above work of Weiss, and in the recent +works on the life of Jesus, and the Biblical Theology of the +New Testament by Beyschlag. (T.T. Clark)</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_III" id="SEC_0_II_III"></a>§ 3. <i>The Common Preaching concerning Jesus Christ in the +First Generation of Believers.</i></h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_OUTLINE" id="SEC_0_II_III_OUTLINE"></a>Men had met with Jesus Christ and in him had found the +Messiah. They were convinced that God had made him to be +wisdom and righteousness, sanctification and redemption. There +was no hope that did not seem to be certified in him, no +lofty idea which had not become in him a living reality. +Everything that one possessed was offered to him. He was +everything lofty that could be imagined. Everything that can +be said of him was already said in the first two generations +after his appearance. Nay, more: he was felt and known to +be the ever living one, Lord of the world and operative principle +of one's own life. "To me to live is Christ and to die is gain;" +"He is the way, the truth and the life." One could now for +the first time be certain of the resurrection and eternal life, +and with that certainty the sorrows of the world melted away +like mist before the sun, and the residue of this present +time became as a day. This group of facts which the history +of the Gospel discloses in the world, is at the same time the +highest and most unique of all that we meet in that history; +it is its seal and distinguishes it from all other universal religions. +Where in the history of mankind can we find anything +resembling this, that men who had eaten and drunk with their +Master should glorify him, not only as the revealer of God, +but as the Prince of life, as the Redeemer and Judge of the +world, as the living power of its existence, and that a choir +of Jews and Gentiles, Greeks and Barbarians, wise and foolish, +should along with them immediately confess that out of the +fulness of this one man they have received grace for grace? +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page77" id="page77"></a>[pg 77]</span> +It has been said that Islam furnishes the unique example of +a religion born in broad daylight, but the community of +Jesus was also born in the clear light of day. The darkness +connected with its birth is occasioned not only by the imperfection +of the records, but by the uniqueness of the fact, +which refers us back to the uniqueness of the Person of Jesus.</p> + +<p>But though it certainly is the first duty of the historian to +signalise the overpowering impression made by the Person of +Jesus on the disciples, which is the basis of all further developments, +it would little become him to renounce the critical +examination of all the utterances which have been connected +with that Person with the view of elucidating and glorifying +it; unless he were with Origen to conclude that Jesus was to +each and all whatever they fancied him to be for their edification. +But this would destroy the personality. Others are of +opinion that we should conceive him, in the sense of the early +communities, as the second God who is one in essence with +the Father, in order to understand from this point of view +all the declarations and judgments of these communities. But +this hypothesis leads to the most violent distortion of the +original declarations, and the suppression or concealment of +their most obvious features. The duty of the historian rather +consists in fixing the common features of the faith of the first +two generations, in explaining them as far as possible from +the belief that Jesus is Messiah, and in seeking analogies for +the several assertions. Only a very meagre sketch can be +given in what follows. The presentation of the matter in the +frame-work of the history of dogma does not permit of more, +because as noted above, § 1, the presupposition of dogma +forming itself in the Gentile Church is not the whole infinitely +rich abundance of early Christian views and perceptions. That +presupposition is simply a proclamation of the one God and +of Christ transferred to Greek soil, fixed merely in its leading +features and otherwise very plastic, accompanied by a message +regarding the future, and demands for a holy life. At the +same time the Old Testament and the early Christian Palestinian +writings with the rich abundance of their contents, did +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page78" id="page78"></a>[pg 78]</span> +certainly exercise a silent mission in the earliest communities, till +by the creation of the canon they became a power in the Church.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_FIRST" id="SEC_0_II_III_FIRST"></a>I. The contents of the faith of the disciples,<a id="footnotetag72" name="footnotetag72"></a><a href="#footnote72"><sup>72</sup></a> and the +common proclamation which united them, may be comprised +in the following propositions. Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah +promised by the prophets. Jesus after his death is by +the Divine awakening raised to the right hand of God, and +will soon return to set up his kingdom visibly upon the earth. +He who believes in Jesus, and has been received into the +community of the disciples of Jesus, who, in virtue of a sincere +change of mind, calls on God as Father, and lives according +to the commandments of Jesus, is a saint of God, and as such +can be certain of the sin-forgiving grace of God, and of a +share in the future glory, that is, of redemption.<a id="footnotetag73" name="footnotetag73"></a><a href="#footnote73"><sup>73</sup></a></p> + +<p>A community of Christian believers was formed within +the Jewish national community. By its organisation, the close +brotherly union of its members, it bore witness to the +impression which the Person of Jesus had made on it, and +drew from faith in Jesus and hope of his return, the assurance +of eternal life, the power of believing in God the Father and +of fulfilling the lofty moral and social commands which Jesus +had set forth. They knew themselves to be the true Israel of +the Messianic time (see § 1), and for that very reason lived +with all their thoughts and feelings in the future. Hence the +Apocalyptic hopes which in manifold types were current in +the Judaism of the time, and which Jesus had not demolished, +continued to a great extent in force (see § 4). One guarantee +for their fulfilment was supposed to be possessed in the various +manifestations of the Spirit,<a id="footnotetag74" name="footnotetag74"></a><a href="#footnote74"><sup>74</sup></a> which were displayed in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page79" id="page79"></a>[pg 79]</span> +members of the new communities at their entrance, with which +an act of baptism seems to have been united from the very first<a id="footnotetag75" name="footnotetag75"></a><a href="#footnote75"><sup>75</sup></a>, +and in their gatherings. They were a guarantee that believers +really were the εκκλησια +του θεου, +those called to be saints, and, +as such, kings and priests unto God<a id="footnotetag76" name="footnotetag76"></a><a href="#footnote76"><sup>76</sup></a> for whom the world, death +and devil are overcome, although they still rule the course of the +world. The confession of the God of Israel as the Father of Jesus, +and of Jesus as Christ and Lord<a id="footnotetag77" name="footnotetag77"></a><a href="#footnote77"><sup>77</sup></a> was sealed by the testimony +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page80" id="page80"></a>[pg 80]</span> +of the possession of the Spirit, which as Spirit of God assured +every individual of his call to the kingdom, united him personally +with God himself and became to him the pledge of future glory<a id="footnotetag78" name="footnotetag78"></a><a href="#footnote78"><sup>78</sup></a>.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_BEGINNINGS" id="SEC_0_II_III_BEGINNINGS"></a>2. As the Kingdom of God which was announced had not +yet visibly appeared, as the appeal to the Spirit could not +be separated from the appeal to Jesus as Messiah, and as +there was actually nothing possessed but the reality of the +Person of Jesus, so in preaching all stress must necessarily +fall on this Person. To believe in him was the decisive fundamental +requirement, and, at first, under the presupposition +of the religion of Abraham and the Prophets, the sure guarantee +of salvation. It is not surprising then to find that in +the earliest Christian preaching Jesus Christ comes before us +as frequently as the Kingdom of God in the preaching of +Jesus himself. The image of Jesus, and the power which proceeded +from it, were the things which were really possessed. +Whatever was expected was expected only from Jesus the +exalted and returning one. The proclamation that the Kingdom +of heaven is at hand must therefore become the proclamation +that Jesus is the Christ, and that in him the revelation +of God is complete. He who lays hold of Jesus lays hold +in him of the grace of God, and of a full salvation. We +cannot, however, call this in itself a displacement: but as soon +as the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ ceased to be +made with the same emphasis and the same meaning that it +had in his own preaching, and what sort of blessings they +were which he brought, not only was a displacement inevitable, +but even a dispossession. But every dispossession requires +the given forms to be filled with new contents. Simple +as was the pure tradition of the confession: "Jesus is the Christ," +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page81" id="page81"></a>[pg 81]</span> +the task of rightly appropriating and handing down entire +the peculiar contents which Jesus had given to his self-witnessing +and preaching was nevertheless great, and in its limit +uncertain. Even the Jewish Christian could perform this task only +according to the measure of his spiritual understanding and +the strength of his religious life. Moreover, the external position +of the first communities in the midst of contemporaries +who had crucified and rejected Jesus, compelled them to +prove, as their main duty, that Jesus really was the Messiah +who was promised. Consequently, everything united to bring +the first communities to the conviction that the proclamation +of the Gospel with which they were entrusted, resolved itself +into the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ. The +διδασκειν +τηρειν παντα 'οτα +ενετειλατο 'ο +Ιησους +(teaching to observe all +that Jesus had commanded), a thing of heart and life, could +not lead to reflection in the same degree, as the +διδασκειν 'οτι +ουτος εστιν +'ο χριστος του +θεου +(teaching that this is the Christ +of God): for a community which possesses the Spirit does not +reflect on whether its conception is right, but, especially a +missionary community, on what the certainty of its faith rests.</p> + +<p>The proclamation of Jesus as the Christ, though rooted entirely +in the Old Testament, took its start from the exaltation +of Jesus, which again resulted from his suffering and death. +The proof that the entire Old Testament points to him, and +that his person, his deeds and his destiny are the actual and +precise fulfilment of the Old Testament predictions, was the +foremost interest of believers, so far as they at all looked +backwards. This proof was not used in the first place for the +purpose of making the meaning and value of the Messianic +work of Jesus more intelligible, of which it did not seem to +be in much need, but to confirm the Messiahship of Jesus. +Still, points of view for contemplating the Person and work +of Jesus could not fail to be got from the words of the Prophets. +The fundamental conception of Jesus dominating everything +was, according to the Old Testament, that God had +chosen him and through him the Church. God had chosen +him and made him to be both Lord and Christ. He had +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page82" id="page82"></a>[pg 82]</span> +made over to him the work of setting up the Kingdom, and +had led him through death and resurrection to a supra-mundane +position of sovereignty, in which he would soon visibly +appear and bring about the end. The hope of Christ's +speedy return was the most important article in the "Christology," +inasmuch as his work was regarded as only reaching +its conclusion by that return. It was the most difficult, inasmuch +as the Old Testament contained nothing of a second +advent of Messiah. Belief in the second advent became the +specific Christian belief.</p> + +<p>But the searching in the scriptures of the Old Testament, +that is, in the prophetic texts, had already, in estimating the +Person and dignity of Christ, given an important impulse towards +transcending the frame-work of the idea of the theocracy +completed solely in and for Israel. Moreover, belief in +the exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God, caused +men to form a corresponding idea of the beginning of his +existence. The missionary work among the Gentiles, so soon +begun and so rich in results, threw a new light on the range +of Christ's purpose and work, and led to the consideration of +its significance for the whole human race. Finally, the self-testimony +of Jesus summoned them to ponder his relation to +God the Father, with the presuppositions of that relation, and +to give it expression in intelligible statements. Speculation +had already begun on these four points in the Apostolic age, +and had resulted in very different utterances as to the Person +and dignity of Jesus (§ 4).<a id="footnotetag79" name="footnotetag79"></a><a href="#footnote79"><sup>79</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page83" id="page83"></a>[pg 83]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_WORK" id="SEC_0_II_III_WORK"></a>3. Since Jesus had appeared and was believed on as the +Messiah promised by the Prophets, the aim and contents of +his mission seemed already to be therewith stated with sufficient +clearness. Further, as the work of Christ was not yet +completed, the view of those contemplating it was, above all, +turned to the future. But in virtue of express words of Jesus, +and in the consciousness of having received the Spirit of God, +one was already certain of the forgiveness of sin dispensed +by God, of righteousness before him, of the full knowledge +of the Divine will, and of the call to the future Kingdom as a +present possession. In the procuring of these blessings not a +few perceived with certainty the results of the first advent of +Messiah, that is, his work. This work might be seen in the +whole activity of Christ. But as the forgiveness of sins might +be conceived as <i>the</i> blessing of salvation which included with +certainty every other blessing, as Jesus had put his death in +express relation with this blessing, and as the fact of this +death so mysterious and offensive required a special explanation, +there appeared in the foreground from the very beginning +the confession, in 1 Cor. XV. 3: +παρεδωξα 'υμιν +εν πρωτοις, +'ο και +παρελαβον, 'οτι +χριστος +απεθανεν 'υπερ +των 'αμαρτιον +'ημον. +"I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, +that <i>Christ died for our sins</i>." Not only Paul, for whom, in +virtue of his special reflections and experiences, the cross of +Christ had become the central point of all knowledge, but +also the majority of believers, must have regarded the preaching +of the death of the Lord as an essential article in +the preaching of Christ<a id="footnotetag80" name="footnotetag80"></a><a href="#footnote80"><sup>80</sup></a>, seeing that, as a rule, they placed +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page84" id="page84"></a>[pg 84]</span> +it somehow under the aspect of a sacrifice offered to God. +Still, there were very different conceptions of the value of the +death as a means of procuring salvation, and there may have +been many who were satisfied with basing its necessity on the +fact that it had been predicted, (απεθανεν +κατα τας +γραφας: +"he died for our sins <i>according to the scriptures</i>"), while their +real religious interests were entirely centered in the future +glory to be procured by Christ. But it must have been of +greater significance for the following period that, from the +first, a short account of the destiny of Jesus lay at the basis +of all preaching about him (see a part of this in 1 Cor. XV. +1-11). Those articles in which the identity of the Christ +who had appeared with the Christ who had been promised +stood out with special clearness, must have been taken up +into this report, as well as those which transcended the common +expectations of Messiah, which for that very reason appeared +of special importance, viz., his death and resurrection. +In putting together this report, there was no intention of +describing the "work" of Christ. But after the interest which +occasioned it had been obscured, and had given place to other +interests, the customary preaching of those articles must have +led men to see in them Christ's real performance, his "work."<a id="footnotetag81" name="footnotetag81"></a><a href="#footnote81"><sup>81</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_BELIEF" id="SEC_0_II_III_BELIEF"></a>4. The firm confidence of the disciples in Jesus was +rooted in the belief that he did not abide in death, but was +raised by God. That Christ had risen was, in virtue of what +they had experienced in him, certainly only after they had +seen him, just as sure as the fact of his death, and became +the main article of their preaching about him.<a id="footnotetag82" name="footnotetag82"></a><a href="#footnote82"><sup>82</sup></a> But in the +message of the risen Lord was contained not only the conviction +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page85" id="page85"></a>[pg 85]</span> +that he lives again, and now lives for ever, but also +the assurance that his people will rise in like manner and +live eternally. Consequently, the resurrection of Jesus became +the sure pledge of the resurrection of all believers, that is of +their real personal resurrection. No one at the beginning +thought of a mere immortality of the spirit, not even those +who assumed the perishableness of man's sensuous nature. In +conformity with the uncertainty which yet adhered to the +idea of resurrection in Jewish hopes and speculations, the +concrete notions of it in the Christian communities were also +fluctuating. But this could not affect the certainty of the +conviction that the Lord would raise his people from death. +This conviction, whose reverse side is the fear of that God +who casts into hell, has become the mightiest power through +which the Gospel has won humanity.<a id="footnotetag83" name="footnotetag83"></a><a href="#footnote83"><sup>83</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page86" id="page86"></a>[pg 86]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_RIGHTEOUSNESS" id="SEC_0_II_III_RIGHTEOUSNESS"></a>5. After the appearance of Paul, the earliest communities +were greatly exercised by the question as to how believers +obtain the righteousness which they possess, and what significance +a precise observance of the law of the Fathers may +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page87" id="page87"></a>[pg 87]</span> +have in connection with it. While some would hear of no +change in the regulations and conceptions which had hitherto +existed, and regarded the bestowal of righteousness by God +as possible only on condition of a strict observance of the +law, others taught that Jesus as Messiah had procured righteousness +for his people, had fulfilled the law once for all, and +had founded a new covenant, either in opposition to the old, +or as a stage above it. Paul especially saw in the death of Christ +the end of the law, and deduced righteousness solely from faith +in Christ, and sought to prove from the Old Testament itself, +by means of historical speculation, the merely temporary +validity of the law and therewith the abrogation of the Old +Testament religion. Others, and this view, which is not everywhere +to be explained by Alexandrian influences (see above +p. 72 f.), is not foreign to Paul, distinguished between spirit and +letter in the Mosaic law, giving to everything a spiritual significance, +and in this sense holding that the whole law as +νομος +πνευματικος +was binding. The question whether righteousness +comes from the works of the law or from faith, was +displaced by this conception, and therefore remained in its +deepest grounds unsolved, or was decided in the sense of a +spiritualised legalism. But the detachment of Christianity from +the political forms of the Jewish religion, and from sacrificial +worship, was also completed by this conception, although it +was regarded as identical with the Old Testament religion +rightly understood. The surprising results of the direct mission +to the Gentiles would seem to have first called forth +those controversies (but see Stephen) and given them the +highest significance. The fact that one section of Jewish +Christians, and even some of the Apostles, at length recognised +the right of the Gentile Christians to be Christians without +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page88" id="page88"></a>[pg 88]</span> +first becoming Jews, is the clearest proof that what was above +all prized was faith in Christ and surrender to him as the +saviour. In agreeing to the direct mission to the Gentiles the +earliest Christians, while they themselves observed the law, +broke up the national religion of Israel, and gave expression +to the conviction that Jesus was not only the Messiah of his +people, but the redeemer of humanity.<a id="footnotetag84" name="footnotetag84"></a><a href="#footnote84"><sup>84</sup></a> The establishment +of the universal character of the Gospel, that is, of Christianity +as a religion for the world, became now, however, a problem, +the solution of which, as given by Paul, but few were able to +understand or make their own.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_CONSCIOUSNESS" id="SEC_0_II_III_CONSCIOUSNESS"></a>6. In the conviction that salvation is entirely bound up +with faith in Jesus Christ, Christendom gained the consciousness +of being a new creation of God. But while the sense of +being the true Israel was thereby, at the same time, held +fast, there followed, on the one hand, entirely new historical +perspectives, and on the other, deep problems which demanded +solution. As a new creation of God, 'η +εκκλησια +του θεου, +the community was conscious of having been chosen by God +in Jesus before the foundation of the world. In the conviction +of being the true Israel, it claimed for itself the whole +historical development recorded in the Old Testament, convinced +that all the divine activity there recorded had the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page89" id="page89"></a>[pg 89]</span> +new community in view. The great question which was to +find very different answers, was how, in accordance with this +view, the Jewish nation, so far as it had not recognised Jesus +as Messiah, should be judged. The detachment of Christianity +from Judaism was the most important preliminary condition, +and therefore the most important preparation, for the Mission +among the Gentile nations, and for union with the Greek spirit.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_1" id="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_1"></a><i>Supplement</i> 1.—Renan and others go too far when they +say that Paul alone has the glory of freeing Christianity from +the fetters of Judaism. Certainly the great Apostle could say +in this connection also: +περισσοτερον +αυτων παντων +εκοπιασα, but +there were others beside him who, in the power of the Gospel, +transcended the limits of Judaism. Christian communities, it +may now be considered certain, had arisen in the empire, in +Rome for example, which were essentially free from the law +without being in any way determined by Paul's preaching. +It was Paul's merit that he clearly formulated the great question, +established the universalism of Christianity in a peculiar manner, +and yet in doing so held fast the character of Christianity +as a positive religion, as distinguished from Philosophy and +Moralism. But the later development presupposes neither his +clear formulation nor his peculiar establishment of universalism, +but only the universalism itself.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_2" id="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_2"></a><i>Supplement</i> 2.—The dependence of the Pauline Theology +on the Old Testament or on Judaism is overlooked in the traditional +contrasting of Paulinism and Jewish Christianity, in +which Paulinism is made equivalent to Gentile Christianity. +This theology, as we might <i>a priori</i> suppose, could, apart from +individual exceptions, be intelligible as a whole to born Jews, +if to any, for its doctrinal presuppositions were strictly Pharisaic, +and its boldness in criticising the Old Testament, rejecting +and asserting the law in its historical sense, could be as +little congenial to the Gentile Christians as its piety towards +the Jewish people. This judgment is confirmed by a glance at +the fate of Pauline Theology in the 120 years that followed. +Marcion was the only Gentile Christian who understood Paul, +and even he misunderstood him: the rest never got beyond +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page90" id="page90"></a>[pg 90]</span> +the appropriation of particular Pauline sayings, and exhibited +no comprehension especially of the theology of the Apostle, +so far as in it the universalism of Christianity as a religion +is proved, even without recourse to Moralism and without putting +a new construction on the Old Testament religion. It +follows from this, however, that the scheme "Jewish Christianity"-"Gentile +Christianity" is insufficient. We must rather, +in the Apostolic age, at least at its close, distinguish four +main tendencies that may have crossed each other here and +there,<a id="footnotetag85" name="footnotetag85"></a><a href="#footnote85"><sup>85</sup></a> (within which again different shades appear). (1) The +Gospel has to do with the people of Israel, and with the +Gentile world only on the condition that believers attach +themselves to the people of Israel. The punctilious observance +of the law is still necessary and the condition on which +the messianic salvation is bestowed (particularism and legalism, +in practice and in principle, which, however, was not to cripple +the obligation to prosecute the work of the Mission). (2) The +Gospel has to do with Jews and Gentiles: the first, as believers +in Christ, are under obligation as before to observe the +law, the latter are not; but for that reason they cannot on +earth fuse into one community with the believing Jews. Very +different judgments in details were possible on this stand-point; +but the bestowal of salvation could no longer be thought of +as depending simply on the keeping of the ceremonial commandments +of the law<a id="footnotetag86" name="footnotetag86"></a><a href="#footnote86"><sup>86</sup></a> (universalism in principle, particularism +in practice; the prerogative of Israel being to some +extent clung to). (3) The Gospel has to do with both Jews +and Gentiles; no one is any longer under obligation to observe +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page91" id="page91"></a>[pg 91]</span> +the law; for the law is abolished (or fulfilled), and the salvation +which Christ's death has procured is appropriated by faith. +The law (that is the Old Testament religion) in its literal +sense is of divine origin, but was intended from the first only +for a definite epoch of history. The prerogative of Israel +remains, and is shewn in the fact that salvation was first +offered to the Jews, and it will be shewn again at the end of +all history. That prerogative refers to the nation as a whole, +and has nothing to do with the question of the salvation of +individuals (Paulinism: universalism in principle and in practice, +and Antinomianism in virtue of the recognition of a merely +temporary validity of the whole law; breach with the traditional +religion of Israel; recognition of the prerogative of the +people of Israel; the clinging to the prerogative of the people +of Israel was not, however, necessary on this stand-point: see +the epistle to the Hebrews and the Gospel of John). (4) +The Gospel has to do with Jews and Gentiles: no one need +therefore be under obligation to observe the ceremonial commandments +and sacrificial worship, because these commandments +themselves are only the wrappings of moral and spiritual +commandments which the Gospel has set forth as fulfilled in a +more perfect form (universalism in principle and in practice in +virtue of a neutralising of the distinction between law and +Gospel, old and new; spiritualising and universalising of the law).<a id="footnotetag87" name="footnotetag87"></a><a href="#footnote87"><sup>87</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page92" id="page92"></a>[pg 92]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_3" id="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_3"></a><i>Supplement</i> 3.—The appearance of Paul is the most important +fact in the history of the Apostolic age. It is impossible +to give in a few sentences an abstract of his theology and +work; and the insertion here of a detailed account is forbidden, +not only by the external limits, but by the aim of this investigation. +For, as already indicated (§ 1), the doctrinal formation +in the Gentile Church is not connected with the +whole phenomenon of the Pauline theology, but only with +certain leading thoughts which were only in part peculiar +to the Apostle. His most peculiar thoughts acted on the development +of Ecclesiastical doctrine only by way of occasional +stimulus. We can find room here only for a few general +outlines.<a id="footnotetag88" name="footnotetag88"></a><a href="#footnote88"><sup>88</sup></a></p> + +<p>(1) The inner conviction that Christ had revealed himself +to him, that the Gospel was the message of the crucified and +risen Christ, and that God had called him to proclaim that +message to the world, was the power and the secret of his +personality and his activity. These three elements were a +unity in the consciousness of Paul, constituting his conversion +and determining his after-life. (2) In this conviction he +knew himself to be a new creature, and so vivid was this +knowledge that he was constrained to become a Jew to the +Jews, and a Greek to the Greeks in order to gain them. (3) +The crucified and risen Christ became the central point of +his theology, and not only the central point, but the one +source and ruling principle. The Christ was not in his +estimation Jesus of Nazareth now exalted, but the mighty +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page93" id="page93"></a>[pg 93]</span> +personal spiritual being in divine form who had for a time +humbled himself, and who as Spirit has broken up the world +of law, sin, and death, and continues to overcome them in +believers. (4) Theology therefore was to him, looking forwards, +the doctrine of the liberating power of the Spirit (of Christ) +in all the concrete relations of human life and need. The +Christ who has already overcome law, sin and death, lives as +Spirit, and through his Spirit lives in believers, who for that +very reason know him not after the flesh. He is a creative +power of life to those who receive him in faith in his redeeming +death upon the cross, that is to say, to those who +are justified. The life in the Spirit, which results from union +with Christ, will at last reveal itself also in the body (not in +the flesh). (5) Looking backwards, theology was to Paul a +doctrine of the law and of its abrogation; or more accurately, +a description of the old system before Christ in the light of +the Gospel, and the proof that it was destroyed by Christ. The +scriptural proof, even here, is only a superadded support to +inner considerations which move entirely within the thought +that that which is abrogated has already had its due, by having +its whole strength made manifest that it might then be annulled,—the +law, the flesh of sin, death: by the law the +law is destroyed, sin is abolished in sinful flesh, death is destroyed +by death. (6) The historical view which followed +from this begins, as regards Christ, with Adam and Abraham; +as regards the law, with Moses. It closes, as regards Christ, +with the prospect of a time when he shall have put all enemies +beneath his feet, when God will be all in all; as regards +Moses and the promises given to the Jewish nation, with the +prospect of a time when all Israel will be saved. (7) Paul's +doctrine of Christ starts from the final confession of the primitive +Church, that Christ is with the Father as a heavenly +being and as Lord of the living and the dead. Though Paul +must have accurately known the proclamation concerning the +historical Christ, his theology in the strict sense of the word +does not revert to it: but springing over the historical, it +begins with the pre-existent Christ (the Man from heaven), +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page94" id="page94"></a>[pg 94]</span> +whose moral deed it was to assume the flesh in self-denying +love, in order to break for all men the powers of nature and +the doom of death. But he has pointed to the words and +example of the historical Christ in order to rule the life in +the Spirit. (8) Deductions, proofs, and perhaps also conceptions, +which in point of form betray the theology of the +Pharisaic schools, were forced from the Apostle by Christian +opponents, who would only grant a place to the message of +the crucified Christ beside the +δικαιοσυνη εξ +εργων. Both as +an exegete and as a typologist he appears as a disciple of +the Pharisees. But his dialectic about law, circumcision and +sacrifice, does not form the kernel of his religious mode of +thought, though, on the other hand, it was unquestionably +his very Pharisaism which qualified him for becoming what +he was. Pharisaism embraced nearly everything lofty which +Judaism apart from Christ at all possessed, and its doctrine +of providence, its energetic insistence on making manifest the +religious contrasts, its Messianic expectations, its doctrines of +sin and predestination, were conditions for the genesis of a +religious and Christian character such as Paul.<a id="footnotetag89" name="footnotetag89"></a><a href="#footnote89"><sup>89</sup></a> This first +Christian of the second generation is the highest product of +the Jewish spirit under the creative power of the Spirit of +Christ. Pharisaism had fulfilled its mission for the world +when it produced this man. (9) But Hellenism also had a +share in the making of Paul, a fact which does not conflict +with his Pharisaic origin, but is partly given with it. In +spite of all its exclusiveness the desire for making proselytes, +especially in the Diaspora, was in the blood of Pharisaism. +Paul continued the old movement in a new way, and he was +qualified for his work among the Greeks by an accurate +knowledge of the Greek translation of the Old Testament, by +considerable dexterity in the use of the Greek language, and +by a growing insight into the spiritual life of the Greeks. +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page95" id="page95"></a>[pg 95]</span> +But the peculiarity of his Gospel as a message from the +Spirit of Christ, which was equally near to and equally +distant from every religious and moral mode of thought +among the nations of the world, signified much more than +all this. This Gospel—who can say whether Hellenism had +already a share in its conception—required that the missionary +to the Greeks should become a Greek and that believers +should come to know, "all things are yours, and ye are Christ's." +Paul, as no doubt other missionaries besides him, connected +the preaching of Christ with the Greek mode of thought; +he even employed philosophic doctrines of the Greeks as +presuppositions in his apologetic,<a id="footnotetag90" name="footnotetag90"></a><a href="#footnote90"><sup>90</sup></a> and therewith prepared +the way for the introduction of the Gospel to the Græco-Roman +world of thought. But, in my opinion, he has nowhere +allowed that world of thought to influence his doctrine of +salvation. This doctrine, however, was so fashioned in its +practical aims that it was not necessary to become a Jew in +order to appropriate it. (10) Yet we cannot speak of any +total effect of Paulinism, as there was no such thing. The +abundance of its details was too great and the greatness of +its simplicity too powerful, its hope of the future too vivid, +its doctrine of the law too difficult, its summons to a new +life in the spirit too mighty to be comprehended and adhered +to even by those communities which Paul himself had founded. +What they did comprehend was its Monotheism, its universalism, +its redemption, its eternal life, its asceticism; but all +this was otherwise combined than by Paul. The style became +Hellenic, and the element of a new kind of knowledge from +the very first, as in the Church of Corinth, seems to have +been the ruling one. The Pauline doctrine of the incarnate +heavenly Man was indeed apprehended; it fell in with Greek +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page96" id="page96"></a>[pg 96]</span> +notions, although it meant something very different from the +notions which Greeks had been able to form of it.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_4" id="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_4"></a><i>Supplement</i> 4.—What we justly prize above all else in the +New Testament is that it is a union of the three groups, +Synoptic Gospels, Pauline Epistles,<a id="footnotetag91" name="footnotetag91"></a><a href="#footnote91"><sup>91</sup></a> and Johannine writings, +in which are expressed the richest contents of the earliest +history of the Gospel. In the Synoptic Gospels and the epistles +of Paul are represented two types of preaching the Gospel which +mutually supplement each other. The subsequent history is +dependent on both, and would have been other than it is had +not both existed alongside of each other. On the other hand, +the peculiar and lofty conception of Christ and of the Gospel, +which stands out in the writings of John, has directly exercised +no demonstrable influence on the succeeding development—with +the exception of one peculiar movement, the Montanistic, +which, however, does not rest on a true understanding of these +writings—and indeed partly for the same reason that has +prevented the Pauline theology as a whole from having such +an influence. What is given in these writings is a criticism +of the Old Testament as religion, or the independence of the +Christian religion, in virtue of an accurate knowledge of the +Old Testament through development of its hidden germs. The +Old Testament stage of religion is really transcended and overcome +in the Johannine Christianity, just as in Paulinism, and +in the theology of the epistle to the Hebrews. "The circle +of disciples who appropriated this characterisation of Jesus is," +says Weizsäcker, "a revived Christ-party in the higher sense." +But this transcending of the Old Testament religion was the +very thing that was unintelligible, because there were few ripe +for such a conception. Moreover, the origin of the Johannine +writings is, from the stand-point of a history of literature and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page97" id="page97"></a>[pg 97]</span> +dogma, the most marvellous enigma which the early history +of Christianity presents: Here we have portrayed a Christ +who clothes the indescribable with words, and proclaims as +his own self-testimony what his disciples have experienced +in him, a speaking, acting, Pauline Christ, walking on the +earth, far more human than the Christ of Paul and yet +far more Divine, an abundance of allusions to the historical +Jesus, and at the same time the most sovereign treatment of +the history. One divines that the Gospel can find no loftier +expression than John XVII.: one feels that Christ himself put +these words into the mouth of the disciple, who gives them +back to him, but word and thing, history and doctrine are +surrounded by a bright cloud of the suprahistorical. It is +easy to shew that this Gospel could as little have been written +without Hellenism, as Luther's treatise on the freedom of +a Christian man could have been written without the "Deutsche +Theologie." But the reference to Philo and Hellenism +is by no means sufficient here, as it does not satisfactorily +explain even one of the external aspects of the problem. The +elements operative in the Johannine theology were not Greek +Theologoumena—even the Logos has little more in common +with that of Philo than the name, and its mention at the beginning +of the book is a mystery, not the solution of one<a id="footnotetag92" name="footnotetag92"></a><a href="#footnote92"><sup>92</sup></a>—but +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page98" id="page98"></a>[pg 98]</span> +the Apostolic testimony concerning Christ has created from +the old faith of Psalmists and Prophets, a new faith in a man +who lived with the disciples of Jesus among the Greeks. For +that very reason, in spite of his abrupt Anti-judaism, we must +without doubt regard the Author as a born Jew.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_5" id="SEC_0_II_III_SUPPLEMENT_5"></a><i>Supplement</i> 5.—The authorities to which the Christian communities +were subjected in faith and life, were these: (1) The +Old Testament interpreted in the Christian sense. (2) The +tradition of the Messianic history of Jesus. (3) The words +of the Lord: see the epistles of Paul, especially 1 Corinthians. +But every writing which was proved to have been given by +the Spirit had also to be regarded as an authority, and every +tested Christian Prophet and Teacher inspired by the Spirit +could claim that his words be received and regarded as the words +of God. Moreover, the twelve whom Jesus had chosen had a +special authority, and Paul claimed a similar authority for himself +(διαταξεις των +αποστολων). +Consequently, there were numerous +courts of appeal in the earliest period of Christendom, of +diverse kinds and by no means strictly defined. In the manifold +gifts of the spirit was given a fluid element indefinable in its +range and scope, an element which guaranteed freedom of development, +but which also threatened to lead the enthusiastic +communities to extravagance.</p> + +<p><i>Literature.</i>—Weiss, Biblical Theology of the New Testament, +1884. Beyschlag, New Testament Theology, 1892. Ritschl, +Entstehung der Alt-Katholischen Kirche, 2 Edit. 1857. Reuss, +History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age, 1864. +Baur, The Apostle Paul, 1866. Holsten, Zum Evangelium des +Paulus und Petrus, 1868. Pfleiderer, Paulinism, 1873: also, Das +Urchristenthum, 1887. Schenkel, Das Christusbild der Apostel, +1879. Renan, Origins of Christianity Vols. II.-IV. Havet, +Le Christianisme et ses orig. T, IV. 1884. Lechler, The +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page99" id="page99"></a>[pg 99]</span> +Apostolic and Post-Apostolic Age, 1885. Weizsäcker, The +Apostolic Age, 1892. Hatch, Article "Paul" in the Encyclopædia +Britannica. Everett, The Gospel of Paul. Boston, 1893. +On the origin and earliest history of the Christian proofs from +prophecy, see my "Texte und Unters. z. Gesch. der Alt-Christl." +Lit. I. 3, p. 56 f.</p> + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_IV" id="SEC_0_II_IV"></a>§ 4. <i>The Current Exposition of the Old Testament, and the +Jewish hopes of the future, in their significance for +the earliest types of Christian preaching.</i></h3> + +<p>Instead of the frequently very fruitless investigations about +"Jewish-Christian," and "Gentile-Christian," it should be asked, +What Jewish elements have been naturalised in the Christian +Church, which were in no way demanded by the contents of +the Gospel? have these elements been simply weakened in +course of the development, or have some of them been strengthened +by a peculiar combination with the Greek? We have +to do here, in the first instance, with the doctrine of Demons +and Angels, the view of history, the growing exclusiveness, +the fanaticism; and on the other hand, with the cultus, and +the Theocracy, expressing itself in forms of law.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_IV_METHODS" id="SEC_0_II_IV_METHODS"></a>1. Although Jesus had in principle abolished the methods +of pedantry, the casuistic treatment of the law, and the subtleties +of prophetic interpretation, yet the old Scholastic exegesis +remained active in the Christian communities above all +the unhistorical local method in the exposition of the Old +Testament, both allegoristic and Haggadic; for in the exposition +of a sacred text—and the Old Testament was regarded +as such—one is always required to look away from its historical +limitations and to expound it according to the needs +of the present.<a id="footnotetag93" name="footnotetag93"></a><a href="#footnote93"><sup>93</sup></a> The traditional view exercised its influence +on the exposition of the Old Testament, as well as on the +representations of the person, fate and deeds of Jesus, especially +in those cases where the question was about the proof +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page100" id="page100"></a>[pg 100]</span> +of the fulfilment of prophecy, that is, of the Messiahship of +Jesus. (See above § 3, 2). Under the impression made by +the history of Jesus it gave to many Old Testament passages +a sense that was foreign to them, and, on the other hand, +enriched the life of Jesus with new facts, turning the interest +at the same time to details which were frequently unreal and +seldom of striking importance.<a id="footnotetag94" name="footnotetag94"></a><a href="#footnote94"><sup>94</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_IV_APOCALYPTIC" id="SEC_0_II_IV_APOCALYPTIC"></a>2. The Jewish Apocalyptic literature, especially as it flourished +since the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and was impregnated +with new elements borrowed from an ethico-religious +philosophy, as well as with Babylonian and Persian myths +(Greek myths can only be detected in very small number), +was not banished from the circles of the first professors of +the Gospel, but was rather held fast, eagerly read, and even +extended with the view of elucidating the promises of Jesus.<a id="footnotetag95" name="footnotetag95"></a><a href="#footnote95"><sup>95</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page101" id="page101"></a>[pg 101]</span> +Though their contents seem to have been modified on Christian +soil, and especially the uncertainty about the person of +the Messiah exalted to victory and coming to judgment,<a id="footnotetag96" name="footnotetag96"></a><a href="#footnote96"><sup>96</sup></a> +yet the sensuous earthly hopes were in no way repressed. +Green fat meadows and sulphurous abysses, white horses and +frightful beasts, trees of life, splendid cities, war and bloodshed +filled the fancy,<a id="footnotetag97" name="footnotetag97"></a><a href="#footnote97"><sup>97</sup></a> and threatened to obscure the simple +and yet, at bottom, much more affecting maxims about the +judgment which is certain to every individual soul, and drew +the confessors of the Gospel into a restless activity, into politics, +and abhorrence of the State. It was an evil inheritance +which the Christians took over from the Jews,<a id="footnotetag98" name="footnotetag98"></a><a href="#footnote98"><sup>98</sup></a> an inheritance +which makes it impossible to reproduce with certainty +the eschatological sayings of Jesus. Things directly foreign were +mixed up with them, and, what was most serious, delineations +of the hopes of the future could easily lead to the undervaluing +of the most important gifts and duties of the Gospel.<a id="footnotetag99" name="footnotetag99"></a><a href="#footnote99"><sup>99</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page102" id="page102"></a>[pg 102]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_IV_MYTHOLOGIES" id="SEC_0_II_IV_MYTHOLOGIES"></a>3. A wealth of mythologies and poetic ideas was naturalised +and legitimised<a id="footnotetag100" name="footnotetag100"></a><a href="#footnote100"><sup>100</sup></a> in the Christian communities, chiefly by +the reception of the Apocalyptic literature, but also by the +reception of artificial exegesis and Haggada. Most important +for the following period were the speculations about +Messiah, which were partly borrowed from expositions of the +Old Testament and from the Apocalypses, partly formed independently, +according to methods the justice of which no +one contested, and the application of which seemed to give +a firm basis to religious faith.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_IV_LIMITS" id="SEC_0_II_IV_LIMITS"></a>Some of the Jewish Apocalyptists had already attributed +pre-existence to the expected Messiah, as to other precious +things in the Old Testament history and worship, and, without +any thought of denying his human nature, placed him as already +existing before his appearing in a series of angelic +beings.<a id="footnotetag101" name="footnotetag101"></a><a href="#footnote101"><sup>101</sup></a> This took place in accordance with an established +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page103" id="page103"></a>[pg 103]</span> +method of speculation, so far as an attempt was made thereby +to express the special value of an empiric object, by distinguishing +between the essence and the inadequate form of appearance, +hypostatising the essence, and exalting it above +time and space. But when a later appearance was conceived +as the aim of a series of preparations, it was frequently hypostatised +and placed above these preparations even in time. +The supposed aim was, in a kind of real existence, placed, +as first cause, before the means which were destined to realise +it on earth.<a id="footnotetag102" name="footnotetag102"></a><a href="#footnote102"><sup>102</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page104" id="page104"></a>[pg 104]</span> + +<p>Some of the first confessors of the Gospel, though not all +the writers of the New Testament, in accordance with the +same method, went beyond the declarations which Jesus himself +had made about his person, and endeavoured to conceive +its value and absolute significance abstractly and speculatively. +The religious convictions (see § 3. 2): (1) That the founding +of the Kingdom of God on earth, and the mission of Jesus +as the perfect mediator, were from eternity based on God's +plan of Salvation, as his main purpose; (2) that the exalted +Christ was called into a position of Godlike Sovereignty belonging +to him of right; (3) that God himself was manifested +in Jesus, and that he therefore surpasses all mediators +of the Old Testament, nay, even all angelic powers,—these +convictions with some took the form that Jesus pre-existed, and +that in him has appeared and taken flesh a heavenly being +fashioned like God, who is older than the world, nay, its creative +principle.<a id="footnotetag103" name="footnotetag103"></a><a href="#footnote103"><sup>103</sup></a> The conceptions of the old Teachers, Paul, +the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Apocalypse, +the author of the first Epistle of Peter, the fourth Evangelist, +differ in many ways when they attempt to define these +convictions more closely. The latter is the only one who has +recognised with perfect clearness that the premundane Christ +must be assumed to be θεος +'ων εν αρχη +προς τον θεον, +so as not +to endanger by this speculation the contents and significance +of the revelation of God which was given in Christ. This, in +the earliest period, was essentially a religious problem, that +is, it was not introduced for the explanation of cosmological +problems, (see, especially, Epistle to the Ephesians, I Peter; +but also the Gospel of John), and there stood peacefully beside +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page105" id="page105"></a>[pg 105]</span> +it, such conceptions as recognised the equipment of the +man Jesus for his office in a communication of the Spirit at +his baptism,<a id="footnotetag104" name="footnotetag104"></a><a href="#footnote104"><sup>104</sup></a> or in virtue of Isaiah VII., found the germ of +his unique nature in his miraculous origin.<a id="footnotetag105" name="footnotetag105"></a><a href="#footnote105"><sup>105</sup></a> But as soon as that +speculation was detached from its original foundation, it necessarily +withdrew the minds of believers from the consideration +of the work of Christ, and from the contemplation of +the revelation of God which was given in the ministry of the +historical person Jesus. The mystery of the person of Jesus +in itself, would then necessarily appear as the true revelation.<a id="footnotetag106" name="footnotetag106"></a><a href="#footnote106"><sup>106</sup></a></p> + +<p>A series of theologoumena and religious problems for the +future doctrine of Christianity lay ready in the teaching of +the Pharisees and in the Apocalypses (see especially the fourth +book of Ezra), and was really fitted for being of service to +it; <i>e.g.</i>, doctrines about Adam, universal sinfulness, the fall, +predestination, Theodicy, etc., besides all kinds of ideas about +redemption. Besides these spiritual doctrines there were not +a few spiritualised myths which were variously made use of +in the Apocalypses. A rich, spiritual, figurative style, only too +rich and therefore confused, waited for the theological artist +to purify, reduce and vigorously fashion. There really remained +very little of the Cosmico-Mythological in the doctrine of the +great Church.</p> + +<p><i>Supplement.</i>—The reference to the proof from prophecy, to +the current exposition of the Old Testament, the Apocalyptic +and the prevailing methods of speculation, does not suffice to +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page106" id="page106"></a>[pg 106]</span> +explain all the elements which are found in the different types +of Christian preaching. We must rather bear in mind here +that the earliest communities were enthusiastic, and had yet +among them prophets and ecstatic persons. Such circumstances +will always directly produce facts in the history. But, in +the majority of cases, it is absolutely impossible to account +subsequently for the causes of such productions, because their +formation is subject to no law accessible to the understanding. +It is therefore inadmissible to regard as proved the reality of +what is recorded and believed to be a fact, when the motive +and interest which led to its acceptance can no longer be +ascertained.<a id="footnotetag107" name="footnotetag107"></a><a href="#footnote107"><sup>107</sup></a></p> + +<p>Moreover, if we consider the conditions, outer and inner, +in which the preaching of Christ in the first decades was +placed, conditions which in every way threatened the Gospel +with extravagance, we shall only see cause to wonder that it +continued to shine forth amid all its wrappings. We can still, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page107" id="page107"></a>[pg 107]</span> +out of the strangest "fulfilments", legends and mythological +ideas, read the religious conviction that the aim and goal of +history is disclosed in the history of Christ, and that the Divine +has now entered into history in a pure form.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_IV_LITERATURE" id="SEC_0_II_IV_LITERATURE"></a><i>Literature.</i>—The Apocalypses of Daniel, Enoch, Moses, +Baruch, Ezra; Schürer, History of the Jewish People in the time +of Christ; Baldensperger, in the work already mentioned. +Weber, System der Altsynagogalen palästinischen Theologie, +1880, Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures, 1883. Hilgenfeld, Die jüdische +Apokalyptik, 1857. Wellhausen, Sketch of the History of Israel +and Judah, 1887. Diestel, Gesch. des A. T. in der Christl. +Kirche, 1869. Other literature in Schürer. The essay of Hellwag +in the Theol. Jahrb. von Baur and Zeller, 1848, "Die +Vorstellung von der Präexistenz Christi in der ältesten Kirche", +is worth noting; also Joël, Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte +zu Anfang des 2 Christl. Jahrhunderts, 1880-1883.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_V" id="SEC_0_II_V"></a>§ 5. <i>The Religious Conceptions and the Religious Philosophy +of the Hellenistic Jews, in their significance for +the later formulation of the Gospel</i>.</h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_V_SPIRITUALISING" id="SEC_0_II_V_SPIRITUALISING"></a>1. From the remains of the Jewish Alexandrian literature +and the Jewish Sibylline writings, also from the work of Josephus, +and especially from the great propaganda of Judaism +in the Græco-Roman world, we may gather that there was +a Judaism in the Diaspora, for the consciousness of which the +cultus and ceremonial law were of comparatively subordinate +importance; while the monotheistic worship of God, apart from +images, the doctrines of virtue and belief in a future reward +beyond the grave, stood in the foreground as its really essential +marks. Converted Gentiles were no longer everywhere required to +be even circumcised; the bath of purification was deemed +sufficient. The Jewish religion here appears transformed into +a universal human ethic and a monotheistic cosmology. For +that reason, the idea of the Theocracy as well as the Messianic +hopes of the future faded away or were uprooted. The +latter, indeed, did not altogether pass away; but as the oracles +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page108" id="page108"></a>[pg 108]</span> +of the Prophets were made use of mainly for the purpose of +proving the antiquity and certainty of monotheistic belief, the +thought of the future was essentially exhausted in the expectation +of the dissolution of the Roman empire, the burning +of the world, and the eternal recompense. The specific Jewish +element, however, stood out plainly in the assertion that the +Old Testament, and especially the books of Moses, were the +source of all true knowledge of God, and the sum total of all +doctrines of virtue for the nations, as well as in the connected +assertion that the religious and moral culture of the Greeks +was derived from the Old Testament, as the source from which +the Greek Poets and Philosophers had drawn their inspiration.<a id="footnotetag108" name="footnotetag108"></a><a href="#footnote108"><sup>108</sup></a></p> + +<p>These Jews and the Greeks converted by them formed, as +it were, a Judaism of a second order without law, <i>i.e.</i>, ceremonial +law, and with a minimum of statutory regulations. +This Judaism prepared the soil for the Christianising of the +Greeks, as well as for the genesis of a great Gentile Church +in the empire, free from the law; and this the more that, as +it seems, after the second destruction of Jerusalem, the punctilious +observance of the law<a id="footnotetag109" name="footnotetag109"></a><a href="#footnote109"><sup>109</sup></a> was imposed more strictly than +before on all who worshipped the God of the Jews.<a id="footnotetag110" name="footnotetag110"></a><a href="#footnote110"><sup>110</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page109" id="page109"></a>[pg 109]</span> + +<p>The Judaism just portrayed, developed itself, under the influence +of the Greek culture with which it came in contact, +into a kind of Cosmopolitanism. It divested itself, as religion, +of all national forms, and exhibited itself as the most perfect +expression of that "natural" religion which the stoics had +disclosed. But in proportion as it was enlarged and spiritualised +to a universal religion for humanity, it abandoned what +was most peculiar to it, and could not compensate for that +loss by the assertion of the thesis that the Old Testament is +the oldest and most reliable source of that natural religion, +which in the traditions of the Greeks had only witnesses of +the second rank. The vigour and immediateness of the religious +feeling was flattened down to a moralism, the barrenness of +which drove some Jews even into Gnosis, mysticism and asceticism.<a id="footnotetag111" name="footnotetag111"></a><a href="#footnote111"><sup>111</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_V_PHILO" id="SEC_0_II_V_PHILO"></a>2. The Jewish Alexandrian philosophy of religion, of which +Philo gives us the clearest conception,<a id="footnotetag112" name="footnotetag112"></a><a href="#footnote112"><sup>112</sup></a> is the scientific theory +which corresponded to this religious conception. The theological +system which Philo, in accordance with the example of +others, gave out as the Mosaic system revealed by God, and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page110" id="page110"></a>[pg 110]</span> +proved from the Old Testament by means of the allegoric +exegetic method, is essentially identical with the system of +Stoicism, which had been mixed with Platonic elements and +had lost its Pantheistic materialistic impress. The fundamental +idea from which Philo starts is a Platonic one; the dualism +of God and the world, spirit and matter. The idea of God +itself is therefore abstractly and negatively conceived (God, +the real substance which is not finite), and has nothing more +in common with the Old Testament conception. The possibility, +however, of being able to represent God as acting on +matter, which as the finite is the non-existent, and therefore +the evil, is reached, with the help of the Stoic +λογος as working +powers and of the Platonic doctrine of archetypal ideas, and +in outward connection with the Jewish doctrine of angels and +the Greek doctrine of demons, by the introduction of intermediate +spiritual beings which, as personal and impersonal +powers proceeding from God, are to be thought of as operative +causes and as Archetypes. All these beings are, as it +were, comprehended in the Logos. By the Logos Philo understands +the operative reason of God, and consequently also the +power of God. The Logos is to him the thought of God and +at the same time the product of his thought, therefore both +idea and power. But further, the Logos is God himself on +that side of him which is turned to the world, as also the +ideal of the world and the unity of the spiritual forces which +produce the world and rule in it. He can therefore be put +beside God and in opposition to the world; but he can also, +so far as the spiritual contents of the world are comprehended +in him, be put with the world in contrast with God. The +Logos accordingly appears as the Son of God, the foremost +creature, the representative, Viceroy, High Priest, and Messenger +of God; and again as principle of the world, spirit of +the world, nay, as the world itself. He appears as a power +and as a person, as a function of God and as an active divine +being. Had Philo cancelled the contradiction which lies +in this whole conception of the Logos, his system would have +been demolished; for that system with its hard antithesis of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page111" id="page111"></a>[pg 111]</span> +God and the world, needed a mediator who was, and yet was +not God, as well as world. From this contrast, however, it +further followed that we can only think of a world-formation +by the Logos, not of a world-creation.<a id="footnotetag113" name="footnotetag113"></a><a href="#footnote113"><sup>113</sup></a> Within this world +man is regarded as a microcosm, that is, as a being of Divine +nature according to his spirit, who belongs to the heavenly +world, while the adhering body is a prison which holds men +captive in the fetters of sense, that is, of sin.</p> + +<p>The Stoic and Platonic ideals and rules of conduct (also +the Neo-pythagorean) were united by Philo in the religious +Ethic as well as in the Cosmology. Rationalistic moralism is +surmounted by the injunction to strive after a higher good +lying above virtue. But here, at the same time, is the point +at which Philo decidedly goes beyond Platonism, and introduces +a new thought into Greek Ethics, and also in correspondence +therewith into theoretic philosophy. This thought, which +indeed lay altogether in the line of the development of Greek +philosophy, was not, however, pursued by Philo into all its +consequences, though it was the expression of a new frame +of mind. While the highest good is resolved by Plato and +his successors into knowledge of truth, which truth, together +with the idea of God, lies in a sphere really accessible to the +intellectual powers of the human spirit, the highest good, the +Divine original being, is considered by Philo, though not +invariably, to be above reason, and the power of comprehending +it is denied to the human intellect. This assumption, +a concession which Greek speculation was compelled to make +to positive religion for the supremacy which was yielded to +it, was to have far-reaching consequences in the future. <i>A +place was now for the first time provided in philosophy for a +mythology to be regarded as revelation.</i> The highest truths +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page112" id="page112"></a>[pg 112]</span> +which could not otherwise be reached, might be sought for in +the oracles of the Deity; for knowledge resting on itself had +learnt by experience its inability to attain to the truth in +which blessedness consists. <i>In this very experience the intellectualism +of Greek Ethics was, not indeed cancelled, but surmounted.</i> +The injunction to free oneself from sense and strive +upwards by means of knowledge, remained; but the wings of +the thinking mind bore it only to the entrance of the sanctuary. +Only ecstasy produced by God himself was able to +lead to the reality above reason. The great novelties in the +system of Philo, though in a certain sense the way had already +been prepared for them, are the introduction of the idea +of a philosophy of revelation and the advance beyond the +absolute intellectualism of Greek philosophy, an advance based +on scepticism, but also on the deep-felt needs of life. Only +the germs of these are found in Philo, but they are already +operative. They are innovations of world-wide importance: +for in them the covenant between the thoughts of reason on +the one hand, and the belief in revelation and mysticism on +the other, is already so completed that neither by itself could +permanently maintain the supremacy. Thought about the world +was henceforth dependent, not only on practical motives, it is +always that, but on the need of a blessedness and peace which +is higher than all reason. It might, perhaps, be allowable to +say that Philo was the first who, as a philosopher, plainly +expressed that need, just because he was not only a Greek, +but also a Jew.<a id="footnotetag114" name="footnotetag114"></a><a href="#footnote114"><sup>114</sup></a></p> + +<p>Apart from the extremes into which the ethical counsels of +Philo run, they contain nothing that had not been demanded +by philosophers before him. The purifying of the affections, +the renunciation of sensuality, the acquisition of the four cardinal +virtues, the greatest possible simplicity of life, as well +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page113" id="page113"></a>[pg 113]</span> +as a cosmopolitan disposition are enjoined.<a id="footnotetag115" name="footnotetag115"></a><a href="#footnote115"><sup>115</sup></a> But the attainment +of the highest morality by our own strength is despaired of, +and man is directed beyond himself to God's assistance. Redemption +begins with the spirit reflecting on its own condition; +it advances by a knowledge of the world and of the +Logos, and it is perfected, after complete asceticism, by mystic +ecstatic contemplation in which a man loses himself, but in +return is entirely filled and moved by God.<a id="footnotetag116" name="footnotetag116"></a><a href="#footnote116"><sup>116</sup></a> In this condition +man has a foretaste of the blessedness which shall be given +him when the soul, freed from the body, will be restored to +its true existence as a heavenly being.</p> + +<p>This system, notwithstanding its appeal to revelation, has, +in the strict sense of the word, no place for Messianic hopes, +of which nothing but very insignificant rudiments are found +in Philo. But he was really animated by the hope of a glorious +time to come for Judaism. The synthesis of the Messiah +and the Logos did not lie within his horizon.<a id="footnotetag117" name="footnotetag117"></a><a href="#footnote117"><sup>117</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_V_PRINCIPLES" id="SEC_0_II_V_PRINCIPLES"></a>3. Neither Philo's philosophy of religion, nor the mode of +thought from which it springs, exercised any appreciable influence +on the first generation of believers in Christ.<a id="footnotetag118" name="footnotetag118"></a><a href="#footnote118"><sup>118</sup></a> But +its practical ground-thoughts, though in different degrees, +must have found admission very early into the Jewish Christian +circles of the Diaspora, and through them to Gentile +Christian circles also. Philo's philosophy of religion became +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page114" id="page114"></a>[pg 114]</span> +operative among Christian teachers from the beginning of +the second century,<a id="footnotetag119" name="footnotetag119"></a><a href="#footnote119"><sup>119</sup></a> and at a later period actually obtained +the significance of a standard of Christian theology, Philo +gaining a place among Christian writers. The systems of +Valentinus and Origen presuppose that of Philo. It can no +longer, however, be shewn with certainty how far the direct +influence of Philo reached, as the development of religious +ideas in the second century took a direction which necessarily +led to views similar to those which Philo had anticipated (see +§ 6, and the whole following account).</p> + +<p><i>Supplement.</i>—The hermeneutic principles (the "Biblicalalchemy"), +above all, became of the utmost importance for the +following period. These were partly invented by Philo himself, +partly traditional,—the Haggadic rules of exposition +and the hermeneutic principles of the Stoics having already +at an earlier period been united in Alexandria. They fall +into two main classes; "first, those according to which the +literal sense is excluded, and the allegoric proved to be the +only possible one, and then, those according to which the +allegoric sense is discovered as standing beside and above the +literal sense."<a id="footnotetag120" name="footnotetag120"></a><a href="#footnote120"><sup>120</sup></a> That these rules permitted the discovery of +a new sense by minute changes within a word, was a point +of special importance.<a id="footnotetag121" name="footnotetag121"></a><a href="#footnote121"><sup>121</sup></a> Christian teachers went still further +in this direction, and, as can be proved, altered the text of +the Septuagint in order to make more definite what suggested +itself to them as the meaning of a passage, or in order to +give a satisfactory meaning to a sentence which appeared to +them unmeaning or offensive.<a id="footnotetag122" name="footnotetag122"></a><a href="#footnote122"><sup>122</sup></a> Nay, attempts were not wanting +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page115" id="page115"></a>[pg 115]</span> +among Christians in the second century—they were +aided by the uncertainty that existed about the extent of +the Septuagint, and by the want of plain predictions about +the death upon the cross—to determine the Old Testament +canon in accordance with new principles; that is, to alter +the text on the plea that the Jews had corrupted it, and to +insert new books into the Old Testament, above all, Jewish +Apocalypses revised in a Christian sense. Tertullian (de cultu +fem. I. 3,) furnishes a good example of the latter. "Scio +scipturam Enoch, quæ hunc ordinem angelis dedit, non recipi +a quibusdam, quia nee in armorium Judaicum admittitur ... +sed cum Enoch eadem scriptura etiam de domino prædicarit, +a nobis quidem nihil omnino reiciendum est quod pertinet ad +nos. Et legimus omnem scripturam ædificationi habilem +divinitus inspirari. A Judæis potest jam videri propterea +reiecta, sicut et cetera fere quæ Christum sonant.... Eo +accedit quod Enoch apud Judam apostolum testimonium possidet." +Compare also the history of the Apocalypse of Ezra in +the Latin Bible (Old Testament). Not only the genuine Greek +portions of the Septuagint, but also many Apocalypses were +quoted by Christians in the second century as of equal value +with the Old Testament. It was the New Testament that +slowly put an end to these tendencies towards the formation +of a Christian Old Testament.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page116" id="page116"></a>[pg 116]</span> + +<p>To find the spiritual meaning of the sacred text, partly beside +the literal, partly by excluding it, became the watchword +for the "scientific" Christian theology which was possible only +on this basis, as it endeavoured to reduce the immense and +dissimilar material of the Old Testament to unity with the +Gospel, and both with the religious and scientific culture of +the Greeks,—yet without knowing a relative standard, the +application of which would alone have rendered possible in a +loyal way the solution of the task. Here, Philo was the master; +for he first to a great extent poured the new wine into old +bottles. Such a procedure is warranted by its final purpose; +for history is a unity. But applied in a pedantic and stringently +dogmatic way it is a source of deception, of untruthfulness, +and finally of total blindness.</p> + +<p><i>Literature.</i>—Gefrörer, Das Jahr des Heils, 1838. Parthey, +Das Alexandr. Museum, 1838. Matter, Hist. de l'école d'Alex. +1840. Dähne, Gesch. Darstellung der jüd.-alex. Religions-philos. +1834. Zeller, Die Philosophie der Griechen, III. 2. 3rd +Edition. Mommsen, History of Rome, Vol. V. Siegfried, +Philo von Alex. 1875. Massebieau, Le Classement des Oeuvres +de Philon. 1889. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, 1889. +Drummond, Philo Judæus, 1888. Bigg, The Christian Platonists +of Alexandria, 1886. Schürer, History of the Jewish People. +The investigations of Freudenthal (Hellenistische Studien), and +Bernays (Ueber das phokylideische Gedicht; Theophrastos' +Schrift über Frömmigkeit; Die heraklitischen Briefe). Kuenen, +Hibbert Lectures: "Christian Theology could have made and +has made much use of Hellenism. But the Christian religion +cannot have sprung from this source." Havet thinks otherwise, +though in the fourth volume of his "Origines" he has +made unexpected admissions.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_VI" id="SEC_0_II_VI"></a>§ 6. <i>The Religious Dispositions of the Greeks and Romans +in the first two centuries, and the current Græco-Roman +Philosophy of Religion.</i></h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_NEEDS" id="SEC_0_II_VI_NEEDS"></a>1. After the national religion and the religious sense generally +in cultured circles had been all but lost in the age of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page117" id="page117"></a>[pg 117]</span> +Cicero and Augustus, there is noticeable in the Græco-Roman +world from the beginning of the second century a revival of +religious feeling which embraced all classes of society, and +appears, especially from the middle of that century, to have +increased from decennium to decennium.<a id="footnotetag123" name="footnotetag123"></a><a href="#footnote123"><sup>123</sup></a> Parallel with it went +the not altogether unsuccessful attempt to restore the old national +worship, religious usages, oracles, etc. In these attempts, +however, which were partly superficial and artificial, the new +religious needs found neither vigorous nor clear expression. +These needs rather sought new forms of satisfaction corresponding +to the wholly changed conditions of the time, including +intercourse and mixing of the nations; decay of the old +republican orders, divisions and ranks; monarchy and absolutism +and social crises; pauperism; influence of philosophy on +the domain of public morality and law; cosmopolitanism and +the rights of man; influx of Oriental cults into the West; +knowledge of the world and disgust with it. The decay of +the old political cults and syncretism produced a disposition +in favour of monotheism both among the cultured classes who +had been prepared for it by philosophy, and also gradually +among the masses. Religion and individual morality became +more closely connected. There was developed a corresponding +attempt at spiritualising the worship alongside of and within +the ceremonial forms, and at giving it a direction towards the +moral elevation of man through the ideas of moral personality, +conscience, and purity. The ideas of repentance and of +expiation and healing of the soul became of special importance, +and consequently such Oriental cults came to the front as +required the former and guaranteed the latter. But what was +sought above all, was to enter into an inner union with the +Deity, to be saved by him and become a partaker in the +possession and enjoyment of his life. The worshipper consequently +longed to find a "præsens numen" and the revelation +of him in the cultus, and hoped to put himself in possession +of the Deity by asceticism and mysterious rites. This new +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page118" id="page118"></a>[pg 118]</span> +piety longed for health and purity of soul, and elevation above +earthly things, and in connection with these a divine, that +is, a painless and eternal life beyond the grave ("renatus in +æternum taurobolio"). A world beyond was desired, sought +for and viewed with an uncertain eye. By detachment from +earthly things and the healing of its diseases (the passions) the +freed, new born soul should return to its divine nature and +existence. It is not a hope of immortality such as the ancients +had dreamed of for their heroes, where they continue, as it +were, their earthly existence in blessed enjoyment. To the +more highly pitched self-consciousness this life had become a +burden, and in the miseries of the present, one hoped for a +future life in which the pain and vulgarity of the unreal life of +earth would be completely laid aside +(Ενκρατεια and +αναστασις). +If the new moralistic feature stood out still more emphatically +in the piety of the second century, it vanished more and more +behind the religious feature, the longing after life<a id="footnotetag124" name="footnotetag124"></a><a href="#footnote124"><sup>124</sup></a> and after +a Redeemer God. No one could any longer be a God who +was not also a saviour.<a id="footnotetag125" name="footnotetag125"></a><a href="#footnote125"><sup>125</sup></a></p> + +<p>With all this Polytheism was not suppressed, but only put +into a subordinate place. On the contrary, it was as lively +and active as ever. For the idea of a <i>numen supremum</i> did +not exclude belief in the existence and manifestation of subordinate +deities. Apotheosis came into currency. The old +state religion first attained its highest and most powerful expression +in the worship of the emperor, (the emperor glorified +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page119" id="page119"></a>[pg 119]</span> +as "dominus ac deus noster",<a id="footnotetag126" name="footnotetag126"></a><a href="#footnote126"><sup>126</sup></a> as "præsens et corporalis deus", +the Antinous cult, etc.)., and in many circles an incarnate ideal +in the present or the past was sought, which might be +worshipped as revealer of God and as God, and which might +be an example of life and an assurance of religious hope. +Apotheosis became less offensive in proportion as, in connection +with the fuller recognition of the spiritual dignity of man, the +estimate of the soul, the spirit, as of supramundane nature, and +the hope of its eternal continuance in a form of existence +befitting it, became more general. That was the import of +the message preached by the Cynics and the Stoics, that the +truly wise man is Lord, Messenger of God, and God upon +the earth. On the other hand, the popular belief clung to +the idea that the gods could appear and be visible in human +form, and this faith, though mocked by the cultured, +gained numerous adherents, even among them, in the age of +the Antonines.<a id="footnotetag127" name="footnotetag127"></a><a href="#footnote127"><sup>127</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page120" id="page120"></a>[pg 120]</span> + +<p>The new thing which was here developed, continued to be +greatly obscured by the old forms of worship which reasons +of state and pious custom maintained. And the new piety, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page121" id="page121"></a>[pg 121]</span> +dispensing with a fixed foundation, groped uncertainly around, +adapting the old rather than rejecting it. The old religious +practices of the Fathers asserted themselves in public life +generally, and the reception of new cults by the state, which +was certainly effected, though with many checks, did not +disturb them. The old religious customs stood out especially +on state holidays, in the games in honour of the Gods, frequently +degenerating into shameless immorality, but yet protecting +the institutions of the state. The patriot, the wise +man, the sceptic, and the pious man compounded with them, +for they had not really at bottom outgrown them, and they +knew of nothing better to substitute for the services they +still rendered to society (see the λογος +αληθης of Celsus).</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_ASSOCIATIONS" id="SEC_0_II_VI_ASSOCIATIONS"></a>2. The system of associations, naturalised centuries before +among the Greeks, was developed under the social and political +pressure of the empire, and was greatly extended by +the change of moral and religious ideas. The free unions, +which, as a rule, had a religious element and were established +for mutual help, support, or edification, balanced to some extent +the prevailing social cleavage, by a free democratic organisation. +They gave to many individuals in their small circle +the rights which they did not possess in the great world, and +were frequently of service in obtaining admission for new cults. +Even the new piety and cosmopolitan disposition seem to have +turned to them in order to find within them forms of expression. +But the time had not come for the greater corporate +unions, and of an organised connection of societies in one city +with those of another we know nothing. The state kept these +associations under strict control. It granted them only to the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page122" id="page122"></a>[pg 122]</span> +poorest classes (<i>collegia tenuiorum</i>) and had the strictest laws +in readiness for them. These free unions, however, did not +in their historical importance approach the fabric of the Roman +state in which they stood. That represented the union of the +greater part of humanity under one head, and also more and +more under one law. Its capital was the capital of the world, +and also, from the beginning of the third century, of religious +syncretism. Hither migrated all who desired to exercise an +influence on the great scale: Jew, Chaldean, Syrian priest, +and Neoplatonic teacher. Law and Justice radiated from Rome +to the provinces, and in their light nationalities faded away, +and a cosmopolitanism was developed which pointed beyond +itself, because the moral spirit can never find its satisfaction +in that which is realised. When that spirit finally turned +away from all political life, and after having laboured for the +ennobling of the empire, applied itself, in Neoplatonism, to +the idea of a new and free union of men, this certainly was +the result of the felt failure of the great creation, but it +nevertheless had that creation for its presupposition. The Church +appropriated piecemeal the great apparatus of the Roman +state, and gave new powers, new significance and respect to +every article that had been depreciated. But what is of greatest +importance is that the Church by her preaching would never +have gained whole circles, but only individuals, had not the +universal state already produced a neutralising of nationalities +and brought men nearer each other in temper and disposition.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_ACQUISITIONS" id="SEC_0_II_VI_ACQUISITIONS"></a>3. Perhaps the most decisive factor in bringing about the +revolution of religious and moral convictions and moods, was +philosophy, which in almost all its schools and representatives, +had deepened ethics, and set it more and more in the foreground. +After Possidonius, Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus +Aurelius of the Stoical school, and men like Plutarch of the +Platonic, attained to an ethical view, which, though not very +clear in principle (knowledge, resignation, trust in God), is +hardly capable of improvement in details. Common to them +all, as distinguished from the early Stoics, is the value put +upon the soul, (not the entire human nature), while in some +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page123" id="page123"></a>[pg 123]</span> +of them there comes clearly to the front a religious mood, a +longing for divine help, for redemption and a blessed life +beyond the grave, the effort to obtain and communicate a +religious philosophical therapeutic of the soul. From the beginning +of the second century, however, already announced +itself that eclectic philosophy based on Platonism which after +two or three generations appeared in the form of a school, +and after three generations more was to triumph over all other +schools. The several elements of the Neoplatonic philosophy, +as they were already foreshadowed in Philo, are clearly seen +in the second century, viz., the dualistic opposition of the +divine and the earthly, the abstract conception of God, the +assertion of the unknowableness of God, scepticism with regard +to sensuous experience, and distrust with regard to the powers +of the understanding, with a greater readiness to examine +things and turn to account the result of former scientific +labour; further, the demand of emancipation from sensuality +by means of asceticism, the need of authority, belief in a +higher revelation, and the fusion of science and religion. The +legitimising of religious fancy in the province of philosophy was +already begun. The myth was no longer merely tolerated +and re-interpreted as formerly, but precisely the mythic form +with the meaning imported into it was the precious element.<a id="footnotetag128" name="footnotetag128"></a><a href="#footnote128"><sup>129</sup></a> +There were, however, in the second century numerous representatives +of every possible philosophic view. To pass over +the frivolous writers of the day, the Cynics criticised the traditional +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page124" id="page124"></a>[pg 124]</span> +mythology in the interests of morality and religion.<a id="footnotetag129" name="footnotetag129"></a><a href="#footnote129"><sup>129</sup></a> +But there were also men who opposed the "ne quid nimis" +to every form of practical scepticism, and to religion at the +same time, and were above all intent on preserving the state +and society, and on fostering the existing arrangements which +appeared to be threatened far more by an intrusive religious +than by a nihilistic philosophy.<a id="footnotetag130" name="footnotetag130"></a><a href="#footnote130"><sup>130</sup></a> Yet men whose interest +was ultimately practical and political, became ever more rare, +especially as from the death of Marcus Aurelius, the maintenance +of the state had to be left more and more to the +sword of the Generals. The general conditions from the end +of the second century were favourable to a philosophy which +no longer in any respect took into real consideration the old +forms of the state.</p> + +<p>The theosophic philosophy which was prepared for in the +second century,<a id="footnotetag131" name="footnotetag131"></a><a href="#footnote131"><sup>131</sup></a> was, from the stand-point of enlightenment +and knowledge of nature, a relapse: but it was the expression +of a deeper religious need, and of a self-knowledge such +as had not been in existence at an earlier period. The final +consequences of that revolution in philosophy which made +consideration of the inner life the starting-point of thought +about the world, only now began to be developed. The +ideas of a divine, gracious providence, of the relationship of +all men, of universal brotherly love, of a ready forgiveness of +wrong, of forbearing patience, of insight into one's own weakness—affected +no doubt with many shadows—became, for +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page125" id="page125"></a>[pg 125]</span> +wide circles, a result of the practical philosophy of the Greeks +as well as, the conviction of inherent sinfulness, the need of +redemption, and the eternal value and dignity of a human +soul which finds rest only in God. These ideas, convictions +and rules, had been picked up in the long journey from Socrates +to Ammonius Saccas: at first, and for long afterwards, +they crippled the interest in a rational knowledge of the +world; but they deepened and enriched the inner life, and +therewith the source of all knowledge. Those ideas, however, +lacked as yet the certain coherence, but, above all, the authority +which could have raised them above the region of wishes, +presentiments, and strivings, and have given them normative +authority in a community of men. There was no sure revelation, +and no view of history which could be put in the place +of the no longer prized political history of the nation or state +to which one belonged.<a id="footnotetag132" name="footnotetag132"></a><a href="#footnote132"><sup>132</sup></a> There was, in fact, no such thing as +certainty. In like manner, there was no power which might +overturn idolatry and abolish the old, and therefore one did +not get beyond the wavering between self-deification, fear of +God, and deification of nature. The glory is all the greater +of those statesmen and jurists who, in the second and third +centuries, introduced human ideas of the Stoics into the legal +arrangements of the empire, and raised them to standards. +And we must value all the more the numerous undertakings +and performances, in which it appeared that the new view of +life was powerful enough in individuals to beget a corresponding +practice even without a sure belief in revelation.<a id="footnotetag133" name="footnotetag133"></a><a href="#footnote133"><sup>133</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_PLATONIC" id="SEC_0_II_VI_PLATONIC"></a><i>Supplement.</i>—For the correct understanding of the beginning +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page126" id="page126"></a>[pg 126]</span> +of Christian theology, that is, for the Apologetic and Gnosis, it +is important to note where they are dependent on Stoic, and +where on Platonic lines of thought. Platonism and Stoicism, +in the second century, appeared in union with each other: +but up to a certain point they may be distinguished in the +common channel in which they flow. Wherever Stoicism +prevailed in religious thought and feeling, as for example, in +Marcus Aurelius, religion gains currency as <i>natural</i> religion in +the most comprehensive sense of the word. The idea of revelation +or redemption scarcely emerges. To this rationalism, +the objects of knowledge are unvarying, ever the same: even +cosmology attracts interest only in a very small degree. Myth +and history are pageantry and masks. Moral ideas (virtues +and duties) dominate even the religious sphere, which in its +final basis has no independent authority. The interest in +psychology and apologetic is very pronounced. On the +other hand, the emphasis, which, in principle, is put on the +contrast of spirit and matter, God and the world, had for +results: inability to rest in the actual realities of the cosmos, +efforts to unriddle the history of the universe backwards and +forwards, recognition of this process as the essential task of +theoretic philosophy, and a deep, yearning conviction that +the course of the world needs assistance. Here were given +the conditions for the ideas of revelation, redemption, etc., and +the restless search for powers from whom help might come, +received here also a scientific justification. The rationalistic +apologetic interests thereby fell into the background: contemplation +and historical description predominated.<a id="footnotetag134" name="footnotetag134"></a><a href="#footnote134"><sup>134</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_CULTURE" id="SEC_0_II_VI_CULTURE"></a>The stages in the ecclesiastical history of dogma, from the +middle of the first to the middle of the fifth century, correspond +to the stages in the history of the ancient religion +during the same period. The Apologists, Irenæus, Tertullian, +Hippolytus; the Alexandrians; Methodius, and the Cappadocians; +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page127" id="page127"></a>[pg 127]</span> +Dionysius, the Areopagite, have their parallels in Seneca, +Marcus Aurelius; Plutarch, Epictetus, Numenius; Plotinus, +Porphyry; Iamblichus and Proclus.</p> + +<p>But it is not only Greek philosophy that comes into question +for the history of Christian dogma. The whole of Greek +culture must be taken into account. In his posthumous work, +Hatch has shewn in a masterly way how that is to be done. +He describes the Grammar, the Rhetoric, the learned Profession, +the Schools, the Exegesis, the Homilies, etc., of the Greeks, +and everywhere shews how they passed over into the Church, +thus exhibiting the Philosophy, the Ethic, the speculative +Theology, the Mysteries, etc., of the Greeks, as the main factors +in the process of forming the ecclesiastical mode of thought.</p> + +<p>But, besides the Greek, there is no mistaking the special influence +of Romish ideas and customs upon the Christian +Church. The following points specially claim attention: (1) The +conception of the contents of the Gospel and its application +as "salus legitima," with the results which followed from +the naturalising of this idea. (2) The conception of the word +of Revelation, the Bible, etc., as "lex." (3) The idea of tradition +in its relation to the Romish idea. (4) The Episcopal +constitution of the Church, including the idea of succession, +of the Primateship and universal Episcopate, in their dependence +on Romish ideas and institutions (the Ecclesiastical organisation +in its dependence on the Roman Empire). (5) The +separation of the idea of the "sacrament" from that of the +"mystery", and the development of the forensic discipline of +penance. The investigation has to proceed in a historical line, +described by the following series of chapters: Rome and Tertullian; +Rome and Cyprian; Rome, Optatus and Augustine; +Rome and the Popes of the fifth century. We have, to shew +how, by the power of her constitution and the earnestness +and consistency of her policy, Rome a second time, step by +step, conquered the world, but this time the Christian world.<a id="footnotetag135" name="footnotetag135"></a><a href="#footnote135"><sup>135</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page128" id="page128"></a>[pg 128]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_CYNICS" id="SEC_0_II_VI_CYNICS"></a>Greek philosophy exercised the greatest influence not only +on the Christian mode of thought, but also through that, on +the institutions of the Church. The Church never indeed became +a philosophic school: but yet in her was realised in a +peculiar way, that which the Stoics and the Cynics had aimed +at. The Stoic (Cynic) Philosopher also belonged to the factors +from which the Christian Priests or Bishops were formed. +That the old bearers of the Spirit—Apostles, Prophets, Teachers—have +been changed into a class of professional moralists +and preachers, who bridle the people by counsel and reproof +(νουθετειν +και ελεγχειν), +that this class considers itself and desires +to be considered as a mediating Kingly Divine class, +that its representatives became "Lords" and let themselves +be called "Lords", all this was prefigured in the Stoic wise +man and in the Cynic Missionary. But so far as these several +"Kings and Lords" are united in the idea and reality +of the Church and are subject to it, the Platonic idea of the +republic goes beyond the Stoic and Cynic ideals, and subordinates +them to it. But this Platonic ideal has again obtained +its political realisation in the Church through the very concrete +laws of the Roman Empire, which were more and +more adopted, or taken possession of. Consequently, in the +completed Church we find again the philosophic schools and +the Roman Empire.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_VI_LITERATURE" id="SEC_0_II_VI_LITERATURE"></a><i>Literature.</i>—Besides the older works of Tzschirner, Döllinger, +Burckhardt, Preller, see Friedländer, Darstellungen aus +der Sittengesch. Roms. in der Zeit von August bis zum Ausgang +der Antonine, 3 Bd. Aufl. Boissier, La Religion Romaine +d'Auguste aux Antonins, 2 Bd. 1874. Ramsay, The Church in +the Roman Empire before 170. London, 1893. Réville, La +Religion à Rome sous les Sévères, 1886. Schiller, Geschichte +der Röm. Kaiserzeit, 1883. Marquardt, Römische Staatsverwaltung, +3 Bde. 1878. Foucart, Les Associations Relig. chez les +Grecs, 1873. Liebeman, Z. Gesch. u. Organisation d. Röm. +Vereinswesen, 1890. K.J. Neumann, Der Röm. Staat und die +allg. Kirche, Bd. I. 1890. Leopold Schmidt, Die Ethik der +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page129" id="page129"></a>[pg 129]</span> +alten Griechen, 2 Bd. 1882. Heinrici, Die Christengemeinde +Korinth's und die religiösen Genossenschaften der Griechen, in +der Ztschr. f. wissensch. Theol. 1876-77. Hatch, The Influence +of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church. Buechner, +De neocoria, 1888. Hirschfeld, Z. Gesch. d. röm. Kaisercultus. +The Histories of Philosophy by Zeller, Erdmann, Ueberweg, +Strümpell, Windelband, etc. Heinze, Die Lehre vom Logos in +der Griech. Philosophie, 1872. By same Author, Der Eudämonismus +in der Griech. Philosophie, 1883. Hirzel, Untersuchungen +zu Cicero's philos. Schriften, 3 Thle. 1877-1883. These +investigations are of special value for the history of dogma, +because they set forth with the greatest accuracy and care, +the later developments of the great Greek philosophic schools, +especially on Roman soil. We must refer specially to the +discussions on the influence of the Roman on the Greek Philosophy. +Volkmann, Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer, +1872.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY" id="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY"></a><i>Supplementary.</i></h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_TWOFOLD" id="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_TWOFOLD"></a>Perhaps the most important fact for the following development +of the history of Dogma, the way for which had already +been prepared in the Apostolic age, is the twofold conception +of the aim of Christ's appearing, or of the religious blessing +of salvation. The two conceptions were indeed as yet mutually +dependent on each other, and were twined together in +the closest way, just as they are presented in the teaching +of Jesus himself; but they began even at this early period +to be differentiated. Salvation, that is to say, was conceived, +on the one hand, as sharing in the glorious kingdom of Christ +soon to appear, and everything else was regarded as preparatory +to this sure prospect; on the other hand, however, +attention was turned to the conditions and to the provisions +of God wrought by Christ, which first made men capable of +attaining that portion, that is, of becoming sure of it. Forgiveness +of sin, righteousness, faith, knowledge, etc., are the +things which come into consideration here, and these blessings +themselves, so far as they have as their sure result life in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page130" id="page130"></a>[pg 130]</span> +kingdom of Christ, or more accurately eternal life, may be +regarded as salvation. It is manifest that these two conceptions +need not be exclusive. The first regards the final effect +as the goal and all else as a preparation, the other regards +the preparation, the facts already accomplished by Christ and +the inner transformation of men as the main thing, and all +else as the natural and necessary result. Paul, above all, as +may be seen especially from the arguments in the epistle to +the Romans, unquestionably favoured the latter conception and +gave it vigorous expression. The peculiar conflicts with which +he saw himself confronted, and, above all, the great controversy +about the relation of the Gospel and the new communities +to Judaism, necessarily concentrated the attention on +questions as to the arrangements on which the community of +those sanctified in Christ should rest, and the conditions of +admission to this community. But the centre of gravity of +Christian faith might also for the moment be removed from +the hope of Christ's second advent, and would then necessarily +be found in the first advent, in virtue of which salvation +was already prepared for man, and man for salvation +(Rom. III.-VIII.). The dual development of the conception +of Christianity which followed from this, rules the whole +history of the Gospel to the present day. The eschatological +view is certainly very severely repressed, but it always +breaks out here and there, and still guards the spiritual from +the secularisation which threatens it. But the possibility of +uniting the two conceptions in complete harmony with each +other, and on the other hand, of expressing them antithetically, +has been the very circumstance that has complicated in +an extraordinary degree the progress of the development of +the history of dogma. From this follows the antithesis, that +from that conception which somehow recognises salvation itself +in a present spiritual possession, eternal life in the sense of +immortality may be postulated as final result, though not a +glorious kingdom of Christ on earth; while, conversely, the +eschatological view must logically depreciate every blessing +which can be possessed in the present life.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page131" id="page131"></a>[pg 131]</span> + +<p>It is now evident that the theology, and, further, the Hellenising, +of Christianity, could arise and has arisen in connection, +not with the eschatological, but only with the other conception. +Just because the matters here in question were present spiritual +blessings, and because, from the nature of the case, the +ideas of forgiveness of sin, righteousness, knowledge, etc., were +not so definitely outlined in the early tradition, as the hopes +of the future, conceptions entirely new and very different, +could, as it were, be secretly naturalised. The spiritual view +left room especially for the great contrast of a religious and +a moralistic conception, as well as for a frame of mind which +was like the eschatological in so far as, according to it, faith +and knowledge were to be only preparatory blessings in contrast +with the peculiar blessing of immortality, which of course +was contained in them. In this frame of mind the illusion +might easily arise that this hope of immortality was the very +kernel of those hopes of the future for which old concrete forms +of expression were only a temporary shell. But it might +further be assumed that contempt for the transitory and finite +as such, was identical with contempt for the kingdom of the +world which the returning Christ would destroy.</p> + +<p>The history of dogma has to shew how the old eschatological +view was gradually repressed and transformed in the Gentile +Christian communities, and how there was finally developed +and carried out a spiritual conception in which a strict +moralism counterbalanced a luxurious mysticism, and wherein +the results of Greek practical philosophy could find a place. +But we must here refer to the fact, which is already taught +by the development in the Apostolic age, that Christian +dogmatic did not spring from the eschatological, but from the +spiritual mode of thought. The former had nothing but sure +hopes and the guarantee of these hopes by the Spirit, by the +words of prophecy and by the apocalyptic writings. One does +not think, he lives and dreams, in the eschatological mode of +thought; and such a life was vigorous and powerful till beyond +the middle of the second century. There can be no external +authorities here; for one has at every moment the highest +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page132" id="page132"></a>[pg 132]</span> +authority in living operation in the Spirit. On the other hand, +not only does the ecclesiastical christology essentially spring +from the spiritual way of thinking, but very specially also the +system of dogmatic guarantees. The co-ordination of +λογος θεου, +διδαχη κυριου, +κηρυγμα των +δωδεκα +αποστολων +[word of God, +teaching of the Lord, preaching of the twelve Apostles], which +lay at the basis of all Gentile Christian speculation almost +from the very beginning, and which was soon directed against +the enthusiasts, originated in a conception which regarded as +the essential thing in Christianity, the sure knowledge which +is the condition of immortality. If, however, in the following +sections of this historical presentation, the pervading and continuous +opposition of the two conceptions is not everywhere +clearly and definitely brought into prominence, that is due to +the conviction that the historian has no right to place the +factors and impelling ideas of a development in a clearer light +than they appear in the development itself. He must respect +the obscurities and complications as they come in his way. +A clear discernment of the difference of the two conceptions +was very seldom attained to in ecclesiastical antiquity, because +they did not look beyond their points of contact, and because +certain articles of the eschatological conception could never +be suppressed or remodelled in the Church. Goethe (Dichtung +und Wahrheit, II. 8,) has seen this very clearly. "The +Christian religion wavers between its own historic positive +element and a pure Deism, which, based on morality, in its +turn offers itself as the foundation of morality. The difference +of character and mode of thought shew themselves here in +infinite gradations, especially as another main distinction cooperates +with them, since the question arises, what share the +reason, and what the feelings, can and should have in such +convictions." See, also, what immediately follows.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_OBSCURITY" id="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_OBSCURITY"></a>2. The origin of a series of the most important Christian +customs and ideas is involved in an obscurity which in all +probability will never be cleared up. Though one part of +those ideas may be pointed out in the epistles of Paul, yet +the question must frequently remain unanswered, whether he +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page133" id="page133"></a>[pg 133]</span> +found them in existence or formed them independently, and +accordingly the other question, whether they are exclusively +indebted to the activity of Paul for their spread and naturalisation +in Christendom. What was the original conception of +baptism? Did Paul develop independently his own conception? +What significance had it in the following period? When +and where did baptism in the name of the Father, Son and +Holy Spirit arise, and how did it make its way in Christendom? +In what way were views about the saving value of +Christ's death developed alongside of Paul's system? When +and how did belief in the birth of Jesus from a Virgin gain +acceptance in Christendom? Who first distinguished Christendom, +as εκκλησια +του θεου, +from Judaism, and how did the concept +εκκλησια +become current? How old is the triad: Apostles, +Prophets and Teachers? When were Baptism and the +Lord's Supper grouped together? How old are our first three +Gospels? To all these questions and many more of equal +importance there is no sure answer. But the greatest problem +is presented by Christology, not indeed in its particular features +doctrinally expressed, these almost everywhere may be +explained historically, but in its deepest roots as it was preached +by Paul as the principle of a new life (2 Cor. V. 17), +and as it was to many besides him the expression of a personal +union with the exalted Christ (Rev. II. 3). But this +problem exists only for the historian who considers things +only from the outside, or seeks for objective proofs. Behind +and in the Gospel stands the Person of Jesus Christ who mastered +men's hearts, and constrained them to yield themselves to him +as his own, and in whom they found their God. Theology +attempted to describe in very uncertain and feeble outline +what the mind and heart had grasped. Yet it testifies of a +new life which, like all higher life, was kindled by a Person, +and could only be maintained by connection with that Person. +"I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me." +"I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." These convictions +are not dogmas and have no history, and they can only be +propagated in the manner described by Paul, Gal. I. 15, 16.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page134" id="page134"></a>[pg 134]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_PAULINE" id="SEC_0_II_SUPPLEMENTARY_PAULINE"></a>3. It was of the utmost importance for the legitimising +of the later development of Christianity as a system of doctrine, +that early Christianity had an Apostle who was a theologian, +and that his Epistles were received into the canon. That the +doctrine about Christ has become the main article in Christianity +is not of course the result of Paul's preaching, but is +based on the confession that Jesus is the Christ. The theology +of Paul was not even the most prominent ruling factor in the +transformation of the Gospel to the Catholic doctrine of faith, +although an earnest study of the Pauline Epistles by the +earliest Gentile Christian theologians, the Gnostics, and their +later opponents, is unmistakable. But the decisive importance +of this theology lies in the fact that, as a rule, it formed the +boundary and the foundation—just as the words of the +Lord himself—for those who in the following period endeavoured +to ascertain original Christianity, because the Epistles +attesting it stood in the canon of the New Testament. Now, +as this theology comprised both speculative and apologetic +elements, as it can be thought of as a system, as it contained +a theory of history and a definite conception of the Old Testament, +finally, as it was composed of objective and subjective +ethical considerations and included the realistic elements of a +national religion (wrath of God, sacrifice, reconciliation, Kingdom +of glory), as well as profound psychological perceptions +and the highest appreciation of spiritual blessings, the Catholic +doctrine of faith as it was formed in the course of time, +seemed, at least in its leading features, to be related to it, +nay, demanded by it. For the ascertaining of the deep-lying +distinctions, above all for the perception that the question in +the two cases is about elements quite differently conditioned, +that even the method is different, in short, that the Pauline +Gospel is not identical with the original Gospel and much +less with any later doctrine of faith, there is required such +historical judgment and such honesty of purpose not to be +led astray in the investigation by the canon of the New +Testament,<a id="footnotetag136" name="footnotetag136"></a><a href="#footnote136"><sup>136</sup></a> that no change in the prevailing ideas can be +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page135" id="page135"></a>[pg 135]</span> +hoped for for long years to come. Besides, critical theology +has made it difficult, to gain an insight into the great difference +that lies between the Pauline and the Catholic theology, +by the one-sided prominence it has hitherto given to the +antagonism between Paulinism and Judaistic Christianity. In contrast +with this view the remark of Havet, though also very +one-sided, is instructive, "Quand on vient de relire Paul, on ne +peut méconnaître le caractère élevé de son oeuvre. Je dirai en +un mot, qu'il a agrandi dans une proportion extraordinaire +l'attrait que le judaïsme exerçait sur le monde ancien" (Le +Christianisme, T. IV. p. 216). That, however, was only very +gradually the case and within narrow limits. The deepest and +most important writings of the New Testament are incontestably +those in which Judaism is understood as religion, but +spiritually overcome and subordinated to the Gospel as a new +religion,—the Pauline Epistles, the Epistle to the Hebrews, +and the Gospel and Epistle of John. There is set forth in +these writings a new and exalted world of religious feelings, +views and judgments, into which the Christians of succeeding +centuries got only meagre glimpses. Strictly speaking, the +opinion that the New Testament in its whole extent comprehends +a unique literature is not tenable; but it is correct +to say that between its most important constituent parts, and +the literature of the period immediately following there is a +great gulf fixed.</p> + +<p>But Paulinism especially has had an immeasurable and +blessed influence on the whole course of the history of dogma, +an influence it could not have had, if the Pauline Epistles +had not been received into the canon. Paulinism is a religious +and Christocentric doctrine, more inward and more powerful +than any other which has ever appeared in the Church. It +stands in the clearest opposition to all merely natural moralism, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page136" id="page136"></a>[pg 136]</span> +all righteousness of works, all religious ceremonialism, all +Christianity without Christ. It has therefore become the conscience +of the Church, until the Catholic Church in Jansenism +killed this her conscience. "The Pauline reactions describe +the critical epochs of theology and the Church."<a id="footnotetag137" name="footnotetag137"></a><a href="#footnote137"><sup>137</sup></a> One might +write a history of dogma as a history of the Pauline reactions +in the Church, and in doing so would touch on all the turning +points of the history. Marcion after the Apostolic Fathers; +Irenæus, Clement and Origen after the Apologists; Augustine +after the Fathers of the Greek Church;<a id="footnotetag138" name="footnotetag138"></a><a href="#footnote138"><sup>138</sup></a> the great Reformers +of the middle ages from Agobard to Wessel in the bosom +of the mediæval Church; Luther after the Scholastics; Jansenism +after the council of Trent:—Everywhere it has been +Paul, in these men, who produced the Reformation. Paulinism +has proved to be a ferment in the history of dogma, a basis +it has never been.<a id="footnotetag139" name="footnotetag139"></a><a href="#footnote139"><sup>139</sup></a> Just as it had that significance in Paul +himself, with reference to Jewish Christianity, so it has continued +to work through the history of the Church.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote46" name="footnote46"></a><b>Footnote 46:</b><a href="#footnotetag46"> (return) </a><p>The Old Testament of itself alone could not have convinced the +Græco-Roman world. But the converse question might perhaps be raised +as to what results the Gospel would have had in that world without +its union with the Old Testament. The Gnostic Schools and the Marcionite +Church are to some extent the answer. But would they ever have arisen +without the presupposition of a Christian community which recognised +the Old Testament?</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote47" name="footnote47"></a><b>Footnote 47:</b><a href="#footnotetag47"> (return) </a><p>We here leave out of account learned attempts to expound Paulinism. +Nor do we take any notice of certain truths regarding the relation of +the Old Testament to the New, and regarding the Jewish religion, stated +by the Antignostic church teachers, truths which are certainly very important, +but have not been sufficiently utilised.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote48" name="footnote48"></a><b>Footnote 48:</b><a href="#footnotetag48"> (return) </a><p>There is indeed no single writing of the new Testament which does not +betray the influence of the mode of thought and general conditions of the culture +of the time which resulted from the Hellenising of the east: even the use +of the Greek translation of the Old Testament attests this fact. Nay, we may +go further, and say that the Gospel itself is historically unintelligible, so long +as we compare it with an exclusive Judaism as yet unaffected by any foreign +influence. But on the other hand, it is just as clear that, specifically, Hellenic +ideas form the presuppositions neither for the Gospel itself, nor for the most +important New Testament writings. It is a question rather as to a general +spiritual atmosphere created by Hellenism, which above all strengthened +the individual element, and with it the idea of completed personality, in itself +living and responsible. On this foundation we meet with a religious mode of +thought in the Gospel and the early Christian writings, which so far as it is at +all dependent on an earlier mode of thought, is determined by the spirit of +the Old Testament (Psalms and Prophets) and of Judaism. But it is already +otherwise with the earliest Gentile Christian writings. The mode of thought +here is so thoroughly determined by the Hellenic spirit that we seem to have +entered a new world when we pass from the synoptists, Paul and John, to +Clement, Barnabas, Justin or Valentinus. We may therefore say, especially in +the frame-work of the history of dogma, that the Hellenic element has exercised +an influence on the Gospel first on Gentile Christian soil, and by those +who were Greek by birth, if only we reserve the general spiritual atmosphere +above referred to. Even Paul is no exception; for in spite of the well-founded +statements of Weizsäcker (Apostolic Age, vol. I. Book 11) and Heinrici +(Das 2 Sendschreiben an die Korinthier, 1887, p. 578 ff), as to the Hellenism +of Paul, it is certain that the Apostle's mode of religious thought, in the +strict sense of the word, and therefore also the doctrinal formation peculiar +to him, are but little determined by the Greek spirit. +But it is to be specially noted that as a missionary and an Apologist he made +use of Greek ideas (Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians). He was not afraid +to put the Gospel into Greek modes of thought. To this extent we can already +observe in him the beginning of the development which we can trace so clearly +in the Gentile Church from Clement to Justin, and from Justin to Irenæus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote49" name="footnote49"></a><b>Footnote 49:</b><a href="#footnotetag49"> (return) </a><p>The complete universalism of salvation is given in the Pauline conception +of Christianity. But this conception is singular. Because: (1) the Pauline +universalism is based on a criticism of the Jewish religion as religion, including +the Old Testament, which was not understood and therefore not received +by Christendom in general. (2) Because Paul not only formulated no national +anti-Judaism, but always recognised the prerogative of the people of Israel as +a people. (3) Because his idea of the Gospel, with all his Greek culture, is +independent of Hellenism in its deepest grounds. This peculiarity of the +Pauline Gospel is the reason why little more could pass from it into the common +consciousness of Christendom than the universalism of salvation, and +why the later development of the Church cannot be explained from Paulinism. +Baur, therefore, was quite right when he recognised that we must exhibit +another and more powerful element in order to comprehend the post-Pauline +formations. In the selection of this element, however, he has made a fundamental +mistake, by introducing the narrow national Jewish Christianity, and +he has also given much too great scope to Paulinism by wrongly conceiving +it as Gentile Christian doctrine. One great difficulty for the historian of +the early Church is that he cannot start from Paulinism, the plainest +phenomenon of the Apostolic age, in seeking to explain the following +development, that in fact the premises for this development are not at all +capable of being indicated in the form of outlines, just because they were +too general. But, on the other hand, the Pauline Theology, this theology +of one who had been a Pharisee, is the strongest proof of the independent +and universal power of the impression made by the Person of Jesus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote50" name="footnote50"></a><b>Footnote 50:</b><a href="#footnotetag50"> (return) </a><p>In the main writings of the New Testament itself we have a twofold +conception of the Spirit. According to the one he comes upon the believer +fitfully, expresses himself in visible signs, deprives men of self-consciousness, +and puts them beside themselves. According to the other, the spirit is a +constant possession of the Christian, operates in him by enlightening the +conscience and strengthening the character, and his fruits are love, joy, +peace, patience, gentleness, etc. (Gal. V. 22). Paul above all taught Christians +to value these fruits of the spirit higher than all the other effects of his +working. But he has not by any means produced a perfectly clear view +on this point: for "he himself spoke with more tongues than they all." +As yet "Spirit" lay within "Spirit." One felt in the spirit of sonship a +completely new gift coming from God and recreating life, a miracle of +God; further, this spirit also produced sudden exclamations—"Abba, +Father;" and thus shewed himself in a way patent to the senses. For +that very reason, the spirit of ecstasy and of miracle appeared identical +with the spirit of sonship. (See Gunkel, Die Wirkungen d. h. Geistes nach +der populären Anschauung der Apostol. Zeit. Göttingen, 1888).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote51" name="footnote51"></a><b>Footnote 51:</b><a href="#footnotetag51"> (return) </a><p>It may even be said here that the +αθανασια +(ζωη αιωνιος), +on the one hand, and the +εκκλησια, on the other, +have already appeared in place of the +Βασιλεια του +θεου, and +that the idea of Messiah has been finally replaced by that of the Divine +Teacher and of God manifest in the flesh.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote52" name="footnote52"></a><b>Footnote 52:</b><a href="#footnotetag52"> (return) </a><p>It is one of the merits of Bruno Bauer (Christus und die Cäsaren, 1877), +that he has appreciated the real significance of the Greek element in the Gentile +Christianity which became the Catholic Church and doctrine, and that he +has appreciated the influence of the Judaism of the Diaspora as a preparation +for this Gentile Christianity. But these valuable contributions have unfortunately +been deprived of their convincing power by a baseless criticism of the +early Christian literature, to which Christ and Paul have fallen a sacrifice. +Somewhat more cautious are the investigations of Havet in the fourth volume +of Le Christianisme, 1884; Le Nouveau Testament. He has won great merit +by the correct interpretation of the elements of Gentile Christianity developing +themselves to catholicism, but his literary criticism is often unfortunately +entirely abstract, reminding one of the criticism of Voltaire, and therefore his +statements in detail are, as a rule, arbitrary and untenable. There is a school +in Holland at the present time closely related to Bruno Bauer and Havet, +which attempts to banish early Christianity from the world. Christ and Paul +are creations of the second century: the history of Christianity begins with +the passage of the first century into the second—a peculiar phenomenon on +the soil of Hellenised Judaism in quest of a Messiah. This Judaism created +Jesus Christ just as the later Greek religious philosophers created their Saviour +(Apollonius, for example). The Marcionite Church produced Paul and the +growing Catholic Church completed him. See the numerous treatises of Loman, +the Verisimilia of Pierson and Naber (1886), and the anonymous English +work "Antiqua Mater" (1887), also the works of Steck (see especially his Untersuchung +über den Galaterbrief). Against these works see P.V. Schmidt's, +"Der Galaterbrief," 1892. It requires a deep knowledge of the problems which +the first two centuries of the Christian Church present, in order not to thrust +aside as simply absurd these attempts, which as yet have failed to deal with +the subject in a connected way. They have their strength in the difficulties +and riddles which are contained in the history of the formation of the Catholic +tradition in the second century. But the single circumstance that we are +asked to regard as a forgery such a document as the first Epistle of Paul to +the Corinthians, appears to me, of itself, to be an unanswerable argument +against the new hypotheses.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote53" name="footnote53"></a><b>Footnote 53:</b><a href="#footnotetag53"> (return) </a><p>It would be a fruitful task, though as yet it has not been undertaken, +to examine how long visions, dreams and apocalypses, on the one hand, +and the claim of speaking in the power and name of the Holy Spirit, on +the other, played a <i>rôle</i> in the early Church; and further to shew how they +nearly died out among the laity, but continued to live among the clergy +and the monks, and how, even among the laity, there were again and again +sporadic outbreaks of them. The material which the first three centuries +present is very great. Only a few may be mentioned here: Ignat. ad. +Rom. VII. 2; ad. Philad. VII; ad Eph. XX. 1, etc.; 1 Clem. LXIII. 2; Martyr. +Polyc.; Acta Perpet. et Felic; Tertull de animo XLVII.; "Major pæne vis +hominum e visionibus deum discunt." Orig. c. Celsum. i. 46: +πολλοι +'οσπερει +ακοντες +προσεληλυθασι +χριστιανισμω, +πνευματος +τινος +τρεψαντος ... +και +φαντασιωσαντος +αυτους 'υπαρ +'η οναρ +(even Arnobius was ostensibly led to Christianity by a +dream). Cyprian makes the most extensive use of dreams, visions, etc., in +his letters, see for example Ep. XI. 3-5; XVI. 4 ("præter nocturnas visiones +per dies quoque impletur apud nos spiritu sancto puerorum innocens aetas, +quæ in ecstasi videt," etc.); XXXIX. 1; LXVI 10 (very interesting: "quamquam +sciam somnia ridicula et visiones ineptas quibusdam videri, sed +utique illis, qui malunt contra sacerdotes credere quam sacerdoti, sed +nihil mirum, quando de Joseph fratres sui dixerunt: ecce somniator ille," +etc.). One who took part in the baptismal controversy in the great Synod +of Carthage writes, "secundum motum animi mei et spiritus sancti." The +enthusiastic element was always evoked with special power in times of +persecution, as the genuine African martyrdoms, from the second half of +the third century, specially shew. Cf. especially the passio Jacobi, Mariani, +etc. But where the enthusiasm was not convenient it was called, as in +the case of the Montanists, dæmonic. Even Constantine operated with +dreams and visions of Christ (see his Vita).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote54" name="footnote54"></a><b>Footnote 54:</b><a href="#footnotetag54"> (return) </a><p>As to the first, the recently discovered "Teaching of the Apostles" +in its first moral part, shews a great affinity with the moral philosophy +which was set up by Alexandrian Jews and put before the Greek world +as that which had been revealed: see Massebieau, L'enseignement des +XII. Apôtres, Paris, 1884, and in the Journal "Le Temoignage," 7 Febr. +1885. Usener, in his Preface to the Ges. Abhandl. Jacob Bernays', which +he edited, 1885, p.v.f., has, independently of Massebieau, pointed out +the relationship of chapters 1-5 of the "Teaching of the Apostles" with +the Phocylidean poem (see Bernays' above work, p. 192 ff.). Later Taylor, +"The teaching of the twelve Apostles", 1886, threw out the conjecture +that the Didache had a Jewish foundation, and I reached the same conclusion +independently of him: see my Treatise: Die Apostellehre und die +judischen beiden Wege, 1886.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote55" name="footnote55"></a><b>Footnote 55:</b><a href="#footnotetag55"> (return) </a><p>It is well known that Judaism at the time of Christ embraced a great +many different tendencies. Beside Pharisaic Judaism as the stem proper +there was a motley mass of formations which resulted from the contact +of Judaism with foreign ideas, customs, and institutions (even with Babylonian +and Persian), and which attained importance for the development +of the predominant church as well as for the formation of the so-called +gnostic Christian communions. Hellenic elements found their way even +into Pharisaic theology. Orthodox Judaism itself has marks which shew +that no spiritual movement was able to escape the influence which proceeded +from the victory of the Greeks over the east. Besides who would +venture to exhibit definitely the origin and causes of that spiritualising +of religions and that limitation of the moral standard of which we can +find so many traces in the Alexandrian age? The nations who inhabited the +eastern shore of the Mediterranean sea had from the fourth century B.C. a +common history and therefore had similar convictions. Who can decide +what each of them acquired by its own exertions and what it obtained +through interchange of opinions? But in proportion as we see this we +must be on our guard against jumbling the phenomena together and effacing +them. There is little meaning in calling a thing Hellenic, as that really formed +an element in all the phenomena of the age. All our great political and ecclesiastical +parties to-day are dependent on the ideas of 1789 and again on +romantic ideas. It is just as easy to verify this as it is difficult to determine +the measure and the manner of the influence for each group. And yet the +understanding of it turns altogether on this point. To call Pharisaism or the +Gospel or the old Jewish Christianity Hellenic is not paradox but confusion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote56" name="footnote56"></a><b>Footnote 56:</b><a href="#footnotetag56">(return)</a><p>The Acts of the Apostles is in this respect a most instructive book. It +as well as the Gospel of Luke is a document of Gentile Christianity developing +itself to Catholicism; Cf. Overbeck in his Commentar z Apostelgesch. But +the comprehensive judgment of Havet in the work above mentioned (IV. p. +395) is correct: "L hellenisme tient assez peu de place dans le N.T. du moins +l hellenisme voulu et reflechi. Ces livres sont ecrits en grec et leurs auteurs +vivaient en pays grec, il y a donc eu chez eux infiltration des idees et des +sentiments helleniques, quelquefois même l imagination hellenique y a pénetre +comme dans le 3 evangile et dans les Actes. Dans son ensemble le +N.T. garde le caractere d un livre hebraique. Le christianisme ne commence +avoir une litterature et des doctrines vraiment helleniques qu au milieu du +second siecle. Mais il y avait un judaisme celui d Alexandrie qui avait faite +alliance avec l hellenisme avant meme qu il y eut des chretiens."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote57" name="footnote57"></a><b>Footnote 57:</b><a href="#footnotetag57"> (return) </a><p>The right of distinguishing (<i>b</i>) and (<i>c</i>) may +be contested. But if we surrender this we therewith surrender the right +to distinguish kernel and husk in the original proclamation of the +Gospel. The dangers to which the attempt is exposed should not frighten +us from it for it has its justification in the fact that the Gospel is +neither doctrine nor law.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote58" name="footnote58"></a><b>Footnote 58:</b><a href="#footnotetag58"> (return) </a><p>Therewith are, doubtless, heavenly blessings bestowed in the present. +Historical investigation has, notwithstanding, every reason for closely +examining whether, and in how far, we may speak of a present for the +Kingdom of God, in the sense of Jesus. But even if the question had to +be answered in the negative, it would make little or no difference for +the correct understanding of Jesus' preaching. The Gospel viewed in its +kernel is independent of this question. It deals with the inner constitution +and mood of the soul.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote59" name="footnote59"></a><b>Footnote 59:</b><a href="#footnotetag59"> (return) </a><p>The question whether, and in what degree, a man of himself can earn +righteousness before God is one of those theoretic questions to which Jesus +gave no answer. He fixed his attention on all the gradations of the moral +and religious conduct of his countrymen as they were immediately presented +to him, and found some prepared for entrance into the kingdom of God, not +by a technical mode of outward preparation, but by hungering and thirsting +for it, and at the same time unselfishly serving their brethren. Humility and +love unfeigned were always the decisive marks of these prepared ones. They +are to be satisfied with righteousness before God, that is, are to receive the +blessed feeling that God is gracious to them as sinners, and accepts them as +his children. Jesus, however, allows the popular distinction of sinners and +righteous to remain, but exhibits its perverseness by calling sinners to him +and by describing the opposition of the righteous to his Gospel as +a mark of their godlessness and hardness of heart.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote60" name="footnote60"></a><b>Footnote 60:</b><a href="#footnotetag60"> (return) </a><p>The blessings of the kingdom were frequently represented by Jesus +as a reward for work done. But this popular view is again broken through +by reference to the fact that all reward is the gift of God's free grace.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote61" name="footnote61"></a><b>Footnote 61:</b><a href="#footnotetag61"> (return) </a><p>Some Critics—most recently Havet, Le Christianisme et ses origines, +1884. T. IV. p. 15 ff.—have called in question the fact that Jesus called himself +Messiah. But this article of the Evangelic tradition seems to me to stand the +test of the most minute investigation. But, in the case of Jesus, the consciousness +of being the Messiah undoubtedly rested on the certainty of being +the Son of God, therefore of knowing the Father and being constrained +to proclaim that knowledge.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote62" name="footnote62"></a><b>Footnote 62:</b><a href="#footnotetag62"> (return) </a><p>We can gather with certainty from the Gospels that Jesus did not enter +on his work with the announcement: Believe in me for I am the Messiah. +On the contrary, he connected his work with the baptising movement of +John, but carried that movement further, and thereby made the Baptist +his forerunner (Mark I. 15: πεπληρωται 'ο καιρος και ηγγικεν 'η βασιλεια του θεου, μετανοειτε +και πιστευετε εν τω ευαγγελιω). He was in no hurry to urge anything +that went beyond that message, but gradually prepared, and cautiously +required of his followers an advance beyond it. The goal to which he +led them was to believe in him as Messiah without putting the usual +political construction on the Messianic ideal.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote63" name="footnote63"></a><b>Footnote 63:</b><a href="#footnotetag63"> (return) </a><p>Even "Son of Man" probably means Messiah: we do not know whether +Jesus had any special reason for favouring this designation which springs +from Dan. VII. The objection to interpreting the word as Messiah really +resolves itself into this, that the disciples (according to the Gospels) did not +at once recognise him as Messiah. But that is explained by the contrast +of his own peculiar idea of Messiah with the popular idea. The confession +of him as Messiah was the keystone of their confidence in him, +inasmuch as by that confession they separated themselves from old ideas.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote64" name="footnote64"></a><b>Footnote 64:</b><a href="#footnotetag64"> (return) </a><p>The distinction between the Father and the Son stands out just as plainly +in the sayings of Jesus, as the complete obedient subordination of the Son to +the Father. Even according to John's Gospel, Jesus finishes the work which +the Father has given him, and is obedient in everything even unto death. He +declares Matt. XIX. 17: 'εις εστιν 'ο αγαθος. Special notice should be given to +Mark XIII. 32, (Matt. XXIV. 36). Behind the only manifested life of Jesus, later +speculation has put a life in which he wrought, not in subordination and +obedience, but in like independence and dignity with God. That goes beyond +the utterances of Jesus even in the fourth Gospel. But it is no advance beyond +these, especially in the religious view and speech of the time, when it is announced +that the relation of the Father to the Son lies beyond time. It is +not even improbable that the sayings in the fourth Gospel referring to this, +have a basis in the preaching of Jesus himself.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote65" name="footnote65"></a><b>Footnote 65:</b><a href="#footnotetag65"> (return) </a><p>Paul knew that the designation of God as the Father of our Lord Jesus +Christ, was the new Evangelic confession. Origen was the first among the +Fathers (though before him Marcion) to recognise that the decisive advance +beyond the Old Testament stage of religion, was given in the preaching of +God as Father; see the exposition of the Lord's prayer in his treatise <i>De +oratione</i>. No doubt the Old Testament, and the later Judaism knew the designation +of God as Father; but it applied it to the Jewish nation, it did not +attach the evangelic meaning to the name, and it did not allow itself in +any way to be guided in its religion by this idea.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote66" name="footnote66"></a><b>Footnote 66:</b><a href="#footnotetag66"> (return) </a><p>See the farewell discourses in John, the fundamental ideas of which +are, in my opinion, genuine, that is, proceed from Jesus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote67" name="footnote67"></a><b>Footnote 67:</b><a href="#footnotetag67"> (return) </a><p>The historian cannot regard a miracle as a sure given historical event: +for in doing so he destroys the mode of consideration on which all historical +investigation rests. Every individual miracle remains historically quite +doubtful, and a summation of things doubtful never leads to certainty. But +should the historian, notwithstanding, be convinced that Jesus Christ did +extraordinary things, in the strict sense miraculous things, then, from the +unique impression he has obtained of this person, he infers the possession +by him of supernatural power. This conclusion itself belongs to the province +of religious faith: though there has seldom been a strong faith which +would not have drawn it. Moreover, the healing miracles of Jesus are the +only ones that come into consideration in a strict historical examination. +These certainly cannot be eliminated from the historical accounts without +utterly destroying them. But how unfit are they of themselves, after 1800 +years, to secure any special importance to him to whom they are attributed, +unless that importance was already established apart from them. That +he could do with himself what he would, that he created a new thing +without overturning the old, that he won men to himself by announcing +the Father, that he inspired without fanaticism, set up a kingdom without politics, +set men free from the world without asceticism, was a teacher without +theology, at a time of fanaticism and politics, asceticism and theology, is the +great miracle of his person, and that he who preached the Sermon on the +Mount declared himself in respect of his life and death, to be the Redeemer +and Judge of the world, is the offence and foolishness which mock all reason.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote68" name="footnote68"></a><b>Footnote 68:</b><a href="#footnotetag68"> (return) </a><p>See Mark X. 45.—That Jesus at the celebration of the first Lord's supper +described his death as a sacrifice which he should offer for the forgiveness of +sin, is clear from the account of Paul. From that account it appears to be certain, +that Jesus gave expression to the idea of the necessity and saving +significance of his death for the forgiveness of sins, in a symbolical ordinance +(based on the conclusion of the covenant, Exod. XXIV. 3 ff., perhaps, +as Paul presupposes, on the Passover), in order that His disciples by +repeating it in accordance with the will of Jesus, might be the more deeply +impressed by it. Certain observations based on John VI., on the supper +prayer in the Didache, nay, even on the report of Mark, and supported +at the same time by features of the earliest practice in which it had the +character of a real meal, and the earliest theory of the supper, which +viewed it as a communication of eternal life and an anticipation of the +future existence, have for years made me doubt very much whether the +Pauline account and the Pauline conception of it, were really either the +oldest, or the universal and therefore only one. I have been strengthened +in this suspicion by the profound and remarkable investigation of Spitta +(z. Gesch. u. Litt. d. Urchristenthums: Die urchristl. Traditionen ü. den +Urspr. u. Sinnd. Abendmahls, 1893). He sees in the supper as not instituted, +but celebrated by Jesus, the festival of the Messianic meal, the anticipated +triumph over death, the expression of the perfection of the Messianic +work, the symbolic representation of the filling of believers with the powers +of the Messianic kingdom and life. The reference to the Passover +and the death of Christ was attached to it later, though it is true very +soon. How much is thereby explained that was hitherto obscure—critical, +historical, and dogmatico-historical questions—cannot at all be stated +briefly. And yet I hesitate to give a full recognition to Spitta's exposition: +the words 1 Cor. XI. 23: εγω γαρ παρελαβον απο του κυριου, 'ο και παρεδοκα +'υμιν κ.τ.λ. are too strong for me. Cf. besides, Weizsäcker's investigation +in "The Apostolic Age." Lobstein, La doctrine de la s. cène. 1889. A. +Harnack i.d. Texten u. Unters. VII. 2. p. 139 ff. Schürer, Theol. Lit. Ztg. +1891, p. 29 ff. Jülicher Abhandl. f Weizsäcker, 1892, p. 215 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote69" name="footnote69"></a><b>Footnote 69:</b><a href="#footnotetag69"> (return) </a><p>With regard to the eschatology, no one can say in detail what proceeds +from Jesus, and what from the disciples. What has been said in the text +does not claim to be certain, but only probable. The most important, +and at the same time the most certain point, is that Jesus made the +definitive fate of the individual depend on faith, humility and love. There +are no passages in the Gospel which conflict with the impression that +Jesus reserved day and hour to God, and wrought in faith and patience +as long as for him it was day.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote70" name="footnote70"></a><b>Footnote 70:</b><a href="#footnotetag70"> (return) </a><p>He did not impose on every one, or desire from every one even the +outward following of himself: see Mark V. 18-19. The "imitation of Jesus", +in the strict sense of the word, did not play any noteworthy rôle either +in the Apostolic or in the old Catholic period.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote71" name="footnote71"></a><b>Footnote 71:</b><a href="#footnotetag71"> (return) </a><p>It is asserted by well-informed investigators, and may be inferred from +the Gospels (Mark XII. 32-34; Luke X. 27, 28), perhaps also from the Jewish +original of the Didache, that some representatives of Pharisaism, beside +the pedantic treatment of the law, attempted to concentrate it on the fundamental +moral commandments. Consequently, in Palestinian and Alexandrian +Judaism at the time of Christ, in virtue of the prophetic word and +the Thora, influenced also, perhaps, by the Greek spirit which everywhere +gave the stimulus to inwardness, the path was indicated in which the future +development of religion was to follow. Jesus entered fully into the view of +the law thus attempted, which comprehended it as a whole and traced it +back to the disposition. But he freed it from the contradiction that adhered +to it, (because, in spite of and alongside the tendency to a deeper perception, +men still persisted in deducing righteousness from a punctilious observance +of numerous particular commandments, because in so doing they became +self-satisfied, that is, irreligious, and because in belonging to Abraham +they thought they had a claim of right on God). For all that, so far as a +historical understanding of the activity of Jesus is at all possible, it is to +be obtained from the soil of Pharisaism, as the Pharisees were those who +cherished and developed the Messianic expectations, and because, along +with their care for the Thora, they sought also to preserve, in their own +way, the prophetic inheritance. If everything does not deceive us, there +were already contained in the Pharisaic theology of the age, speculations +which were fitted to modify considerably the narrow view of history, and +to prepare for universalism. The very men who tithed mint, anise and +cummin, who kept their cups and dishes outwardly clean, who, hedging +round the Thora, attempted to hedge round the people, spoke also of the sum +total of the law. They made room in their theology for new ideas which +are partly to be described as advances, and on the other hand, they have +already pondered the question even in relation to the law, whether submission +to its main contents was not sufficient for being numbered among the people +of the covenant (see Renan: <i>Paul</i>). In particular the whole sacrificial system, +which Jesus also essentially ignored, was therewith thrust into the background. +Baldensperger (Selbstbewusstsein Jesu. p. 46) justly says. "There +lie before us definite marks that the certainty of the nearness of God in +the Temple (from the time of the Maccabees) begins to waver, and the +efficacy of the temple institutions to be called in question. Its recent desecration +by the Romans, appears to the author of the Psalms of Solomon (II. 2) as +a kind of Divine requital for the sons of Israel, themselves having been guilty +of so grossly profaning the sacrificial gifts. Enoch calls the shewbread of the +second Temple polluted and unclean. There had crept in among the pious +a feeling of the insufficiency of their worship, and from this side the Essenic +schism will certainly represent only the open outbreak of a disease which had +already begun to gnaw secretly at the religious life of the nation": see here +the excellent explanations of the origin of Essenism in Lucius (Essenism +75 ff. 109 ff.) The spread of Judaism in the world, the secularization and apostacy +of the priestly caste, the desecration of the Temple, the building of the +Temple at Leontopolis, the perception brought about by the spiritualising of +religion in the empire of Alexander the Great, that no blood of beast can be a +means of reconciling God—all these circumstances must have been absolutely +dangerous and fatal, both to the local centralisation of worship, and to the +statutory sacrificial system. The proclamation of Jesus (and of Stephen) as to +the overthrow of the Temple, is therefore no absolutely new thing, nor is the +fact that Judaism fell back upon the law and the Messianic hope, a mere result +of the destruction of the Temple. This change was rather prepared by the +inner development. Whatever point in the preaching of Jesus we may fix on, +we shall find, that—apart from the writings of the Prophets and the Psalms, +which originated in the Greek Maccabean periods—parallels can be found +only in Pharisaism, but at the same time that the sharpest contrasts must +issue from it. Talmudic Judaism is not in every respect the genuine continuance +of Pharisaic Judaism, but a product of the decay which attests that the +rejection of Jesus by the spiritual leaders of the people had deprived the +nation, and even the Virtuosi of Religion of their best part (see for this the +expositions of Kuenen "Judaismus und Christenthum", in his (Hibbert) lectures +on national religions and world religions). The ever recurring attempts +to deduce the origin of Christianity from Hellenism, or even from the Roman +Greek culture, are there also rightly, briefly and tersely rejected. Also the +hypotheses, which either entirely eliminate the person of Jesus or make him +an Essene, or subordinate him to the person of Paul, may be regarded as +definitively settled. Those who think they can ascertain the origin of Christian +religion from the origin of Christian Theology will, indeed, always think of +Hellenism: Paul will eclipse the person of Jesus with those who believe that +a religion for the world must be born with a universalistic doctrine. Finally, +Essenism will continue in authority with those who see in the position of indifference +which Jesus took to the Temple worship, the main thing, and who, +besides, create for themselves an "Essenism of their own finding." Hellenism, +and also Essenism, can of course indicate to the historian some of the conditions +by which the appearance of Jesus was prepared and rendered possible; +but they explain only the possibility, not the reality of the appearance. But +this with its historically not deducible power is the decisive thing. If some one +has recently said that "the historical speciality of the person of Jesus" is not +the main thing in Christianity, he has thereby betrayed that he does not know +how a religion that is worthy of the name is founded, propagated, and maintained. +For the latest attempt to put the Gospel in a historical connection +with Buddhism (Seydel, Das Ev von Jesus in seinen Verhältnissen zur +Buddha-Sage, 1882: likewise, Die Buddha-Legende und das Leben Jesu, 1884), +see, Oldenburg, Theol. Lit-Z'g 1882. Col. 415 f. 1884. 185 f. However much +necessarily remains obscure to us in the ministry of Jesus when we seek +to place it in a historical connection,—what is known is sufficient to +confirm the judgment that his preaching developed a germ in the religion +of Israel (see the Psalms) which was finally guarded and in many respects +developed by the Pharisees, but which languished and died under their +guardianship. The power of development which Jesus imported to it was +not a power which he himself had to borrow from without; but doctrine +and speculation were as far from him as ecstasy and visions. On the +other hand, we must remember we do not know the history of Jesus up +to his public entrance on his ministry, and that therefore we do not know +whether in his native province he had any connection with Greeks.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote72" name="footnote72"></a><b>Footnote 72:</b><a href="#footnotetag72"> (return) </a><p>See the brilliant investigations of Weizsäcker (Apost. Zeitalter. p. 36) +as to the earliest significant names, self-designations, of the disciples. +The twelve were in the first place "μαθηται," (disciples and family-circle +of Jesus, see also the significance of James and the brethren of Jesus), +then witnesses of the resurrection and therefore Apostles; very soon +there appeared beside them, even in Jerusalem, Prophets and Teachers.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote73" name="footnote73"></a><b>Footnote 73:</b><a href="#footnotetag73"> (return) </a><p>The Christian preaching is very pregnantly described in +Acts XXVIII. 31. as κηρυσσειν την Βασιλειαν του Θεου, και διδασκειν +τα περι του Ιησου Χριστου.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote74" name="footnote74"></a><b>Footnote 74:</b><a href="#footnotetag74"> (return) </a><p>On the spirit of God (of Christ) see note, p. 50. The earliest Christians +felt the influence of the spirit as one coming on them from without.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote75" name="footnote75"></a><b>Footnote 75:</b><a href="#footnotetag75"> (return) </a><p>It cannot be directly proved that Jesus instituted +baptism, for Matth. XXVIII. 19, is not a saying of the Lord. The reasons +for this assertion are: (1) It is only a later stage of the tradition +that represents the risen Christ as delivering speeches and giving +commandments. Paul knows nothing of it. (2) The Trinitarian formula is +foreign to the mouth of Jesus and has not the authority in the Apostolic +age which it must have had if it had descended from Jesus himself. On +the other hand, Paul knows of no other way of receiving the Gentiles +into the Christian communities than by baptism, and it is highly +probable that in the time of Paul all Jewish Christians were also +baptised. We may perhaps assume that the practice of baptism was +continued in consequence of Jesus' recognition of John the Baptist and +his baptism, even after John himself had been removed. According to John +IV. 2, Jesus himself baptised not, but his disciples under his +superintendence. It is possible only with the help of tradition to trace +back to Jesus a "Sacrament of Baptism," or an obligation to it <i>ex +necessitate salutis</i>, though it is credible that tradition is correct +here. Baptism in the Apostolic age was εις αφεσιν 'αμαρτιων, +and indeed εις το ονομα χριστου (1 Cor. I. 13; Acts XIX. 5). +We cannot make out when the formula, εις το ονομα του πατρος, +και του 'υιου, και του 'αγιου πνευματος, emerged. The formula +εις το ονομα expresses that the person baptised is put into a relation +of dependence on him into whose name he is baptised. Paul has given +baptism a relation to the death of Christ, or justly inferred it from +the εις αφεσιν 'αμαρτιων. The descent of the spirit on the +baptised very soon ceased to be regarded as the necessary and immediate +result of baptism; yet Paul, and probably his contemporaries also, +considered the grace of baptism and the communication of the spirit to +be inseparably united. See Scholten. Die Taufformel. 1885. Holtzman, Die +Taufe im N.T. Ztsch. f. wiss. Theol. 1879.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote76" name="footnote76"></a><b>Footnote 76:</b><a href="#footnotetag76"> (return) </a><p>The designation of the Christian community as +εκκλησια originates perhaps with Paul, though that is by no means +certain; see as to this "name of honour," Sohm, Kirchenrecht, Vol. I. p. +16 ff. The words of the Lord, Matt. XVI. 18; XVIII. 17, belong to a later +period. According to Gal. I. 22, ταις εν χριστο is added to +the ταις εκκλησιαις της Ιουδαιας. The independence of every +individual Christian in, and before God is strongly insisted on in the +Epistles of Paul, and in the Epistle of Peter, and in the Christian +portions of Revelations: εποιησεν 'ημας βασιλειαν, 'ιερεις τω +θεο και πατρι αυτου.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote77" name="footnote77"></a><b>Footnote 77:</b><a href="#footnotetag77"> (return) </a><p>Jesus is regarded with adoring reverence as Messiah and Lord, that +is, these are regarded as the names which his Father has given him. +Christians are those who call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. +I. 2): every creature must bow before him and confess him as Lord +(Phil. II. 9): see Deissmann on the N.T. formula "in Christo Jesu."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote78" name="footnote78"></a><b>Footnote 78:</b><a href="#footnotetag78"> (return) </a><p>The confession of Father, Son and Spirit is therefore the unfolding +of the belief that Jesus is the Christ: but there was no intention of expressing +by this confession the essential equality of the three persons, or +even the similar relation of the Christian to them. On the contrary, the +Father, in it, is regarded as the God and Father over all, the Son as +revealer, redeemer and Lord, the Spirit as a possession, principle of the +new supernatural life and of holiness. From the Epistles of Paul we perceive +that the Formula Father, Son and Spirit could not yet have been customary, +especially in Baptism. But it was approaching (2 Cor. XIII. 13).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote79" name="footnote79"></a><b>Footnote 79:</b><a href="#footnotetag79"> (return) </a><p>The Christological utterances which are found in the New Testament +writings, so far as they explain and paraphrase the confession of Jesus as the +Christ and the Lord, may be almost entirely deduced from one or other of the +four points mentioned in the text. But we must at the same time insist that +these declarations were meant to be explanations of the confession that +"Jesus is the Lord," which of course included the recognition that Jesus by +the resurrection became a heavenly being (see Weizsäcker in above mentioned +work, p. 110) The solemn protestation of Paul, 1 Cor. XII. 3 διο γνωριζο +'υμιν 'οτι ουδεις εν πνευματι θεου λαλων λεγει ΑΝΑΘΕΜΑ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, και ουδεις δυναται +ειπειν ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ει μη εν πνευματι 'αγιω (cf. Rom. X. 9), shews that he who +acknowledged Jesus as the Lord, and accordingly believed in the resurrection +of Jesus, was regarded as a full-born Christian. It undoubtedly excludes from +the Apostolic age the independent authority of any christological dogma +besides that confession and the worship of Christ connected with it. It is +worth notice, however, that those early Christian men who recognised +Christianity as the vanquishing of the Old Testament religion (Paul, the +Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, John) all held that Christ was a +being who had come down from heaven.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote80" name="footnote80"></a><b>Footnote 80:</b><a href="#footnotetag80"> (return) </a><p>Compare in their fundamental features the common declarations about +the saving value of the death of Christ in Paul, in the Johannine writings, +in 1st Peter, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in the Christian portions +of the book of Revelation: τω αγαπωντι 'ημας και λυσαντι 'ημας εκ των 'αμαρτιων +εν τω 'αιματι αυτου, αυτω 'η δοξα: Compare the reference to Isaiah LIII. and +the Passover lamb: the utterances about the "lamb" generally in the +early writings: see Westcott, The Epistles of John, p. 34 f.: The idea of +the blood of Christ in the New Testament.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote81" name="footnote81"></a><b>Footnote 81:</b><a href="#footnotetag81"> (return) </a><p>This of course could not take place otherwise than by reflecting on its +significance. But a dislocation was already completed as soon as it was +isolated and separated from the whole of Jesus, or even from his future +activity. Reflection on the meaning or the causes of particular facts might +easily, in virtue of that isolation, issue in entirely new conceptions.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote82" name="footnote82"></a><b>Footnote 82:</b><a href="#footnotetag82"> (return) </a><p>See the discriminating statements of Weizsäcker, "Apostolic Age", +p. 1 f., especially as to the significance of Peter as first witness of the +resurrection. Cf. 1 Cor. XV. 5 with Luke XXIV. 34: also the fragment of +the "Gospel of Peter" which unfortunately breaks off at the point where +one expects the appearance of the Lord to Peter.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote83" name="footnote83"></a><b>Footnote 83:</b><a href="#footnotetag83"> (return) </a><p>It is often said that Christianity rests on the belief in +the resurrection of Christ. This may be correct, if it is first declared +who this Jesus Christ is, and what his life signifies. But when it +appears as a naked report to which one must above all submit, and when +in addition, as often happens, it is supplemented by the assertion that +the resurrection of Christ is the most certain fact in the history of +the world, one does not know whether he should marvel more at its +thoughtlessness or its unbelief. We do not need to have faith in a fact, +and that which requires religious belief, that is, trust in God, can +never be a fact which would hold good apart from that belief. The +historical question and the question of faith must therefore be clearly +distinguished here. The following points are historically certain: (1) +That none of Christ's opponents saw him after his death. (2) That the +disciples were convinced that they had seen him soon after his death. +(3) That the succession and number of those appearances can no longer be +ascertained with certainty. (4) That the disciples and Paul were +conscious of having seen Christ not in the crucified earthly body, but +in heavenly glory—even the later incredible accounts of the appearances +of Christ, which strongly emphasise the reality of the body, speak at +the same time of such a body as can pass through closed doors, which +certainly is not an earthly body. (5) That Paul does not compare the +manifestation of Christ given to him with any of his later visions, but, +on the other hand, describes it in the words (Gal. I. 15): 'οτε +ευδοκησεν 'ο θεος αποκαλυψαι τον 'υιον αυτου εν εμοι, and yet puts +it on a level with the appearances which the earlier Apostles had seen. +But, as even the empty grave on the third day can by no means be +regarded as a certain historical fact, because it appears united in the +accounts with manifest legendary features, and further because it is +directly excluded by the way in which Paul has portrayed the +resurrection 1 Cor. XV. it follows: (1) That every conception which +represents the resurrection of Christ as a simple reanimation of his +mortal body, is far from the original conception, and (2) that the +question generally as to whether Jesus has risen, can have no existence +for any one who looks at it apart from the contents and worth of the +Person of Jesus. For the mere fact that friends and adherents of Jesus +were convinced that they had seen him, especially when they themselves +explain that he appeared to them in heavenly glory, gives, to those who +are in earnest about fixing historical facts not the least cause for the +assumption that Jesus did not continue in the grave.</p> + +<p>History is therefore at first unable to bring any succour to faith here. +However firm may have been the faith of the disciples in the appearances +of Jesus in their midst, and it was firm, to believe in appearances +which others have had is a frivolity which is always revenged by rising +doubts. But history is still of service to faith; it limits its scope and +therewith shews the province to which it belongs. The question which +history leaves to faith is this: Was Jesus Christ swallowed up of death, +or did he pass through suffering and the cross to glory, that is, to +life, power and honour. The disciples would have been convinced of that +in the sense in which Jesus meant them to understand it, though they had +not seen him in glory (a consciousness of this is found in Luke XXIV. 26 +ουχι ταυτα εδει παθειν τον χριστον και εισελθειν εις την +δοξαν αυτου, and Joh. XX. 29 'οτι εωρακας με πεπιστευκας, +μακαριοι 'οι μη ιδοντες και πιστευσαντας) and we might probably +add, that no appearances of the Lord could permanently have convinced +them of his life, if they had not possessed in their hearts the +impression of his Person. Faith in the eternal life of Christ and in our +own eternal life is not the condition of becoming a disciple of Jesus, +but is the final confession of discipleship. Faith has by no means to do +with the knowledge of the form in which Jesus lives, but only with the +conviction that he is the living Lord. The determination of the form was +immediately dependent on the most varied general ideas of the future +life, resurrection, restoration, and glorification of the body, which were +current at the time. The idea of the rising again of the body of Jesus +appeared comparatively early, because it was this hope which animated +wide circles of pious people for their own future. Faith in Jesus, the +living Lord, in spite of the death on the cross, cannot be generated by +proofs of reason or authority, but only to-day in the same way as Paul +has confessed of himself 'οτε ευδοκησεν 'ο θεος αποκαλυψσαι +τον 'υιον αυτου εν εμοι. The conviction of having seen the Lord was no +doubt of the greatest importance for the disciples and made them +Evangelists, but what they saw cannot at first help us. It can only then +obtain significance for us when we have gained that confidence in the +Lord which Peter has expressed in Mark VIII. 29. The Christian even +to-day confesses with Paul ει εν τη ζωη ταυτη εν χριστω +ηλπικοτες εσμεν μονον, ελεειστεροι παντων ανθροπων εσμεν. He +believes in a future life for himself with God because he believes that +Christ lives. That is the peculiarity and paradox of Christian faith. +But these are not convictions that can be common and matter of course to +a deep feeling and earnest thinking being standing amid nature and +death, but can only be possessed by those who live with their whole +hearts and minds in God, and even they need the prayer, I believe, help +thou mine unbelief. To act as if faith in eternal life and in the living +Christ was the simplest thing in the world, or a dogma to which one has +just to submit, is irreligious. The whole question about the +resurrection of Christ, its mode and its significance, has thereby been +so thoroughly confused in later Christendom, that we are in the habit of +considering eternal life as certain, even apart from Christ. That, at +any rate, is not Christian. It is Christian to pray that God would give +the Spirit to make us strong to overcome the feelings and the doubts of +nature and create belief in an eternal life through the experience of +dying to live. Where this faith obtained in this way exists, it has +always been supported by the conviction that the Man lives who brought +life and immortality to light. To hold fast this faith is the goal of +life, for only what we consciously strive for is in this matter our own. +What we think we possess is very soon lost.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote84" name="footnote84"></a><b>Footnote 84:</b><a href="#footnotetag84"> (return) </a><p>Weizsäcker (Apostolic Age, p. 73) says very justly: "The rising of Judaism +against believers put them on their own feet. They saw themselves for +the first time persecuted in the name of the law, and therewith for the first +time it must have become clear to them, that in reality the law was no longer +the same to them as to the others. Their hope is the coming kingdom of +heaven, in which it is not the law, but their Master from whom they expect +salvation. Everything connected with salvation is in him. But we should not +investigate the conditions of the faith of that early period, as though the +question had been laid before the Apostles whether they could have part in +the Kingdom of heaven without circumcision, or whether it could be obtained +by faith in Jesus, with or without the observance of the law. Such questions +had no existence for them either practically or as questions of the school. But +though they were Jews, and the law which even their Master had not abolished, +was for them a matter of course, that did not exclude a change of inner +position towards it, through faith in their Master and hope of the Kingdom. +There is an inner freedom which can grow up alongside of all the constraints +of birth, custom, prejudice, and piety. But this only comes into consciousness, +when a demand is made on it which wounds it, or when it is assailed +on account of an inference drawn not by its own consciousness, but only +by its opponents."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote85" name="footnote85"></a><b>Footnote 85:</b><a href="#footnotetag85"> (return) </a><p>Only one of these four tendencies—the Pauline, with the Epistle to the +Hebrews and the Johannine writings which are related to Paulinism—has +seen in the Gospel the establishment of a new religion. The rest identified +it with Judaism made perfect, or with the Old Testament religion rightly +understood. But Paul, in connecting Christianity with the promise given to +Abraham, passing thus beyond the law, that is, beyond the actual Old +Testament religion, has not only given it a historical foundation, but also +claimed for the Father of the Jewish nation a unique significance for +Christianity. As to the tendencies named 1 and 2, see Book I. chap. 6.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote86" name="footnote86"></a><b>Footnote 86:</b><a href="#footnotetag86"> (return) </a><p>It is clear from Gal. II. 11 ff. that Peter then and for long before +occupied in principle the stand-point of Paul: see the judicious remarks +of Weizsäcker in the book mentioned above, p. 75 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote87" name="footnote87"></a><b>Footnote 87:</b><a href="#footnotetag87"> (return) </a><p>These four tendencies were represented in the Apostolic age by those +who had been born and trained in Judaism, and they were collectively transplanted +into Greek territory. But we cannot be sure that the third of the +above tendencies found intelligent and independent representatives in this +domain, as there is no certain evidence of it. Only one who had really been +subject to it, and therefore understood it, could venture on a criticism of +the Old Testament religion. Still, it may be noted that the majority of non-Jewish +converts in the Apostolic age, had probably come to know the Old +Testament beforehand—not always the Jewish religion, (see Havet, Le +Christianisme, T. IV. p. 120: "Je ne sais s'il y est entré, du vivant de Paul, un +seul païen: je veux dire un homme, qui ne connût pas déjà, avant d'y +entrer, le judaïsme et la Bible"). These indications will shew how mistaken +and misleading it is to express the different tendencies in the Apostolic age +and the period closely following by the designations "Jewish Christianity-Gentile +Christianity." Short watchwords are so little appropriate here that +one might even with some justice reverse the usual conception, and maintain +that what is usually understood by Gentile Christianity (criticism of the Old +Testament religion) was possible only within Judaism, while that which is +frequently called Jewish Christianity is rather a conception which must have +readily suggested itself to born Gentiles superficially acquainted with the Old +Testament.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote88" name="footnote88"></a><b>Footnote 88:</b><a href="#footnotetag88"> (return) </a><p>The first edition of this volume could not appeal to Weizsäcker's work, +Das Apostolische Zeitalter der Christlichen Kirche, 1886, (second edition translated +in this series). The author is now in the happy position of being able to +refer the readers of his imperfect sketch to this excellent presentation, the +strength of which lies in the delineation of Paulinism in its relation to the +early Church, and to early Christian theology (p. 79-172). The truth of +Weizsäcker's expositions of the inner relations (p. 85 f.), is but little affected +by his assumptions concerning the outer relations, which I cannot everywhere +regard as just. The work of Weizsäcker as a whole is, in my opinion, +the most important work on Church history we have received since Ritschl's +"Entstehung der alt-katholischen Kirche." (2 Aufl. 1857.)</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote89" name="footnote89"></a><b>Footnote 89:</b><a href="#footnotetag89"> (return) </a><p>Kabisch, <i>Die Eschatologie des Paulus</i>, 1893, has shewn how strongly +the eschatology of Paul was influenced by the later Pharisaic Judaism. He +has also called attention to the close connection between Paul's doctrine +of sin and the fall, and that of the Rabbis.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote90" name="footnote90"></a><b>Footnote 90:</b><a href="#footnotetag90"> (return) </a><p>Some of the Church Fathers (see Socr. H. E. III. 16) have attributed +to Paul an accurate knowledge of Greek literature and philosophy: but +that cannot be proved. The references of Heinrici (2 Kor.-Brief. p. 537-604) +are worthy of our best thanks; but no certain judgment can be formed +about the measure of the Apostles' Greek culture, so long as we do not +know how great was the extent of spiritual ideas which were already +precipitated in the speech of the time.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote91" name="footnote91"></a><b>Footnote 91:</b><a href="#footnotetag91"> (return) </a><p>The epistle to the Hebrews and the first epistle of Peter, as well as the +Pastoral epistles belong to the Pauline circle; they are of the greatest value +because they shew that certain fundamental features of Pauline theology took +effect afterwards in an original way, or received independent parallels, and +because they prove that the cosmic Christology of Paul made the greatest +impression and was continued. In Christology, the epistle to the Ephesians +in particular, leads directly from Paul to the pneumatic Christology of the +post-apostolic period. Its non-genuineness is by no means certain to me.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote92" name="footnote92"></a><b>Footnote 92:</b><a href="#footnotetag92"> (return) </a><p>In the Ztschr. für Theol und Kirche, II. p. 189 ff. I have +discussed the relation of the prologue of the fourth Gospel to the whole +work and endeavoured to prove the following: "The prologue of the Gospel +is not the key to its comprehension. It begins with a well-known great +object, the Logos, re-adapts and transforms it—implicitly opposing +false Christologies—in order to substitute for it Jesus Christ, the +μονογενης θεος, or in order to unveil it as this Jesus +Christ. The idea of the Logos is allowed to fall from the moment that +this takes place." The author continues to narrate of Jesus only with +the view of establishing the belief that he is the Messiah, the son of +God. This faith has for its main article the recognition that Jesus is +descended from God and from heaven; but the author is far from +endeavouring to work out this recognition from cosmological, +philosophical considerations. According to the Evangelist, Jesus proves +himself to be the Messiah, the Son of God, in virtue of his +self-testimony, and because he has brought a full knowledge of God and +of life—purely supernatural divine blessings (Cf. besides, and partly +in opposition, Holtzmann, i.d. Ztschr. f. wissensch. Theol. 1893). The +author's peculiar world of theological ideas, is not, however, so +entirely isolated in the early Christian literature as appears on the +first impression. If, as is probable, the Ignatian Epistles are +independent of the Gospel of John, further, the Supper prayer in the +Didache, finally, certain mystic theological phrases in the Epistle of +Barnabas, in the second epistle of Clement, and in Hermas, a complex of +Theologoumena may be put together, which reaches back to the primitive +period of the Church, and may be conceived as the general ground for the +theology of John. This complex has on its side a close connection with +the final development of the Jewish Hagiographic literature under Greek +influence.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote93" name="footnote93"></a><b>Footnote 93:</b><a href="#footnotetag93"> (return) </a><p>The Jewish religion, especially since the (relative) close of the canon, +had become more and more a religion of the Book.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote94" name="footnote94"></a><b>Footnote 94:</b><a href="#footnotetag94"> (return) </a><p>Examples of both in the New Testament are numerous. See, above all, +Matt. I. 11. Even the belief that Jesus was born of a Virgin sprang from +Isaiah VII. 14. It cannot, however, be proved to be in the writings of Paul +(the two genealogies in Matt. and Luke directly exclude it: according to Dillmann, +Jahrb. f. protest. Theol. p. 192 ff. Luke I. 34, 35 would be the addition +of a redactor); but it must have arisen very early, as the Gentile Christians of +the second century would seem to have unanimously confessed it (see the +Romish Symbol, Ignatius, Aristides, Justin, etc.) For the rest, it was long before +theologians recognised in the Virgin birth of Jesus more than fulfilment of a +prophecy, viz., a fact of salvation. The conjecture of Usener, that the idea of +the birth from a Virgin is a heathen myth which was received by the Christians, +contradicts the entire earliest development of Christian tradition which is free +from heathen myths, so far as these had not already been received by wide +circles of Jews, (above all, certain Babylonian and Persian Myths), which in +the case of that idea is not demonstrable. Besides, it is in point of method not +permissible to stray so far when we have near at hand such a complete explanation +as Isaiah VII. 14. Those who suppose that the reality of the Virgin +birth must be held fast, must assume that a misunderstood prophecy has been +here fulfilled (on the true meaning of the passage see Dillmann (Jesajas, 5 Aufl. +p. 69): "of the birth by a Virgin (<i>i.e.</i>, of one who at the birth was still a Virgin.) +the Hebrew text says nothing ... Immanuel as beginning and representative +of the new generation, from which one should finally take possession of the +king's throne"). The application of an unhistorical local method in the exposition +of the Old Testament—Haggada and Rabbinic allegorism—may be +found in many passages of Paul (see, <i>e.g.</i>, Gal. III. 16, 19; IV. 22-31; 1 Cor. IX. +9; X. 4; XI. 10; Rom. IV. etc.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote95" name="footnote95"></a><b>Footnote 95:</b><a href="#footnotetag95"> (return) </a><p>The proof of this may be found in the quotations in early Christian writings +from the Apocalypses of Enoch, Ezra, Eldad and Modad, the assumption +of Moses and other Jewish Apocalypses unknown to us. They were regarded +as Divine revelations beside the Old Testament; see the proofs of their frequent +and long continued use in Schürer's "History of the Jewish people in the time +of our Lord." But the Christians in receiving these Jewish Apocalypses did +not leave them intact, but adapted them with greater or less Christian additions +(see Ezra, Enoch, Ascension of Isaiah). Even the Apocalypse of John is, as +Vischer (Texte u. Unters. 3 altchristl. lit. Gesch. Bd. II. H. 4) has shown, a +Jewish Apocalypse adapted to a Christian meaning. But in this activity, and +in the production of little Apocalyptic prophetic sayings and articles (see in +the Epistle to the Ephesians, and in those of Barnabas and Clement) the Christian +labour here in the earliest period seems to have exhausted itself. At least +we do not know with certainty of any great Apocalyptic writing of an original +kind proceeding from Christian circles. Even the Apocalypse of Peter which, +thanks to the discovery of Bouriant, we now know better, is not a completely +original work as contrasted with the Jewish Apocalypses.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote96" name="footnote96"></a><b>Footnote 96:</b><a href="#footnotetag96"> (return) </a><p>The Gospel reliance on the Lamb who was slain, very significantly pervades +the Revelation of John, that is, its Christian parts. Even the Apocalypse +of Peter shews Jesus Christ as the comfort of believers and as the Revealer of +the future. In it (v. 3,) Christ says; "Then will God come to those who believe +on me, those who hunger and thirst and mourn, etc."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote97" name="footnote97"></a><b>Footnote 97:</b><a href="#footnotetag97"> (return) </a><p>These words were written before the Apocalypse of Peter was discovered. +That Apocalypse confirms what is said in the text. Moreover, its delineation +of Paradise and blessedness are not wanting in poetic charm and power. In +its delineation of Hell, which prepares the way for Dante's Hell, the author is +scared by no terror.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote98" name="footnote98"></a><b>Footnote 98:</b><a href="#footnotetag98"> (return) </a><p>These ideas, however, encircled the earliest Christendom as with a wall +of fire, and preserved it from a too early contact with the world.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote99" name="footnote99"></a><b>Footnote 99:</b><a href="#footnotetag99"> (return) </a><p>An accurate examination of the eschatological sayings of +Jesus in the synoptists shews that much foreign matter is mixed with +them (see Weiffenbach, Der Wiederkunftsgedanke Jesu, 1875). That the +tradition here was very uncertain because influenced by the Jewish +Apocalyptic, is shewn by the one fact that Papias (in Iren. V. 33) +quotes as words of the Lord which had been handed down by the disciples, +a group of sayings which we find in the Apocalypse of Baruch, about the +amazing fruitfulness of the earth during the time of the Messianic +Kingdom.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote100" name="footnote100"></a><b>Footnote 100:</b><a href="#footnotetag100"> (return) </a><p>We may here call attention to an interesting remark of Goethe. +Among his Apophthegms (no. 537) is the following: "Apocrypha: It would +be important to collect what is historically known about these books, +and to shew that these very Apocryphal writings with which the communities +of the first centuries of our era were flooded, were the real cause why +Christianity at no moment of political or Church history could stand forth in +all her beauty and purity." A historian would not express himself in this +way, but yet there lies at the root of this remark a true historical insight.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote101" name="footnote101"></a><b>Footnote 101:</b><a href="#footnotetag101"> (return) </a><p>See Schürer, History of the Jewish people. Div. II. vol. +II. p. 160 f., yet the remarks of the Jew Trypho in the dialogue of +Justin shew that the notions of a pre-existent Messiah were by no means +very widely spread in Judaism. (See also Orig. c. Cels. I. 49: "A Jew +would not at all admit that any Prophet had said, the Son of God will +come: they avoided this designation and used instead the saying: the +anointed of God will come"). The Apocalyptists and Rabbis attributed +pre-existence, that is, a heavenly origin to many sacred things and +persons, such as the Patriarchs, Moses, the Tabernacle, the Temple +vessels, the city of Jerusalem. That the true Temple and the real +Jerusalem were with God in heaven and would come down from heaven at the +appointed time, must have been a very wide-spread idea, especially at +the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, and even earlier than that +(see Gal. IV. 26; Rev. XXI. 2; Heb. XII. 22). In the Assumption of Moses +(c. 1) Moses says of himself: Dominus invenit me, qui ab initio orbis +terrarum præparatus sum, ut sim arbiter (μεσιτης) testamenti +illius (της διαθηκης αυτου). In the Midrasch Bereschith +rabba VIII. 2. we read, "R. Simeon ben Lakisch says, 'The law was in +existence 2000 years before the creation of the world.'" In the Jewish +treatise Προσευχη Ιωσηφ, which Origen has several times +quoted, Jacob says of himself (ap. Orig. tom. II. in Joann. C. 25. Opp. +IV. 84): "'ο γαρ λαλων προς 'υμας, εγω Ιακωβ και Ισρηλ, αγγελος +θεου ειμι εγω και πνευμα αρχικον και Αβρααμ και Ισαακ προεκτισθησαν +προ παντος εργου, εγω δε Ιακοβ ... εγω πρωτογονος παντος ζωος +ζωουμενου 'υπο θεου." These examples could easily be increased. The +Jewish speculations about Angels and Mediators, which at the time of +Christ grew very luxuriantly among the Scribes and Apocalyptists, and +endangered the purity and vitality of the Old Testament idea of God, +were also very important for the development of Christian dogmatics. But +neither these speculations, nor the notions of heavenly Archetypes, nor +of pre-existence, are to be referred to Hellenic influence. This may +have co-operated here and there, but the rise of these speculations in +Judaism is not to be explained by it; they rather exhibit the Oriental +stamp. But, of course, the stage in the development of the nations had +now been reached, in which the creations of Oriental fancy and Mythology +could be fused with the ideal conceptions of Hellenic philosophy.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote102" name="footnote102"></a><b>Footnote 102:</b><a href="#footnotetag102"> (return) </a><p>The conception of heavenly ideals of precious earthly +things followed from the first naive method of speculation we have +mentioned, that of a pre-existence of persons from the last. If the +world was created for the sake of the people of Israel, and the +Apocalyptists expressly taught that, then it follows, that in the +thought of God Israel was older than the world. The idea of a kind of +pre-existence of the people of Israel follows from this. We can still +see this process of thought very plainly in the shepherd of Hermas, who +expressly declares that the world was created for the sake of the +Church. In consequence of this he maintains that the Church was very +old, and was created before the foundation of the world. See Vis. I. 2. +4; II. 4. 1 διατι ουν πρεσβυτερα (scil.) 'η +εκκλησια: 'Οτι, φησιν, παντων πρωτε εκτισθη δια τουτο πρεσβυτερα, +και δια ταυτην 'ο κοσμος κατηρτισθη. But in order to estimate +aright the bearing of these speculations, we must observe that, +according to them, the precious things and persons, so far as they are +now really manifested, were never conceived as endowed with a double +nature. No hint is given of such an assumption; the sensible appearance +was rather conceived as a mere wrapping which was necessary only to its +becoming visible, or, conversely, the pre-existence or the archetype was +no longer thought of in presence of the historical appearance of the +object. That pneumatic form of existence was not set forth in accordance +with the analogy of existence verified by sense, but was left in +suspense. The idea of "existence" here could run through all the stages +which, according to the Mythology and Meta-physic of the time, lay +between what we now call "valid," and the most concrete being. He who +nowadays undertakes to justify the notion of pre-existence, will find +himself in a very different situation from these earlier times, as he +will no longer be able to count on shifting conceptions of existence. +See Appendix I. at the end of this Vol. for a fuller discussion of the +idea of pre-existence.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote103" name="footnote103"></a><b>Footnote 103:</b><a href="#footnotetag103"> (return) </a><p>It must be observed here that Palestinian Judaism, without any +apparent influence from Alexandria, though not independently of the +Greek spirit, had already created a multitude of intermediate beings +between God and the world, avowing thereby that the idea of God had +become stiff and rigid. "Its original aim was simply to help the God +of Judaism in his need." Among these intermediate beings should be +specially mentioned the Memra of God (see also the Shechina and the +Metatron).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote104" name="footnote104"></a><b>Footnote 104:</b><a href="#footnotetag104"> (return) </a><p>See Justin Dial. 48. fin: Justin certainly is not +favourably disposed towards those who regard Christ as a "man among +men," but he knows that there are such people.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote105" name="footnote105"></a><b>Footnote 105:</b><a href="#footnotetag105"> (return) </a><p>The miraculous genesis of Christ in the Virgin by the +Holy Spirit and the real pre-existence are of course mutually exclusive. +At a later period, it is true, it became necessary to unite them in +thought.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote106" name="footnote106"></a><b>Footnote 106:</b><a href="#footnotetag106"> (return) </a><p>There is the less need for treating this more fully here, +as no New Testament Christology has become the direct starting-point of +later doctrinal developments. The Gentile Christians had transmitted to +them, as a unanimous doctrine, the message that Christ is the Lord who +is to be worshipped, and that one must think of him as the Judge of the +living and the dead, that is, 'ως περι θεου. But it +certainly could not fail to be of importance for the result that already +many of the earliest Christian writers, and therefore even Paul, +perceived in Jesus a spiritual being come down from heaven ( +πνευμα) who was εν μορφη θεου, and whose real +act of love consisted in his very descent.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote107" name="footnote107"></a><b>Footnote 107:</b><a href="#footnotetag107"> (return) </a><p>The creation of the New Testament canon first paved the +way for putting an end, though only in part, to the production of +Evangelic "facts" within the Church. For Hermas (Sim. IX. 16) can relate +that the Apostles also descended to the under world and there preached. +Others report the same of John the Baptist. Origen in his homily on 1 +Kings XXVII. says that Moses, Samuel and all the Prophets descended to +Hades and there preached. A series of facts of Evangelic history which +have no parallel in the accounts of our Synoptists, and are certainly +legendary, may be put together from the epistle of Barnabas, Justin, the +second epistle of Clement, Papias, the Gospel to the Hebrews, and the +Gospel to the Egyptians. But the synoptic reports themselves, especially +in the articles for which we have only a solitary witness, shew an +extensive legendary material, and even in the Gospel of John, the free +production of facts cannot be mistaken. Of what a curious nature some of +these were, and that they are by no means to be entirely explained from +the Old Testament, as for example, Justin's account of the ass on which +Christ rode into Jerusalem, having been bound to a vine, is shewn by the +very old fragment in one source of the Apostolic constitutions (Texte u. +Unters II. 5. p. 28 ff.); 'οτε ητψεν 'ο διδασκαλος τον +αρτον και το ποτηριον και ηυλογησεν αυτα λεγων τουτο εστι το σωμα +μου και το 'αιμα, ουκ επετρεψε ταυταις (the women) +συστηναι 'ημιν ... Μαρθα ειπεν δια Μαριαμ, 'οτι ειδεν αυτην +μειδιωσαν. Μαρια ειπεν ουκετι εγελασα. Narratives such as those +of Christ's descent to Hell and ascent to heaven, which arose +comparatively late, though still at the close of the first century (see +Book I. Chap 3) sprang out of short formulæ containing an antithesis +(death and resurrection, first advent in lowliness, second advent in +glory: descensus de cœlo, ascensus in cœlum; ascensus in cœlum, +descensus ad inferna) which appeared to be required by Old Testament +predictions, and were commended by their naturalness. Just as it is +still, in the same way naively inferred: if Christ rose bodily he must +also have ascended bodily (visibly?) into heaven.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote108" name="footnote108"></a><b>Footnote 108:</b><a href="#footnotetag108"> (return) </a><p>The Sibylline Oracles, composed by Jews, from 160 B.C. to 189 A.D. +are specially instructive here: See the Editions of Friedlieb. 1852; Alexandre, +1869; Rzach, 1891. Delaunay, Moines et Sibylles dans l'antiquité +judéo-grecque, 1874. Schürer in the work mentioned above. The writings +of Josephus also yield rich booty, especially his apology for Judaism in +the two books against Apion. But it must be noted that there were Jews, +enlightened by Hellenism, who were still very zealous in their observance +of the law. "Philo urges most earnestly to the observance of the law in +opposition to that party which drew the extreme inferences of the allegoristic +method, and put aside the outer legality as something not essential +for the spiritual life. Philo thinks that by an exact observance of +these ceremonies on their material side, one will also come to know +better their symbolical meaning" (Siegfried, Philo, p. 157).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote109" name="footnote109"></a><b>Footnote 109:</b><a href="#footnotetag109"> (return) </a><p> Direct evidence is certainly almost entirely wanting here, but the +indirect speaks all the more emphatically: see § 3, Supplements 1, 2.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote110" name="footnote110"></a><b>Footnote 110:</b><a href="#footnotetag110"> (return) </a><p> The Jewish propaganda, though by no means effaced, gave way very +distinctly to the Christian from the middle of the second century. But +from this time we find few more traces of an enlightened Hellenistic +Judaism. Moreover, the Messianic expectation also seems to have somewhat +given way to occupation with the law. But the God of Abraham, +Isaac and Jacob, as well as other Jewish terms certainly played a great +rôle in Gentile and Gnostic magical formulæ of the third century, as +may be seen, <i>e.g.</i>, from many passages in Origen c. Celsum.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote111" name="footnote111"></a><b>Footnote 111:</b><a href="#footnotetag111"> (return) </a><p> +The prerogative of Israel was for all that clung to; Israel remains the +chosen people.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote112" name="footnote112"></a><b>Footnote 112:</b><a href="#footnotetag112"> (return) </a><p> +The brilliant investigations of Bernays, however, have shewn how many-sided +that philosophy of religion was. The proofs of asceticism in this Hellenistic +Judaism are especially of great interest for the history of dogma (See +Theophrastus' treatise on piety). In the eighth Epistle of Heraclitus, composed +by a Hellenistic Jew in the first century, it is said (Bernays, +p. 182). "So long +a time before, O Hermodorus, saw thee that Sibyl, and even then thou wert" +ειδε σε προ ποσουτου αιωνος, Ερμοδωρε 'η Σιβυλλα εκεινη, και τοτε ησθα. Even +here then the notion is expressed that foreknowledge and predestination +invest the known and the determined with a kind of existence. Of great importance +is the fact that even before Philo, the idea of the wisdom of God +creating the world and passing over to men had been hypostatised in Alexandrian +Judaism (see Sirach, Baruch, the wisdom of Solomon, Enoch, nay, even +the book of Proverbs). But so long as the deutero-canonical Old Testament, +and also the Alexandrine and Apocalyptic literature continue in the sad condition +in which they are at present, we can form no certain judgment and +draw no decided conclusions on the subject. When will the scholar appear who +will at length throw light on these writings, and therewith on the section of +inner Jewish history most interesting to the Christian theologian? As yet we +have only a most thankworthy preliminary study in Schürer's great work, and +beside it particular or dilettante attempts which hardly shew what the problem +really is, far less solve it. What disclosures even the fourth book of the +Maccabees alone yields for the connection of the Old Testament with +Hellenism!</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote113" name="footnote113"></a><b>Footnote 113:</b><a href="#footnotetag113"> (return) </a><p> "So far as the sensible world is a work of the Logos, it +is called νεωτερος 'υιος (quod deus immut. 6. I.277), or +according to Prov. VIII. 22, an offspring of God and wisdom: 'η +δε παραδεξαμηνε το του θεου σπερμα τελεσφοροις ωδισι τον μονον και +αγαπητον αισθητον 'υιον απεκυησε τον δε τον κοσμον (de ebriet 8 I. +361 f). So far as the Logos is High Priest his relation to the world is +symbolically expressed by the garment of the High Priest, to which +exegesis the play on the word κοσμος, as meaning both ornament +and world, lent its aid." This speculation (see Siegfried. Philo, 235) +is of special importance; for it shews how closely the ideas +κοσμος and λογος were connected.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote114" name="footnote114"></a><b>Footnote 114:</b><a href="#footnotetag114"> (return) </a><p> Of all the Greek Philosophers of the second century, Plutarch of Chäronea, +died c. 125 A.D., and Numenius of Apamea, second half of the second century, +approach nearest to Philo; but the latter of the two was undoubtedly familiar +with Jewish philosophy, specially with Philo, and probably also with Christian +writings.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote115" name="footnote115"></a><b>Footnote 115:</b><a href="#footnotetag115"> (return) </a><p> As to the way in which Philo (see also 4 Maccab. V. 24) learned to connect +the Stoic ethics with the authority of the Torah, as was also done by the +Palestinian Midrash, and represented the Torah as the foundation of the world, +and therewith as the law of nature: see Siegfried, Philo, p. 156.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote116" name="footnote116"></a><b>Footnote 116:</b><a href="#footnotetag116"> (return) </a><p> Philo by his exhortations to seek the blessed life, has by no means broken +with the intellectualism of the Greek philosophy, he has only gone beyond it. +The way of knowledge and speculation is to him also the way of religion and +morality. But his formal principle is supernatural and leads to a supernatural +knowledge which finally passes over into sight.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote117" name="footnote117"></a><b>Footnote 117:</b><a href="#footnotetag117"> (return) </a><p> But everything was now ready for this synthesis so that it could be, and +immediately was, completed by Christian philosophers.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote118" name="footnote118"></a><b>Footnote 118:</b><a href="#footnotetag118"> (return) </a><p> We cannot discover Philo's influence in the writings of Paul. But here +again we must remember that the scripture learning of Palestinian teachers +developed speculations which appear closely related to the Alexandrian, and +partly are so, but yet cannot be deduced from them. The element common to +them must, for the present at least, be deduced from the harmony of conditions +in which the different nations of the East were at that time placed, a +harmony which we cannot exactly measure.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote119" name="footnote119"></a><b>Footnote 119:</b><a href="#footnotetag119"> (return) </a><p> The conception of God's relation to the world as given in the fourth +Gospel is not Philonic. The Logos doctrine there is therefore essentially +not that of Philo (against Kuenen and others. See p. 93).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote120" name="footnote120"></a><b>Footnote 120:</b><a href="#footnotetag120"> (return) </a><p> Siegfried (Philo. p. 160-197) has presented in detail Philo's allegorical +interpretation of scripture, his hermeneutic principles and their application. +Without an exact knowledge of these principles we cannot understand the +Scripture expositions of the Fathers, and therefore also cannot do them justice.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote121" name="footnote121"></a><b>Footnote 121:</b><a href="#footnotetag121"> (return) </a><p> See Siegfried, Philo. p. 176. Yet, as a rule, the method of isolating and +adapting passages of scripture, and the method of unlimited combination +were sufficient.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote122" name="footnote122"></a><b>Footnote 122:</b><a href="#footnotetag122"> (return) </a><p> Numerous examples of this may be found in the epistle of Barnabas (see +c. 4-9), and in the dialogue of Justin with Trypho (here they are objects of +controversy, see cc. 71-73, 120), but also in many other Christian writings, (<i>e.g.</i>, +Clem. ad. Cor. VIII. 3; XVII. 6; XXIII. 3, 4; XXVI. 5; XLVI. 2; 2 Clem. +XIII. 2). These Christian additions were long retained in the Latin Bible, +(see also Lactantius and other Latins: Pseudo-Cyprian de aleat. 2 etc.), the +most celebrated of them is the addition "a ligno" to "dominus regnavit" in +Psalm XCVI., see Credner, Beiträge II. The treatment of the Old Testament +in the epistle of Barnabas is specially instructive, and exhibits the greatest +formal agreement with that of Philo. We may close here with the words in +which Siegfried sums up his judgment on Philo. "No Jewish writer has contributed +so much as Philo to the breaking up of particularism, and the dissolution +of Judaism. The history of his people, though he believed in it literally, +was in its main points a didactic allegoric poem for enabling him to inculcate +the doctrine that man attains the vision of God by mortification of the flesh. +The law was regarded by him as the best guide to this, but it had lost its +exclusive value, as it was admitted to be possible to reach the goal without it, +and it had, besides, its aim outside itself. The God of Philo was no longer the +old living God of Israel, but an imaginary being who, to obtain power over the +world, needed a Logos by whom the palladium of Israel, the unity of God, was +taken a prey. So Israel lost everything which had hitherto characterised her."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote123" name="footnote123"></a><b>Footnote 123:</b><a href="#footnotetag123"> (return) </a><p>Proofs in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte, vol. 3.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote124" name="footnote124"></a><b>Footnote 124:</b><a href="#footnotetag124"> (return) </a><p> See the chapter on belief in immortality in Friedländer. Sittengesch. +Roms. Bde. 3. Among the numerous mysteries known to us, that of Mythras +deserves special consideration. From the middle of the second century +the Church Fathers saw in it, above all, the caricature of the Church. The +worship of Mithras had its redeemer, its mediator, hierarchy, sacrifice, +baptism and sacred meal. The ideas of expiation, immortality, and the +Redeemer God, were very vividly present in this cult, which of course, +in later times, borrowed much from Christianity: see the accounts of +Marquardt, Réville, and the Essay of Sayous, Le Taurobole in the Rev. +de l'Hist. des Religions, 1887, where the earliest literature is also utilised. +The worship of Mithras in the third century became the most powerful +rival of Christianity. In connection with this should be specially noted +the cult of Æsculapius, the God who helps the body and the soul; see +my essay "Medicinisches aus der ältesten Kirchengeschichte," 1892. p. 93 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote125" name="footnote125"></a><b>Footnote 125:</b><a href="#footnotetag125"> (return) </a><p>Hence the wide prevalence of the cult of Æsculapius.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote126" name="footnote126"></a><b>Footnote 126:</b><a href="#footnotetag126"> (return) </a><p> Dominus in certain circumstances means more than deus; +see Tertull. Apol. It signifies more than Soter: see Irenæus I. 1. +3: τον σωτηρα λεγουσιν, ουδε γαρ κυριον ονομαζειν αυτον +θελουσιν—κυριος and δεσποτης are almost synonymous. See +Philo. Quis. rer. div. heres. 6: συνωνυμα ταυτα ειναι λεγεται.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote127" name="footnote127"></a><b>Footnote 127:</b><a href="#footnotetag127"> (return) </a><p> We must give special attention here to the variability +and elasticity of the concept θεος, and indeed among the +cultured as well as the uncultured (Orig. prolegg. in Psalm, in Pitra, +Anal. T. II. p. 437, according to a Stoic source; κατ' αλλον δε +τροπον λεγεσθαι θεον ζωιον αθανατον λογικον οπουδαιον, 'ωστε πασαν +αστειαν ψυχην θεον 'υπαρχειν, καν περιεχηται, αλλως δε λεγεσθαι +θεον το καθ' αυτο ον ζωιον αθανατον 'ως τα εν ανθρωποις +περιεχομενας ψυχας μη 'υπαρχειν θεους). They still regarded the +Gods as passionless, blessed men living for ever. The idea therefore of +a θεοποιησις, and on the other hand, the idea of the +appearance of the Gods in human form presented no difficulty (see Acts +XIV. 11; XXVIII. 6). But philosophic speculation—the Platonic, as well +as in yet greater measure the Stoic, and in the greatest measure of all +the Cynic—had led to the recognition of something divine in man's +spirit (πνευμα, νους). Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations +frequently speaks of the God who dwells in us. Clement of Alexandria +(Strom. VI. 14. 113) says: 'ουτως δυναμιν λαβουσα κυριακην 'η +ψυχη μελεται ειναι θεος, κακον μεν ουδεν αλλο πλην αγνοιας ειναι +νομιζουσα. In Bernays' Heraclitian Epistles, pp. 37 f. 135 f., will be +found a valuable exposition of the Stoic (Heraclitian) thesis and its +history, that men are Gods. See Norden, Beiträge zur Gesch. d. griech. +Philos. Jahrb. f. klass Philol. XIX. Suppl. Bd. p. 373 ff., about the +Cynic Philosopher who, contemplating the life and activity of man +(κατασκοπος), becomes its επισκοπος, and further +κυριος, αγγελος θεου, θεος εν ανθρωποις. The passages which +he adduces are of importance for the history of dogma in a twofold +respect. (1) They present remarkable parallels to Christology (one even +finds the designations, κυριος, αγγελος, κατασκοπος, επισκοπος, +θεος associated with the philosophers as with Christ, <i>e.g.</i>, in +Justin; nay, the Cynics and Neoplatonics speak of επισκοποι +δαιμονες); cf. also the remarkable narrative in Laertius VI. 102, +concerning the Cynic Menedemus; 'ουτος, καθα φησιν +'Ιπποβοτος, εις τοσος τον τερατειας ηλασεν, 'ωστε Ερινυος αναλαβον +σχημα περιειει, λεγων επισκοπος αφιχθαι εξ 'Αιδου των +'αμαρτομενον, 'οπως παλιν κατιων ταστα απαγγελλοι τοις εκει, +δαιμοσιν. (2) They also explain how the ecclesiastical +επισκοποι came to be so highly prized, inasmuch as these also were from +a very early period regarded as mediators between God and man, and +considered as εν ανθρωποις θεοι. There were not a few who in +the first and second centuries, appeared with the claim to be regarded +as a God or an organ inspired and chosen by God (Simon Magus [cf. the +manner of his treatment in Hippol. Philos. VI. 8: see also Clem. Hom. +II. 27], Apollonius of Tyana (?), see further Tacitus Hist. II. 51: +"Mariccus.... iamque adsertor Galliarum et deus, nomen id sibi +indiderat"; here belongs also the gradually developing worship of the +Emperor: "dominus ac deus noster." cf. Augustus, Inscription of the year +25; 24 B.C. in Egypt [where the Ptolemies were for long described as +Gods] 'Υπερ Καισαρος Αυτοκραττορος θεου (Zeitschrift fur +Aegypt. Sprache. XXXI Bd. p. 3). Domitian: θεος Αδριανος, +Kaibel Inscr. Gr. 829. 1053. θεος Σεουηρος Ευσεβης. +1061—the Antinouscult with its prophets. See also Josephus on Herod +Agrippa. Antiq. XIX 8. 2. (Euseb. H. E. II. 10). The flatterers said to +him, θεον προσαγορευοντες; ει και μεχρι νυν 'ως ανθρωπον +εφοβηθημεν, αλλα τουντευθεν κρειττονα σε θνητης της φυσεως +'ομολογουμεν. Herod himself, § 7, says to his friends in his +sickness: 'ο θεος 'υμιν εγω ηδη καταστρεφειν επιταττομαι τον +βιον ... 'ο κληθεις αθανατος 'υφ' 'ημων ηδη θανειν απαγομαι). +On the other hand, we must mention the worship of the founder in some +philosophic schools, especially among the Epicureans Epictetus says +(Moral. 15), Diogenes and Heraclitus and those like them are justly +called Gods. Very instructive in this connection are the reproaches of +the heathen against the Christians, and of Christian partisans against +one another with regard to the almost divine veneration of their +teachers. Lucian (Peregr. II) reproaches the Christians in Syria for +having regarded Peregrinus as a God and a new Socrates. The heathen in +Smyrna, after the burning of Polycarp, feared that the Christians would +begin to pay him divine honours (Euseb. H. E. IV. 15 41). Cæcilius in +Minucius Felix speaks of divine honours being paid by Christians to +priests (Octav. IX. 10). The Antimontanist (Euseb. H. E. V. 18. 6) asserts +that the Montanists worship their prophet and Alexander the Confessor as +divine. The opponents of the Roman Adoptians (Euseb. H. E. V. 28) reproach +them with praying to Galen. There are many passages in which the +Gnostics are reproached with paying Divine honours to the heads of their +schools, and for many Gnostic schools (the Carpocratians, for example) +the reproach seems to have been just. All this is extremely instructive. +The genius, the hero, the founder of a new school who promises to shew +the certain way to the <i>vita beata</i>, the emperor, the philosopher +(numerous Stoic passages might be noted here) finally, man, in so far as +he is inhabited by νους—could all somehow be considered as +θεοι, so elastic was this concept. All these instances of +Apotheosis in no way endangered the Monotheism which had been developed +from the mixture of Gods and from philosophy; for the one supreme +Godhead can unfold his inexhaustible essence in a variety of existences, +which, while his creatures as to their origin, are parts of his essence +as to their contents. This Monotheism does not yet exactly disclaim its +Polytheistic origin. The Christian, Hermas, says to his Mistress (Vis. I +1. 7) ου παντοτε σε 'ως θεαν 'εγησαμην, and the author of +the Epistle of Diognetus writes (X. 6), ταυτα τοις επιδεομενοις +χορηγων, (<i>i.e.</i>, the rich man) θεος γινεται των +λαμβανοντων. That the concept θεος was again used only of one +God, was due to the fact that one now started from the definition "qui +vitam æternam habet," and again from the definition "qui est super omnia +et originem nescit." From the latter followed the absolute unity of God, +from the former a plurality of Gods. Both could be so harmonised (see +Tertull. adv. Prax. and Novat. de Trinit.) that one could assume that +the God, <i>qui est super omnia</i>, might allow his monarchy to be +administered by several persons, and might dispense the gift of +immortality and with it a relative divinity.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote128" name="footnote128"></a><b>Footnote 128:</b><a href="#footnotetag128"> (return) </a><p> See the so-called Neopythagorean philosophers and the +so-called forerunners of Neoplatonism (Cf. Bigg, The Platonists of +Alexandria, p. 250, as to Numenius). Unfortunately, we have as yet no +sufficient investigation of the question what influence, if any, the +Jewish Alexandrian Philosophy of religion had on the development of +Greek philosophy in the second and third centuries. The answering of the +question would be of the greatest importance. But at present it cannot +even be said whether the Jewish philosophy of religion had any influence +on the genesis of Neoplatonism. On the relation of Neoplatonism to +Christianity and their mutual approximation, see the excellent account +in Tzschirner, Fall des Heidenthums, pp. 574-618. Cf. also Réville, La +Religion à Rome, 1886.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote129" name="footnote129"></a><b>Footnote 129:</b><a href="#footnotetag129"> (return) </a><p> The Christians, that is the Christian preachers, were most in agreement +with the Cynics (see Lucian's Peregrinus Proteus), both on the negative and +on the positive side; but for that very reason they were hard on one +another (Justin and Tatian against Crescens)—not only because the Christians +gave a different basis for the right mode of life from the Cynics, but +above all, because they did not approve of the self-conscious, contemptuous, +proud disposition which Cynicism produced in many of its adherents. +Morality frequently underwent change for the worse in the hands of Cynics, +and became the morality of a "Gentleman," such as we have also experience +of in modern Cynicism.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote130" name="footnote130"></a><b>Footnote 130:</b><a href="#footnotetag130"> (return) </a><p> The attitude of Celsus, the opponent of the Christians, is specially +instructive here.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote131" name="footnote131"></a><b>Footnote 131:</b><a href="#footnotetag131"> (return) </a><p> For the knowledge of the spread of the idealistic philosophy the +statement of Origen (c. Celsum VI. 2) that Epictetus was admired not +only by scholars, but also by ordinary people who felt in themselves the +impulse to be raised to something higher, is well worthy of notice.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote132" name="footnote132"></a><b>Footnote 132:</b><a href="#footnotetag132"> (return) </a><p> This point was of importance for the propaganda of Christianity among +the cultured. There seemed to be given here a reliable, because revealed, +Cosmology and history of the world—which already contained the foundation +of everything worth knowing. Both were needed and both were +here set forth in closest union.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote133" name="footnote133"></a><b>Footnote 133:</b><a href="#footnotetag133"> (return) </a><p> The universalism as reached by the Stoics is certainly again threatened +by the self-righteous and self-complacent distinction between men of virtue, +and men of pleasure, who, properly speaking, are not men. Aristotle had +already dealt with the virtuous élite in a notable way. He says (Polit. 3. 13. p. 1284), +that men who are distinguished by perfect virtue should not be put on +a level with the ordinary mass, and should not be subjected to the constraints +of a law adapted to the average man. "There is no law for these elect, who +are a law to themselves."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote134" name="footnote134"></a><b>Footnote 134:</b><a href="#footnotetag134"> (return) </a><p> Notions of pre-existence were readily suggested by the +Platonic philosophy; yet this whole philosophy rests on the fact that +one again posits the thing (after stripping it of certain marks as +accidental, or worthless, or ostensibly foreign to it) in order to +express its value in this form, and hold fast the permanent in the +change of the phenomena.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote135" name="footnote135"></a><b>Footnote 135:</b><a href="#footnotetag135"> (return) </a><p> See Tzschirn. i.d. Ztschr. f. K.-Gesch. XII. p. 215 ff. "The genesis +of the Romish Church in the second century." What he presents is no +doubt partly incomplete, partly overdone and not proved: yet much of +what he states is useful.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote136" name="footnote136"></a><b>Footnote 136:</b><a href="#footnotetag136"> (return) </a><p> What is meant here is the imminent danger of taking the +several constituent parts of the canon, even for historical +investigation, as constituent parts, that is, of explaining one writing +by the standard of another and so creating an artificial unity. The +contents of any of Paul's epistles, for example, will be presented very +differently if it is considered by itself and in the circumstances in +which it was written, or if attention is fixed on it as part of a +collection whose unity is presupposed.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote137" name="footnote137"></a><b>Footnote 137:</b><a href="#footnotetag137"> (return) </a><p>See Bigg, The Christian Platonist of Alexandria, pp. 53, 283 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote138" name="footnote138"></a><b>Footnote 138:</b><a href="#footnotetag138"> (return) </a><p> Reuter (August. Studien, p. 492) has drawn a valuable parallel between +Marcion and Augustine with regard to Paul.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote139" name="footnote139"></a><b>Footnote 139:</b><a href="#footnotetag139"> (return) </a><p> Marcion of course wished to raise it to the exclusive basis, but he +entirely misunderstood it.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page137" id="page137"></a>[pg 137]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="DIV_I" id="DIV_I"></a>DIVISION I.</h2> + +<h3>THE GENESIS OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA, +OR +THE GENESIS OF +THE CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC DOGMATIC THEOLOGY, +AND +THE FIRST SCIENTIFIC ECCLESIASTICAL +SYSTEM OF DOCTRINE.</h3> + +<h2><a name="BOOK_I" id="BOOK_I"></a>BOOK I.</h2> + +<h3>THE PREPARATION.</h3> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page139" id="page139"></a>[pg 139]</span> + +<p>Εαν μυριους παιδαγωγους εχητε εν χριστω αλλ' ου +πολλους πατερας.</p> + +<p>1 Cor IV. 15.</p> + +<p>Eine jede Idee tritt als ein fremder Gast in +die Erscheinung, und wie sie sich zu realisiren +beginnt, ist sie kaum von Phantasie +und Phantasterei zu unterscheiden.</p> + +<p>GOETHE, Sprüche in Prosa, 566</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page141" id="page141"></a>[pg 141]</span> + + + + +<h2>BOOK I</h2> + +<h3><i>THE PREPARATION</i></h3> + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_I" id="CHAP_I_I"></a>CHAPTER I</h2> + +<h3>HISTORICAL SURVEY</h3> + + +<p>The first century of the existence of Gentile Christian +communities is particularly characterised by the following +features:</p> + +<p>I. The rapid disappearance of Jewish Christianity.<a id="footnotetag140" name="footnotetag140"></a><a href="#footnote140"><sup>140</sup></a></p> + +<p>II. The enthusiastic character of the religious temper; the +Charismatic teachers and the appeal to the Spirit.<a id="footnotetag141" name="footnotetag141"></a><a href="#footnote141"><sup>141</sup></a></p> + +<p>III. The strength of the hopes for the future, Chiliasm.<a id="footnotetag142" name="footnotetag142"></a><a href="#footnote142"><sup>142</sup></a></p> + +<p>IV. The rigorous endeavour to fulfil the moral precepts +of Christ, and truly represent the holy and heavenly community +of God in abstinence from everything unclean, and in +love to God and the brethren here on earth "in these last +days."<a id="footnotetag143" name="footnotetag143"></a><a href="#footnote143"><sup>143</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page142" id="page142"></a>[pg 142]</span> + +<p>V. The want of a fixed doctrinal form in relation to the +abstract statement of the faith, and the corresponding variety +and freedom of Christian preaching on the basis of clear formulæ +and an increasingly rich tradition.</p> + +<p>VI. The want of a clearly defined external authority in +the communities, sure in its application, and the corresponding +independence and freedom of the individual Christian in relation +to the expression of the ideas, beliefs and hopes of faith.<a id="footnotetag144" name="footnotetag144"></a><a href="#footnote144"><sup>144</sup></a></p> + +<p>VII. The want of a fixed political union of the several communities +with each other—every <i>ecclesia</i> is an image complete +in itself, and an embodiment of the whole heavenly Church—while +the consciousness of the unity of the holy Church of Christ +which has the spirit in its midst, found strong expression.<a id="footnotetag145" name="footnotetag145"></a><a href="#footnote145"><sup>145</sup></a></p> + +<p>VIII. A quite unique literature in which were manufactured +facts for the past and for the future, and which did not submit +to the usual literary rules and forms, but came forward with +the loftiest pretensions.<a id="footnotetag146" name="footnotetag146"></a><a href="#footnote146"><sup>146</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page143" id="page143"></a>[pg 143]</span> + +<p>IX. The reproduction of particular sayings and arguments of +Apostolic Teachers with an uncertain understanding of them.<a id="footnotetag147" name="footnotetag147"></a><a href="#footnote147"><sup>147</sup></a></p> + +<p>X. The rise of tendencies which endeavoured to hasten in +every respect the inevitable process of fusing the Gospel with +the spiritual and religious interests of the time, viz., the Hellenic, +as well as attempts to separate the Gospel from its origins +and provide for it quite foreign presuppositions. To the latter +belongs, above all, the Hellenic idea that knowledge is not a +charismatic supplement to the faith, or an outgrowth of faith +alongside of others, but that it coincides with the essence of +faith itself.<a id="footnotetag148" name="footnotetag148"></a><a href="#footnote148"><sup>148</sup></a></p> + +<p>The sources for this period are few, as there was not much +written, and the following period did not lay itself out for +preserving a great part of the literary monuments of that +epoch. Still we do possess a considerable number of writings +and important fragments,<a id="footnotetag149" name="footnotetag149"></a><a href="#footnote149"><sup>149</sup></a> and further important inferences +here are rendered possible by the monuments of the following +period, since the conditions of the first century were not changed +in a moment, but were partly, at least, long preserved, especially +in certain national Churches and in remote communities.<a id="footnotetag150" name="footnotetag150"></a><a href="#footnote150"><sup>150</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page144" id="page144"></a>[pg 144]</span> + +<p><i>Supplement.</i>—The main features of the message concerning +Christ, of the matter of the Evangelic history, were fixed in +the first and second generations of believers, and on Palestinian +soil. But yet, up to the middle of the second century, this +matter was in many ways increased in Gentile Christian regions, +revised from new points of view, handed down in very +diverse forms, and systematically allegorised by individual +teachers. As a whole, the Evangelic history certainly appears +to have been completed at the beginning of the second century. +But in detail, much that was new was produced at a +later period—and not only in Gnostic circles—and the old +tradition was recast or rejected.<a id="footnotetag151" name="footnotetag151"></a><a href="#footnote151"><sup>151</sup></a></p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote140" name="footnote140"></a><b>Footnote 140:</b><a href="#footnotetag140"> (return) </a><p> This fact must have been apparent as early as the year 100. The +first direct evidence of it is in Justin (Apol. I. 53).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote141" name="footnote141"></a><b>Footnote 141:</b><a href="#footnotetag141"> (return) </a><p> Every individual was, or at least should have been conscious, as a +Christian, of having received the πνευμα θεου, though that does not exclude +spiritual grades. A special peculiarity of the enthusiastic nature of the +religious temper is that it does not allow reflection as to the authenticity +of the faith in which a man lives. As to the Charismatic teaching, see +my edition of the Didache (Texte u Unters. II 1. 2 p. 93 ff.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote142" name="footnote142"></a><b>Footnote 142:</b><a href="#footnotetag142"> (return) </a><p> The hope of the approaching end of the world and the glorious +kingdom of Christ still determined men's hearts; though exhortations +against theoretical and practical scepticism became more and more +necessary. On the other hand, after the Epistles to the Thessalonians, +there were not wanting exhortations to continue sober and diligent.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote143" name="footnote143"></a><b>Footnote 143:</b><a href="#footnotetag143"> (return) </a><p> There was a strong consciousness that the Christian Church is, above all, +a union for a holy life, as well as a consciousness of the obligation to help +one another, and use all the blessings bestowed by God in the service +of our neighbours. Justin (2 Apol. in Euseb. H. E. IV. 17. 10) calls +Christianity το +διδασκαλιον +της θηιας +αρητες.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote144" name="footnote144"></a><b>Footnote 144:</b><a href="#footnotetag144"> (return) </a><p> The existing authorities (Old Testament, sayings of the Lord, words +of Apostles) did not necessarily require to be taken into account; for +the living acting Spirit, partly attesting himself also to the senses, gave +new revelations. The validity of these authorities therefore held good +only in theory, and might in practice be completely set aside (cf. above +all, the Shepherd of Hermas).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote145" name="footnote145"></a><b>Footnote 145:</b><a href="#footnotetag145"> (return) </a><p> Zahn remarks (Ignatius, v. A. p. VII.): "I do not believe it to be the +business of that province of historical investigation which is dependent on +the writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers as main sources, to explain the +origin of the universal Church in any sense of the term; for that Church existed +before Clement and Hermas, before Ignatius and Polycarp. But an explanatory +answer is needed for the question, by what means did the consciousness of +the 'universal Church' so little favoured by outer circumstances, maintain +itself unbroken in the post-Apostolic communities?" This way of stating it +obscures, at least, the problem which here lies before us, for it does not take +account of the changes which the idea "universal Church" underwent up to +the middle of the third century—besides, we do not find the title before +Ignatius. In so far as the "universal Church" is set forth as an earthly power +recognisable in a doctrine or in political forms, the question as to the origin +of the idea is not only allowable, but must be regarded as one of the most important. +On the earliest conception of the "Ecclesia" and its realisation, see +the fine investigations of Sohm "Kirchenrecht," I. p. i ff., which, however, +suffer from being a little overdriven.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote146" name="footnote146"></a><b>Footnote 146:</b><a href="#footnotetag146"> (return) </a><p> See the important essay of Overbeck: Ueber die Anfänge d. patrist. +Litteratur (Hist. Ztschr. N. F. Bd. XII pp. 417-472). Early Christian literature, +as a rule, claims to be inspired writing. One can see, for example, in the history +of the resurrection in the recently discovered Gospel of Peter (fragment) +how facts were remodelled or created.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote147" name="footnote147"></a><b>Footnote 147:</b><a href="#footnotetag147"> (return) </a><p> The writings of men of the Apostolic period, and that +immediately succeeding, attained in part a wide circulation, and in some +portions of them, often of course incorrectly understood, very great +influence. How rapidly this literature was diffused, even the letters, +may be studied in the history of the Epistles of Paul, the first Epistle +of Clement, and other writings.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote148" name="footnote148"></a><b>Footnote 148:</b><a href="#footnotetag148"> (return) </a><p> That which is here mentioned is of the greatest importance; it is not a +mere reference to the so-called Gnostics. The foundations for the Hellenising +of the Gospel in the Church were already laid in the first century (50-150).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote149" name="footnote149"></a><b>Footnote 149:</b><a href="#footnotetag149"> (return) </a><p> We should not over-estimate the extent of early Christian +literature. It is very probable that we know, so far as the titles of +books are concerned, nearly all that was effective, and the greater +part, by very diverse means, has also been preserved to us. We except, +of course, the so-called Gnostic literature of which we have only a few +fragments. Only from the time of Commodus, as Eusebius, H. E. V. 21. 27, +has remarked, did the great Church preserve an extensive literature.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote150" name="footnote150"></a><b>Footnote 150:</b><a href="#footnotetag150"> (return) </a><p> It is therefore important to note the locality in which a document +originates, and the more so the earlier the document is. In the earliest +period, in which the history of the Church was more uniform, and the +influence from without relatively less, the differences are still in the background. +Yet the spirit of Rome already announces itself in the Epistle +of Clement, that of Alexandria in the Epistle of Barnabas, that of the +East in the Epistles of Ignatius.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote151" name="footnote151"></a><b>Footnote 151:</b><a href="#footnotetag151"> (return) </a><p> The history of the genesis of the four Canonical Gospels, or the +comparison of them, is instructive on this point. Then we must bear in +mind the old Apocryphal Gospels, and the way in which the so-called +Apostolic Fathers and Justin attest the Evangelic history, and in part +reproduce it independently, the Gospels of Peter, of the Egyptians, and +of Marcion; the Diatesseron of Tatian; the Gnostic Gospels and Acts of +the Apostles, etc. The greatest gap in our knowledge consists in the +fact, that we know so little about the course of things from about the +year 61 to the beginning of the reign of Trajan. The consolidating and +remodelling process must, for the most part, have taken place in this +period. We possess probably not a few writings which belong to that +period; but how are we to prove this, how are they to be arranged? +Here lies the cause of most of the differences, combinations and uncertainties; +many scholars, therefore, actually leave these 40 years out of +account, and seek to place everything in the first three decennia of the +second century.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page145" id="page145"></a>[pg 145]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_II" id="CHAP_I_II"></a>CHAPTER II.</h2> + +<h3>THE ELEMENT COMMON TO ALL CHRISTIANS AND +THE BREACH WITH JUDAISM</h3> + + +<p>On account of the great differences among those who, in +the first century, reckoned themselves in the Church of God, +and called themselves by the name of Christ,<a id="footnotetag152" name="footnotetag152"></a><a href="#footnote152"><sup>152</sup></a> it seems at first +sight scarcely possible to set up marks which would hold +good for all, or even for nearly all, the groups. Yet the great +majority had one thing in common, as is proved, among other +things, by the gradual expulsion of Gnosticism. The conviction +that they knew the supreme God, the consciousness of +being responsible to him (Heaven and Hell), reliance on Jesus +Christ, the hope of an eternal life, the vigorous elevation above +the world—these are the elements that formed the fundamental +mood. The author of the Acts of Thecla expresses +the general view when he (c. 5-7) co-ordinates τον του χριστου +λογον with λογος θεου περι ενκατειας, και αναστασεως. The following +particulars may here be specified.<a id="footnotetag153" name="footnotetag153"></a><a href="#footnote153"><sup>153</sup></a></p> + +<p>I. The Gospel, because it rests on revelation, is the sure +manifestation of the supreme God, and its believing acceptance +guarantees salvation (σωτερια).</p> + +<p>II. The essential content of this manifestation (besides the +revelation and the verification of the oneness and spirituality of +God),<a id="footnotetag154" name="footnotetag154"></a><a href="#footnote154"><sup>154</sup></a> is, first of all, the message of the resurrection and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page146" id="page146"></a>[pg 146]</span> +eternal life (αναστασις ζωη αιωνιος), then the preaching of moral +purity and continence (εγκρατεια), on the basis of repentance +toward God (μετανοια), and of an expiation once assured by +baptism, with eye ever fixed on the requital of good and evil.<a id="footnotetag155" name="footnotetag155"></a><a href="#footnote155"><sup>155</sup></a></p> + +<p>III. This manifestation is mediated by Jesus Christ, who is +the Saviour (σωτηρ) sent by God "in these last days," and who +stands with God himself in a union special and unique, (cf. the +ambiguous παις θεου, which was much used in the earliest +period). He has brought the true and full knowledge of God, +as well as the gift of immortality γνωσις και ζωη, or γνωσις της +ζωης, as an expression for the sum of the Gospel. See the +supper prayer in the Didache, c. IX. an X.; ευχαριστουμεν σοι, +πατερ 'ημων 'υπερ της ζωης και γνωσεως 'ης εγνωρισας 'ημιν δια +Ιησου του παιδος σου, and is for that very reason the redeemer +(σωτηρ and victor over the demons) on whom we are to place +believing trust. But he is, further, in word and walk the +highest example of all moral virtue, and therefore in his own +person the law for the perfect life, and at the same time the +God-appointed lawgiver and judge.<a id="footnotetag156" name="footnotetag156"></a><a href="#footnote156"><sup>156</sup></a></p> + +<p>IV. Virtue as continence, embraces as its highest task, renunciation +of temporal goods and separation from the common +world; for the Christian is not a citizen, but a stranger on +the earth, and expects its approaching destruction.<a id="footnotetag157" name="footnotetag157"></a><a href="#footnote157"><sup>157</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page147" id="page147"></a>[pg 147]</span> + +<p>V. Christ has committed to chosen men, the Apostles (or +to one Apostle), the proclamation of the message he received +from God; consequently, their preaching represents that of +Christ himself. But, besides, the Spirit of God rules in Christians, +"the Saints." He bestows upon them special gifts, and, +above all, continually raises up among them Prophets and spiritual +Teachers who receive revelations and communications +for the edification of others, and whose injunctions are to be +obeyed.</p> + +<p>VI. Christian Worship is a service of God in spirit and in +truth (a spiritual sacrifice), and therefore has no legal ceremonial +and statutory rules. The value of the sacred acts and +consecrations which are connected with the cultus, consists in +the communication of spiritual blessings. (Didache X., 'ημιν δε +εχαρισω, δεσποτα, πνευματικην τροφην και ποτον και ζωην αιωνιον +δια του παιδος σου).</p> + +<p>VII. Everything that Jesus Christ brought with him, may +be summed up in γνωσις και ζωη, or in the knowledge of immortal +life.<a id="footnotetag158" name="footnotetag158"></a><a href="#footnote158"><sup>158</sup></a> To possess the perfect knowledge was, in wide +circles, an expression for the sum total of the Gospel.<a id="footnotetag159" name="footnotetag159"></a><a href="#footnote159"><sup>159</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page148" id="page148"></a>[pg 148]</span> + +<p>VIII. Christians, as such, no longer take into account the +distinctions of race, age, rank, nationality and worldly culture, +but the Christian community must be conceived as a communion +resting on a divine election. Opinions were divided +about the ground of that election.</p> + +<p>IX. As Christianity is the only true religion, and as it is +no national religion, but somehow concerns the whole of humanity, +or its best part, it follows that it can have nothing +in common with the Jewish nation and its contemporary +cultus. The Jewish nation in which Jesus Christ appeared, +has, for the time at least, no special relation to the God +whom Jesus revealed. Whether it had such a relation at +an earlier period is doubtful (cf. here, <i>e.g.</i>, the attitude of +Marcion, Ptolemæus the disciple of Valentinus, the author +of the Epistle of Barnabas, Aristides and Justin); but certain +it is that God has now cast it off, and that all revelations of +God, so far as they took place at all before Christ, (the majority +assumed that there had been such revelations and considered +the Old Testament as a holy record), must have +aimed solely at the call of the "new people", and in some +way prepared for the revelation of God through his Son.<a id="footnotetag160" name="footnotetag160"></a><a href="#footnote160"><sup>160</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page149" id="page149"></a>[pg 149]</span> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote152" name="footnote152"></a><b>Footnote 152:</b><a href="#footnotetag152"> (return) </a><p>See, as to this, Celsus in Orig. III. 10 ff. and V. 59 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote153" name="footnote153"></a><b>Footnote 153:</b><a href="#footnotetag153"> (return) </a><p> The marks adduced in the text do not certainly hold good for some +comparatively unimportant Gnostic groups, but they do apply to the +great majority of them, and in the main to Marcion also.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote154" name="footnote154"></a><b>Footnote 154:</b><a href="#footnotetag154"> (return) </a><p> Most of the Gnostic schools know only one God, and put +all emphasis on the knowledge of the oneness, supramundaneness, and +spirituality of this God. The Æons, the Demiurgus, the God of matter, do +not come near this God though they are called Gods. See the testimony of +Hippolytus c. Noet. 11; και γαρ παντες απεκλεισθησαν εις τουτο +ακοντες ειπειν 'οτι το παν εις 'ενα ανατρεχει ει ουν τα παντα εις 'ενα +ανατρεχει και κατα θυαλεντινον και κατα Μαρκιωνα, Κηρινθον τε και +πασαν την εκεινων φλυαριαν, και ακοντες εις τουτο περιεπεσαν, 'ινα τον +'ενα 'ομολογησωσιν αιτιον των παντων 'ουτως ουν συντρεχουσιν και αυτοι +μη θελοντες τη αληθεια 'ενα θεον λεγειν ποιησαντα 'ως +ηθελησεν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote155" name="footnote155"></a><b>Footnote 155:</b><a href="#footnotetag155"> (return) </a><p> Continence was regarded as the condition laid down by God for the +resurrection and eternal life. The sure hope of this was for many, if not for +the majority, the whole sum of religion, in connection with the idea of the +requital of good and evil which was now firmly established. See the testimony +of the heathen Lucian, in Peregrinus Proteus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote156" name="footnote156"></a><b>Footnote 156:</b><a href="#footnotetag156"> (return) </a><p> Even where the judicial attributes were separated from God (Christ) +as not suitable, Christ was still comprehended as the critical appearance by +which every man is placed in the condition which belongs to him. The +Apocalypse of Peter expects that God himself will come as Judge (see the +Messianic expectations of Judaism, in which it was always uncertain whether +God or the Messiah would hold the judgment).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote157" name="footnote157"></a><b>Footnote 157:</b><a href="#footnotetag157"> (return) </a><p> Celsus (Orig. c. Celsum, V. 59) after referring to the many Christian +parties mutually provoking and fighting with each other, remarks (V. 64) that +though they differ much from each other, and quarrel with each other, +you can yet hear from them all the protestation, "The world is crucified +to me and I to the world." In the earliest Gentile Christian communities +brotherly love for reflective thought falls into the background behind +ascetic exercises of virtue, in unquestionable deviation from the sayings +of Christ, but in fact it was powerful. See the testimony of Pliny and Lucian, +Aristides, Apol. 15, Tertull Apol. 39.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote158" name="footnote158"></a><b>Footnote 158:</b><a href="#footnotetag158"> (return) </a><p> The word "life" comes into consideration in a double sense, viz., as +soundness of the soul, and as immortality. Neither, of course, is to be separated +from the other. But I have attempted to shew in my essay, "Medicinisches +aus der ältesten Kirchengesch" (1892), the extent to which the Gospel +in the earliest Christendom was preached as medicine and Jesus as a +Physician, and how the Christian Message was really comprehended by the +Gentiles as a medicinal religion. Even the Stoic philosophy gave itself out as +a soul therapeutic, and Æsculapius was worshipped as a Saviour-God; but +Christianity alone was a religion of healing.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote159" name="footnote159"></a><b>Footnote 159:</b><a href="#footnotetag159"> (return) </a><p> Heinrici, in his commentary on the epistles to the Corinthians, has dealt +very clearly with this matter; see especially (Bd. II. p. 557 ff.) the description +of the Christianity of the Corinthians: On what did the community base its +Christian character? It believed in one God who had revealed himself to it +through Christ, without denying the reality of the hosts of gods in the heathen +world (1 VIII. 6). It hoped in immortality without being clear as to the nature +of the Christian belief in the resurrection (1 XV.) It had no doubt as to the +requital of good and evil (1 IV. 5; 2 V. 10; XI. 15: Rom. II. 4), without understanding +the value of self-denial, claiming no merit, for the sake of important +ends. It was striving to make use of the Gospel as a new doctrine +of wisdom about earthly and super-earthly things, which led to the perfect +and best established knowledge (1 I. 21: VIII. 1). It boasted of special +operations of the Divine Spirit, which in themselves remained obscure +and non-transparent, and therefore unfruitful (1 XIV.), while it was prompt +to put aside as obscure, the word of the Cross as preached by Paul (2. IV. 1 f). +The hope of the near Parousia, however, and the completion of all things, +evinced no power to effect a moral transformation of society We herewith +obtain the outline of a conviction that was spread over the widest circles of +the Roman Empire "Naturam si expellas furca, tamen usque recurret."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote160" name="footnote160"></a><b>Footnote 160:</b><a href="#footnotetag160"> (return) </a><p> Nearly all Gentile Christian groups that we know, are at +one in the detachment of Christianity from empiric Judaism; the +"Gnostics," however, included the Old Testament in Judaism, while the +greater part of Christians did not. That detachment seemed to be +demanded by the claims of Christianity to be the one, true, absolute and +therefore oldest religion, foreseen from the beginning. The different +estimates of the Old Testament in Gnostic circles have their exact +parallels in the different estimates of Judaism among the other +Christians; cf. for example, in this respect, the conception stated in +the Epistle of Barnabas with the views of Marcion, and Justin with +Valentinus. The particulars about the detachment of the Gentile +Christians from the Synagogue, which was prepared for by the inner +development of Judaism itself, and was required by the fundamental fact +that the Messiah, crucified and rejected by his own people, was +recognised as Saviour by those who were not Jews, cannot be given in the +frame-work of a history of dogma; though, see Chaps. III. IV. VI. On the +other hand, the turning away from Judaism is also the result of the mass +of things which were held in common with it, even in Gnostic circles. +Christianity made its appearance in the Empire in the Jewish propaganda. +By the preaching of Jesus Christ who brought the gift of eternal life, +mediated the full knowledge of God, and assembled round him in these +last days a community, the imperfect and hybrid creations of the Jewish +propaganda in the empire were converted into independent formations. +These formations were far superior to the synagogue in power of +attraction, and from the nature of the case would very soon be directed +with the utmost vigour against the synagogue.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page150" id="page150"></a>[pg 150]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_III" id="CHAP_I_III"></a>CHAPTER III</h2> + +<h3>THE COMMON FAITH AND THE BEGINNINGS OF KNOWLEDGE +IN GENTILE CHRISTIANITY AS IT WAS BEING +DEVELOPED INTO CATHOLICISM<a id="footnotetag162" name="footnotetag162"></a><a href="#footnote162"><sup>162</sup></a></h3> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_I" id="SEC_I_III_I"></a>§ 1. <i>The Communities and the Church.</i></h3> + + +<p>The confessors of the Gospels, belonging to organised communities +who recognised the Old Testament as the Divine +record of revelation, and prized the Evangelic tradition as a +public message for all, to which, in its undiluted form, they +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page151" id="page151"></a>[pg 151]</span> +wished to adhere truly and sincerely, formed the stem of +Christendom both as to extent and importance.<a id="footnotetag163" name="footnotetag163"></a><a href="#footnote163"><sup>163</sup></a> The communities +stood to each other in an outwardly loose, but inwardly +firm connection, and every community by the vigour +of its faith, the certainty of its hope, the holy character of its +life, as well as by unfeigned love, unity and peace, was to +be an image of the holy Church of God which is in heaven, +and whose members are scattered over the earth. They were +further, by the purity of their walk and an active brotherly +disposition, to prove to those without, that is to the world, +the excellence and truth of the Christian faith.<a id="footnotetag164" name="footnotetag164"></a><a href="#footnote164"><sup>164</sup></a> The hope +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page152" id="page152"></a>[pg 152]</span> +that the Lord would speedily appear to gather into his Kingdom +the believers who were scattered abroad, punishing the +evil and rewarding the good, guided these communities in +faith and life. In the recently discovered "Teaching of the +Apostles" we are confronted very distinctly with ideas and +aspirations of communities that are not influenced by Philosophy.</p> + +<p>The Church, that is the totality of all believers destined to +be received into the kingdom of God (Didache, 9. 10), is the +holy Church, (Hermas) because it is brought together and preserved +by the Holy Spirit. It is the one Church, not because +it presents this unity outwardly, on earth the members of the +Church are rather scattered abroad, but because it will be +brought to unity in the kingdom of Christ, because it is ruled +by the same spirit and inwardly united in a common relation +to a common hope and ideal. The Church, considered in its +origin, is the number of those chosen by God,<a id="footnotetag165" name="footnotetag165"></a><a href="#footnote165"><sup>165</sup></a> the true Israel,<a id="footnotetag166" name="footnotetag166"></a><a href="#footnote166"><sup>166</sup></a> +nay, still more, the final purpose of God, for the world +was created for its sake.<a id="footnotetag167" name="footnotetag167"></a><a href="#footnote167"><sup>167</sup></a> There were in connection with +these doctrines in the earliest period, various speculations about +the Church: it is a heavenly Æon, is older than the world, +was created by God at the beginning of things as a companion +of the heavenly Christ;<a id="footnotetag168" name="footnotetag168"></a><a href="#footnote168"><sup>168</sup></a> its members form the new nation +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page153" id="page153"></a>[pg 153]</span> +which is really the oldest nation,<a id="footnotetag169" name="footnotetag169"></a><a href="#footnote169"><sup>169</sup></a> it is the λαος 'ο του +αγαπημενου 'ο φιλουμενος και φιλον αυτον,<a id="footnotetag170" name="footnotetag170"></a><a href="#footnote170"><sup>170</sup></a> the people whom God +has prepared "in the Beloved,"<a id="footnotetag171" name="footnotetag171"></a><a href="#footnote171"><sup>171</sup></a> etc. The creation of God, +the Church, as it is of an antemundane and heavenly nature, +will also attain its true existence only in the Æon of the +future, the Æon of the kingdom of Christ. The idea of a +heavenly origin, and of a heavenly goal of the Church, was +therefore an essential one, various and fluctuating as these +speculations were. Accordingly, the exhortations, so far as +they have in view the Church, are always dominated by the +idea of the contrast of the kingdom of Christ with the kingdom +of the world. On the other hand, he who communicated +knowledge for the present time, prescribed rules of life, endeavoured +to remove conflicts, did not appeal to the peculiar +character of the Church. The mere fact, however, that from +nearly the beginning of Christendom, there were reflections +and speculations not only about God and Christ, but also +about the Church, teaches us how profoundly the Christian +consciousness was impressed with being a new people, viz., +the people of God.<a id="footnotetag172" name="footnotetag172"></a><a href="#footnote172"><sup>172</sup></a> These speculations of the earliest Gentile +Christian time about Christ and the Church, as inseparable +correlative ideas, are of the greatest importance, for they +have absolutely nothing Hellenic in them, but rather have +their origin in the Apostolic tradition. But for that very reason +the combination very soon, comparatively speaking, became +obsolete or lost its power to influence. Even the Apologists +made no use of it, though Clement of Alexandria and +other Greeks held it fast, and the Gnostics by their Æon +"Church" brought it into discredit. Augustine was the first to +return to it.</p> + +<p>The importance attached to morality is shewn in <i>Didache</i> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page154" id="page154"></a>[pg 154]</span> +cc. 1-6, with parallels<a id="footnotetag173" name="footnotetag173"></a><a href="#footnote173"><sup>173</sup></a>. But this section and the statements +so closely related to it in the pseudo phocylidean poem, which +is probably of Christian origin, as well as in Sibyl, II. v. +56, 148, which is likewise to be regarded as Christian, and +in many other Gnomic paragraphs, shews at the same time, +that in the memorable expression and summary statement of +higher moral commandments, the Christian propaganda had +been preceded by the Judaism of the Diaspora, and had entered +into its labours. These statements are throughout dependent +on the Old Testament wisdom, and have the closest +relationship with the genuine Greek parts of the Alexandrian +Canon, as well as with Philonic exhortations. Consequently, +these moral rules, the two ways, so aptly compiled and filled +with such an elevated spirit, represent the ripest fruit of Jewish +as well as of Greek development. The Christian spirit +found here a disposition which it could recognise as its own. +It was of the utmost importance, however, that this disposition +was already expressed in fixed forms suitable for didactic purposes. +The young Christianity therewith received a gift of +first importance. It was spared a labour in a legion, the +moral, which experience shews, can only be performed in generations, +viz, the creation of simple fixed impressive rules, +the labour of the Catechist. The sayings of the Sermon on +the Mount were not of themselves sufficient here. Those who +in the second century attempted to rest in these alone and +turned aside from the Judaeo-Greek inheritance, landed in +Marcionite or Encratite doctrines.<a id="footnotetag174" name="footnotetag174"></a><a href="#footnote174"><sup>174</sup></a> We can see, especially +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page155" id="page155"></a>[pg 155]</span> +from the Apologies of Aristides (c. 15), Justin and Tatian (see +also Lucian), that the earnest men of the Græco-Roman world +were won by the morality and active love of the Christians.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_II" id="SEC_I_III_II"></a>§ 2 <i>The Foundations of the Faith.</i></h3> + +<p>The foundations of the faith—whose abridged form was, on +the one hand, the confession of the one true God, μονος αλεθινος +θεος,<a id="footnotetag175" name="footnotetag175"></a><a href="#footnote175"><sup>175</sup></a> and of Jesus, the Lord, the Son of God, the Saviour<a id="footnotetag176" name="footnotetag176"></a><a href="#footnote176"><sup>176</sup></a> +and also of the Holy Spirit, and on the other hand, the confident +hope of Christ's kingdom and the resurrection—were laid on +the Old Testament interpreted in a Christian sense together with +the Apocalypses,<a id="footnotetag177" name="footnotetag177"></a><a href="#footnote177"><sup>177</sup></a> and the progressively enriched traditions about +Jesus Christ ('ε παροδοσις—'ο παραδοθεις λογος—'ο κανων της +αληθειας or της παραδοσεως—'η πιστις—'ο κανων της πιστεως—'ο +δοθεισα πιστις—το κηρυγμα—τα διδαγματα του χριστου—'η +διδαχη—τα μαθηματα, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page156" id="page156"></a>[pg 156]</span> +or το μαθημα).<a id="footnotetag178" name="footnotetag178"></a><a href="#footnote178"><sup>178</sup></a> The Old Testament +revelations and oracles were regarded as pointing to Christ; +the Old Testament itself, the words of God spoken by the +Prophets, as the primitive Gospel of salvation, having in view +the new people, which is, however, the oldest, and belonging +to it alone.<a id="footnotetag179" name="footnotetag179"></a><a href="#footnote179"><sup>179</sup></a> The exposition of the Old Testament, which, as +a rule, was of course read in the Alexandrian Canon of the +Bible, turned it into a Christian book. A historical view of +it, which no born Jew could in some measure fail to take, +did not come into fashion, and the freedom that was used in +interpreting the Old Testament,—so far as there was a method, +it was the Alexandrian Jewish—went the length of even +correcting the letter and enriching the contents.<a id="footnotetag180" name="footnotetag180"></a><a href="#footnote180"><sup>180</sup></a></p> + +<p>The traditions concerning Christ on which the communities +were based, were of a twofold character. First, there were +words of the Lord, mostly ethical, but also of eschatological +content, which were regarded as rules, though their expression +was uncertain, ever changing, and only gradually assuming a +fixed form. The διδαγματα του χριστου are often just the moral +commandments.<a id="footnotetag181" name="footnotetag181"></a><a href="#footnote181"><sup>181</sup></a> Second, the foundation of the faith, that is, +the assurance of the blessing of salvation, was formed by a +proclamation of the history of Jesus concisely expressed, and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page157" id="page157"></a>[pg 157]</span> +composed with reference to prophecy.<a id="footnotetag182" name="footnotetag182"></a><a href="#footnote182"><sup>182</sup></a> The confession of God +the Father Almighty, of Christ as the Lord and Son of God, +and of the Holy Spirit,<a id="footnotetag183" name="footnotetag183"></a><a href="#footnote183"><sup>183</sup></a> was at a very early period in the +communities, united with the short proclamation of the history +of Jesus, and at the same time, in certain cases, referred expressly +to the revelation of God (the Spirit) through the prophets.<a id="footnotetag184" name="footnotetag184"></a><a href="#footnote184"><sup>184</sup></a> +The confession thus conceived had not everywhere +obtained a fixed definite expression in the first century (c. +50-150). It would rather seem that, in most of the communities, +there was no exact formulation beyond a confession of +Father, Son and Spirit, accompanied in a free way by the historical +proclamation.<a id="footnotetag185" name="footnotetag185"></a><a href="#footnote185"><sup>185</sup></a> It is highly probable, however, that a short confession +was strictly formulated in the Roman community before +the middle of the second century,<a id="footnotetag186" name="footnotetag186"></a><a href="#footnote186"><sup>186</sup></a> expressing belief in the +Father, Son and Spirit, embracing also the most important facts in +the history of Jesus, and mentioning the Holy Church, as well +as the two great blessings of Christianity, the forgiveness of +sin, and the resurrection of the dead (αφεσις 'αμαρτιων, σαρκος αναστασις<a id="footnotetag187" name="footnotetag187"></a><a href="#footnote187"><sup>187</sup></a>). +But, however the proclamation might be handed +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page158" id="page158"></a>[pg 158]</span> +down, in a form somehow fixed, or in a free form, the disciples +of Jesus, the (twelve) Apostles, were regarded as the authorities +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page159" id="page159"></a>[pg 159]</span> +who mediated and guaranteed it. To them was traced +back in the same way everything that was narrated of the +history of Jesus, and everything that was inculcated from his +sayings.<a id="footnotetag188" name="footnotetag188"></a><a href="#footnote188"><sup>188</sup></a> Consequently, it may be said, that beside the Old +Testament, the chief court of appeal in the communities was +formed by an aggregate of words and deeds of the Lord;—for +the history and the suffering of Jesus are his deed: 'ο Ιησους +'υπεμεινεν παθειν, κ.τ.λ.—fixed +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page160" id="page160"></a>[pg 160]</span> +in certain fundamental features, +though constantly enriched, and traced back to apostolic +testimony.<a id="footnotetag189" name="footnotetag189"></a><a href="#footnote189"><sup>189</sup></a></p> + +<p>The authority which the Apostles in this way enjoyed, did +not, in any great measure, rest on the remembrance of direct +services which the twelve had rendered to the Gentile Churches: +for, as the want of reliable concrete traditions proves, no +such services had been rendered, at least not by the <i>twelve</i>. +On the contrary, there was a theory operative here regarding +the special authority which the twelve enjoyed in the Church +at Jerusalem, a theory which was spread by the early missionaries, +including Paul, and sprang from the <i>a priori</i> consideration +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page161" id="page161"></a>[pg 161]</span> +that the tradition about Christ, just because it grew +up so quickly,<a id="footnotetag190" name="footnotetag190"></a><a href="#footnote190"><sup>190</sup></a> must have been entrusted to eye-witnesses who +were commissioned to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world, +and who fulfilled that commission. The <i>a priori</i> character of +this assumption is shewn by the fact that—with the exception +of reminiscences of an activity of Peter and John among +the εθνη, not sufficiently clear to us<a id="footnotetag191" name="footnotetag191"></a><a href="#footnote191"><sup>191</sup></a>—the twelve, as a rule, +are regarded as a <i>college</i>, to which the mission and the tradition +are traced back.<a id="footnotetag192" name="footnotetag192"></a><a href="#footnote192"><sup>192</sup></a> That such a theory, based on a dogmatic +construction of history, could have at all arisen, proves +that either the Gentile Churches never had a living relation +to the twelve, or that they had very soon lost it in the rapid +disappearance of Jewish Christianity, while they had been referred +to the twelve from the beginning. But even in the communities +which Paul had founded and for a long time guided, +the remembrance of the controversies of the Apostolic age +must have been very soon effaced, and the vacuum thus produced +filled by a theory which directly traced back the <i>status quo</i> +of the Gentile Christian communities to a tradition of the +twelve as its foundation. This fact is extremely paradoxical, +and is not altogether explained by the assumptions that the +Pauline-Judaistic controversy had not made a great impression +on the Gentile Christians, that the way in which Paul, +while fully recognising the twelve, had insisted on his own +independent importance, had long ceased to be really understood, +and that Peter and John had also really been missionaries +to the Gentiles. The guarantee that was needed for the +"teaching of the Lord" must, finally, be given not by Paul, +but only by chosen eye-witnesses. The less that was known +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page162" id="page162"></a>[pg 162]</span> +about them, the easier it was to claim them. The conviction +as to the unanimity of the twelve, and as to their activity in +founding the Gentile Churches, appeared in these Churches as +early as the urgent need of protection against the serious consequences +of unfettered religious enthusiasm and unrestrained +religious fancy. This urgency cannot be dated too far back. +In correspondence therewith, the principle of tradition in the +Church (Christ, the twelve Apostles) in the case of those who +were intent on the unity and completeness of Christendom, is +also very old. But one passed logically from the Apostles to +the disciples of the Apostles, "the Elders," without at first +claiming for them any other significance than that of reliable +hearers (Apostoli et discentes ipsorum). In coming down to +them, one here and there betook oneself again to real historical +ground, disciples of Paul, of Peter, of John.<a id="footnotetag193" name="footnotetag193"></a><a href="#footnote193"><sup>193</sup></a> Yet even +here legends with a tendency speedily got mixed with facts, +and because, in consequence of this theory of tradition, the +Apostle Paul must needs fall into the background, his disciples +also were more or less forgotten. The attempt which we have +in the Pastoral Epistles remained without effect, as regards +those to whom these epistles were addressed. Timothy and +Titus obtained no authority outside these epistles. But so far +as the epistles of Paul were collected, diffused, and read, there +was created a complex of writings which at first stood beside +the "Teaching of the Lord by the twelve Apostles", without +being connected with it, and only obtained such connection by +the creation of the New Testament, that is, by the interpolation +of the Acts of the Apostles, between Gospels and Epistles.<a id="footnotetag194" name="footnotetag194"></a><a href="#footnote194"><sup>194</sup></a></p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_III" id="SEC_I_III_III"></a>§ 3. <i>The Main Articles of Christianity and the Conceptions of +Salvation. Eschatology.</i></h3> + +<p>1. The main articles of Christianity were (1) belief in God the +δεσποτης, and in the Son in virtue of proofs from prophecy, and the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page163" id="page163"></a>[pg 163]</span> +teaching of the Lord as attested by the Apostles; (2) discipline +according to the standard of the words of the Lord; (3) baptism; +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page164" id="page164"></a>[pg 164]</span> +(4) the common offering of prayer, culminating in the Lord's +Supper and the holy meal, (5) the sure hope of the nearness +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page165" id="page165"></a>[pg 165]</span> +of Christ's glorious kingdom. In these appears the unity of +Christendom, that is, of the Church which possesses the Holy +Spirit.<a id="footnotetag195" name="footnotetag195"></a><a href="#footnote195"><sup>195</sup></a> On the basis of this unity Christian knowledge was +free and manifold. It was distinguished as σοφια, συνεσις, επιστημε, +γνωσις (των δικαιωματων), from the λογος θεου της πιστεως, +the κλησις της επαγγελιας and the εντολαι της διδαχης (Barn. +16. 9, similarly Hermas). Perception and knowledge of Divine +things was a Charism possessed only by individuals, but like +all Charisms it was to be used for the good of the whole. +In so far as every actual perception was a perception produced +by the Spirit, it was regarded as important and indubitable +truth, even though some Christians were unable to understand +it. While attention was given to the firm inculcation +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page166" id="page166"></a>[pg 166]</span> +and observance of the moral precepts of Christ, as well as to +the awakening of sure faith in Christ, and while all waverings +and differences were excluded in respect of these, there was +absolutely no current doctrine of faith in the communities, in +the sense of a completed theory, and the theological speculations +of even closely related Christian writers of this epoch, +exhibit the greatest differences.<a id="footnotetag196" name="footnotetag196"></a><a href="#footnote196"><sup>196</sup></a> The productions of fancy, +the terrible or consoling pictures of the future pass for sacred +knowledge, just as much as intelligent and sober reflections, +and edifying interpretation of Old Testament sayings. Even +that which was afterwards separated as Dogmatic and Ethics +was then in no way distinguished.<a id="footnotetag197" name="footnotetag197"></a><a href="#footnote197"><sup>197</sup></a> The communities gave +expression in the cultus, chiefly in the hymns and prayers, +to what they possessed in their God and their Christ; here +sacred formulæ were fashioned and delivered to the members.<a id="footnotetag198" name="footnotetag198"></a><a href="#footnote198"><sup>198</sup></a> +The problem of surrendering the world in the hope of a life +beyond was regarded as the practical side of the faith, and +the unity in temper and disposition resting on faith in the +saving revelation of God in Christ, permitted the highest degree +of freedom in knowledge, the results of which were absolutely +without control as soon as the preacher or the writer was +recognised as a true teacher, that is, inspired by the Spirit +of God.<a id="footnotetag199" name="footnotetag199"></a><a href="#footnote199"><sup>199</sup></a> There was also in wide circles a conviction that +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page167" id="page167"></a>[pg 167]</span> +the Christian faith, after the night of error, included the full +knowledge of everything worth knowing, that precisely in its +most important articles it is accessible to men of every degree +of culture, and that in it, in the now attained truth, is contained +one of the most essential blessings of Christianity. When +it is said in the Epistle of Barnabas (II. 2. 3); της πιστεως 'ημων +εισιν βοηθοι φοβος και 'υπομονη, τα δε συμμαχουντα 'ημιν μακροθυμια +και εγκρατεια; τουτων μενοντων τα προς κυριον 'αγνως, συνευφραινονται +αυτοις σοφια, συνεσις, επιστημη, γνωσις, knowledge +appears in this classic formula to be an essential element in +Christianity, conditioned by faith and the practical virtues, +and dependent on them. Faith takes the lead, knowledge +follows it: but of course in concrete cases it could not always +be decided what was λογος της πιστηως, which implicitly +contained the highest knowledge, and what the special γνωσις; +for in the last resort the nature of the two was regarded as +identical, both being represented as produced by the Spirit +of God.</p> + +<p>2. The conceptions of Christian salvation, or of redemption, +were grouped around two ideas, which were themselves +but loosely connected with each other, and of which the one +influenced more the temper and the imagination, the other +the intellectual faculty. On the one hand, salvation, in accordance +with the earliest preaching, was regarded as the glorious +kingdom which was soon to appear on earth with the visible return +of Christ, which will bring the present course of the world +to an end, and introduce for a definite series of centuries, +before the final judgment, a new order of all things to the +joy and blessedness of the saints.<a id="footnotetag200" name="footnotetag200"></a><a href="#footnote200"><sup>200</sup></a> In connection with this +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page168" id="page168"></a>[pg 168]</span> +the hope of the resurrection of the body occupied the foreground<a id="footnotetag201" name="footnotetag201"></a><a href="#footnote201"><sup>201</sup></a>. +On the other hand, salvation appeared to be given in the truth, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page169" id="page169"></a>[pg 169]</span> +that is, in the complete and certain knowledge +of God, as contrasted with the error of heathendom and the +night of sin, and this truth included the certainty of the gift +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page170" id="page170"></a>[pg 170]</span> +of eternal life, and all conceivable spiritual blessings.<a id="footnotetag202" name="footnotetag202"></a><a href="#footnote202"><sup>202</sup></a> Of +these the community, so far as it is a community of saints, +that is, so far as it is ruled by the Spirit of God, already +possesses forgiveness of sins and righteousness. But, as a rule, +neither blessing was understood in a strictly religious sense, that +is to say, the effect of their religious sense was narrowed. +The moralistic view, in which eternal life is the wages and +reward of a perfect moral life wrought out essentially by one's +own power, took the place of first importance at a very early +period. On this view, according to which the righteousness +of God is revealed in punishment and reward alike, the forgiveness +of sin only meant a single remission of sin in connection +with entrance into the Church by baptism,<a id="footnotetag203" name="footnotetag203"></a><a href="#footnote203"><sup>203</sup></a> and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page171" id="page171"></a>[pg 171]</span> +righteousness became identical with virtue. The idea is indeed +still operative, especially in the oldest Gentile-Christian writings +known to us, that sinlessness rests upon a new creation +(regeneration) which is effected in baptism;<a id="footnotetag204" name="footnotetag204"></a><a href="#footnote204"><sup>204</sup></a> but, so far as +dissimilar eschatological hopes do not operate, it is everywhere +in danger of being supplanted by the other idea, which maintains +that there is no other blessing in the Gospel than the +perfect truth and eternal life. All else is but a sum of obligations +in which the Gospel is presented as a new law. The +christianising of the Old Testament supported this conception. +There was indeed an opinion that the Gospel, even so far as +it is a law, comprehends a gift of salvation which is to be +grasped by faith νομος ανευ ζυγου αναγκης,<a id="footnotetag205" name="footnotetag205"></a><a href="#footnote205"><sup>205</sup></a> νομος τ. ελευθεριας,<a id="footnotetag206" name="footnotetag206"></a><a href="#footnote206"><sup>206</sup></a> +Christ himself the law;<a id="footnotetag207" name="footnotetag207"></a><a href="#footnote207"><sup>207</sup></a> but this notion, as it is obscure in +itself, was also an uncertain one and was gradually lost. Further, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page172" id="page172"></a>[pg 172]</span> +by the "law" was frequently meant in the first place, +not the law of love, but the commandments of ascetic holiness, +or an explanation and a turn were given to the law of +love, according to which it is to verify itself above all in +asceticism.<a id="footnotetag208" name="footnotetag208"></a><a href="#footnote208"><sup>208</sup></a></p> + +<p>The expression of the contents of the Gospel in the concepts +επαγγελια (ζωη αιωνιος) γνωσις (αληθεια) νομος (εγκρατεια), seemed +quite as plain as it was exhaustive, and the importance of +faith which was regarded as the basis of hope and knowledge +and obedience in a holy life, was at the same time in every +respect perceived.<a id="footnotetag209" name="footnotetag209"></a><a href="#footnote209"><sup>209</sup></a></p> + + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 1.—The moralistic view of sin, forgiveness of +sin, and righteousness, in Clement, Barnabas, Polycarp and +Ignatius, gives place to Pauline formulæ; but the uncertainty +with which these are reproduced, shews that the Pauline idea +has not been clearly seen.<a id="footnotetag210" name="footnotetag210"></a><a href="#footnote210"><sup>210</sup></a> In Hermas, however, and in the +second Epistle of Clement, the consciousness of being under +grace, even after baptism, almost completely disappears behind +the demand to fulfil the tasks which baptism imposes.<a id="footnotetag211" name="footnotetag211"></a><a href="#footnote211"><sup>211</sup></a> The +idea that serious sins, in the case of the baptised, no longer +should or can be forgiven, except under special circumstances, +appears to have prevailed in wide circles, if not everywhere.<a id="footnotetag212" name="footnotetag212"></a><a href="#footnote212"><sup>212</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page173" id="page173"></a>[pg 173]</span> +It reveals the earnestness of those early Christians and their +elevated sense of freedom and power; but it might be united +either with the highest moral intensity, or with a lax judgment +on the little sins of the day. The latter, in point of +fact, threatened to become more and more the presupposition +and result of that idea—for there exists here a fatal reciprocal +action.</p> + + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 2.—The realisation of salvation—as βασιλεια +του θεου and as αφθαρσια—being expected from the future, +the whole present possession of salvation might be comprehended +under the title of vocation (κλησις) see, for example, +the second Epistle of Clement. In this sense <i>gnosis</i> itself +was regarded as something only preparatory.</p> + + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 3.—In some circles the Pauline formula about +righteousness and salvation by faith alone, must, it would appear, +not infrequently (as already in the Apostolic age itself) +have been partly misconstrued, and partly taken advantage +of as a cloak for laxity. Those who resisted such a disposition, +and therefore also the formula in the post-Apostolic age, +shew indeed by their opposition how little they have hit +upon or understood the Pauline idea of faith: for they not +only issued the watchword "faith and works" (though the +Jewish ceremonial law was not thereby meant), but they admitted, +and not only hypothetically, that one might have the +true faith even though in his case that faith remained dead +or united with immorality. See, above all, the Epistle of +James and the Shepherd of Hermas; though the first Epistle +of John comes also into consideration (III. 7: "He that doeth +righteousness is righteous").<a id="footnotetag213" name="footnotetag213"></a><a href="#footnote213"><sup>213</sup></a></p> + + +<p><i>Supplement</i> 4.—However similar the eschatological expectations +of the Jewish Apocalyptists and the Christians may +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page174" id="page174"></a>[pg 174]</span> +seem, there is yet in one respect an important difference +between them. The uncertainty about the final consummation +was first set aside by the Gospel. It should be noted as +highly characteristic of the Jewish hopes of the future, even +of the most definite, how the beginning of the end, that is, +the overthrow of the world-powers and the setting up of the +earthly kingdom of God, was much more certainly expressed +than the goal and the final end. Neither the general judgment, +nor what we, according to Christian tradition, call +heaven and hell, should be described as a sure possession of +Jewish faith in the primitive Christian period. It is only in +the Gospel of Christ, where everything is subordinated to +the idea of a higher righteousness and the union of the individual +with God, that the general judgment and the final +condition after it are the clear, firmly grasped goal of all +meditation. No doctrine has been more surely preserved in +the convictions and preaching of believers in Christ than +this. Fancy might roam ever so much and, under the direction +of the tradition, thrust bright and precious images between +the present condition and the final end, the main thing continued +to be the great judgment of the world, and the certainty +that the saints would go to God in heaven, the wicked to +hell. But while the judgment, as a rule, was connected with the +Person of Jesus himself (see the Romish Symbol: the words +κριτης ζωντων και νεκρων, were very frequently applied to Christ +in the earliest writings), the moral condition of the individual, +and the believing recognition of the Person of Christ were +put in the closest relation. The Gentile Christians held firmly +to this. Open the Shepherd, or the second Epistle of Clement, +or any other early Christian writing, and you will find that +the judgment, heaven and hell, are the decisive objects. But +that shews that the moral character of Christianity as a religion +is seen and adhered to. The fearful idea of hell, far +from signifying a backward step in the history of the religious +spirit, is rather a proof of its having rejected the morally +indifferent point of view, and of its having become sovereign +in union with the ethical spirit.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page175" id="page175"></a>[pg 175]</span> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_IV" id="SEC_I_III_IV"></a>§ 4. <i>The Old Testament as Source of the Knowledge of Faith.</i><a id="footnotetag214" name="footnotetag214"></a><a href="#footnote214"><sup>214</sup></a></h3> + +<p>The sayings of the Old Testament, the word of God, were +believed to furnish inexhaustible material for deeper knowledge. +The Christian prophets were nurtured on the Old +Testament, the teachers gathered from it the revelation of +the past, present and future (Barn. 1. 7), and were therefore +able as prophets to edify the Churches; from it was further +drawn the confirmation of the answers to all emergent questions, +as one could always find in the Old Testament what +he was in search of. The different writers laid the holy book +under contribution in very much the same way; for they +were all dominated by the presupposition that this book is a +Christian book, and contains the explanations that are necessary +for the occasion. There were several teachers, <i>e.g.</i>, Barnabas, +who at a very early period boasted of finding in it +ideas of special profundity and value—these were always an +expression of the difficulties that were being felt. The plain +words of the Lord as generally known, did not seem sufficient +to satisfy the craving for knowledge, or to solve the problems +that were emerging;<a id="footnotetag215" name="footnotetag215"></a><a href="#footnote215"><sup>215</sup></a> their origin and form also opposed +difficulties at first to the attempt to obtain from them new +disclosures by re-interpretation. But the Old Testament sayings +and histories were in part unintelligible, or in their literal +sense offensive; they were at the same time regarded as fundamental +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page176" id="page176"></a>[pg 176]</span> +words of God. This furnished the conditions for +turning them to account in the way we have stated. The +following are the most important points of view under which +the Old Testament was used. (1) The Monotheistic cosmology +and view of nature were borrowed from it (see, for example, +1 Clem.). (2) It was used to prove that the appearance and +entire history of Jesus had been foretold centuries, nay, thousands +of years beforehand, and that the founding of a new +people gathered out of all nations had been predicted and +prepared for from the very beginning.<a id="footnotetag216" name="footnotetag216"></a><a href="#footnote216"><sup>216</sup></a> (3) It was used as +a means of verifying all principles and institutions of the +Christian Church,—the spiritual worship of God without +images, the abolition of all ceremonial legal precepts, baptism, +etc. (4) The Old Testament was used for purposes of exhortation +according to the formula <i>a minori ad majus</i>; if God +then punished and rewarded this or that in such a way, how +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page177" id="page177"></a>[pg 177]</span> +much more may we expect, who now stand in the last days, +and have received the κλησις της επαγγελιας. (5) It was proved +from the Old Testament that the Jewish nation is in error, +and either never had a covenant with God or has lost it, +that it has a false apprehension of God's revelations, and therefore +has, now at least, no longer any claim to their possession. +But beyond all this, (6) there were in the Old Testament +books, above all, in the Prophets and in the Psalms, a great +number of sayings—confessions of trust in God and of help +received from God, of humility and holy courage, testimonies +of a world-overcoming faith and words of comfort, love and +communion—which were too exalted for any cavilling, and +intelligible to every spiritually awakened mind. Out of this +treasure which was handed down to the Greeks and Romans, +the Church edified herself, and in the perception of its riches +was largely rooted the conviction that the holy book must +in every line contain the highest truth.</p> + +<p>The point mentioned under (5) needs, however, further explanation. +The self-consciousness of the Christian community +of being the people of God, must have been, above all, expressed +in its position towards Judaism, whose mere existence—even +apart from actual assaults—threatened that consciousness +most seriously. A certain antipathy of the Greeks and +Romans towards Judaism co-operated here with a law of self-preservation. +On all hands, therefore, Judaism as it then existed +was abandoned as a sect judged and rejected by God, as a +society of hypocrites,<a id="footnotetag217" name="footnotetag217"></a><a href="#footnote217"><sup>217</sup></a> as a synagogue of Satan,<a id="footnotetag218" name="footnotetag218"></a><a href="#footnote218"><sup>218</sup></a> as a people +seduced by an evil angel,<a id="footnotetag219" name="footnotetag219"></a><a href="#footnote219"><sup>219</sup></a> and the Jews were declared to +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page178" id="page178"></a>[pg 178]</span> +have no further right to the possession of the Old Testament. +Opinions differed, however, as to the earlier history of the +nation and its relation to the true God. While some denied +that there ever had been a covenant of salvation between God +and this nation, and in this respect recognised only an intention +of God,<a id="footnotetag220" name="footnotetag220"></a><a href="#footnote220"><sup>220</sup></a> which was never carried out because of the +idolatry of the people, others admitted in a hazy way that +a relation did exist; but even they referred all the promises +of the Old Testament to the Christian people.<a id="footnotetag221" name="footnotetag221"></a><a href="#footnote221"><sup>221</sup></a> While the +former saw in the observance of the letter of the law, in the +case of circumcision, sabbath, precepts as to food, etc., a proof +of the special devilish temptation to which the Jewish people +succumbed,<a id="footnotetag222" name="footnotetag222"></a><a href="#footnote222"><sup>222</sup></a> the latter saw in circumcision a sign<a id="footnotetag223" name="footnotetag223"></a><a href="#footnote223"><sup>223</sup></a> given by +God, and in virtue of certain considerations acknowledged +that the literal observance of the law was for the time God's +intention and command, though righteousness never came from +such observance. Yet even they saw in the spiritual the alone +true sense, which the Jews had denied, and were of opinion +that the burden of ceremonies was a pædagogic necessity +with reference to a people stiff-necked and prone to idolatry, +<i>i.e.</i>, a defence of monotheism, and gave an interpretation to +the sign of circumcision which made it no longer a blessing, +but rather the mark for the execution of judgment on Israel.<a id="footnotetag224" name="footnotetag224"></a><a href="#footnote224"><sup>224</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page179" id="page179"></a>[pg 179]</span> + +<p>Israel was thus at all times the pseudo-Church. The older +people does not in reality precede the younger people, the +Christians, even in point of time; for though the Church +appeared only in the last days, it was foreseen and created by +God from the beginning. The younger people is therefore +really the older, and the new law rather the original law.<a id="footnotetag225" name="footnotetag225"></a><a href="#footnote225"><sup>225</sup></a> +The Patriarchs, Prophets, and men of God, however, who were +favoured with the communication of God's words, have nothing +inwardly in common with the Jewish people. They are God's +elect who were distinguished by a holy walk, and must be +regarded as the forerunners and fathers of the Christian people.<a id="footnotetag226" name="footnotetag226"></a><a href="#footnote226"><sup>226</sup></a> +To the question how such holy men appeared exclusively, or +almost exclusively, among the Jewish people, the documents +preserved to us yield no answer.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_V" id="SEC_I_III_V"></a>§ 5. <i>The Knowledge of God and of the World. Estimate of the World.</i></h3> + +<p>The knowledge of faith was, above all, the knowledge of +God as one, supramundane, spiritual,<a id="footnotetag227" name="footnotetag227"></a><a href="#footnote227"><sup>227</sup></a> and almighty (παντοκρατωρ); +God is creator and governor of the world and therefore +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page180" id="page180"></a>[pg 180]</span> +the Lord.<a id="footnotetag228" name="footnotetag228"></a><a href="#footnote228"><sup>228</sup></a> But as he created the world a beautiful +ordered whole (monotheistic view of nature)<a id="footnotetag229" name="footnotetag229"></a><a href="#footnote229"><sup>229</sup></a> for the sake +of man,<a id="footnotetag230" name="footnotetag230"></a><a href="#footnote230"><sup>230</sup></a> he is at the same time the God of goodness and +redemption (θεος σωτηρ), and the true faith in God and knowledge +of him as the Father,<a id="footnotetag231" name="footnotetag231"></a><a href="#footnote231"><sup>231</sup></a> is made perfect only in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page181" id="page181"></a>[pg 181]</span> +knowledge of the identity of the God of creation and the God +of redemption. Redemption, however, was necessary, because +at the beginning humanity and the world alike fell under the +dominion of evil demons,<a id="footnotetag232" name="footnotetag232"></a><a href="#footnote232"><sup>232</sup></a> of the evil one. There was no +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page182" id="page182"></a>[pg 182]</span> +universally accepted theory as to the origin of this dominion; +but the sure and universal conviction was that the present +condition and course of the world is not of God, but is of +the devil. Those, however, who believed in God, the almighty +creator, and were expecting the transformation of the +earth, as well as the visible dominion of Christ upon it, could +not be seduced into accepting a dualism in principle (God +and devil: spirit and matter). Belief in God, the creator, and +eschatological hopes, preserved the communities from the theoretic +dualism that so readily suggested itself, which they +slightly touched in many particular opinions, and which threatened +to dominate their feelings. The belief that the world +is of God and therefore good, remained in force. A distinction +was made between the present constitution of the +world, which is destined for destruction, and the future order +of the world which will be a glorious "restitutio in integrum." +The theory of the world as an articulated whole which had +already been proclaimed by the Stoics, and which was strengthened +by Christian monotheism, would not, even if it had +been known to the uncultured, have been vigorous enough to +cope with the impression of the wickedness of the course of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page183" id="page183"></a>[pg 183]</span> +this world, and the vulgarity of all things material. But the +firm belief in the omnipotence of God, and the hope of the +world's transformation grounded on the Old Testament, conquered +the mood of absolute despair of all things visible and +sensuous, and did not allow a theoretic conclusion, in the +sense of dualism in principle, to be drawn from the practical +obligation to renounce the world, or from the deep distrust +with regard to the flesh.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_VI" id="SEC_I_III_VI"></a>§ 6. <i>Faith in Jesus Christ.</i></h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VI_LORD" id="SEC_I_III_VI_LORD"></a>1. As surely as redemption was traced back to God himself, +so surely was Jesus ('ο σωτηρ 'ημων) held to be the mediator +of it. Faith in Jesus was therefore, even for Gentile Christians, +a compendium of Christianity. Jesus is mostly designated +with the same name as God,<a id="footnotetag233" name="footnotetag233"></a><a href="#footnote233"><sup>233</sup></a> 'ο κυριος ('ημων), for we +must remember the ancient use of this title. All that has +taken place or will take place with reference to salvation, is +traced back to the "Lord." The carelessness of the early +Christian writers about the bearing of the word in particular +cases,<a id="footnotetag234" name="footnotetag234"></a><a href="#footnote234"><sup>234</sup></a> shews that in a religious relation, so far as there +was reflection on the gift of salvation, Jesus could directly +take the place of God. The invisible God is the author, +Jesus the revealer and mediator, of all saving blessings. The +final subject is presented in the nearest subject, and there is +frequently no occasion for expressly distinguishing them, as +the range and contents of the revelation of salvation in Jesus +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page184" id="page184"></a>[pg 184]</span> +coincide with the range and contents of the will of salvation +in God himself. Yet prayers, as a rule, were addressed to +God: at least, there are but few examples of direct prayers +to Jesus belonging to the first century (apart from the prayers +in the Act. Joh. of the so-called Leucius). The usual +formula rather reads: θεω εξομολογουμεθα δια 'Ι. Χρ.—θεω +δοξα διο 'Ι. Χρ.<a id="footnotetag235" name="footnotetag235"></a><a href="#footnote235"><sup>235</sup></a></p> + +<p><a href="#SEC_I_III_VI_CHRIST" id="SEC_I_III_VI_CHRIST"></a>2. As the Gentile Christians did not understand the significance +of the idea that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the designation +"χριστος" had either to be given up in their communities, +or to subside into a mere name.<a id="footnotetag236" name="footnotetag236"></a><a href="#footnote236"><sup>236</sup></a> But even where, +through the Old Testament, one was reminded of the meaning +of the word, and allowed a value to it, he was far +from finding in the statement that Jesus is the Lord's anointed, +a clear expression of the dignity peculiar to him. That +dignity had therefore to be expressed by other means. Nevertheless +the eschatological series of ideas connected the Gentile +Christians very closely with the early Christian ideas of faith, +and therefore also with the earliest ideas about Jesus. In the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page185" id="page185"></a>[pg 185]</span> +confession that God chose<a id="footnotetag237" name="footnotetag237"></a><a href="#footnote237"><sup>237</sup></a> and prepared<a id="footnotetag238" name="footnotetag238"></a><a href="#footnote238"><sup>238</sup></a> Jesus, that Jesus +is the Angel<a id="footnotetag239" name="footnotetag239"></a><a href="#footnote239"><sup>239</sup></a> and the servant of God,<a id="footnotetag240" name="footnotetag240"></a><a href="#footnote240"><sup>240</sup></a> that he will judge +the living and the dead,<a id="footnotetag241" name="footnotetag241"></a><a href="#footnote241"><sup>241</sup></a> etc., expression is given to ideas +about Jesus, in the Gentile Christian communities, which are +borrowed from the thought that he is the Christ called of +God and entrusted with an office.<a id="footnotetag242" name="footnotetag242"></a><a href="#footnote242"><sup>242</sup></a> Besides, there was a +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page186" id="page186"></a>[pg 186]</span> +very old designation handed down from the circle of the disciples, +and specially intelligible to Gentile Christians, though +not frequent and gradually disappearing, viz., "the Master."<a id="footnotetag243" name="footnotetag243"></a><a href="#footnote243"><sup>243</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VI_THEOLOGIA" id="SEC_I_III_VI_THEOLOGIA"></a>3. But the earliest tradition not only spoke of Jesus as +κυριος, σωτηρ, and διδασκαλος, but as "'ο 'υιος του +θεου", and this +name was firmly adhered to in the Gentile Christian communities.<a id="footnotetag244" name="footnotetag244"></a><a href="#footnote244"><sup>244</sup></a> +It followed immediately from this that Jesus belongs +to the sphere of God, and that, as is said in the earliest +preaching known to us,<a id="footnotetag245" name="footnotetag245"></a><a href="#footnote245"><sup>245</sup></a> one must think of him "'ως περι θεου." +This formula describes in a classic manner the indirect "theologia +Christi" which we find unanimously expressed in all +witnesses of the earliest epoch.<a id="footnotetag246" name="footnotetag246"></a><a href="#footnote246"><sup>246</sup></a> We must think about Christ +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page187" id="page187"></a>[pg 187]</span> +as we think about God, because, on the one hand, God had +exalted him, and committed to him as Lord, judgment over +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page188" id="page188"></a>[pg 188]</span> +the living and the dead, and because, on the other hand, he +has brought the knowledge of the truth, called sinful men, +delivered them from the dominion of demons, and hath led, +or will lead them, out of the night of death and corruption +to eternal life. Jesus Christ is "our faith", "our hope", "our +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page189" id="page189"></a>[pg 189]</span> +life", and in this sense "our God." The religious assurance +that he is this, for we find no wavering on this point, is the +root of the "theologia Christi"; but we must also remember +that the formula "θεος" was inserted beside "κυριος," that +the "dominus ac deus," was very common at that time,<a id="footnotetag247" name="footnotetag247"></a><a href="#footnote247"><sup>247</sup></a> and +that a Saviour σωτηρ could only be represented somehow as +a Divine being.<a id="footnotetag248" name="footnotetag248"></a><a href="#footnote248"><sup>248</sup></a> Yet Christ never was, as "θεος," placed +on an equality with the Father,<a id="footnotetag249" name="footnotetag249"></a><a href="#footnote249"><sup>249</sup></a>—monotheism guarded +against that. Whether he was intentionally and deliberately +identified with Him the following paragraph will shew.</p> + + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VI_ADOPTIAN" id="SEC_I_III_VI_ADOPTIAN"></a>4. The common confession did not go beyond the statements +that Jesus is the Lord, the Saviour, the Son of God, that +one must think of him as of God, that dwelling now with +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page190" id="page190"></a>[pg 190]</span> +God in heaven, he is to be adored as προστατης και βοηθος της +ασθενειας, and as αρχιερευς των προσφορων 'ημων [as guardian and +helper of the weak and as High Priest of our oblations], to +be feared as the future Judge, to be esteemed most highly +as the bestower of immortality, that he is our hope and our +faith. There are found rather, on the basis of that confession, +very diverse conceptions of the Person, that is, of the nature +of Jesus, beside each other,<a id="footnotetag250" name="footnotetag250"></a><a href="#footnote250"><sup>250</sup></a> which collectively exhibit a +certain analogy with the Greek theologies, the naive and the +philosophic.<a id="footnotetag251" name="footnotetag251"></a><a href="#footnote251"><sup>251</sup></a> There was as yet no such thing here as ecclesiastical +"doctrines" in the strict sense of the word, but rather +conceptions more or less fluid, which were not seldom fashioned +<i>ad hoc.</i><a id="footnotetag252" name="footnotetag252"></a><a href="#footnote252"><sup>252</sup></a> These may be reduced collectively to two.<a id="footnotetag253" name="footnotetag253"></a><a href="#footnote253"><sup>253</sup></a> +Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, +in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, +after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page191" id="page191"></a>[pg 191]</span> +dominion, (Adoptian Christology);<a id="footnotetag254" name="footnotetag254"></a><a href="#footnote254"><sup>254</sup></a> or Jesus was regarded as +a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page192" id="page192"></a>[pg 192]</span> +flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of +his work on earth (pneumatic Christology).<a id="footnotetag255" name="footnotetag255"></a><a href="#footnote255"><sup>255</sup></a> These two +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page193" id="page193"></a>[pg 193]</span> +Christologies which are, strictly speaking, mutually exclusive—the +man who has become a God, and the Divine being who +has appeared in human form—yet came very near each other +when the Spirit of God implanted in the man Jesus was conceived +as the pre-existent Son of God,<a id="footnotetag256" name="footnotetag256"></a><a href="#footnote256"><sup>256</sup></a> and when, on the +other hand, the title, Son of God, for that pneumatic being, +was derived only from the miraculous generation in the flesh; +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page194" id="page194"></a>[pg 194]</span> +yet both these seem to have been the rule.<a id="footnotetag257" name="footnotetag257"></a><a href="#footnote257"><sup>257</sup></a> Yet, in spite +of all transitional forms, the two Christologies may be clearly +distinguished. Characteristic of the one is the development +through which Jesus is first to become a Godlike Ruler,<a id="footnotetag258" name="footnotetag258"></a><a href="#footnote258"><sup>258</sup></a> +and connected therewith, the value put on the miraculous +event at the baptism; of the other, a naive docetism.<a id="footnotetag259" name="footnotetag259"></a><a href="#footnote259"><sup>259</sup></a> For +no one as yet thought of affirming two natures in Jesus:<a id="footnotetag260" name="footnotetag260"></a><a href="#footnote260"><sup>260</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page195" id="page195"></a>[pg 195]</span> +the Divine dignity appeared rather, either as a gift,<a id="footnotetag261" name="footnotetag261"></a><a href="#footnote261"><sup>261</sup></a> or the +human nature (σαρξ) as a veil assumed for a time, or as +the metamorphosis of the Spirit.<a id="footnotetag262" name="footnotetag262"></a><a href="#footnote262"><sup>262</sup></a> The formula that Jesus +was a mere man (ψιλος ανθρωπος), was undoubtedly always, +and from the first, regarded as offensive.<a id="footnotetag263" name="footnotetag263"></a><a href="#footnote263"><sup>263</sup></a> But the converse +formulæ, which identified the person of Jesus in its essence +with the Godhead itself, do not seem to have been rejected +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page196" id="page196"></a>[pg 196]</span> +with the same decision.<a id="footnotetag264" name="footnotetag264"></a><a href="#footnote264"><sup>264</sup></a> Yet such formulæ may have been +very rare, and even objects of suspicion, in the leading ecclesiastical +circles, at least until after the middle of the second +century we can point to them only in documents which hardly +found approbation in wide circles. The assumption of the +existence of at least one heavenly and eternal spiritual being +beside God, was plainly demanded by the Old Testament +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page197" id="page197"></a>[pg 197]</span> +writings, as they were understood; so that even those whose +Christology did not require them to reflect on that heavenly +being were forced to recognise it.<a id="footnotetag265" name="footnotetag265"></a><a href="#footnote265"><sup>265</sup></a> The pneumatic Christology, +accordingly, meets us wherever there is an earnest occupation +with the Old Testament, and wherever faith in Christ +as the perfect revealer of God, occupies the foreground, therefore +not in Hermas, but certainly in Barnabas, Clement, etc. +The future belonged to this Christology, because the current +exposition of the Old Testament seemed directly to require +it, because it alone permitted the close connection between +creation and redemption, because it furnished the proof that +the world and religion rest upon the same Divine basis, +because it was represented in the most valuable writings of +the early period of Christianity, and finally, because it had +room for the speculations about the Logos. On the other +hand, no direct and natural relation to the world and to +universal history could be given to the Adoptian Christology, +which was originally determined eschatologically. If such a +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page198" id="page198"></a>[pg 198]</span> +relation, however, were added to it, there resulted formulæ +such as that of two Sons of God, one natural and eternal, +and one adopted, which corresponded neither to the letter of +the Holy Scriptures, nor to the Christian preaching. Moreover, +the revelations of God in the Old Testament made by +Theophanies, must have seemed, because of this their form, +much more exalted than the revelations made through a +man raised to power and glory, which Jesus constantly seemed +to be in the Adoptian Christology. Nay, even the mysterious +personality of Melchisedec, without father or mother, might +appear more impressive than the Chosen Servant, Jesus, who +was born of Mary, to a mode of thought which, in order to +make no mistake, desired to verify the Divine by outer marks. +The Adoptian Christology, that is, the Christology which is +most in keeping with the self-witness of Jesus (the Son as the +chosen Servant of God), is here shewn to be unable to assure +to the Gentile Christians those conceptions of Christianity which +they regarded as of highest value. It proved itself insufficient +when confronted by any reflection on the relation of religion +to the cosmos, to humanity, and to its history. It might, +perhaps, still have seemed doubtful about the middle of the +second century, as to which of the two opposing formulæ +"Jesus is a man exalted to a Godlike dignity", and "Jesus is +a divine spiritual being incarnate", would succeed in the Church. +But one only needs to read the pieces of writing which represent +the latter thesis, and to compare them, say, with the +Shepherd of Hermas, in order to see to which view the future +must belong. In saying this, however, we are anticipating; +for the Christological reflections were not yet vigorous enough +to overcome enthusiasm and the expectation of the speedy +end of all things, and the mighty practical tendency of the +new religion to a holy life did not allow any theory to become +the central object of attention. But, still, it is necessary +to refer here to the controversies which broke out at a later +period; for the pneumatic Christology forms an essential article, +which cannot be dispensed with, in the expositions of +Barnabas, Clement and Ignatius, and Justin shews that he +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page199" id="page199"></a>[pg 199]</span> +cannot conceive of a Christianity without the belief in a real +pre-existence of Christ. On the other hand, the liturgical formulæ, +the prayers, etc., which have been preserved, scarcely +ever take notice of the pre-existence of Christ. They either +comprise statements which are borrowed from the Adoptian +Christology, or they testify in an unreflective way to the +Dominion and Deity of Christ.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VI_WORK" id="SEC_I_III_VI_WORK"></a>5. The ideas of Christ's work which were influential in the +communities—Christ as Teacher: creation of knowledge, setting +up of the new law; Christ as Saviour: creation of life, overcoming +of the demons, forgiveness of sins committed in the +time of error,—were by some, in conformity with Apostolic +tradition and following the Pauline Epistles, positively connected +with the death and resurrection of Christ, while others +maintained them without any connection with these events. +But one nowhere finds independent thorough reflections on +the connection of Christ's saving work with the facts proclaimed +in the preaching, above all, with the death on the cross +and the resurrection as presented by Paul. The reason of +this undoubtedly is that in the conception of the work of +salvation, the procuring of forgiveness fell into the background, +as this could only be connected by means of the notion of +sacrifice, with a definite act of Jesus, viz., with the surrender +of his life. Consequently, the facts of the destiny of Jesus +combined in the preaching, formed, only for the religious +fancy, not for reflection, the basis of the conception of the +work of Christ, and were therefore by many writers, Hermas, +for example, taken no notice of. Yet the idea of suffering +freely accepted, of the cross and of the blood of Christ, operated +in wide circles as a holy mystery, in which the deepest +wisdom and power of the Gospel must somehow lie concealed.<a id="footnotetag266" name="footnotetag266"></a><a href="#footnote266"><sup>266</sup></a> +The peculiarity and uniqueness of the work of the +historical Christ seemed, however, to be prejudiced by the +assumption that Christ, essentially as the same person, was +already in the Old Testament the Revealer of God. All +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page200" id="page200"></a>[pg 200]</span> +emphasis must therefore fall on this—without a technical reflection +which cannot be proved—that the Divine revelation +has now, through the historical Christ, become accessible and +intelligible to all, and that the life which was promised will +shortly be made manifest.<a id="footnotetag267" name="footnotetag267"></a><a href="#footnote267"><sup>267</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page201" id="page201"></a>[pg 201]</span> + +<p>As to the facts of the history of Jesus, the real and the +supposed, the circumstance that they formed the ever repeated +proclamation about Christ gave them an extraordinary +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page202" id="page202"></a>[pg 202]</span> +significance. In addition to the birth from the Holy Spirit +and the Virgin, the death, the resurrection, the exaltation to +the right hand of God, and the coming again, there now appeared +more definitely the ascension to heaven, and also, though +more uncertainly, the descent into the kingdom of the dead. +The belief that Jesus ascended into heaven forty days after +the resurrection, gradually made way against the older conception, +according to which resurrection and ascension really +coincided, and against other ideas which maintained a longer +period between the two events. That probably is the +result of a reflection which sought to distinguish the first +from the later manifestations of the exalted Christ, and it is of +the utmost importance as the beginning of a demarcation of +the times. It is also very probable that the acceptance of an +actual <i>ascensus in cœlum</i>, not a mere <i>assumptio</i>, was favourable +to the idea of an actual descent of Christ <i>de cœlo</i>, therefore +to the pneumatic Christology and vice versa. But there is +also closely connected with the <i>ascensus in cœlum</i>, the notion +of a <i>descensus ad inferna</i>, which commended itself on the ground +of Old Testament prediction. In the first century, however, +it still remained uncertain, lying on the borders of those productions +of religious fancy which were not able at once to +acquire a right of citizenship in the communities.<a id="footnotetag268" name="footnotetag268"></a><a href="#footnote268"><sup>268</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page203" id="page203"></a>[pg 203]</span> + +<p>One can plainly see that the articles contained in the <i>Kerygma</i> +were guarded and defended in their reality (κατ' αληθειαν) by +the professional teachers of the Church, against sweeping attempts +at explaining them away, or open attacks on them.<a id="footnotetag269" name="footnotetag269"></a><a href="#footnote269"><sup>269</sup></a> +But they did not yet possess the value of dogmas, for they +were neither put in an indissoluble union with the idea of +salvation, nor were they stereotyped in their extent, nor were +fixed limits set to the imagination in the concrete delineation +and conception of them.<a id="footnotetag270" name="footnotetag270"></a><a href="#footnote270"><sup>270</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page204" id="page204"></a>[pg 204]</span> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_VII" id="SEC_I_III_VII"></a>§ 7. <i>The Worship, the Sacred Ordinances, and the Organisation of the Churches.</i></h3> + +<p>It is necessary to examine the original forms of the worship +and constitution, because of the importance which they acquired +in the following period even for the development of doctrine.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VII_WORSHIP" id="SEC_I_III_VII_WORSHIP"></a>1. In accordance with the purely spiritual idea of God, it +was a fixed principle that only a spiritual worship is well +pleasing to Hun, and that all ceremonies are abolished, 'ινα 'ο +καινος νομος του κυριου 'ημων Ιησου Χριστου μη ανθροπωποιητον εχηι +την προσφοραν.<a id="footnotetag271" name="footnotetag271"></a><a href="#footnote271"><sup>271</sup></a> But as the Old Testament and the Apostolic +tradition made it equally certain that the worship of God is +a sacrifice, the Christian worship of God was set forth under +the aspect of the spiritual sacrifice. In the most general sense +it was conceived as the offering of the heart and of obedience, +as well as the consecration of the whole personality, body and +soul (Rom XIII. 1) to God.<a id="footnotetag272" name="footnotetag272"></a><a href="#footnote272"><sup>272</sup></a> Here, with a change of the +figure, the individual Christian and the whole community were +described as a temple of God.<a id="footnotetag273" name="footnotetag273"></a><a href="#footnote273"><sup>273</sup></a> In a more special sense, +prayer as thanksgiving and intercession,<a id="footnotetag274" name="footnotetag274"></a><a href="#footnote274"><sup>274</sup></a> was regarded as the +sacrifice which was to be accompanied, without constraint +or ceremony, by fasts and acts of compassionate love.<a id="footnotetag275" name="footnotetag275"></a><a href="#footnote275"><sup>275</sup></a> Finally, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page205" id="page205"></a>[pg 205]</span> +prayers offered by the worshipper in the public worship of +the community, and the gifts brought by them, out of which +were taken the elements for the Lord's supper, and which were +used partly in the common meal, and partly in support of +the poor, were regarded as sacrifice in the most special sense +(προσφορα, δωρα).<a id="footnotetag276" name="footnotetag276"></a><a href="#footnote276"><sup>276</sup></a> For the following period, however, it became +of the utmost importance, (1) that the idea of sacrifice ruled +the whole worship, (2) that it appeared in a special manner +in the celebration of the Lord's supper, and consequently +invested that ordinance with a new meaning, (3) that the support +of the poor, alms, especially such alms as had been gained +by prayer and fasting, was placed under the category of sacrifice +(Heb. XIII. 16), for this furnished the occasion for giving +the widest application to the idea of sacrifice, and thereby +substituting for the original Semitic Old Testament idea of +sacrifice with its spiritual interpretation, the Greek idea with +its interpretation.<a id="footnotetag277" name="footnotetag277"></a><a href="#footnote277"><sup>277</sup></a> It may, however, be maintained that the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page206" id="page206"></a>[pg 206]</span> +changes imposed on the Christian religion by Catholicism, are +at no point so obvious and far-reaching, as in that of sacrifice, +and especially in the solemn ordinance of the Lord's +supper, which was placed in such close connection with the +idea of sacrifice.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VII_BAPTISM" id="SEC_I_III_VII_BAPTISM"></a>2. When in the "Teaching of the Apostles," which may +be regarded here as a classic document, the discipline of life +in accordance with the words of the Lord, Baptism, the order +of fasting and prayer, especially the regular use of the Lord's +prayer, and the Eucharist are reckoned the articles on which +the Christian community rests, and when the common Sunday +offering of a sacrifice made pure by a brotherly disposition, +and the mutual exercise of discipline are represented as decisive +for the stability of the individual community,<a id="footnotetag278" name="footnotetag278"></a><a href="#footnote278"><sup>278</sup></a> we perceive +that the general idea of a pure spiritual worship of God +has nevertheless been realised in definite institutions, and that, +above all, it has included the traditional sacred ordinances, +and adjusted itself to them as far as that was possible.<a id="footnotetag279" name="footnotetag279"></a><a href="#footnote279"><sup>279</sup></a> This +could only take effect under the idea of the symbolical, and +therefore this idea was most firmly attached to these ordinances. +But the symbolical of that time is not to be considered +as the opposite of the objectively real, but as the mysterious, +the God produced (μυστηριον) as contrasted with the natural, +the profanely clear. As to Baptism, which was administered +in the name of the Father, Son and Spirit, though Cyprian, +Ep. 73. 16-18, felt compelled to oppose the custom of baptising +in the name of Jesus, we noted above (Chap. III. p. 161 f.) +that it was regarded as the bath of regeneration, and as renewal +of life, inasmuch as it was assumed that by it the sins of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page207" id="page207"></a>[pg 207]</span> +past state of blindness were blotted out.<a id="footnotetag280" name="footnotetag280"></a><a href="#footnote280"><sup>280</sup></a> But as faith was +looked upon as the necessary condition,<a id="footnotetag281" name="footnotetag281"></a><a href="#footnote281"><sup>281</sup></a> and as on the other +hand, the forgiveness of the sins of the past was in itself +deemed worthy of God,<a id="footnotetag282" name="footnotetag282"></a><a href="#footnote282"><sup>282</sup></a> the asserted specific result of baptism +remained still very uncertain, and the hard tasks which it +imposed, might seem more important than the merely retrospective +gifts which it proffered.<a id="footnotetag283" name="footnotetag283"></a><a href="#footnote283"><sup>283</sup></a> Under such circumstances the +rite could not fail to lead believers about to be baptized, to +attribute value here to the mysterious as such.<a id="footnotetag284" name="footnotetag284"></a><a href="#footnote284"><sup>284</sup></a> But that +always creates a state of things which not only facilitates, but +positively prepares for the introduction of new and strange +ideas. For neither fancy nor reflection can long continue in +the vacuum of mystery. The names σφραγις and φωτισμος, which +at that period came into fashion for baptism, are instructive, +inasmuch as neither of them is a direct designation of the +presupposed effect of baptism, the forgiveness of sin, and as +besides, both of them evince a Hellenic conception. Baptism +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page208" id="page208"></a>[pg 208]</span> +in being called the seal,<a id="footnotetag285" name="footnotetag285"></a><a href="#footnote285"><sup>285</sup></a> is regarded as the guarantee of a +blessing, not as the blessing itself, at least the relation to it +remains obscure; in being called enlightenment,<a id="footnotetag286" name="footnotetag286"></a><a href="#footnote286"><sup>286</sup></a> it is placed +directly under an aspect that is foreign to it. It would be +different if we had to think of φωτισμος as a gift of the Holy +Spirit, which is given to the baptised as real principle of a +new life and miraculous powers. But the idea of a necessary +union of baptism with a miraculous communication of the +Spirit, seems to have been lost very early, or to have become +uncertain, the actual state of things being no longer favourable +to it;<a id="footnotetag287" name="footnotetag287"></a><a href="#footnote287"><sup>287</sup></a> at any rate, it does not explain the designation of +baptism as φωτισμος.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page209" id="page209"></a>[pg 209]</span> + +<p>As regards the Lord's Supper, the most important point is +that its celebration became more and more the central point, +not only for the worship of the Church, but for its very life +as a Church. The form of this celebration, the common meal, +made it appear to be a fitting expression of the brotherly +unity of the community (on the public confession before the +meal, see Didache, 14, and my notes on the passage). The +prayers which it included presented themselves as vehicles +for bringing before God, in thanksgiving and intercession, every +thing that affected the community; and the presentation of +the elements for the holy ordinance was naturally extended +to the offering of gifts for the poor brethren, who in this way +received them from the hand of God himself. In all these +respects, however, the holy ordinance appeared as a sacrifice +of the community, and indeed, as it was also named, ευχαριστια, +sacrifice of thanksgiving.<a id="footnotetag288" name="footnotetag288"></a><a href="#footnote288"><sup>288</sup></a> As an act of sacrifice, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page210" id="page210"></a>[pg 210]</span> +<i>termini technici</i> which the Old Testament applied to sacrifice +could be applied to it, and all the wealth of ideas which the +Old Testament connects with sacrifice, could be transferred +to it. One cannot say that anything absolutely foreign was +therewith introduced into the ordinance, however doubtful it +may be whether in the idea of its founder the meal was thought +of as a sacrificial meal. But it must have been of the most +wide-reaching significance, that a wealth of ideas was in this +way connected with the ordinance, which had nothing whatever +in common, either with the purpose of the meal as a +memorial of Christ's death,<a id="footnotetag289" name="footnotetag289"></a><a href="#footnote289"><sup>289</sup></a> or with the mysterious symbols of +the body and blood of Christ. The result was that the one +transaction obtained a double value. At one time it appeared +as the προσφορα and θυσια of the Church,<a id="footnotetag290" name="footnotetag290"></a><a href="#footnote290"><sup>290</sup></a> as the pure sacrifice +which is presented to the great king by Christians scattered +over the world, as they offer to him their prayers, and place +before him again what he has bestowed in order to receive +it back with thanks and praise. But there is no reference in +this to the mysterious words that the bread and wine are the +body of Christ broken, and the blood of Christ shed for the forgiveness +of sin. These words, in and of themselves, must have +challenged a special consideration. They called forth the +recognition in the sacramental action, or rather in the consecrated +elements, of a mysterious communication of God, a +gift of salvation, and this is the second aspect. But on a purely +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page211" id="page211"></a>[pg 211]</span> +spiritual conception of the Divine gift of salvation, the blessings +mediated through the Holy Supper could only be +thought of as spiritual (faith, knowledge, or eternal life), and +the consecrated elements could only be recognised as the +mysterious vehicles of these blessings. There was yet no +reflection on the distinction between symbol and vehicle; the +symbol was rather regarded as the vehicle, and vice versa. +We shall search in vain for any special relation of the partaking +of the consecrated elements to the forgiveness of sin. +That was made impossible by the whole current notions of +sin and forgiveness. That on which value was put was the +strengthening of faith and knowledge, as well as the guarantee +of eternal life, and a meal in which there was appropriated +not merely common bread and wine, but a τροφη +πνευματικη, seemed to have a bearing upon these. There +was as yet little reflection; but there can be no doubt that +thought here moved in a region bounded, on the one hand, +by the intention of doing justice to the wonderful words of +institution which had been handed down, and on the other +hand, by the fundamental conviction that spiritual things can +only be got by means of the Spirit.<a id="footnotetag291" name="footnotetag291"></a><a href="#footnote291"><sup>291</sup></a> There was thus attached +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page212" id="page212"></a>[pg 212]</span> +to the Supper the idea of sacrifice, and of a sacred gift +guaranteed by God. The two things were held apart, for +there is as yet no trace of that conception, according to which +the body of Christ represented in the bread<a id="footnotetag292" name="footnotetag292"></a><a href="#footnote292"><sup>292</sup></a> is the sacrifice +offered by the community. But one feels almost called upon +here to construe from the premises the later development of +the idea, with due regard to the ancient Hellenic ideas of sacrifice.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VII_ORGANISATION" id="SEC_I_III_VII_ORGANISATION"></a>3. The natural distinctions among men, and the differences +of position and vocation which these involve, were not to be +abolished in the Church, notwithstanding the independence +and equality of every individual Christian, but were to be +consecrated: above all, every relation of natural piety was to +be respected. Therefore the elders also acquired a special +authority, and were to receive the utmost deference and due +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page213" id="page213"></a>[pg 213]</span> +obedience. But, however important the organisation that was +based on the distinction between πρεσβυτεροι and νεοτεροι, it +ought not to be considered as characteristic of the Churches, +not even where there appeared at the head of the community +a college of chosen elders, as was the case in the +greater communities and perhaps soon everywhere. On the +contrary, only an organisation founded on the gifts of the +Spirit χαρισματα, bestowed on the Church by God,<a id="footnotetag293" name="footnotetag293"></a><a href="#footnote293"><sup>293</sup></a> corresponded +to the original peculiarity of the Christian community. +The Apostolic age therefore transmitted a twofold organisation +to the communities. The one was based on the +διακονια του λογου, and was regarded as established directly +by God; the other stood in the closest connection with the +economy of the church, above all with the offering of gifts, and +so with the sacrificial service. In the first were men speaking +the word of God, commissioned and endowed by God, and bestowed +on Christendom, not on a particular community, who +as αποστολοι, προφηται, and διδασκαλοι had to spread the Gospel, +that is to edify the Church of Christ. They were regarded +as the real 'ηγουμενοι in the communities, whose words given +them by the Spirit all were to accept in faith. In the second +were επισκοποι, and διακονοι, appointed by the individual congregation +and endowed with the charisms of leading and helping, +who had to receive and administer the gifts, to perform +the sacrificial service (if there were no prophets present), and +take charge of the affairs of the community.<a id="footnotetag294" name="footnotetag294"></a><a href="#footnote294"><sup>294</sup></a> It lay in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page214" id="page214"></a>[pg 214]</span> +nature of the case that as a rule the επισκοποι, as independent +officials, were chosen from among the elders, and might thus +coincide with the chosen πρεσβυτεροι. But a very important +development takes place in the second half of our epoch. +The prophets and teachers—as the result of causes which +followed the naturalising of the Churches in the world—fell +more and more into the background, and their function, the +solemn service of the word, began to pass over to the officials +of the community, the bishops, who already played a +great rôle in the public worship. At the same time, however, +it appeared more and more fitting to entrust one official, as +chief leader (superintendent of public worship), with the reception +of gifts and their administration, together with the care +of the unity of public worship, that is, to appoint one bishop +instead of a number of bishops, leaving, however, as before, the +college of presbyters, as προισταμενοι της εκκλησιας, a kind of +senate of the community.<a id="footnotetag295" name="footnotetag295"></a><a href="#footnote295"><sup>295</sup></a> Moreover, the idea of the chosen +bishops and deacons as the antitypes of the Priests and Levites, +had been formed at an early period in connection with +the idea of the new sacrifice. But we find also the idea, which +is probably the earlier of the two, that the prophets and +teachers, as the commissioned preachers of the word, are the +priests. The hesitancy in applying this important allegory +must have been brought to an end by the disappearance of +the latter view. But it must have been still more important +that the bishops, or bishop, in taking over the functions of +the old λαλουντες τον λογον, who were not Church officials, took +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page215" id="page215"></a>[pg 215]</span> +over also the profound veneration with which they were regarded +as the special organs of the Spirit. But the condition +of the organisation in the communities about the year 140, +seems to have been a very diverse one. Here and there, no +doubt, the convenient arrangement of appointing only one +bishop was carried out, while his functions had not perhaps +been essentially increased, and the prophets and teachers were +still the great spokesmen. Conversely, there may still have +been in other communities a number of bishops, while the +prophets and teachers no longer played regularly an important +rôle. A fixed organisation was reached, and the Apostolic +episcopal constitution established, only in consequence of the +so-called Gnostic crisis, which was epoch-making in every +respect. One of its most important presuppositions, and one +that has struck very deep into the development of doctrine must, +however, be borne in mind here. As the Churches traced +back all the laws according to which they lived, and all the +blessings they held sacred, to the tradition of the twelve +Apostles, because they regarded them as Christian only on +that presupposition, they also in like manner, as far as we +can discover, traced back their organisation of presbyters, +<i>i.e.</i>, of bishops and deacons, to Apostolic appointment. The +notion which followed quite naturally, was that the Apostles themselves +had appointed the first church officials.<a id="footnotetag296" name="footnotetag296"></a><a href="#footnote296"><sup>296</sup></a> That idea may +have found support in some actual cases of the kind, but this +does not need to be considered here; for these cases would +not have led to the setting up of a theory. But the point +in question here is a theory, which is nothing else than an +integral part of the general theory, that the twelve Apostles +were in every respect the middle term between Jesus and +the present Churches (see above, p. 158). This conception is +earlier than the great Gnostic crisis, for the Gnostics also +shared it. But no special qualities of the officials, but only of +the Church itself, were derived from it, and it was believed that +the independence and sovereignty of the Churches were in no way +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page216" id="page216"></a>[pg 216]</span> +endangered by it, because an institution by Apostles was considered +equivalent to an institution by the Holy Spirit, whom +they possessed, and whom they followed. The independence +of the Churches rested precisely on the fact that they had +the Spirit in their midst. The conception here briefly sketched, +was completely transformed in the following period by the +addition of another idea—that of Apostolic succession,<a id="footnotetag297" name="footnotetag297"></a><a href="#footnote297"><sup>297</sup></a> and +then became, together with the idea of the specific priesthood +of the leader of the Church, the most important means +of exalting the office above the community.<a id="footnotetag298" name="footnotetag298"></a><a href="#footnote298"><sup>298</sup></a></p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_III_VIII" id="SEC_I_III_VIII"></a>Supplementary.</h3> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VIII_PREMISES" id="SEC_I_III_VIII_PREMISES"></a>This review of the common faith and the beginnings of +knowledge, worship and organisation, in the earliest Gentile +Christianity, will have shewn that the essential premises for the +development of Catholicism were already in existence before +the middle of the second century, and before the burning +conflict with Gnosticism. We may see this, whether we look +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page217" id="page217"></a>[pg 217]</span> +at the peculiar form of the <i>Kerygma</i>, or at the expression of +the idea of tradition, or at the theology with its moral and +philosophic attitude. We may therefore conclude that the +struggle with Gnosticism hastened the development, but did +not give it a new direction. For the Greek spirit, the element +which was most operative in Gnosticism, was already concealed +in the earliest Gentile Christianity itself: it was the atmosphere +which one breathed; but the elements peculiar to Gnosticism +were for the most part rejected.<a id="footnotetag299" name="footnotetag299"></a><a href="#footnote299"><sup>299</sup></a> We may even go back a +step further (see above, pp. 41, 76). The great Apostle to the +Gentiles himself, in his epistle to the Romans, and in those to the +Corinthians, transplanted the Gospel into Greek modes of +thought. He attempted to expound it with Greek ideas, and +not only called the Greeks to the Old Testament and the +Gospel, but also introduced the Gospel as a leaven into the +religious and philosophic world of Greek ideas. Moreover, in +his pneumatico-cosmic Christology he gave the Greeks an +impulse towards a theologoumenon, at whose service they could +place their whole philosophy and mysticism. He preached +the foolishness of Christ crucified, and yet in doing so, proclaimed +the wisdom of the nature-vanquishing Spirit, the +heavenly Christ. From this moment was established a development +which might indeed assume very different forms, but in +which all the forces and ideas of Hellenism must gradually +pass over to the Gospel. But even with this the last word +has not been said; on the contrary, we must remember that +the Gospel itself belonged to the fulness of the times, which +is indicated by the inter-action of the Old Testament and the +Hellenic religions (see above, pp. 41, 56).</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_III_VIII_DIVERSITIES" id="SEC_I_III_VIII_DIVERSITIES"></a>The documents which have been preserved from the first +century of the Gentile Church are, in their relation to the +history of Dogma, very diverse. In the Didache we have +a Catechism for Christian life, dependent on a Jewish Greek +Catechism, and giving expression to what was specifically Christian +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page218" id="page218"></a>[pg 218]</span> +in the prayers, and in the order of the Church. The Epistle +of Barnabas, probably of Alexandrian origin, teaches the correct, +Christian, interpretation of the Old Testament, rejects +the literal interpretation and Judaism as of the devil, and in +Christology essentially follows Paul. The Romish first Epistle +of Clement, which also contains other Pauline reminiscences +(reconciliation and justification) represents the same Christology, +but it set it in a moralistic mode of thought. This is +a most typical writing in which the spirit of tradition, order, +stability, and the universal ecclesiastical guardianship of Rome +is already expressed. The moralistic mode of thought is +classically represented by the Shepherd of Hermas, and the +second Epistle of Clement, in which, besides, the eschatological +element is very prominent. We have in the Shepherd +the most important document for the Church Christianity of +the age, reflected in the mirror of a prophet who, however, +takes into account the concrete relations. The theology of +Ignatius is the most advanced, in so far as he, opposing the +Gnostics, brings the facts of salvation into the foreground, +and directs his Gnosis not so much to the Old Testament as +to the history of Christ. He attempts to make Christ κατα +πνευμα and κατα σαρκα the central point of Christianity. In this +sense his theology and speech is Christocentric, related to +that of Paul and the fourth Evangelist, (specially striking is +the relationship with Ephesians), and is strongly contrasted +with that of his contemporaries. Of kindred spirit with him +are Melito and Irenæus, whose forerunner he is. He is related +to them as Methodius at a later period was related to the +classical orthodox theology of the fourth and fifth centuries. +This parallel is appropriate, not merely in point of form: it +is rather one and the same tendency of mind which passes +over from Ignatius to Melito, Irenæus, Methodius, Athanasius, +Gregory of Nyssa (here, however, mixed with Origenic elements), +and to Cyril of Alexandria. Its characteristic is that not +only does the person of Christ as the God-man form the central +point and sphere of theology, but also that all the main points +of his history are mysteries of the world's redemption. (Ephes. +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page219" id="page219"></a>[pg 219]</span> +19). But Ignatius is also distinguished by the fact that behind +all that is enthusiastic, pathetic, abrupt, and again all that +pertains to liturgical form, we find in his epistles a true devotion +to Christ ('ο θεος μου). He is laid hold of by Christ: Cf. Ad. +Rom. 6: εκεινον ζητω, τον 'υπερ 'ημων αποθανοντα, εκεινον θελω +τον δι' 'ημας ανασταντα; Rom. 7: 'ο εμος ερως εσταυρωται και ουκ +εστιν εν εμοι πυρ φιλουλον. As a sample of his theological speech +and his rule of faith, see ad. Smyrn. 1: ενοησα 'υμας κατηρτισμενους +εν ακινητω πιστει, 'ωσπερ καθηλωμενους εν τω σταυρω του κυριου +Ιησου Χριστου σαρκι τε και πνευματι και 'ηδρασμενους εν αγαπη εν +τω 'αιματι Χριστου, πεπληροφορημενους εις τον κυριου 'ημων, αληθως +οντα εκ γενους δαβιδ κατα σαρκα, 'υιον θεου κατα θελημα και δυναμιν +θεου, γεγενημενον αληθως εκ παρθενου, βεβαπτισμενον 'υπο Ιωαννου, +'ινα πληρωθη πασα δικαιοσυνη 'υπ' αυτου, αληθως επι Ποντιου Πιλατου +και 'Ηρωδου τετραρχου καθηλωμενον 'υπερ 'ημων εν σαρκι—αφ' 'ου +καρπου 'ημεις, απο του θεομακαριτου αυτου παθους—'ινα αρη συσσημον +εις τους αιωνας δια της αναστασεως εις τους αγιους και πιστους +αυτου ειτε εν Ιουδαιους ειτε εν εθνεσιν εν 'ενι σωματι της εκκλησιας +αυτου. The Epistle of Polycarp is characterised by its dependence +on earlier Christian writings (Epistles of Paul, 1 Peter, +1 John), consequently, by its conservative attitude with regard +to the most valuable traditions of the Apostolic period. The +<i>Kerygma</i> of Peter exhibits the transition from the early Christian +literature to the apologetic (Christ as νομος and as λογος).</p> + +<p>It is manifest that the lineage, "Ignatius, Polycarp, Melito, +Irenæus", is in characteristic contrast with all others, has +deep roots in the Apostolic age, as in Paul and in the Johannine +writings, and contains in germ important factors of the +future formation of dogma, as it appeared in Methodius, Athanasius, +Marcellus, Cyril of Jerusalem. It is very doubtful +therefore, whether we are justified in speaking of an Asia +Minor theology. (Ignatius does not belong to Asia Minor.) +At any rate, the expression, Asia Minor-Romish Theology, has +no justification. But it has its truth in the correct observation, +that the standards by which Christianity and Church +matters were measured and defined, must have been similar +in Rome and Asia Minor during the second century. We +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page220" id="page220"></a>[pg 220]</span> +lack all knowledge of the closer connections. We can only +again refer to the journey of Polycarp to Rome, to that of +Irenæus by Rome to Gaul, to the journey of Abercius and +others (cf. also the application of the Montanist communities in +Asia Minor for recognition by the Roman bishop). In all probability, +Asia Minor, along with Rome, was the spiritual centre +of Christendom from about 60-200: but we have but few +means for describing how this centre was brought to bear on +the circumference. What we do know belongs more to the +history of the Church than to the special history of dogma.</p> + +<p><i>Literature.</i>—The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers. +See the edition of v. Gebhardt, Harnack, Zahn, 1876. Hilgenfeld, +Nov. Test. extra Can. recept. fasc. IV. 2 edit. 1884, +has collected further remains of early Christian literature. The +Teaching of the twelve Apostles. Fragments of the Gospel +and Apocalypse of Peter (my edition, 1893). Also the writings +of Justin and other apologists, in so far as they give disclosures +about the faith of the communities of his time, as well +as statements in Celsus Αληθης Λογος, in Irenæus, Clement of +Alexandria, and Tertullian. Even Gnostic fragments may be +cautiously turned to profit. Ritschl, Entstehung der altkath. +Kirche 2 Aufl. 1857. Pfleiderer, Das Urchristenthum, 1887. +Renan, Origins of Christianity, vol. V. V. Engelhardt, Das Christenthum +Justin's, d. M. 1878, p. 375 ff. Schenkel, Das Christusbild +der Apostel, etc., 1879. Zahn, Gesch. des N.-Tlichen +Kanons, 2 Bde. 1888. Behm, Das Christliche Gesetzthum der +Apostolischen Väter (Zeitschr. f. kirchl. Wissensch. 1886). +Dorner, History of the doctrine of the Person of Christ, 1845. +Schultz, Die Lehre von der Gottheit Christi, 1881, p. 22 ff. +Höfling. Die Lehre der ältesten Kirche vom Opfer, 1851. +Höfling, Das Sacrament d. Taufe, 1848. Kahnis, Die Lehre +vom Abendmahl, 1851. Th. Harnack, Der Christliche Gemeindegottedienst +im Apost. u. Altkath. Zeitalter, 1854. Hatch, +Organisation of the Early Church, 1883. My Prolegomena +to the Didache (Texte u. Unters. II. Bd. H. 1, 2). Diestel, +Gesch. des A.T. in der Christi. Kirche, 1869. Sohm, Kirchenrecht, +1892, Monographs on the Apostolic Fathers: on 1 +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page221" id="page221"></a>[pg 221]</span> +Clem.: Lipsius, Lightfoot (most accurate commentary), Wrede; +on 2 Clem.: A. Harnack (Ztschr. f. K. Gesch. 1887); on Barnabas: +J. Müller; on Hermas: Zahn, Hückstädt, Link; on Papias: Weiffenbach, +Leimbach, Zahn, Lightfoot; on Ignatius and Polycarp: +Lightfoot (accurate commentary) and Zahn; on the Gospel and +Apocalypse of Peter: A. Harnack: on the Kerygma of Peter: +von Dobschütz; on Acts of Thecla: Schlau.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote162" name="footnote162"></a><b>Footnote 162:</b><a href="#footnotetag162"> (return) </a><p> The statements made in this chapter need special forbearance, especially +as the selection from the rich and motley material—cf. only the so-called Apostolic +Fathers—the emphasising of this, the throwing into the background of +that element, cannot here be vindicated. It is not possible, in the compass of a +brief account, to give expression to that elasticity and those oscillations of +ideas and thoughts which were peculiar to the Christians of the earliest +period. There was indeed, as will be shewn, a complex of tradition in many +respects fixed, but this complex was still under the dominance of an +enthusiastic fancy, so that what at one moment seemed fixed, in the next had +disappeared. Finally, attention must be given to the fact that when we speak +of the beginnings of knowledge, the members of the Christian community in +their totality are no longer in question, but only individuals who of course +were the leaders of the others. If we had no other writings from the times of +the Apostolic Fathers than the first Epistle of Clement and the Epistle of +Polycarp, it would be comparatively easy to sketch a clear history of the +development connecting Paulinism with the old-Catholic Theology as represented +by Irenæus, and so to justify the traditional ideas. But besides these +two Epistles which are the classic monuments of the mediating tradition, we +have a great number of documents which shew us how manifold and complicated +the development was. They also teach us how careful we should be in +the interpretation of the post-Apostolic documents that immediately followed +the Pauline Epistles, and that we must give special heed to the paragraphs and +ideas in them, which distinguish them from Paulinism. Besides, it is of the greatest +importance that those two Epistles originated in Rome and Asia Minor, +as these are the places where we must seek the embryonic stage of old-Catholic +doctrine. Numerous fine threads, in the form of fundamental ideas and +particular views, pass over from the Asia Minor theology of the post-Apostolic +period into the old-Catholic theology.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote163" name="footnote163"></a><b>Footnote 163:</b><a href="#footnotetag163"> (return) </a><p> The Epistle to the Hebrews (X. 25), the Epistle of +Barnabas (IV. 10), the Shepherd of Hermas (Sim. IX. 26, 3), but +especially the Epistles of Ignatius and still later documents, shew that +up to the middle of the second Century, and even later, there were +Christians who, for various reasons, stood outside the union of +communities, or wished to have only a loose and temporary relation to +them. The exhortation: επι το αυτο συνερχομενοι συνζητειτε +περι του κοινη συμφεροντος (see my note on Didache, XVI. 2, and cf.) +for the expression the interesting State Inscription which was found at +Magnesia on the Meander. Bull, Corresp. Hellen 1883, p. 506: +απαγορευο μητε συνερχεσθαι τους αρτοκοκους κατ' 'εταιριαν μητε +παρεστηκοτας θρασυνεσθαι, πειθαρχειν δε παντως τοις 'υπερ του +κοινη συμφεροντος επιταττομενοις κ.τ.λ. or the exhortation: +κολλασθε τοις 'αγιοις, 'οτι 'οι κολλωμενοι αυτοις 'αγιασθησονται (1 +Clem. 46. 2, introduced as γραφη) runs through most of the +writings of the post-Apostolic and pre-catholic period. New doctrines +were imported by wandering Christians who, in many cases, may not +themselves have belonged to a community, and did not respect the +arrangements of those they found in existence, but sought to form +conventicles. If we remember how the Greeks and Romans were wont to get +themselves initiated into a mystery cult, and took part for a long time +in the religious exercises, and then, when they thought they had got the +good of it, for the most part or wholly to give up attending, we shall +not wonder that the demand to become a permanent member of a Christian +community was opposed by many. The statements of Hermas are specially +instructive here.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote164" name="footnote164"></a><b>Footnote 164:</b><a href="#footnotetag164"> (return) </a><p> "Corpus sumus," says Tertullian at a time when this +description had already become an anachronism, "de conscientia +religionis et disciplinæ unitate et spei foedere." (Apol. 39: cf. Ep. +Petri ad Jacob. I.: εις θεος, εις νομος, μια ελπις). The +description was applicable to the earlier period, when there was no such +thing as a federation with political forms, but when the consciousness +of belonging to a community and of forming a brotherhood +(αδελφοτης) was all the more deeply felt: See, above all, 1 Clem ad +Corinth., the Didache (9-15), Aristides, Apol 15: "and when they have +become Christians, they call them (the slaves) brethren without +hesitation ... for they do not call them brethren according to the +flesh, but according to the spirit and in God;" cf. also the statements +on brotherhood in Tertullian and Minucius Felix (also Lucian). We have +in 1 Clem. I. 2, the delineation of a perfect Christian Church. The +Epistles of Ignatius are specially instructive as to the independence of +each individual community: 1 Clem. and Didache, as to the obligation to +assist stranger communities by counsel and action, and to support the +travelling brethren. As every Christian is a παροικος so every +community is a παροικουσα την πολιν but it is under obligation +to give an example to the world, and must watch that "the name be not +blasphemed." The importance of the social element in the oldest +Christian communities, has been very justly brought into prominence in +the latest works on the subject (Renan, Heinrici, Hatch). The historian +of dogma must also emphasise it, and put the fluid notions of the faith +in contrast with the definite consciousness of moral tasks. See 1 Clem. +47-50; Polyc. Ep. 3; Didache 1 ff.; Ignat. ad Eph. 14, on +αγαπη as the main requirement Love demands that everyone +"ζητει το κοινωφελες πασιν και μη το 'εαυτου" (1 Clem. 48. 6, with +parallels; Didache 16. 3; Barn. 4. 10; Ignatius).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote165" name="footnote165"></a><b>Footnote 165:</b><a href="#footnotetag165"> (return) </a><p> 1 Clem. 59. 2. in the Church prayer; 'οπως τον +αριθμον τον κατηριθμηνον των εκλεκτων αυτου εν 'ολω τω κοσμω +διαφυλαξη αθραυστον 'ο δημιουργος των 'απαντων δια του ηγαπημενου +παιδος αυτου Ιησου Χριστου.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote166" name="footnote166"></a><b>Footnote 166:</b><a href="#footnotetag166"> (return) </a><p> See 1 Clem., 2 Clem., Ignatius (on the basis of the +Pauline view; but see also Rev. II. 9).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote167" name="footnote167"></a><b>Footnote 167:</b><a href="#footnotetag167"> (return) </a><p>See Hermas (the passage is given above, p. 103, note).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote168" name="footnote168"></a><b>Footnote 168:</b><a href="#footnotetag168"> (return) </a><p> See Hermas Vis. I-III. Papias. Fragm. VI. and VII. of my +edition. 2 Clem. 14: ποιουντες το θελημα του πατρος 'ημων +εσομεθα εκ της εκκλησιας της πρωτης της πνευματικης, της προ +'ηλιου και σεληνης εκτισμενες.... εκκλησια ζωσα σωμα εστι Χριστου +λεγει γαρ 'η γραφη εποιησεν 'ο θεος τον ανθρωπον αρσεν και θηλυ. +το αρσεν εστιν 'ο Χριστος, το θηλυ 'η εκκλησια.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote169" name="footnote169"></a><b>Footnote 169:</b><a href="#footnotetag169"> (return) </a><p>See Barn. 13 (2 Clem. 2).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote170" name="footnote170"></a><b>Footnote 170:</b><a href="#footnotetag170"> (return) </a><p> See Valentinus in Clem. Strom. VI. 6. 52. "Holy Church", +perhaps also in Marcion, if his text (Zahn. Gesch. des N.T.-lichen +Kanons, II. p. 502) in Gal. IV. 21, read: 'ητις εστιν μητηρ 'υμων, +γεννωσα εις 'ην επεγγειλαμεθα 'αγιαν εκκλησιαν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote171" name="footnote171"></a><b>Footnote 171:</b><a href="#footnotetag171"> (return) </a><p>Barn. 3. 6.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote172" name="footnote172"></a><b>Footnote 172:</b><a href="#footnotetag172"> (return) </a><p> We are also reminded here of the "tertium genus." The nickname +of the heathen corresponded to the self-consciousness of the Christians +(see Aristides, Apol).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote173" name="footnote173"></a><b>Footnote 173:</b><a href="#footnotetag173"> (return) </a><p> See also the letter of Pliny the paragraphs about +Christian morality, in the first third part of Justin's apology and +especially the apology of Aristides c. 15. Aristides portrays +Christianity by portraying Christian morality. The Christians know and +believe in God the creator of heaven and of earth, the God by whom all +things consist, <i>i.e.</i> in him from whom they have received the +commandments which they have written in their hearts commandments, which +they observe in faith and in the expectation of the world to come. For +this reason they do not commit adultery, nor practise unchastity, nor bear +false witness, nor covet that with which they are entrusted or what does +not belong to them, etc. Compare how in the Apocalypse of Peter definite +penalties in hell are portrayed for the several forms of immorality.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote174" name="footnote174"></a><b>Footnote 174:</b><a href="#footnotetag174"> (return) </a><p> An investigation of the Greco Jewish Christian literature of norms and +moral rules commencing with the Old Testament doctrine of wisdom on the +one hand and the Stoic collections on the other then passing beyond the +Alexandrian and Evangelic norms up to the Didache, the Pauline tables +of domestic duties, the Sibylline sayings, Phocylides, the Neopythagorean +rules and to the norms of the enigmatic Sextus, is still an unfulfilled +task. The moral rules of the Pharisaic Rabbis should also be included.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote175" name="footnote175"></a><b>Footnote 175:</b><a href="#footnotetag175"> (return) </a><p> Herm. Mand. I. has merely fixed the Monotheistic confession προτον +παντων πιστευσον, 'οτι εις εστιν 'ο θεος, 'ο τα παντα κτισας και καταρτισας κ.τ.λ. +See Praed Petri in Clem Strom VI. 6, 48, VI. 5, 39. Aristides gives in +c. 2 of his Apology the preaching of Jesus Christ but where he wishes +to give a short expression of Christianity he is satisfied with saying that +Christians are those who have found the one true God. See <i>e.g.</i> c. 15.</p> + +<p>Christians have found the truth. They know and believe in God the +creator of heaven and of earth by whom all things consist and from whom +all things come who has no other god beside him and from whom they have +received commandments which they have written on their hearts, +commandments which they observe in faith and in expectation of the world +to come. It is interesting to note how Origen Comm. in Joh. XXXII. 9 has +brought the Christological Confession into approximate harmony with that +of Hermas. First Mand. I. is verbally repeated and then it is said +χρη δε και πιστευειν, 'οτι κυριος Ιησους Χριστος και πασε τη περι +αυτου κατα την θεοτητα και την ανθροπωτετα αληθεια δει δε και +εις το 'αγιον πιστευειν πνευμα, και 'οτι αυτεξουσιοι οντες κολαζομεθα +μεν εφ' 'οις 'αμαρτανομεν τιμωμεθα δε εφ' 'οις ευ πραττομεν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote176" name="footnote176"></a><b>Footnote 176:</b><a href="#footnotetag176"> (return) </a><p> Very instructive here is 2 Clem. ad Corinth. 20, 5 +το μονω θεο αορατο, πατρι της αληθειας, τω εξατοστειλαντι 'ημιν τον +σωτηρα και αρχηγον της αφθαρσιας, δι' ου και εφανερωσεν 'ημιν +την αληθειαν και την επουρανιον ζωην, αυτω 'ε δοξα. On the Holy +Spirit see previous note.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote177" name="footnote177"></a><b>Footnote 177:</b><a href="#footnotetag177"> (return) </a><p>They were quoted as 'η γραφη, τα βιβλια, or +with the formula 'ο θεος (κυριος) λεγει, γεγραπται. Also Law +and Prophets. Law Prophets and Psalms. See the original of the first six +books of the Apostolic Constitutions.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote178" name="footnote178"></a><b>Footnote 178:</b><a href="#footnotetag178"> (return) </a><p> See the collection of passages in Patr. App. Opp. edit. Gebhardt. 1. 2 p. +133, and the formula, Diogn. 11: αποστολων γενομενος μαθητης γινομαι +διδασκαλος εθνων, τα παραδοθεντα αξιως 'υπηρετων γινομενοις αληθειας μαθηταις. +Besides the Old Testament and the traditions about Jesus (Gospels), the +Apocalyptic writings of the Jews, which were regarded as writings of the +Spirit, were also drawn upon. Moreover, Christian letters and manifestoes +proceeding from Apostles, prophets, or teachers, were read. The Epistles +of Paul were early collected and obtained wide circulation in the first half +of the second century; but they were not Holy Scripture in the specific +sense, and therefore their authority was not unqualified.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote179" name="footnote179"></a><b>Footnote 179:</b><a href="#footnotetag179"> (return) </a><p> Barn. 5. 6, 'οι προφεται, απο του κυριου +εχοντες την χαριν, εις αυτον επροφητευσαν. Ignat. ad Magn. 8. 2. +cf. also Clem. Paedag. I. 7. 59: 'ο γαρ αυτος 'ουτος παιδαγωγος +τοτε μεν "φοβηθηση κυριον τον θεον ελεγεν, 'ημιν δε αγαπησεις +κυριον τον θεον σου" ταρηνεσεν. δια τουτο και εντελλεται 'ημιν +"παυσασθε απο των εργων 'υμων" των παλαιων 'αμαρτιων, "μαθετε καλον +ποιειν, εκκλινον απο κακου και ποιησον αγαθον, ηγαπησας +δικαιοσυνην, εμισησας ανομιαν" 'αυτη μου 'η νεα διαθηκη παλαιοι +κεχαραγμενη γραμματι.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote180" name="footnote180"></a><b>Footnote 180:</b><a href="#footnotetag180"> (return) </a><p>See above § 5, p. 114 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote181" name="footnote181"></a><b>Footnote 181:</b><a href="#footnotetag181"> (return) </a><p> See my edition of the Didache. Prolegg. p. 32 ff.; Rothe, "De disciplina +arcani origine," 1841.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote182" name="footnote182"></a><b>Footnote 182:</b><a href="#footnotetag182"> (return) </a><p> The earliest example is 1 Cor. XI. 1 f. It is different in 1 Tim. III. +16, where already the question is about το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον. See Patr. +App. Opp. 1. 2. p. 134.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote183" name="footnote183"></a><b>Footnote 183:</b><a href="#footnotetag183"> (return) </a><p> Father, son, and spirit: Paul; Matt XXVIII. 19; 1 Clem. ad. Cor. 58. 2 +(see 2. 1. f.; 42. 3; 46. 6); Didache 7; Ignat. Eph. 9. 1; Magn. 13. 1. 2.; +Philad. inscr.; Mart. Polyc. 14. 1. 2; Ascens. Isai. 8 18:9. 27:10. 4:11. 32ff;, +Justin <i>passim</i>; Montan. ap. Didym. de trinit. 411; Excerpta ex Theodot. 80; +Pseudo Clem. de virg. 1 13. Yet the omission of the Holy Spirit is frequent, as +in Paul, or the Holy Spirit is identified with the Spirit of Christ. The latter +takes place even with such writers as are familiar with the baptismal formula. +Ignat. ad Magn. 15; κεκτημενοι αδιακριτον πνευμα, 'ος εστιν Ιησους Χριστος..</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote184" name="footnote184"></a><b>Footnote 184:</b><a href="#footnotetag184"> (return) </a><p> The formulæ run: "God who has spoken through the Prophets," or +the "Prophetic Spirit," etc.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote185" name="footnote185"></a><b>Footnote 185:</b><a href="#footnotetag185"> (return) </a><p> That should be assumed as certain in the case of the Egyptian +Church, yet Caspari thinks he can shew that already Clement of Alexandria +presupposes a symbol.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote186" name="footnote186"></a><b>Footnote 186:</b><a href="#footnotetag186"> (return) </a><p> Also in the communities of Asia Minor (Smyrna); for a combination of +Polyc. Ep. c. 2 with c. 7, proves that in Smyrna the παραδοθεις λογος must have +been something like the Roman Symbol, see Lightfoot on the passage; it cannot +be proved that it was identical with it. See, further, how in the case of +Polycarp the moral element is joined on to the dogmatic. This reminds us of +the Didache and has its parallel even in the first homily of Aphraates.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote187" name="footnote187"></a><b>Footnote 187:</b><a href="#footnotetag187"> (return) </a><p> See Caspari, Quellen z. Gesch. des Taufsymbols, III. p. 3 +ff. and Patr. App. Opp. 1. 2. p 115-142. The old Roman Symbol reads: +Πιστευω εις θεον πατερα παντοκρατορα, και εις Χριστον Ιησουν +(τον) 'υιον αυτου τον μονογενη, (on this word see Westcott's Excursus in +his commentary on 1st John) τον κυριον 'ημων τον γεννηθεντα +εκ πνευματος 'αγιου και Μαριας της παρθενου, τον επι Ποντιου Πιλατου +σταυρωθεντα και ταφεντα; τη τριτη 'ημεραι ανασταντα εκ νεκρων, +αναβαντα εις τους ουρανους, καθημενον εν δεξια του πατρος, 'οθεν +ερχεται κριναι ζωντας και νεκρους. και εις πνευμα 'αγιον, 'αγιαν +εκκλησιαν, αφεσιν 'αμαρτιων σαρκος αναστασιν, αμην. To estimate this +very important article aright we must note the following: (1) It is not +a formula of doctrine, but of confession. (2) It has a liturgical form +which is shewn in the rhythm and in the disconnected succession of its +several members, and is free from everything of the nature of polemic. +(3) It tapers off into the three blessings, Holy Church, forgiveness of +sin, resurrection of the body, and in this as well as in the fact that +there is no mention of γνωσις (αληθεια) και ζωη αιωνος, is +revealed an early Christian untheological attitude. (4) It is worthy of +note, on the other hand, that the birth from the Virgin occupies the +first place, and all reference to the baptism of Jesus, also to the +Davidic Sonship, is wanting. (5) It is further worthy of note, that +there is no express mention of the death of Jesus, and that the +Ascension already forms a special member (that is also found elsewhere, +Ascens. Isaiah, c. 3. 13. ed. Dillmann. p. 13. Murator. Fragment, etc.). +Finally, we should consider the want of the earthly Kingdom of Christ +and the mission of the twelve Apostles, as well as, on the other hand, +the purely religious attitude, no notice being taken of the new law. +Zahn (Das Apostol. Symbolum, 1893) assumes, "That in all essential +respects the identical baptismal confession which Justin learned in +Ephesus about 130, and Marcion confessed in Rome about 145, originated +at latest somewhere about 120." In some "unpretending notes" (p. 37 ff.) +he traces this confession back to a baptismal confession of the Pauline +period ("it had already assumed a more or less stereotyped form in the +earlier Apostolic period"), which, however, was somewhat revised, so far +as it contained, for example, "of the house of David", with reference to +Christ. "The original formula, reminding us of the Jewish soil of +Christianity, was thus remodelled, perhaps about 70-120, with retention +of the fundamental features, so that it might appear to answer better to +the need of candidates for baptism, proceeding more and more from the +Gentiles.... This changed formula soon spread on all sides. It lies at +the basis of all the later baptismal confessions of the Church, even of +the East. The first article was slightly changed in Rome about 200-220." +While up till then, in Rome as everywhere else, it had read +πιστευω εις 'ενα θεον παντοκρατορα, it was now changed in +πιστευω εις θεον πατερα παντοκρατορα. This hypothesis, with regard to +the early history of the Roman Symbol, presupposes that the history of +the formation of the baptismal confession in the Church, in east and +west, was originally a uniform one. This cannot be proved; besides, it +is refuted by the facts of the following period. It presupposes +secondly, that there was a strictly formulated baptismal confession +outside Rome before the middle of the second century, which likewise +cannot be proved; (the converse rather is probable, that the fixed +formulation proceeded from Rome.) Moreover, Zahn himself retracts +everything again by the expression "more or less stereotyped form;" for +what is of decisive interest here is the question, when and where the +fixed sacred form was produced. Zahn here has set up the radical thesis +that it can only have taken place in Rome between 200 and 220. But +neither his negative nor his positive proof for a change of the Symbol +in Rome at so late a period is sufficient. No sure conclusion as to the +Symbol can be drawn from the wavering <i>regulæ fidei</i> of Irenæus and +Tertullian which contain the "unum"; further, the "unum" is not found in +the western provincial Symbols, which, however, are in part earlier than +the year 200. The Romish correction must therefore have been +subsequently taken over in the provinces (Africa?). Finally, the formula +θεον πατερα παντοκρατορα beside the more frequent +θεον παντοκρατορα is attested by Irenæus, I. 10. 1, a decisive +passage. With our present means we cannot attain to any direct knowledge +of Symbol formation before the Romish Symbol. But the following +hypotheses, which I am not able to establish here, appear to me to +correspond to the facts of the case and to be fruitful: (1) There were, +even in the earliest period, separate <i>Kerygmata</i> about God and +Christ: see the Apostolic writings, Hermas, Ignatius, etc. (2) The +<i>Kerygma</i> about God was the confession of the one God of creation, +the almighty God. (3) The <i>Kerygma</i> about Christ had essentially +the same historical contents everywhere, but was expressed in diverse +forms: (a) in the form of the fulfilment of prophecy, (b) in the form +κατα σαρκα, κατα πνευμα, +(c) in the form of the first and second advent, (d) in the +form, καταβασ-αναβας; these forms were also partly combined. +(4) The designations "Christ", "Son of God" and "Lord"; further, the +birth from the Holy Spirit, or κατα πνευμα, the sufferings (the +practice of exorcism contributed also to the fixing and naturalising of +the formula "crucified under Pontius Pilate"), the death, the +resurrection, the coming again to judgment, formed the stereotyped +content of the <i>Kerygma</i> about Jesus. The mention of the Davidic +Sonship, of the Virgin Mary, of the baptism by John, of the third day, +of the descent into Hades, of the <i>demonstratio veræ carnis post +resurrectionem</i>, of the ascension into heaven and the sending out of +the disciples, were additional articles which appeared here and there. +The σαρκα λαβον, +and the like, were very early developed out of the forms (b) and (d). +All this was already in existence at the transition of the first century +to the second. (5) The proper contribution of the Roman community +consisted in this, that it inserted the <i>Kerygma</i> about God and +that about Jesus into the baptismal formula, widened the clause +referring to the Holy Spirit, into one embracing Holy Church, +forgiveness of sin, resurrection of the body, excluded theological +theories in other respects, undertook a reduction all round, and +accurately defined everything up to the last world. (6) The western +<i>regulæ fidei</i> do not fall back exclusively on the old Roman +Symbol, but also on the earlier freer <i>Kerygmata</i> about God and +about Jesus which were common to the east and west; not otherwise can +the <i>regulæ fidei</i> of Irenæus and Tertullian, for example, be +explained. But the symbol became more and more the support of the +<i>regula</i>. (7) The eastern confessions (baptismal symbols) do not +fall back directly on the Roman Symbol, but were probably on the model +of this symbol, made up from the provincial <i>Kerygmata</i>, rich in +contents and growing ever richer, hardly, however, before the third +century. (8) It cannot be proved, and it is not probable, that the Roman +Symbol was in existence before Hermas, that is, about 135.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote188" name="footnote188"></a><b>Footnote 188:</b><a href="#footnotetag188"> (return) </a><p>See the fragment in Euseb. H. E. III. 39, from the work of Papias.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote189" name="footnote189"></a><b>Footnote 189:</b><a href="#footnotetag189"> (return) </a><p>διδαχη κυριον δια των ιβ' αποστολων +(Did. inscr.) is the most accurate expression (similarly 2 Pet. +III. 2). Instead of this might be said simply 'ο κυριος +(Hegesipp.). Hegesippus (Euseb. H. E. IV. 22. 3; See also Steph. Gob.) +comprehends the ultimate authorities under the formula: 'ως 'ο +νομος κηρυσσει και 'οι προφηται και 'ο κυριος, just as even Pseudo +Clem de Virg. I. 2: "Sicut ex lege ac prophetis et a domino nostro Jesu +Christo didicimus." Polycarp (6.3) says: καθως αυτος ενετειλατο +και 'οι ευαγγελισαμενοι 'ημας αποστολοι και 'οι προφηται 'οι +προκηρυξαντες την ελευσιν του κυριου 'ημων. In the second Epistle of +Clement (14. 2) we read: τα βιβλια (O.T.) και 'οι +αποστολοι, το ευαγγελιον may also stand for 'ο κυριος; +(Ignat., Didache. 2 Clem. etc.). The Gospel, so far as it is described, +is quoted as τα απομνημονευματα τ. αποστολων (Justin, Tatian), +or on the other hand, as 'αι κυριακαι γραφαι, (Dionys. Cor. in +Euseb. H. E. IV. 23. 12: at a later period in Tertull. and Clem. Alex.). +The words of the Lord, in the same way as the words of God, are called +simply τα λογια (κυριακα). The declaration of Serapion at the +beginning of the third century (Euseb., H. E. VI. 12. 3): +'ημεις και Πετρον και τους αλλους αποστολους αποδεχομεθα 'ως +Χριστον, is an innovation in so far as it puts the words of the +Apostles fixed in writing and as distinct from the words of the Lord, on +a level with the latter. That is, while differentiating the one from the +other, Serapion ascribes to the words of the apostles and those of the +Lord equal authority. But the development which led to this position, +had already begun in the first century. At a very early period there +were read in the communities, beside the Old Testament, Gospels, that is +collections of words of the Lord, which at the same time contained the +main facts of the history of Jesus. Such notes were a necessity (Luke +1.4; 'ινα επιγνως περι 'ων κατηχηθης λογων την +ασφαλειαν), and though still indefinite and in many ways unlike, they +formed the germ for the genesis of the New Testament. (See Weiss, +Lehrb. d. Einleit in d. N. T. p. 21 ff.). Further there were read Epistles +and Manifestoes by apostles, prophets and teachers, but, above all, +Epistles of Paul. The Gospels at first stood in no connection with these +Epistles, however high they might be prized. But there did exist a +connection between the Gospels and the απ' αρχης αυτοπταις και +'υπηρεταις του λογου, so far as these mediated the tradition of the +Evangelic material, and on their testimony rests the <i>Kerygma</i> of +the Church about the Lord as the Teacher, the crucified and risen One. +Here lies the germ for the genesis of a canon which will comprehend the +Lord and the Apostles, and will also draw in the Pauline Epistles. +Finally, Apocalypses were read as Holy Scriptures.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote190" name="footnote190"></a><b>Footnote 190:</b><a href="#footnotetag190"> (return) </a><p> Read, apart from all others, the canonical Gospels, the remains of the +so-called Apocryphal Gospels, and perhaps the Shepherd of Hermas: see +also the statements of Papias.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote191" name="footnote191"></a><b>Footnote 191:</b><a href="#footnotetag191"> (return) </a><p> That Peter was in Antioch follows from Gal. II.; that he laboured in +Corinth, perhaps before the composition of the first epistle to the Corinthians, +is not so improbable as is usually maintained (1 Cor.; Dionys. of +Corinth); that he was at Rome even is very credible. The sojourn of +John in Asia Minor cannot, I think, be contested.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote192" name="footnote192"></a><b>Footnote 192:</b><a href="#footnotetag192"> (return) </a><p> See how in the three early "writings of Peter" (Gospel, Apocalypse, +<i>Kerygma</i>) the twelve are embraced in a perfect unity. Peter is the head +and spokesman for them all.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote193" name="footnote193"></a><b>Footnote 193:</b><a href="#footnotetag193"> (return) </a><p> See Papias and the Reliq. Presbyter, ap. Iren., collecta in Patr. Opp. +I. 2, p. 105: see also Zahn, Forschungen. III., p. 156 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote194" name="footnote194"></a><b>Footnote 194:</b><a href="#footnotetag194"> (return) </a><p> The Gentile-Christian conception of the significance of +the twelve—a fact to be specially noted—was all but unanimous (see +above Chap. II.): the only one who broke through it was Marcion. The +writers of Asia Minor, Rome and Egypt coincide in this point. Beside the +Acts of the Apostles, which is specially instructive, see 1 Clem. 42; +Barn 5. 9, 8. 3: Didache inscr.; Hermas, Vis. III. 5, 11; Sim. IX. 15, +16, 17, 25; Petrusev-Petrusapok. Præd. Petr. ap. Clem. Strom. VI. 6, 48; +Ignat. ad Trall. 3; ad Rom 4; ad Philad. 5; Papias; Polyc., Aristides; +Justin <i>passim</i>; inferences from the great work of Irenæus, the +works of Tertull. and Clem. Alex; the Valentinians. The inference that +follows from the eschatological hope, that the Gospel has already been +preached to the world, and the growing need of having a tradition +mediated by eye-witnesses co-operated here, and out of the twelve who +were in great part obscure, but who had once been authoritative in +Jerusalem and Palestine, and highly esteemed in the Christian Diaspora +from the beginning, though unknown, created a court of appeal, which +presented itself as not only taking a second rank after the Lord +himself, but as the medium through which alone the words of the Lord +became the possession of Christendom, as he neither preached to the +nations nor left writings. The importance of the twelve in the main body +of the Church may at any rate be measured by the facts, that the +personal activity of Jesus was confined to Palestine, that he left +behind him neither a confession nor a doctrine, and that in this respect +the tradition tolerated no more corrections. Attempts which were made in +this direction, the fiction of a semi-Gentile origin of Christ, the +denial of the Davidic Sonship, the invention of a correspondence between +Jesus and Abgarus, meetings of Jesus with Greeks, and much else, belong +only in part to the earliest period, and remained as really inoperative +as they were uncertain (according to Clem. Alex., Jesus himself is the +Apostle to the Jews; the twelve are the Apostles to the Gentiles in +Euseb. H. E. VI. 141). The notion about the twelve Apostles evangelising +the world in accordance with the commission of Jesus, is consequently to +be considered as the means by which the Gentile Christians got rid of +the inconvenient fact of the merely local activity of Jesus (compare how +Justin expresses himself about the Apostles: their going out into all +the world is to him one of the main articles predicted in the Old +Testament, Apol. 1. 39; compare also the Apology of Aristides, c. 2, and +the passage of similar tenor in the Ascension of Isaiah, where the +"adventus XII. discipulorum" is regarded as one of the fundamental facts +of salvation, c. 3. 13, ed. Dillmann, p 13, and a passage such as Iren. +fragm. XXIX. in Harvey II., p. 494, where the parable about the grain of +mustard seed is applied to the λογος επουρανιος and the twelve +Apostles; the Apostles are the branches 'υπ' 'ων κλαδων +σκεπασθεντες 'οι παντες 'ως ορνεα 'υπο καλιαν συνελθοντα μετελαβον +της εξ αυτων προερχομενης εδωδιμου και επουρανιου τροφης Hippol. +de Antichr. 61. Orig. c. Cels. III. 28). This means, as it was empty of +contents, was very soon to prove the most convenient instrument for +establishing ever new historical connections, and legitimising the +<i>status quo</i> in the communities. Finally, the whole catholic idea +of tradition was rooted in that statement which was already, at the +close of the first century, formulated by Clement of Rome (c. 42): +'οι αποστολοι 'ημιν ευηγγελισθησαν απο του κυριου Ιησου Χριστου, +Ιησους 'ο χριστος απο του θεου εξεπεμφθη. 'ο χριστος ουν απο του +θεου, και 'οι αποστολοι απο του Χριστου; εγενοντο ουν αμφοτερα +ευτακτως εκ θεληματος θεου, κ.τ.λ. Here, as in all similar +statements which elevate the Apostles into the history of revelation, +the unanimity of all the Apostles is always presupposed, so that the +statement of Clem. Alex. (Strom VII., 17, 108: μια 'η παντων +γεγονε των αποστολων 'ωσπερ διδασκαλια 'ουτως δε και 'η παραδοσις, see +Tertull., de præscr. 32: "Apostoli non diversa inter se docuerent," Iren. +alii), contains no innovation, but gives expression to an old idea: That +the twelve unitedly proclaimed one and the same message, that they +proclaimed it to the world, that they were chosen to this vocation by +Christ, that the communities possess the witness of the Apostles as their +rule of conduct (Excerp. ex Theod. 25 'οσπερ 'υπο των ζωδιον 'η +γενεσις διοικειται 'ουτως 'υπο των αποστολων 'η αναγεννησις) are +authoritative theses which can be traced back as far as we have any +remains of Gentile-Chnstian literature. It was thereby presupposed that +the unanimous <i>kerygma</i> of the twelve Apostles which the +communities possess as κανων της παραδοσεως (1 Clem. 7), was +public and accessible to all. Yet the idea does not seem to have been +everywhere kept at a distance that besides the <i>kerygma</i> a still +deeper knowledge was transmitted by the Apostles or by certain Apostles +to particular Christians who were specially gifted. Of course we have no +direct evidence of this, but the connection in which certain Gnostic +unions stood at the beginning with the communities developing themselves +to Catholicism and inferences from utterances of later writers (Clem. +Alex. Tertull.), make it probable that this conception was present in the +communities here and there even in the age of the so-called Apostolic +Fathers. It may be definitely said that the peculiar idea of tradition +(θεος—χριστος—'οι δοδεκα αποστολοι—εκκλησιαι) in +the Gentile Churches is very old but that it was still limited in its +significance at the beginning and was threatened (1) by a wider +conception of the idea 'Apostle' (besides, the fact is important that +Asia Minor and Rome were the very places where a stricter idea of +Apostle made its appearance. See my Edition of the Didache, p. 117), +(2) by free prophets and teachers moved by the Spirit, who introduced +new conceptions and rules and whose word was regarded as the word of God, +(3) by the assumption not always definitely rejected, that besides the +public tradition of the <i>kerygma</i> there was a secret tradition. +That Paul as a rule was not included in this high estimate of the +Apostles is shewn by this fact among others, that the earlier Apocryphal +Acts of the Apostles are much less occupied with his person than with +the rest of the Apostles. The features of the old legends which make the +Apostles in their deeds, their fate, nay even in appearance as far as +possible, equal to the person of Jesus himself deserve special +consideration (see, for example the descent of the Apostles into hell in +Herm. Sim. IX. 16), for it is just here that the fact above established +that the activity of the Apostles was to make up for the want of the +activity of Jesus himself among the nations stands clearly out (See Acta +Johannis ed. Zahn p 246 'ο εκλεξαμενος 'ημας εις αποστολην +εθνων 'ο εκπεμψας 'ημας εις την οικουμενεν θεος 'ο δειξας 'εαυτον +δια των αποστολων also the remarkable declaration of Origen about the +Chronicle of Phlegon [Hadrian], that what holds good of Christ, is in +that Chronicle transferred to Peter; finally we may recall to mind the +visions in which an Apostle suddenly appears as Christ). Between the +judgment of value 'ημεις τους αποστολους αποδεχομεθα 'ως +Χριστον and those creations of fancy in which the Apostles appear as +gods and demigods there is certainly a great interval but it can be +proved that there are stages lying between these extreme points. It is +therefore permissible to call to mind here the oldest Apocryphal Acts of +the Apostles although they may have originated almost completely in +Gnostic circles (see also the Pistis Sophia which brings a metaphysical +theory to the establishment of the authority of the Apostles, p. 11, 14; see +Texte u Unters VII. 2 p. 61 ff.). Gnosticism here as frequently elsewhere is +related to common Christianity as excess progressing to the invention of +a myth with a tendency to a historical theorem determined by the effort +to maintain one's own position; cf. the article from the <i>kerygma</i> +of Peter in Clem. Strom. VI. 6, 48 Εξελεξαμην 'υμας δωδεκα +μαθητας, κ.τ.λ. the introduction to the basal writing of the first 6 +books of the Apostolic Constitutions and the introduction to the +Egyptian ritual, κατα κελευσιν του κυριου 'υμων κ.τ.λ. Besides +it must be admitted that the origin of the idea of tradition and its +connection with the twelve is obscure; what is historically reliable +here has still to be investigated, even the work of Seufert (Der Urspr. u. +d. Bedeutung des Apostolats in der christl Kirche der ersten zwei +Jahrhunderte, 1887) has not cleared up the dark points. We will perhaps +get more light by following the important hint given by Weizsäcker +(Apost. Age p. 13 ff.) that Peter was the first witness of the +resurrection, and was called such in the <i>kerygma</i> of the +communities (see 1 Cor. XV., 5 Luke XXIV. 34). The twelve Apostles are also +further called 'οι περι τον Πετρον (Mrc. fin. in L Ign. ad Smyrn. +3, cf. Luke VIII. 45, Acts II. 14, Gal. I. 18 f., 1 Cor. XV. 5), and it is a +correct historical reminiscence when Chrysostom says (Hom. in Joh. 88), +'ο Πετρος εκηριτος ην των αποστολων και στομα των μαθητων και +κορυφη του χορου. Now as Peter was really in personal relation with +important Gentile-Christian communities, that which held good of him, +the recognized head and spokesman of the twelve, was perhaps transferred +to these. One has finally to remember that besides the appeal to the +twelve there was in the Gentile Churches an appeal to Peter and Paul +(but not for the evangelic <i>kerygma</i>) which has a certain +historical justification, cf. Gal. II. 8, 1 Cor. I. 12 f., IX. 5, 1 Clem. Ign. ad +Rom. 4 and the numerous later passages. Paul in claiming equality with +Peter, though Peter was the head and mouth of the twelve and had himself +been active in mission work, has perhaps contributed most towards +spreading the authority of the twelve. It is notable how rarely we find +any special appeal to John in the tradition of the main body of the +Church. For the middle of the 2nd century the authority of the twelve +Apostles may be expressed in the following statements: (1) They were +missionaries for the world, (2) They ruled the Church and established +Church Offices, (3) They guaranteed the true doctrine (a) by the +tradition going back to them, (b) by writings, (4) They are the ideals +of Christian life, (5) They are also directly mediators of +salvation—though this point is uncertain.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote195" name="footnote195"></a><b>Footnote 195:</b><a href="#footnotetag195"> (return) </a><p>See Didache c. 1-10, with parallel passages.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote196" name="footnote196"></a><b>Footnote 196:</b><a href="#footnotetag196"> (return) </a><p> Cf., for example, the first epistle of Clement to the Corinthians with +the Shepherd of Hermas. Both documents originated in Rome.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote197" name="footnote197"></a><b>Footnote 197:</b><a href="#footnotetag197"> (return) </a><p> Compare how dogmatic and ethical elements are inseparably united in the +Shepherd, in first and second Clement, as well as in Polycarp and Justin.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote198" name="footnote198"></a><b>Footnote 198:</b><a href="#footnotetag198"> (return) </a><p> Note the hymnal parts of the Revelation of John, the +great prayer with which the first epistle of Clement closes, the "carmen +dicere Christo quasi deo," reported by Pliny, the eucharist prayer in +the διδαχη, the hymn 1 Tim. III. 16, the fragments from the +prayers which Justin quotes, and compare with these the declaration of +the anonymous writer in Euseb. H. E. V. 28. 5, that the belief of the +earliest Christians in the Deity of Christ might be proved from the old +Christian hymns and odes. In the epistles of Ignatius the theology +frequently consists of an aimless stringing together of articles +manifestly originating in hymns and the cultus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote199" name="footnote199"></a><b>Footnote 199:</b><a href="#footnotetag199"> (return) </a><p> The prophet and teacher express what the Spirit of God +suggests to them. Their word is therefore God's word, and their +writings, in so far as they apply to the whole of Christendom, are +inspired, holy writings. Further, not only does Acts XV. 22 f. exhibit +the formula εδοξεν τω πνευματι τω 'αγιω και 'ημιν (see +similar passages in the Acts), but the Roman writings also appeal to the +Holy Spirit (1 Clem. 63. 2): likewise Barnabas, Ignatius, etc. Even in +the controversy about the baptism of heretics a Bishop gave his vote +with the formula: "secundum motum animi mei et spiritus sancti" (Cypr. +Opp. ed. Hartel, I. p. 457).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote200" name="footnote200"></a><b>Footnote 200:</b><a href="#footnotetag200"> (return) </a><p> The so-called Chiliasm—the designation is unsuitable and misleading—is +found wherever the Gospel is not yet Hellenised (see, for example, Barn. 4. +15; Hermas; 2 Clem.; Papias [Euseb. III. 39]; διδαχη, 10. 16; Apoc. Petri; Justin. +Dial. 32, 51, 80, 82, 110, 139; Cerinthus), and must be regarded as a main +element of the Christian preaching (see my article "Millenium" in the +Encycl. Brit.) In it lay not the least of the power of Christianity in the first +century, and the means whereby it entered the Jewish propaganda in the Empire +and surpassed it. The hopes springing out of Judaism were at first but +little modified, that is, only so far as the substitution of the Christian +communities for the nation of Israel made modification necessary. In all +else even the details of the Jewish hopes of the future were retained, +and the extra-canonical Jewish Apocalypses (Esra, Enoch, Baruch, Moses, +etc.) were diligently read alongside of Daniel. Their contents were in part +joined on to sayings of Jesus and they served as models for similar productions +(here therefore an enduring connection with the Jewish religion +is very plain). In the Christian hopes of the future as in the Jewish +eschatology may be distinguished essential and accidental fixed and +fluid elements. To the former belong: (1) the notion of a final fearful conflict +with the powers of the world which is just about to break out το +τελειον σκανδαλον εγγικεν, (2) belief in the speedy return of Christ, (3) the +conviction that after conquering the secular power (this was variously +conceived as God's Ministers as that which restrains—2 Thess. II. 6, +as a pure kingdom of Satan see the various estimates in Justin, Melito, +Irenæus and Hippolytus) Christ will establish a glorious kingdom on the +earth and will raise the saints to share in that kingdom, and (4) that he +will finally judge all men. To the fluid elements belong the notions of the +Antichrist or of the secular power culminating in the Antichrist as well +as notions about the place, the extent, and the duration of Christ's glorious +kingdom. But it is worthy of special note that Justin regarded the +belief that Christ will set up his kingdom in Jerusalem, and that it will +endure for 1000 years, as a necessary element of orthodoxy, though he +confesses he knew Christians who did not share this belief, while they +did not like the pseudo Christians reject also the resurrection of the +body (the promise of Montanus that Christ's kingdom would be let down +at Pepuza and Tymion is a thing by itself and answers to the other +promises and pretensions of Montanus). The resurrection of the body is +expressed in the Roman Symbol while very notably the hope of Christ's +earthly kingdom is not there mentioned (see above p. 157). The great +inheritance which the Gentile Christian communities received from Judaism +is the eschatological hopes along with the Monotheism assured by revelation +and belief in providence. The law as a national law was abolished. +The Old Testament became a new book in the hands of the Gentile +Christians. On the contrary the eschatological hopes in all their details +and with all the deep shadows which they threw on the state and public +life were at first received and maintained themselves in wide circles +pretty much unchanged and only succumbed in some of their details—just +as in Judaism—to the changes which resulted from the constant change +of the political situation. But these hopes were also destined in great +measure to pass away after the settlement of Christianity on Græco-Roman +soil. We may set aside the fact that they did not occupy the foreground +in Paul, for we do not know whether this was of importance for the period +that followed. But that Christ would set up the kingdom in Jerusalem, and +that it would be an earthly kingdom with sensuous enjoyments—these and +other notions contend on the one hand with the vigorous antijudaism of the +communities, and on the other with the moralistic spiritualism, in the pure +carrying out of which the Gentile Christians in the East at least increasingly +recognised the essence of Christianity. Only the vigorous world renouncing +enthusiasm which did not permit the rise of moralistic spiritualism and +mysticism, and the longing for a time of joy and dominion that was born of it, +protected for a long time a series of ideas which corresponded to the spiritual +disposition of the great multitude of converts only at times of special oppression. +Moreover the Christians in opposition to Judaism were, as a rule, instructed +to obey magistrates whose establishment directly contradicted +the judgment of the state contained in the Apocalypses. In such a conflict +however that judgment necessarily conquers at last which makes as little +change as possible in the existing forms of life. A history of the gradual +attenuation and subsidence of eschatologlcal hopes in the II.-IV. centuries +can only be written in fragments. They have rarely—at best by fits +and starts—marked out the course. On the contrary if I may say so +they only gave the smoke, for the course was pointed out by the abiding +elements of the Gospel, trust in God and the Lord Christ, the resolution +to a holy life, and a firm bond of brotherhood. The quiet gradual change, in +which the eschatologlcal hopes passed away fell into the background or lost +important parts, was on the other hand a result of deep reaching changes in +the faith and life of Christendom. Chiliasm as a power was broken up by speculative +mysticism and on that account very much later in the West than in +the East. But speculative mysticism has its centre in christology. In the earliest +period this as a theory belonged more to the defence of religion than to +religion itself. Ignatius alone was able to reflect on that transference of power +from Christ which Paul had experienced. The disguises in which the apocalyptic +eschatologlcal prophecies were set forth belonged in part to the form +of this literature (in so far as one could easily be given the lie if he became +too plain or in so far as the prophet really saw the future only in large outline) +partly it had to be chosen in order not to give political offence. See Hippol. +comm. in Daniel (Georgiades, p. 49, 51. νοειν οφειλομεν τα κατα καιρον συμβαινοντα +και ειδοτας σιωπαν), but above all Constantine orat. ad s. coetum 19, on some +verses of Virgil which are interpreted in a Christian sense but that none of +the rulers in the capital might be able to accuse their author of violating the +laws of the state with his poetry or of destroying the traditional ideas of the +procedure about the gods he concealed the truth under a veil. That holds +good also of the Apocalyptists and the poets of the Christian Sibylline sayings.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote201" name="footnote201"></a><b>Footnote 201:</b><a href="#footnotetag201"> (return) </a><p> The hope of the resurrection of the body (1 Clem. 26. 3 +αναστεσεις τεν +σαρκα μου ταυτεν, Herm. Sim. V. 7. 2 βλεπε μητοτε αναβη επι την καρδιαν σου +την σαρκα σου ταυτην φθαρτην ειναι. Barn. 5. 6 f., 21. 1, 2 Clem. 9. 1 +και μη +λεγετω τις 'υμων οτι 'αυτη 'η σαρξ ου κρινεται ουδε ανισταται. Polyc. Ep. 7. 2, +Justin Dial. 80, etc.) finds its place originally in the hope of a share in the +glorious kingdom of Christ. It therefore disappears or is modified wherever +that hope itself falls into the background. But it finally asserted itself through +out and became of independent importance in a new structure of eschatologlcal +expectations in which it attained the significance of becoming the +specific conviction of Christian faith. With the hope of the resurrection +of the body was originally connected the hope of a happy life in easy +blessedness under green trees in magnificent fields with joyous feeding +flocks and flying angels clothed in white. One must read the Revelation +of Peter the Shepherd or the Acts of Perpetua and Felicitas in order +to see how entirely the fancy of many Christians and not merely of those +who were uncultured dwelt in a fairyland in which they caught sight now +of the Ancient of days and now of the Youthful Shepherd Christ. The most +fearful delineations of the torments of Hell formed the reverse side to this. We +now know through the Apocalypse of Peter, how old these delineations are.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote202" name="footnote202"></a><b>Footnote 202:</b><a href="#footnotetag202"> (return) </a><p> The perfect knowledge of the truth and eternal life are +connected in the closest way (see p. 144, note 1) because the Father of +truth is also Prince of life (see Diognet. 12: ουδε γαρ ζωη +ανευ γνωσεως ουδε γνωσις ασφαλης ανευ ζωης αληθους διο πλησιον +εκατερον πεφυτευται, see also what follows). The classification is a +Hellenic one, which has certainly penetrated also into Palestinian +Jewish theology. It may be reckoned among the great intuitions, which in +the fulness of the times, united the religious and reflective minds of +all nations. The Pauline formula, "Where there is forgiveness of sin, +there also is life and salvation", had for centuries no distinct +history. But the formula, "Where there is truth, perfect knowledge, +there also is eternal life", has had the richest history in Christendom +from the beginning. Quite apart from John, it is older than the theology +of the Apologists (see, for example, the Supper prayer in the Didache, +9. 10, where there is no mention of the forgiveness of sin, but thanks +are given, 'υπερ της γνωσεως και πιστεως και αθανασιας 'ης +εγνωρισεν 'ημιν 'ο θεος δια Ιησου, or 'υπερ της ζωης και +γνωσεως, and 1 Clem. 36. 2: δια τουτο ηθελησεν 'ο δεσποτες +της αθανατου γνωσεως 'ημας γευσασθαι). It is capable of a very +manifold content, and has never made its way in the Church without +reservations, but so far as it has we may speak of a hellenising of +Christianity. This is shewn most clearly in the fact that the +αθανασια, identical with αφθαρσια and ζωη +αιωνιος, as is proved by their being often interchanged, gradually +supplanted the βασιλεια του θεου (χριστου) and +thrust it out of the sphere of religious intuition and hope into that of +religious speech. It should also be noted, at the same time, that in the +hope of eternal life which is bestowed with the knowledge of the truth, +the resurrection of the body is by no means with certainty included. It +is rather added to it (see above) from another series of ideas. +Conversely, the words ζωην αιωνιον were first added to the +words σαρκος αναστασιν in the western Symbols at a +comparatively late period, while in the prayers they are certainly very +old.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote203" name="footnote203"></a><b>Footnote 203:</b><a href="#footnotetag203"> (return) </a><p> Even the assumption of such a remission is fundamentally in contradiction +with moralism; but that solitary remission of sin was not called +in question, was rather regarded as distinctive of the new religion, +and was established by an appeal to the omnipotence and special goodness +of God, which appears just in the calling of sinners. In this calling, +grace as grace is exhausted (Barn. 5. 9; 2 Clem. 2. 4-7). But this grace +itself seems to be annulled, inasmuch as the sins committed before baptism +were regarded as having been committed in a state of ignorance +(Tertull. de bapt. I.: delicta pristinæ cæcitatis), on account of which it +seemed worthy of God to forgive them, that is, to accept the repentance +which followed on the ground of the new knowledge. So considered, +everything, in point of fact, amounts to the gracious gift of knowledge, +and the memory of the saying, "Jesus receiveth sinners", is completely +obscured. But the tradition of this saying and many like it, and above +all, the religious instinct, where it was more powerfully stirred, did not +permit a consistent development of that moralistic conception. See for +this, Hermas, Sim. V. 7. 3: περι των προτερων αγνοηματων τω θεω μονω δυνατον +ιασιν δουναι; αυτου γαρ εστι πασα εξουσια. Præd. Petri ap. Clem. Strom. VI. +6. 48: 'οσα εν αγνοια τις 'υμων εποιησεν μη ειδως σαφως τον θεον, εαν επιγνους +μετανοησηι, παντα αυτω αφεθησεται τα 'αμαρτηματα. Aristides, Apol. 17: "The +Christians offer prayers (for the unconverted Greeks) that they may be +converted from their error. But when one of them is converted he is ashamed +before the Christians of the works which he has done. And he confesses to +God, saying: 'I have done these things in ignorance.' And he cleanses his heart, +and his sins are forgiven him, because he had done them in ignorance, in the +earlier period when he mocked and jeered at the true knowledge of the Christians." +Exactly the same in Tertull. de pudic. so. init. The statement of this +same writer (1. c. fin), "Cessatio delicti radix est veniæ, ut venia sit pænitentiæ +fructus", is a pregnant expression of the conviction of the earliest +Gentile Christians.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote204" name="footnote204"></a><b>Footnote 204:</b><a href="#footnotetag204"> (return) </a><p> This idea appears with special prominence in the Epistle of Barnabas +(see 6. 11. 14); the new formation (αναπλασσειν) results through the +forgiveness of sin. In the moralistic view the forgiveness of sin is the +result of the renewal that is spontaneously brought about on the ground +of knowledge shewing itself in penitent feeling.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote205" name="footnote205"></a><b>Footnote 205:</b><a href="#footnotetag205"> (return) </a><p>Barn. 2. 6, and my notes on the passage.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote206" name="footnote206"></a><b>Footnote 206:</b><a href="#footnotetag206"> (return) </a><p> James I. 25.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote207" name="footnote207"></a><b>Footnote 207:</b><a href="#footnotetag207"> (return) </a><p> Hermas. Sim. VIII. 3. 2; Justin Dial. II. 43; Præd. Petri in Clem., +Strom. I. 29. 182; II. 15. 68.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote208" name="footnote208"></a><b>Footnote 208:</b><a href="#footnotetag208"> (return) </a><p>Didache, c. 1., and my notes on the passage (Prolegg. p. 45 f.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote209" name="footnote209"></a><b>Footnote 209:</b><a href="#footnotetag209"> (return) </a><p>The concepts, επαγγελια, γνωσις, νομος, form the +Triad on which the later catholic conception of Christianity is based, +though it can be proved to have been in existence at an earlier period. +That πιστις must everywhere take the lead was undoubted, though +we must not think of the Pauline idea of πιστις. When the +Apostolic Fathers reflect upon faith, which, however, happens only +incidentally, they mean a holding for true of a sum of holy traditions, +and obedience to them, along with the hope that their consoling contents +will yet be fully revealed. But Ignatius speaks like a Christian who +knows what he possesses in faith in Christ, that is, in confidence in +him. In Barn. 1, Polyc. Ep. 2, we find "faith, hope, love"; in Ignatius, +"faith and love." Tertullian, in an excellent exposition, has shewn how +far patience is a temper corresponding to Christian faith (see besides +the Epistle of James).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote210" name="footnote210"></a><b>Footnote 210:</b><a href="#footnotetag210"> (return) </a><p> See Lipsius De Clementis R. ep. ad. Cor. priore disquis. 1855. It +would be in point of method inadmissible to conclude from the fact +that in 1 Clem. Pauline formulæ are relatively most faithfully produced, +that Gentile Christianity generally understood Pauline theology at first, +but gradually lost this understanding in the course of two generations.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote211" name="footnote211"></a><b>Footnote 211:</b><a href="#footnotetag211"> (return) </a><p> Formally: τηρησατε την σαρκα αγνην και την +σφραγιδα ασπιλον (2 Clem. 8. 6).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote212" name="footnote212"></a><b>Footnote 212:</b><a href="#footnotetag212"> (return) </a><p> Hermas (Mand. IV. 3) and Justin presuppose it. Hermas of course sought +and found a way of meeting the results of that idea which were threatening +the Church with decimation; but he did not question the idea itself. +Because Christendom is a community of saints which has in its midst +the sure salvation, all its members—this is the necessary inference—must +lead a sinless life.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote213" name="footnote213"></a><b>Footnote 213:</b><a href="#footnotetag213"> (return) </a><p> The formula, "righteousness by faith alone", was really repressed +in the second century; but it could not be entirely destroyed: see my +Essay, "Gesch. d. Seligkeit allein durch den Glauben in der alten K." +Ztsch. f. Theol. u Kirche. I. pp. 82-105.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote214" name="footnote214"></a><b>Footnote 214:</b><a href="#footnotetag214"> (return) </a><p> The only thorough discussion of the use of the Old Testament by +an Apostolic Father, and of its authority, that we possess, is Wrede's +"Untersuchungen zum 1 Clemensbrief" (1891). Excellent preliminary investigations, +which, however, are not everywhere quite reliable, may be +found in Hatch's Essays in Biblical Greek, 1889. Hatch has taken up +again the hypothesis of earlier scholars, that there were very probably +in the first and second centuries systematised extracts from the Old +Testament (see p. 203-214). The hypothesis is not yet quite established +(see Wrede, above work, p. 65), but yet it is hardly to be rejected. The +Jewish catechetical and missionary instruction in the Diaspora needed +such collections, and their existence seem to be proved by the Christian +Apologies and the Sybilline books.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote215" name="footnote215"></a><b>Footnote 215:</b><a href="#footnotetag215"> (return) </a><p> It is an extremely important fact that the words of the Lord were +quoted and applied in their literal sense (that is chiefly for the statement +of Christian morality) by Ecclesiastical authors, almost without exception, +up to and inclusive of Justin. It was different with the theologians of +the age, that is the Gnostics, and the Fathers from Irenæus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote216" name="footnote216"></a><b>Footnote 216:</b><a href="#footnotetag216"> (return) </a><p> Justin was not the first to do so, for it had already been done by the +so-called Barnabas (see especially c. 13) and others. On the proofs from prophecy +see my Texte und Unters. Bd. I. 3. pp. 56-74. The passage in the Praed. +Petri (Clem. Strom. VI. 15. 128) is very complete: 'Ημις αναπτιξαντες τας +βιβλους τας ειχομεν των προφητων, 'α μεν δια παραβολων 'α δε δια αινιγματων, 'α δε +αυθεντικως και αυτολεξει τον Χριστον Ιησουν ονομαζοντων, ευρομεν και την παρουσιαν +αυτου και τον θανατον και τον σταυρον και τας λοιπας κολασεις πασας, 'οσας εποιησαν +αυτω 'οι Ιουδαιοι, και την εγερσιν και την εις ουρανους αναληψιν προ του 'ιερσολυμα +κριθηναι, καθως εγεγραπτο ταυτα παντα 'α εδει αυτον παθειν και μετ' αυτον 'α +εσται; ταυτα ουν επιγνοντες επιστευσαμεν τω θεω δια των γεγραμμεννων εις αυτον. +With the help of the Old Testament the teachers dated back the Christian +religion to the beginning of the human race, and joined the preparations +for the founding of the Christian community with the creation of the +world. The Apologists were not the first to do so, for Barnabas and +Hermas, and before these, Paul, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, +and others had already done the same. This was undoubtedly to the +cultured classes one of the most impressive articles in the missionary +preaching. The Christian religion in this way got a hold which the others—with +the exception of the Jewish—lacked. But for that very reason, we must +guard against turning it into a formula, that the Gentile Christians had +comprehended the Old Testament essentially through the scheme of +prediction and fulfilment. The Old Testament is certainly the book of +predictions, but for that very reason the complete revelation of God +which needs no additions and excludes subsequent changes. The historical +fulfilment only proves to the world the truth of those revelations. +Even the scheme of shadow and reality is yet entirely out of sight. In +such circumstances the question necessarily arises, as to what independent +meaning and significance Christ's appearance could have, apart +from that confirmation of the Old Testament. But, apart from the Gnostics, +a surprisingly long time passed before this question was raised, that +is to say, it was not raised till the time of Irenæus.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote217" name="footnote217"></a><b>Footnote 217:</b><a href="#footnotetag217"> (return) </a><p>See διδαχη, 8.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote218" name="footnote218"></a><b>Footnote 218:</b><a href="#footnotetag218"> (return) </a><p> See the Revelation of John II. 9; III. 9; but see also the "Jews" in +the Gospels of John and of Peter. The latter exonerates Pilate almost +completely, and makes the Jews and Herod responsible for the crucifixion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote219" name="footnote219"></a><b>Footnote 219:</b><a href="#footnotetag219"> (return) </a><p> See Barn. 9. 4. In the second epistle of Clement the Jews are called: +'οι δοκιουντες εχειν θεον, cf. Præd. Petri in Clem., Strom. VI. 5. 41: +μηδε κατα +Ιουδαιους σεβεσθε, και γαρ εκεινοι μονοι οιομενοι τον θεον γιγνωσκειν ουκ επιστανται, +λατρευοντες αγγελοις και αρχαγγελοις, μηνι και σεληνη, και εαν μη σεληνη φανηι, +σαββατον ουκ αγουσι το λεγομενον πρωτον, ουδε νεομηνιαν αγουσιν, ουδε αζυμα, ουδε +'εορτην, ουδε μεγαλην 'ημερα. (Cf. Diognet. 34.) Even Justin does not judge the +Jews more favourably than the Gentiles, but less favourably; see Apol I. 37, +39, 43, 34, 47, 53, 60. On the other hand, Aristides (Apol. c. 14, especially +in the Syrian text) is much more friendly disposed to the Jews and +recognises them more. The words of Pionius against and about the Jews, +in the "Acta Pionii," c. 4, are very instructive.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote220" name="footnote220"></a><b>Footnote 220:</b><a href="#footnotetag220"> (return) </a><p> Barn. 4. 6. f.; 14. 1 f. The author of Præd. Petri must have had a +similar view of the matter.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote221" name="footnote221"></a><b>Footnote 221:</b><a href="#footnotetag221"> (return) </a><p>Justin in the Dialogue with Trypho.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote222" name="footnote222"></a><b>Footnote 222:</b><a href="#footnotetag222"> (return) </a><p> Barn. 9 f. It is a thorough misunderstanding of Barnabas' position +towards the Old Testament to suppose it possible to pass over his +expositions, c. 6-10, as oddities and caprices, and put them aside as +indifferent or unmethodical. There is nothing here unmethodical, and therefore +nothing arbitrary. Barnabas' strictly spiritual idea of God, and the +conviction that all (Jewish) ceremonies are of the devil, compel his +explanations. These are so little ingenious conceits to Barnabas that, but for +them, he would have been forced to give up the Old Testament altogether. +The account, for example, of Abraham having circumcised his slaves would +have forced Barnabas to annul the whole authority of the Old Testament if +he had not succeeded in giving it a particular interpretation. He does this by +combining other passages of Genesis with the narrative, and then finding in +it no longer circumcision, but a prediction of the crucified Christ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote223" name="footnote223"></a><b>Footnote 223:</b><a href="#footnotetag223"> (return) </a><p> Barn. 9. 6: αλλ' ερεις, και μην περιτετμηται 'ο +λαος εις σφραγιδα.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote224" name="footnote224"></a><b>Footnote 224:</b><a href="#footnotetag224"> (return) </a><p> See the expositions of Justin in the Dial. (especially, 16, 18, 20, 30, +40-46); +Von Engelhardt, "Christenthum Justin's", p. 429, ff. Justin has the +three estimates side by side. (1) That the ceremonial law was a pædagogic +measure of God with reference to a stiff-necked people, prone to +idolatry. (2) That it—like circumcision—was to make the people conspicuous +for the execution of judgment, according to the Divine appointment. +(3) That in the ceremonial legal worship of the Jews is exhibited +the special depravity and wickedness of the nation. But Justin conceived +the Decalogue as the natural law of reason, and therefore definitely +distinguished it from the ceremonial law.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote225" name="footnote225"></a><b>Footnote 225:</b><a href="#footnotetag225"> (return) </a><p>See Ztschr fur K.G. I., p. 330 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote226" name="footnote226"></a><b>Footnote 226:</b><a href="#footnotetag226"> (return) </a><p> This is the unanimous opinion of all writers of the +post-Apostolic age. Christians are the true Israel; and therefore all +Israel's predicates of honour belong to them. They are the twelve +tribes, and therefore Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, are the Fathers of the +Christians. This idea, about which there was no wavering, cannot +everywhere be traced back to the Apostle Paul. The Old Testament men of +God were in a certain measure Christians. See Ignat. Magn. 8. 2: +'οι προφηται κατα Χριστον Ιησουν εζησαν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote227" name="footnote227"></a><b>Footnote 227:</b><a href="#footnotetag227"> (return) </a><p> God was naturally conceived and represented as corporeal by +uncultured Christians, though not by these alone, as the later controversies +prove (<i>e.g.</i>, Orig. contra Melito; see also Tertull. De anima). In +the case of the cultured, the idea of a corporeality of God may be +traced back to Stoic influences; in the case of the uncultured, popular +ideas co-operated with the sayings of the Old Testament literally understood, +and the impression of the Apocalyptic images.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote228" name="footnote228"></a><b>Footnote 228:</b><a href="#footnotetag228"> (return) </a><p>See Joh. IV. 22, 'ημεις προσκυνουμεν 'ο οιδαμεν. 1 +Clem. 59. 3, 4, Herm. Mand. I., Præd Petri in Clem., Strom. VI. 5. 9 +γινωσκετε 'οτι εις θεος εστιν, 'ος αρχην παντων εποιησεν, και τελους +εξουσιαν εχων. Aristides Apol. 15 (Syr) "The Christians know and believe +in God, the creator of heaven and of earth." Chap. 16 "Christians as men +who know God pray to him for things which it becomes him to give and +them to receive." Similarly Justin: "From very many old Gentile Christian +writings we hear it as a cry of joy 'We know God the Almighty, the night +of blindness is past'" (see, <i>e.g.</i>, 2 Clem. c. 1). God is +δεσποτης, a designation which is very frequently used (it is rare in +the New Testament). Still more frequently do we find κυριος. As +the Lord and Creator God is also called the Father (of the world) so 1 +Clem. 19. 2 'ο πατηρ και κτιστης του συμπαντος κοσμου; 35. 3 +δημιουργος και πατηρ των αιωνων. This use of the name Father +for the supreme God was as is well known familiar to the Greeks, but the +Christians alone were in earnest with the name. The creation out of +nothing was made decidedly prominent by Hermas, see Vis. I. 1. 6 and my +notes on the passage. In the Christian Apocrypha, in spite of the +vividness of the idea of God, the angels play the same rôle as in the +Jewish, and as in the current Jewish speculations. According to Hermas, +<i>e.g.</i>, all God's actions are mediated by special angels, nay the +Son of God himself is represented by a special angel, viz. Michael, and +works by him. But outside the Apocalypses there seems to have been +little interest in the good angels.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote229" name="footnote229"></a><b>Footnote 229:</b><a href="#footnotetag229"> (return) </a><p>See, for example 1 Clem. 20.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote230" name="footnote230"></a><b>Footnote 230:</b><a href="#footnotetag230"> (return) </a><p> This is frequent in the Apologists, see also Diogn. 10. 2; but Hermas, +Vis. II. 4. 1 (see also Cels. ap Orig. IV. 23) says δια την εκκλησιαν +'ο κοσμος κατηρτισθη (cf. I. 1. 6 and my notes on the passage). Aristides +(Apol. 16) declares it as his conviction that "the beautiful things, that +is, the world are maintained only for the sake of Christians," see besides +the words (I. c.), "I have no doubt that the earth continues to exist +(only) on account of the prayers of the Christians." Even the Jewish +Apocalyptists wavered between the formulæ, that the world was created +for the sake of man and for the sake of the Jewish nation. The two +are not mutually exclusive. The statement in the Eucharistic prayer of +Didache, 9. 3 εκτισας τα παντα 'ενεκεν του ονοματος σου is singular.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote231" name="footnote231"></a><b>Footnote 231:</b><a href="#footnotetag231"> (return) </a><p> God is named the Father, (1) in relation to the Son (very +frequent) (2) as Father of the world (see above) (3) as the merciful one +who has proved his goodness, declared his will and called Christians to +be his sons (1 Clem. 23. 1, 29. 1, 2 Clem. 1. 4, 8. 4, 10. 1, 14. 1, see the +index to Zahn's edition of the Ignatian Epistles, Didache, 1. 5, 9. 2, 3, +10. 2). The latter usage is not very common, it is entirely wanting for +example in the Epistle of Barnabas. Moreover God is also called +πατηρ της αληθειας as the source of all truth (2 Clem. 3. 1, 20. 5 +θεος το αληθειας). The identity of the Almighty God of +creation with the merciful God of redemption is the tacit presupposition +of all declarations about God in the case of both the cultured and the +uncultured. It is also frequently expressed (see above all the Pastoral +Epistles), most frequently by Hermas (Vis. 1. 3. 4) so far as the +declaration about the creation of the world is there united in the +closest way with that about the creation of the Holy Church. As to the +designation of God in the Roman Symbol as the "Father Almighty," that +threefold exposition just given, may perhaps allow it.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote232" name="footnote232"></a><b>Footnote 232:</b><a href="#footnotetag232"> (return) </a><p> The present dominion of evil demons or of one evil demon, was just as +generally presupposed as man's need of redemption, which was regarded as +a result of that dominion. The conviction that the world's course (the πολιτεια +εν τω κοσμω, the Latins afterwards used the word Sæculum) is determined by +the devil, and that the dark one (Barnabas) has dominion, comes out most +prominently where eschatological hopes obtain expression. But where salvation +is thought of as knowledge and immortality, it is ignorance and frailty +from which men are to be delivered. We may here also assume with certainty +that these, in the last instance, were traced back by the writers to the +action of demons. But it makes a very great difference whether the judgment +was ruled by fancy which saw a real devil everywhere active, or whether, in +consequence of theoretic reflection, it based the impression of universal +ignorance and mortality on the assumption of demons who have produced +them. Here again we must note the two series of ideas which intertwine and +struggle with each other in the creeds of the earliest period, the traditional +religious series resting on a fanciful view of history—it is essentially identical +with the Jewish Apocalyptic, see, for example Barn 4—and the empiric +moralistic, (see 2 Clem. 1. 2-7, as a specially valuable discussion, or Praed. +Petri in Clem, Strom. VI. 5, 39, 40), which abides by the fact that men have +fallen into ignorance, weakness and death (2 Clem. 1. 6 'ο βιος 'ημων 'ολος αλλο +ουδεν ην ει μη θανατος). But perhaps, in no other point, with the exception of the +αναστασις σαρκος has the religious conception remained so tenacious as in +this and it decidedly prevailed, especially in the epoch with which we are +now dealing. Its tenacity may be explained, among other things, by the living +impression of the polytheism that surrounded the communities on every +side. Even where the national gods were looked upon as dead idols—and +that was perhaps the rule, see Praed. Petri. I. c, 2 Clem. 3. 1, Didache, 6—one +could not help assuming that there were mighty demons operative behind +them, as otherwise the frightful power of idolatry could not be explained. +But on the other hand, even a calm reflection and a temper unfriendly to all +religious excess must have welcomed the assumption of demons who sought +to rule the world and man. For by means of this assumption which was +wide-spread even among the Greeks, humanity seemed to be unburdened, +and the presupposed capacity for redemption could therefore be justified in +its widest range. From the assumption that the need of redemption was altogether +due to ignorance and mortality there was but one step, or little more +than one step, to the assumption that the need of redemption was grounded +in a condition of man for which he was not responsible, that is, in the flesh. +But this step which would have led either to dualism (heretical Gnosis) or to +the abolition of the distinction between natural and moral, was not taken +within the main body of the Church. The eschatological series of ideas with +its thesis that death evil and sin entered into humanity at a definite historical +moment when the demons took possession of the world drew a limit which +was indeed overstepped at particular points but was in the end respected. We +have therefore the remarkable fact that, on the one hand, early Christian +(Jewish) eschatology called forth and maintained a disposition in which the +Kingdom of God, and that of the world, (Kingdom of the devil) were felt to be +absolutely opposed (practical dualism), while, on the other hand, it rejected +theoretic dualism. Redemption through Christ, however, was conceived in +the eschatological Apocalyptic series of ideas as essentially something entirely +in the future, for the power of the devil was not broken, but rather increased +(or it was virtually broken in believers and increased in unbelievers), +by the first advent of Christ, and therefore the period between the first and +second advent of Christ belongs to 'ουτος 'ο αιων (see Barn. 2. 4; Herm. Sim 1; +2 Clem. 6. 3: εστιν δε 'ουτος 'ο αιων και 'ο μελλων δυο εχθροι; 'ουτος +λεγει μοιχειαν και +φθοραν και φιλαργουριαν και απατην, εκεινος δε τουτοις αποστασσεται, Ignat. Magn. +5. 2). For that very reason, the second coming of Christ must, as a matter of +course, be at hand, for only through it could the first advent get its full value. +The painful impression that nothing had been outwardly changed by Christ's +first advent (the heathen, moreover, pointed this out in mockery to the suffering +Christians), must be destroyed by the hope of his speedy coming again. +But the first advent had its independent significance in the series of ideas +which regarded Christ as redeeming man from ignorance and mortality; for +the knowledge was already given, and the gift of immortality could only of +course be dispensed after this life was ended, but then immediately. The hope +of Christ's return was therefore a superfluity, but was not felt or set aside as +such, because there was still a lively expectation of Christ's earthly Kingdom.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote233" name="footnote233"></a><b>Footnote 233:</b><a href="#footnotetag233"> (return) </a><p>No other name adhered to Christ so firmly as that of κυριος; see a +specially clear evidence of this, Novatian de trinit. 30, who argues against the +Adoptian and Modalistic heretics thus: "Et in primis illud retorquendum in +istos, qui duorum nobis deorum controversiam facere præsumunt. Scriptum +est, quod negare non possunt: 'Quoniam unus est dominus.' De Christo +ergo quid sentiunt? Dominum esse, aut illum omnino non esse? Sed +dominum illum omnino non dubitant. Ergo si vera est illorum ratiocinatio, +jam duo sunt domini." On κυριος—δεσποτης, see above, p. 119, note.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote234" name="footnote234"></a><b>Footnote 234:</b><a href="#footnotetag234"> (return) </a><p> Specially instructive examples of this are found in the Epistle of +Barnabas and the second Epistle of Clement. Clement (Ep. 1) speaks +only of faith in God.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote235" name="footnote235"></a><b>Footnote 235:</b><a href="#footnotetag235"> (return) </a><p>See 1 Clem. 59-61. διδαχη, c. 9. 10. Yet Novatian +(de trinit. 14) exactly +reproduces the old idea, "Si homo tantummodo Christus, cur homo in +orationibus mediator invocatur, cum invocatio hominis ad præstandam +salutem inefficax judicetur." As the Mediator, High Priest, etc., Christ +is of course always and everywhere invoked by the Christians, but such +invocations are one thing and formal prayer another. The idea of the +congruence of God's will of salvation with the revelation of salvation +which took place through Christ, was further continued in the idea of +the congruence of this revelation of salvation with the universal preaching +of the twelve chosen Apostles (see above, p. 162 ff.), the root of the +Catholic principle of tradition. But the Apostles never became "'οι κυριοι" +though the concepts διδαχη (λογος) κυριου, διδαχη (κηρυγμα) των αποστολων +were just as interchangeable as λογος θεου and λογος χριστου. +The full +formula would be λογος θεου δια Ιησου Χριστου δια των αποστολων. But as the +subjects introduced by δια are chosen and perfect media, religious usage +permitted the abbreviation.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote236" name="footnote236"></a><b>Footnote 236:</b><a href="#footnotetag236"> (return) </a><p> In the epistle of Barnabas "Jesus Christ" and "Christ" appear each +once, but "Jesus" twelve times: in the Didache "Jesus Christ" once, "Jesus" +three times. Only in the second half of the second century, if I am not +mistaken, did the designation "Jesus Christ", or "Christ", become the +current one, more and more crowding out the simple "Jesus." Yet the +latter designation—and this is not surprising—appears to have continued +longest in the regular prayers. It is worthy of note that in the Shepherd +there is no mention either of the name Jesus or of Christ. The Gospel +of Peter also says 'ο κυριος where the other Gospels use these names.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote237" name="footnote237"></a><b>Footnote 237:</b><a href="#footnotetag237"> (return) </a><p> See 1 Clem. 64: 'ο θεος, 'ο εκλεξαμενος τον κυριον Ιησουν +Χριστον και 'ημας +δι' αυτου εις λαον περιουσιον δωη, κ.τ.λ. (It is instructive to note that wherever +the idea of election is expressed, the community is immediately thought of, +for in point of fact the election of the Messiah has no other aim than to elect +or call the community; Barn. 3. 6: 'ο λαος 'ον 'ητοιμασεν εν τω ηγαπημενωι +αυτου). +Herm. Sim. V. 2: εκλεξαμενος δουλον τινα πιστον και ευαρεστον V. 6. 5. Justin, +Dial. 48: μη αρνεισθαι 'οτι 'ουτος εστιν 'ο Χριστος, εαν φαινηται 'ως +ανθρωπος εξ +ανθρωπον γεννηθεις και εκλογη γενομενος εις το Χριστον ειναι αποδεικνυηται.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote238" name="footnote238"></a><b>Footnote 238:</b><a href="#footnotetag238"> (return) </a><p> See Barn. 14. 5: Ιησους εις τουτο 'ητοιμασθη, 'ινα ... 'ημας +λυτρωσαμενος εκ +του σκοτους διαθηται εν 'ημιν διαθηκην λογωι. The same word concerning the +Church, I. c. 3. 6. and 5. 7: αυτος εαυτω τον λαον τον καινον ετοιμαζων 14 6.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote239" name="footnote239"></a><b>Footnote 239:</b><a href="#footnotetag239"> (return) </a><p> "Angel" is a very old designation for Christ (see Justin's Dial.) which +maintained itself up to the Nicean controversy, and is expressly claimed +for him in Novatian's treatise "de trinit." 11. 25 ff. (the word was taken +from Old Testament passages which were applied to Christ). As a rule, +however, it is not to be understood as a designation of the nature, but +of the office of Christ as such, though the matter was never very clear. +There were Christians who used it as a designation of the nature, and +from the earliest times we find this idea contradicted (see the Apoc. +Sophoniæ, ed. Stern, 1886, IV. fragment, p 10: "He appointed no Angel +to come to us, nor Archangel, nor any power, but he transformed himself +into a man that he might come to us for our deliverance." Cf. the +remarkable parallel, ep. ad. Diagn. 7. 2: ... ου, καθαπερ αν τις εικασειεν +ανθρωπος, 'υπηρετην τινα πεμψας η αγγελον η αρχοντα η τινα των διεποντων τα +επιγεια 'η τινα των πεπιστευμενων τας εν ουρανοις διοικησεις, αλλ' αυτον τον τεχνιτην +και δημιουργον των 'ολων. κ.τ.λ.). Yet it never got the length of a great controversy +and as the Logos doctrine gradually made way, the designation +"Angel" became harmless and then vanished.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote240" name="footnote240"></a><b>Footnote 240:</b><a href="#footnotetag240"> (return) </a><p>Παις (after Isaiah): this designation, frequently united with +Ιησους and +with the adjectives 'αγιος and ηγαπημενος (see Barn. 3, 6; 4, 3; 4, +8; Valent. +ap. Clem. Alex., Strom. VI. 6. 52, and the Ascensio Isaiae), seems to have +been at the beginning a usual one. It sprang undoubtedly from the Messianic +circle of ideas, and at its basis lies the idea of election. It is very +interesting to observe how it was gradually put into the background and +finally abolished. It was kept longest in the liturgical prayers: see 1 +Clem. 59. 2; Barn. 61. 9. 2; Acts iii. 13, 26; iv. 27, 30; Didache, 9. 2. 3; +Mart. Polyc. 14. 20; Act. Pauli et Theclæ, 17, 24; Sibyl. I. v. 324, 331, +364; Diogn. 8, 9, 10: 'ο 'αγαπητος παις 9; also Ep. Orig. ad Afric. init; +Clem. Strom. VII. 1. 4: 'ο μονογενης παις, and my note on Barn 6. 1. In the +Didache (9. 2) Jesus as well as David is in one statement called "Servant +of God." Barnabas, who calls Christ the "Beloved", uses the same expression +for the Church (4. 1. 9); see also Ignat ad Smyrn. inscr.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote241" name="footnote241"></a><b>Footnote 241:</b><a href="#footnotetag241"> (return) </a><p> See the old Roman Symbol and Acts X. 42; 2 Tim. IV. 1; Barn. +7. 2; Polyc. Ep. 2. 1; 2 Clem. 2. 1; Hegesipp. in Euseb. H. E. III. 20, 6: +Justin Dial. 118</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote242" name="footnote242"></a><b>Footnote 242:</b><a href="#footnotetag242"> (return) </a><p> There could of course be no doubt that Christ meant the "anointed" +(even Aristides Apol. 2 fin., if Nestle's correction is right, Justin's Apol. +1. 4 and similar passages do not justify doubt on that point). But the +meaning and the effect of this anointing was very obscure. Justin says +(Apol. II. 6) Χριστος μεν κατα το κεχρισθαι και κοσμησαι τα παντα δι αυτου +τον θεον λεγεται and therefore (see Dial. 76 fin.) finds in this designation +an expression of the cosmic significance of Christ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote243" name="footnote243"></a><b>Footnote 243:</b><a href="#footnotetag243"> (return) </a><p> See the Apologists: Apost. K.O. (Texte. v. Unters. II. 5, p. 25) +προορωντας τους λογους του διδασκαλου 'ημων, ibid, p. 28 οτε ητησεν +'ο διδασκαλος +τον αρτον, ibid. p. 30 προελεγεν οτε εδιδασκεν, Apost. Constit. (original +writing) +III. 6 αυτος 'ο διδασκαλος 'ημων και κυριος, III. 7 'ο κυριος και +διδασκαλος +'ημων ειπεν, III. 19, III. 20, V. 12, 1 Clem. 13. 1 των λογων του κυριου +Ιησου 'ους ελαλησεν διδασκων, Polyc. Ep. 2 μνημονευοντες 'ων ειπεν 'ο κυριος +διδασκων, Ptolem. ad Floram 5 'η διδασκαλια του σωτηρος.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote244" name="footnote244"></a><b>Footnote 244:</b><a href="#footnotetag244"> (return) </a><p> The baptismal formula which had been naturalised everywhere in +the communities at this period preserved it above all. The addition of +ιδιος πρωτοτοκος is worthy of notice. Μονογενης (= the only begotten +and +also the beloved) is not common, it is found only in John, in Justin, in +the Symbol of the Romish Church and in Mart. Polyc. (Diogn. 10. 3).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote245" name="footnote245"></a><b>Footnote 245:</b><a href="#footnotetag245"> (return) </a><p> The so-called second Epistle of Clement begins with the words +Αδελφοι ουτως δει 'ημας φρονειν περι Ιησου 'ως περι θεου, 'ως περι κριτου +ζωντων +και νεκρων (this order in which the Judge appears as the higher is also +found in Barn. 7. 2), και ου δει 'ημας μικρα φρονειν περι της σωτηριας +'ημων; εν τω +γαρ φρονειν 'ημας μικρα περι αυτου μικρα και ελπιζομεν λαβειν. This argumentation +(see also the following verses up to II. 7) is very instructive, for +it shews the grounds on which the φρονειν περι αυτου ως περι θεου was +based H. Schultz (L. v. d. Gottheit Christi, p. 25 f.) very correctly +remarks. In the second Epistle of Clement and in the Shepherd the +Christological interest of the writer ends in obtaining the assurance, through +faith in Christ as the world ruling King and Judge that the community of +Christ will receive a glory corresponding to its moral and ascetic works.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote246" name="footnote246"></a><b>Footnote 246:</b><a href="#footnotetag246"> (return) </a><p> Pliny in his celebrated letter (96) speaks of a "Carmen dicere Christo +quasi deo" on the part of the Christians. Hermas has no doubt that the Chosen +Servant, after finishing his work, will be adopted as God's Son, and therefore +has been destined from the beginning, εις εξουσιαν μεγαλην και κυριοτητα, Sim. +V. +6. 1. But that simply means that he is now in a Divine sphere and that one +must think of him as of God. But there was no unanimity beyond that. The formula +says nothing about the nature or constitution of Jesus. It might indeed +appear from Justin's dialogue that the direct designation of Jesus as θεος (not +as ο θεος) was common in the communities, but not only are there some passages +in Justin himself to be urged against this but also the testimony of +other writers. Θεος, even without the article, was in no case a usual +designation +for Jesus. On the contrary, it was always quite definite occasions which led +them to speak of Christ as of a God or as God. In the first place there were +Old Testament passages such as Ps. XLV. 8, CX. 1 f. etc. which as soon as +they were interpreted in relation to Christ led to his getting the predicate +θεος. +These passages, with many others taken from the Old Testament, were used +in this way by Justin. Yet it is very well worth noting that the author of the +Epistle of Barnabas avoided this expression in a passage which must have +suggested it (12, 10, 11 on Ps. CX. 4) The author of the Didache calls him +"ο θεος δαβιδ" on the basis of the above psalm. It is manifestly therefore in +liturgical formulæ of exalted paradox or living utterances of religious feeling +that Christ is called God. See Ignat. ad Rom. 6. 3, επιτρεψατε μοι μιμητην ειναι +του παθους του θεου μου (the μου here should be observed), ad Eph. 1. 1 +αναζωπυρησαντες εν αιματι θεου, Tatian Orat. 13 διακονος του +πεπονθοτος θεου. As to +the celebrated passage 1 Clem. ad Cor. 2. 10 τα παθηματα αυτου (the +αυτου +refers to θεος) we may perhaps observe that that ο θεος stands far +apart. However, +such a consideration is hardly in place. The passages just adduced +shew that precisely the union of suffering (blood, death) with the concept +"God"—and only this union—must have been in Christendom from a very +early period, see Acts XX. 28 την εκκλησιαν του θεου 'ην περιεποιησατο δια του +'αιματος του ιδιου, and from a later period Melito, Fragm (in Routh Rel Sacra +I. 122), 'ο θεος πεπονθεν 'υπο δεξιας Ισραηλιτιδος, Anonym ap Euseb H. E. V. +28 +11, 'ο ευσπλαγχνος θεος και κυριος 'ημων Ιησους Χριστος ουκ εβουλετο +απολεσθαι μαρτυρα +των ιδιων παθηματων, Test XII. Patriarch. (Levi. 4) επι τω παθει του +'υψιστου; Tertull. +de carne 5, "passiones dei," ad Uxor. II. 3: "sanguine dei." Tertullian also +speaks frequently of the crucifying of God, the flesh of God, the death of God. +(see Lightfoot, Clem. of Rome, p. 400, sq.). These formulæ were first subjected +to examination in the Patripassian controversy. They were rejected by +Athanasius for example in the fourth century (cf. Apollin. II. 13, 14, Opp. I. +p. 758) πως ουν γεγραφατε 'οτι θεος 'ο δια σαρκος παθων και αναστας, ... +ουδαμου +δε 'αιμα θεου διχα σαρκος παραδεδωκασιν 'αι γραφαι η θεον δια σαρκος παθοντα και +ανασταντα. They continued in use in the west and became of the utmost significance +in the christological controversies of the fifth century. It is not quite +certain whether there is a theologia Christi in such passages as Tit. II. 13, +2 Pet. I. 1 (see the controversies on Rom. IX. 5). Finally θεος and +Christus were +often interchanged in religious discourse (see above). In the so called second +Epistle of Clement (c. 1. 4) the dispensing of right knowledge is traced back +to Christ. It is said of him that like a Father, he has called us children, he has +delivered us, he has called us into existence out of non-existence and in this +God himself is not thought of. Indeed he is called (2. 2. 3) the hearer of +prayer and the controller of history, but immediately thereon a saying of the +Lord is introduced as a saying of God (Matt. IX. 13). On the contrary Isaiah +XXIX. 13 is quoted (3. 5) as a declaration of Jesus, and again (13. 4) a saying +of the Lord with the formula λεγει ο θεος. It is Christ who pitied us (3. 1, +16. +2), he is described simply as the Lord who hath called and redeemed us +(5. 1, 8. 2, 9. 5 etc). Not only is there frequent mention of the εντολαι +(ενταλματα) of Christ, but 6. 7 (see 14. 1) speak directly of a +ποιειν το θελημα +του Χριστου. Above all, in the entire first division (up to 9. 5) the religious +situation is for the most part treated as if it were something +essentially between the believer and Christ. On the other hand, (10. 1), +the Father is he who calls (see also 16. 1), who brings salvation (9. 7), +who accepts us as Sons (9. 10; 16. 1); he has given us promises (11. 1, +6. 7.); we expect his kingdom, nay, the day of his appearing (12. 1 f.; 6. +9; 9. 6; 11. 7; 12. 1). He will judge the world, etc.; while in 17. 4. we +read of the day of Christ's appearing, of his kingdom and of his function +of Judge, etc. Where the preacher treats of the relation of the community +to God, where he describes the religious situation according to its establishment +or its consummation, where he desires to rule the religious and +moral conduct, he introduces, without any apparent distinction, now God +himself, and now Christ. But this religious view, in which acts of God +coincide with acts of Christ, did not, as will be shewn later on, influence +the theological speculations of the preacher. We have also to observe +that the interchanging of God and Christ is not always an expression of +the high dignity of Christ, but, on the contrary, frequently proves that +the personal significance of Christ is misunderstood, and that he is regarded +only as the dependent revealer of God. All this shews that there cannot +have been many passages in the earliest literature where Christ was +roundly designated θεος. It is one thing to speak of the blood (death, +suffering) of God, and to describe the gifts of salvation brought by Christ +as gifts of God, and another thing to set up the proposition that Christ +is a God (or God). When, from the end of the second century, one began +to look about in the earlier writings for passages εν 'οις θεολογειται +'ο χριστος, +because the matter had become a subject of controversy, one could, +besides the Old Testament, point only to the writings of authors from +the time of Justin (to apologists and controversialists) as well as to Psalms +and odes (see the Anonym. in Euseb. H. E. V. 28. 4-6). In the following +passages of the Ignatian Epistles "θεος" appears as a designation of Christ; +he is called 'ο θεος 'ημων in Ephes. inscript.; Rom. inscr. bis 3. 2; Polyc. +8. 3; Eph. 1. 1, 'αιμα θεου; Rom. 6. 3, το παθος του θεου +μου; Eph. 7. 2, εν +σαρκι γενομενος θεος, in another reading, εν ανθρωπω θεος, Smyrn. +I. 1, I. Chr. 'ο +θεος 'ο ουτως 'υμας σοφισας. The latter passage, in which the relative clause +must he closely united with "'ο θεος", seems to form the transition to the +three passages (Trall. 7. 1; Smyrn. 6. 1; 10. 1), in which Jesus is called +θεος without addition. But these passages are critically suspicious, see +Lightfoot <i>in loco</i>. In the same way the "deus Jesus Christus" in Polyc. +Ep. 12. 2, is suspicious, and indeed in both parts of the verse. In the +first, all Latin codd. have "dei filius," and in the Greek codd. of the Epistle, +Christ is nowhere called θεος. We have a keen polemic against the designation +of Christ as θεος in Clem. Rom. Homil. XVI. 15 sq.; 'ο +Πετρος απεκριθη +'ο κυριος 'ημων ουτε θεους ειναι εφθεγξατο παρα τον κτισαντα τα παντα ουτε +'εαυτον θεον +ειναι ανηγορευσεν, 'υιον δε θεου του τα παντα διακοσμησαντος τον ειποντα αυτον ευλογως +εμακαρισεν, και ο Σιμων απεκρινατο; ου δοκει σοι ουν τον απο θεου θεον ειναι, και +'ο Πετρος +εφη: πως τουτο ειναι δυναται, φρασον 'ημιν, τουτο γαρ 'ημεις ειπειν σοι ου δυναμεθα, +'οτι μη 'ηκουσαμεν παρ' αυτου.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote247" name="footnote247"></a><b>Footnote 247:</b><a href="#footnotetag247"> (return) </a><p>On the further use of the word θεος in antiquity, see above, +§ 8, +p. 120 f.; the formula "θεος εκ θεου" for Augustus, even 24 years before +Christ's +birth; on the formula "dominus ac deus", see John XX. 28; the interchange +of these concepts in many passages beside one another in the +anonymous writer (Euseb. H. E. V. 28. 11). Domitian first allowed himself +to be called "dominus ac deus." Tertullian, Apol. 10. 11, is very instructive +as to the general situation in the second century. Here are brought +forward the different causes which then moved men, the cultured and the +uncultured, to give to this or that personality the predicate of Divinity. +In the third century the designation of "dominus ac deus noster" for +Christ, was very common, especially in the west (see Cyprian, Pseudo-Cyprian, +Novatian; in the Latin Martyrology a Greek 'ο κυριος is also frequently +so translated). But only at this time had the designation come +to be in actual use even for the Emperor. It seems at first sight to follow +from the statements of Celsus (in Orig. c. Cels. III. 22-43) that this Greek +had and required a very strict conception of the Godhead; but his whole +work shews how little that was really the case. The reference to these +facts of the history of the time is not made with the view of discovering +the "theologia Christi" itself in its ultimate roots—these roots lie elsewhere, +in the person of Christ and Christian experience; but that this experience, +before any technical reflection, had so easily and so surely substituted +the new formula instead of the idea of Messiah, can hardly be explained +without reference to the general religious ideas of the time.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote248" name="footnote248"></a><b>Footnote 248:</b><a href="#footnotetag248"> (return) </a><p>The combination of θεος and σωτηρ in the Pastoral +Epistles is very +important. The two passages in the New Testament in which perhaps a +direct "theologia Christi" may be recognised, contain likewise the concept +σωτηρ; see Tit. II. 13; προσδεχομενοι την μακαριαν ελπιδα και +επιφανειαν της δοξης +του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος 'ημων Χριστου Ιησου (cf. Abbot, Journal of the +Society of Bibl. Lit., and Exeg. 1881. June. p. 3 sq.): 2 Pet. I. 1: εν +δικαιοσυνηι +του θεου 'ημων και σωτηρος 'Ι. Χρ.. In both cases the 'ημων should be +specially +noted. Besides, θεος σωτηρ is also an ancient formula.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote249" name="footnote249"></a><b>Footnote 249:</b><a href="#footnotetag249"> (return) </a><p>A very ancient formula ran "θεος και θεος 'υιος" see Cels. +ap. Orig II. +30; Justin, frequently: Alterc. Sim. et Theoph. 4, etc. The formula is +equivalent to θεος μονογενης (see Joh. I. 18).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote250" name="footnote250"></a><b>Footnote 250:</b><a href="#footnotetag250"> (return) </a><p> Such conceptions are found side by side in the same writer. See, +for example, the second Epistle of Clement, and even the first.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote251" name="footnote251"></a><b>Footnote 251:</b><a href="#footnotetag251"> (return) </a><p>See § 6, p. 120. The idea of a θεοποιησις was as common as +that of +the appearances of the gods. In wide circles, however, philosophy had long +ago naturalised the idea of the λογος του θεου. But now there is no mistaking +a new element everywhere. In the case of the Christologies which include +a kind of θεοποιησις, it is found in the fact that the deified Jesus was to +be recognised not as a Demigod or Hero, but as Lord of the world, +equal in power and honour to the Deity. In the case of those Christologies +which start with Christ as the heavenly spiritual being, it is found in the +belief in an actual incarnation. These two articles, as was to be expected, +presented difficulties to the Gentile Christians, and the latter more than +the former.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote252" name="footnote252"></a><b>Footnote 252:</b><a href="#footnotetag252"> (return) </a><p> This is usually overlooked. Christological doctrinal conceptions are +frequently constructed by a combination of particular passages, the nature +of which does not permit of combination. But the fact that there +was no universally recognised theory about the nature of Jesus till beyond +the middle of the second century, should not lead us to suppose that +the different theories were anywhere declared to be of equal value, etc., +therefore more or less equally valid; on the contrary, everyone, so far +as he had a theory at all, included his own in the revealed truth. That +they had not yet come into conflict is accounted for, on the one hand, +by the fact that the different theories ran up into like formulæ, and +could even frequently be directly carried over into one another, and +on the other hand, by the fact that their representatives appealed to the +same authorities. But we must, above all, remember that conflict could +only arise after the enthusiastic element, which also had a share in the +formation of Christology, had been suppressed, and problems were felt +to be such, that is, after the struggle with Gnosticism, or even during +that struggle.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote253" name="footnote253"></a><b>Footnote 253:</b><a href="#footnotetag253"> (return) </a><p>Both were clearly in existence in the Apostolic age.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote254" name="footnote254"></a><b>Footnote 254:</b><a href="#footnotetag254"> (return) </a><p> Only one work has been preserved entire which gives clear expression +to the Adoptian Christology, viz., the Shepherd of Hermas (see Sim. V. and +IX. 1. 12). According to it, the Holy Spirit—it is not certain whether he is +identified with the chief Archangel—is regarded as the pre-existent Son of +God, who is older than creation, nay, was God's counsellor at creation. The +Redeemer is the virtuous man σαρξ chosen by God, with whom that Spirit of +God was united. As he did not defile the Spirit, but kept him constantly as his +companion, and carried out the work to which the Deity had called him, nay, +did more than he was commanded, he was in virtue of a Divine decree adopted +as a son and exalted to μεγαλη εξουσια και κυριοτης. That this Christology is +set forth in a book which enjoyed the highest honour and sprang from the +Romish community, is of great significance. The representatives of this +Christology, who in the third century were declared to be heretics, expressly +maintained that it was at one time the ruling Christology at Rome and had +been handed down by the Apostles. (Anonym, in Euseb. H. E. V. 28. 3, concerning +the Artemonites: φασι τους μεν προτερους 'απαντας και αυτους τους αποστολους +παρειληφεναι τε και δεδιδαχεναι ταυτα, 'α νυν 'ουτοι λεγουσι, και τετηρησθαι την +αληθειαν του κηρυγματος μεχρι των χρονων του Βικτορος ... απο του διαδοχον +αυτο Ζεφυρινου παρακεχαραχθαι την αληθειαν). This assertion, though exaggerated, +is not incredible after what we find in Hermas. It cannot, certainly, be +verified by a superficial examination of the literary monuments preserved to +us, but a closer investigation shews that the Adoptian Christology must at +one time have been very widespread, that it continued here and there undisturbed +up to the middle of the third century (see the Christology in the Acta +Archelai. 49, 50), and that it continued to exercise great influence even in +the fourth and fifth centuries (see Book II. c. 7). Something similar is found +even in some Gnostics, <i>e.g.</i>, Valentinus himself (see Iren. I. 11. 1: +και τον +Χριστον δε ουκ απο των εν τωι πληρωματι αιωνων προβεβλησθαι, αλλα 'υπο της μητρος, +εξω δε γενομενης, κατα την γνωμην των κρειττονων αποκεκυησθαι μετα σκιας τινος. +Και τουτον μεν, 'ατε αρρενα 'υπαρχονταφ, αποκοψαντα 'υφ' 'εαυτου την σκιαν, αναδραμειν +εις το πληρομα. The same in the Exc. ex Theodot §§ 22, 23, 32, 33), and the +Christology of Basilides presupposes that of the Adoptians. Here also belongs +the conception which traces back the genealogy of Jesus to Joseph. +The way in which Justin (Dialog. 48, 49, 87 ff.) treats the history of the baptism +of Jesus, against the objection of Trypho that a pre-existent Christ would not +have needed to be filled with the Spirit of God, is instructive. It is here +evident that Justin deals with objections which were raised within the +communities themselves to the pre-existence of Christ, on the ground of the +account of the baptism. In point of fact, this account (it had, according to +very old witnesses, see Resch, Agrapha Christi, p. 307, according to Justin, +for example, Dial. 88. 103, the wording: 'αμα τωι αναβηναι αυτον απο του ποταμου +του Ιορδανου, της φωνης αυτου λεχθεισης 'υιος μου ει σς, εγω σημερον γεγεννηκα +σε; +see the Cod. D. of Luke. Clem. Alex, etc.) forms the strongest foundation of +the Adoptian Christology, and hence it is exceedingly interesting to see how +one compounds with it from the second to the fifth century, an investigation +which deserves a special monograph. But, of course, the edge was taken off +the report by the assumption of the miraculous birth of Jesus from the Holy +Spirit, so that the Adoptians in recognising this, already stood with one +foot in the camp of their opponents. It is now instructive to see here how +the history of the baptism, which originally formed the beginning of the +proclamation of Jesus' history, is suppressed in the earliest formulæ, and +therefore also in the Romish Symbol, while the birth from the Holy +Spirit is expressly stated. Only in Ignatius (ad Smyrn. I; cf. ad Eph. 18. 2) +is the baptism taken into account in the confession; but even he has given +the event a turn by which it has no longer any significance for Jesus himself +(just as in the case of Justin, who concludes from the <i>resting</i> of the +Spirit in his fulness upon Jesus, that there will be no more prophets among +the Jews, spiritual gifts being rather communicated to Christians; compare +also the way in which the baptism of Jesus is treated in Joh. I.). Finally, we +must point out that in the Adoptian Christology, the parallel between +Jesus and all believers who have the Spirit and are Sons of God, stands +out very clearly (Cf. Herm. Sim. V. with Mand. III. V. 1; X. 2; most important +is Sim. V. 6. 7). But this was the very thing that endangered the +whole view. Celsus, I. 57, addressing Jesus, asks; "If thou sayest that every +man whom Divine Providence allows to be born (this is of course a +formulation for which Celsus alone is responsible), is a son of God, what +advantage hast thou then over others?" We can see already in the Dialogue +of Justin, the approach of the later great controversy, whether Christ is +Son of God κατα γνωμην, or κατα φυσιν, that is, had a +pre-existence: "και γαρ +εισι τινες, he says, απο του 'υμετερου γενους 'ομολογουντες αυτον Χριστον +ειναι, +ανθρωπον δε εξ ανθρωπων γενομενον αποφαινομενοι, 'οις ου συντιθεμαι" (c. 48).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote255" name="footnote255"></a><b>Footnote 255:</b><a href="#footnotetag255"> (return) </a><p> This Christology which may be traced back to the Pauline, but which +can hardly have its point of departure in Paul alone, is found also in the +Epistle to the Hebrews and in the writings of John, including the Apocalypse, +and is represented by Barnabas, 1 and 2 Clem., Ignatius, Polycarp, +the author of the Pastoral Epistles, the Authors of Praed. Petri, and the +Altercatio Jasonis et Papisci, etc. The Classic formulation is in 2 Clem. 9. 5: +Χριστος 'ο κυριος 'ο σωσας 'ημας ων μεν το πρωτον πνευμα εγενετο σαρξ και +'ουτως +'ημας εκαλεσεν. According to Barnabas (5. 3), the pre-existent Christ is +παντος του κοσμου κυριοσ: to him God said, απο καταβολης κοσμου, "Let +us +make man, etc." He is (5. 6) the subject and goal of all Old Testament +revelation. He is ουξι 'υιος ανθρωπου αλλ: 'υιος του θεου, τυπωι δε εν σαρκι +φανερωθεις +(12. 10); the flesh is merely the veil of the Godhead, without which man +could not have endured the light (5. 10). According to 1 Clement, Christ +is το σκηπτρον της μελαγοσυνης του θεου (16. 2), who if he had wished could +have appeared on earth εν κομπωι αλαζονειας, he is exalted far above the +angels (32), as he is the Son of God (παθηματα του θεου, 2. 1); he hath +spoken through the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament (22. 1). It is not certain +whether Clement understood Christ under the λογος μεγαλοσυνης του θεου +(27. 4). According to 2 Clem., Christ and the church are heavenly spiritual +existences which have appeared in the last times. Gen. I. 27 refers to their +creation (c. 14; see my note on the passage: We learn from Origen that a very +old Theologoumenon identified Jesus with the ideal of Adam, the church +with that of Eve). Similar ideas about Christ are found in Gnostic Jewish Christians); +one must think about Christ as about God (I. 1). Ignatius writes (Eph. +7-2): Εις, ιατρος εστιν σαρκικος τε και πνευματικος, γεννητος και αγεννητος, +εν σαρκι +γενομενος θεος, εν θανατωι ζωη αληθινη, και εκ Μαριας και εκ θεου, πρωτον +παθαετος και τοτε +απαθης Ιησους Χριστος 'ο κυριος 'ημων. As the human predicates stand here first, +it might appear as though, according to Ignatius, the man Jesus first became +God ('ο θεος 'ημων, Cf. Eph. inscr.: 18. 2). In point of fact, he regards +Jesus as Son of God only by his birth from the Spirit; but on the +other hand, Jesus is αφ' 'ενος πατρος προελθων (Magn. 7. 2), is λογος +θεου (Magn. +8. 2,) and when Ignatius so often emphasises the truth of Jesus' history +against Docetism (Trall. 9. for example), we must assume that he shares +the thesis with the Gnostics that Jesus is by nature a spiritual being. But +it is well worthy of notice that Ignatius, as distinguished from Barnabas and +Clement, really gives the central place to the historical Jesus Christ, the Son +of God and the Son of Mary, and his work. The like is found only in Irenæus. +The pre-existence of Christ is presupposed by Polycarp. (Ep 7. 1); but, like +Paul, he strongly emphasises a real exaltation of Christ (2. 1). The author of +Præd. Petri calls Christ the λογος (Clem. Strom. I. 29, 182). As Ignatius calls +him this also, as the same designation is found in the Gospel, Epistles, and +Apocalypse of John (the latter a Christian adaptation of a Jewish writing), in +the Act. Joh. (see Zahn, Acta Joh. p. 220), finally, as Celsus (II. 31) says quite +generally, "The Christians maintain that the Son of God is at the same time +his incarnate Word", we plainly perceive that this designation for Christ was +not first started by professional philosophers (see the Apologists, for example, +Tatian, Orat. 5, and Melito Apolog. fragm. in the Chron. pasch. p. 483, ed. +Dindorf: Χριστος ων θεου λογος προ αιωνων. We do not find in the Johannine +writings such a Logos speculation as in the Apologists, but the current +expression is taken up in order to shew that it has its truth in the appearing +of Jesus Christ. The ideas about the existence of a Divine Logos were very +widely spread; they were driven out of philosophy into wide circles. The +author of the Alterc. Jas. et Papisci conceived the phrase in Gen I. 1, εν +αρχη, +as equivalent to εν 'υιωι (Χριστωι) Jerome. Quæst. hebr. in Gen. p. 3; see +Tatian +Orat. 5: θεος ην εν αρχηι την δε αρχην λογου δυναμιν παρειληφαμεν. Ignatius +(Eph. 3) also called Christ 'η γνομη του πατρος (Eph. 17: 'η γνωσις +του θεου); +that is a more fitting expression than λογος. The subordination of Christ +as a heavenly being to the Godhead, is seldom or never carefully emphasised, +though it frequently comes plainly into prominence. Yet the author +of the second Epistle of Clement does not hesitate to place the pre-existent +Christ and the pre-existent church on one level, and to declare +of both that God created them (c. 14). The formulæ φανερουσθαι εν σαρκι, +or, γιγγεσθαι σαρξ, are characteristic of this Christology. It is +worthy of +special notice that the latter is found in all those New Testament writers, +who have put Christianity in contrast with the Old Testament religions, +and proclaimed the conquest of that religion by the Christian, viz., Paul, +John, and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote256" name="footnote256"></a><b>Footnote 256:</b><a href="#footnotetag256"> (return) </a><p> Hermas, for example, does this (therefore Link; Christologie des +Hermas, and Weizsäcker, Gott Gel. Anz. 1886, p. 830, declare his Christology +to be directly pneumatic): Christ is then identified with this Holy +Spirit (see Acta. Archel. 50), similarly Ignatius (ad. Magn. 15): κεκτημενοι +αδιακριτον πνευμα, 'ος εστιν Ιησους Χριστος. This formed the transition to Gnostic +conceptions on the one hand, to pneumatic Christology on the other. +But in Hermas the real substantial thing in Jesus Christ is the σαρξ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote257" name="footnote257"></a><b>Footnote 257:</b><a href="#footnotetag257"> (return) </a><p> Passages may indeed be found in the earliest Gentile Christian literature, +in which Jesus is designated Son of God, independently of his +human birth and before it (so in Barnabas, against Zahn), but they are +not numerous. Ignatius very clearly deduces the predicate "Son" from +the birth in the flesh. Zahn, Marcellus, p. 216 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote258" name="footnote258"></a><b>Footnote 258:</b><a href="#footnotetag258"> (return) </a><p>The distinct designation "θεοποιησις" is not found, though that +may be an +accident. Hermas has the thing itself quite distinctly (See Epiph. c. Alog. H. +51. 18: νομιζοντες απο Μαριας και δευρο Χριστον αυτον καλεισθαι και 'υιον +θεου, και ειναι +μεν προτερον ψιλον ανθρωπον, κατα προκοπην δε ειληφεναι την του 'υιου του θεου +προσηγοριαν). The stages of the προκοπη were undoubtedly the birth, baptism +and resurrection. Even the adherents of the pneumatic Christology, could not +at first help recognising that Jesus, through his exaltation, got more than he +originally possessed. Yet in their case, this conception was bound to become +rudimentary, and it really did so.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote259" name="footnote259"></a><b>Footnote 259:</b><a href="#footnotetag259"> (return) </a><p> The settlement with Gnosticism prepared a still always uncertain end +for this naive Docetism. Apart from Barn. 5. 12, where it plainly appears, +we have to collect laboriously the evidences of it which have not +accidentally either perished or been concealed. In the communities of the +second century there was frequently no offence taken at Gnostic docetism +(see the Gospel of Peter. Clem. Alex., Adumbrat in Joh. Ep. I. c. 1, +[Zahn, Forsch. z. Gesch. des N. T.-lichen Kanons, III. p. 871]; "Fertur ergo +in traditionibus, quoniam Johannes ipsum corpus, quod erat extrinsecus, +tangens manum suam in profunda misisse et duritiam carnis nullo modo +reluctatam esse, sed locum manui præbuisse discipuli." Also Acta Joh. +p. 219, ed. Zahn). In spite of all his polemic against "δοκησις" proper, +one can still perceive a "moderate docetism" in Clem. Alex., to which +indeed certain narratives in the Canonical Gospels could not but lead. +The so-called Apocryphal literature (Apocryphal Gospels and Acts of +Apostles), lying on the boundary between heretical and common Christianity, +and preserved only in scanty fragments and extensive alterations, +was, it appears, throughout favourable to Docetism. But the later recensions +attest that it was read in wide circles.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote260" name="footnote260"></a><b>Footnote 260:</b><a href="#footnotetag260"> (return) </a><p> Even such a formulation as we find in Paul (<i>e.g.</i>, Rom. I. 3 f. +κατα σαρκα—κατα +πνευμα), does not seem to have been often repeated (yet see 1 Clem. 32. +21). It is of value to Ignatius only, who has before his mind the full Gnostic +contrast. But even to him we cannot ascribe any doctrine of two natures: for +this requires as its presupposition, the perception that the divinity and humanity +are equally essential and important for the personality of the Redeemer +Christ. Such insight, however, presupposes a measure and a direction +of reflection which the earliest period did not possess. The expression "δυο +ουσιαι Χριστου" first appears in a fragment of Melito, whose genuineness is not, +however, generally recognised (see my Texte u. Unters. I. 1. 2. p. 257). +Even the definite expression for Christ θεος ων 'ομου τε και ανθρωπος was +fixed only in consequence of the Gnostic controversy.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote261" name="footnote261"></a><b>Footnote 261:</b><a href="#footnotetag261"> (return) </a><p> Hermas (Sim. V. 6. 7) describes the exaltation of Jesus, thus: +'ινα και +'η σαρξ 'αυτη, δουλευσασα τωι πνευματι αμεμπτως, σχαηι τοπον τινα κατασκηνωσεως, +και μη δοξηι τον μισθον της δουλειας αυτης απολωλεκεναι. The point in question +is a reward of grace which consists in a position of rank (see Sim. V. +6. 1). The same thing is manifest from the statements of the later +Adoptians. (Cf. the teaching of Paul Samosata).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote262" name="footnote262"></a><b>Footnote 262:</b><a href="#footnotetag262"> (return) </a><p> Barnabas, e. g., conceives it as a veil (5. 10: ει γαρ μη +ηλθεν εν σαρκι, ουδ' +αν πως 'οι ανθρωποι εσωθησαν βλεποντες αυτον, 'οτε τον μελλοντα μη ειναι 'ηλιον +εμβλεποντες +ουκ ισχυσουσιν εις τας ακτινας αυτου αντοφθαλμησαι). The formulation +of the Christian idea in Celsus is instructive (c. Cels VI. 69): "Since God is +great and not easily accessible to the view, he put his spirit in a body which +is like our own, and sent it down in order that we might be instructed by it." +To this conception corresponds the formula: ερχεσθαι (φανερουσθαι) εν σαρκι +(Barnabas, frequently; Polyc. Ep. 7. 1). But some kind of transformation must +also have been thought of (See 2 Clem. 9. 5. and Celsus IV. 18: "Either God, +as these suppose, is really transformed into a mortal body...." Apoc. +Sophon. ed. Stern. 4 fragm. p. 10; "He has transformed himself into a man +who comes to us to redeem us"). This conception might grow out of the +formula σαρξ εγενετο (Ignat. ad. Eph. 7, 2 is of special importance here). +One is almost throughout here satisfied with the σαρξ of Christ, that is the +αληθεια της σαρκος, against the Heretics (so Ignatius, who was already +anti-gnostic +in his attitude). There is very seldom any mention of the humanity of +Jesus. Barnabas (12). the author of the Didache (c. 10. 6. See my note on the +passage), and Tatian questioned the Davidic Sonship of Jesus, which was +strongly emphasised by Ignatius; nay, Barnabas even expressly rejects the +designation "Son of Man" (12. 10; ιδε παλιν Ιησους, ουχι 'υιος ανθρωπου αλλα +'υιος +του θεου, τυπο δε εν σαρκι φανερωθεις). A docetic thought, however, lies in the +assertion that the spiritual being Christ only assumed human flesh, however +much the reality of the flesh may be emphasised. The passage 1 Clem. +49. 6, is quite unique: το 'αιμα αυτου εδωκεν 'υπερ 'ημων Ιησους +Χριστος ... και +την σαρκα 'υπερ της σαρκος 'ημων και την ψυχην 'υπερ των ψυχων 'υμων. One +would fain +believe this an interpolation; the same idea is first found in Irenæus. (V. 1. 1).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote263" name="footnote263"></a><b>Footnote 263:</b><a href="#footnotetag263"> (return) </a><p>Even Hermas docs not speak of Jesus as ανθρωπος (see Link). +This designation +was used by the representatives of the Adoptian Christology +only after they had expressed their doctrine antithetically and developed +it to a theory, and always with a certain reservation. The "ανθρωπος Χριστος +Ιησους" in 1 Tim. II. 5 is used in a special sense. The expression ανθρωπος +for Christ appears twice in the Ignatian Epistles (the third passage +Smyrn. 4. 2: αυτου με ενδυναμουντος του τελειου ανθρωπου γενομενου, apart from +the γενομενου, is critically suspicious, as well as the fourth, Eph. 7. 2; see +above), in both passages, however, in connections which seem to modify +the humanity; see Eph. 20. 1: οικονομια εις τον καινον ανθρωπον Ιησουν +Χριστον, +Eph. 20. 2: τωι 'υιωι ανθρωπου και 'υιωι θεου.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote264" name="footnote264"></a><b>Footnote 264:</b><a href="#footnotetag264"> (return) </a><p> See above p. 185, note; p. 189, note. We have no sure evidence that the +later so-called Modalism (Monarchianism) had representatives before the last +third of the second century; yet the polemic of Justin, Dial. 128, seems to +favour the idea, (the passage already presupposes controversies about the +personal independence of the pre-existent pneumatic being of Christ beside +God; but one need not necessarily think of such controversies within the +communities; Jewish notions might be meant, and this, according to Apol. +I. 63, is the more probable). The judgment is therefore so difficult, because +there were numerous formulæ in practical use which could be so understood, +as if Christ was to be completely identified with the Godhead itself (see Ignat. +ad Eph. 7. 2, besides Melito in Otto Corp. Apol. IX. p. 419. and Noëtus in the +Philos. IX. 10, p. 448). These formulæ may, in point of fact, have been so +understood, here and there, by the rude and uncultivated. The strongest again +is presented in writings whose authority was always doubtful: see the Gospel +of the Egyptians (Epiph. H. 62. 2), in which must have stood a statement +somewhat to this effect: τον αυτον ειναι πατερα, τον αυτον ειναι 'υιον, τον αυτον +ειναι 'αγιον πνευμα, and the Acta Joh. (ed. Zahn, p. 220 f., 240 f.: 'ο αγαθος +'ημων θεος 'ο ευσπλανχνος, 'ο ελεημων, 'ο 'αγιος, 'ο καθαρος, 'ο αμιαντος, 'ο μονος, +'ο 'εις, 'ο +αμεταβλητος, 'ο ειλικρινης, 'ο αδολος, 'ο μη οργιζομενος, 'ο πασης 'ημιν λεγομενης +η νοουμενης +προσηγοριας ανωτερος και 'υψηλοτερος 'ημων θεος Ιησους). In the Act. Joh. are +found also +prayers with the address θεε Ιησου Χριστε (pp. 242. 247). Even Marcion and a +part the Montanists—both bear witness to old traditions—put no value on +the distinction between God and Christ; cf. the Apoc. Sophon. A witness +to a naive Modalism is found also in the Acta Pionii 9: "Quem deum +colis? Respondit: Christum Polemon (judex): Quid ergo? iste alter est? [the +co-defendant Christians had immediately before confessed God the Creator] +Respondit: Non; sed ipse quem et ipsi paullo ante confessi sunt;" +cf. c. 16. Yet a reasoned Modalism may perhaps be assumed here. See also +the Martyr Acts; <i>e.g.</i>, Acta Petri, Andræ, Pauli et Dionysiæ I (Ruinart, p. 205): +'ημεις οι Χριστον τον βασιλεα εχομεν, 'οτι αληθινος θεος εστιν και +ποιητης ουρανου και +γης και θαλασσης. "Oportet me magis deo vivo et vero. regi sæculorum +omnium Christo, sacrificium offerre." Act. Nicephor. 3 (p. 285). I take +no note of the Testament of the twelve Patriarchs, out of which one +can, of course, beautifully verify the strict Modalistic, and even the +Adoptian Christology. But the Testamenta are not a primitive or Jewish +Christian writing which Gentile Christians have revised, but a Jewish +writing christianised at the end of the second century by a Catholic of +Modalistic views. But he has given us a very imperfect work, the Christology +of which exhibits many contradictions. It is instructive to find +Modalism in the theology of the Simonians, which was partly formed +according to Christian ideas; see Irenæus I. 23. I. "hic igitur a multis +quasi deus glorificatus est, et docuit semetipsum esse qui inter Judæos +quidem quasi filius apparuerit, in Samaria autem quasi pater descenderit, +in reliquis vero gentibus quasi Spiritus Sanctus adventaverit."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote265" name="footnote265"></a><b>Footnote 265:</b><a href="#footnotetag265"> (return) </a><p> That is a very important fact which clearly follows from the Shepherd. +Even the later school of the Adoptians in Rome, and the later Adoptians +in general, were forced to assume a divine hypostasis beside the Godhead, +which of course sensibly threatened their Christology. The adherents of +the pneumatic Christology partly made a definite distinction between the +pre-existent Christ and the Holy Spirit (see, <i>e.g.</i>, 1 Clem. 22. 1), and partly +made use of formulæ from which one could infer an identity of the two. +The conceptions about the Holy Spirit were still quite fluctuating; whether +he is a power of God, or personal, whether he is identical with the pre-existent +Christ, or is to be distinguished from him, whether he is the servant +of Christ (Tatian Orat. 13), whether he is only a gift of God to believers, or +the eternal Son of God, was quite uncertain. Hermas assumed the latter, and +even Origen (de princip. præf. c. 4) acknowledges that it is not yet decided +whether or not the Holy Spirit is likewise to be regarded as God's Son. The +baptismal formula prevented the identification of the Holy Spirit with the +pre-existent Christ, which so readily suggested itself. But so far as Christ was +regarded as a πνευμα, his further demarcation from the angel powers was +quite uncertain, as the Shepherd of Hermas proves (though see 1 Clem. 36). +For even Justin, in a passage, no doubt, in which his sole purpose was to shew +that the Christians were not αθεοι, could venture to thrust in between God, the +Son and the Spirit, the good angels as beings who were worshipped and +adored by the Christians (Apol. 1. 6 [if the text be genuine and not an interpolation]; +see also the Suppl. of Athanagoras). Justin, and certainly most of +those who accepted a pre-existence of Christ, conceived of it as a real pre-existence. +Justin was quite well acquainted with the controversy about the +independent quality of the power which proceeded from God. To him it is not +merely, "Sensus, motus, affectus dei", but a "personalis substantia" (Dial. 128).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote266" name="footnote266"></a><b>Footnote 266:</b><a href="#footnotetag266"> (return) </a><p> See the remarkable narrative about the cross in the fragment of the +Gospel of Peter, and in Justin, Apol. 1. 55.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote267" name="footnote267"></a><b>Footnote 267:</b><a href="#footnotetag267"> (return) </a><p> We must, above all things, be on our guard here against attributing +dogmas to the churches, that is to say, to the writers of this period. The +difference in the answers to the question, How far and by what means, Jesus +procured salvation? was very great, and the majority undoubtedly never at +all raised the question, being satisfied with recognising Jesus as the revealer +of God's saving will (Didache, 10. 2: ευχαριστοι μεν σοι, πατερ 'αγιε, 'υπερ του +αγιου ονοματος σου, ου κατεσκηνωσας εν ταις καρδιαις 'ημων και 'υπερ της γνωσεως και +πιστεως και αθανασιας, 'ης εγνωρισας 'ημιν δια Ιησου του παιδος σου), without +reflecting +on the fact that this saving will was already revealed in the Old +Testament. There is nowhere any mention of a saving work of Christ in +the whole Didache, nay, even the <i>Kerygma</i> about him is not taken notice +of. The extensive writing of Hermas shews that this is not an accident. +There is absolutely no mention here of the birth, death, resurrection, +etc., of Jesus, although the author in Sim. V had an occasion for +mentioning them. He describes the work of Jesus as (1) preserving the +people whom God had chosen. (2) purifying the people from sin, (3) +pointing out the path of life and promulgating the Divine law (c. c. 5. 6). +This work however, seems to have been performed by the whole life and +activity of Jesus; even to the purifying of sin the author has only added the +words: (και αυτος τας 'αμαρτιας αυτων εκαθαρισε) πολλα κοπιασας και πολλους +κοπους +ηντληκως (Sim. V. 6. 2). But we must further note that Hermas held the proper +and obligatory work of Jesus to be only the preservation of the chosen +people (from demons in the last days, and at the end), while in the other +two articles he saw a performance in excess of his duty, and wished +undoubtedly to declare therewith, that the purifying from sin and the +giving of the law are not, strictly speaking, integral parts of the Divine plan +of salvation, but are due to the special goodness of Jesus (this idea is +explained by Moralism). Now, as Hermas, and others, saw the saving activity +of Jesus in his whole labours, others saw salvation given and assured +in the moment of Jesus' entrance into the world, and in his personality +as a spiritual being become flesh. This mystic conception, which +attained such wide-spread recognition later on, has a representative in Ignatius, +if one can at all attribute clearly conceived doctrines to this emotional +confessor. That something can be declared of Jesus, κατα πνευμα and κατα +σαρκα—this is the mystery on which the significance of Jesus seems to Ignatius +essentially to rest, but how far is not made clear. But the παθος ('αιμα, +σταυρος) +and αναστασις of Jesus are to the same writer of great significance, and by +forming paradoxical formulæ of worship, and turning to account reminiscences +of Apostolic sayings, he seems to wish to base the whole salvation +brought by Christ on his suffering and resurrection (see Lightfoot on Eph. +inscr. Vol. II. p. 25). In this connection also, he here and there regards all articles +of the <i>Kerygma</i> as of fundamental significance. At all events, we have in +the Ignatian Epistles the first attempt in the post-Apostolic literature, to +connect all the theses of the <i>Kerygma</i> about Jesus as closely as possible with +the benefits which he brought. But only the will of the writer is plain here, all +else is confused, and what is mainly felt is that the attempt to conceive the +blessings of salvation as the fruit of the sufferings and resurrection, has deprived +them of their definiteness and clearness. In proof we may adduce the following: +If we leave out of account the passages in which Ignatius speaks of the +necessity of repentance for the Heretics, or the Heathen, and the possibility +that their sins may be forgiven (Philad. 3. 2:8. 1; Smyrn. 4. 1: 5-3; Eph. 10. +1), there remains only one passage in which the forgiveness of sin is mentioned, +and that only contains a traditional formula (Smyrn 7. 1: σαρξ Ιησου +Χριστου, 'η 'υπερ των 'αμαρτιων 'ημων παθουσα). The same writer, who is constantly +speaking of the παθος and αναστασις of Christ, has nothing to say, to +the +communities to which he writes, about the forgiveness of sin. Even the +concept "sin", apart from the passages just quoted, appears only once, viz., +Eph 14. 2: ουδεις πιστιν επαγγελλομενος 'αμαρτανει. Ignatius has only +once spoken +to a community about repentance (Smyrn. 9. 1). It is characteristic that the +summons to repentance runs exactly as in Hermas and 2 Clem., the conclusion +only being peculiarly Ignatian. It is different with Barnabas, Clement +and Polycarp. They (see 1 Clem. 7. 4:12, 7:21, 6:49 6; Barn. 5. 1 ff.) +place the forgiveness of sin procured by Jesus in the foreground, connect +it most definitely with the death of Christ, and in some passages seem to +have a conception of that connection, which reminds us of Paul. But this +just shews that they are dependent here on Paul (or on 1st Peter), and on +a closer examination we perceive that they very imperfectly understand Paul, +and have no independent insight into the series of ideas which they reproduce. +That is specially plain in Clement. For in the first place, he everywhere +passes over the resurrection (he mentions it only twice, once as a guarantee +of our own resurrection, along with the Phoenix and other guarantees, +24. 1, and then as a means whereby the Apostles were convinced that the +kingdom of God will come, 42. 3). In the second place, he in one passage +declares that the χαρις μετανοιας was communicated to the world through +the shedding of Christ's blood (7. 4.) But this transformation of the +αφεσις 'αμαρτιων into χαρις μετανοιας plainly shews that +Clement had merely +taken over from tradition the special estimate of the death of Christ as +procuring salvation; for it is meaningless to deduce the χαρις μετανοιας +from the blood of Christ. Barnabas testifies more plainly that Christ behoved +to offer the vessel of his spirit as a sacrifice for our sins (4. 3; 5. 1), nay, +the chief aim of his letter is to harmonise the correct understanding of +the cross, the blood, and death of Christ in connection with baptism, the +forgiveness of sin, and sanctification (application of the idea of sacrifice). +He also unites the death and resurrection of Jesus (5. 6: αυτος δε +'ινα καταεργησηι τον θανατον και την εκ νεκρων αναστασιν δειξηι, 'οτι εν σαρκι εδει +αυτον φανερωθηναι, 'υπεμεινεν, 'ινα και τοις πατρασιν την επαγγελλιαν αποδωι και +αυτος +'εαυτωι τον λαον τον καινον 'ετοιμαζων επιδειξηι, επι της γης ων. 'οτι την αναστασιν +αυτος ποιησας κρινει): but the significance of the death of Christ is for him at +bottom, the fact that it is the fulfilment of prophecy. But the prophecy is +related, above all, to the significance of the tree, and so Barnabas on one +occasion says with admirable clearness (5. 13); αυτος δε ηθελησεν 'ουτω +παθειν; +εδει γαρ 'ινα επι ξυλου παθηι. The notion which Barnabas entertains of the +σαρξ +of Christ suggests the supposition that he could have given up all reference +to the death of Christ, if it had not been transmitted as a fact and predicted +in the Old Testament. Justin shews still less certainty. To him also, as to +Ignatius, the cross (the death) of Christ is a great, nay, the greatest mystery, +and he sees all things possible in it (see Apol. 1. 35, 55). He knows, further, +as a man acquainted with the Old Testament, how to borrow from it very +many points of view for the significance of Christ's death, (Christ the sacrifice, +the Paschal lamb; the death of Christ the means of redeeming men; +death as the enduring of the curse for us; death as the victory over the +devil; see Dial 44. 90, 91, 111, 134). But in the discussions which set forth +in a more intelligible way the significance of Christ, definite facts from the +history have no place at all, and Justin nowhere gives any indication of +seeing in the death of Christ more than the mystery of the Old Testament, +and the confirmation of its trustworthiness. On the other hand, it cannot be +mistaken that the idea of an individual righteous man being able effectively +to sacrifice himself for the whole, in order through his voluntary death to +deliver them from evil, was not unknown to antiquity. Origen (c. Celsum 1. +31) has expressed himself on this point in a very instructive way. The purity +and voluntariness of him who sacrifices himself are here the main things. +Finally, we must be on our guard against supposing that the expressions +σωρτια, απολυτρωσις and the like, were as a rule related to the deliverance +from sin. In the superscription of the Epistle from Lyons, for example, +(Euseb. H. E V. 1. 3: 'οι αυτην της απολυτρωσεως 'ημιν πιστιν και ελπιδα +εχοντες) +the future redemption is manifestly to be understood by απολυτρωσις.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote268" name="footnote268"></a><b>Footnote 268:</b><a href="#footnotetag268"> (return) </a><p> On the Ascension, see my edition of the Apost. Fathers I. 2, p. 138. +Paul knows nothing of an Ascension, nor is it mentioned by Clement, +Ignatius, Hermas, or Polycarp. In no case did it belong to the earliest +preaching. Resurrection and sitting at the right hand of God are frequently +united in the formulæ (Eph. I. 20; Acts. II. 32 ff.) According to +Luke XXIV. 51, and Barn. 15. 9, the ascension into heaven took place +on the day of the resurrection (probably also according to Joh. XX. 17; +see also the fragment of the Gosp. of Peter), and is hardly to be thought +of as happening but once (Joh. III. 13; VI 62; see also Rom. X. 6 f.; +Eph. IV. 9 f; 1 Pet. III. 19 f.; very instructive for the origin of the +notion). According to the Valentinians and Ophites, Christ ascended into +heaven 18 months after the resurrection (Iren. I. 3. 2; 30. 14); according +to the Ascension of Isaiah, 545 days (ed. Dillmann, pp. 43. 57 etc.); according +to Pistis Sophia 11 years after the resurrection. The statement +that the Ascension took place 40 days after the resurrection is first +found in the Acts of the Apostles. The position of the ανελημφθη εν δοξηι, +in the fragment of an old Hymn, 1 Tim. III. 16, is worthy of note, in so far +as it follows the ωφθη αγγελοις, εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν, επιστευθη εν +κοσμωι. Justin +speaks very frequently of the Ascension into heaven (see also Aristides). +It is to him a necessary part of the preaching about Christ. On the +descent into hell, see the collection of passages in my edition of the +Apost. Fathers, III. p. 232. It is important to note that it is found already +in the Gospel of Peter (εκηρυξας τοις κοιμωμενοις, ναι), and that even Marcion +recognised it (in Iren. I. 27. 31), as well as the Presbyter of Irenæus (IV. +27. 2), and Ignatius (ad Magn. 9. 3), see also Celsus in Orig. II. 43. The +witnesses to it are very numerous, see Huidekoper, "The belief of the +first three centuries concerning Christ's Mission to the under-world." +New York, 1876.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote269" name="footnote269"></a><b>Footnote 269:</b><a href="#footnotetag269"> (return) </a><p>See the Pastoral Epistles, and the Epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote270" name="footnote270"></a><b>Footnote 270:</b><a href="#footnotetag270"> (return) </a><p> The "facts" of the history of Jesus were handed down to the following +period as mysteries predicted in the Old Testament, but the idea of sacrifice +was specially attached to the death of Christ, certainly without any closer +definition. It is very noteworthy that in the Romish baptismal confession, the +Davidic Sonship of Jesus, the baptism, the descent into the under-world, +and the setting up of a glorious Kingdom on the earth, are not mentioned. +These articles do not appear even in the parallel confessions which began +to be formed. The hesitancy that yet prevailed here with regard to details, +is manifest from the fact, for example, that instead of the formula, "Jesus +was born of (εκ) Mary," is found the other, "He was born through (δια) +Mary" (see Justin, Apol. I. 22. 31-33, 54, 63; Dial. 23. 43, 45. 48, 57. 54, +63, 66, 75, 85, 87, 100, 105, 120, 127), Iren. (I. 7. 2) and Tertull. (de carne +20) first contested the δια against the Valentinians.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote271" name="footnote271"></a><b>Footnote 271:</b><a href="#footnotetag271"> (return) </a><p> This was strongly emphasised see my remarks on Barn. 2. 3. The +Jewish cultus is often brought very close to the heathen by Gentile +Christian writers: Praed. Petri (Clem. Strom. VI. 5. 41) καινως τον θεον δια +του Χριστου σεβομεθα. The statement in Joh. IV. 24, πνευμα 'ο θεος και τους +προσκυνουντας αυτον εν πνευματι και αληθειας δει προσκυνειν, was for long the +guiding principle for the Christian worship of God.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote272" name="footnote272"></a><b>Footnote 272:</b><a href="#footnotetag272"> (return) </a><p> Ps. LI. 19 is thus opposed to the ceremonial system (Barn. 2. 10). +Polycarp consumed by fire is (Mart. 14. 1) compared to a κριος επισημος +εκ μεγαλου ποιμνιου εις προσφοραν ολοκαυτωμα δεκτον τωι θεωι 'ητοιμασμενον.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote273" name="footnote273"></a><b>Footnote 273:</b><a href="#footnotetag273"> (return) </a><p> See Barn. 6. 15, 16, 7-9, Tatian Orat. 15, Ignat. ad. Eph. 9. 15, Herm +Mand. V. etc. The designation of Christians as priests is not often found.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote274" name="footnote274"></a><b>Footnote 274:</b><a href="#footnotetag274"> (return) </a><p> Justin, Apol. I. 9. Dial. 117 'οτι μεν ουν και ευχαι κα ευχαριστιαι, +'υπο +των αξιων γινομεναι τελειαι μοναι και ευαρεστοι εισι τωι θεωι θυσιαι και αυτος +φημι, see also still the later Fathers: Clem. Strom. VII. 6. 31: 'ημεις δι +ευχης τιμωμεν τον θεον και ταυτην την θυσιαν αριστην και 'αγιωτατην μετα +δικαιοσυνης +αναπεμπομεν τωι δικαιωι λογωι, Iren. III. 18. 3, Ptolem ad. Floram. 3: +προσφορας προσφερειν προσεταξεν 'ημιν 'ο σωτηρ αλλα ουχι τας δι αλογων ζωων +'η +τουτων των δωμιαματων αλλα δια πνευματικων αινων και δοξων και ευχαριστιας και +δια της εις τους πλησιον κοινωνιας και ευποιιας.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote275" name="footnote275"></a><b>Footnote 275:</b><a href="#footnotetag275"> (return) </a><p> The Jewish regulations about fastings together with the Jewish system of +sacrifice were rejected, but on the other hand, in virtue of words of the Lord, +fasts were looked upon as a necessary accompaniment of prayer and +definite arrangements were already made for them (see Barn. 3, Didache +8, Herm. Sim. V. 1. ff). The fast is to have a special value from the fact +that whatever one saved by means of it is to be given to the poor +(see Hermas and Aristides, Apol. 15, "And if any one among the Christians +is poor and in want, and they have not overmuch of the means of +life, they fast two or three days in order that they may provide those +in need with the food they require"). The statement of James I. 27 +θρησκεια καθαρα και αμιαντος παρα τω θεω και πατρι 'αυτη +εστιν επισκεπτεσθαι +ορφανους και χηρας εν τη θλιψει αυτων, was again and again inculcated in +diverse phraseology (Polycarp Ep. 4, called the Widows θυσιαστηριον of +the community). Where moralistic views preponderated as in Hermas +and 2 Clement good works were already valued in detail, prayers, fasts, +alms appeared separately, and there was already introduced especially +under the influence of the so-called deutero-canonical writings of the Old +Testament the idea of a special meritoriousness of certain performances +in fasts and alms (see 2 Clem. 16. 4). Still the idea of the Christian +moral life as a whole occupied the foreground (see Didache cc. 1-5) +and the exhortations to love God and one's neighbour, which as exhortations +to a moral life were brought forward in every conceivable relation, +supplemented the general summons to renounce the world just as +the official diaconate of the churches originating in the cultus, prevented +the decomposition of them into a society of ascetics.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote276" name="footnote276"></a><b>Footnote 276:</b><a href="#footnotetag276"> (return) </a><p> For details, see below in the case of the Lord's Supper. It is specially +important that even charity, through its union with the cultus, +appeared as sacrificial worship (see <i>e.g.</i> Polyc. Ep. 4. 3).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote277" name="footnote277"></a><b>Footnote 277:</b><a href="#footnotetag277"> (return) </a><p> The idea of sacrifice adopted by the Gentile Christian communities, +was that which was expressed in individual prophetic sayings and in the +Psalms, a spiritualising of the Semitic Jewish sacrificial ritual which, +however, had not altogether lost its original features. The entrance of +Greek ideas of sacrifice cannot be traced before Justin. Neither was +there as yet any reflection as to the connection of the sacrifice of the +Church with the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote278" name="footnote278"></a><b>Footnote 278:</b><a href="#footnotetag278"> (return) </a><p> See my Texte und Unters. z Gesch. d. Altchristl. Lit. II. 1. 2, p. +88 ff., p. 137 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote279" name="footnote279"></a><b>Footnote 279:</b><a href="#footnotetag279"> (return) </a><p> There neither was a "doctrine" of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, +nor was there any inner connection presupposed between these holy +actions. They were here and there placed together as actions by the Lord.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote280" name="footnote280"></a><b>Footnote 280:</b><a href="#footnotetag280"> (return) </a><p> Melito, Fragm. XII. (Otto. Corp. Apol. IX. p. 418). δυο +συνεστη τα +αφεσιν 'αμαρτηματων παρεχομενα, παθος δια Χριστον και βαπτισμα.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote281" name="footnote281"></a><b>Footnote 281:</b><a href="#footnotetag281"> (return) </a><p> There is no sure trace of infant baptism in this epoch; personal +faith is a necessary condition (see Hermas, Vis. III. 7. 3; Justin, Apol. +1. 61). "Prius est prædicare posterius tinguere" (Tertull. "de bapt." 14).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote282" name="footnote282"></a><b>Footnote 282:</b><a href="#footnotetag282"> (return) </a><p> On the basis of repentance. See Praed. Petri in Clem. Strom. VI. +5. 43, 48.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote283" name="footnote283"></a><b>Footnote 283:</b><a href="#footnotetag283"> (return) </a><p> See especially the second Epistle of Clement; Tertull. "de bapt." 15: +"Felix aqua quæ semel abluit, quas ludibrio peccatoribus non est."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote284" name="footnote284"></a><b>Footnote 284:</b><a href="#footnotetag284"> (return) </a><p> The sinking and rising in baptism, and the immersion, were regarded +as significant, but not indispensable symbols (see Didache. 7). The most +important passages for baptism are Didache 7; Barn. 6. 11; 11. 1. 11 +(the connection in which the cross of Christ is here placed to the water +is important; the tertium comp. is that forgiveness of sin is the result +of both); Herm. Vis. III. 3, Sim. IX 16. Mand. IV. 3 ('ετερα μετανοια ουκ +εστιν ει μη εκεινη, 'οτε εις 'υδωρ κατεβημεν και ελαβομεν αφεσιν 'αμαρτιων 'ημων των +προτερον); 2 Clem. 6. 9; 7. 6; 8. 6. Peculiar is Ignat. ad. Polyc. 6. 2: +το βαπτισμα 'υμων μενετω 'ως 'οπλα. Specially important is Justin, Apol. I. 61. +65. To this also belong many passages from Tertullian's treatise "de +bapt."; a Gnostic baptismal hymn in the third pseudo-Solomonic ode in +the Pistis Sophia, p. 131, ed. Schwartze; Marcion's baptismal formula in +Irenæus 1. 21. 3. It clearly follows from the seventh chapter of the +Didache, that its author held that the pronouncing of the sacred names +over the baptised, and over the water, was essential, but that immersion +was not; see the thorough examination of this passage by Schaff, "The +oldest church manual called the teaching of the twelve Apostles" pp. 29-57. +The controversy about the nature of John's baptism in its relation to +Christian baptism, is very old in Christendom; see also Tertull. "de bapt." +10. Tertullian sees in John's baptism only a baptism to repentance, not +to forgiveness.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote285" name="footnote285"></a><b>Footnote 285:</b><a href="#footnotetag285"> (return) </a><p> In Hermas and 2 Clement. The expression probably arose from the +language of the mysteries: see Appuleius, "de Magia", 55: "Sacrorum pleraque +initia in Græcia participavi. Eorum quædam signa et monumenta +tradita mihi a sacerdotibus sedulo conservo." Ever since the Gentile +Christians conceived baptism (and the Lord's Supper) according to the +mysteries, they were of course always surprised by the parallel with the +mysteries themselves. That begins with Justin. Tertullian, "de bapt." 5, +says: "Sed enim nationes extraneæ, ab omni intellectu spiritalium potestatum +eadem efficacia idolis suis subministrant. Sed viduis aquis sibi +mentiuntur. Nam et sacris quibusdam per lavacrum initiantur, Isidis +alicujus aut Mithræ; ipsos etiam deos suos lavationibus efferunt. Ceterum +villas, domos, templa totasque urbes aspergine circumlatæ aquæ; expiant passim. +Certe ludis Apollinaribus et Eleusiniis tinguuntur, idque se in regenerationem +et impunitatem periuriorum suorum agere præsumunt. Item penes +veteres, quisquis se homicidio infecerat, purgatrices aquas explorabat." De +praescr. 40: "Diabolus ipsas quoque res sacramentorum divinorum idolorum +mysteriis æmulatur. Tingit et ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fideles suos; +expositionem delictorum de lavacro repromittit. et si adhuc memini, Mithras +signat illic in frontibus milites suos, celebrat et panis oblationem et imaginem +resurrectionis inducit ... summum pontificem in unius nuptiis statuit, habet +et virgines, habet et continentes." The ancient notion that matter has a mysterious +influence on spirit, came very early into vogue in connection with +baptism. We see that from Tertullian's treatise on baptism and his speculations +about the power of the water (c. 1 ff.). The water must, of course, have +been first consecrated for this purpose (that is, the demons must be driven +out of it). But then it is holy water with which the Holy Spirit is united, and +which is able really to cleanse the soul. See Hatch, "The influence of Greek +ideas, etc.," p. 19. The consecration of the water is certainly very old: though +we have no definite witnesses from the earliest period. Even for the exorcism +of the baptised before baptism I know of no earlier witness than the Sentent. +LXXXVII. episcoporum (Hartel. Opp. Cypr. I. p. 450, No. 37: "primo per +manus impositionem in exorcismo, secundo per baptismi regenerationem").</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote286" name="footnote286"></a><b>Footnote 286:</b><a href="#footnotetag286"> (return) </a><p> Justin is the first who does so (I. 61). The word comes from the +Greek mysteries. On Justin's theory of baptism, see also I. 62. and Von +Engelhardt, "Christenthum Justin's," p. 102 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote287" name="footnote287"></a><b>Footnote 287:</b><a href="#footnotetag287"> (return) </a><p> Paul unites baptism and the communication of the Spirit; but they were +very soon represented apart, see the accounts in the Acts of the Apostles, +which are certainly very obscure, because the author has evidently never +himself observed the descent of the Spirit, or anything like it. The +ceasing of special manifestations of the Spirit in and after baptism, and +the enforced renunciation of seeing baptism accompanied by special +shocks, must be regarded as the first stage in the sobering of the churches.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote288" name="footnote288"></a><b>Footnote 288:</b><a href="#footnotetag288"> (return) </a><p> The idea of the whole transaction of the Supper as a sacrifice, is plainly +found in the Didache, (c. 14), in Ignatius, and, above all, in Justin (I. 65 f.) +But even Clement of Rome presupposes it, when in (cc. 40-44) he draws a +parallel between bishops and deacons and the Priests and Levites of the Old +Testament, describing as the chief function of the former (44. 4) προσφερειν τα +δωρα. This is not the place to enquire whether the first celebration had, in the +mind of its founder, the character of a sacrificial meal; but, certainly, the +idea, as it was already developed at the time of Justin, had been created by +the churches. Various reasons tended towards seeing in the Supper a +sacrifice. In the first place, Malachi I. 11, demanded a solemn Christian sacrifice: +see my notes on Didache, 14. 3. In the second place, all prayers were +regarded as sacrifice, and therefore the solemn prayers at the Supper must +be specially considered as such. In the third place, the words of institution +τουτο ποιειτε, contained a command with regard to a definite religious action. +Such an action, however, could only be represented as a sacrifice, and this +the more that the Gentile Christians might suppose that they had to understand +ποιειν in the sense of θυειν. In the fourth place, payments in kind +were +necessary for the "agapæ" connected with the Supper, out of which were +taken the bread and wine for the Holy celebration; in what other aspect +could these offerings in the worship be regarded than as προσφοραι for the +purpose of a sacrifice? Yet the spiritual idea so prevailed that only the +prayers were regarded as the θυσια proper, even in the case of Justin (Dial. +117). The elements are only δωρα, προσφοραι which obtain their value from the +prayers, in which thanks are given for the gifts of creation and redemption, +as well as for the holy meal, and entreaty is made for the introduction of the +community into the Kingdom of God (see Didache, 9. 10). Therefore, even +the sacred meal itself is called ευχαριστια (Justin, Apol. I. 66: 'η +τροφη 'αυτη χαλειται παρ' 'ημιν ευχαριστια). Didache, 9. 1; Ignat., because it is +τροφη ευχαριστηθεισα. It is a mistake to suppose that Justin +already understood +the body of Christ to be the object of ποιειν, and therefore thought of +a sacrifice of this body (I. 66). The real sacrificial act in the Supper consists +rather, according to Justin, only in the ευχαριστιαν ποιειν, whereby the +κοινος αρτος becomes the αρτος της ευχαριστιας. The sacrifice of +the Supper +in its essence, apart from the offering of alms, which in the practice +of the Church was closely united with it, is nothing but a sacrifice of +prayer: the sacrificial act of the Christian here also is nothing else than +an act of prayer (see Apol. I. 13, 65-67; Dial. 28, 29, 41, 70, 116-118).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote289" name="footnote289"></a><b>Footnote 289:</b><a href="#footnotetag289"> (return) </a><p> Justin lays special stress on this purpose. On the other hand, it is +wanting in the Supper prayers of the Didache, unless c. 9. 2 be regarded +as an allusion to it.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote290" name="footnote290"></a><b>Footnote 290:</b><a href="#footnotetag290"> (return) </a><p>The designation θυσια is first found in the Didache, c. 14.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote291" name="footnote291"></a><b>Footnote 291:</b><a href="#footnotetag291"> (return) </a><p> The Supper was regarded as a "Sacrament" in so far as a blessing +was represented in its holy food. The conception of the nature of +this blessing as set forth in John VI. 27-58, appears to have been the +most common. It may be traced back to Ignatius, ad Eph. 20.2: 'ενα αρτον +κλωντες 'ος εστιν φαρμακον αθανασιας, αντιδοτος του μη αποθανειν αλλα ζην εν Ιησου +Χριστου δια παντος. Cf Didache, 10.3: 'ημιν εχαρισω πνευματικην τροφην και +ποτον και ζωην αιωνιον, also 10.21: ευχαριστουμεν σοι 'υπερ της γνωσεως +και πιστεος +και αθανασιας. Justin Apol. 1. 66: εκ της τροφης ταυτης 'αιμα και +σαρκες κατα +μεταβολην τρεφονται 'ημων κατα μεταβολην that is, the holy food, like all +nourishment, is completely transformed into our flesh; but what Justin +has in view here is most probably the body of the resurrection. The +expression, as the context shews, is chosen for the sake of the parallel +to the incarnation). Iren. IV. 18. 5; V. 2. 2 f. As to how the elements are +related to the body and blood of Christ, Ignatius seems to have expressed +himself in a strictly realistic way in several passages, especially ad. Smyr. +7-1: ευχαριστιας και προσευχης απεχονται δια το μη 'ομολογειν, την +ευχαριστιαν +σαρκα ειναι του σωτηρος 'ημων Ιησου Χριστου, την 'υπερ των 'αμαρτιον 'ημων +παθουσαν. +But many passages shew that Ignatius was far from such a conception, +and rather thought as John did. In Trall. 8, faith is described as the flesh, +and love as the blood of Christ; in Rom. 7, in one breath the flesh of +Christ is called the bread of God, and the blood αγαπη αφθαρτος. In Philad. +1, we read: 'αιμα Ι. Χρ. 'ητις εστιν χαρα αιωνιος και παραμονος. In Philad. +5, the +Gospel is called the flesh of Christ, etc. Höfling is therefore right in +saying (Lehre v. Opfer, p. 39): "The Eucharist is to Ignatius σαρξ of +Christ, as a visible Gospel, a kind of Divine institution attesting the +content of πιστις, viz., belief in the σαρξ παθουσα, an institution +which is +at the same time, to the community, a means of representing and preserving +its unity in this belief." On the other hand, it cannot be mistaken +that Justin (Apol. I. 66) presupposed the identity, miraculously produced +by the Logos, of the consecrated bread and the body he had assumed. +In this we have probably to recognise an influence on the conception of +the Supper, of the miracle represented in the Greek Mysteries: Ουχ 'ως +κοινον αρτον ουδε κοινον πομα ταυτα λαμβανομεν, αλλ' 'ον τροπον δια λογου θεου +σαρκοποιηθεις Ιησους Χριστος 'ο σωτηρ 'ημων και σαρκα και 'αιμα 'υπερ σωτηριας +'ημων +εσχεν, 'ουτως και την δι' ευχης λογου του παρ' αυτου ευχαριστηθεισαν τροφην, εξ +ης 'αιμα κα σαρκες κατα μεταβολεν τρεφονται 'εμων, εκεινου του σαρκοποιεθεντος +Ιησου και σαρκα και 'αιμα εδιδαχθημεν ειναι (See Von Otto on the passage). In +the Texte u. Unters. VII. 2. p. 117 ff., I have shewn that in the different +Christian circles of the second century, water and only water was often +used in the Supper instead of wine, and that in many regions this custom +was maintained up to the middle of the third century (see Cypr. Ep. +63). I have endeavoured to make it further probable, that even Justin in +his Apology describes a celebration of the Lord's Supper with bread and +water. The latter has been contested by Zahn, "Bread and wine in the +Lord's Supper, in the early Church," 1892, and Jülicher, Zur Gesch. der +Abendmahlsfeier in der aeltesten Kirche (Abhandl. f Weiszacker, 1892, p. +217 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote292" name="footnote292"></a><b>Footnote 292:</b><a href="#footnotetag292"> (return) </a><p> Ignatius calls the thank-offering the flesh of Christ, but the concept +"flesh of Christ" is for him itself a spiritual one. On the contrary, Justin +sees in the bread the actual flesh of Christ, but does not connect it +with the idea of sacrifice. They are thus both as yet far from the later +conception. The numerous allegories which are already attached to the +Supper (one bread equivalent to one community; many scattered grains +bound up in the one bread, equivalent to the Christians scattered abroad +in the world, who are to be gathered together into the Kingdom of God; +one altar, equivalent to one assembly of the community, excluding private +worship, etc.), cannot as a group be adduced here.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote293" name="footnote293"></a><b>Footnote 293:</b><a href="#footnotetag293"> (return) </a><p> Cf. for the following my arguments in the larger edition of the "Teaching +of the Apostles" Chap 5, (Texte u. Unters II. 1. 2). The numerous recent +enquiries (Loening, Loofs, Réville etc.) will be found referred to in Sohm's +Kirchenrecht. Vol. I. 1892, where the most exhaustive discussions are given.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote294" name="footnote294"></a><b>Footnote 294:</b><a href="#footnotetag294"> (return) </a><p> That the bishops and deacons were, primarily, officials connected +with the cultus, is most clearly seen from 1 Clem. 40-44, but also from +the connection in which the 14th Chap. of the Didache stands with the +15th (see the ουν, 15. 1) to which Hatch in conversation called my attention. +The φιλοξενια, and the intercourse with other communities (the fostering +of the "unitas") belonged, above all, to the affairs of the church. Here, +undoubtedly, from the beginning lay an important part of the bishop's +duties. Ramsay ("The Church in the Roman Empire," p. 361 ff.) has +emphasised this point exclusively, and therefore one-sidedly. According +to him, the monarchical Episcopate sprang from the officials who were +appointed <i>ad hoc</i> and for a time, for the purpose of promoting intercourse +with other churches.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote295" name="footnote295"></a><b>Footnote 295:</b><a href="#footnotetag295"> (return) </a><p> Sohm (in the work mentioned above) seeks to prove that the monarchical +Episcopate originated in Rome and is already presupposed by +Hermas. I hold that the proof for this has not been adduced, and I +must also in great part reject the bold statements which are +fastened on to the first Epistle of Clement. They may be comprehended +in the proposition which Sohm, p. 158, has placed at the head of his +discussion of the Epistle. "The first Epistle of Clement makes an epoch +in the history of the organisation of the Church. It was destined to put +an end to the early Christian constitution of the Church." According to +Sohm (p. 165), another immediate result of the Epistle was a change of +constitution in the Romish Church, the introduction of the monarchical +Episcopate. That, however, can only be asserted, not proved; for the +proof which Sohm has endeavoured to bring from Ignatius' Epistle to +the Romans and the Shepherd of Hermas, is not convincing.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote296" name="footnote296"></a><b>Footnote 296:</b><a href="#footnotetag296"> (return) </a><p> See, above all, 1 Clem. 42, 44, Acts of the Apostles, +Pastoral Epistles, etc.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote297" name="footnote297"></a><b>Footnote 297:</b><a href="#footnotetag297"> (return) </a><p>This idea is Romish. See Book II. chap, 11 C.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote298" name="footnote298"></a><b>Footnote 298:</b><a href="#footnotetag298"> (return) </a><p> We must remember here, that besides the teachers, elders, and deacons, +the ascetics (virgins, widows, celibates, abstinentes) and the martyrs +(confessors) enjoyed a special respect in the Churches, and frequently +laid hold of the government and leading of them. Hermas enjoins plainly +enough the duty of esteeming the confessors higher than the presbyters +(Vis. III. 1. 2). The widows were soon entrusted with diaconal tasks +connected with the worship, and received a corresponding respect. As +to the limits of this there was, as we can gather from different passages, +much disagreement. One statement in Tertullian shews that the confessors +had special claims to be considered in the choice of a bishop (adv. Valent. +4: "Speraverat Episcopatum Valentinus, quia et ingenio poterat et eloquio. +Sed alium ex martyrii praerogativa loci potitum indignatus de ecclesia +authenticae regulæ abrupit"). This statement is strengthened by other +passages; see Tertull. de fuga; 11. "Hoc sentire et facere omnem servum +dei oportet, etiam minoris loci, ut maioris fieri possit, si quem gradum +in persecutionis tolerantia ascenderit"; see Hippol in the Arab. canons, +and also Achelis, Texte u. Unters VI. 4. pp. 67, 220; Cypr. Epp. 38. 39. +The way in which confessors and ascetics, from the end of the second +century, attempted to have their say in the leading of the Churches, and +the respectful way in which it was sought to set their claims aside, shew +that a special relation to the Lord, and therefore a special right with +regard to the community, was early acknowledged to these people, on +account of their achievements. On the transition of the old prophets and +teachers into wandering ascetics, later into monks, see the Syriac Pseudo-Clementine +Epistles, "de virginitate," and my Abhandl i d. Sitzungsberichten +d. K. Pr. Akad. d. Wissensch. 1891, p. 361 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote299" name="footnote299"></a><b>Footnote 299:</b><a href="#footnotetag299"> (return) </a><p> See Weizsäcker, Gött Gel. Anz. 1886, No. 21, whose statements I +can almost entirely make my own.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page222" id="page222"></a>[pg 222]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_IV" id="CHAP_I_IV"></a>CHAPTER IV</h2> + +<h3>THE ATTEMPTS OF THE GNOSTICS TO CREATE AN APOSTOLIC +DOGMATIC, AND A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY; OR, THE +ACUTE SECULARISING OF CHRISTIANITY.</h3> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_IV_I" id="SEC_I_IV_I"></a>§ 1. <i>The Conditions for the Rise of Gnosticism.</i></h3> + +<p>The Christian communities were originally unions for a +holy life, on the ground of a common hope, which rested on the +belief that the God who has spoken by the Prophets has sent +his Son Jesus Christ, and through him revealed eternal life, +and will shortly make it manifest. Christianity had its roots +in certain facts and utterances, and the foundation of the +Christian union was the common hope, the holy life in the +Spirit according to the law of God, and the holding fast to +those facts and utterances. There was, as the foregoing chapter +will have shewn, no fixed Didache beyond that.<a id="footnotetag300" name="footnotetag300"></a><a href="#footnote300"><sup>300</sup></a> There +was abundance of fancies, ideas, and knowledge, but these +had not yet the value of being the religion itself. Yet the +belief that Christianity guarantees the perfect knowledge, and +leads from one degree of clearness to another, was in operation +from the very beginning. This conviction had to be immediately +tested by the Old Testament, that is, the task was +imposed on the majority of thinking Christians, by the circumstances +in which the Gospel had been proclaimed to them, +of making the Old Testament intelligible to themselves, in +other words, of using this book as a Christian book, and of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page223" id="page223"></a>[pg 223]</span> +finding the means by which they might be able to repel the +Jewish claim to it, and refute the Jewish interpretation of it. +This task would not have been imposed, far less solved, if +the Christian communities in the Empire had not entered +into the inheritance of the Jewish propaganda, which had already +been greatly influenced by foreign religions (Babylonian +and Persian, see the Jewish Apocalypses), and in which an +extensive spiritualising of the Old Testament religion had +already taken place. This spiritualising was the result of a +philosophic view of religion, and this philosophic view was the +outcome of a lasting influence of Greek philosophy and of the +Greek spirit generally on Judaism. In consequence of this +view, all facts and sayings of the Old Testament in which +one could not find his way, were allegorised. "Nothing was +what it seemed, but was only the symbol of something invisible. +The history of the Old Testament was here sublimated +to a history of the emancipation of reason from passion." +It describes, however, the beginning of the historical +development of Christianity, that as soon as it wished to give +account of itself, or to turn to advantage the documents of +revelation which were in its possession, it had to adopt the +methods of that fantastic syncretism. We have seen above +that those writers who made a diligent use of the Old Testament, +had no hesitation in making use of the allegorical method. +That was required not only by the inability to understand +the verbal sense of the Old Testament, presenting +diverging moral and religious opinions, but, above all, by the +conviction, that on every page of that book Christ and the +Christian Church must be found. How could this conviction +have been maintained, unless the definite concrete meaning +of the documents had been already obliterated by the Jewish +philosophic view of the Old Testament?</p> + +<p>This necessary allegorical interpretation, however, brought +into the communities an intellectual philosophic element, a +<i>gnosis</i>, which was perfectly distinct from the Apocalyptic +dreams, in which were beheld angel hosts on white horses, +Christ with eyes as a flame of fire, hellish beasts, conflict and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page224" id="page224"></a>[pg 224]</span> +victory.<a id="footnotetag301" name="footnotetag301"></a><a href="#footnote301"><sup>301</sup></a> In this γνωσις, which attached itself to the Old +Testament, many began to see the specific blessing which +was promised to mature faith, and through which it was to +attain perfection. What a wealth of relations, hints, and +intuitions seemed to disclose itself, as soon as the Old Testament +was considered allegorically, and to what extent had +the way been prepared here by the Jewish philosophic +teachers! From the simple narratives of the Old Testament +had already been developed a theosophy, in which the most +abstract ideas had acquired reality, and from which sounded +forth the Hellenic canticle of the power of the Spirit over +matter and sensuality, and of the true home of the soul. +Whatever in this great adaptation still remained obscure and +unnoticed, was now lighted up by the history of Jesus, his birth, +his life, his sufferings and triumph. The view of the Old Testament +as a document of the deepest wisdom, transmitted to +those who knew how to read it as such, unfettered the intellectual +interest which would not rest until it had entirely transferred +the new religion from the world of feelings, actions and hopes, +into the world of Hellenic conceptions, and transformed it +into a metaphysic. In that exposition of the Old Testament +which we find, for example, in the so-called Barnabas, there is +already concealed an important philosophic, Hellenic element, +and in that sermon which bears the name of Clement (the so-called +second Epistle of Clement), conceptions such as that of +the Church, have already assumed a bodily form and been +joined in marvellous connections, while, on the contrary, +things concrete have been transformed into things invisible.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page225" id="page225"></a>[pg 225]</span> + +<p>But once the intellectual interest was unfettered, and the +new religion had approximated to the Hellenic spirit by means +of a philosophic view of the Old Testament, how could that +spirit be prevented from taking complete and immediate possession +of it, and where, in the first instance, could the power +be found that was able to decide whether this or that opinion +was incompatible with Christianity? This Christianity, as it +was, unequivocally excluded all polytheism, and all national +religions existing in the Empire. It opposed to them the one +God, the Saviour Jesus, and a spiritual worship of God. But, +at the same time, it summoned all thoughtful men to knowledge, +by declaring itself to be the only true religion, while +it appeared to be only a variety of Judaism. It seemed to +put no limits to the character and extent of the knowledge, +least of all to such knowledge as was able to allow all that was +transmitted to remain, and at the same time, abolish it by +transforming it into mysterious symbols. That really was the +method which every one must and did apply who wished to +get from Christianity more than practical motives and super-earthly +hopes. But where was the limit of the application? +Was not the next step to see in the Evangelic records also +new material for spiritual interpretations, and to illustrate from +the narratives there, as from The Old Testament, the conflict +of the spirit with matter, of reason with sensuality? Was +not the conception that the traditional deeds of Christ were +really the last act in the struggle of those mighty spiritual +powers whose conflict is delineated in the Old Testament, at least +as evident as the other, that those deeds were the fulfilment of +mysterious promises? Was it not in keeping with the consciousness +possessed by the new religion of being the universal +religion, that one should not be satisfied with mere beginnings +of a new knowledge, or with fragments of it, but should seek +to set up such knowledge in a complete and systematic form, +and so to exhibit the best and universal system of life as +also the best and universal system of knowledge of the world? +Finally, did not the free and yet so rigid forms in which +the Christian communities were organised, the union of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page226" id="page226"></a>[pg 226]</span> +mysterious with a wonderful publicity, of the spiritual with +significant rites (baptism and the Lord's Supper), invite men +to find here the realisation of the ideal which the Hellenic +religious spirit was at that time seeking, viz., a communion +which in virtue of a Divine revelation, is in possession of the +highest knowledge, and therefore leads the holiest life, a +communion which does not communicate this knowledge by +discourse, but by mysterious efficacious consecrations, and by +revealed dogmas? These questions are thrown out here in +accordance with the direction which the historical progress of +Christianity took. The phenomenon called Gnosticism gives +the answer to them.<a id="footnotetag302" name="footnotetag302"></a><a href="#footnote302"><sup>302</sup></a></p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_IV_II" id="SEC_I_IV_II"></a>§ 2. <i>The Nature of Gnosticism.</i></h3> + +<p>The Catholic Church afterwards claimed as her own those +writers of the first century (60-160) who were content with +turning speculation to account only as a means of spiritualising +the Old Testament, without, however, attempting a +systematic reconstruction of tradition. But all those who in +the first century undertook to furnish Christian practice with the +foundation of a complete systematic knowledge, she declared false +Christians, Christians only in name. Historical enquiry cannot +accept this judgment. On the contrary, it sees in Gnosticism +a series of undertakings, which in a certain way is analogous +to the Catholic embodiment of Christianity, in doctrine, morals, +and worship. The great distinction here consists essentially +in the fact that the Gnostic systems represent the acute +secularising or hellenising of Christianity, with the rejection +of the Old Testament,<a id="footnotetag303" name="footnotetag303"></a><a href="#footnote303"><sup>303</sup></a> while the Catholic system, on the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page227" id="page227"></a>[pg 227]</span> +other hand, represents a gradual process of the same kind +with the conservation of the Old Testament. The traditional +religion on being, as it were, suddenly required to recognise +itself in a picture foreign to it, was yet vigorous enough to +reject that picture; but to the gradual, and one might say +indulgent remodelling to which it was subjected, it offered +but little resistance, nay, as a rule, it was never conscious of it. +It is therefore no paradox to say that Gnosticism, which is +just Hellenism, has in Catholicism obtained half a victory. +We have, at least, the same justification for that assertion—the +parallel may be permitted—as we have for recognising +a triumph of 18<sup>th</sup> century ideas in the first Empire, and a +continuance, though with reservations, of the old regime.</p> + +<p>From this point of view the position to be assigned to the +Gnostics in the history of dogma, which has hitherto been +always misunderstood, is obvious. <i>They were, in short, the +Theologians of the first century.</i><a id="footnotetag304" name="footnotetag304"></a><a href="#footnote304"><sup>304</sup></a> They were the first to +transform Christianity into a system of doctrines (dogmas). +They were the first to work up tradition systematically. They +undertook to present Christianity as the absolute religion, and +therefore placed it in definite opposition to the other religions, +even to Judaism. But to them the absolute religion, viewed +in its contents, was identical with the result of the philosophy +of religion for which the support of a revelation was to be +sought. They are therefore those Christians who, in a swift +advance, attempted to capture Christianity for Hellenic culture, +and Hellenic culture for Christianity, and who gave up the +Old Testament in order to facilitate the conclusion of the +covenant between the two powers, and make it possible to +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page228" id="page228"></a>[pg 228]</span> +assert the absoluteness of Christianity.—But the significance of +the Old Testament in the religious history of the world, lies just +in this, that, in order to be maintained at all, it required the +application of the allegoric method, that is, a definite proportion +of Greek ideas, and that, on the other hand, it opposed the strongest +barrier to the complete hellenising of Christianity. Neither +the sayings of Jesus, nor Christian hopes, were at first capable +of forming such a barrier. If, now, the majority of Gnostics +could make the attempt to disregard the Old Testament, that +is a proof that, in wide circles of Christendom, people were +at first satisfied with an abbreviated form of the Gospel, containing +the preaching of the one God, of the resurrection and +of continence, a law and an ideal of practical life.<a id="footnotetag305" name="footnotetag305"></a><a href="#footnote305"><sup>305</sup></a> In this +form, as it was realised in life, the Christianity which dispensed +with "doctrines" seemed capable of union with every form +of thoughtful and earnest philosophy, because the Jewish +foundation did not make its appearance here at all. But the +majority of Gnostic undertakings may also be viewed as +attempts to transform Christianity into a theosophy, that is, +into a revealed metaphysic and philosophy of history, with a +complete disregard of the Jewish Old Testament soil on which +it originated, through the use of Pauline ideas,<a id="footnotetag306" name="footnotetag306"></a><a href="#footnote306"><sup>306</sup></a> and under +the influence of the Platonic spirit. Moreover, comparison is +possible between writers such as Barnabas and Ignatius, and +the so-called Gnostics, to the effect of making the latter appear +in possession of a completed theory, to which fragmentary +ideas in the former exhibit a striking affinity.</p> + +<p>We have hitherto tacitly presupposed that in Gnosticism +the Hellenic spirit desired to make itself master of Christianity, +or more correctly of the Christian communities. This +conception may be, and really is still contested. For according +to the accounts of later opponents, and on these we are +almost exclusively dependent here, the main thing with the +Gnostics seems to have been the reproduction of Asiatic Mythologoumena +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page229" id="page229"></a>[pg 229]</span> +of all kinds, so that we should rather have to +see in Gnosticism a union of Christianity with the most remote +Oriental cults and their wisdom. But with regard to the most +important Gnostic systems the words hold true, "The hands +are the hands of Esau, but the voice is the voice of Jacob." +There can be no doubt of the fact, that the Gnosticism which +has become a factor in the movement of the history of dogma, +was ruled in the main by the Greek spirit, and determined +by the interests and doctrines of the Greek philosophy of +religion,<a id="footnotetag307" name="footnotetag307"></a><a href="#footnote307"><sup>307</sup></a> which doubtless had already assumed a syncretistic +character. This fact is certainly concealed by the circumstance +that the material of the speculations was taken now +from this, and now from that Oriental religious philosophy, +from astrology and the Semitic cosmologies. But that is +only in keeping with the stage which the religious development +had reached among the Greeks and Romans of that +time.<a id="footnotetag308" name="footnotetag308"></a><a href="#footnote308"><sup>308</sup></a> The cultured, and these primarily come into consideration +here, no longer had a religion in the sense of a national +religion, but a philosophy of religion. They were, however, +in search of a religion, that is, a firm basis for the results +of their speculations, and they hoped to obtain it by turning +themselves towards the very old Oriental cults, and seeking +to fill them with the religious and moral knowledge which had +been gained by the Schools of Plato and of Zeno. The union +of the traditions and rites of the Oriental religions, viewed as +mysteries, with the spirit of Greek philosophy is the characteristic +of the epoch. The needs, which asserted themselves +with equal strength, of a complete knowledge of the All, of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page230" id="page230"></a>[pg 230]</span> +a spiritual God, a sure, and therefore very old revelation, +atonement and immortality, were thus to be satisfied at one +and the same time. The most sublimated spiritualism enters +here into the strangest union with a crass superstition based on +Oriental cults. This superstition was supposed to insure and +communicate the spiritual blessings. These complicated tendencies +now entered into Christianity.</p> + +<p>We have accordingly to ascertain and distinguish in the +prominent Gnostic schools, which, in the second century on +Greek soil, became an important factor in the history of the +Church, the Semitic-cosmological foundations, the Hellenic philosophic +mode of thought, and the recognition of the redemption +of the world by Jesus Christ. Further, we have to take +note of the three elements of Gnosticism, viz., the speculative +and philosophical, the mystic element connection with worship, +and the practical, ascetic. The close connection in which these +three elements appear,<a id="footnotetag309" name="footnotetag309"></a><a href="#footnote309"><sup>309</sup></a> the total transformation of all ethical +into cosmological problems, the upbuilding of a philosophy of +God and the world on the basis of a combination of popular +Mythologies, physical observations belonging to the Oriental +(Babylonian) religious philosophy, and historical events, as +well as the idea that the history of religion is the last act in +the drama-like history of the Cosmos—all this is not peculiar +to Gnosticism, but rather corresponds to a definite stage of +the general development. It may, however, be asserted that +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page231" id="page231"></a>[pg 231]</span> +Gnosticism anticipated the general development, and that not +only with regard to Catholicism, but also with regard to Neo-platonism, +which represents the last stage in the inner history +of Hellenism.<a id="footnotetag310" name="footnotetag310"></a><a href="#footnote310"><sup>310</sup></a> The Valentinians have already got as far as +Jamblichus.</p> + +<p>The name Gnosis, Gnostics, describes excellently the aims +of Gnosticism, in so far as its adherents boasted of the absolute +knowledge, and faith in the Gospel was transformed into +a knowledge of God, nature and history. This knowledge, +however, was not regarded as natural, but in the view of the +Gnostics was based on revelation, was communicated and +guaranteed by holy consecrations, and was accordingly cultivated +by reflection supported by fancy. A mythology of ideas +was created out of the sensuous mythology of any Oriental +religion, by the conversion of concrete forms into speculative +and moral ideas, such as "Abyss," "Silence," "Logos," "Wisdom," +"Life," while the mutual relation and number of these +abstract ideas were determined by the data supplied by the +corresponding concretes. Thus arose a philosophic dramatic +poem, similar to the Platonic, but much more complicated, +and therefore more fantastic, in which mighty powers, the +spiritual and good, appear in an unholy union with the material +and wicked, but from which the spiritual is finally delivered +by the aid of those kindred powers which are too exalted to +be ever drawn down into the common. The good and heavenly +which has been drawn down into the material, and therefore really +non-existing, is the human spirit, and the exalted power who +delivers it is Christ. The Evangelic history as handed down +is not the history of Christ, but a collection of allegoric representations +of the great history of God and the world. Christ +has really no history. His appearance in this world of mixture +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page232" id="page232"></a>[pg 232]</span> +and confusion is his deed, and the enlightenment of the spirit +about itself is the result which springs out of that deed. This +enlightenment itself is life. But the enlightenment is dependent +on revelation, asceticism and surrender to those mysteries +which Christ founded, in which one enters into communion +with a <i>præsens numen</i>, and which in mysterious ways promote +the process of raising the spirit above the sensual. This +rising above the sensual is, however, to be actively practised. +Abstinence therefore, as a rule, is the watchword. Christianity +thus appears here as a speculative philosophy which +redeems the spirit by enlightening it, consecrating it, and instructing +it in the right conduct of life. The Gnosis is free from +the rationalistic interest in the sense of natural religion. Because +the riddles about the world which it desires to solve +are not properly intellectual, but practical, because it desires +to be in the end γνωσις σωτηριας, it removes into the region +of the suprarational the powers which are supposed to confer +vigour and life on the human spirit. Only a μαθησις, however, +united with μυσταγογια, resting on revelation, leads thither, +not an exact philosophy. Gnosis starts from the great problem +of this world, but occupies itself with a higher world, +and does not wish to be an exact philosophy, but a philosophy +of religion. Its fundamental philosophic doctrines are the +following: (1) The indefinable, infinite nature of the Divine +primeval Being exalted above all thought. (2) Matter as opposed +to the Divine Being, and therefore having no real being, the +ground of evil. (3) The fulness of divine potencies, Æons, +which are thought of partly as powers, partly as real ideas, +partly as relatively independent beings, presenting in gradation +the unfolding and revelation of the Godhead, but at the same +time rendering possible the transition of the higher to the +lower. (4) The Cosmos as a mixture of matter with divine +sparks, which has arisen from a descent of the latter into the +former, or, as some say, from the perverse, or, at least, merely +permitted undertaking of a subordinate spirit. The Demiurge, +therefore, is an evil, intermediate, or weak, but penitent being; +the best thing therefore in the world is aspiration. (5) The +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page233" id="page233"></a>[pg 233]</span> +deliverance of the spiritual element from its union with matter, +or the separation of the good from the world of sensuality by +the Spirit of Christ which operates through knowledge, asceticism, +and holy consecration: thus originates the perfect +Gnostic, the man who is free from the world, and master of +himself, who lives in God and prepares himself for eternity. +All these are ideas for which we find the way prepared in the +philosophy of the time, anticipated by Philo, and represented +in Neoplatonism as the great final result of Greek philosophy. +It lies in the nature of the case that only some men are able +to appropriate the Christianity that is comprehended in these +ideas, viz., just as many as are capable of entering into this +kind of Christianity, those who are spiritual. The others must +be considered as non-partakers of the Spirit from the beginning, +and therefore excluded from knowledge as the <i>profanum +vulgus</i>. Yet some, the Valentinians, for example, made +a distinction in this <i>vulgus</i>, which can only be discussed later +on, because it is connected with the position of the Gnostics +towards Jewish Christian tradition.</p> + +<p>The later opponents of Gnosticism preferred to bring out +the fantastic details of the Gnostic systems, and thereby +created the prejudice that the essence of the matter lay in +these. They have thus occasioned modern expounders to speculate +about the Gnostic speculations in a manner that is +marked by still greater strangeness. Four observations shew +how unhistorical and unjust such a view is, at least with regard +to the chief systems. (1) The great Gnostic schools, +wherever they could, sought to spread their opinions. But +it is simply incredible that they should have expected of all +their disciples, male and female, an accurate knowledge of the +details of their system. On the contrary, it may be shewn that +they often contented themselves with imparting consecration, with +regulating the practical life of their adherents, and instructing +them in the general features of their system.<a id="footnotetag311" name="footnotetag311"></a><a href="#footnote311"><sup>311</sup></a> (2) We see +how in one and the same school, for example, the Valentinian, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page234" id="page234"></a>[pg 234]</span> +the details of the religious metaphysic were very various +and changing. (3) We hear but little of conflicts between +the various schools. On the contrary, we learn that the +books of doctrine and edification passed from one school to +another.<a id="footnotetag312" name="footnotetag312"></a><a href="#footnote312"><sup>312</sup></a> (4) The fragments of Gnostic writings which have +been preserved, and this is the most important consideration +of the four, shew that the Gnostics devoted their main strength +to the working out of those religious, moral, philosophical +and historical problems, which must engage the thoughtful +of all times.<a id="footnotetag313" name="footnotetag313"></a><a href="#footnote313"><sup>313</sup></a> We only need to read some actual Gnostic +document, such as the Epistle of Ptolemæus to Flora, or certain +paragraphs of the Pistis Sophia, in order to see that the +fantastic details of the philosophic poem can only, in the case +of the Gnostics themselves, have had the value of liturgical +apparatus, the construction of which was not of course a +matter of indifference, but hardly formed the principal interest. +The things to be proved, and to be confirmed by the aid of this +or that very old religious philosophy, were certain religious +and moral fundamental convictions, and a correct conception +of God, of the sensible, of the creator of the world, of Christ, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page235" id="page235"></a>[pg 235]</span> +of the Old Testament, and the evangelic tradition. Here were +actual dogmas. But how the grand fantastic union of all the +factors was to be brought about, was, as the Valentinian +school shews, a problem whose solution was ever and again +subjected to new attempts.<a id="footnotetag314" name="footnotetag314"></a><a href="#footnote314"><sup>314</sup></a> No one to-day can in all respects +distinguish what to those thinkers was image and what +reality, or in what degree they were at all able to distinguish +image from reality, and in how far the magic formulæ of their +mysteries were really objects of their meditation. But the +final aim of their endeavours, the faith and knowledge of +their own hearts which they instilled into their disciples, the +practical rules which they wished to give them, and the view +of Christ which they wished to confirm them in, stand out +with perfect clearness. Like Plato, they made their explanation +of the world start from the contradiction between sense +and reason, which the thoughtful man observes in himself. +The cheerful asceticism, the powers of the spiritual and the +good which were seen in the Christian communities, attracted +them and seemed to require the addition of theory to practice. +Theory without being followed by practice had long been in +existence, but here was the as yet rare phenomenon of a moral +practice which seemed to dispense with that which was regarded +as indispensable, viz., theory. The philosophic life was already +there; how could the philosophic doctrine be wanting, and after +what other model could the latent doctrine be reproduced than +that of the Greek religious philosophy?<a id="footnotetag315" name="footnotetag315"></a><a href="#footnote315"><sup>315</sup></a> That the Hellenic +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page236" id="page236"></a>[pg 236]</span> +spirit in Gnosticism turned with such eagerness to the Christian +communities and was ready even to believe in Christ in order +to appropriate the moral powers which it saw operative in +them, is a convincing proof of the extraordinary impression +which these communities made. For what other peculiarities +and attractions had they to offer to that spirit than the certainty +of their conviction (of eternal life), and the purity of +their life? We hear of no similar edifice being erected in +the second century on the basis of any other Oriental cult—even +the Mithras cult is scarcely to be mentioned here—as +the Gnostic was on the foundation of the Christian.<a id="footnotetag316" name="footnotetag316"></a><a href="#footnote316"><sup>316</sup></a> The +Christian communities, however, together with their worship +of Christ, formed the real solid basis of the greater number +and the most important of the Gnostic systems, and in this fact we +have, on the very threshold of the great conflict, a triumph +of Christianity over Hellenism. The triumph lay in the recognition +of what Christianity had already performed as a moral +and social power. This recognition found expression in bringing +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page237" id="page237"></a>[pg 237]</span> +the highest that one possessed as a gift to be consecrated +by the new religion, a philosophy of religion whose end was +plain and simple, but whose means were mysterious and complicated.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_IV_III" id="SEC_I_IV_III"></a>§ 3. <i>History of Gnosticism and the forms in which it appeared.</i></h3> + +<p>In the previous section we have been contemplating Gnosticism +as it reached its prime in the great schools of Basilides and +Valentinus, and those related to them,<a id="footnotetag317" name="footnotetag317"></a><a href="#footnote317"><sup>317</sup></a> at the close of the +period we are now considering, and became an important factor +in the history of dogma. But this Gnosticism had (1) preliminary +stages, and (2) was always accompanied by a great +number of sects, schools and undertakings which were only +in part related to it, and yet, reasonably enough, were grouped +together with it.</p> + +<p>To begin with the second point, the great Gnostic schools +were flanked on the right and left by a motley series of groups +which at their extremities can hardly be distinguished from +popular Christianity on the one hand, and from the Hellenic and +the common world on the other.<a id="footnotetag318" name="footnotetag318"></a><a href="#footnote318"><sup>318</sup></a> On the right were communities +such as the Encratites, which put all stress on a strict asceticism, +in support of which they urged the example of Christ, +but which here and there fell into dualistic ideas.<a id="footnotetag319" name="footnotetag319"></a><a href="#footnote319"><sup>319</sup></a> There +were further, whole communities which, for decennia, drew their +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page238" id="page238"></a>[pg 238]</span> +views of Christ from books which represented him as a heavenly +spirit who had merely assumed an apparent body.<a id="footnotetag320" name="footnotetag320"></a><a href="#footnote320"><sup>320</sup></a> There +were also individual teachers who brought forward peculiar +opinions without thereby causing any immediate stir in the +Churches.<a id="footnotetag321" name="footnotetag321"></a><a href="#footnote321"><sup>321</sup></a> On the left there were schools such as the Carpocratians, +in which the philosophy and communism of Plato +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page239" id="page239"></a>[pg 239]</span> +were taught, the son of the founder and second teacher +Epiphanes honoured as a God (at Cephallenia), as Epicurus +was in his school, and the image of Jesus crowned along with +those of Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle.<a id="footnotetag322" name="footnotetag322"></a><a href="#footnote322"><sup>322</sup></a> On this left flank +are, further, swindlers who take their own way, like Alexander +of Abonoteichus, magicians, soothsayers, sharpers and jugglers, +under the sign-board of Christianity, deceivers and hypocrites +who appear using mighty words with a host of unintelligible +formulæ, and take up with scandalous ceremonies, in order +to rob men of their money and women of their honour.<a id="footnotetag323" name="footnotetag323"></a><a href="#footnote323"><sup>323</sup></a> All +this was afterwards called "Heresy" and "Gnosticism," and +is still so called.<a id="footnotetag324" name="footnotetag324"></a><a href="#footnote324"><sup>324</sup></a> And these names may be retained, if +we will understand by them nothing else than the world +taken into Christianity, all the manifold formations which +resulted from the first contact of the new religion with the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page240" id="page240"></a>[pg 240]</span> +society into which it entered. To prove the existence of that +left wing of Gnosticism is of the greatest interest for the +history of dogma, but the details are of no consequence. On +the other hand, in the aims and undertakings of the Gnostic +right, it is just the details that are of greatest significance, +because they shew that there was no fixed boundary between +what one may call common Christian and Gnostic Christian. +But as Gnosticism, in its contents, extended itself from the +Encratites and the philosophic interpretation of certain articles +of the Christian proclamation, as brought forward without offence +by individual teachers in the communities, to the complete +dissolution of the Christian element by philosophy, or the +religious charlatanry of the age, so it exhibits itself formally +also in a long series of groups which comprised all imaginable +forms of unions. There were churches, ascetic associations, +mystery cults, strictly private philosophic schools,<a id="footnotetag325" name="footnotetag325"></a><a href="#footnote325"><sup>325</sup></a> free unions +for edification, entertainments by Christian charlatans and +deceived deceivers, who appeared as magicians and prophets, +attempts at founding new religions after the model and under +the influence of the Christian, etc. But, finally, the thesis that +Gnosticism is identical with an acute secularising of Christianity, +in the widest sense of the word, is confirmed by the +study of its own literature. The early Christian production +of Gospel and Apocalypses was indeed continued in Gnosticism +yet so that the class of "Acts of the Apostles" was added +to them, and that didactic, biographic and "belles lettres," +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page241" id="page241"></a>[pg 241]</span> +elements were received into them, and claimed a very important +place. If this makes the Gnostic literature approximate +to the profane, that is much more the case with the scientific +theological literature which Gnosticism first produced. Dogmatico-philosophic +tracts, theologico-critical treatises, historical +investigations and scientific commentaries on the sacred books, +were, for the first time in Christendom, composed by the +Gnostics, who in part occupied the foremost place in the +scientific knowledge, religious earnestness and ardour of the +age. They form, in every respect, the counterpart to the +scientific works which proceeded from the contemporary philosophic +schools. Moreover, we possess sufficient knowledge of +Gnostic hymns and odes, songs for public worship, didactic +poems, magic formulæ, magic books, etc., to assure us that +Christian Gnosticism took possession of a whole region of the +secular life in its full breadth, and thereby often transformed +the original forms of Christian literature into secular.<a id="footnotetag326" name="footnotetag326"></a><a href="#footnote326"><sup>326</sup></a> If, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page242" id="page242"></a>[pg 242]</span> +however, we bear in mind how all this at a later period was +gradually legitimised in the Catholic Church, philosophy, +the science of the sacred books, criticism and exegesis, the +ascetic associations, the theological schools, the mysteries, the +sacred formulæ, the superstition, the charlatanism, all kinds +of profane literature, etc., it seems to prove the thesis that the +victorious epoch of the gradual hellenising of Christianity followed +the abortive attempts at an acute hellenising.</p> + +<p>The traditional question as to the origin and development +of Gnosticism, as well as that about the classification of the +Gnostic systems, will have to be modified in accordance +with the foregoing discussion. As the different Gnostic systems +might be contemporary, and in part were undoubtedly contemporary, +and as a graduated relation holds good only between +some few groups, we must, in the classification, limit ourselves +essentially to the features which have been specified in the +foregoing paragraph, and which coincide with the position +of the different groups to the early Christian tradition in its +connection with the Old Testament religion, both as a rule of +practical life, and of the common cultus.<a id="footnotetag327" name="footnotetag327"></a><a href="#footnote327"><sup>327</sup></a></p> + +<p>As to the origin of Gnosticism, we see how, even in the +earliest period, all possible ideas and principles foreign to +Christianity force their way into it, that is, are brought in +under Christian rules, and find entrance, especially in the consideration +of the Old Testament.<a id="footnotetag328" name="footnotetag328"></a><a href="#footnote328"><sup>328</sup></a> We might be satisfied +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page243" id="page243"></a>[pg 243]</span> +with the observation that the manifold Gnostic systems were +produced by the increase of this tendency. In point of fact +we must admit that in the present state of our sources, we +can reach no sure knowledge beyond that. These sources, +however, give certain indications which should not be left +unnoticed. If we leave out of account the two assertions of +opponents, that Gnosticism was produced by demons<a id="footnotetag329" name="footnotetag329"></a><a href="#footnote329"><sup>329</sup></a> and—this, +however, was said at a comparatively late period—that +it originated in ambition and resistance to the ecclesiastical +office, the episcopate, we find in Hegesippus, one of the earliest +writers on the subject, the statement that the whole of the +heretical schools sprang out of Judaism or the Jewish sects; +in the later writers, Irenæus, Tertullian and Hippolytus, +that these schools owe most to the doctrines of Pythagoras, +Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, etc.<a id="footnotetag330" name="footnotetag330"></a><a href="#footnote330"><sup>330</sup></a> But they all agree in this, that +a definite personality, viz., Simon the Magician, must be regarded +as the original source of the heresy. If we try it by these +statements of the Church Fathers, we must see at once that +the problem in this case is limited—certainly in a proper +way. For after Gnosticism is seen to be the acute secularising +of Christianity the only question that remains is, how +are we to account for the origin of the great Gnostic schools, +that is, whether it is possible to indicate their preliminary +stages. The following may be asserted here with some confidence: +Long before the appearance of Christianity, combinations +of religion had taken place in Syria and Palestine,<a id="footnotetag331" name="footnotetag331"></a><a href="#footnote331"><sup>331</sup></a> +especially in Samaria, in so far, on the one hand, as the Assyrian +and Babylonian religious philosophy, together with its myths, as +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page244" id="page244"></a>[pg 244]</span> +well as the Greek popular religion, with its manifold interpretations, +had penetrated as far as the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, +and been accepted even by the Jews, and, on the +other hand, the Jewish Messianic idea had spread and called +forth various movements.<a id="footnotetag332" name="footnotetag332"></a><a href="#footnote332"><sup>332</sup></a> The result of every mixing of +national religions, however, is to break through the traditional, +legal and particular forms.<a id="footnotetag333" name="footnotetag333"></a><a href="#footnote333"><sup>333</sup></a> For the Jewish religion syncretism +signified the shaking of the authority of the Old +Testament by a qualitative distinction of its different parts, +as also doubt as to the identity of the supreme God with +the national God. These ferments were once more set in +motion by Christianity. We know that in the Apostolic age +there were attempts in Samaria to found new religions, which +were in all probability influenced by the tradition and preaching +concerning Jesus. Dositheus, Simon Magus, Cleobius, +and Menander appeared as Messiahs or bearers of the Godhead, +and proclaimed a doctrine in which the Jewish faith +was strangely and grotesquely mixed with Babylonian myths, +together with some Greek additions. The mysterious worship, +the breaking up of Jewish particularism, the criticism of the +Old Testament, which for long had had great difficulty in +retaining its authority in many circles, in consequence of the +widened horizon and the deepening of religious feeling, finally, +the wild syncretism, whose aim, however, was a universal +religion, all contributed to gain adherents for Simon.<a id="footnotetag334" name="footnotetag334"></a><a href="#footnote334"><sup>334</sup></a> His +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page245" id="page245"></a>[pg 245]</span> +enterprise appeared to the Christians as a diabolical caricature +of their own religion, and the impression made by the success +which Simonianism gained by a vigorous propaganda even +beyond Palestine into the West, supported this idea.<a id="footnotetag335" name="footnotetag335"></a><a href="#footnote335"><sup>335</sup></a> We can +therefore understand how, afterwards, all heresies were traced +back to Simon. To this must be added that we can actually +trace in many Gnostic systems the same elements which were +prominent in the religion proclaimed by Simon (the Babylonian +and Syrian), and that the new religion of the Simonians, +just like Christianity, had afterwards to submit to be transformed +into a philosophic, scholastic doctrine.<a id="footnotetag336" name="footnotetag336"></a><a href="#footnote336"><sup>336</sup></a> The formal +parallel to the Gnostic doctrines was therewith established. +But even apart from these attempts at founding new religions, +Christianity in Syria, under the influence of foreign religions +and speculation on the philosophy of religion, gave a powerful +impulse to the criticism of the law and the prophets which +had already been awakened. In consequence of this, there +appeared, about the transition of the first century to the second, +a series of teachers, who, under the impression of the Gospel, +sought to make the Old Testament capable of furthering the +tendency to a universal religion, not by allegorical interpretation, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page246" id="page246"></a>[pg 246]</span> +but by a sifting criticism. These attempts were of +very different kinds. Teachers such as Cerinthus, clung to +the notion that the universal religion revealed by Christ was +identical with undefined Mosaism, and therefore maintained +even such articles as circumcision and the Sabbath commandment, +as well as the earthly kingdom of the future. But they +rejected certain parts of the law, especially, as a rule, the +sacrificial precepts, which were no longer in keeping with the +spiritual conception of religion. They conceived the creator +of the world as a subordinate being distinct from the supreme +God, which is always the mark of a syncretism with a dualistic +tendency; introduced speculations about Æons and angelic +powers, among whom they placed Christ, and recommended +a strict asceticism. When, in their Christology, they +denied the miraculous birth, and saw in Jesus a chosen man +on whom the Christ, that is, the Holy Spirit, descended at +the baptism, they were not creating any innovation, but only +following the earliest Palestinian tradition. Their rejection of +the authority of Paul is explained by their efforts to secure +the Old Testament as far as possible for the universal religion.<a id="footnotetag337" name="footnotetag337"></a><a href="#footnote337"><sup>337</sup></a> +There were others who rejected all ceremonial commandments +as proceeding from the devil, or from some intermediate +being, but yet always held firmly that the God of the Jews +was the supreme God. But alongside of these stood also +decidedly anti-Jewish groups, who seem to have been influenced +in part by the preaching of Paul. They advanced much further +in the criticism of the Old Testament and perceived the +impossibility of saving it for the Christian universal religion. +They rather connected this religion with the cultus-wisdom of +Babylon and Syria, which seemed more adapted for allegorical +interpretations, and opposed this formation to the Old Testament +religion. The God of the Old Testament appears here +at best as a subordinate Angel of limited power, wisdom and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page247" id="page247"></a>[pg 247]</span> +goodness. In so far as he was identified with the creator +of the world, and the creation of the world itself was regarded +as an imperfect or an abortive undertaking, expression was +given both to the anti-Judaism and to that religious temper of +the time, which could only value spiritual blessing in contrast +with the world and the sensuous. These systems appeared +more or less strictly dualistic, in proportion as they did or +did not accept a slight co-operation of the supreme God in +the creation of man; and the way in which the character and +power of the world-creating God of the Jews was conceived, +serves as a measure of how far the several schools were from +the Jewish religion and the Monism that ruled it. All possible +conceptions of the God of the Jews, from the assumption that +he is a being supported in his undertakings by the supreme +God, to his identification with Satan, seem to have been exhausted +in these schools. Accordingly, in the former case, +the Old Testament was regarded as the revelation of a subordinate +God, in the latter as the manifestation of Satan, and +therefore the ethic—with occasional use of Pauline formula—always +assumed an antinomian form, compared with the +Jewish law, in some cases antinomian even in the sense of +libertinism. Correspondingly, the anthropology exhibits man +as bipartite, or even tripartite, and the Christology is strictly +docetic and anti-Jewish. The redemption by Christ is always, +as a matter of course, related only to that element in humanity +which has an affinity with the Godhead.<a id="footnotetag338" name="footnotetag338"></a><a href="#footnote338"><sup>338</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page248" id="page248"></a>[pg 248]</span> + +<p>It is uncertain whether we should think of the spread of +these doctrines in Syria in the form of a school, or of a +cultus; probably it was both. From the great Gnostic +systems as formed by Basilides and Valentinus they are distinguished +by the fact, that they lack the peculiar philosophic, +that is Hellenic element, the speculative conversion of angels +and Æons into real ideas, etc. We have almost no knowledge +of their effect. This Gnosticism has never directly been a +historical factor of striking importance, and the great question +is whether it was so indirectly.<a id="footnotetag339" name="footnotetag339"></a><a href="#footnote339"><sup>339</sup></a> That is to say, we do not +know whether this Syrian Gnosticism was, in the strict sense, +the preparatory stage of the great Gnostic schools, so that +these schools should be regarded as an actual reconstruction +of it. But there can be no doubt that the appearance of the +great Gnostic schools in the Empire, from Egypt to Gaul, is +contemporaneous with the vigorous projection of Syrian cults +westwards, and therefore the assumption is suggested, that the +Syrian Christian syncretism was also spread in connection with +that projection, and underwent a change corresponding to the +new conditions. We know definitely that the Syrian Gnostic, +Cerdo, came to Rome, wrought there, and exercised an influence +on Marcion. But no less probable is the assumption +that the great Hellenic Gnostic schools arose spontaneously, +in the sense of having been independently developed out of +the elements to which undoubtedly the Asiatic cults also +belonged, without being influenced in any way by Syrian +syncretistic efforts. The conditions for the growth of such +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page249" id="page249"></a>[pg 249]</span> +formations were nearly the same in all parts of the Empire. +The great advance lies in the fact that the religious material +as contained in the Gospel, the Old Testament, and the wisdom +connected with the old cults, was philosophically, that +is, scientifically, manipulated by means of allegory, and the +aggregate of mythological powers translated into an aggregate +of ideas. The Pythagorean and Platonic, more rarely the +Stoic philosophy, were compelled to do service here. Great +Gnostic schools, which were at the same time unions for worship, +first enter into the clear light of history in this form, +(see previous section), and on the conflict with these, surrounded +as they were by a multitude of dissimilar and related +formations, depends the progress of the development.<a id="footnotetag340" name="footnotetag340"></a><a href="#footnote340"><sup>340</sup></a></p> + +<p>We are no longer able to form a perfectly clear picture of +how these schools came into being, or how they were related +to the Churches. It lay in the nature of the case that +the heads of the schools, like the early itinerant heretical +teachers, devoted attention chiefly, if not exclusively, to +those who were already Christian, that is, to the Christian +communities.<a id="footnotetag341" name="footnotetag341"></a><a href="#footnote341"><sup>341</sup></a> From the Ignatian Epistles, the Shepherd of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page250" id="page250"></a>[pg 250]</span> +Hermas (Vis. III. 7. 1; Sim. VIII. 6. 5; IX. 19. and especially 22) +and the Didache (XI. 1. 2) we see that those teachers who +boasted of a special knowledge, and sought to introduce +"strange" doctrines, aimed at gaining the entire churches. +The beginning, as a rule, was necessarily the formation of +conventicles. In the first period therefore, when there was +no really fixed standard for warding off the foreign doctrines—Hermas +is unable even to characterise the false doctrines—the +warnings were commonly exhausted in the exhortation: +κολλασθε τοις 'αγιοις, 'οτι 'οι κολλωμενοι αυτοις 'αγιασθησονται +["connect yourselves with the saints, because those who are +connected with them shall be sanctified"]. As a rule, the +doctrines may really have crept in unobserved, and those +gained over to them may for long have taken part in a two-fold +worship, the public worship of the churches, and the +new consecration. Those teachers must of course have assumed +a more aggressive attitude who rejected the Old Testament. +The attitude of the Church, when it enjoyed competent +guidance, was one of decided opposition towards unmasked or +recognised false teachers. Yet Irenæus' account of Cerdo in +Rome shews us how difficult it was at the beginning to get +rid of a false teacher.<a id="footnotetag342" name="footnotetag342"></a><a href="#footnote342"><sup>342</sup></a> For Justin, about the year 150, the +Marcionites, Valentinians, Basilideans and Saturninians, are +groups outside the communities, and undeserving of the name +"Christians."<a id="footnotetag343" name="footnotetag343"></a><a href="#footnote343"><sup>343</sup></a> There must therefore have been at that time, +in Rome and Asia Minor at least, a really perfect separation +of those schools from the Churches (it was different in Alexandria). +Notwithstanding, this continued to be the region +from which those schools obtained their adherents. For the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page251" id="page251"></a>[pg 251]</span> +Valentinians recognised that the common Christians were much +better than the heathen, that they occupied a middle position +between the "pneumatic" and the "hylic", and might look +forward to a kind of salvation. This admission, as well as +their conforming to the common Christian tradition, enabled +them to spread their views in a remarkable way, and they +may not have had any objection in many cases, to their +converts remaining in the great Church. But can this community +have perceived everywhere and at once, that the +Valentinian distinction of "psychic" and "pneumatic" is not +identical with the scriptural distinction of children and men +in understanding? Where the organisation of the school (the +union for worship) required a long time of probation, where +degrees of connection with it were distinguished, and a strict +asceticism demanded of the perfect, it followed of course that +those on the lower stage should not be urged to a speedy +break with the Church.<a id="footnotetag344" name="footnotetag344"></a><a href="#footnote344"><sup>344</sup></a> But after the creation of the +catholic confederation of churches, existence was made more +and more difficult for these schools. Some of them lived on +somewhat like our freemason-unions, some, as in the East, +became actual sects (confessions), in which the wise and the +simple now found a place, as they were propagated by families. +In both cases they ceased to be what they had been at the +beginning. From about 210, they ceased to be a factor of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page252" id="page252"></a>[pg 252]</span> +the historical development, though the Church of Constantine +and Theodosius was alone really able to suppress them.</p> + + +<h3><a name="SEC_I_IV_IV" id="SEC_I_IV_IV"></a>4. <i>The most important Gnostic Doctrines.</i></h3> + +<p>We have still to measure and compare with the earliest +tradition those Gnostic doctrines which, partly at once and +partly in the following period, became important. Once more, +however, we must expressly refer to the fact, that the epoch-making +significance of Gnosticism for the history of dogma, +must not be sought chiefly in the particular doctrines, but +rather in the whole way in which Christianity is here conceived +and transformed. The decisive thing is the conversion of the +Gospel into a doctrine, into an absolute philosophy of religion, +the transforming of the <i>disciplina Evangelii</i> into an asceticism +based on a dualistic conception, and into a practice of mysteries.<a id="footnotetag345" name="footnotetag345"></a><a href="#footnote345"><sup>345</sup></a> +We have now briefly to shew, with due regard to +the earliest tradition, how far this transformation was of positive +or negative significance for the following period, that is, +in what respects the following development was anticipated by +Gnosticism, and in what respects Gnosticism was disavowed +by this development.<a id="footnotetag346" name="footnotetag346"></a><a href="#footnote346"><sup>346</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page253" id="page253"></a>[pg 253]</span> + +<p>(1) Christianity, which is the only true and absolute religion, +embraces a revealed system of doctrine (positive).</p> + +<p>(2) This doctrine contains mysterious powers, which are +communicated to men by initiation (mysteries).</p> + +<p>(3) The revealer is Christ (positive), but Christ alone, and +only in his historical appearance—no Old Testament Christ +(negative); this appearance is itself redemption: the doctrine +is the announcement of it and of its presuppositions (positive).<a id="footnotetag347" name="footnotetag347"></a><a href="#footnote347"><sup>347</sup></a></p> + +<p>(4) Christian doctrine is to be drawn from the Apostolic +tradition, critically examined. This tradition lies before us in +a series of Apostolic writings, and in a secret doctrine derived +from the Apostles, (positive).<a id="footnotetag348" name="footnotetag348"></a><a href="#footnote348"><sup>348</sup></a> As exoteric it is comprehended +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page255" id="page255"></a>[pg 255]</span> +in the <i>regula fidei</i> (positive),<a id="footnotetag349" name="footnotetag349"></a><a href="#footnote349"><sup>349</sup></a> as esoteric it is propagated +by chosen teachers.<a id="footnotetag350" name="footnotetag350"></a><a href="#footnote350"><sup>350</sup></a></p> + +<p>(5) The documents of revelation (Apostolic writings), just because +they are such, must be interpreted by means of allegory, that is, +their deeper meaning must be extracted in this way (positive).<a id="footnotetag351" name="footnotetag351"></a><a href="#footnote351"><sup>351</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page256" id="page256"></a>[pg 256]</span> + +<p>(6) The following may be noted as the main points in the +Gnostic conception of the several parts of the <i>regula fidei</i>.</p> + +<p>(<i>a</i>) The difference between the supreme God and the +creator of the world, and therewith the opposing of redemption +and creation, and therefore the separation of the Mediator +of revelation from the Mediator of creation.<a id="footnotetag352" name="footnotetag352"></a><a href="#footnote352"><sup>352</sup></a></p> + +<p>(<i>b</i>) The separation of the supreme God from the God of +the Old Testament, and therewith the rejection of the Old +Testament, or the assertion that the Old Testament contains +no revelations of the supreme God, or at least only in certain +parts.<a id="footnotetag353" name="footnotetag353"></a><a href="#footnote353"><sup>353</sup></a></p> + +<p>(<i>c</i>) The doctrine of the independence and eternity of matter.</p> + +<p>(<i>d</i>) The assertion that the present world sprang from a fall +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page257" id="page257"></a>[pg 257]</span> +of man, or from an undertaking hostile to God, and is therefore +the product of an evil or intermediate being.<a id="footnotetag354" name="footnotetag354"></a><a href="#footnote354"><sup>354</sup></a></p> + +<p>(<i>e</i>) The doctrine, that evil is inherent in matter, and therefore +is a physical potence.<a id="footnotetag355" name="footnotetag355"></a><a href="#footnote355"><sup>355</sup></a></p> + +<p>(<i>f</i>) The assumption of Æons, that is, real powers and heavenly +persons in whom is unfolded the absoluteness of the +Godhead.<a id="footnotetag356" name="footnotetag356"></a><a href="#footnote356"><sup>356</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page258" id="page258"></a>[pg 258]</span> + +<p>(<i>g</i>) The assertion that Christ revealed a God hitherto unknown.</p> + +<p>(<i>h</i>) The doctrine that in the person of Jesus Christ—the +Gnostics saw in it redemption, but they reduced the person +to the physical nature—the heavenly Æon, Christ, and the +human appearance of that Æon must be clearly distinguished, +and a "distincte agere" ascribed to each. Accordingly, there +were some, such as Basilides, who acknowledged no real union +between Christ and the man Jesus, whom, besides, they regarded +as an earthly man. Others, <i>e.g.</i>, part of the Valentinians, +among whom the greatest differences prevailed—see +Tertull. adv. Valent. 39—taught that the body of Jesus was +a heavenly psychical formation, and sprang from the womb +of Mary only in appearance. Finally, a third party, such as +Saturninus, declared that the whole visible appearance of +Christ was a phantom, and therefore denied the birth of Christ.<a id="footnotetag357" name="footnotetag357"></a><a href="#footnote357"><sup>357</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page259" id="page259"></a>[pg 259]</span> +Christ separates that which is unnaturally united, and thus +leads everything back again to himself; in this redemption +consists (full contrast to the notion of the ανακεφαλαιωσις).</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page260" id="page260"></a>[pg 260]</span> + +<p>(<i>i</i>) The conversion of the εκκλησια (it was no innovation to +regard the heavenly Church as an Æon) into the college of +the pneumatic, who alone, in virtue of their psychological endowment, +are capable of Gnosis and the divine life, while the +others, likewise in virtue of their constitution, as hylic perish. +The Valentinians, and probably many other Gnostics also, +distinguished between pneumatic, psychic and hylic. They +regarded the psychic as capable of a certain blessedness, and +of a corresponding certain knowledge of the supersensible, the +latter being obtained through Pistis, that is, through Christian +faith.<a id="footnotetag358" name="footnotetag358"></a><a href="#footnote358"><sup>358</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page261" id="page261"></a>[pg 261]</span> + +<p>(<i>k</i>) The rejection of the entire early Christian eschatology, +especially the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of +the body, and Christ's Kingdom of glory on the earth, and, +in connection with this, the assertion that the deliverance of +the spirit from the sensuous can be expected only from the +future, while the spirit enlightened about itself already possesses +immortality, and only awaits its introduction into the +pneumatic pleroma.<a id="footnotetag359" name="footnotetag359"></a><a href="#footnote359"><sup>359</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page262" id="page262"></a>[pg 262]</span> + +<p>In addition to what has been mentioned here, we must +finally fix our attention on the ethics of Gnosticism. Like +the ethics of all systems which are based on the contrast +between the sensuous and spiritual elements of human nature, +that of the Gnostics took a twofold direction. On the one +hand, it sought to suppress and uproot the sensuous, and thus +became strictly ascetic (imitation of Christ as motive of asceticism;<a id="footnotetag360" name="footnotetag360"></a><a href="#footnote360"><sup>360</sup></a> +Christ and the Apostles represented as ascetics);<a id="footnotetag361" name="footnotetag361"></a><a href="#footnote361"><sup>361</sup></a> +on the other hand, it treated the sensuous element as indifferent, +and so became libertine, that is, conformed to the +world. The former was undoubtedly the more common, +though there are credible witnesses to the latter; the <i>frequentissimum +collegium</i> in particular, the Valentinians, in the +days of Irenæus and Tertullian, did not vigorously enough +prohibit a lax and world-conforming morality;<a id="footnotetag362" name="footnotetag362"></a><a href="#footnote362"><sup>362</sup></a> and among +the Syrian and Egyptian Gnostics there were associations +which celebrated the most revolting orgies.<a id="footnotetag363" name="footnotetag363"></a><a href="#footnote363"><sup>363</sup></a> As the early +Christian tradition summoned to a strict renunciation of the +world and to self-control, the Gnostic asceticism could not but +make an impression at the first; but the dualistic basis on +which it rested could not fail to excite suspicion as soon as +one was capable of examining it.<a id="footnotetag364" name="footnotetag364"></a><a href="#footnote364"><sup>364</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page263" id="page263"></a>[pg 263]</span> + +<p><i>Literature.</i>—The writings of Justin (his syntagma against +heresies has not been preserved), Irenæus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, +Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Epiphanius, Philastrius +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page264" id="page264"></a>[pg 264]</span> +and Theodoret; cf. Volkmar, Die Quellen der Ketzergeschichte, +1885.</p> + +<p>Lipsius, Zur Quellenkritik des Epiphanios, 1875; also Die +Quellen der ältesten Ketzergeschichte, 1875.</p> + +<p>Harnack, Zur Quellenkritik d. Gesch. d. Gnostic, 1873 (continued +i. D. Ztschr. f. d. hist. Theol. 1874, and in Der Schrift +de Apellis gnosi monarch. 1874).</p> + +<p>Of Gnostic writings we possess the book Pistis Sophia, +the writings contained in the Coptic Cod. Brucianus, and the +Epistle of Ptolemy to Flora; also numerous fragments, in +connection with which Hilgenfeld especially deserves thanks, +but which still require a more complete selecting and a more +thorough discussion (see Grabe, Spicilegium T. I. II. 1700. +Heinrici, Die Valentin. Gnosis, u. d. H. Schrift, 1871).</p> + +<p>On the (Gnostic) Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, see +Zahn, Acta Joh. 1880, and the great work of Lipsius, Die +apokryphen Apostelgeschichten, I. Vol., 1883; II. Vol., 1887. +(See also Lipsius, Quellen d. röm. Petrussage, 1872).</p> + +<p>Neander, Genet. Entw. d. vornehmsten gnostischen Systeme, +1818.</p> + +<p>Matter, Hist. crit. du gnosticisme, 2 Vols., 1828.</p> + +<p>Baur, Die Christl. Gnosis, 1835.</p> + +<p>Lipsius, Der Gnosticismus, in Ersch. und Gruber's Allg. +Encykl. 71 Bd. 1860.</p> + +<p>Moeller, Geschichte d. Kosmologie i. d. Griech. K. his auf +Origenes. 1860.</p> + +<p>King, The Gnostics and their remains, 1873.</p> + +<p>Mansel, The Gnostic heresies, 1875.</p> + +<p>Jacobi, Art. "Gnosis" in Herzog's Real Encykl. 2nd Edit.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page265" id="page265"></a>[pg 265]</span> + +<p>Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristenthums, 1884, +where the more recent, special literature concerning individual +Gnostics is quoted.</p> + +<p>Lipsius, Art. "Valentinus" in Smith's Dictionary of Christian +Biography.</p> + +<p>Harnack, Art. "Valentinus" in the Encycl. Brit.</p> + +<p>Harnack, Pistis Sophia in the Texte und Unters. VII. 2.</p> + +<p>Carl Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften in koptischer Sprache +aus dem Codex Brucianus (Texte und Unters. VIII. 1. 2).</p> + +<p>Joël, Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte zu Anfang des 2 Christl. +Jahrhunderts, 2 parts, 1880, 1883.</p> + +<p>Renan, History of the Origins of Christianity. Vols. V. VI. VII.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote300" name="footnote300"></a><b>Footnote 300:</b><a href="#footnotetag300"> (return) </a><p> We may consider here once more the articles which are embraced +in the first ten chapters of the recently discovered διδαχη των αποστολων, +after enumerating and describing which, the author continues (II. 1): +'ος αν ουν ελθων διδαχηι υμας ταυτα παντα τα προειρημενα, δεξασθε αυτον.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote301" name="footnote301"></a><b>Footnote 301:</b><a href="#footnotetag301"> (return) </a><p> It is a good tradition, which designates the so-called Gnosticism, +simply as Gnosis, and yet uses this word also for the speculations of +non-Gnostic teachers of antiquity (<i>e.g.</i>, of Barnabas). But the inferences +which follow have not been drawn. Origen says truly (c. Celsus III. 12) +"As men, not only the labouring and serving classes, but also many +from the cultured classes of Greece, came to see something honourable +in Christianity, sects could not fail to arise, not simply from the desire +for controversy and contradiction, but because several scholars endeavoured +to penetrate deeper into the truth of Christianity. In this way +sects arose, which received their names from men who indeed admired +Christianity in its essence, but from many different causes had arrived +at different conceptions of it."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote302" name="footnote302"></a><b>Footnote 302:</b><a href="#footnotetag302"> (return) </a><p> The majority of Christians in the second century belonged no doubt +to the uncultured classes, and did not seek abstract knowledge, nay, were +distrustful of it; see the λογος αληθης of Celsus, especially III. 44, and the +writings of the Apologists. Yet we may infer from the treatise of Origen +against Celsus that the number of "Christiani rudes" who cut themselves +off from theological and philosophic knowledge, was about the year 240 +a very large one; and Tertullian says (Adv. Prax. 3): "Simplices quique, +ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotæ, quæ major semper credentium pars +est," cf. de jejun. 11: "Major pars imperitorum apud gloriosissimam +multitudinem psychicorum."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote303" name="footnote303"></a><b>Footnote 303:</b><a href="#footnotetag303"> (return )</a><p>Overbeck (Stud. z. Gesch. d. alten Kirche. p. 184) has the merit of +having first given convincing expression to this view of Gnosticism.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote304" name="footnote304"></a><b>Footnote 304:</b><a href="#footnotetag304"> (return) </a><p> The ability of the prominent Gnostic teachers has been recognised by +the Church Fathers: see Hieron. Comm in Osee. II. 10, Opp. VI. i: "Nullus +potest haeresim struere, nisi qui ardens ingenii est et habet dona naturæ quæ +a deo artifice sunt creata: talis fuit Valentinus, tails Marcion, quos doctissimos +legimus, talis Bardesanes, cujus etiam philosophi admirantur ingenium." +It is still more important to see how the Alexandrian theologians +(Clement and Origen) estimated the exegetic labours of the Gnostics, and +took account of them. Origen undoubtedly recognised Herakleon as a prominent +exegete, and treats him most respectfully even where he feels compelled +to differ from him. All Gnostics cannot, of course, be regarded as theologians. +In their totality they form the Greek society with a Christian name.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote305" name="footnote305"></a><b>Footnote 305:</b><a href="#footnotetag305"> (return) </a><p>Otherwise the rise of Gnosticism cannot at all be explained.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote306" name="footnote306"></a><b>Footnote 306:</b><a href="#footnotetag306"> (return) </a><p> Cf. Bigg, "The Christian Platonists of Alexandria," p. 83: "Gnosticism +was in one respect distorted Paulinism."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote307" name="footnote307"></a><b>Footnote 307:</b><a href="#footnotetag307"> (return) </a><p> Joel, "Blick in die Religionsgesch." Vol. I. pp. 101-170, has justly +emphasised the Greek character of Gnosis, and insisted on the significance +of Platonism for it. "The Oriental element did not always in the +case of the Gnostics, originate at first hand, but had already passed +through a Greek channel."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote308" name="footnote308"></a><b>Footnote 308:</b><a href="#footnotetag308"> (return) </a><p> The age of the Antonines was the flourishing period of Gnosticism. +Marquardt (Römische Staatsverwaltung Vol. 3, p. 81) says of this age: +"With the Antonines begins the last period of the Roman religious development +in which two new elements enter into it. These are the Syrian +and Persian deities, whose worship at this time was prevalent not only in the +city of Rome, but in the whole empire, and, at the same time, Christianity, +which entered into conflict with all ancient tradition, and in this conflict +exercised a certain influence even on the Oriental forms of worship."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote309" name="footnote309"></a><b>Footnote 309:</b><a href="#footnotetag309"> (return) </a><p> It is a special merit of Weingarten (Histor. Ztschr. Bd 45. 1881. p. +441 f.) and Koffmane (Die Gnosis nach ihrer Tendenz und Organisation, +1881) to have strongly emphasised the mystery character of Gnosis, and in +connection with that, its practical aims. Koffmane, especially, has collected +abundant material for proving that the tendency of the Gnostics was the +same as that of the ancient mysteries, and that they thence borrowed +their organisation and discipline. This fact proves the proposition that +Gnosticism was an acute hellenising of Christianity. Koffmane has, however, +undervalued the union of the practical and speculative tendency in the +Gnostics, and, in the effort to obtain recognition for the mystery character +of the Gnostic communities, has overlooked the fact that they were also +schools. The union of mystery-cultus and school is just, however, their +characteristic. In this also they prove themselves the forerunners of +Neoplatonism and the Catholic Church. Moehler in his programme of +1831 (Urspr. d. Gnosticismus Tubingen), vigorously emphasised the practical +tendency of Gnosticism, though not in a convincing way. Hackenschmidt +(Anfange des katholischen Kirchenbegriffs, p. 83 f.) has judged correctly.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote310" name="footnote310"></a><b>Footnote 310:</b><a href="#footnotetag310"> (return) </a><p> We have also evidence of the methods by which ecstatic visions +were obtained among the Gnostics, see the Pistis Sophia, and the important +rôle which prophets and Apocalypses played in several important +Gnostic communities (Barcoph and Barcabbas, prophets of the Basilideans; +Martiades and Marsanes among the Ophites; Philumene in the case of +Apelles; Valentinian prophecies, Apocalypses of Zostrian, Zoroaster, etc.) +Apocalypses were also used by some under the names of Old Testament +men of God and Apostles.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote311" name="footnote311"></a><b>Footnote 311:</b><a href="#footnotetag311"> (return) </a><p>See Koftmane, before-mentioned work, p. 5 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote312" name="footnote312"></a><b>Footnote 312:</b><a href="#footnotetag312"> (return) </a><p> See Fragm. Murat. V. 81 f.; Clem. Strom. VII. 17. 108; Orig. Hom. 34. +The Marcionite Antitheses were probably spread among other Gnostic +sects. The Fathers frequently emphasise the fact that the Gnostics were +united against the church: Tertullian de præscr 42: "Et hoc est, quod +schismata apud hæreticos fere non sunt, quia cum sint, non parent. Schisma +est enim unitas ipsa." They certainly also delight in emphasising the contradictions +of the different schools; but they cannot point to any earnest +conflict of these schools with each other. We know definitely that Bardasanes +argued against the earlier Gnostics, and Ptolemæus against Marcion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote313" name="footnote313"></a><b>Footnote 313:</b><a href="#footnotetag313"> (return) </a><p> See the collection, certainly not complete, of Gnostic fragments by Grabe +(Spicileg.) and Hilgenfeld (Ketzergeschichte). Our books on the history of +Gnosticism take far too little notice of these fragments as presented to us, +above all, by Clement and Origen, and prefer to keep to the doleful +accounts of the Fathers about the "Systems", (better in Heinrici: Valent. +Gnosis, 1871). The vigorous efforts of the Gnostics to understand the +Pauline and Johannine ideas, and their in part surprisingly rational and +ingenious solutions of intellectual problems, have never yet been systematically +estimated. Who would guess, for example, from what is currently +known of the system of Basilides, that, according to Clement, the following +proceeds from him, (Strom. IV. 12. 18): 'ως αυτος φησιν 'ο Βασιλειδης, εν μερος +εκ του λεγομενου θεληματος του θεου 'υπειληφαμεν, το ηγαπηκεναι 'απαντα. 'οτι λογον +αποσωζουσι προς το παν 'απαντα; 'ετερον δε το μηδενος επιθυμειν, και το τριτον μισειν +μηδε 'εν, and where do we find, in the period before Clement of Alexandria, +faith in Christ united with such spiritual maturity and inner freedom as in +Valentinians, Ptolemæus and Heracleon?</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote314" name="footnote314"></a><b>Footnote 314:</b><a href="#footnotetag314"> (return) </a><p> Testament of Tertullian (adv. Valent. 4) shews the difference between +the solution of Valentinus, for example, and his disciple Ptolemæus. +"Ptolemæus nomina et numeros Æonum distinxit in personales substantias, +sed extra deum determinatas, quas Valentinus in ipsa summa divinitatis +ut sensus et affectus motus incluserat." It is, moreover, important that +Tertullian himself should distinguish this so clearly.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote315" name="footnote315"></a><b>Footnote 315:</b><a href="#footnotetag315"> (return) </a><p> There is nothing here more instructive than to hear the judgments +of the cultured Greeks and Romans about Christianity, as soon as they +have given up the current gross prejudices. They shew with admirable +clearness, the way in which Gnosticism originated. Galen says (quoted +by Gieseler, Church Hist. 1. 1. 41): "Hominum plerique orationem demonstrativam +continuam mente assequi nequeunt, quare indigent, ut instituantur +parabolis. Veluti nostro tempore videmus, homines illos, qui Christian! +vocantur, fidem suam e parabolis petiisse. Hi tamen interdum talia +faciunt, qualia qui vere philosophantur. Nam quod mortem contemnunt, +id quidem omnes ante oculos habemus; item quod verecundia quadam +ducti ab usu rerum venerearum abhorrent. Sunt enim inter eos feminæ et +viri, qui per totam vitam a concubitu abstinuerint; sunt etiam qui in animis +regendis coërcendisque et in accerrimo honestatis studio eo progressi sint, +ut nihil cedant vere philosophantibus." Christians, therefore, are philosophers +without philosophy. What a challenge for them to produce such, that is to +seek out the latent philosophy! Even Celsus could not but admit a certain +relationship between Christians and philosophers. But as he was convinced +that the miserable religion of the Christians could neither include nor endure +a philosophy, he declared that the moral doctrines of the Christians were +borrowed from the philosophers (I. 4). In course of his presentation (V. 65; VI. +12. 15-19, 42; VII. 27-35) he deduces the most decided marks of Christianity, +as well as the most important sayings of Jesus from (misunderstood) +statements of Plato and other Greek philosophers. This is not the place +to shew the contradictions in which Celsus was involved by this. But it +is of the greatest significance that even this intelligent man could only +see philosophy where he saw something precious. The whole of Christianity +from its very origin appeared to Celsus (in one respect) precisely as +the Gnostic systems appear to us, that is, these really are what Christianity +as such seemed to Celsus to be. Besides, it was constantly asserted up +to the fifth century that Christ had drawn from Plato's writings. Against +those who made this assertion, Ambrosius (according to Augustine, Ep. +31. c. 8) wrote a treatise which unfortunately is no longer in existence.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote316" name="footnote316"></a><b>Footnote 316:</b><a href="#footnotetag316"> (return) </a><p> The Simonian system at most might be named, on the basis +of the syncretistic religion founded by Simon Magus. But we know little +about it, and that little is uncertain. Parallel attempts are +demonstrable in the third century on the basis of various "revealed" +fundamental ideas ('η εκ λογιων φιλοσοφια).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote317" name="footnote317"></a><b>Footnote 317:</b><a href="#footnotetag317"> (return) </a><p> Among these I reckon those Gnostics whom Irenæus (I. 29-31) has portrayed, +as well as part of the so-called Ophites, Peratæ, Sethites and the +school of the Gnostic Justin (Hippol. Philosoph. V. 6-28). There is no reason +for regarding them as earlier or more Oriental than the Valentinians, as is +done by Hilgenfeld against Baur, Möller, and Gruber (the Ophites, 1864). See +also Lipsius, "Ophit. Systeme", i. d. Ztschr. f. wiss. Theol. 1863. IV, 1864, +I. These schools claimed for themselves the name Gnostic (Hippol. Philosoph. +V. 6). A part of them, as is specially apparent from Orig. c. Celsum. VI., +is not to be reckoned Christian. This motley group is but badly known to us +through Epiphanius, much better through the original Gnostic writings preserved +in the Coptic language. (Pistis Sophia and the works published by +Carl Schmidt Texte u. Unters. Bd. VIII.). Yet these original writings belong, +for the most part, to the second half of the third century (see also the important +statements of Porphyry in the Vita Plotini, c. 16), and shew a Gnosticism +burdened with an abundance of wild speculations, formulæ, mysteries, and +ceremonial. However, from these very monuments it becomes plain that +Gnosticism anticipated Catholicism as a ritual system (see below).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote318" name="footnote318"></a><b>Footnote 318:</b><a href="#footnotetag318"> (return) </a><p>On Marcion, see the following Chapter.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote319" name="footnote319"></a><b>Footnote 319:</b><a href="#footnotetag319"> (return) </a><p> We know that from the earliest period (perhaps we might refer even to +the Epistle to the Romans) there were circles of ascetics in the Christian +communities who required of all, as an inviolable law, under the name of +Christian perfection, complete abstinence from marriage, renunciation of +possessions, and a vegetarian diet. (Clem. Strom. III. 6. 49: 'υπο διαβολου +ταυτην +παραδιδοσθαι δογματιζουσι, μιμεισθαι δ' αυτους 'οι μεγαλανχοι φασι τον κυριον μητε +γημαντα, μητε τι εν τωι κοσμωι κτησαμενον, μαλλον παρα αλλους νενοηκεναι το +ευαγγελιον καυχομενοι.—Here then, already, imitation of the poor life of +Jesus, +the "Evangelic" life, was the watchword. Tatian wrote a book, περι του κατα +τον σωτηρα καταρτισμου, that is, on perfection according to the Redeemer: in +which he set forth the irreconcilability of the worldly life with the Gospel). +No doubt now existed in the Churches that abstinence from marriage, from +wine and flesh, and from possessions, was the perfect fulfilling of the law +of Christ (βασταζειν 'ολον τον ζυγον του κυριου). But in wide circles +strict abstinence +was deduced from a special charism, all boastfulness was forbidden, +and the watchword given out: 'οσον δυνασαι 'αγνευσεις, which may be understood +as a compromise with the worldly life as well as a reminiscence of a +freer morality (see my notes on Didache, c. 6; 11, 11 and Prolegg. p. 42 ff.). +Still, the position towards asceticism yielded a hard problem, the solution of +which was more and more found in distinguishing a higher and a lower +though sufficient morality, yet repudiating the higher morality as soon as +it claimed to be the alone authoritative one. On the other hand, there were +societies of Christian ascetics who persisted in applying literally to all +Christians the highest demands of Christ, and thus arose, by secession, the +communities of the Encratites and Severians. But in the circumstances of the +time even they could not but be touched by the Hellenic mode of thought, to +the effect of associating a speculative theory with asceticism, and thus approximating +to Gnosticism. This is specially plain in Tatian, who connected +himself with the Encratites, and in consequence of the severe asceticism +which he prescribed, could no longer maintain the identity of the supreme +God and the creator of the world (see the fragments of his later writings in +the Corp. Apol. ed Otto. T. VI.). As the Pauline Epistles could furnish arguments +to either side, we see some Gnostics such as Tatian himself, making +diligent use of them, while others such as the Severians, rejected them. +(Euseb. H. E. IV. 29. 5, and Orig. c. Cels. V. 65). The Encratite controversy +was, on the one hand, swallowed up by the Gnostic, and on the other hand, +replaced by the Montanistic. The treatise written in the days of Marcus Aurelius +by a certain Musanus (where?) which contains warnings against joining +the Encratites (Euseb. H. E. IV. 28) we unfortunately no longer possess.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote320" name="footnote320"></a><b>Footnote 320:</b><a href="#footnotetag320"> (return) </a><p> See Eusebius, H. E. VI. 12. Docetic elements are apparent even in +the fragment of the Gospel of Peter recently discovered.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote321" name="footnote321"></a><b>Footnote 321:</b><a href="#footnotetag321"> (return) </a><p> Here, above all, we have to remember Tatian, who in his highly praised +Apology, had already rejected altogether the eating of flesh (c. 23) and set up +very peculiar doctrines about the spirit, matter, and the nature of man (c. 12 +ff.). The fragments of the Hypotyposes of Clem. of Alex. show how much one +had to bear in some rural Churches at the end of the second century.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote322" name="footnote322"></a><b>Footnote 322:</b><a href="#footnotetag322"> (return) </a><p> See Clem. Strom III. 2. 5; Επιφανης, 'υιος Καρποκρατους, +εζησε τα παντα ετη +'επτακαιδεκα και θεος εν Σαμηι της Κεφαλληνιας τετιμηται, ενθα αυτωι 'ιερον ρυτων +λιθων, βωμοι, τεμενη, μουσειον, ωικοδομηται τε και καθιερωται, και συνιοντες εις το +'ιερον 'οι Καφαλληνες κατα νουμηνιαν γενεθλιον αποθεωσιν θυουσιν Επιφανει, +σπενδουσι +τε και ευωχουνται και 'υμνοι λεγονται. Clement's quotations from the writings of +Epiphanes shew him to be a pure Platonist: the proposition that property is +theft is found in him. Epiphanes and his father, Carpocrates, were the first +who attempted to amalgamate Plato's State with the Christian ideal of the +union of men with each other. Christ was to them, therefore, a philosophic +Genius like Plato, see Irenæus I. 25. 5: "Gnosticos autem se vocant, etiam +imagines, quasdam quidem depictas, quasdam autem et de reliqua materia +fabricatas habent..... et has coronant, et proponent eas cum imaginibus +mundi philosophorum, videlicet cum imagine Pythagoræ et Platonis et +Aristotelis et reliquorum, et reliquam observationem circa eas similiter ut +gentes faciunt."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote323" name="footnote323"></a><b>Footnote 323:</b><a href="#footnotetag323"> (return) </a><p> See the "Gnostics" of Hermas, especially the false prophet whom he +portrays, Mand. XI., Lucian's Peregrinus, and the Marcus, of whose doings +Irenæus (I. 13. ff.) gives such an abominable picture. To understand how such +people were able to obtain a following so quickly in the Churches, we must +remember the respect in which the "prophets" were held (see Didache XI.). +If one had once given the impression that he had the Spirit, he could win +belief for the strangest things, and could allow himself all things possible +(see the delineations of Celsus in Orig. c. Cels. VII. 9. 11). We hear +frequently of Gnostic prophets and prophetesses, see my notes on Herm. +Mand. XI. 1 and Didache XI. 7. If an early Christian element is here +preserved by the Gnostic schools, it has undoubtedly been hellenised and +secularised as the reports shew. But that the prophets altogether were +in danger of being secularised is shewn in Didache XI. In the case of +the Gnostics the process is again only hastened.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote324" name="footnote324"></a><b>Footnote 324:</b><a href="#footnotetag324"> (return) </a><p> The name Gnostic originally attached to schools which had so +named themselves. To these belonged, above all, the so-called Ophites, +but not the Valentinians or Basilideans.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote325" name="footnote325"></a><b>Footnote 325:</b><a href="#footnotetag325"> (return) </a><p> Special attention should be given to this form, as it became in later +times of the very greatest importance for the general development of doctrine +in the Church. The sect of Carpocrates was a school. Of Tatian Irenæus +says (I. 28. 1): Τατιανος Ιουστινου ακροατης γεγοναις ... μετα δε την εκεινου +μαρτυριαν αποστας της εκκλησιας, οιηματι διδασκαλον επαρθεις ... ιδιον χαρακτηρ +διδασκαλειου συνεστησατο. Rhodon (in Euseb. H. E. V. 13. 4) speaks of a +Marcionite διδασκαλειον. Other names were, "Collegium" (Tertull. ad Valen +1), "Secta", the word had not always a bad meaning, 'αιρεσις, εκκλησια +(Clem. Strom. VII. 16. 98, on the other hand, VII. 15. 92: Tertull. de præscr. +42: plerique nec Ecclesias habent), θιασος (Iren. I. 13. 4, for the Marcosians). +συναγωγη, συστημα, διατριβη, 'αι αθρωπιναι συνηλυσεις, factiuncula, +congregatio, +conciliabulum, conventiculum. The mystery-organisation most clearly +appears in the Naassenes of Hippolytus, the Marcosians of Irenæus, and +the Elkasites of Hippolytus, as well as in the Coptic-Gnostic documents +that have been preserved. (See Koffmane, above work, pp. 6-22).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote326" name="footnote326"></a><b>Footnote 326:</b><a href="#footnotetag326"> (return) </a><p> The particulars here belong to church history. Overbeck ("Ueber die +Anfänge der patristischen Litteratur" in d. hist. Ztschr. N. F. Bd. XII. p. 417 +ff.) has the merit of being the first to point out the importance, for the history +of the Church, of the forms of literature as they were gradually received in +Christendom. Scientific, theological literature has undoubtedly its origin in +Gnosticism. The Old Testament was here, for the first time, systematically +and also in part, historically criticised; a selection was here made from the +primitive Christian literature; scientific commentaries were here written +on the sacred books (Basilides and especially the Valentinians, see Heracleon's +comm. on the Gospel of John [in Origen]); the Pauline Epistles were +also technically expounded; tracts were here composed on dogmatico-philosophic +problems (for example, περι δικαιοσυνης—περι προσφυους ψυχης—ηθικα—περι +εγκρατειας 'η περι ευνουχιας), and systematic doctrinal systems already +constructed (as the Basilidean and Valentinian); the original form of the +Gospel was here first transmuted into the Greek form of sacred novel and +biography (see, above all, the Gospel of Thomas, which was used by the +Marcosians and Naassenes, and which contained miraculous stories from the +childhood of Jesus); here, finally, psalms, odes and hymns were first composed +(see the Acts of Lucius, the psalms of Valentinus, the psalms of Alexander +the disciple of Valentinus, the poems of Bardesanes). Irenæus, Tertullian +and Hippolytus have indeed noted, that the scientific method of interpretation +followed by the Gnostics, was the same as that of the philosophers +(<i>e.g.</i>, of Philo). Valentinus, as is recognised even by the Church Fathers, +stands out prominent for his mental vigour and religious imagination, +Heracleon for his exegetic theological ability, Ptolemy for his ingenious +criticism of the Old Testament and his keen perception of the stages of +religious development (see his Epistle to Flora in Epiphanius, hær. 33. c. 7). +As a specimen of the language of Valentinus one extract from a homily may +suffice (in Clem. Strom. IV. 13. 89). Απ αρχης αθανατοι εστε και τεκνα +ζωης εστε +αιωνιας, και τον θανατον ηθελετε μερισασθαι εις 'εαυτους, 'ινα δαπανησητε αυτον και +αναλωσητε, και αποθανη 'ο θανατος εν 'υμιν και δι' 'υμων, 'οταν γαρ τον μεν +κοσμον λυητε, +αυτοι δε μη καταλυησθε, κυριευετε της κρισεως και της φθορας απασης. +Basilides falls +into the background behind Valentinus and his school. Yet the Church +Fathers, when they wish to summarise the most important Gnostics, usually +mention Simon Magus, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion (even Apelles). On the +relation of the Gnostics to the New Testament writings, and to the New +Testament, see Zahn, Gesch. des N. T-lichen Kanons I. 2, p. 718.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote327" name="footnote327"></a><b>Footnote 327:</b><a href="#footnotetag327"> (return) </a><p> Baur's classification of the Gnostic systems, which rests on the +observation +of how they severally realised the idea of Christianity as the +absolute religion, in contrast to Judaism and Heathenism, is very ingenious, +and contains a great element of truth. But it is insufficient with reference +to the whole phenomenon of Gnosticism, and it has been carried out by +Baur by violent abstractions.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote328" name="footnote328"></a><b>Footnote 328:</b><a href="#footnotetag328"> (return) </a><p> The question, therefore, as to the time of the origin of Gnosticism, as a +complete phenomenon, cannot be answered. The remarks of Hegesippus +(Euseb. H. E. IV. 22) refer to the Jerusalem Church, and have not even for +that the value of a fixed datum. The only important question here is +the point of time at which the expulsion or secession of the schools and +unions took place in the different national churches.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote329" name="footnote329"></a><b>Footnote 329:</b><a href="#footnotetag329"> (return) </a><p>Justin Apol. 1. 26.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote330" name="footnote330"></a><b>Footnote 330:</b><a href="#footnotetag330"> (return) </a><p> Hegesippus in Euseb. H. E. IV. 22, Iren. II. 14. 1 f., Tertull. de +præscr. 7, Hippol. Philosoph. The Church Fathers have also noted the +likeness of the cultus of Mithras and other deities.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote331" name="footnote331"></a><b>Footnote 331:</b><a href="#footnotetag331"> (return) </a><p> We must leave the Essenes entirely out of account here, as their +teaching, in all probability, is not to be considered syncretistic in the strict +sense of the word, (see Lucius, "Der Essenismus", 1881), and as we know +absolutely nothing of a greater diffusion of it. But we need no names +here, as a syncretistic, ascetic Judaism could and did arise everywhere +in Palestine and the Diaspora.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote332" name="footnote332"></a><b>Footnote 332:</b><a href="#footnotetag332"> (return) </a><p> Freudenthal's "Hellenistische Studien" informs us as to the Samaritan +syncretism; see also Hilgenfeld's "Ketzergeschichte", p. 149 ff. As to the +Babylonian mythology in Gnosticism, see the statements in the elaborate +article, "Manichaismus", by Kessler (Real-Encycl. für protest. Theol., 2 Aufl.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote333" name="footnote333"></a><b>Footnote 333:</b><a href="#footnotetag333"> (return) </a><p> Wherever traditional religions are united under the badge of philosophy +a conservative syncretism is the result, because the allegoric method, +that is, the criticism of all religion, veiled and unconscious of itself, is +able to blast rocks and bridge over abysses. All forms may remain here, +under certain circumstances, but a new spirit enters into them. On the +other hand, where philosophy is still weak, and the traditional religion +is already shaken by another, there arises the critical syncretism in which +either the gods of one religion are subordinated to those of another, or +the elements of the traditional religion are partly eliminated and replaced +by others. Here, also, the soil is prepared for new religious formations, +for the appearance of religious founders.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote334" name="footnote334"></a><b>Footnote 334:</b><a href="#footnotetag334"> (return) </a><p> It was a serious mistake of the critics to regard Simon Magus as a fiction, +which, moreover, has been given up by Hilgenfeld (Ketzergeschichte, p. 163 ff.). +and Lipsius (Apocr Apostelgesch 11. 1),—the latter, however, not decidedly. +The whole figure, as well as the doctrines attributed to Simon +(see Acts of the Apostles, Justin, Irenæus, Hippolytus), not only have +nothing improbable in them, but suit very well the religious circumstances +which we must assume for Samaria. The main point in Simon is his +endeavour to create a universal religion of the supreme God. This explains +his success among the Samaritans and Greeks. He is really a +counterpart to Jesus, whose activity can just as little have been unknown +to him as that of Paul. At the same time, it cannot be denied, that the +later tradition about Simon was the most confused and biassed imaginable, +or that certain Jewish Christians at a later period may have attempted +to endow the magician with the features of Paul in order to discredit +the personality and teaching of the Apostle. But this last assumption +requires a fresh investigation.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote335" name="footnote335"></a><b>Footnote 335:</b><a href="#footnotetag335"> (return) </a><p> Justin, Apol. I. 26: και σχεδον παντες μεν Σαμαρεις, ολιγοι δε και +εν αλλοις +εθνεσιν, 'ως τον πρωτον θεον Σιμωνα 'ομολογουντες, εκεινον και προσκυνουσιν (besides +the account in the Philos and Orig. c. Cels i. 57; VI. 11). The positive +statement of Justin that Simon came even to Rome (under Claudius) can +hardly be refuted from the account of the Apologist himself, and therefore +not at all (See Renan, "Antichrist").</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote336" name="footnote336"></a><b>Footnote 336:</b><a href="#footnotetag336"> (return) </a><p>We have it as such in the Μεγαλη Αποφασις which Hippolytus +(Philosoph. +VI. 19. 20) made use of. This Simonianism may perhaps have been related +to the original, as the doctrines of the Christian Gnostics to the Apostolic +preaching.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote337" name="footnote337"></a><b>Footnote 337:</b><a href="#footnotetag337"> (return) </a><p> The Heretics opposed in the Epistle to the Colossians may belong +to these. On Cerinthus, see Polycarp, in Iren. III. 3. 2, Irenæus (I. 26. I.; +III. 11. 1), Hippolytus and the redactions of the Syntagma, Cajus in +Euseb. III. 28. 2, Hilgenfeld, Ketzergeschichte, p. 411 ff. To this category +belong also the Ebionites and Elkasites of Epiphanius (See Chap. 6).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote338" name="footnote338"></a><b>Footnote 338:</b><a href="#footnotetag338"> (return) </a><p> The two Syrian teachers, Saturninus and Cerdo, must in particular be +mentioned here. The first (See Iren I. 24. 1. 2, Hippolyt. and the redactions +of the Syntagma) was not strictly speaking a dualist, and therefore +allowed the God of the Old Testament to be regarded as an Angel of the +supreme God, while at the same time he distinguished him from Satan. +Accordingly, he assumed that the supreme God co-operated in the creation +of man by angel powers—sending a ray of light, an image of light, that should +be imitated as an example and enjoined as an ideal. But all men have not +received the ray of light. Consequently, two classes of men stand in abrupt +contrast with each other. History is the conflict of the two. Satan stands at +the head of the one, the God of the Jews at the head of the other. The Old +Testament is a collection of prophecies out of both camps. The truly good +first appears in the Æon Christ, who assumed nothing cosmic, did not even +submit to birth. He destroys the works of Satan (generation, eating of flesh), +and delivers the men who have within them a spark of light The Gnosis of +Cerdo was much coarser. (Iren. I. 27. 1, Hippolyt. and the redactions). He +contrasted the good God and the God of the Old Testament as two primary +beings. The latter he identified with the creator of the world. Consequently, +he completely rejected the Old Testament and everything cosmic and taught +that the good God was first revealed in Christ. Like Saturninus he preached +a strict docetism; Christ had no body, was not born, and suffered in an unreal +body. All else that the Fathers report of Cerdo's teaching has probably been +transferred to him from Marcion, and is therefore very doubtful.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote339" name="footnote339"></a><b>Footnote 339:</b><a href="#footnotetag339"> (return) </a><p> This question might perhaps be answered if we had the Justinian Syntagma +against all heresies; but, in the present condition of our sources, it +remains wrapped in obscurity. What may be gathered from the fragments of +Hegesippus, the Epistles of Ignatius, the Pastoral Epistles and other documents, +such as, for example, the Epistle of Jude, is in itself so obscure, so +detached, and so ambiguous, that it is of no value for historical construction.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote340" name="footnote340"></a><b>Footnote 340:</b><a href="#footnotetag340"> (return) </a><p> There are, above all, the schools of the Basilideans, Valentinians and +Ophites. To describe the systems in their full development lies, in my +opinion, outside the business of the history of dogma and might easily +lead to the mistake that the systems as such were controverted, and that +their construction was peculiar to Christian Gnosticism. The construction, +as remarked above, is rather that of the later Greek philosophy, though +it cannot be mistaken that, for us, the full parallel to the Gnostic systems +first appears in those of the Neoplatonists. But only particular doctrines +and principles of the Gnostics were really called in question, their critique +of the world, of providence, of the resurrection, etc.; these therefore are +to be adduced in the next section. The fundamental features of an inner +development can only be exhibited in the case of the most important, +viz., the Valentinian school. But even here, we must distinguish an Eastern +and a Western branch. (Tertull. adv. Valent. I.: "Valentiniani frequentissimum +plane collegium inter hæreticos." Iren. I. 1.; Hippol. Philos. VI. 35; +Orig. Hom. II. 5 in Ezech. Lomm. XIV. p. 40: "Valentini robustissima secta").</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote341" name="footnote341"></a><b>Footnote 341:</b><a href="#footnotetag341"> (return) </a><p> Tertull. de præscr. 42: "De verbi autem administratione quid dicam, +cum hoc sit negotium illis, non ethnicos convertendi, sed nostros evertendi? +Hanc magis gloriam captant, si stantibus ruinam, non si jacentibus elevationem +operentur. Quoniam et ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio +ædificio venit, sed de veritatis destructione; nostra suffodiunt, ut sua +ædificent. Adime illis legem Moysis et prophetas et creatorem deum, accusationem +eloqui non habent." (See adv. Valent. I init.). This is hardly a malevolent +accusation. The philosophic interpretation of a religion will always impress +those only on whom the religion itself has already made an impression.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote342" name="footnote342"></a><b>Footnote 342:</b><a href="#footnotetag342"> (return) </a><p> Iren. III. 4. 2: Κερδων εις την εκκλησιαν ελθων και +εξομολογουμενος, 'ουτως +διετελετε, ποτε μεν λαθροδιδασκαλων ποτε δε παλιν εξομολογουμενος, ποτε δε ελεγγομενος +εφ 'οις εδιδασκε κακως, και αφισταμενος της των αδελφων συνοδιας, see, +besides, the valuable account of Tertull. de præscr. 30. The account of +Irenæus (I. 13) is very instructive as to the kind of propaganda of Marcus, +and the relation of the women he deluded to the Church. Against actually +recognised false teachers the fixed rule was to renounce all intercourse +with them (2 Joh. 10. 11, Iren. ep. ad. Florin on Polycarp's procedure, +in Euseb. H. E. V. 20. 7; Iren. III. 3. 4) But how were the heretics to +be surely known?</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote343" name="footnote343"></a><b>Footnote 343:</b><a href="#footnotetag343"> (return) </a><p> Among those who justly bore this name he distinguishes those 'οι +ορθογνωμενες κατα παντα χριστανοι εισιν (Dial. 80).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote344" name="footnote344"></a><b>Footnote 344:</b><a href="#footnotetag344"> (return) </a><p> Very important is the description which Irenæus (III. 15. 2) and +Tertullian have given of the conduct of the Valentinians as observed by +themselves (adv. Valent. 1). "Valentiniani nihil magis curant quam occultare, +quod prædicant; si tamen prædicant qui occultant. Custodiæ officium +conscientiæ officium est (a comparison with the Eleusinian mysteries +follows.) Si bona fide quæras, concreto vultu, suspenso supercilio, Altum +est, aiunt. Si subtiliter temptes per ambiguitates bilingues communem +fidem adfirmant. Si scire te subostendas negant quidquid agnoscunt. +Si cominus certes, tuam simplicitatem sua cæde dispergunt. Ne discipulis +quidem propriis ante committunt quam suos fecerint. Habent artificium +quo prius persuadeant quam edoceant." At a later period Dionysius +of Alex, (in Euseb. H. E. VII. 7) speaks of Christians who maintain +an apparent communion with the brethren, but resort to one of the +false teachers (cf. as to this Euseb. H. E. VI. 2. 13). The teaching +of Bardesanes influenced by Valentinus, who, moreover, was hostile to +Marcionitism, was tolerated for a long time in Edessa (by the Christian +kings), nay, was recognised. The Bardesanites and the "Palutians" (catholics) +were differentiated only after the beginning of the third century.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote345" name="footnote345"></a><b>Footnote 345:</b><a href="#footnotetag345"> (return) </a><p> There can be no doubt that the Gnostic propaganda was seriously +hindered by the inability to organise and discipline churches, which is +characteristic of all philosophic systems of religion. The Gnostic organisation +of schools and mysteries was not able to contend with the episcopal +organisation of the churches; see Ignat. ad Smyr. 6. 2; Tertull de præscr. +41. Attempts at actual formations of churches were not altogether wanting +in the earliest period; at a later period they were forced on some schools. +We have only to read Iren. III. 15. 2 in order to see that these associations +could only exist by finding support in a church. Irenæus expressly remarks +that the Valentinians designated the common Christians καθολικοι (communes) +και εκκλησιαστικοι, but that they, on the other hand, complained that "we +kept away from their fellowship without cause, as they thought like ourselves."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote346" name="footnote346"></a><b>Footnote 346:</b><a href="#footnotetag346"> (return) </a><p> The differences between the Gnostic Christianity and that of the Church, +that is, the later ecclesiastical theology, were fluid, if we observe the following +points. (1) That even in the main body of the Church, the element of knowledge +was increasingly emphasised, and the Gospel began to be converted into +a perfect knowledge of the world (increasing reception of Greek philosophy, +development of πιστις to γνωσις). (2) That the dramatic eschatology +began +to fade away. (3) That room was made for docetic views, and value put upon +a strict asceticism. On the other hand, we must note: (1) That all this existed +only in germ or fragments within the great Church during the flourishing +period of Gnosticism. (2) That the great Church held fast to the facts fixed +in the baptismal formula (in the <i>Kerygma</i>), and to the eschatological expectations, +further, to the creator of the world as the supreme God, to the unity of +Jesus Christ, and to the Old Testament, and therefore rejected dualism. (3) +That the great Church defended the unity and equality of the human race, and +therefore the uniformity and universal aim of the Christian salvation. (4) That +it rejected every introduction of new, especially of Oriental Mythologies, guided +in this by the early Christian consciousness and a sure intelligence. A deeper, +more thorough distinction between the Church and the Gnostic parties +hardly dawned on the consciousness of either. The Church developed herself +instinctively into an imperial Church, in which office was to play the chief rôle. +The Gnostics sought to establish or conserve associations in which the genius +should rule, the genius in the way of the old prophets or in the sense of Plato, or +in the sense of a union of prophecy and philosophy. In the Gnostic conflict, at +least at its close, the judicial priest fought with the virtuoso and overcame him.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote347" name="footnote347"></a><b>Footnote 347:</b><a href="#footnotetag347"> (return) </a><p> The absolute significance of the person of Christ was very plainly +expressed in Gnosticism (Christ is not only the teacher of the truth, but the +manifestation of the truth), more plainly than where he was regarded as the +subject of Old Testament revelation. The pre-existent Christ has significance +in some Gnostic schools, but always a comparatively subordinate one. The +isolating of the person of Christ, and quite as much the explaining away of his +humanity, is manifestly out of harmony with the earliest tradition. But, on the +other hand, it must not be denied that the Gnostics recognised redemption +in the historical Christ: Christ personally procured it (see under 6. h.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote348" name="footnote348"></a><b>Footnote 348:</b><a href="#footnotetag348"> (return) </a><p> In this thesis, which may be directly corroborated by the most important +Gnostic teachers, Gnosticism shews that it desires <i>in thesi</i> (in a way similar +to Philo) to continue on the soil of Christianity as a positive religion. Conscious +of being bound to tradition, it first definitely raised the question, what +is Christianity? and criticised and sifted the sources for an answer to the question. +The rejection of the Old Testament led it to that question and to this +sifting. It may be maintained with the greatest probability, that the idea +of a canonical collection of Christian writings first emerged among the +Gnostics (see also Marcion). They really needed such a collection, while all +those who recognised the Old Testament as a document of revelation, and +gave it a Christian interpretation, did not at first need a new document, but +simply joined on the new to the old, the Gospel to the Old Testament. From +the numerous fragments of Gnostic commentaries on New Testament writings +which have been preserved, we see that these writings there enjoyed canonical +authority, while at the same period, we hear nothing of such authority, nor +of commentaries in the main body of Christendom (see Heinrici, "Die Valentinianische +Gnosis", u. d. h. Schrift, 1871). Undoubtedly, sacred writings were +selected according to the principle of apostolic origin. This is proved by the +inclusion of the Pauline Epistles in the collections of books. There is evidence +of such having been made by the Naassenes, Peratæ, Valentinians, Marcion, +Tatian, and the Gnostic Justin. The collection of the Valentinians, and the +Canon of Tatian must have really coincided with the main parts of the later +Ecclesiastical Canon. The later Valentinians accommodated themselves to +this Canon, that is, recognised the books that had been added (Tertull. de +præscr. 38). The question as to who first conceived and realised the idea of a +Canon of Christian writings, Basilides or Valentinus or Marcion or whether +this was done by several at the same time, will always remain obscure, though +many things favour Marcion. If it should even be proved that Basilides (see +Euseb. H. E. IV. 7. 7) and Valentinus himself, regarded the Gospels only as +authoritative yet the full idea of the Canon lies already in the fact of their +making these the foundation and interpreting them allegorically. The question +as to the extent of the Canon afterwards became the subject of an important +controversy between the Gnostics and the Catholic Church. The Catholics +throughout took up the position that their Canon was the earlier, and the +Gnostic collection the corrupt revision of it (they were unable to adduce +proof, as is attested by Tertullian's de præscr.) But the aim of the Gnostics +to establish themselves on the uncorrupted apostolic tradition gathered from +writings was crossed by three tendencies, which, moreover, were all jointly +operative in the Christian communities and are therefore not peculiar to +Gnosticism. (1) By faith in the continuance of prophecy, in which new things +are always revealed by the Holy Spirit (the Basilidean and Marcionite prophets). +(2) By the assumption of an esoteric secret tradition of the Apostles +(see Clem. Strom. VII. 17. 106, 108, Hipp. Philos. VII. 20, Iren. I. 25. 5, III. 2. +1, Tertull. de præscr. 25. Cf. the Gnostic book Πιστις Σοφια, which in great +part is based on doctrines said to be imparted by Jesus to his disciples after +his resurrection). (3) By the inability to oppose the continuous production of +Evangelic writings in other words by the continuance of this kind of literature +and the addition of Acts of the Apostles (Gospel of the Egyptians (?), +other Gospels, Acts of John, Thomas, Philip etc. We know absolutely nothing +about the conditions under which these writings originated the measure of +authority which they enjoyed or the way in which they gained that authority). +In all these points which in Gnosticism hindered the development of Christianity +to the religion of a new book the Gnostic schools shew that they +stood precisely under the same conditions as the Christian communities in +general (see above Chap. 3 § 2). If all things do not deceive us, the same +inner development may be observed even in the Valentinian school, as in the +great Church viz. the production of sacred Evangelic and Apostolic writings, +prophecy and secret gnosis, falling more and more into the background, and +the completed Canon becoming the most important basis of the doctrine of +religion. The later Valentinians (see Tertull. de præscr. and adv. Valent.) +seem to have appealed chiefly to this Canon, and Tatian no less (about whose +Canon see my Texte u Unters I. 1. 2. pp. 213-218). But finally we must +refer to the fact that it was the highest concern of the Gnostics to furnish the +historical proof of the Apostolic origin of their doctrine by an exact reference +to the links of the tradition (see Ritschl Entstehung der altkath Kirche 2nd +ed. p. 338 f.). Here again it appears that Gnosticism shared with Christendom +the universal presupposition that the valuable thing is the Apostolic origin +(see above p. 160 f.), but that it first created artificial chains of tradition, +and that this is the first point in which it was followed by the Church +(see the appeals to the Apostle Matthew, to Peter and Paul, through the +mediation of "Glaukias," and "Theodas," to James and the favourite disciples +of the Lord, in the case of the Naassenes, Ophites, Basilideans and Valentinians, +etc., see, further, the close of the Epistle of Ptolemy to Flora in Epiphan +H. 33. 7 Μαθαεσαε εξης και την τουτου αρχην τε κα κεννησιν, αξιουμενη της +αποστολικης παραδοσεος. 'η εκ διαδοχης και 'ημεις παρειληφαμεν μετα καιρου [sic] +κανονισαι παντας τους λογους τηι του σωτηρος διδασκαλια, as well as the +passages +adduced above under (2)). From this it further follows that the Gnostics may +have compiled their Canon solely according to the principle of Apostolic +origin. Upon the whole we may see here how foolish it is to seek to dispose +of Gnosticism with the phrase lawless fancies. On the contrary, the +Gnostics purposely took their stand on the tradition, nay they were the first +in Christendom who determined the range, contents and manner of propagating +the tradition. They are thus the first Christian theologians.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote349" name="footnote349"></a><b>Footnote 349:</b><a href="#footnotetag349"> (return) </a><p> Here also we have a point of unusual historical importance. As we first +find a new Canon among the Gnostics so also among them (and in Marcion) +we first meet with the traditional complex of the Christian <i>Kerygma</i> as a doctrinal +confession (<i>regula fidei</i>), that is, as a confession which, because it is +fundamental, +needs a speculative exposition, but is set forth by this exposition as +the summary of all wisdom. The hesitancy about the details of the <i>Kerygma</i>, +only shews the general uncertainty which at that time prevailed. But again, +we see that the later Valentinians completely accommodated themselves to +the later development in the Church (Tertull. adv. Valent. I: communem +fidem adfirmant) that is attached themselves, probably even from the first, +to the existing forms, while in the Marcionite Church a peculiar <i>regula</i> was set +up by a criticism of the tradition. The <i>regula</i> as a matter of course, was regarded +as Apostolic. On Gnostic <i>regulæ</i> see Iren. I. 21. 5, 31. 3, II. præf. II. 19. 8, +III. II. 3, III. 16. 1, 5, Ptolem. ap Epiph. h. 33. 7, Tertull. adv Valent. I. +4, de præscr. 42, adv Marc. I. 1, IV. 5, 17, Ep. Petri ad Jacob in Clem. +Hom. c. 1. We still possess in great part verbatim the <i>regula</i> of Apelles, in +Epiphan II. 44, 2 Irenæus (I. 7. 2) and Tertull (de carne. 20) state that the +Valentinian <i>regula</i> contained the formula, 'γεννηθεντα δια Μαριας', +see on this +p. 203. In noting that the two points so decisive for Catholicism the Canon +of the New Testament and the Apostolic <i>regula</i> were first, in the strict sense, +set up by the Gnostics on the basis of a definite fixing and systematising of +the oldest tradition we may see that the weakness of Gnosticism here consisted +in its inability to exhibit the publicity of tradition and to place +its propagation in close connection with the organisation of the churches.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote350" name="footnote350"></a><b>Footnote 350:</b><a href="#footnotetag350"> (return) </a><p> We do not know the relation in which the Valentinians placed the +public Apostolic <i>regula fidei</i> to the secret doctrine derived from one +Apostle. The Church in opposition to the Gnostics strongly emphasised +the publicity of all tradition. Yet afterwards though with reservations, +she gave a wide scope to the assumption of a secret tradition.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote351" name="footnote351"></a><b>Footnote 351:</b><a href="#footnotetag351"> (return) </a><p> The Gnostics transferred to the Evangelic writings, and demanded as +simply necessary, the methods which Barnabas and others used in +expounding the Old Testament (see the samples of their exposition in +Irenæus and Clement. Heinrici, l. c.). In this way, of course, all the specialties +of the systems may be found in the documents. The Church at first +condemned this method (Tertull. de præscr. 17-19. 39; Iren. I. 8. 9), but +applied it herself from the moment in which she had adopted a New +Testament Canon of equal authority with that of the Old Testament. +However, the distinction always remained, that in the confrontation of +the two Testaments with the views of getting proofs from prophecy, the +history of Jesus described in the Gospels was not at first allegorised. +Yet afterwards, the Christological dogmas of the third and following +centuries demanded a docetic explanation of many points in that history.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote352" name="footnote352"></a><b>Footnote 352:</b><a href="#footnotetag352"> (return) </a><p> In the Valentinian, as well as in all systems not coarsely dualistic, +the Redeemer Christ has no doubt a certain share in the constitution of +the highest class of men, but only through complicated mediations. The +significance which is attributed to Christ in many systems for the production +or organisation of the upper world, may be mentioned. In the Valentinian +system there are several mediators. It may be noted that the +abstract conception of the divine primitive Being seldom called forth +a real controversy. As a rule, offence was taken only at the expression.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote353" name="footnote353"></a><b>Footnote 353:</b><a href="#footnotetag353"> (return) </a><p> The Epistle of Ptolemy to Flora is very instructive here. If we leave +out of account the peculiar Gnostic conception, we have represented in +Ptolemy's criticism the later Catholic view of the Old Testament, as +well as also the beginning of a historical conception of it. The Gnostics +were the first critics of the Old Testament in Christendom. Their allegorical +exposition of the Evangelic writings should be taken along with +their attempts at interpreting the Old Testament literally and historically. +It may be noted, for example, that the Gnostics were the first to call +attention to the significance of the change of name for God in the Old +Testament; see Iren. II. 35.. 3. The early Christian tradition led to a +procedure directly the opposite. Apelles, in particular, the disciple of +Marcion, exercised an intelligent criticism on the Old Testament, see +my treatise, "de Apellis gnosi." p. 71 sq., and also Texte u. Unters +VI. 3. p. 111 ff. Marcion himself recognised the historical contents of +the Old Testament as reliable, and the criticism of most Gnostics only +called in question its religious value.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote354" name="footnote354"></a><b>Footnote 354:</b><a href="#footnotetag354"> (return) </a><p> Ecclesiastical opponents rightly put no value on the fact, that some +Gnostics advanced to Pan-Satanism with regard to the conception of +the world, while others beheld a certain <i>justitia civilis</i> ruling in the +world. For the standpoint which the Christian tradition had marked out, +this distinction is just as much a matter of indifference, as the other, +whether the Old Testament proceeded from an evil, or from an intermediate +being. The Gnostics attempted to correct the judgment of faith +about the world and its relation to God, by an empiric view of the world. +Here again they are by no means "visionaries", however fantastic the +means by which they have expressed their judgment about the condition +of the world, and attempted to explain that condition. Those, rather are +"visionaries" who give themselves up to the belief that the world is the +work of a good and omnipotent Deity, however apparently reasonable +the arguments they adduce. The Gnostic (Hellenistic) philosophy of religion, +at this point, comes into the sharpest opposition to the central point of +the Old Testament Christian belief, and all else really depends on this. +Gnosticism is antichristian so far as it takes away from Christianity its Old +Testament foundation, and belief in the identity of the creator of the world +with the supreme God. That was immediately felt and noted by its opponents.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote355" name="footnote355"></a><b>Footnote 355:</b><a href="#footnotetag355"> (return) </a><p> The ecclesiastical opposition was long uncertain on this point. It is +interesting to note that Basilides portrayed the sin inherent in the child +from birth, in a way that makes one feel as though he were listening to +Augustine (see the fragment from the 23rd book of the Εξηγητικα in +Clem., Strom. VI. 12. 83). But it is of great importance to note how even +very special later terminologies, dogmas, etc., of the Church, were in a +certain way anticipated by the Gnostics. Some samples will be given +below; but meanwhile we may here refer to a fragment from Apelles' +Syllogisms in Ambrosius (de Parad. V. 28): "Si hominem non perfectum +fecit deus, unusquisque autcm per industriam propriam perfectionem sibi +virtutis adsciscit: nonne videtur plus sibi homo adquirere, quam ei deus +contulit?" One seems here to be transferred into the fifth century.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote356" name="footnote356"></a><b>Footnote 356:</b><a href="#footnotetag356"> (return) </a><p> The Gnostic teaching did not meet with a vigorous resistance even +on this point, and could also appeal to the oldest tradition. The arbitrariness +in the number, derivation and designation of the Æons was contested. The +aversion to barbarism also co-operated here, in so far as Gnosticism delighted +in mysterious words borrowed from the Semites. But the Semitic element +attracted as well as repelled the Greeks and Romans of the second century. +The Gnostic terminologies within the Æon speculations were partly +reproduced among the Catholic theologians of the third century; most +important is it that the Gnostics have already made use of the concept +"'ομοουσιος"; see Iren., I. 5. 1: αλλα το μεν πνευματικον μη +δεδυνησθαι αυτην +μορφωσαι, επειδη 'ομοουσιον 'υπηρχεν αυτηι (said of the Sophia): L. 5. 4, +και +τουτον ειναι τον κατ' εικονα και 'ομοιωσιν γεγονοτα; κατ' εικονα μεν τον 'υλικον +'υπαρχειν, παραπλησιον μεν, αλλ' ουχ 'ομοουσιον τωι θεωι καθ' 'ομοιωσιν δε τον +ψυχικον. +I. 5. 5: το δε κυημα της μητρος της "Αχαμωθ", 'ομοουσιον 'υπαρχον τηι +μητρι. +In all these cases the word means "of one substance." It is found in the +same sense in Clem., Hom. 20. 7: See also Philos. VII. 22; Clem., Exc. +Theod. 42. Other terms also which have acquired great significance in the +Church since the days of Origen, (<i>e.g.</i>, αγεννητος), are found among +the Gnostics, +see Ep. Ptol. ad Floram, 5; and Bigg. (1. c. p. 58, note 3) calls attention to the +appearance τριας in Excerpt. ex. Theod. § 80, perhaps the earliest passage.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote357" name="footnote357"></a><b>Footnote 357:</b><a href="#footnotetag357"> (return) </a><p> The characteristic of the Gnostic Christology is not Docetism, in the +strict sense, but the doctrine of the two natures, that is, the distinction +between Jesus and Christ, or the doctrine that the Redeemer as Redeemer +was not a man. The Gnostics based this view on the inherent sinfulness +of human nature, and it was shared by many teachers of the age without +being based on any principle (see above, p. 195 f.). The most popular +of the three Christologies briefly characterised above was undoubtedly +that of the Valentinians. It is found, with great variety of details, in +most of the nameless fragments of Gnostic literature that have been +preserved, as well as in Apelles. This Christology might be accommodated +to the accounts of the Gospels and the baptismal confession (how +far is shewn by the <i>regula</i> of Apelles, and that of the Valentinians may +have run in similar terms). It was taught here that Christ had passed through +Mary as a channel; from this doctrine followed very easily the notion of the +Virginity of Mary, uninjured even after the birth—it was already known to +Clem. Alex. (Strom. VII. 16. 93). The Church also, later on, accepted this +view. It is very difficult to get a clear idea of the Christology of Basilides, as +very diverse doctrines were afterwards set up in his school as is shewn by +the accounts. Among them is the doctrine, likewise held by others, that Christ +in descending from the highest heaven took to himself something from every +sphere through which he passed. Something similar is found among the Valentinians, +some of whose prominent leaders made a very complicated phenomenon +of Christ, and gave him also a direct relation to the demiurge. There is +further found here the doctrine of the heavenly humanity, which was afterwards +accepted by ecclesiastical theologians. Along with the fragments of +Basilides the account of Clem. Alex. seems to me the most reliable. According +to this, Basilides taught that Christ descended on the man Jesus at the baptism. +Some of the Valentinians taught something similar: the Christology of +Ptolemy is characterised by the union of all conceivable Christology theories. +The different early Christian conceptions may be found in him. Basilides did +not admit a real union between Christ and Jesus; but it is interesting to see +how the Pauline Epistles caused the theologians to view the sufferings of +Christ as necessarily based on the assumption of sinful flesh, that is, to deduce +from the sufferings that Christ has assumed sinful flesh. The Basilidean Christology +will prove to be a peculiar preliminary stage of the later ecclesiastical +Christology. The anniversary of the baptism of Christ was to the Basilideans, +as the day of the επιφανεια, a high festival day (see Clem., Strom. I. 21. 146): +they fixed it for the 6th (2nd) January. And in this also the Catholic Church +has followed the Gnosis. The real docetic Christology as represented by +Saturninus (and Marcion) was radically opposed to the tradition, and struck +out the birth of Jesus, as well as the first 30 years of his life. An accurate +exposition of the Gnostic Christologies, which would carry us too far here, +(see especially Tertull., de carne Christi), would shew, that a great part of the +questions which occupy Church theologians till the present day, were already +raised by the Gnostics; for example, what happened to the body of Christ +after the resurrection? (see the doctrines of Apelles and Hermogenes); what +significance the appearance of Christ had for the heavenly and Satanic powers? +what meaning belongs to his sufferings, although there was no real +suffering for the heavenly Christ, but only for Jesus? etc. In no other point do +the anticipations in the Gnostic dogmatic stand out so plainly (see the +system of Origen; many passages bearing on the subject will be found in the +third and fourth volumes of this work, to which readers are referred). The +Catholic Church has learned but little from the Gnostics, that is, from the +earliest theologians in Christendom, in the doctrine of God and the world, +but very much in Christology, and who can maintain that she has ever completely +overcome the Gnostic doctrine of the two natures, nay, even Docetism? +Redemption viewed in the historical person of Jesus, that is, in the +appearance of a Divine being on the earth, but the person divided and the +real history of Jesus explained away and made inoperative, is the signature +of the Gnostic Christology—this, however, is also the danger of the system +of Origen and those systems that are dependent on him (Docetism) as well +as, in another way, the danger of the view of Tertullian and the Westerns +(doctrine of two natures). Finally, it should be noted that the Gnosis +always made a distinction between the supreme God and Christ, but that, +from the religious position, it had no reason for emphasising that distinction. +For to many Gnostics, Christ was in a certain way the manifestation of +the supreme God himself, and therefore in the more popular writings of the +Gnostics (see the Acta Johannis) expressions are applied to Christ which +seem to identify him with God. The same thing is true of Marcion and +also of Valentinus (see his Epistle in Clem., Strom. II. 20. 114: εις δε +εστιν αγαθος. ου παρουσια 'η δια του 'υιου φανερωσις). This Gnostic estimate of +Christ has undoubtedly had a mighty influence on the later Church +development of Christology. We might say without hesitation that to +most Gnostics Christ was a πνευμα 'ομοουσιον τωι πατρι. The details of the +life, sufferings and resurrection of Jesus are found in many Gnostics, +transformed, complemented and arranged in the way in which Celsus +(Orig., c. Cels. I. II.) required for an impressive and credible history. +Celsus indicates how everything must have taken place if Christ had +been a God in human form. The Gnostics in part actually narrate it so. +What an instructive coincidence! How strongly the docetic view itself +was expressed in the case of Valentinus, and how the exaltation of +Jesus above the earthly was thereby to be traced back to his moral +struggle, is shewn in the remarkable fragment of a letter (in Clem., +Strom. III. 7. 59): Παντα 'υπομεινας ηγκρατης την θεοτητα Ιησους ειργαζετο. +ησθιεν γαρ και απιεν ιδιως ουκ αποδιδους τα βρωματα, τοσαυτη ην αυτωι της +εγκρατειας δυναμις, 'ωστε και μη φθαρηναι την τροφην εν αυτωι επει το φθερεσθαι +αυτος ουκ ειχεν. In this notion, however, there is more sense and historical +meaning than in that of the later ecclesiastical aphtharto-docetism.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote358" name="footnote358"></a><b>Footnote 358:</b><a href="#footnotetag358"> (return) </a><p> The Gnostic distinction of classes of men was connected with the +old distinction of stages in spiritual understanding, but has its basis in a +law of nature. There were again empirical and psychological views—they +must have been regarded as very important, had not the Gnostics taken +them from the traditions of the philosophic schools—which made the +universalism of the Christian preaching of salvation, appear unacceptable +to the Gnostics. Moreover, the transformation of religion into a doctrine +of the school, or into a mystery cult, always resulted in the distinction +of the knowing from the <i>profanum vulgus</i>. But in the Valentinian assumption +that the common Christians as psychical occupy an intermediate +stage, and that they are saved by faith, we have a compromise which +completely lowered the Gnosis to a scholastic doctrine within Christendom. +Whether and in what way the Catholic Church maintained the significance +of Pistis as contrasted with Gnosis, and in what way the distinction +between the knowing (priests) and the laity was there reached, will be +examined in its proper place. It should be noted, however, that the +Valentinian, Ptolemy, ascribes freedom of will to the psychic (which the +pneumatic and hylic lack), and therefore has sketched by way of by-work +a theology for the psychical beside that for the pneumatic, which exhibits +striking harmonies with the exoteric system of Origen. The denial by Gnosticism +of free will, and therewith of moral responsibility, called forth very +decided contradiction. Gnosticism, that is, the acute hellenising of Christianity, +was wrecked in the Church on free will, the Old Testament and eschatology.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote359" name="footnote359"></a><b>Footnote 359:</b><a href="#footnotetag359"> (return) </a><p> The greatest deviation of Gnosticism from tradition appears in eschatology, +along with the rejection of the Old Testament and the separation +of the creator of the world from the supreme God. Upon the whole our +sources say very little about the Gnostic eschatology. This, however, +is not astonishing; for the Gnostics had not much to say on the matter, +or what they had to say found expression in their doctrine of the genesis +of the world, and that of redemption through Christ. We learn that the +<i>regula</i> of Apelles closed with the words: ανεπτη εις ουρανον 'οθεν +και 'ηκε, +instead of 'οθεν ερχεται κριναι ζωντας και νεκρους. We know that Marcion, +who may already be mentioned here, referred the whole eschatological +expectations of early Christian times to the province of the god of the +Jews, and we hear that Gnostics (Valentinians) retained the words σαρκος +αναστασιν, but interpreted them to mean that one must rise in this life, that is +perceive the truth (thus the "resurrectio a mortuis", that is, exaltation above +the earthly, took the place of the "resurrectio mortuorum"; See Iren. II. 31. +2: Tertull., de resurr. carnis, 19). While the Christian tradition placed a great +drama at the close of history, the Gnostics regard the history itself as the +drama, which virtually closes with the (first) appearing of Christ. It may not +have been the opinion of all Gnostics that the resurrection has already taken +place, yet for most of them the expectations of the future seem to have been +quite faint, and above all without significance. The life is so much included in +knowledge, that we nowhere in our sources find a strong expression of hope +in a life beyond (it is different in the earliest Gnostic documents preserved +in the Coptic language), and the introduction of the spirits into the Pleroma +appears very vague and uncertain. But it is of great significance that those +Gnostics who, according to their premises, required a real redemption +from the world as the highest good, remained finally in the same uncertainty +and religious despondency with regard to this redemption, as +characterised the Greek philosophers. A religion which is a philosophy +of religion remains at all times fixed to this life, however strongly it +may emphasise the contrast between the spirit and its surroundings, and +however ardently it may desire redemption. The desire for redemption +is unconsciously replaced by the thinker's joy in his knowledge, which +allays the desire (Iren. III. 15. 2: "Inflatus est iste [scil. the Valentinian +proud of knowledge] neque in coelo, neque in terra putat se esse, sed +intra Pleroma introisse et complexum jam angelum suum, cum institorio +et supercilio incedit gallinacei elationem habens.... Plurimi, quasi jam +perfecti, semetipsos spiritales vocant, et se nosse jam dicunt eum qui +sit intra Pleroma ipsorum refrigerii locum"). As in every philosophy of +religion, an element of free thinking appears very plainly here also. The +eschatological hopes can only have been maintained in vigour by the +conviction that the world is of God. But we must finally refer to the +fact, that even in eschatology, Gnosticism only drew the inferences +from views which were pressing into Christendom from all sides, and +were in an increasing measure endangering its hopes of the future. Besides, +in some Valentinian circles, the future life was viewed as a condition +of education, as a progress through the series of the (seven) +heavens; <i>i.e.</i>, purgatorial experiences in the future were postulated. Both +afterwards, from the time of Origen, forced their way into the doctrine +of the Church (purgatory, different ranks in heaven), Clement and Origen +being throughout strongly influenced by the Valentinian eschatology.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote360" name="footnote360"></a><b>Footnote 360:</b><a href="#footnotetag360"> (return) </a><p>See the passage Clem. Strom. III. 6, 49, which is given above, p. 238.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote361" name="footnote361"></a><b>Footnote 361:</b><a href="#footnotetag361"> (return) </a><p> Cf. the Apocryphal Acts of Apostles and diverse legends of Apostles +(<i>e.g.</i>, in Clem. Alex.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote362" name="footnote362"></a><b>Footnote 362:</b><a href="#footnotetag362"> (return) </a><p> More can hardly be said: the heads of schools were themselves +earnest men. No doubt statements such as that of Heracleon seem to +have led to laxity in the lower sections of the collegium: 'ομολογιαν ειναι +την μεν εν τηι πιστει και πολιτειαι. την δε εν φωνηι; 'η μην ουν εν φωνηι +'ομολογια και +επι των εξουσιων γινεται, 'ην μονην 'ομολογιαν 'ηγουνται ειναι 'οι πολλοι, ουχ 'υγιως +δυνανται δε ταυτην την 'ομολογιαν και 'οι 'υποκριται 'ομολογειν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote363" name="footnote363"></a><b>Footnote 363:</b><a href="#footnotetag363"> (return) </a><p> See Epiph. h. 26, and the statements in the Coptic Gnostic works. +(Schmidt, Texte u Unters. VIII. 1. 2, p. 566 ff.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote364" name="footnote364"></a><b>Footnote 364:</b><a href="#footnotetag364"> (return) </a><p> There arose in this way an extremely difficult theoretical problem, but +practically a convenient occasion for throwing asceticism altogether overboard, +with the Gnostic asceticism, or restricting it to easy exercises. +This is not the place for entering into the details. Shibboleths, such as φευγετε +ου τας φυσεις αλλα τας γνωμας των κακων, may have soon appeared. It may be +noted here, that the asceticism which gained the victory in Monasticism, was +not really that which sprang from early Christian, but from Greek impulses, +without, of course, being based on the same principle. Gnosticism anticipated +the future even here. That could be much more clearly proved in the history +of the worship. A few points which are of importance for the history of dogma +may be mentioned here: (1) The Gnostics viewed the traditional sacred +actions (Baptism and the Lord's Supper) entirely as mysteries, and applied to +them the terminology of the mysteries (some Gnostics set them aside as +psychic); but in doing so they were only drawing the inferences from changes +which were then in process throughout Christendom. To what extent the +later Gnosticism in particular was interested in sacraments, may be studied +especially in the Pistis Sophia and the other Coptic works of the Gnostics, +which Carl Schmidt has edited; see, for example, Pistis Sophia, p. 233. "Dixit +Jesus ad suos μαθητας; αμην dixi vobis, haud adduxi quidquam in +κοσμον +veniens nisi hunc ignem et hanc aquam et hoc vinum et hunc sanguinem." +(2) They increased the holy actions by the addition of new ones, repeated +baptisms (expiations), anointing with oil, sacrament of confirmation απολυτρωσις; +see, on Gnostic sacraments, Iren. I. 20, and Lipsius, Apokr. Apostelgesch. +I. pp. 336-343, and cf. the πυκνως μετανοσυσι in the delineation of the +Shepherd of Hermas. Mand. XI. (3) Marcus represented the wine in the +Lord's Supper as actual blood in consequence of the act of blessing: see Iren., +I. 13.2: ποτηρια οινω κεκραμενα προσποιουμενος ευχαριστειν και επι πλεον εκτεινων +τον λογον της επικλησεως, πορφυρεα και ερυθρα αναφαινεσθαι ποιει, 'ως δοκειν την +απο των 'υπερ τα 'ολα χαριν το 'αιμα το 'εαυτης σταζειν εν εκεινω τω ποτηριω δια +της επικλησεως αυτου, και 'υπεριμειρεσθαι τους παροντας εξ εκεινου γευσασθαι του +ποματος, 'ινα και εις αυτους επομβρηση 'η δια του μαγου τουτου κληιζομενη χαρις. +Marcus was indeed a charlatan; but religious charlatanry afterwards +became very earnest, and was certainly taken earnestly by many adherents +of Marcus. The transubstantiation idea, in reference to the elements in +the mysteries, is also plainly expressed in the Excerpt. ex. Theodot. § 82: +και 'ο αρτος και το ελαιον αγιαζεται τη δυναμει του ονοματος ου τα αυτα οντα κατα +το φαινομενον δια εληφθη, αλλα δυ αμει εις δυναμιν πνευματικην μεταβεβληται +(that is, not into a new super-terrestrial material, not into the real body of +Christ, but into a spiritual power) ουτως και το 'υδωρ και το εξορκιζομενον και το +βαπτισμα γινομενον ου μονον χωρει το χειρον, αλλα και αγιασμον προσλαμβανει. +Irenæus possessed a liturgical handbook of the Marcionites, and communicates +many sacramental formula from it (I. c. 13 sq). In my treatise +on the Pistis Sophia (Texte u. Unters. VII. 2. pp. 59-94) I think I have +shewn ("The common Christian and the Catholic elements of the Pistis +Sophia") to what extent Gnosticism anticipated Catholicism as a system +of doctrine and an institute of worship. These results have been strengthened +by Carl Schmidt (Texte u. Unters. VIII. 1. 2). Even purgatory, +prayers for the dead, and many other things, raised in speculative questions +and definitely answered, are found in those Coptic Gnostic writings, +and are then met with again in Catholicism. One general remark may +be permitted in conclusion. The Gnostics were not interested in apologetics, +and that is a very significant fact. The πνευμα in man was regarded +by them as a supernatural principle, and on that account they are +free from all rationalism and moralistic dogmatism. For that very reason +they are in earnest with the idea of revelation, and do not attempt to prove +it or convert its contents into natural truths. They did endeavour to prove +that their doctrines were Christian, but renounced all proof that revelation +is the truth (proofs from antiquity). One will not easily find in the +case of the Gnostics themselves, the revealed truth described as philosophy, +or morality as the philosophic life. If we compare therefore, the +first and fundamental system of Catholic doctrine, that of Origen, with +the system of the Gnostics, we shall find that Origen, like Basilides and +Valentinus, was a philosopher of revelation, but that he had besides a +second element which had its origin in apologetics.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page266" id="page266"></a>[pg 266]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_V" id="CHAP_I_V"></a>CHAPTER V</h2> + +<h3>MARCION'S ATTEMPT TO SET ASIDE THE OLD TESTAMENT +FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIANITY, +TO PURIFY TRADITION AND TO REFORM CHRISTENDOM ON +THE BASIS OF THE PAULINE GOSPEL</h3> + + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_0" id="SEC_I_V_0"></a>Marcion cannot be numbered among the Gnostics in the +strict sense of the word.<a id="footnotetag365" name="footnotetag365"></a><a href="#footnote365"><sup>365</sup></a> For (1) he was not guided by any +speculatively scientific, or even by an apologetic, but by a soteriological +interest.<a id="footnotetag366" name="footnotetag366"></a><a href="#footnote366"><sup>366</sup></a> (2) He therefore put all emphasis on +faith, not on Gnosis.<a id="footnotetag367" name="footnotetag367"></a><a href="#footnote367"><sup>367</sup></a> (3) In the exposition of his ideas he +neither applied the elements of any Semitic religious wisdom, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page267" id="page267"></a>[pg 267]</span> +nor the methods of the Greek philosophy of religion.<a id="footnotetag368" name="footnotetag368"></a><a href="#footnote368"><sup>368</sup></a> (4) +He never made the distinction between an esoteric and an +exoteric form of religion. He rather clung to the publicity +of the preaching, and endeavoured to reform Christendom, in +opposition to the attempts at founding schools for those who +knew and mystery cults for such as were in quest of initiation. +It was only after the failure of his attempts at reform +that he founded churches of his own, in which brotherly +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page268" id="page268"></a>[pg 268]</span> +equality, freedom from all ceremonies, and strict evangelical +discipline were to rule.<a id="footnotetag369" name="footnotetag369"></a><a href="#footnote369"><sup>369</sup></a> Completely carried away with the +novelty, uniqueness and grandeur of the Pauline Gospel of +the grace of God in Christ, Marcion felt that all other conceptions +of the Gospel, and especially its union with the Old +Testament religion, was opposed to, and a backsliding from +the truth.<a id="footnotetag370" name="footnotetag370"></a><a href="#footnote370"><sup>370</sup></a> He accordingly supposed that it was necessary +to make the sharp antitheses of Paul, law and gospel, wrath +and grace, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness, +death and life, that is the Pauline criticism of the +Old Testament religion, the foundation of his religious views, +and to refer them to two principles, the righteous and wrathful +god of the Old Testament, who is at the same time identical +with the creator of the world, and the God of the Gospel, +quite unknown before Christ, who is only love and mercy.<a id="footnotetag371" name="footnotetag371"></a><a href="#footnote371"><sup>371</sup></a> +This Paulinism in its religious strength, but without dialectic, +without the Jewish Christian view of history, and detached from +the soil of the Old Testament, was to him the true Christianity. +Marcion, like Paul, felt that the religious value of a +statutory law with commandments and ceremonies, was very +different from that of a uniform law of love.<a id="footnotetag372" name="footnotetag372"></a><a href="#footnote372"><sup>372</sup></a> Accordingly, +he had a capacity for appreciating the Pauline idea of faith; +it is to him reliance on the unmerited grace of God which is +revealed in Christ. But Marcion shewed himself to be a Greek, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page269" id="page269"></a>[pg 269]</span> +influenced by the religious spirit of the time, by changing the +ethical contrast of the good and legal into the contrast between +the infinitely exalted spiritual and the sensible which is subject +to the law of nature, by despairing of the triumph of +good in the world and, consequently, correcting the traditional +faith that the world and history belong to God, by an empirical +view of the world and the course of events in it,<a id="footnotetag373" name="footnotetag373"></a><a href="#footnote373"><sup>373</sup></a> a +view to which he was no doubt also led by the severity of +the early Christian estimate of the world. Yet to him +systematic speculation about the final causes of the contrast +actually observed, was by no means the main thing. So far +as he himself ventured on such a speculation he seems to +have been influenced by the Syrian Cerdo. The numerous +contradictions which arise as soon as one attempts to reduce +Marcion's propositions to a system, and the fact that his disciples +tried all possible conceptions of the doctrine of principles, +and defined the relation of the two Gods very differently, +are the clearest proof that Marcion was a religious character, +that he had in general nothing to do with principles, but with +living beings whose power he felt, and that what he ultimately +saw in the Gospel was not an explanation of the world, +but redemption from the world,<a id="footnotetag374" name="footnotetag374"></a><a href="#footnote374"><sup>374</sup></a>—redemption from a world, +which even in the best that it can offer, has nothing that +can reach the height of the blessing bestowed in Christ.<a id="footnotetag375" name="footnotetag375"></a><a href="#footnote375"><sup>375</sup></a> +Special attention may be called to the following particulars.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_I" id="SEC_I_V_I"></a>1. Marcion explained the Old Testament in its literal sense +and rejected every allegorical interpretation. He recognised +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page270" id="page270"></a>[pg 270]</span> +it as the revelation of the creator of the world and the god +of the Jews, but placed it, just on that account, in sharpest +contrast to the Gospel. He demonstrated the contradictions +between the Old Testament and the Gospel in a voluminous +work (the αντιθεσεις).<a id="footnotetag376" name="footnotetag376"></a><a href="#footnote376"><sup>376</sup></a> In the god of the former book he saw +a being whose character was stern justice, and therefore anger; +contentiousness and unmercifulness. The law which rules nature +and man appeared to him to accord with the characteristics +of this god and the kind of law revealed by him, and therefore +it seemed credible to him that this god is the creator +and lord of the world (κοσμοκρατωρ). As the law which governs +the world is inflexible, and yet, on the other hand, full of +contradictions, just and again brutal, and as the law of the +Old Testament exhibits the same features, so the god of creation +was to Marcion a being who united in himself the whole +gradations of attributes from justice to malevolence, from obstinacy +to inconsistency.<a id="footnotetag377" name="footnotetag377"></a><a href="#footnote377"><sup>377</sup></a> Into this conception of the creator +of the world, the characteristic of which is that it cannot be +systematised, could easily be fitted the Syrian Gnostic theory +which regards him as an evil being, because he belongs to this +world and to matter. Marcion did not accept it in principle,<a id="footnotetag378" name="footnotetag378"></a><a href="#footnote378"><sup>378</sup></a> +but touched it lightly and adopted certain inferences.<a id="footnotetag379" name="footnotetag379"></a><a href="#footnote379"><sup>379</sup></a> On +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page271" id="page271"></a>[pg 271]</span> +the basis of the Old Testament and of empirical observation, +Marcion divided men into two classes, good and evil, though +he regarded them all, body and soul, as creatures of the demiurge. +The good are those who strive to fulfil the law of +the demiurge. These are outwardly better than those who +refuse him obedience. But the distinction found here is not +the decisive one. To yield to the promptings of Divine grace +is the only decisive distinction, and those just men will shew +themselves less susceptible to the manifestation of the truly +good than sinners. As Marcion held the Old Testament to +be a book worthy of belief, though his disciple, Apelles, thought +otherwise, he referred all its predictions to a Messiah whom +the creator of the world is yet to send, and who, as a warlike +hero, is to set up the earthly kingdom of the "just" God.<a id="footnotetag380" name="footnotetag380"></a><a href="#footnote380"><sup>380</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_II" id="SEC_I_V_II"></a>2. Marcion placed the good God of love in opposition to +the creator of the world.<a id="footnotetag381" name="footnotetag381"></a><a href="#footnote381"><sup>381</sup></a> This God has only been revealed +in Christ. He was absolutely unknown before Christ,<a id="footnotetag382" name="footnotetag382"></a><a href="#footnote382"><sup>382</sup></a> and +men were in every respect strange to him.<a id="footnotetag383" name="footnotetag383"></a><a href="#footnote383"><sup>383</sup></a> Out of pure +goodness and mercy, for these are the essential attributes of +this God who judges not and is not wrathful, he espoused +the cause of those beings who were foreign to him, as he +could not bear to have them any longer tormented by their +just and yet malevolent lord.<a id="footnotetag384" name="footnotetag384"></a><a href="#footnote384"><sup>384</sup></a> The God of love appeared +in Christ and proclaimed a new kingdom (Tertull., adv. Marc. +III. 24. fin.). Christ called to himself the weary and heavy +laden,<a id="footnotetag385" name="footnotetag385"></a><a href="#footnote385"><sup>385</sup></a> and proclaimed to them that he would deliver them +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page272" id="page272"></a>[pg 272]</span> +from the fetters of their lord and from the world. He shewed +mercy to all while he sojourned on the earth, and did in +every respect the opposite of what the creator of the world had +done to men. They who believed in the creator of the world +nailed him to the cross. But in doing so they were unconsciously +serving his purpose, for his death was the price by +which the God of love purchased men from the creator of the +world.<a id="footnotetag386" name="footnotetag386"></a><a href="#footnote386"><sup>386</sup></a> He who places his hope in the Crucified can now +be sure of escaping from the power of the creator of the +world, and of being translated into the kingdom of the good +God. But experience shews that, like the Jews, men who are +virtuous according to the law of the creator of the world, +do not allow themselves to be converted by Christ; it is +rather sinners who accept his message of redemption. Christ, +therefore, rescued from the under-world, not the righteous men +of the Old Testament (Iren. I. 27. 3), but the sinners who +were disobedient to the creator of the world. If the determining +thought of Marcion's view of Christianity is here again +very clearly shewn, the Gnostic woof cannot fail to be seen +in the proposition that the good God delivers only the souls, +not the bodies of believers. The antithesis of spirit and matter, +appears here as the decisive one, and the good God of love +becomes the God of the spirit, the Old Testament god the +god of the flesh. In point of fact, Marcion seems to have +given such a turn to the good God's attributes of love, and +incapability of wrath, as to make Him the apathetic, infinitely +exalted Being, free from all affections. The contradiction in +which Marcion is here involved is evident, because he taught +expressly that the spirit of man is in itself just as foreign to +the good God as his body. But the strict asceticism which +Marcion demanded as a Christian, could have had no motive, +without the Greek assumption of a metaphysical contrast of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page273" id="page273"></a>[pg 273]</span> +flesh and Spirit, which in fact was also apparently the doctrine +of Paul.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_III" id="SEC_I_V_III"></a>3. The relation in which Marcion placed the two Gods, +appears at first sight to be one of equal rank.<a id="footnotetag387" name="footnotetag387"></a><a href="#footnote387"><sup>387</sup></a> Marcion himself, +according to the most reliable witnesses, expressly asserted +that both were uncreated, eternal, etc. But if we look more +closely we shall see that in Marcion's mind there can be no +thought of equality. Not only did he himself expressly declare +that the creator of the world is a self-contradictory being +of limited knowledge and power, but the whole doctrine of +redemption shews that he is a power subordinate to the good +God. We need not stop to enquire about the details, but it +is certain that the creator of the world formerly knew nothing +of the existence of the good God, that he is in the end completely +powerless against him, that he is overcome by him, and +that history in its issue with regard to man, is determined +solely by its relation to the good God. The just god appears +at the end of history, not as an independent being, hostile +to the good God, but as one subordinate to him,<a id="footnotetag388" name="footnotetag388"></a><a href="#footnote388"><sup>388</sup></a> so that +some scholars, such as Neander, have attempted to claim for +Marcion a doctrine of one principle, and to deny that he +ever held the complete independence of the creator of the +world, the creator of the world being simply an angel of the +good God. This inference may certainly be drawn with +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page274" id="page274"></a>[pg 274]</span> +little trouble, as the result of various considerations, but it is +forbidden by reliable testimony. The characteristic of Marcion's +teaching is just this, that as soon as we seek to raise +his ideas from the sphere of practical considerations to that +of a consistent theory, we come upon a tangled knot of contradictions. +The theoretic contradictions are explained by +the different interests which here cross each other in Marcion. +In the first place, he was consciously dependent on the Pauline +theology, and was resolved to defend everything which +he held to be Pauline. Secondly, he was influenced by the +contrast in which he saw the ethical powers involved. This +contrast seemed to demand a metaphysical basis, and its actual +solution seemed to forbid such a foundation. Finally, +the theories of Gnosticism, the paradoxes of Paul, the recognition +of the duty of strictly mortifying the flesh, suggested +to Marcion the idea that the good God was the exalted God +of the spirit, and the just god the god of the sensuous, of +the flesh. This view, which involved the principle of a metaphysical +dualism, had something very specious about it, and +to its influence we must probably ascribe the fact that Marcion +no longer attempted to derive the creator of the world +from the good God. His disciples who had theoretical interests +in the matter, no doubt noted the contradictions. In +order to remove them, some of these disciples advanced to +a doctrine of three principles, the good God, the just creator +of the world, the evil god, by conceiving the creator of the +world sometimes as an independent being, sometimes as one +dependent on the good God. Others reverted to the common +dualism, God of the spirit and god of matter. But Apelles, +the most important of Marcion's disciples, returned to the +creed of the one God (μια αρχη), and conceived the creator +of the world and Satan as his angels, without departing from +the fundamental thought of the master, but rather following +suggestions which he himself had given.<a id="footnotetag389" name="footnotetag389"></a><a href="#footnote389"><sup>389</sup></a> Apart from Apelles, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page275" id="page275"></a>[pg 275]</span> +who founded a Church of his own, we hear nothing of the +controversies of disciples breaking up the Marcionite church. +All those who lived in the faith for which the master had +worked—viz., that the laws ruling in nature and history, as +well as the course of common legality and righteousness, are +the antitheses of the act of Divine mercy in Christ, and that +cordial love and believing confidence have their proper contrasts +in self-righteous pride and the natural religion of the +heart,—those who rejected the Old Testament and clung solely +to the Gospel proclaimed by Paul, and finally, those who considered +that a strict mortification of the flesh and an earnest +renunciation of the world were demanded in the name of the +Gospel, felt themselves members of the same community, and +to all appearance allowed perfect liberty to speculations about +final causes.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_IV" id="SEC_I_V_IV"></a>4. Marcion had no interest in specially emphasising the +distinction between the good God and Christ, which according +to the Pauline Epistles, could not be denied. To him +Christ is the manifestation of the good God himself.<a id="footnotetag390" name="footnotetag390"></a><a href="#footnote390"><sup>390</sup></a> But +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page276" id="page276"></a>[pg 276]</span> +Marcion taught that Christ assumed absolutely nothing from +the creation of the Demiurge, but came down from heaven in +the 15th year of the Emperor Tiberius, and after the assumption +of an apparent body, began his preaching in the synagogue +of Capernaum.<a id="footnotetag391" name="footnotetag391"></a><a href="#footnote391"><sup>391</sup></a> This pronounced docetism which denies +that Jesus was born, or subjected to any human process of +development,<a id="footnotetag392" name="footnotetag392"></a><a href="#footnote392"><sup>392</sup></a> is the strongest expression of Marcion's abhorrence +of the world. This aversion may have sprung from the +severe attitude of the early Christians toward the world, but +the inference which Marcion here draws, shews, that this +feeling was, in his case, united with the Greek estimate of +spirit and matter. But Marcion's docetism is all the more +remarkable that, under Paul's guidance, he put a high +value on the fact of Christ's death upon the cross. Here +also is a glaring contradiction which his later disciples laboured +to remove. This much, however, is unmistakable, that Marcion +succeeded in placing the greatness and uniqueness of +redemption through Christ in the clearest light and in beholding +this redemption in the person of Christ, but chiefly in his +death upon the cross.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_V" id="SEC_I_V_V"></a>5. Marcion's eschatology is also quite rudimentary. Yet be +assumed with Paul that violent attacks were yet in store for +the Church of the good God on the part of the Jewish Christ +of the future, the Antichrist. He does not seem to have taught +a visible return of Christ, but, in spite of the omnipotence +and goodness of God, he did teach a twofold issue of history. +The idea of a deliverance of all men, which seems to follow +from his doctrine of boundless grace, was quite foreign to him. +For this very reason, he could not help actually making the +good God the judge, though in theory he rejected the idea, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page277" id="page277"></a>[pg 277]</span> +in order not to measure the will and acts of God by a human +standard. Along with the fundamental proposition of Marcion, +that God should be conceived only as goodness and grace, we +must take into account the strict asceticism which he prescribed +for the Christian communities, in order to see that that idea +of God was not obtained from antinomianism. We know of +no Christian community in the second century which insisted +so strictly on renunciation of the world as the Marcionites. No +union of the sexes was permitted. Those who were married +had to separate ere they could be received by baptism into +the community. The sternest precepts were laid down in the +matter of food and drink. Martyrdom was enjoined; and +from the fact that they were ταλαιπωροι και μισουμενοι in the +world, the members were to know that they were disciples of +Christ.<a id="footnotetag393" name="footnotetag393"></a><a href="#footnote393"><sup>393</sup></a> With all that, the early Christian enthusiasm was +wanting.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_VI" id="SEC_I_V_VI"></a>6. Marcion defined his position in theory and practice towards +the prevailing form of Christianity, which, on the one hand, +shewed throughout its connection with the Old Testament, +and, on the other, left room for a secular ethical code, by +assuming that it had been corrupted by Judaism, and therefore +needed a reformation.<a id="footnotetag394" name="footnotetag394"></a><a href="#footnote394"><sup>394</sup></a> But he could not fail to note +that this corruption was not of recent date, but belonged to +the oldest tradition itself. The consciousness of this moved +him to a historical criticism of the whole Christian tradition.<a id="footnotetag395" name="footnotetag395"></a><a href="#footnote395"><sup>395</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page278" id="page278"></a>[pg 278]</span> +Marcion was the first Christian who undertook such a task. +Those writings to which he owed his religious convictions, +viz., the Pauline Epistles, furnished the basis for it. He found +nothing in the rest of Christian literature that harmonised +with the Gospel of Paul. But he found in the Pauline Epistles +hints which explained to him this result of his observations. +The twelve Apostles whom Christ chose did not understand +him, but regarded him as the Messiah of the god of creation.<a id="footnotetag396" name="footnotetag396"></a><a href="#footnote396"><sup>396</sup></a> +And therefore Christ inspired Paul by a special revelation, +lest the Gospel of the grace of God should be lost through +falsifications.<a id="footnotetag397" name="footnotetag397"></a><a href="#footnote397"><sup>397</sup></a> But even Paul had been understood only by +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page279" id="page279"></a>[pg 279]</span> +few (by none?). His Gospel had also been misunderstood, +nay, his Epistles had been falsified in many passages,<a id="footnotetag398" name="footnotetag398"></a><a href="#footnote398"><sup>398</sup></a> in +order to make them teach the identity of the god of creation +and the God of redemption. A new reformation was therefore +necessary. Marcion felt himself entrusted with this commission, +and the church which he gathered recognised this +vocation of his to be the reformer.<a id="footnotetag399" name="footnotetag399"></a><a href="#footnote399"><sup>399</sup></a> He did not appeal to a +new revelation such as he presupposed for Paul. As the Pauline +Epistles and an authentic ευαγγελιον κυριου were in existence, +it was only necessary to purify these from interpolations, and +restore the genuine Paulinism which was just the Gospel itself. +But it was also necessary to secure and preserve this true +Christianity for the future. Marcion, in all probability, was +the first to conceive and, in great measure, to realise the idea +of placing Christendom on the firm foundation of a definite +theory of what is Christian—but not of basing it on a theological +doctrine—and of establishing this theory by a fixed +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page280" id="page280"></a>[pg 280]</span> +collection of Christian writings with canonical authority.<a id="footnotetag400" name="footnotetag400"></a><a href="#footnote400"><sup>400</sup></a> He +was not a systematic thinker; but he was more, for he was +not only a religious character, but at the same time a man +with an organising talent, such as has no peer in the early +Church. If we think of the lofty demands he made on +Christians, and, on the other hand, ponder the results that +accompanied his activity, we cannot fail to wonder. Wherever +Christians were numerous about the year 160, there must +have been Marcionite communities with the same fixed but +free organisation, with the same canon and the same conception +of the essence of Christianity, pre-eminent for the strictness of +their morals and their joy in martyrdom.<a id="footnotetag401" name="footnotetag401"></a><a href="#footnote401"><sup>401</sup></a> The Catholic +Church was then only in process of growth, and it was long +ere it reached the solidity won by the Marcionite church +through the activity of one man, who was animated by a +faith so strong that he was able to oppose his conception of +Christianity to all others as the only right one, and who did +not shrink from making selections from tradition instead of +explaining it away. He was the first who laid the firm foundation +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page281" id="page281"></a>[pg 281]</span> +for establishing what is Christian, because, in view of +the absoluteness of his faith,<a id="footnotetag402" name="footnotetag402"></a><a href="#footnote402"><sup>402</sup></a> he had no desire to appeal +either to a secret evangelic tradition, or to prophecy, or to +natural religion.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_V_REMARKS" id="SEC_I_V_REMARKS"></a><i>Remarks.</i>—The innovations of Marcion are unmistakable. +The way in which he attempted to sever Christianity from +the Old Testament was a bold stroke which demanded the +sacrifice of the dearest possession of Christianity as a religion, +viz., the belief that the God of creation is also the God of +redemption. And yet this innovation was partly caused by a +religious conviction, the origin of which must be sought not +in heathenism, but on Old Testament and Christian soil. For +the bold Anti-judaist was the disciple of a Jewish thinker, +Paul, and the origin of Marcion's antinomianism may be +ultimately found in the prophets. It will always be the glory +of Marcion in the early history of the Church that he, the +born heathen, could appreciate the religious criticism of the +Old Testament religion as formerly exercised by Paul. The +antinomianism of Marcion was ultimately based on the strength +of his religious feeling, on his personal religion as contrasted +with all statutory religion. That was also its basis in the +case of the prophets and of Paul, only the statutory religion +which was felt to be a burden and a fetter was different in +each case. As regards the prophets, it was the outer sacrificial +worship, and the deliverance was the idea of Jehovah's +righteousness. In the case of Paul, it was the pharisaic treatment +of the law, and the deliverance was righteousness by +faith. To Marcion it was the sum of all that the past had +described as a revelation of God: only what Christ had given +him was of real value to him. In this conviction he founded +a Church. Before him there was no such thing in the sense +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page282" id="page282"></a>[pg 282]</span> +of a community, firmly united by a fixed conviction, harmoniously +organised, and spread over the whole world. Such a +Church the Apostle Paul had in his mind's eye, but he was +not able to realise it. That in the century of the great +mixture of religion the greatest apparent paradox was actually +realised: namely, a Paulinism with two Gods and without the +Old Testament; and that this form of Christianity first resulted +in a church which was based not only on intelligible words, +but on a definite conception of the essence of Christianity as +a religion, seems to be the greatest riddle which the earliest +history of Christianity presents. But it only seems so. The +Greek, whose mind was filled with certain fundamental features +of the Pauline Gospel (law and grace), who was therefore convinced +that in all respects the truth was there, and who on +that account took pains to comprehend the real sense of +Paul's statements, could hardly reach any other results than +those of Marcion. The history of Pauline theology in the +Church, a history first of silence, then of artificial interpretation, +speaks loudly enough. And had not Paul really separated +Christianity as religion from Judaism and the Old Testament? +Must it not have seemed an inconceivable inconsistency, if +he had clung to the special national relation of Christianity +to the Jewish people, and if he had taught a view of history +in which for pædagogic reasons indeed, the Father of mercies +and God of all comfort had appeared as one so entirely +different? He who was not capable of translating himself +into the consciousness of a Jew, and had not yet learned the +method of special interpretation, had only the alternative, if +he was convinced of the truth of the Gospel of Christ as +Paul had proclaimed it, of either giving up this Gospel against +the dictates of his conscience, or striking out of the Epistles +whatever seemed Jewish. But in this case the god of creation +also disappeared, and the fact that Marcion could make this +sacrifice proves that this religious spirit, with all his energy, +was not able to rise to the height of the religious faith which +we find in the preaching of Jesus.</p> + +<p>In basing his own position and that of his church on Paulism, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page283" id="page283"></a>[pg 283]</span> +as he conceived and remodelled it, Marcion connected +himself with that part of the earliest tradition of Christianity +which is best known to us, and has enabled us to understand +his undertaking historically as we do no other. Here we +have the means of accurately indicating what part of this +structure of the second century has come down from the +Apostolic age and is really based on tradition, and what does +not. Where else could we do that? But Marcion has taught +us far more. He does not impart a correct understanding of +early Christianity, as was once supposed, for his explanation +of that is undoubtedly incorrect, but a correct estimate of +the reliability of the traditions that were current in his day +alongside of the Pauline. There can be no doubt that Marcion +criticised tradition from a dogmatic stand-point. But would +his undertaking have been at all possible, if at that time a +reliable tradition of the twelve Apostles and their teaching +had existed and been operative in wide circles? We may +venture to say no. Consequently, Marcion gives important +testimony against the historical reliability of the notion that +the common Christianity was really based on the tradition of +the twelve Apostles. It is not surprising that the first man +who clearly put and answered the question, "What is Christian?" +adhered exclusively to the Pauline Epistles, and therefore +found a very imperfect solution. When more than 1600 years +later the same question emerged for the first time in scientific +form, its solution had likewise to be first attempted from the +Pauline Epistles, and therefore led at the outset to a one-sidedness +similar to that of Marcion. The situation of Christendom +in the middle of the second century was not really +more favourable to a historical knowledge of early Christianity, +than that of the 18<sup>th</sup> century, but in many respects more +unfavourable. Even at that time, as attested by the enterprise +of Marcion, its results, and the character of the polemic against +him, there were besides the Pauline Epistles, no reliable documents +from which the teaching of the twelve Apostles could +have been gathered. The position which the Pauline Epistles +occupy in the history of the world is, however, described by +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page284" id="page284"></a>[pg 284]</span> +the fact that every tendency in the Church which was unwilling +to introduce into Christianity the power of Greek mysticism, +and was yet no longer influenced by the early Christian +eschatology, learned from the Pauline Epistles a Christianity +which, as a religion, was peculiarly vigorous. But that position +is further described by the fact that every tendency which +courageously disregards spurious traditions, is compelled to +turn to the Pauline Epistles, which, on the one hand, present +such a profound type of Christianity, and on the other, darken +and narrow the judgment about the preaching of Christ himself, +by their complicated theology. Marcion was the first, +and for a long time the only Gentile Christian who took his +stand on Paul. He was no moralist, no Greek mystic, no +Apocalyptic enthusiast, but a religious character, nay, one of +the few pronouncedly typical religious characters whom we +know in the early Church before Augustine. But his attempt +to resuscitate Paulinism is the first great proof that the conditions +under which this Christianity originated do not repeat +themselves, and that therefore Paulinism itself must receive a +new construction if one desires to make it the basis of a +Church. His attempt is a further proof of the unique value +of the Old Testament to early Christendom, as the only +means at that time of defending Christian monotheism. Finally, +his attempt confirms the experience that a religious +community can only be founded by a religious spirit who +expects nothing from the world.</p> + +<p>Nearly all ecclesiastical writers, from Justin to Origen, opposed +Marcion. He appeared already to Justin as the most +wicked enemy. We can understand this, and we can quite +as well understand how the Church Fathers put him on a +level with Basilides and Valentinus, and could not see the +difference between them. Because Marcion elevated a better +God above the god of creation, and consequently robbed the +Christian God of his honour, he appeared to be worse than +a heathen (Sentent. episc. LXXXVII., in Hartel's edition of +Cyprian, I. p. 454; "Gentiles quamvis idola colant, tamen +summum deum patrem creatorem cognoscunt et confitentur [!]; +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page285" id="page285"></a>[pg 285]</span> +in hunc Marcion blasphemat, etc."), as a blaspheming emissary +of demons, as the first-born of Satan (Polyc., Justin, Irenæus). +Because he rejected the allegoric interpretation of the Old +Testament, and explained its predictions as referring to a Messiah +of the Jews who was yet to come, he seemed to be a +Jew (Tertull., adv. Marc. III.). Because he deprived Christianity +of the apologetic proof (the proof from antiquity) he +seemed to be a heathen and a Jew at the same time (see my +Texte u. Unters. I. 3, p. 68; the antitheses of Marcion became +very important for the heathen and Manichæan assaults +on Christianity). Because he represented the twelve Apostles +as unreliable witnesses, he appeared to be the most wicked +and shameless of all heretics. Finally, because he gained so +many adherents, and actually founded a church, he appeared +to be the ravening wolf (Justin, Rhodon), and his church as +the spurious church. (Tertull., adv. Marc. IV. 5). In Marcion +the Church Fathers chiefly attacked what they attacked in +all Gnostic heretics, but here error shewed itself in its worst +form. They learned much in opposing Marcion (see Bk. II.). +For instance, their interpretation of the <i>regula fidei</i> and of +the New Testament received a directly Antimarcionite expression +in the Church. One thing, however, they could not learn +from him, and that was how to make Christianity into a philosophic +system. He formed no such system, but he has +given a clearly outlined conception, based on historic documents, +of Christianity as the religion which redeems the world.</p> + +<p><i>Literature.</i>—All anti-heretical writings of the early Church, +but especially Justin, Apol. I. 26, 58; Iren. I. 27; Tertull., +adv. Marc. I-V.; de præscr.; Hippol., Philos.; Adamant., de +recta in deum fidei; Epiph. h. 42; Ephr. Syr.; Esnik. The +older attempts to restore the Marcionite Gospel and Apostolicum +have been antiquated by Zahn's Kanonsgeschichte, l. c. +Hahn (Regimonti, 1823) has attempted to restore the Antitheses. +We are still in want of a German monograph on Marcion +(see the whole presentation of Gnosticism by Zahn, with his +Excursus, l. c.). Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch. p. 316 f. 522 f.; cf. my +works, Zur Quellenkritik des Gnosticismus, 1873; de Apelles +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page286" id="page286"></a>[pg 286]</span> +Gnosis Monarchia, 1874; Beiträge z. Gesch. der Marcionitischen +Kirchen (Ztschr. f. wiss. Theol. 1876). Marcion's Commentar +zum Evangelium (Ztschr. f. K. G. Bd. IV. 4). Apelles +Syllogismen in the Texte u. Unters. VI. H. 3. Zahn, die +Dialoge des Adamantius in the Ztschr. f. K.-Gesch. IX. p. +193 ff. Meyboom, Marcion en de Marcionieten, Leiden, 1888.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote365" name="footnote365"></a><b>Footnote 365:</b><a href="#footnotetag365"> (return) </a><p> He belonged to Pontus and was a rich shipowner: about 139 he +came to Rome already a Christian, and for a short time belonged to +the church there. As he could not succeed in his attempt to reform it, +he broke away from it about 144. He founded a church of his own and +developed a very great activity. He spread his views by numerous journeys +and communities bearing his name very soon arose in every province +of the Empire (Adamantius, de recta in deum fide, Origen Opp. +ed Delarue 1. p. 809, Epiph. h. 42. p. 668, ed. Oehler). They were +ecclesiastically organised (Tertull., de præscr. 41. and adv. Marc. IV. 5) +and possessed bishops, presbyters, etc. (Euseb. H. E. IV. 15. 46: de +Mart. Palæst. X. 2; Les Bas and Waddington Inscript, Grecq. et Latines +rec. en Grêce et en Asie Min. Vol. III. No. 2558). Justin (Apol. 1. 26) +about 150 tells us that Marcion's preaching had spread κατα παν γενος +ανθρωπων and by the year 155, the Marcionites were already numerous in +Rome (Iren. III. 34). Up to his death however Marcion did not give up +the purpose of winning the whole of Christendom and therefore again +and again sought connection with it (Iren. I. c.; Tertull., de præscr. 30), +likewise his disciples (see the conversation of Apelles with Rhodon in +Euseb. H. E. V. 13. 5. and the dialogue of the Marcionites with Adamantius). +It is very probable that Marcion had fixed the ground features +of his doctrine and had laboured for its propagation even before he +came to Rome. In Rome the Syrian Gnostic Cerdo had a great influence +on him, so that we can even yet perceive, and clearly distinguish the +Gnostic element in the form of the Marcionite doctrine transmitted to us.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote366" name="footnote366"></a><b>Footnote 366:</b><a href="#footnotetag366"> (return) </a><p> "Sufficit," said the Marcionites, "unicum opsus deo nostro quod hominem +liberavit summa et præcipua bonitate sua" (Tertull. adv. Marc. I. 17).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote367" name="footnote367"></a><b>Footnote 367:</b><a href="#footnotetag367"> (return) </a><p> Apelles, the disciple of Marcion, declared (Euseb. H. E. V. 13. 5) +σωθησεσθαι +τους επι τον εσταυρωμενον ηλπικοτας, μονον εαν εν εργοις αγαθοις ευρισκωνται.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote368" name="footnote368"></a><b>Footnote 368:</b><a href="#footnotetag368"> (return) </a><p> This is an extremely important point. Marcion rejected all allegories +(See Tertull. adv. Marc. II. 19. 21, 22, III. 5. 6, 14, 19, IV. 15. 20, V. 1, +Orig. Comment. in Matth. T. XV. 3, Opp. III. p. 655, in ep. ad. Rom. Opp. +IV. p. 494 sq., Adamant. Sect. I., Orig. Opp. I. pp. 808, 817, Ephr. Syrus. +hymn. 36., Edit. Benedict p. 520 sq.) and describes this method as an arbitrary +one. But that simply means that he perceived and avoided the transformation +of the Gospel into Hellenic philosophy. No philosophic formulæ are found in +any of his statements that have been handed down to us. But what is still +more important, none of his early opponents have attributed to Marcion a +system as they did to Basilides and Valentinus. There can be no doubt that +Marcion did not set up any system (the Armenian Esnik first gives a Marcionite +system but that is a late production, see my essay in the Ztschr. f. wiss. +Theol. 1896, p. 80 f.). He was just as far from having any apologetic or +rationalistic interest; Justin (Apol. I. 58) says of the Marcionites αποδειξιν +μηδεμιαν περι 'ων λεγουσιν εχουσιν αλλα αλογως 'ως 'υπο λυκου αρνες συνηρπασμενοι +κ.τ.λ.. Tertullian again and again casts in the teeth of Marcion that he has +adduced no proof. See I. 11 sq., III. 2. 3, 4, IV. 11: "Subito Christus subito +et Johannes Sic sunt omnia apud Marcionem quæ suum et plenum habent +ordinem apud creatorem." Rhodon (Euseb. H. E. V. 13. 4) says of two prominent +genuine disciples of Marcion μη ευρισκοντες την διαιρεσιν των πραγματων +'ως ουδε εκεινος δυο αρχας απεφηναντο ψιλως κα αναποδεικτως. Of Apelles the +most important of Marcion's disciples, who laid aside the Gnostic borrows of +his master, we have the words (1. c) μη δειν 'ολως εξεταζειν τον λογον αλλ' +'εκαστον 'ως πεπιστευκε διαμενειν Σωθησεσθαι γαρ τους ετι τον εσταρωμενον ηλπικοτας +απεφαινετο μονον εαν εν εργοις αγαθοις 'ευρισκωνται. το δε πως εστι +μια αρχη μη γινωσκειν ελεγεν 'ουτω δε κινεισθαι μονον. μη επιστασθαι πως +εις εστιν αγεννητος θεος τουτο δε πιστευειν. It was Marcion's purpose therefore +to give all value to faith alone to make it dependent on its own convincing +power and avoid all philosophic paraphrase and argument. The contrast in +which he placed the Christian blessing of salvation has in principle nothing +in common with the contract in which Greek philosophy viewed the <i>summum +bonum</i>. Finally it may be pointed out that Marcion introduced no new elements +(Æons, Matter, etc.) into his evangelic views and leant on no Oriental +religious science. The later Marcionite speculations about matter (see the +account of Esnik) should not be charged upon the master himself as is manifest +from the second book of Tertullian against Marcion. The assumption that +the creator of the world created it out of a <i>materia subjacens</i> is certainly found +in Marcion (see Tertull. 1. 15, Hippol. Philos. X. 19) but he speculated no +further about it and that assumption itself was not rejected, for example, by +Clem. Alex. (Strom. II. 16. 74, Photius on Clement's Hypotyposes). Marcion did +not really speculate even about the good God, yet see Tertull. adv. Marc. I. +14. 15, IV. 7: "Mundus ille superior—coelum tertium."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote369" name="footnote369"></a><b>Footnote 369:</b><a href="#footnotetag369"> (return) </a><p> Tertull., de præscr. 41. sq.; the delineation refers chiefly to the +Marcionites +(see Epiph. h. 42. c. 3. 4, and Esnik's account), on the Church system +of Marcion, see also Tertull., adv. Marc. I. 14, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29: III. 1, 22: IV. +5, 34: V. 7, 10, 15, 18.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote370" name="footnote370"></a><b>Footnote 370:</b><a href="#footnotetag370"> (return) </a><p> Marcion himself originally belonged to the main body of the Church, as +is expressly declared by Tertullian and Epiphanius, and attested by one of +his own letters.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote371" name="footnote371"></a><b>Footnote 371:</b><a href="#footnotetag371"> (return) </a><p> Tertull., adv. Marc. I. 2, 19: "Separatio legis et evangelii proprium et +principale opus est Marcionis ... ex diversitate sententiarum utriusque +instrumenti diversitatem quoque argumentatur deorum." II. 28, 29: IV. 1. I. 6: +"dispares deos, alterum, judicem, ferum, bellipotentem; alterum mitem, placidum +et tantummodo bonum atque optimum." Iren. I. 27. 2.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote372" name="footnote372"></a><b>Footnote 372:</b><a href="#footnotetag372"> (return) </a><p> Marcion maintained that the good God is not to be feared. Tertull., adv. +Marc. I. 27: "Atque adeo præ se ferunt Marcionitæ quod deum suum omnino +non timeant. Malus autem, inquiunt, timebitur; bonus autem diligitur." To the +question why they did not sin if they did not fear their God, the Marcionites +answered in the words of Rom. VI. 1. 2. (l. c).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote373" name="footnote373"></a><b>Footnote 373:</b><a href="#footnotetag373"> (return) </a><p>Tertull., adv. Marc. I. 2; II. 5.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote374" name="footnote374"></a><b>Footnote 374:</b><a href="#footnotetag374"> (return) </a><p> See the passage adduced, p. 266, note 2, and Tertull, I. 19: "Immo +inquiunt Marcionitæ, deus noster, etsi non ab initio, etsi non per conditionem, +sed per semetipsum revelatus est in Christi Jesu." The very fact +that different theological tendencies (schools) appeared within Marcionite +Christianity and were mutually tolerant, proves that the Marcionite Church +itself was not based on a formulated system of faith. Apelles expressly +conceded different forms of doctrine in Christendom, on the basis of faith +in the Crucified and a common holy ideal of life (see p. 267).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote375" name="footnote375"></a><b>Footnote 375:</b><a href="#footnotetag375"> (return) </a><p> Tertull., I, 13. "Narem contrahentes impudentissimi Marcionitæ convertuntur +ad destructionem operum creatoris. Nimirum, inquiunt, grande +opus et dignum deo mundus?" The Marcionites (Iren., IV. 34. 1) put the +question to their ecclesiastical opponents, "Quid novi attulit dominus +veniens?" and therewith caused them no small embarrassment.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote376" name="footnote376"></a><b>Footnote 376:</b><a href="#footnotetag376"> (return) </a><p> On these see Tertull. I. 19; II. 28. 29; IV. 1, 4, 6; Epiph. Hippol., +Philos. VII. 30; the book was used by other Gnostics also (it is very +probable that 1 Tim. VI. 20, an addition to the Epistle—refers to Marcion's +Antitheses). Apelles, Marcion's disciple, composed a similar work under +the title of "Syllogismi." Marcion's Antitheses, which may still in part be +reconstructed from Tertullian, Epiphanius, Adamantius, Ephraem, etc., +possessed canonical authority in the Marcionite church, and therefore took +the place of the Old Testament. That is quite clear from Tertull., I. 19 +(cf. IV. 1): Separatio legis et Evangelii proprium et principale opus est +Marcionis, nee poterunt negare discipuli ejus, quod in summo (suo) instrumento +habent, quo denique initiantur et indurantur in hanc hæresim.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote377" name="footnote377"></a><b>Footnote 377:</b><a href="#footnotetag377"> (return) </a><p> Tertullian has frequently pointed to the contradictions in the Marcionite +conception of the god of creation. These contradictions, however, vanish +as soon as we regard Marcion's god from the point of view that he is +like his revelation in the Old Testament.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote378" name="footnote378"></a><b>Footnote 378:</b><a href="#footnotetag378"> (return) </a><p> The creator of the world is indeed to Marcion "malignus", but not +"malus."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote379" name="footnote379"></a><b>Footnote 379:</b><a href="#footnotetag379"> (return) </a><p> Marcion touched on it when he taught that the "visibilia" belonged +to the god of creation, but the "invisibilia" to the good God (I. 16). +He adopted the consequences, inasmuch as he taught docetically about +Christ, and only assumed a deliverance of the human soul.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote380" name="footnote380"></a><b>Footnote 380:</b><a href="#footnotetag380"> (return) </a><p>See especially the third book of Tertull., adv. Marcion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote381" name="footnote381"></a><b>Footnote 381:</b><a href="#footnotetag381"> (return) </a><p> "Solius bonitatis", "deus melior", were Marcion's standing expressions +for him.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote382" name="footnote382"></a><b>Footnote 382:</b><a href="#footnotetag382"> (return) </a><p> "Deus incognitus" was likewise a standing expression. They maintained +against all attacks the religious position that, from the nature of the case, +believers only can know God, and that this is quite sufficient (Tertull., 1. 11).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote383" name="footnote383"></a><b>Footnote 383:</b><a href="#footnotetag383"> (return) </a><p> Marcion firmly emphasised this and appealed to passages in Paul; see +Tertull., I. 11, 19, 23: "scio dicturos, atquin hanc esse principalem et perfectam +bonitatem, cum sine ullo debito familiaritatis in extraneos voluntaria et +libera effunditur, secundum quam inimicos quoque nostros et hoc nomine jam +extraneos deligere jubeamur." The Church Fathers therefore declared that +Marcion's good God was a thief and a robber. See also Celsus, in Orig. VI. 53.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote384" name="footnote384"></a><b>Footnote 384:</b><a href="#footnotetag384"> (return) </a><p>See Esnik's account, which, however, is to be used cautiously.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote385" name="footnote385"></a><b>Footnote 385:</b><a href="#footnotetag385"> (return) </a><p> Marcion has strongly emphasised the respective passages in Luke's +Gospel: see his Antitheses, and his comments on the Gospel, as presented +by Tertullian (l. IV).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote386" name="footnote386"></a><b>Footnote 386:</b><a href="#footnotetag386"> (return) </a><p> That can be plainly read in Esnik, and must have been thought by +Marcion himself, as he followed Paul (see Tertull., l. V. and I. 11). Apelles +also emphasised the death upon the cross. Marcion's conception of the purchase +can indeed no longer be ascertained in its details. But see Adamant., +de recta in deum fide, sect. I. It is one of his theoretic contradictions that the +good God who is exalted above righteousness should yet purchase men.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote387" name="footnote387"></a><b>Footnote 387:</b><a href="#footnotetag387"> (return) </a><p>Tertull. I. 6: "Marcion non negat creatorem deum esse."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote388" name="footnote388"></a><b>Footnote 388:</b><a href="#footnotetag388"> (return) </a><p> Here Tertull., I. 27, 28, is of special importance; see also II. 28: IV. +29 (on Luke XII. 41-46): IV. 30. Marcion's idea was this. The good +God does not judge or punish; but He judges in so far as he keeps evil +at a distance from Him: it remains foreign to Him. "Marcionitæ interrogati +quid fiet peccatori cuique die illo? respondent abici illum quasi ab +oculis." "Tranquilitas est et mansuetudinis segregare solummodo et partem +ejus cum infidelibus ponere." But what is the end of him who is thus +rejected? "Ab igne, inquiunt, creatoris deprehendetur." We might think +with Tertullian that the creator of the world would receive sinners with +joy: but this is the god of the law who punishes sinners. The issue is +twofold: the heaven of the good God, and the hell of the creator of the +world. Either Marcion assumed with Paul that no one can keep the law, +or he was silent about the end of the "righteous" because he had no +interest in it. At any rate, the teaching of Marcion closes with an outlook +in which the creator of the world can no longer be regarded as an independent +god. Marcion's disciples (see Esnik) here developed a consistent +theory: the creator of the world violated his own law by killing the +righteous Christ, and was therefore deprived of all his power by Christ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote389" name="footnote389"></a><b>Footnote 389:</b><a href="#footnotetag389"> (return) </a><p> Schools soon arose in the Marcionite church, just as they did later on in +the main body of Christendom (see Rhodon in Euseb, H. E. V. 13. 2-4). The +different doctrines of principles which were here developed (two, three, four +principles; the Marcionite Marcus's doctrine of two principles in which the +creator of the world is an evil being, diverges furthest from the Master), +explain the different accounts of the Church Fathers about Marcion's +teaching. The only one of the disciples who really seceded from the +Master, was Apelles (Tertull., de præscr. 30). His teaching is therefore the +more important, as it shews that it was possible to retain the fundamental +ideas of Marcion without embracing dualism. The attitude of Apelles to +the Old Testament is that of Marcion, in so far as he rejects the book. +But perhaps he somewhat modified the strictness of the Master. On the +other hand, he certainly designated much in it as untrue and fabulous. +It is remarkable that we meet with a highly honoured prophetess in the +environment of Apelles: in Marcion's church we hear nothing of such, +nay, it is extremely important as regards Marcion, that he has never +appealed to the Spirit and to prophets. The "sanctiores feminæ" Tertull. +V. 8, are not of this nature, nor can we appeal even to V. 15. Moreover, +it is hardly likely that Jerome ad Eph. III. 5, refers to Marcionites. In +this complete disregard of early Christian prophecy, and in his exclusive +reliance on literary documents, we see in Marcion a process of despiritualising, +that is, a form of secularisation peculiar to himself. Marcion no longer +possessed the early Christian enthusiasm as, for example, Hermas did.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote390" name="footnote390"></a><b>Footnote 390:</b><a href="#footnotetag390"> (return) </a><p> Marcion was fond of calling Christ "Spiritus salutaris." From the +treatise of Tertullian we can prove both that Marcion distinguished Christ +from God, and that he made no distinction (see, for example, I. 11, 14; +II. 27; III. 8, 9, 11; IV. 7). Here again Marcion did not think theologically. +What he regarded as specially important was that God has revealed +himself in Christ, "per semetipsum." Later Marcionites expressly taught +Patripassianism, and have on that account been often grouped with the +Sabellians. But other Christologies also arose in Marcion's church, which +is again a proof that it was not dependent on scholastic teaching, and +therefore could take part in the later development of doctrines.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote391" name="footnote391"></a><b>Footnote 391:</b><a href="#footnotetag391"> (return) </a><p>See the beginning of the Marcionite Gospel.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote392" name="footnote392"></a><b>Footnote 392:</b><a href="#footnotetag392"> (return) </a><p> Tertullian informs us sufficiently about this. The body of Christ was +regarded by Marcion merely as an "umbra", a "phantasma." His disciples +adhered to this, but Apelles first constructed a "doctrine" of the +body of Christ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote393" name="footnote393"></a><b>Footnote 393:</b><a href="#footnotetag393"> (return) </a><p> The strict asceticism of Marcion and the Marcionites is reluctantly +acknowledged by the Church Fathers; see Tertull., de præscr. 30: "Sanctissimus +magister"; I. 28, "carni imponit sanctitem." The strict prohibition +of marriage: I. 29: IV. 11, 17, 29, 34, 38: V. 7, 8, 15. 18; prohibition +of food: I. 14; cynical life: Hippol., Philos. VII. 29; numerous +martyrs: Euseb. H. E. V. 16, 21. and frequently elsewhere. Marcion +named his adherents (Tertull. IV. 9 36) "συνταλαιπωροι και συμμισουμενοι." It +is questionable whether Marcion himself allowed the repetition of baptism; +it arose in his church. But this repetition is a proof that the prevailing +conception of baptism was not sufficient for a vigorous religious temper.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote394" name="footnote394"></a><b>Footnote 394:</b><a href="#footnotetag394"> (return) </a><p> Tertull. I. 20. "Aiunt, Marcionem non tam innovasse regulam separatione +legis et evangelii quam retro adulteratam recurasse." See the +account of Epiphanius, taken from Hippolytus, about the appearance of +Marcion in Rome (h. 42. 1, 2).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote395" name="footnote395"></a><b>Footnote 395:</b><a href="#footnotetag395"> (return) </a><p> Here again we must remember that Marcion appealed neither to a +secret tradition, nor to the "Spirit," in order to appreciate the epoch-making +nature of his undertaking.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote396" name="footnote396"></a><b>Footnote 396:</b><a href="#footnotetag396"> (return) </a><p> In his estimate of the twelve Apostles Marcion took as his standpoint +Gal. II. See Tertull. I. 20: IV. 3 (generally IV. 1-6), V. 3; de +præscr. 22. 23. He endeavoured to prove from this chapter that from a +misunderstanding of the words of Christ, the twelve Apostles had proclaimed +a different Gospel than that of Paul; they had wrongly taken +the Father of Jesus Christ for the god of creation. It is not quite clear +how Marcion conceived the inward condition of the Apostles during the +lifetime of Jesus (See Tertull. III. 22: IV. 3. 39). He assumed that they +were persecuted by the Jews as the preachers of a new God. It is +probable, therefore, that he thought of a gradual obscuring of the preaching +of Jesus in the case of the primitive Apostles. They fell back into +Judaism; see Iren. III. 2. 2. "Apostolos admiscuisse ea quæ sunt legalia salvatoris +verbis"; III. 12. 12: "Apostoli quæ sunt Judæorum sentientes scripserunt" +etc.; Tertull. V. 3: "Apostolos vultis Judaismi magis adfines subintelligi." +The expositions of Marcion in Tertull. IV. 9, 11, 13, 21, 24, 39: V. 13. shew +that he regarded the primitive Apostles as out and out real Apostles of Christ.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote397" name="footnote397"></a><b>Footnote 397:</b><a href="#footnotetag397"> (return) </a><p> The call of Paul was viewed by Marcion as a manifestation of Christ, +of equal value with His first appearance and ministry; see the account of +Esnik. "Then for the second time Jesus came down to the lord of the +creatures in the form of his Godhead, and entered into judgment with him +on account of his death.... And Jesus said to him: 'Judgment is between +me and thee, let no one be judge but thine own laws.... hast thou not +written in this thy law, that he who killeth shall die?' And he answered, +'I have so written' ... Jesus said to him, 'Deliver thyself therefore into +my hands' ... The creator of the world said, 'Because I have slain thee +I give thee a compensation, all those who shall believe on thee, that thou +mayest do with them what thou pleasest.' Then Jesus left him and carried +away Paul, and shewed him the price, and sent him to preach that +we are bought with this price, and that all who believe in Jesus are sold +by this just god to the good one." This is a most instructive account; +for it shews that in the Marcionite schools the Pauline doctrine of reconciliation +was transformed into a drama, and placed between the death of +Christ and the call of Paul, and that the Pauline Gospel was based, not +directly on the death of Christ upon the cross, but on a theory of it converted +into history. On Paul as the one apostle of the truth; see Tertull. I. 20: III. +5, 14: IV. 2 sq.: IV. 34: V. 1. As to a Marcionite theory that the promise +to send the Spirit was fulfilled in the mission of Paul, an indication of the +want of enthusiasm among the Marcionites, see the following page, note 2.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote398" name="footnote398"></a><b>Footnote 398:</b><a href="#footnotetag398"> (return) </a><p> Marcion must have spoken <i>ex professo</i> in his Antitheses about the +Judaistic corruptions of Paul's Epistles and the Gospel. He must also +have known Evangelic writings bearing the names of the original Apostles, +and have expressed himself about them (Tertull. IV. 1-6).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote399" name="footnote399"></a><b>Footnote 399:</b><a href="#footnotetag399"> (return) </a><p> Marcion's self-consciousness of being a reformer, and the recognition +of this in his church is still not understood, although his undertaking +itself and the facts speak loud enough. (1) The great Marcionite church +called itself after Marcion (Adamant., de recta in deum fide. I. 809; Epiph. +h. 42, p. 668, ed. Oehler: Μαρκιων σου το ονομα επικεκληνται 'οι υπο σου +ηπατημενοι, +'ως σεαυτον κηρυξαντος και ουχι Χριστον. We possess a Marcionite inscription +which begins: συναγωγη Μαρκιωνιστων). As the Marcionites did not form a +school, but a church, it is of the greatest value for shewing the estimate +of the master in this church, that its members called themselves by his +name. (2) The Antitheses of Marcion had a place in the Marcionite canon +(see above, p. 270). This canon therefore embraced a book of Christ, +Epistles of Paul, and a book of Marcion, and for that reason the Antitheses +were always circulated with the canon of Marcion. (3) Origen (in +Luc. hom. 25. T. III. p. 962) reports as follows: "Denique in tantam +quidam dilectionis audaciam proruperunt, ut nova quædam et inaudita +super Paulo monstra confingerent. Alli enim aiunt, hoc quod scriptum +est, sedere a dextris salvatoris et sinistris, de Paulo et de Marcione dici, +quod Paulus sedet a dextris, Marcion sedet a sinistris. Porro alii legentes: +Mittam vobis advocatum Spiritum veritatis, nolunt intelligere tertiam +personam a patre et filio, sed Apostolum Paulum." The estimate of Marcion +which appears here is exceedingly instructive. (4) An Arabian writer, +who, it is true, belongs to a later period, reports that Marcionites called +their founder "Apostolorum principem." (5) Justin, the first opponent of +Marcion, classed him with Simon Magus and Menander, that is, with +demonic founders of religion. These testimonies may suffice.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote400" name="footnote400"></a><b>Footnote 400:</b><a href="#footnotetag400"> (return) </a><p> On Marcion's Gospel see the Introductions to the New Testament +and Zahn's Kanonsgeschichte, Bd. I., p. 585 ff. and II., p. 409. Marcion +attached no name to his Gospel, which, according to his own testimony, +he produced from the third one of our Canon (Tertull, adv. Marc. IV. +2, 3, 4). He called it simply ευαγγελιον (κυριου), but held that it +was the +Gospel which Paul had in his mind when he spoke of his Gospel. The +later Marcionites ascribed the authorship of the Gospel partly to Paul, +partly to Christ himself, and made further changes in it. That Marcion +chose the Gospel called after Luke should be regarded as a makeshift; +for this Gospel, which is undoubtedly the most Hellenistic of the four +Canonical Gospels, and therefore comes nearest to the Catholic conception +of Christianity, accommodated itself in its traditional form but little +better than the other three to Marcionite Christianity. Whether Marcion +took it for a basis because in his time it had already been connected +with Paul (or really had a connection with Paul), or whether the numerous +narratives about Jesus as the Saviour of sinners, led him to recognise +in this Gospel alone a genuine kernel, we do not know.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote401" name="footnote401"></a><b>Footnote 401:</b><a href="#footnotetag401"> (return) </a><p> The associations of the Encratites and the community founded by Apelles +stood between the main body of Christendom and the Marcionite church. +The description of Celsus (especially V. 61-64 in Orig.) shews the motley +appearance which Christendom presented soon after the middle of the second +century. He there mentions the Marcionites, and a little before (V. 59), the +"great Church." It is very important that Celsus makes the main distinction +consist in this, that some regarded their God as identical with the God of the +Jews, whilst others again declared that "theirs was a different Deity who is +hostile to that of the Jews, and that it was he who had sent the Son." (V. 61).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote402" name="footnote402"></a><b>Footnote 402:</b><a href="#footnotetag402"> (return) </a><p> One might be tempted to comprise the character of Marcion's religion +in the words, "The God who dwells in my breast can profoundly excite my +inmost being. He who is throned above all my powers can move nothing outwardly." +But Marcion had the firm assurance that God has done something +much greater than move the world: he has redeemed men from the world, +and given them the assurance of this redemption, in the midst of all oppression +and enmity which do not cease.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page287" id="page287"></a>[pg 287]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="CHAP_I_VI" id="CHAP_I_VI"></a>CHAPTER VI.</h2> + +<h3>APPENDIX: THE CHRISTIANITY OF THE JEWISH +CHRISTIANS</h3> + + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_I" id="SEC_I_VI_I"></a>1. Original Christianity was in appearance Christian Judaism, +the creation of a universal religion on Old Testament soil. +It retained therefore, so far as it was not hellenised, which +never altogether took place, its original Jewish features. The +God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was regarded as the Father +of Jesus Christ, the Old Testament was the authoritative source +of revelation, and the hopes of the future were based on the +Jewish ones. The heritage which Christianity took over from +Judaism, shews itself on Gentile Christian soil, in fainter or +distincter form, in proportion as the philosophic mode of thought +already prevails, or recedes into the background.<a id="footnotetag403" name="footnotetag403"></a><a href="#footnote403"><sup>403</sup></a> To describe +the appearance of the Jewish, Old Testament, heritage in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page288" id="page288"></a>[pg 288]</span> +Christian faith, so far as it is a religious one, by the name +Jewish Christianity, beginning at a certain point quite arbitrarily +chosen, and changeable at will, must therefore necessarily +lead to error, and it has done so to a very great extent. +For this designation makes it appear as though the Jewish +element in the Christian religion were something accidental, +while it is rather the case that all Christianity, in so far as +something alien is not foisted into it, appears as the religion +of Israel perfected and spiritualised. We are therefore not +justified in speaking of Jewish Christianity, where a Christian +community, even one of Gentile birth, calls itself the true +Israel, the people of the twelve tribes, the posterity of Abraham; +for this transfer is based on the original claim of Christianity +and can only be forbidden by a view that is alien to +it. Just as little may we designate Jewish Christian the mighty +and realistic hopes of the future which were gradually repressed +in the second and third centuries. They may be described +as Jewish, or as Christian; but the designation Jewish Christian +must be rejected; for it gives a wrong impression as to the +historic right of these hopes in Christianity. The eschatological +ideas of Papias were not Jewish Christian, but Christian; +while, on the other hand, the eschatological speculations of +Origen were not Gentile Christian, but essentially Greek. Those +Christians who saw in Jesus the man chosen by God and +endowed with the Spirit, thought about the Redeemer not in +a Jewish Christian, but in a Christian manner. Those of Asia +Minor who held strictly to the 14th of Nisan as the term of +the Easter festival, were not influenced by Jewish Christian, +but by Christian or Old Testament, considerations. The author +of the "Teaching of the Apostles," who has transferred the +rights of the Old Testament priests with respect to the first +fruits, to the Christian prophets, shews himself by such transference +not as a Jewish Christian, but as a Christian. There +is no boundary here; for Christianity took possession of the +whole of Judaism as religion, and it is therefore a most arbitrary +view of history which looks upon the Christian appropriation +of the Old Testament religion, after any point, as no +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page289" id="page289"></a>[pg 289]</span> +longer Christian, but only Jewish Christian. Wherever the +universalism of Christianity is not violated in favour of the +Jewish nation, we have to recognise every appropriation of +the Old Testament as Christian. Hence this proceeding +could be spontaneously undertaken in Christianity, as was in +fact done.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_II" id="SEC_I_VI_II"></a>2. But the Jewish religion is a national religion, and Christianity +burst the bonds of nationality, though not for all who +recognised Jesus as Messiah. This gives the point at which +the introduction of the term "Jewish Christianity" is appropriate.<a id="footnotetag404" name="footnotetag404"></a><a href="#footnote404"><sup>404</sup></a> +It should be applied exclusively to those Christians who really +maintained in their whole extent, or in some measure, even +if it were to a minimum degree, the national and political +forms of Judaism and the observance of the Mosaic law in +its literal sense, as essential to Christianity, at least to the +Christianity of born Jews, or who, though rejecting these forms, +nevertheless assumed a prerogative of the Jewish people even +in Christianity (Clem., Homil. XI. 26: εαν 'ο αλλοφυλος τον νομον +πραξηι, Ιουδαιος εστιν, μη πραξας δε 'Ελλην; "If the foreigner +observe the law he is a Jew, but if not he is a Greek.")<a id="footnotetag405" name="footnotetag405"></a><a href="#footnote405"><sup>405</sup></a> +To this Jewish Christianity is opposed, not Gentile Christianity, +but the Christian religion, in so far as it is conceived +as universalistic and anti-national in the strict sense of the +term (Presupp. § 3), that is, the main body of Christendom in +so far as it has freed itself from Judaism as a nation.<a id="footnotetag406" name="footnotetag406"></a><a href="#footnote406"><sup>406</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_III" id="SEC_I_VI_III"></a>It is not strange that this Jewish Christianity was subject +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page290" id="page290"></a>[pg 290]</span> +to all the conditions which arose from the internal and external +position of the Judaism of the time; that is, different tendencies +were necessarily developed in it, according to the measure +of the tendencies (or the disintegrations) which asserted themselves +in the Judaism of that time. It lies also in the nature +of the case that, with one exception, that of Pharisaic Jewish +Christianity, all other tendencies were accurately parallelled in +the systems which appeared in the great, that is, anti-Jewish +Christendom. They were distinguished from these, simply by +a social and political, that is, a national element. Moreover, +they were exposed to the same influences from without as the +synagogue, and as the larger Christendom, till the isolation +to which Judaism as a nation, after severe reverses condemned +itself, became fatal to them also. Consequently, there were +besides Pharisaic Jewish Christians, ascetics of all kinds who +were joined by all those over whom Oriental religious wisdom +and Greek philosophy had won a commanding influence (see +above, p. 242 f.)</p> + +<p>In the first century these Jewish Christians formed the +majority in Palestine, and perhaps also in some neighbouring +provinces. But they were also found here and there in the West.</p> + +<p>Now the great question is, whether this Jewish Christianity +as a whole, or in certain of its tendencies, was a factor in the +development of Christianity to Catholicism. This question is +to be answered in the negative, and quite as much with regard +to the history of dogma as with regard to the political history +of the Church. From the stand-point of the universal history +of Christianity, these Jewish Christian communities appear as +rudimentary structures which now and again, as objects of +curiosity, engaged the attention of the main body of Christendom +in the East, but could not exert any important influence +on it, just because they contained a national element.</p> + +<p>The Jewish Christians took no considerable part in the Gnostic +controversy, the epoch-making conflict which was raised within +the pale of the larger Christendom about the decisive question, +whether, and to what extent, the Old Testament should remain +a basis of Christianity, although they themselves were no less +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page291" id="page291"></a>[pg 291]</span> +occupied with the question.<a id="footnotetag407" name="footnotetag407"></a><a href="#footnote407"><sup>407</sup></a> The issue of this conflict in +favour of that party which recognised the Old Testament in +its full extent as a revelation of the Christian God, and asserted +the closest connection between Christianity and the Old Testament +religion, was so little the result of any influence of Jewish +Christianity, that the existence of the latter would only have +rendered that victory more difficult, unless it had already +fallen into the background, as a phenomenon of no importance.<a id="footnotetag408" name="footnotetag408"></a><a href="#footnote408"><sup>408</sup></a> +How completely insignificant it was is shewn not +only by the limited polemics of the Church Fathers, but perhaps +still more by their silence, and the new import which +the reproach of Judaising obtained in Christendom after the +middle of the second century. In proportion as the Old Testament, +in opposition to Gnosticism, became a more conscious +and accredited possession in the Church, and at the same +time, in consequence of the naturalising of Christianity in the +world, the need of regulations, fixed rules, statutory enactments +etc., appeared as indispensable, it must have been natural to +use the Old Testament as a holy code of such enactments. +This procedure was no falling away from the original anti-Judaic +attitude, provided nothing national was taken from the +book, and some kind of spiritual interpretation given to what +had been borrowed. The "apostasy" rather lay simply in +the changed needs. But one now sees how those parties in +the Church, to which for any reason this progressive legislation +was distasteful, raised the reproach of "Judaising,"<a id="footnotetag409" name="footnotetag409"></a><a href="#footnote409"><sup>409</sup></a> and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page292" id="page292"></a>[pg 292]</span> +further, how conversely the same reproach was hurled at +those Christians who resisted the advancing hellenising of +Christianity, with regard, for example, to the doctrine of God, +eschatology, Christology, etc.<a id="footnotetag410" name="footnotetag410"></a><a href="#footnote410"><sup>410</sup></a> But while this reproach is +raised, there is nowhere shewn any connection between those +described as Judaising Christians and the Ebionites. That they +were identified off-hand is only a proof that "Ebionitism" +was no longer known. That "Judaising" within Catholicism +which appears, on the one hand, in the setting up of a Catholic +ceremonial law (worship, constitution, etc.), and on the other, +in a tenacious clinging to less hellenised forms of faith and +hopes of faith, has nothing in common with Jewish Christianity, +which desired somehow to confine Christianity to the +Jewish nation.<a id="footnotetag411" name="footnotetag411"></a><a href="#footnote411"><sup>411</sup></a> Speculations that take no account of history +may make out that Catholicism became more and more Jewish +Christian. But historical observation, which reckons only with +concrete quantities, can discover in Catholicism, besides Christianity, +no element which it would have to describe as Jewish +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page293" id="page293"></a>[pg 293]</span> +Christian. It observes only a progressive hellenising, and in +consequence of this, a progressive spiritual legislation which +utilizes the Old Testament, a process which went on for centuries +according to the same methods which had been employed +in the larger Christendom from the beginning.<a id="footnotetag412" name="footnotetag412"></a><a href="#footnote412"><sup>412</sup></a> Baur's brilliant +attempt to explain Catholicism as a product of the mutual +conflict and neutralising of Jewish and Gentile Christianity, +(the latter according to Baur being equivalent to Paulinism) +reckons with two factors, of which, the one had no significance +at all, and the other only an indirect effect, as regards +the formation of the Catholic Church. The influence of Paul +in this direction is exhausted in working out the universalism +of the Christian religion, for a Greater than he had laid the +foundation for this movement, and Paul did not realise it by +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page294" id="page294"></a>[pg 294]</span> +himself alone. Placed on this height Catholicism was certainly +developed by means of conflicts and compromises, not, however, +by conflicts with Ebionitism, which was to all intents +and purposes discarded as early as the first century, but as +the result of the conflict of Christianity with the united +powers of the world in which it existed, on behalf of its own +peculiar nature as the universal religion based on the Old +Testament. Here were fought triumphant battles, but here +also compromises were made which characterise the essence +of Catholicism as Church and as doctrine.<a id="footnotetag413" name="footnotetag413"></a><a href="#footnote413"><sup>413</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_IV" id="SEC_I_VI_IV"></a>A history of Jewish Christianity and its doctrines does not +therefore, strictly speaking, belong to the history of dogma, +especially as the original distinction between Jewish Christianity +and the main body of the Church lay, as regards its +principle, not in doctrine, but in policy. But seeing that the +opinions of the teachers in this Church regarding Jewish +Christianity, throw light upon their own stand-point, also that +up till about the middle of the second century Jewish Christians +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page295" id="page295"></a>[pg 295]</span> +were still numerous and undoubtedly formed the great majority +of believers in Palestine,<a id="footnotetag414" name="footnotetag414"></a><a href="#footnote414"><sup>414</sup></a> and finally, that attempts—unsuccessful +ones indeed—on the part of Jewish Christianity +to bring Gentile Christians under its sway, did not cease till +about the middle of the third century, a short sketch may +be appropriate here.<a id="footnotetag415" name="footnotetag415"></a><a href="#footnote415"><sup>415</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page296" id="page296"></a>[pg 296]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_V" id="SEC_I_VI_V"></a>Justin vouches for the existence of Jewish Christians, and distinguishes +between those who would force the law even on Gentile-Christians, +and would have no fellowship with such as did not +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page297" id="page297"></a>[pg 297]</span> +observe it, and those who considered that the law was binding +only on people of Jewish birth, and did not shrink from fellowship +with Gentile Christians who were living without the +law. How the latter could observe the law and yet enter +into intercourse with those who were not Jews, is involved in +obscurity, but these he recognises as partakers of the Christian +salvation and therefore as Christian brethren, though he declares +that there are Christians who do not possess this large heartedness. +He also speaks of Gentile Christians who allowed +themselves to be persuaded by Jewish Christians into the observance +of the Mosaic law, and confesses that he is not quite +sure of the salvation of these. This is all we learn from +Justin,<a id="footnotetag416" name="footnotetag416"></a><a href="#footnote416"><sup>416</sup></a> but it is instructive enough. In the first place, we +can see that the question is no longer a burning one: "Justin +here represents only the interests of a Gentile Christianity +whose stability has been secured." This has all the more meaning +that in the Dialogue Justin has not in view an individual +Christian community, or the communities of a province, but +speaks as one who surveys the whole situation of Christendom.<a id="footnotetag417" name="footnotetag417"></a><a href="#footnote417"><sup>417</sup></a> +The very fact that Justin has devoted to the whole question +only one chapter of a work containing 142, and the magnanimous +way in which he speaks, shew that the phenomena +in question have no longer any importance for the main body +of Christendom. Secondly, it is worthy of notice that Justin +distinguishes two tendencies in Jewish Christianity. We observe +these two tendencies in the Apostolic age (Presupp. § 3); +they had therefore maintained themselves to his time. Finally, +we must not overlook the circumstance that he adduces +only the εννομος πολιτεια, "legal polity," as characteristic of +this Jewish Christianity. He speaks only incidentally of a +difference in doctrine, nay, he manifestly presupposes that the +διδαγματα Χριστου, "teachings of Christ," are essentially found +among them just as among the Gentile Christians; for he +regards the more liberal among them as friends and brethren.<a id="footnotetag418" name="footnotetag418"></a><a href="#footnote418"><sup>418</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page298" id="page298"></a>[pg 298]</span> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_VI" id="SEC_I_VI_VI"></a>The fact that, even then, there were Jewish Christians here +and there who sought to spread the εννομος πολιτεια among +Gentile Christians, has been attested by Justin and also by +other contemporary writers.<a id="footnotetag419" name="footnotetag419"></a><a href="#footnote419"><sup>419</sup></a> But there is no evidence of +this propaganda having acquired any great importance. Celsus +also knows Christians who desire to live as Jews according +to the Mosaic law (V. 61), but he mentions them only +once, and otherwise takes no notice of them in his delineation +of, and attack on, Christianity. We may perhaps infer +that he knew of them only from hearsay, for he simply enumerates +them along with the numerous Gnostic sects. Had +this keen observer really known them he would hardly have +passed them over, even though he had met with only a small +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page299" id="page299"></a>[pg 299]</span> +number of them.<a id="footnotetag420" name="footnotetag420"></a><a href="#footnote420"><sup>420</sup></a> Irenæus placed the Ebionites among the +heretical schools,<a id="footnotetag421" name="footnotetag421"></a><a href="#footnote421"><sup>421</sup></a> but we can see from his work that in his +day they must have been all but forgotten in the West.<a id="footnotetag422" name="footnotetag422"></a><a href="#footnote422"><sup>422</sup></a> +This was not yet the case in the East. Origen knows of them. +He knows also of some who recognise the birth from the +Virgin. He is sufficiently intelligent and acquainted with +history to judge that the Ebionites are no school, but as believing +Jews are the descendants of the earliest Christians, in +fact he seems to suppose that all converted Jews have at all +times observed the law of their fathers. But he is far from +judging of them favourably. He regards them as little better +than the Jews (Ιουδαιοι και 'οι ολιγω διαφεροντες αυτων Εβιωναιοι, +"Jews and Ebionites who differ little from them"). Their +rejection of Paul destroys the value of their recognition +of Jesus as Messiah. They appear only to have assumed +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page300" id="page300"></a>[pg 300]</span> +Christ's name, and their literal exposition of the Scripture +is meagre and full of error. It is possible that such Jewish +Christians may have existed in Alexandria, but it is not +certain. Origen knows nothing of an inner development +in this Jewish Christianity.<a id="footnotetag423" name="footnotetag423"></a><a href="#footnote423"><sup>423</sup></a> Even in Palestine, Origen +seems to have occupied himself personally with these Jewish +Christians, just as little as Eusebius.<a id="footnotetag424" name="footnotetag424"></a><a href="#footnote424"><sup>424</sup></a> They lived apart by +themselves and were not aggressive. Jerome is the last who +gives us a clear and certain account of them.<a id="footnotetag425" name="footnotetag425"></a><a href="#footnote425"><sup>425</sup></a> He, who associated +with them, assures us that their attitude was the +same as in the second century, only they seem to have made +progress in the recognition of the birth from the Virgin and +in their more friendly position towards the Church.<a id="footnotetag426" name="footnotetag426"></a><a href="#footnote426"><sup>426</sup></a> Jerome +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page301" id="page301"></a>[pg 301]</span> +at one time calls them Ebionites and at another Nazarenes, +thereby proving that these names were used synonymously.<a id="footnotetag427" name="footnotetag427"></a><a href="#footnote427"><sup>427</sup></a> +There is not the least ground for distinguishing two clearly +marked groups of Jewish Christians, or even for reckoning +the distinction of Origen and the Church Fathers to the account +of Jewish Christians themselves, so as to describe as +Nazarenes those who recognised the birth from the Virgin, +and who had no wish to compel the Gentile Christians to +observe the law, and the others as Ebionites. Apart from +syncretistic or Gnostic Jewish Christianity, there is but one +group of Jewish Christians holding various shades of opinion, +and these from the beginning called themselves Nazarenes +as well as Ebionites. From the beginning, likewise, one +portion of them was influenced by the existence of a great +Gentile Church which did not observe the law. They acknowledged +the work of Paul and experienced in a slight degree +influences emanating from the great Church.<a id="footnotetag428" name="footnotetag428"></a><a href="#footnote428"><sup>428</sup></a> But the gulf +which separated them from that Church did not thereby become +narrower. That gulf was caused by the social and +political separation of these Jewish Christians, whatever mental +attitude, hostile or friendly, they might take up to the +great Church. This Church stalked over hem with iron feet, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page302" id="page302"></a>[pg 302]</span> +as over a structure which in her opinion was full of contradictions +throughout ("Semi-christiani"), and was disconcerted +neither by the gospel of these Jewish Christians nor by anything +else about them.<a id="footnotetag429" name="footnotetag429"></a><a href="#footnote429"><sup>429</sup></a> But as the Synagogue also vigorously +condemned them, their position up to their extinction was a +most tragic one. These Jewish Christians, more than any other +Christian party, bore the reproach of Christ.</p> + +<p>The Gospel, at the time when it was proclaimed among +the Jews, was not only law, but theology, and indeed syncretistic +theology. On the other hand, the temple service +and the sacrificial system had begun to lose their hold in +certain influential circles.<a id="footnotetag430" name="footnotetag430"></a><a href="#footnote430"><sup>430</sup></a> We have pointed out above +(Presupp. §§. 1. 2. 5) how great were the diversities of Jewish sects, +and that there was in the Diaspora, as well as in Palestine +itself, a Judaism which, on the one hand, followed ascetic +impulses, and on the other, advanced to a criticism of the +religious tradition without giving up the national claims. It +may even be said that in theology the boundaries between +the orthodox Judaism of the Pharisees and a syncretistic +Judaism were of an elastic kind. Although religion, in those +circles, seemed to be fixed in its legal aspect, yet on its theological +side it was ready to admit very diverse speculations, +in which angelic powers especially played a great rôle.<a id="footnotetag431" name="footnotetag431"></a><a href="#footnote431"><sup>431</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page303" id="page303"></a>[pg 303]</span> +That introduced into Jewish monotheism an element of differentiation, +the results of which were far-reaching. The field +was prepared for the formation of syncretistic sects. They +present themselves to us on the soil of the earliest Christianity, +in the speculations of those Jewish Christian teachers +who are opposed in the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the +Gnosis of Cerinthus (see above, p. 246). Here cosmological +ideas and myths were turned to profit. The idea of God +was sublimated by both. In consequence of this, the Old +Testament records were subjected to criticism, because they +could not in all respects be reconciled with the universal religion +which hovered before men's minds. This criticism was +opposed to the Pauline in so far as it maintained, with the +common Jewish Christians, and Christendom as a whole, that +the genuine Old Testament religion was essentially identical +with the Christian. But while those common Jewish Christians +drew from this the inference that the whole of the Old +Testament must be adhered to in its traditional sense and +in all its ordinances, and while the larger Christendom secured +for itself the whole of the Old Testament by deviating +from the ordinary interpretation, those syncretistic Jewish +Christians separated from the Old Testament, as interpolations, +whatever did not agree with their purer moral conceptions +and borrowed speculations. Thus, in particular, they got +rid of the sacrificial ritual, and all that was connected with +it, by putting ablutions in their place. First the profanation, +and afterwards, the abolition of the temple worship, after +the destruction of Jerusalem, may have given another new +and welcome impulse to this by coming to be regarded +as its Divine confirmation (Presupp. § 2). Christianity now +appeared as purified Mosaism. In these Jewish Christian undertakings +we have undoubtedly before us a series of peculiar +attempts to elevate the Old Testament religion into the universal +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page304" id="page304"></a>[pg 304]</span> +one, under the impression of the person of Jesus; attempts, +however, in which the Jewish religion, and not the +Jewish people, was to bear the costs by curtailment of its +distinctive features. The great inner affinity of these attempts +with the Gentile Christian Gnostics has already been set forth. +The firm partition wall between them, however, lies in the +claim of these Jewish Christians to set forth the pure Old +Testament religion, as well as in the national Jewish colouring +which the constructed universal religion was always to preserve. +This national colouring is shewn in the insistence upon +a definite measure of Jewish national ceremonies as necessary +to salvation, and in the opposition to the Apostle Paul, which +united the Gnostic Judæo-Christians with the common type, +those of the strict observance. How the latter were related +to the former, we do not know, for the inner relations here +are almost completely unknown to us.<a id="footnotetag432" name="footnotetag432"></a><a href="#footnote432"><sup>432</sup></a></p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_VII" id="SEC_I_VI_VII"></a>Apart from the false doctrines opposed in the Epistle to +the Colossians, and from Cerinthus, this syncretistic Jewish +Christianity which aimed at making itself a universal religion, +meets us in tangible form only in three phenomena:<a id="footnotetag433" name="footnotetag433"></a><a href="#footnote433"><sup>433</sup></a> in the +Elkesaites of Hippolytus and Origen, in the Ebionites with +their associates of Epiphanius, sects very closely connected, +in fact to be viewed as one party of manifold shades,<a id="footnotetag434" name="footnotetag434"></a><a href="#footnote434"><sup>434</sup></a> and +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page305" id="page305"></a>[pg 305]</span> +in the activity of Symmachus.<a id="footnotetag435" name="footnotetag435"></a><a href="#footnote435"><sup>435</sup></a> We observe here a form of +religion as far removed from that of the Old Testament as from +the Gospel, subject to strong heathen influences, not Greek, but +Asiatic, and scarcely deserving the name "Christian," because it +appeals to a new revelation of God which is to complete that +given in Christ. We should take particular note of this in +judging of the whole remarkable phenomenon. The question +in this Jewish Christianity is not the formation of a philosophic +school, but to some extent the establishment of a kind of +new religion, that is, the completion of that founded by Christ, +undertaken by a particular person basing his claims on a +revealed book which was delivered to him from heaven. This +book which was to form the complement of the Gospel, possessed, +from the third century, importance for all sections of +Jewish Christians so far as they, in the phraseology of Epiphanius, +were not Nazarenes.<a id="footnotetag436" name="footnotetag436"></a><a href="#footnote436"><sup>436</sup></a> The whole system reminds +one of Samaritan Christian syncretism;<a id="footnotetag437" name="footnotetag437"></a><a href="#footnote437"><sup>437</sup></a> but we must be on +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page306" id="page306"></a>[pg 306]</span> +our guard against identifying the two phenomena, or even +regarding them as similar. These Elkesaite Jewish Christians +held fast by the belief that Jesus was the Son of God, and +saw in the "book" a revelation which proceeded from him. +They did not offer any worship to their founder,<a id="footnotetag438" name="footnotetag438"></a><a href="#footnote438"><sup>438</sup></a> that is, to +the receiver of the "book," and they were, as will be shewn, +the most ardent opponents of Simonianism.<a id="footnotetag439" name="footnotetag439"></a><a href="#footnote439"><sup>439</sup></a></p> + +<p>Alcibiades of Apamea, one of their disciples, came from the +East to Rome about 220-230, and endeavoured to spread the +doctrines of the sect in the Roman Church. He found the +soil prepared, inasmuch as he could announce from the "book" +forgiveness of sins to all sinful Christians, even the grossest +transgressors, and such forgiveness was very much needed. +Hippolytus opposed him, and had an opportunity of seeing the +book and becoming acquainted with its contents. From his +account and that of Origen we gather the following: (1) The +sect is a Jewish Christian one, for it requires the νομου πολιτεια +(circumcision and the keeping of the Sabbath), and repudiates +the Apostle Paul; but it criticises the Old Testament and rejects +a part of it. (2) The objects of its faith are the "Great and +most High God", the Son of God (the "Great King"), and +the Holy Spirit (thought of as female); Son and Spirit appear +as angelic powers. Considered outwardly, and according to +his birth, Christ is a mere man, but with this peculiarity, +that he has already been frequently born and manifested +(πολλακις γεννηθεντα και γεννωμενον πεφηνεναι και φυεσθαι, αλλασσοντα +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page307" id="page307"></a>[pg 307]</span> +γενεσεις και μετενσωματουμενον, cf. the testimony of Victorinus +as to Symmachus). From the statements of Hippolytus +we cannot be sure whether he was identified with the Son of +God,<a id="footnotetag440" name="footnotetag440"></a><a href="#footnote440"><sup>440</sup></a> at any rate the assumption of repeated births of Christ +shews how completely Christianity was meant to be identified +with what was supposed to be the pure Old Testament religion. +(3) The "book" proclaimed a new forgiveness of sin, +which, on condition of faith in the "book" and a real change +of mind, was to be bestowed on every one, through the medium +of washings, accompanied by definite prayers which are +strictly prescribed. In these prayers appear peculiar Semitic +speculations about nature ("the seven witnesses: heaven, +water, the holy spirits, the angels of prayer, oil, salt, +earth"). The old Jewish way of thinking appears in the +assumption that all kinds of sickness and misfortune are punishments +for sin, and that these penalties must therefore be +removed by atonement. The book contains also astrological +and geometrical speculations in a religious garb. The main +thing, however, was the possibility of a forgiveness of sin, ever +requiring to be repeated, though Hippolytus himself was unable +to point to any gross laxity. Still, the appearance of +this sect represents the attempt to make the religion of Christian +Judaism palatable to the world. The possibility of repeated +forgiveness of sin, the speculations about numbers, elements, +and stars, the halo of mystery, the adaptation to the +forms of worship employed in the "mysteries", are worldly +means of attraction which shew that this Jewish Christianity +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page308" id="page308"></a>[pg 308]</span> +was subject to the process of acute secularization. The Jewish +mode of life was to be adopted in return for these concessions. +Yet its success in the West was of small extent and short-lived.</p> + +<p>Epiphanius confirms all these features, and adds a series of +new ones. In his description, the new forgiveness of sin is +not so prominent as in that of Hippolytus, but it is there. +From the account of Epiphanius we can see that these syncretistic +Judæo-Christian sects were at first strictly ascetic and +rejected marriage as well as the eating of flesh, but that they +gradually became more lax. We learn here that the whole +sacrificial service was removed from the Old Testament by +the Elkesaites and declared to be non-Divine, that is non-Mosaic, +and that fire was consequently regarded as the impure +and dangerous element, and water as the good one.<a id="footnotetag441" name="footnotetag441"></a><a href="#footnote441"><sup>441</sup></a> We +learn further, that these sects acknowledged no prophets and +men of God between Aaron and Christ, and that they completely +adapted the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew to their own +views.<a id="footnotetag442" name="footnotetag442"></a><a href="#footnote442"><sup>442</sup></a> In addition to this book, however, (the Gospel of +the 12 Apostles), other writings, such as Περιοδοι Πετρου δια +Κλημεντος, Αναβαθμοι Ιακωβου and similar histories of Apostles, +were held in esteem by them. In these writings the Apostles +were represented as zealous ascetics, and, above all, as vegetarians, +while the Apostle Paul was most bitterly opposed. +They called him a Tarsene, said he was a Greek, and heaped +on him gross abuse. Epiphanius also dwells strongly upon +their Jewish mode of life (circumcision, Sabbath), as well as +their daily washings,<a id="footnotetag443" name="footnotetag443"></a><a href="#footnote443"><sup>443</sup></a> and gives some information about the +constitution and form of worship of these sects (use of baptism: +Lord's Supper with bread and water). Finally, Epiphanius +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page309" id="page309"></a>[pg 309]</span> +gives particulars about their Christology. On this point there +were differences of opinion, and these differences prove that +there was no Christological dogma. As among the common +Jewish Christians, the birth of Jesus from the Virgin was a +matter of dispute. Further, some identified Christ with Adam, +others saw in him a heavenly being (ανωθεν ον), a spiritual +being, who was created before all, who was higher than all +angels and Lord of all things, but who chose for himself the +upper world; yet this Christ from above came down to this +lower world as often as he pleased. He came in Adam, he +appeared in human form to the patriarchs, and at last appeared +on earth as a man with the body of Adam, suffered, etc. +Others again, as it appears, would have nothing to do with +these speculations, but stood by the belief that Jesus was the +man chosen by God, on whom, on account of his virtue, the +Holy Spirit—'οπερ εστιν 'ο Χριστος—descended at the baptism.<a id="footnotetag444" name="footnotetag444"></a><a href="#footnote444"><sup>444</sup></a> +(Epiph. h. 30. 3, 14, 16). The account which Epiphanius gives +of the doctrine held by these Jewish Christians regarding the +Devil, is specially instructive (h. 30. 16): δυο δε τινας συνιστωσιν +εκ θεου τεταγμενους, ενα μεν τον Χριστον, ενα δε τον διαβολον. +και τον μεν Χριστον λεγουσι του μελλοντος αιωνος ειληφεναι τον +κληρον, τον δε διαβολον τουτον πεπιστευσθαι ον αιωνα, εκ προσταγης +δηθεν του παντοκρατοπος κατα αιτησιν εκατερων αυτων. Here we +have a very old Semitico-Hebraic idea preserved in a very +striking way, and therefore we may probably assume that in +other respects also, these Gnostic Ebionites preserved that +which was ancient. Whether they did so in their criticism +of the Old Testament, is a point on which we must not +pronounce judgment.</p> + +<p><a name="SEC_I_VI_VIII" id="SEC_I_VI_VIII"></a>We might conclude by referring to the fact that this syncretistic +Jewish Christianity, apart from a well-known missionary +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page310" id="page310"></a>[pg 310]</span> +effort at Rome, was confined to Palestine and the neighbouring +countries, and might consider it proved that this +movement had no effect on the history and development of +Catholicism,<a id="footnotetag445" name="footnotetag445"></a><a href="#footnote445"><sup>445</sup></a> were it not for two voluminous writings which +still continue to be regarded as monuments of the earliest +epoch of syncretistic Jewish Christianity. Not only did Baur +suppose that he could prove his hypothesis about the origin +of Catholicism by the help of these writings, but the attempt +has recently been made on the basis of <i>the Pseudo-Clementine +Recognitions and Homilies</i>, for these are the writings in question, +to go still further and claim for Jewish Christianity the glory +of having developed by itself the whole doctrine, worship and +constitution of Catholicism, and of having transmitted it to +Gentile Christianity as a finished product which only required +to be divested of a few Jewish husks.<a id="footnotetag446" name="footnotetag446"></a><a href="#footnote446"><sup>446</sup></a> It is therefore necessary +to subject these writings to a brief examination. Everything +depends on the time of their origin, and the tendencies +they follow. But these are just the two questions that are +still unanswered. Without depreciating those worthy men +who have earnestly occupied themselves with the Pseudo-Clementines,<a id="footnotetag447" name="footnotetag447"></a><a href="#footnote447"><sup>447</sup></a> +it may be asserted, that in this region everything +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page311" id="page311"></a>[pg 311]</span> +is as yet in darkness, especially as no agreement has been +reached even in the question of their composition. No doubt +such a result appears to have been pretty nearly arrived at +as far as the time of composition is concerned, but that +estimate (150-170, or the latter half of the second century) +not only awakens the greatest suspicion, but can be proved +to be wrong. The importance of the question for the history +of dogma does not permit the historian to set it aside, while, +on the other hand, the compass of a manual does not allow +us to enter into an exhaustive investigation. The only course +open in such circumstances is briefly to define one's own +position.</p> + +<p>1. The Recognitions and Homilies, in the form in which +we have them, do not belong to the second century, but at +the very earliest to the first half of the third. There is +nothing, however, to prevent our putting them a few decades +later.<a id="footnotetag448" name="footnotetag448"></a><a href="#footnote448"><sup>448</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page312" id="page312"></a>[pg 312]</span> + +<p>2. They were not composed in their present form by heretical +Christians, but most probably by Catholics. Nor do they aim +at forming a theological system,<a id="footnotetag449" name="footnotetag449"></a><a href="#footnote449"><sup>449</sup></a> or spreading the views of a +sect. Their primary object is to oppose Greek polytheism, +immoral mythology, and false philosophy, and thus to promote +edification.<a id="footnotetag450" name="footnotetag450"></a><a href="#footnote450"><sup>450</sup></a></p> + +<p>3. In describing the authors as Catholic, we do not mean +that they were adherents of the theology of Irenæus or Origen. +The instructive point here rather, is that they had as yet no +fixed theology, and therefore could without hesitation regard +and use all possible material as means of edification. In like +manner, they had no fixed conception of the Apostolic age, +and could therefore appropriate motley and dangerous material. +Such Christians, highly educated and correctly trained +too, were still to be found, not only in the third century, but +even later. But the authors do not seem to have been free +from a bias, inasmuch as they did not favour the Catholic, +that is, the Alexandrian apologetic theology which was in +process of formation.</p> + +<p>4. The description of the Pseudo-Clementine writings, naturally +derived from their very form, as "edifying, didactic romances +for the refutation of paganism", is not inconsistent with the idea, +that the authors, at the same time, did their utmost to oppose +heretical phenomena, especially the Marcionite church and +Apelles, together with heresy and heathenism in general, as +represented by Simon Magus.</p> + +<p>5. The objectionable materials which the authors made +use of were edifying for them, because of the position assigned +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page313" id="page313"></a>[pg 313]</span> +therein to Peter, because of the ascetic and mysterious elements +they contained, and the opposition offered to Simon, etc. +The offensive features, so far as they were still contained in +these sources, had already become unintelligible and harmless. +They were partly conserved as such and partly removed.</p> + +<p>6. The authors are to be sought for perhaps in Rome, +perhaps in Syria, perhaps in both places, certainly not in +Alexandria.</p> + +<p>7. The main ideas are: (1) The monarchy of God. (2) the +syzygies (weak and strong). (3) Prophecy (the true Prophet). +(4) Stoical rationalism, belief in providence, good works. Φιλανθρωπια, +etc.—Mosaism. The Homilies are completely saturated +with stoicism, both in their ethical and metaphysical +systems, and are opposed to Platonism, though Plato is quoted +in Hom. XV. 8, as 'Ελληνων σοφιστια (a wise man of the Greeks). +In addition to these ideas we have also a strong hierarchical +tendency. The material which the authors made use of was +in great part derived from syncretistic Jewish Christian tradition, +in other words, those histories of the Apostles were here +utilised which Epiphanius reports to have been used by the +Ebionites (see above). It is not probable, however, that these +writings in their original form were in the hands of the narrators; +the likelihood is that they made use of them in revised +forms.</p> + +<p>8. It must be reserved for an accurate investigation to +ascertain whether those modified versions which betray clear +marks of Hellenic origin, were made within syncretistic Judaism +itself, or whether they are to be traced back to Catholic +writers. In either case, they should not be placed earlier than +about the beginning of the third century, but in all probability +one or two generations later still.</p> + +<p>9. If we adopt the first assumption, it is most natural to +think of that propaganda which, according to the testimony +of Hippolytus and Origen, Jewish Christianity attempted in +Rome in the age of Caracalla and Heliogabalus, through the +medium of the Syrian, Alcibiades. This coincides with the last +great advance of Syrian cults into the West, and is, at the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page314" id="page314"></a>[pg 314]</span> +same time, the only one known to us historically. But it is +further pretty generally admitted that the immediate sources +of the Pseudo-Clementines already presuppose the existence of +Elkesaite Christianity. We should accordingly have to assume +that in the West, this Christianity made greater concessions +to the prevailing type, that it gave up circumcision and accommodated +itself to the Church system of Gentile Christianity, +at the same time withdrawing its polemic against Paul.</p> + +<p>10. Meanwhile the existence of such a Jewish Christianity +is not as yet proved, and therefore we must reckon with the +possibility that the remodelled form of the Jewish Christian +sources, already found in existence by the revisers of the +Pseudo-Clementine Romances, was solely a Catholic literary +product. In this assumption, which commends itself both as +regards the aim of the composition and its presupposed conditions, +we must remember that, from the third century +onwards, Catholic writers systematically corrected, and to a +great extent reconstructed, the heretical histories which were +in circulation in the churches as interesting reading, and that +the extent and degree of this reconstruction varied exceedingly, +according to the theological and historical insight of +the writer. The identifying of pure Mosaism with Christianity +was in itself by no means offensive when there was no further +question of circumcision. The clear distinction between the +ceremonial and moral parts of the Old Testament, could no +longer prove an offence after the great struggle with Gnosticism.<a id="footnotetag451" name="footnotetag451"></a><a href="#footnote451"><sup>451</sup></a> +The strong insistence upon the unity of God, and the +rejection of the doctrine of the Logos, were by no means +uncommon in the beginning of the third century; and in the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page315" id="page315"></a>[pg 315]</span> +speculations about Adam and Christ, in the views about God +and the world and such, like, as set before us in the immediate +sources of the Romances, the correct and edifying elements +must have seemed to outweigh the objectionable. At +any rate, the historian who, until further advised, denies the +existence of a Jewish Christianity composed of the most contradictory +elements, lacking circumcision and national hopes, +and bearing marks of Catholic and therefore of Hellenic +influence, judges more prudently than he who asserts, solely +on the basis of Romances which are accompanied by no +tradition and have never been the objects of assault, the +existence of a Jewish Christianity accommodating itself to +Catholicism which is entirely unattested.</p> + +<p>11. Be that as it may, it may at least be regarded as +certain that the Pseudo-Clementines contribute absolutely +nothing to our knowledge of the origin of the Catholic Church +and doctrine, as they shew at best in their immediate sources +a Jewish Christianity strongly influenced by Catholicism and +Hellenism.</p> + +<p>12. They must be used with great caution even in seeking +to determine the tendencies and inner history of syncretistic +Jewish Christianity. It cannot be made out with certainty, +how far back the first sources of the Pseudo-Clementines date, +or what their original form and tendency were. As to the +first point, it has indeed been said that Justin, nay, even the +author of the Acts of the Apostles, presupposes them, and +that the Catholic tradition of Peter, in Rome, and of Simon +Magus, are dependent on them (as is still held by Lipsius); +but there is so little proof of this adduced, that in Christian +literature up to the end of the second century (Hegesippus?) +we can only discover very uncertain traces of acquaintance +with Jewish Christian historical narrative. Such indications +can only be found, to any considerable extent, in the third +century, and I do not mean to deny that the contents of +the Jewish Christian histories of the Apostles contributed +materially to the formation of the ecclesiastical legends +about Peter. As is shewn in the Pseudo-Clementines, these +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page316" id="page316"></a>[pg 316]</span> +histories of the Apostles especially opposed Simon Magus and +his adherents (the new Samaritan attempt at a universal religion), +and placed the authority of the Apostle Peter against +them. But they also opposed the Apostle Paul, and seem to +have transferred Simonian features to Paul, and Pauline features +to Simon. Yet it is also possible that the Pauline traits +found in the magician were the outcome of the redaction, in +so far as the whole polemic against Paul is here struck out, +though certain parts of it have been woven into the polemic +against Simon. But probably the Pauline features of the +magician are merely an appearance. The Pseudo-Clementines +may, to some extent, be used, though with caution, in determining +the doctrines of syncretistic Jewish Christianity. In +connection with this we must take what Epiphanius says as +our standard. The Pantheistic and Stoic elements which are +found here and there must of course be eliminated. But the +theory of the genesis of the world from a change in God +himself (that is from a προβολη), the assumption that all things +emanated from God in antitheses (Son of God—Devil; heaven—earth; +male—female; male and female prophecy), nay, that +these antitheses are found in God himself (goodness, to which +corresponds the Son of God—punitive justice, to which corresponds +the Devil), the speculations about the elements which +have proceeded from the one substance, the ignoring of freedom +in the question about the origin of evil, the strict adherence +to the unity and absolute causality of God, in spite +of the dualism, and in spite of the lofty predicates applied to +the Son of God—all this plainly bears the Semitic-Jewish stamp.</p> + +<p>We must here content ourselves with these indications. +They were meant to set forth briefly the reasons which forbid +our assigning to syncretistic Jewish Christianity, on the basis +of the Pseudo-Clementines, a place in the history of the genesis +of the Catholic Church and its doctrine.</p> + +<p>Bigg, The Clementine Homilies (Studia Biblica et Eccles. II. +p. 157 ff.), has propounded the hypothesis that the Homilies are +an Ebionitic revision of an older Catholic original (see p. 1841: +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page317" id="page317"></a>[pg 317]</span> +"The Homilies as we have it, is a recast of an orthodox +work by a highly unorthodox editor." P. 175: "The Homilies +are surely the work of a Catholic convert to Ebionitism, who +thought he saw in the doctrine of the two powers the only +tenable answer to Gnosticism. We can separate his Catholicism +from his Ebionitism, just as surely as his Stoicism"). +This is the opposite of the view expressed by me in the text. +I consider Bigg's hypothesis well worth examining, and at +first sight not improbable; but I am not able to enter into +it here.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote403" name="footnote403"></a><b>Footnote 403:</b><a href="#footnotetag403"> (return) </a><p> The attitude of the recently discovered "Teaching of the twelve +Apostles" is strictly universalistic, and hostile to Judaism as a nation, +but shews us a Christianity still essentially uninfluenced by philosophic +elements. The impression made by this fact has caused some scholars to +describe the treatise as a document of Jewish Christianity. But the attitude +of the Didache is rather the ordinary one of universalistic early Christianity +on the soil of the Græco-Roman world. If we describe this as Jewish +Christian, then from the meaning which we must give to the words +"Christian" and "Gentile Christian", we tacitly legitimise an undefined +and undefinable aggregate of Greek ideas, along with a specifically Pauline +element, as primitive Christianity, and this is perhaps not the intended, but +yet desired, result of the false terminology. Now, if we describe even such +writings as the Epistle of James and the Shepherd of Hermas as Jewish +Christian, we therewith reduce the entire early Christianity, which is the +creation of a universal religion on the soil of Judaism, to the special case of +an indefinable religion. The same now appears as one of the particular values +of a completely indeterminate magnitude. Hilgenfeld (Judenthum und Juden-christenthum, +1886; cf. also Ztschr f. wiss. Theol. 1886, II. 4) advocates another +conception of Jewish Christianity in opposition to the following account. +Zahn, Gesch. des N.T-lich. Kanons, II. p. 668 ff. has a different view still.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote404" name="footnote404"></a><b>Footnote 404:</b><a href="#footnotetag404"> (return) </a><p>Or even Ebionitism; the designations are to be used as synonymous.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote405" name="footnote405"></a><b>Footnote 405:</b><a href="#footnotetag405"> (return) </a><p> The more rarely the right standard has been set up in the literature +of Church history, for the distinction of Jewish Christianity, the more +valuable are those writings in which it is found. We must refer, above +all, to Diestel, Geschichte des A. T. in der Christl. Kirche, p. 44, note 7.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote406" name="footnote406"></a><b>Footnote 406:</b><a href="#footnotetag406"> (return) </a><p> See Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1883. Col. 409 f. as to the attempt of Joël to +make out that the whole of Christendom up to the end of the first century +was strictly Jewish Christian, and to exhibit the complete friendship +of Jews and Christians in that period ("Blicke in die Religionsgesch." +2 Abth. 1883). It is not improbable that Christians like James, living in +strict accordance with the law, were for the time being respected even +by the Pharisees in the period preceding the destruction of Jerusalem. +But that can in no case have been the rule. We see from, Epiph., h. +29. 9. and from the Talmud, what was the custom at a later period.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote407" name="footnote407"></a><b>Footnote 407:</b><a href="#footnotetag407"> (return) </a><p> There were Jewish Christians who represented the position of the +great Church with reference to the Old Testament religion, and there +were some who criticised the Old Testament like the Gnostics. Their +contention may have remained as much an internal one, as that between +the Church Fathers and Gnostics (Marcion) did, so far as Jewish Christianity +is concerned. There may have been relations between Gnostic +Jewish Christians and Gnostics, not of a national Jewish type, in Syria +and Asia Minor, though we are completely in the dark on the matter.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote408" name="footnote408"></a><b>Footnote 408:</b><a href="#footnotetag408"> (return) </a><p> From the mere existence of Jewish Christians, those Christians who +rejected the Old Testament might have argued against the main body of +Christendom and put before it the dilemma: either Jewish Christian or +Marcionite. Still more logical indeed was the dilemma: either Jewish, or +Marcionite Christian.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote409" name="footnote409"></a><b>Footnote 409:</b><a href="#footnotetag409"> (return) </a><p> So did the Montanists and Antimontanists mutually reproach each other +with Judaising (see the Montanist writings of Tertullian). Just in the same +way the arrangements as to worship and organisation, which were ever being +more richly developed, were described by the freer parties as Judaising, +because they made appeal to the Old Testament, though, as regards their +contents, they had little in common with Judaism. But is not the method of +claiming Old Testament authority for the regulations rendered necessary +by circumstances nearly as old as Christianity itself? Against whom the lost +treatise of Clement of Alexandria "κανων εκκλησιαστικος 'η προς τους +Ιουδαιζοντας" +(Euseb., H. E. VI. 13. 3) was directed, we cannot tell. But as we read, Strom., +VI. 15, 125, that the Holy Scriptures are to be expounded according to the +εκκλησιαστικος κανων, and then find the following definition of the Canon: +κανων δε εκκλησιαστικος 'η συνωδια και συμφωνια νομον τε και προφητων +τη κατα +την του κυριου παρουσιαν παραδιδομενηι διαθηκηι, we may conjecture that the +Judaisers were those Christians, who, in principle, or to some extent, +objected to the allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament. We have +then to think either of Marcionite Christians or of "Chiliasts," that is, +the old Christians who were still numerous in Egypt about the middle +of the third century (see Dionys. Alex, in Euseb., H. E. VII. 24). In the +first case, the title of the treatise would be paradoxical. But perhaps +the treatise refers to the Quarto-decimans, although the expression κανων +εκκλησιαστικος seems too ponderous for them (see, however, Orig., Comm. +in Matth. n. 76, ed. Delarue III. p. 895) Clement may possibly have had +Jewish Christians before him. See Zahn, Forschungen, vol. III. p. 37 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote410" name="footnote410"></a><b>Footnote 410:</b><a href="#footnotetag410"> (return) </a><p> Cases of this kind are everywhere, up to the fifth century, so +numerous that they need not be cited. We may only remind the reader +that the Nestorian Christology was described by its earliest and its +latest opponents as Ebionitic.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote411" name="footnote411"></a><b>Footnote 411:</b><a href="#footnotetag411"> (return) </a><p> Or were those western Christians Ebionitic who, in the fourth century +still clung to very realistic Chiliastic hopes, who, in fact, regarded +their Christianity as consisting in these?</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote412" name="footnote412"></a><b>Footnote 412:</b><a href="#footnotetag412"> (return) </a><p> The hellenising of Christianity went hand in hand with a more extensive +use of the Old Testament; for, according to the principles of Catholicism, every +new article of the Church system must be able to legitimise itself as springing +from revelation. But, as a rule, the attestation could only be gathered from the +Old Testament, since religion here appears in the fixed form of a secular community. +Now the needs of a secular community for outward regulations gradually +became so strong in the Church as to require palpable ceremonial rules. +But it cannot be denied, that from a certain point of time, first by means of +the fiction of Apostolic constitutions (see my edition of the Didache, Prolegg. +p. 239 ff.), and then without this fiction, not, however, as a rule, without reservations, +ceremonial regulations were simply taken over from the Old Testament. +But this transference (See Bk. II.) takes place at a time when there can be +absolutely no question of an influence of Jewish Christianity. Moreover, it +always proves itself to be catholic by the fact that it did not in the least +soften the traditional anti-Judaism. On the contrary, it attained its full growth +in the age of Constantine. Finally, it should not be overlooked that at all +times in antiquity, certain provincial churches were exposed to Jewish influences, +especially in the East and in Arabia, that they were therefore threatened +with being Judaised, or with apostasy to Judaism, and that even at the present +day, certain Oriental Churches shew tokens of having once been subject to +Jewish influences (see Serapion in Euseb, H. E. VI. 12. 1, Martyr. Pion., Epiph. +de mens. et pond. 15. 18; my Texte u. Unters. I. 3. p. 73 f., and Wellhausen, +Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, Part. 3. p. 197 ff.; actual disputations with Jews do +not seem to have been common, though see Tertull. adv. Jud. and Orig. c. +Cels. I. 45, 49, 55: II. 31. Clement also keeps in view Jewish objections.) +This Jewish Christianity, if we like to call it so, which in some regions of the +East was developed through an immediate influence of Judaism on Catholicism, +should not, however, be confounded with the Jewish Christianity which is the +most original form in which Christianity realised itself. This was no longer +able to influence the Christianity which had shaken itself free from the Jewish +nation (as to futile attempts, see below), any more than the protecting covering +stripped from the new shoot, can ever again acquire significance for the latter.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote413" name="footnote413"></a><b>Footnote 413:</b><a href="#footnotetag413"> (return) </a><p> What is called the ever-increasing legal feature of Gentile Christianity +and the Catholic Church is conditioned by its origin, in so far as its theory +is rooted in that of Judaism spiritualised and influenced by Hellenism. As +the Pauline conception of the law never took effect and a criticism of the Old +Testament religion which is just law neither understood nor ventured upon in +the larger Christendom—the forms were not criticised, but the contents spiritualised—so +the theory that Christianity is promise and spiritual law is +to be regarded as the primitive one. Between the spiritual law and the national +law there stand indeed ceremonial laws, which, without being spiritually +interpreted, could yet be freed from the national application. It cannot +be denied that the Gentile Christian communities and the incipient Catholic +Church were very careful and reserved in their adoption of such laws +from the Old Testament, and that the later Church no longer observed this +caution. But still it is only a question of degree for there are many examples +of that adoption in the earliest period of Christendom. The latter had no +cause for hurry in utilizing the Old Testament so long as there was no external +or internal policy or so long as it was still in embryo. The decisive factor lies +here again in enthusiasm and not in changing theories. The basis for these +was supplied from the beginning. But a community of individuals under spiritual +excitement builds on this foundation something different from an association +which wishes to organise and assert itself as such on earth. (The +history of Sunday is specially instructive here, see Zahn, Gesch. des Sonntags, +1878, as well as the history of the discipline of fasting, see Linsenmayr, +Entwickelung der Kirchl Fastendisciplin, 1877, and Die Abgabe des Zehnten. +In general, Cf. Ritschl Entstehung der Altkath Kirche 2 edit. pp. 312 ff., 331 +ff., 1 Cor. IX. 9, may be noted).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote414" name="footnote414"></a><b>Footnote 414:</b><a href="#footnotetag414"> (return) </a><p> Justin. Apol. I. 53, Dial. 47, Euseb. H. E. IV. 5, Sulpic Sev. Hist. +Sacr. II. 31, Cyrill. Catech. XIV. 15. Important testimonies in Origen, +Eusebius, Epiphanius and Jerome.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote415" name="footnote415"></a><b>Footnote 415:</b><a href="#footnotetag415"> (return) </a><p> No Jewish Christian writings have been transmitted to us even +from the earliest period, for the Apocalypse of John, which describes +the Jews as a synagogue of Satan, is not a Jewish Christian book (III. +9 especially shews that the author knows of only one covenant of God, +viz. that with the Christians). Jewish Christian sources lie at the basis +of our synoptic Gospels, but none of them in their present form is a +Jewish Christian writing. The Acts of the Apostles is so little Jewish +Christian, its author seemingly so ignorant of Jewish Christianity, at least +so unconcerned with regard to it that to him the spiritualised Jewish +law, or Judaism as a religion which he connects as closely as possible +with Christianity, is a factor already completely detached from the Jewish +people (see Overbeck's Commentar z Apostelgesch and his discussion +in the Ztschr f wiss. Theol. 1872 p. 305 ff.) Measured by the Pauline +theology we may indeed, with Overbeck, say of the Gentile Christianity, +as represented by the author of the Acts of the Apostles, that it already +has germs of Judaism, and represents a falling off from Paulinism; but +these expressions are not correct, because they have at least the appearance +of making Paulinism the original form of Gentile Christianity. +But as this can neither be proved nor believed, the religious attitude of +the author of the Acts of the Apostles must have been a very old one +in Christendom. The Judaistic element was not first introduced into +Gentile Christianity by the opponents of Paul, who indeed wrought in +the national sense, and there is even nothing to lead to the hypothesis +that the common Gentile Christian view of the Old Testament and of +the law should be conceived as resulting from the efforts of Paul and +his opponents, for the consequent effect here would either have been +null, or a strengthening of the Jewish Christian thesis. The Jewish element, +that is the total acceptance of the Jewish religion <i>sub specie aeternitatis +et Christi</i>, is simply the original Christianity of the Gentile Christians itself +considered as theory. Contrary to his own intention, Paul was compelled to +lead his converts to this Christianity, for only for such Christianity was "the +time fulfilled" within the empire of the world. The Acts of the Apostles +gives eloquent testimony to the pressing difficulties which under such circumstances +stand in the way of a historical understanding of the Gentile Christians +in view of the work and the theology of Paul. Even the Epistle to +the Hebrews is not a Jewish Christian writing, but there is certainly a peculiar +state of things connected with this document. For, on the one hand, +the author and his readers are free from the law; a spiritual interpretation is +given to the Old Testament religion, which makes it appear to be glorified +and fulfilled in the work of Christ; and there is no mention of any prerogative +of the people of Israel. But, on the other hand, because the spiritual interpretation, +as in Paul, is here teleological, the author allows a temporary +significance to the cultus as literally understood, and therefore, by his criticism +he conserves the Old Testament religion for the past, while declaring +that it was set aside, as regards the present, by the fulfilment of Christ. +The teleology of the author, however, looks at everything only from the +point of view of shadow and reality, an antithesis which is at the service +of Paul also, but which in his case vanishes behind the antithesis of law +and grace. This scheme of thought, which is to be traced back to a way +of looking at things which arose in Christian Judaism, seeing that it really +distinguishes between old and new, stands midway between the conception +of the Old Testament religion entertained by Paul, and that of the common +Gentile Christian as it is represented by Barnabas. The author of the +Epistle to the Hebrews undoubtedly knows of a twofold covenant of God. +But the two are represented as stages, so that the second is completely +based on the first. This view was more likely to be understood by the +Gentile Christians than the Pauline, that is, with some seemingly slight +changes, to be recognised as their own. But even it at first fell to the +ground, and it was only in the conflict with the Marcionites that some +Church Fathers advanced to views which seem to be related to those +of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Whether the author of this Epistle was +a born Jew or a Gentile—in the former case he would far surpass the +Apostle Paul in his freedom from the national claims—we cannot, at +any rate, recognise in it a document containing a conception which still +prizes the Jewish nationality in Christianity, nay, not even a document to prove +that such a conception was still dangerous. Consequently, we have no Jewish +Christian memorial in the New Testament at all, unless it be in the Pauline +Epistles. But as concerns the early Christian literature outside the Canon, the +fragments of the great work of Hegesippus are even yet by some investigators +claimed for Jewish Christianity. Weizsäcker (Art "Hegesippus" in Herzog's +R. E. 2 edit) has shewn how groundless this assumption is. That Hegesippus +occupied the common Gentile Christian position is certain from unequivocal +testimony of his own. If, as is very improbable, we were obliged to ascribe to +him a rejection of Paul, we should have to refer to Eusebius, H. E. IV. 29. 5. +(Σευηριανοι βλασφημουντες Παυλον τον αποστολον αθετουσιν αυτου τας επιστολας +μηδε τας πραξεις των αποστολων καταδεχομενοι, but probably the Gospels; these +Severians therefore, like Marcion, recognised the Gospel of Luke, but rejected +the Acts of the Apostles), and Orig. c. Cels. V. 65: (εισι γαρ τινες 'αιρεσεις τας +Παυλου επιστολας του αποστολου μη προσιεμεναι 'ωσπερ Εβιωναιοι αμφοτεροι και 'οι +καλουμενοι Ενκρατηται). Consequently, our only sources of knowledge of Jewish +Christianity in the post-Pauline period are merely the accounts of the Church +Fathers, and some additional fragments (see the collection of fragments of the +Ebionite Gospel and that to the Hebrews in Hilgenfeld, Nov. Test, extra can. +rec. fasc. IV. Ed 2, and in Zahn, l. c. II. p 642 ff.). We know better, but +still very imperfectly, certain forms of the syncretistic Jewish Christianity, +from the Philosoph. of Hippolytus and the accounts of Epiphanius, who is certainly +nowhere more incoherent than in the delineation of the Jewish Christians, +because he could not copy original documents here, but was forced to +piece together confused traditions with his own observations. See below on +the extensive documents which are even yet as they stand, treated as records +of Jewish Christianity, viz., the Pseudo-Clementines. Of the pieces of writing +whose Jewish Christian origin is controverted, in so far as they may be +simply Jewish, I say nothing.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote416" name="footnote416"></a><b>Footnote 416:</b><a href="#footnotetag416"> (return) </a><p> As to the chief localities where Jewish Christians were found, see +Zahn, Kanonsgesch. II. p. 648 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote417" name="footnote417"></a><b>Footnote 417:</b><a href="#footnotetag417"> (return) </a><p>Dialogue 47.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote418" name="footnote418"></a><b>Footnote 418:</b><a href="#footnotetag418"> (return) </a><p> Yet it should be noted that the Christians who, according to Dial. 48, +denied the pre-existence of Christ and held him to be a man, are described +as Jewish Christians. We should read in the passage in question, as +my recent comparison of the Parisian codex shews, απο του υμετερου γενους. +Yet Justin did not make this a controversial point of great moment.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote419" name="footnote419"></a><b>Footnote 419:</b><a href="#footnotetag419"> (return) </a><p> The so-called Barnabas is considerably older than Justin. In his Epistle +(4. 6) he has in view Gentile Christians who have been converted by Jewish +Christians, when he utters a warning against those who say 'οτι α διαθηκη +εκεινον +(the Jews) και 'ημων (εστιν). But how great the actual danger was cannot be +gathered from the Epistle. Ignatius in two Epistles (ad Magn. 8-10, ad +Philad. 6. 9) opposes Jewish Christian intrigues, and characterises them +solely from the point of view that they mean to introduce the Jewish +observance of the law. He opposes them with a Pauline idea (Magn. 8 1: +ει γαρ μεχρι νυν κατα νομον. Ιουδαισμον ζωμεν 'ομολογουμεν χαριν μη +ειληφεναι), +as well as with the common Gentile Christian assumption that the prophets +themselves had already lived κατα Χριστον. These Judaists must be strictly +distinguished from the Gnostics whom Ignatius elsewhere opposes (against +Zahn, Ignat. v. Ant. p. 356 f.). The dangers from this Jewish Christianity +cannot have been very serious, even if we take Magn. 11. 1, as a phrase. +There was an active Jewish community in Philadelphia (Rev. III. 9), and +so Jewish Christian plots may have continued longer there. At the first +look it seems very promising that in the old dialogue of Aristo of Pella, +a Hebrew Christian, Jason, is put in opposition to the Alexandrian Jew, +Papiscus. But as the history of the little book proves, this Jason must have +essentially represented the common Christian and not the Ebionite conception +of the Old Testament and its relation to the Gospel, etc; see my Texte +u. Unters. I. 1 2. p. 115 ff.; I. 3 p. 115-130. Testimony as to an apostasy to +Judaism is occasionally though rarely given; see Serapion in Euseb., H. E. VI. +12, who addresses a book to one Domninus, εκπεπτωκοτα παρα τον του διωγμου +καιρον απο της εις Χριστον πιστεως επι την Ιουδαικην εθελοθρησκειαν; see also Acta +Pionii, 13. 14. According to Epiphanius, de mens. et pond. 14, 15, Acquila, +the translator of the Bible, was first a Christian and then a Jew. This +account is perhaps derived from Origen, and is probably reliable. Likewise +according to Epiphanius (l. c. 17. 18), Theodotion was first a Marcionite +and then a Jew. The transition from Marcionitism to Judaism (for extremes +meet) is not in itself incredible.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote420" name="footnote420"></a><b>Footnote 420:</b><a href="#footnotetag420"> (return) </a><p> It follows from c. Cels II. 1-3, that Celsus could hardly have +known Jewish Christians.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote421" name="footnote421"></a><b>Footnote 421:</b><a href="#footnotetag421"> (return) </a><p> Iren. I. 26. 2; III 11. 7; III. 15. 1, 21. 1; IV. 33. 4; V. 1. 3. +We first find +the name Ebionæi, the poor, in Irenæus. We are probably entitled to +assume that this name was given to the Christians in Jerusalem as early +as the Apostolic age, that is, they applied it to themselves (poor in the sense +of the prophets and of Christ, fit to be received into the Messianic kingdom). +It is very questionable whether we should put any value on Epiph. h. 30. 17.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote422" name="footnote422"></a><b>Footnote 422:</b><a href="#footnotetag422"> (return) </a><p> When Irenæus adduces as the points of distinction between the Church +and the Ebionites, that besides observing the law and repudiating the +Apostle Paul, the latter deny the Divinity of Christ and his birth from the +Virgin, and reject the New Testament Canon (except the Gospel of Matthew), +that only proves that the formation of dogma has made progress in the +Church. The less was known of the Ebionites from personal observation, +the more confidently they were made out to be heretics who denied the +Divinity of Christ and rejected the Canon. The denial of the Divinity of +Christ and the birth from the Virgin was, from the end of the second +century, regarded as the Ebionite heresy <i>par excellence</i>, and the Ebionites +themselves appeared to the Western Christians, who obtained their +information solely from the East, to be a school like those of the Gnostics, +founded by a scoundrel named Ebion for the purpose of dragging down +the person of Jesus to the common level. It is also mentioned incidentally, +that this Ebion had commanded the observance of circumcision and the +Sabbath; but that is no longer the main thing (see Tertull, de carne 14, +18, 24: de virg. vel. 6: de præscr. 10. 33; Hippol, Syntagma, (Pseudo-Tertull, +11; Philastr. 37; Epiph. h. 30); Hippol, Philos. VII. 34. The latter +passage contains the instructive statement that Jesus by his perfect keeping +of the law became the Christ). This attitude of the Western Christians +proves that they no longer knew Jewish Christian communities. Hence it +is all the more strange that Hilgenfeld (Ketzergesch. p. 422 ff.) has in all +earnestness endeavoured to revive the Ebion of the Western Church Fathers.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote423" name="footnote423"></a><b>Footnote 423:</b><a href="#footnotetag423"> (return) </a><p> See Orig. c. Cels II. 1; V. 61, 65; de princip. IV. 22; hom. in +Genes. III. 15 (Opp. II. p. 65); hom. in Jerem XVII. 12 (III. p. 254); in +Matth. T. XVI. 12 (III. p. 494), T. XVII. 12 (III. p. 733); cf. Opp. III. p. +895; hom in XVII. (III. p. 952). That a portion of the Ebionites recognised +the birth from the Virgin was according to Origen frequently attested. +That was partly reckoned to them for righteousness and partly not, +because they would not admit the pre-existence of Christ. The name +"Ebionites" is interpreted as a nickname given them by the Church +("beggarly" in the knowledge of scripture, and particularly of Christology).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote424" name="footnote424"></a><b>Footnote 424:</b><a href="#footnotetag424"> (return) </a><p> Eusebius knows no more than Origen (H. E. III. 27), unless we specially +credit him with the information that the Ebionites keep along with the Sabbath +also the Sunday. What he says of Symmachus, the translator of the Bible, +and an Ebionite, is derived from Origen (H. E. VI. 17). The report is interesting, +because it declares that Symmachus <i>wrote</i> against Catholic Christianity, +especially against the Catholic Gospel of Matthew (about the year 200). +But Symmachus is to be classed with the Gnostics, and not with the +common type of Jewish Christianity (see below). We have also to thank +Eusebius (H. E. III. 5. 3) for the information that the Christians of Jerusalem +fled to Pella, in Peræa, before the destruction of that city. In the +following period the most important settlements of the Ebionites must have +been in the countries east of the Jordan, and in the heart of Syria (see +Jul. Afric. in Euseb. H. E. I. 7. 14; Euseb. de loc. hebr. in Lagarde, +Onomast p. 301; Epiph., h. 29. 7; h. 30. 2). This fact explains how the +bishops in Jerusalem and the coast towns of Palestine came to see very +little of them. There was a Jewish Christian community in Beroea with +which Jerome had relations (Jerom., de Vir inl 3).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote425" name="footnote425"></a><b>Footnote 425:</b><a href="#footnotetag425"> (return) </a><p> Jerome correctly declares (Ep. ad. August. 122 c. 13, Opp. I. p. 746), +"(Ebionitæ) credentes in Christo propter hoc solum a patribus anathematizati +sunt, quod legis cæremonias Christi evangelio miscuerunt, et sic +nova confessi sunt, ut vetera non omitterent."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote426" name="footnote426"></a><b>Footnote 426:</b><a href="#footnotetag426"> (return) </a><p> Ep. ad August. l. c.: "Quid dicam de Hebionitis, qui Christianos esse se +simulant? usque hodie per totas orientis synagogas inter Judæos(!) hæresis est, +que dicitur Minæorum et a Pharisæis nunc usque damnatur, quos vulgo Nazaræos +nuncupant, qui credunt in Christum filium dei natum de Virgine Maria et +eum dicunt esse, qui sub pontio Pilato passus est et resurrexit, in quem et nos +credimus; sed dum volunt et Judæi esse et Christiani, nec Judæi sunt nec +Christiani." The approximation of the Jewish Christian conception to that +of the Catholics shews itself also in their exposition of Isaiah IX. 1. f. +(see Jerome on the passage). But we must not forget that there were +such Jewish Christians from the earliest times. It is worthy of note that +the name Nazarenes, as applied to Jewish Christians, is found in the +Acts of the Apostles XXIV. 5, in the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus, +and then first again in Jerome.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote427" name="footnote427"></a><b>Footnote 427:</b><a href="#footnotetag427"> (return) </a><p> Zahn, l. c. p. 648 ff. 668 ff. has not convinced me of the contrary, +but I confess that Jerome's style of expression is not everywhere clear.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote428" name="footnote428"></a><b>Footnote 428:</b><a href="#footnotetag428"> (return) </a><p> Zahn, (l. c.) makes a sharp distinction between the Nazarenes, on the +one side, who used the Gospel of the Hebrews, acknowledged the birth +from the Virgin, and in fact the higher Christology to some extent, did +not repudiate Paul, etc., and the Ebionites on the other, whom he simply +identifies with the Gnostic Jewish Christians, if I am not mistaken. In +opposition to this, I think I must adhere to the distinction as given +above in the text and in the following: (1) Non-Gnostic, Jewish Christians +(Nazarenes, Ebionites) who appeared in various shades, according to +their doctrine and attitude to the Gentile Church, and whom, with the +Church Fathers, we may appropriately classify as strict or tolerant (exclusive +or liberal). (2) Gnostic or syncretistic Judæo-Christians who are +also termed Ebionites.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote429" name="footnote429"></a><b>Footnote 429:</b><a href="#footnotetag429"> (return) </a><p> This Gospel no doubt greatly interested the scholars of the Catholic +Church from Clement of Alexandria onwards. But they have almost all +contrived to evade the hard problem which it presented. It may be noted, +incidentally, that the Gospel of the Hebrews, to judge from the remains +preserved to us, can neither have been the model nor the translation of +our Matthew, but a work independent of this, though drawing from the +same sources, representing perhaps to some extent an earlier stage of +the tradition. Jerome also knew very well that the Gospel of the Hebrews +was not the original of the canonical Matthew, but he took care not to +correct the old prejudice. Ebionitic conceptions, such as that of the +female nature of the Holy Spirit, were of course least likely to convince +the Church Fathers. Moreover, the common Jewish Christians hardly +possessed a Church theology, because for them Christianity was something +entirely different from the doctrine of a school. On the Gospel +of the Hebrews, see Handmann (Texte u. Unters V. 3), Resch, Agrapha +(I. c. V. 4), and Zahn, 1. c. p. 642 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote430" name="footnote430"></a><b>Footnote 430:</b><a href="#footnotetag430"> (return) </a><p> We have as yet no history of the sacrificial system, and the views as to +sacrifice +in the Græco-Roman epoch, of the Jewish Nation. It is urgently needed.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote431" name="footnote431"></a><b>Footnote 431:</b><a href="#footnotetag431"> (return) </a><p> We may remind readers of the assumptions, that the world was +created by angels, that the law was given by angels, and similar ones +which are found in the theology of the Pharisees Celsus (in Orig. I. 26; +V. 6) asserts generally that the Jews worshipped angels, so does the +author of the Prædicatio Petri, as well as the apologist Aristides. Cf +Joel, Blicke in die Religionsgesch I. Abth, a book which is certainly to +be used with caution (see Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1881. Coll. 184 ff.).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote432" name="footnote432"></a><b>Footnote 432:</b><a href="#footnotetag432"> (return) </a><p> No reliance can be placed on Jewish sources, or on Jewish scholars, +as a rule. What we find in Joël, l. c. I. Abth. p. 101 ff. is instructive. +We may mention Grätz, Gnosticismus und Judenthum (Krotoschin, 1846), +who has called attention to the Gnostic elements in the Talmud, and +dealt with several Jewish Gnostics and Antignostics, as well as with +the book of Jezira. Grätz assumes that the four main dogmatic points in +the book Jezira, viz., the strict unity of the deity, and, at the same time, +the negation of the demiurgic dualism, the creation out of nothing with +the negation of matter, the systematic unity of the world and the balancing +of opposites, were directed against prevailing Gnostic ideas.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote433" name="footnote433"></a><b>Footnote 433:</b><a href="#footnotetag433"> (return) </a><p> We may pass over the false teachers of the Pastoral Epistles, as +they cannot be with certainty determined, and the possibility is not +excluded that we have here to do with an arbitrary construction; see +Holtzman, Pastoralbriefe, p. 150 f.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote434" name="footnote434"></a><b>Footnote 434:</b><a href="#footnotetag434"> (return) </a><p> Orig. in Euseb. VI. 38; Hippol., Philos. IX. 13 ff., X. 29; Epiph., h. 30, +also +h. 19, 53; Method, Conviv. VIII. 10. From the confused account of Epiphanius +who called the common Jewish Christians Nazarenes, the Gnostic type +Ebionites and Sampsæi, and their Jewish forerunners Osseni, we may conclude, +that in many regions where there were Jewish Christians they yielded +to the propaganda of the Elkesaite doctrines, and that in the fourth +century there was no other syncretistic Jewish Christianity besides the +various shades of Elkesaites.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote435" name="footnote435"></a><b>Footnote 435:</b><a href="#footnotetag435"> (return) </a><p> I formerly reckoned Symmachus, the translator of the Bible, among +the common Jewish Christians; but the statements of Victorinus Rhetor +on Gal. I. 19. II. 26 (Migne T. VIII. Col. 1155, 1162) shew that he has a +close affinity with the Pseudo-Clementines, and is also to be classed with +the Elkesaite Alcibiades. "Nam Jacobum apostolum Symmachiani faciunt +quasi duodecimum et hunc secuntur, qui ad dominum nostrum Jesum +Christum adjungunt Judaismi observationem, quamquam etiam Jesum Christum +fatentur; dicunt enim eum ipsum Adam esse et esse animam generalem, +et aliæ hujusmodi blasphemiæ." The account given by Eusebius, +H. E. VI. 17 (probably on the authority of Origen, see also Demonstr. +VII. I) is important: Των γε μεν 'ερμηνευτων αυτων δη τουτων 'ιστεον, Εβιωναιον +τον Συμμαχον γεγονεναι ... και 'υπομνηματα δε του Συμμαχου εισετι νυν φερεται, +'εν οις δοκει προς το κατα Ματυαιον αποτεινομενος ευαγγελιον την δεδηλωμενην +αιρεσιν +κρατυνειν. Symmachus therefore adopted an aggressive attitude towards the +great Church, and hence we may probably class him with Alcibiades who +lived a little later. Common Jewish Christianity was no longer aggressive +in the second century.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote436" name="footnote436"></a><b>Footnote 436:</b><a href="#footnotetag436"> (return) </a><p> Wellhausen (l. c. Part III. p. 206) supposes that Elkesai is equivalent +to Alexius. That the receiver of the "book" was a historical person is +manifest from Epiphanius' account of his descendants (h. 19. 2; 53. 1). +From Hipp, Philosoph. IX. 16, p. 468, it is certainly probable, though not +certain, that the book was produced by the unknown author as early as the +time of Trajan. On the other hand, the existence of the sect itself can be +proved only at the beginning of the third century, and therefore we have +the possibility of an ante-dating of the "book." This seems to have been +Origen's opinion.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote437" name="footnote437"></a><b>Footnote 437:</b><a href="#footnotetag437"> (return) </a><p> Epiph. (h. 53. 1) says of the Elkesaites: ουτε χριστιανοι +'υπαρχοντες ουτε +Ιουδαιοι ουτε Ελληνες, αλλα μεσον απλως υπαρχοντες. He pronounces a similar +judgment as to the Samaritan sects (Simonians), and expressly (h. 30. 1) +connects the Elkesaites with them.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote438" name="footnote438"></a><b>Footnote 438:</b><a href="#footnotetag438"> (return) </a><p> The worship paid to the descendants of this Elkesai, spoken of by +Epiphanius, does not, if we allow for exaggerations, go beyond the +measure of honour which was regularly paid to the descendants of prophets +and men of God in the East. Cf. the respect enjoyed by the blood +relations of Jesus and Mohammed.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote439" name="footnote439"></a><b>Footnote 439:</b><a href="#footnotetag439"> (return) </a><p> If the "book" really originated in the time of Trajan, then its production +keeps within the frame-work of common Christianity, for at that time there +were appearing everywhere in Christendom revealed books which contained +new instructions and communications of grace. The reader may be reminded, +for example, of the Shepherd of Hermas. When the sect declared that the +"book" was delivered to Elkesai by a male and a female angel, each as large +as a mountain, that these angels were the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, +etc., we have, apart from the fantastic colouring, nothing extraordinary.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote440" name="footnote440"></a><b>Footnote 440:</b><a href="#footnotetag440"> (return) </a><p> It may be assumed from Philos. X. 29, that, in the opinion of Hippolytus, +the Elkesaites identified the Christ from above with the Son of +God, and assumed that this Christ appeared on earth in changing and +purely human forms, and will appear again (αυτον μεταγγιζομενον εν σωμασι +πολλοις πολλακις, και νυν δε εν τω Ιησου, 'ομοιως ποτε μεν εκ του θεου γεγενησθαι, +ποτε δε +πνευμα γεγονεναι, ποτε δε εκ παρθενου, ποτε δε ου και τουτου δε μετεπειτα αει εν σωματι +μεταγγιζεσθαι και εν πολλοις κατα καιρους δεικνυσθαι). As the Elkesaites +(see the +account by Epiphanius) traced back the incarnations of Christ to Adam, +and not merely to Abraham, we may see in this view of history the +attempt to transform Mosaism into the universal religion. But the Pharisitic +theology had already begun with these Adam-speculations, which +are always a sign that the religion in Judaism is feeling its limits +too narrow. The Jews in Alexandria were also acquainted with these +speculations.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote441" name="footnote441"></a><b>Footnote 441:</b><a href="#footnotetag441"> (return) </a><p> In the Gospel of these Jewish Christians Jesus is made to say +(Epiph. h. 30. 16) ηλθον καταλυσαι τας θυσιας, και εαν μη παυσησθε του +θυειν, ου +παυσεται αφ' 'υμων 'η οργη. We see the essential progress of this Jewish +Christianity within Judaism, in the opposition in principle to the whole +sacrificial service (vid. also Epiph., h. 19. 3).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote442" name="footnote442"></a><b>Footnote 442:</b><a href="#footnotetag442"> (return) </a><p>On this new Gospel see Zahn, Kanongesch II. p. 724 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote443" name="footnote443"></a><b>Footnote 443:</b><a href="#footnotetag443"> (return) </a><p> It is incorrect to suppose that the lustrations were meant to take +the place of baptism, or were conceived by these Jewish Christians as +repeated baptisms. Their effect was certainly equal to that of baptism. +But it is nowhere hinted in our authorities that they were on that account +made equivalent to the regular baptism.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote444" name="footnote444"></a><b>Footnote 444:</b><a href="#footnotetag444"> (return) </a><p> The characteristic here, as in the Gentile Christian Gnosis, is the +division of the person of Jesus into a more or less indifferent medium, +and into the Christ. Here the factor constituting his personality could +sometimes be placed in that medium, and sometimes in the Christ spirit, +and thus contradictory formulæ could not but arise. It is therefore easy +to conceive how Epiphanius reproaches these Jewish Christians with a +denial, sometimes of the Divinity, and sometimes of the humanity of +Christ (see h. 30. 14).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote445" name="footnote445"></a><b>Footnote 445:</b><a href="#footnotetag445"> (return) </a><p> This syncretistic Judaism had indeed a significance for the history +of the world, not, however, in the history of Christianity, but for the +origin of Islam. Islam, as a religious system, is based partly on syncretistic +Judaism (including the Zabians, so enigmatic in their origin), and, +without questioning Mohammed's originality, can only be historically +understood by taking this into account. I have endeavoured to establish +this hypothesis in a lecture printed in MS form, 1877. Cf. now the conclusive +proofs in Wellhausen, l. c. Part III. p. 197-212. On the Mandeans, +see Brandt, Die Mandäische Religion, 1889; (also Wellhausen in d. deutschen +Lit. Ztg., 1890 No. 1. Lagarde i. d. Gött. Gel. Anz., 1890, No. 10).</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote446" name="footnote446"></a><b>Footnote 446:</b><a href="#footnotetag446"> (return) </a><p> See Bestmann, Gesch. der Christl. Sitte Bd. II. 1 Part: Die +juden-christliche Sitte, 1883; also, Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1883. Col. 269 ff. The same +author, Der Ursprung des Katholischen Christenthums und des Islams, +1884; also Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1884, Col. 291 ff.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote447" name="footnote447"></a><b>Footnote 447:</b><a href="#footnotetag447"> (return) </a><p> See Schliemann, Die Clementinen etc. 1844; Hilgenfeld, Die Clementinischen +Recogn. u. Homil, 1848; Ritschl, in d Allg Monatschrift f. +Wissensch. u. Litt., 1852. Uhlhorn, Die Homil. u. Recogn., 1854; Lehmann, +Die Clement. Schriften, 1869; Lipsius, in d. Protest. K. Ztg., 1869, p. 477 +ff.; Quellen der Römische Petrussage, 1872. Uhlhorn, in Herzog's R. +Encykl. (Clementinen) 2 Edit. III. p. 286, admits: "There can be no +doubt that the Clementine question still requires further discussion. It +can hardly make any progress worth mentioning until we have collected +better the material, and especially till we have got a corrected edition +with an exhaustive commentary." The theory of the genesis, contents and +aim of the pseudo-Clementine writings, unfolded by Renan (Orig. T. +VII. p. 74-101) is essentially identical with that of German scholars. +Langen (die Clemensromane, 1890) has set up very bold hypotheses, +which are also based on the assumption that Jewish Christianity was an +important church factor in the second century, and that the pseudo-Clementines +are comparatively old writings.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote448" name="footnote448"></a><b>Footnote 448:</b><a href="#footnotetag448"> (return) </a><p> There is no external evidence for placing the pseudo-Clementine writings +in the second century. The oldest witness is Origen (IV. p. 401, Lommatzsch); +but the quotation: "Quoniam opera bona, quæ fiunt ab infidelibus, in hoc +sæculo iis prosunt," etc., is not found in our Clementines, so that Origen +appears to have used a still older version. The internal evidence all points to +the third century (canon, composition, theological attitude, etc.) Moreover, +Zahn (Gött. Gel. Anz. 1876. No. 45) and Lagarde have declared themselves +in favour of this date; while Lipsius (Apokr. Apostelgesch II. 1) and Weingarten +(Zeittafeln, 3 Edit. p. 23) have recently expressed the same opinion. +The Homilies presuppose (1) Marcion's Antitheses, (2) Apelles' Syllogisms, +(3) perhaps Callistus' edict about penance (see III. 70), and writings of +Hippolytus (see also the expression επισκοπος επισκοπων, Clem. ep. ad Jacob +I, which is first found in Tertull, de pudic I.) (4) The most highly +developed form of polemic against heathen mythology. (5) The complete +development of church apologetics, as well as the conviction that Christianity +is identical with correct and absolute knowledge. They further +presuppose a time when there was a lull in the persecution of Christians, +for the Emperor, though pretty often referred to, is never spoken of as +a persecutor, and when the cultured heathen world was entirely disposed +in favour of an eclectic monotheism. Moreover, the remarkable Christological +statement in Hom. XVI. 15, 16. points to the third century, in +fact probably even presupposes the theology of Origen; Cf. the sentence: +του πατρος το μη γεγεννησθαι εστιν, 'υιου δε το γεγεννησθαι γεννητον δε +αγεννητω η +και αυτογεννητω ου συνκρινεται. Finally, the decided repudiation of the awakening +of Christian faith by visions and dreams, and the polemic against +these is also no doubt of importance for determining the date; see +XVII. 14-19. Peter says, § 18: το αδιδακτως ανευ οπτασιας και ονειρων μαθειν +αποκαλυψις εστιν, he had already learned that at his confession (Matt. +XVI.). The question, ει τις δι οπτασιαν προς διδασκαλιαν σοφισθηναι δυναται, +is +answered in the negative, § 19.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote449" name="footnote449"></a><b>Footnote 449:</b><a href="#footnotetag449"> (return) </a><p>This is also acknowledged in Koffmane. Die Gnosis, etc, p. 33</p></blockquote>. + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote450" name="footnote450"></a><b>Footnote 450:</b><a href="#footnotetag450"> (return) </a><p> The Homilies, as we have them, are mainly composed of the speeches +of Peter and others. These speeches oppose polytheism, mythology and the +doctrine of demons, and advocate monotheism, ascetic morality and rationalism. +The polemic against Simon Magus almost appears as a mere accessory.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote451" name="footnote451"></a><b>Footnote 451:</b><a href="#footnotetag451"> (return) </a><p> This distinction can also be shewn elsewhere in the Church of the third +century. But I confess I do not know how Catholic circles got over the fact +that, for example, in the third book of the Homilies many passages of the old +Testament are simply characterised as untrue, immoral and lying. Here the +Homilies remind one strongly of the Syllogisms of Apelles, the author of +which, in other respects, opposed them in the interest of his doctrine of creating +angels. In some passages the Christianity of the Homilies really looks +like a syncretism composed of the common Christianity, the Jewish Christianity, +Gnosticism, and the criticism of Apelles. Hom. VIII. 6-8 is also highly +objectionable.</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page318" id="page318"></a>[pg 318]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="APPENDIX_I" id="APPENDIX_I"></a>APPENDIX I.</h2> + +<h3><i>On the Conception of Pre-existence.</i></h3> + + +<p>On account of the importance of the question we may be +here permitted to amplify a few hints given in Chap. II., § 4, +and elsewhere, and to draw a clearer distinction between the +Jewish and Hellenic conceptions of pre-existence.</p> + +<p>According to the theory held by the ancient Jews and by +the whole of the Semitic nations, everything of real value, +that from time to time appears on earth has its existence in +heaven. In other words it exists with God, that is, God possesses +a knowledge of it; and for that reason it has a real +being. But it exists beforehand with God in the same way +as it appears on earth, that is with all the material attributes +belonging to its essence. Its manifestation on earth is merely +a transition from concealment to publicity (Π'ανερουσθαι). In +becoming visible to the senses, the object in question assumes +no attribute that it did not already possess with God. Hence +its material nature is by no means an inadequate expression +of it, nor is it a second nature added to the first. The truth +rather is that what was in heaven before is now revealing +itself upon earth, without any sort of alteration taking place +in the process. There is no <i>assumptio naturæ novæ</i>, and no +change or mixture. The old Jewish theory of pre-existence +is founded on the religious idea of the omniscience and omnipotence +of God, that God to whom the events of history do +not come as a surprise, but who guides their course. As the +whole history of the world and the destiny of each individual +are recorded on his tablets or books, so also each thing is +ever present before him. The decisive contrast is between +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page319" id="page319"></a>[pg 319]</span> +God and the creature. In designating the latter as "foreknown" +by God, the primary idea is not to ennoble the creature, but +rather to bring to light the wisdom and power of God. The +ennobling of created things by attributing to them a pre-existence +is a secondary result (see below).</p> + +<p>According to the Hellenic conception, which has become +associated with Platonism, the idea of pre-existence is independent +of the idea of God; it is based on the conception of the +contrast between spirit and matter, between the infinite and +finite, found in the cosmos itself. In the case of all spiritual +beings, life in the body or flesh is at bottom an inadequate +and unsuitable condition, for the spirit is eternal, the flesh +perishable. But the pre-temporal existence, which was only a +doubtful assumption as regards ordinary spirits, was a matter +of certainty in the case of the higher and purer ones. They +lived in an upper world long before this earth was created, +and they lived there as spirits without the "polluted garment +of the flesh." Now if they resolved for some reason or other +to appear in this finite world, they cannot simply become +visible, for they have no "visible form." They must rather +"assume flesh", whether they throw it about them as a covering, +or really make it their own by a process of transformation +or mixture. In all cases—and here the speculation gave +rise to the most exciting problems—the body is to them +something inadequate which they cannot appropriate without +adopting certain measures of precaution, but this process may +indeed pass through all stages, from a mere seeming appropriation +to complete union. The characteristics of the Greek +ideas of pre-existence may consequently be thus expressed. +First, the objects in question to which pre-existence is ascribed +are meant to be ennobled by this attribute. Secondly, these +ideas have no relation to God. Thirdly, the material appearance +is regarded as something inadequate. Fourthly, speculations +about <i>phantasma</i>, <i>assumptio naturæ humanæ</i>, <i>transmutatio</i>, +<i>mixtura</i>, <i>duæ naturæ</i>, etc., were necessarily associated +with these notions.</p> + +<p>We see that these two conceptions are as wide apart as the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page320" id="page320"></a>[pg 320]</span> +poles. The first has a religious origin, the second a cosmological +and psychological, the first glorifies God, the second +the created spirit.</p> + +<p>However, not only does a certain relationship in point of +form exist between these speculations, but the Jewish conception +is also found in a shape which seems to approximate still +more to the Greek one.</p> + +<p>Earthly occurrences and objects are not only regarded as +"foreknown" by God before being seen in this world, but +the latter manifestation is frequently considered as the copy +of the existence and nature which they possess in heaven, and +which remains unalterably the same, whether they appear upon +earth or not. That which is before God experiences no change. +As the destinies of the world are recorded in the books, and God +reads them there, it being at the same time a matter of indifference, +as regards this knowledge of his, when and how they +are accomplished upon earth, so the Tabernacle and its furniture, +the Temple, Jerusalem, etc., are before God, and continue +to exist before him in heaven, even during their appearance +on earth and after it.</p> + +<p>This conception seems really to have been the oldest one. +Moses is to fashion the Temple and its furniture according to +the pattern he saw on the Mount (Exod. XXV. 9. 40; XXVI. +30; XXVII. 8; Num. VIII. 4). The Temple and Jerusalem +exist in heaven, and they are to be distinguished from the +earthly Temple and the earthly Jerusalem; yet the ideas of +a Π'ανερουσθαι of the thing which is in heaven and of its copy +appearing on earth, shade into one another and are not always +clearly separated.</p> + +<p>The classing of things as original and copy was at first no more +meant to glorify them than was the conception of a pre-existence +they possessed within the knowledge of God. But +since the view which in theory was true of everything earthly, +was, as is naturally to be expected, applied in practice to +nothing but valuable objects—for things common and ever +recurring give no impulse to such speculations—the objects +thus contemplated were ennobled, because they were raised +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page321" id="page321"></a>[pg 321]</span> +above the multitude of the commonplace. At the same time +the theory of original and copy could not fail to become a +starting-point for new speculations, as soon as the contrast +between the spiritual and material began to assume importance +among the Jewish people.</p> + +<p>That took place under the influence of the Greek spirit; +and was perhaps also the simultaneous result of an intellectual +or moral development which arose independently of that +spirit. Accordingly, a highly important advance in the old +ideas of pre-existence appeared in the Jewish theological literature +belonging to the time of the Maccabees and the following +decades. To begin with, these conceptions are now +applied to persons, which, so far as I know, was not the case +before this (individualism). Secondly, the old distinction of original +and copy is now interpreted to mean that the copy is +the inferior and more imperfect, that in the present æon of +the transient it cannot be equivalent to the original, and that +we must therefore look forward to the time when the original +itself will make its appearance, (contrast of the material and +finite and the spiritual).</p> + +<p>With regard to the first point, we have not only to consider +passages in Apocalypses and other writings in which pre-existence +is attributed to Moses, the patriarchs, etc., (see above, +p. 102), but we must, above all, bear in mind utterances like +Ps. CXXXIX. 15, 16. The individual saint soars upward to +the thought that the days of his life are in the book of God, +and that he himself was before God, whilst he was still un-perfect. +But, and this must not be overlooked, it was not +merely his spiritual part that was before God, for there is +not the remotest idea of such a distinction, but the whole man, +although he is [Hebrew: bashar] (flesh).</p> + +<p>As regards the second point, the distinction between a +heavenly and an earthly Jerusalem, a heavenly and an earthly +Temple, etc., is sufficiently known from the Apocalypses and +the New Testament. But the important consideration is that +the sacred things of earth were regarded as objects of less +value, instalments, as it were, pending the fulfilment of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page322" id="page322"></a>[pg 322]</span> +whole promise. The desecration and subsequent destruction +of sacred things must have greatly strengthened this idea. +The hope of the heavenly Jerusalem comforted men for the +desecration or loss of the earthly one. But this gave at the +same time the most powerful impulse to reflect whether it +was not an essential feature of this temporal state, that everything +high and holy in it could only appear in a meagre and +inadequate form. Thus the transition to Greek ideas was +brought about. The fulness of the time had come when the +old Jewish ideas, with a slightly mythological colouring, could +amalgamate with the ideal creations of Hellenic philosophers.</p> + +<p>These, however, are also the general conditions which gave +rise to the earliest Jewish speculations about a personal Messiah, +except that, in the case of the Messianic ideas within +Judaism itself, the adoption of specifically Greek thoughts, so +far as I am able to see, cannot be made out.</p> + +<p>Most Jews, as Trypho testifies in Justin's Dialogue, 49, conceived +the Messiah as a man. We may indeed go a step +further and say that no Jew at bottom imagined him otherwise; +for even those who attached ideas of pre-existence to +him, and gave the Messiah a supernatural background, never +advanced to speculations about assumption of the flesh, incarnation, +two natures and the like. They only transferred in +specific manner to the Messiah the old idea of pre-terrestrial +existence with God, universally current among the Jews. Before +the creation of the world the Messiah was hidden with God, +and, when the time is fulfilled, he makes his appearance. This +is neither an incarnation nor a humiliation, but he appears on +earth as he exists before God, viz., as a mighty and just king, +equipped with all gifts. The writings in which this thought +appears most clearly are the Apocalypse of Enoch (Book of +Similitudes, Chap. 46-49) and the Apocalypse of Esra (Chap. +12-14). Support to this idea, if anything more of the kind +had been required, was lent by passages like Daniel VII. 13 f. +and Micah, V. 1. Nowhere do we find in Jewish writings a +conception which advances beyond the notion that the Messiah +is the man who is with God in heaven; and who will make +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page323" id="page323"></a>[pg 323]</span> +his appearance at his own time. We are merely entitled to +say that, as the same idea was not applied to all persons with +the same certainty, it was almost unavoidable that men's minds +should have been led to designate the Messiah as the man +from heaven. This thought was adopted by Paul (see below), +but I know of no <i>Jewish</i> writing which gave clear expression +to it.</p> + +<p>Jesus Christ designated himself as the Messiah, and the first +of his disciples who recognised him as such were native Jews. +The Jewish conceptions of the Messiah consequently passed +over into the Christian community. But they received an +impulse to important modifications from the living impression +conveyed by the person and destiny of Jesus. Three facts +were here of pre-eminent importance. First, Jesus appeared +in lowliness, and even suffered death. Secondly, he was believed +to be exalted through the resurrection to the right hand of +God, and his return in glory was awaited with certainty. +Thirdly, the strength of a new life and of an indissoluble union +with God was felt issuing from him, and therefore his people +were connected with him in the closest way.</p> + +<p>In some old Christian writings found in the New Testament +and emanating from the pen of native Jews, there are no speculations +at all about the pre-temporal existence of Jesus as +the Messiah, or they are found expressed in a manner which +simply embodies the old Jewish theory and is merely distinguished +from it by the emphasis laid on the exaltation of Jesus +after death through the resurrection. 1. Pet. I. 18 ff. is a classic +passage: ελυτρωθητε τιμιω 'αιματι 'ως αμνου αμωμου και ασπιλου +Χριστου, προεγνωσμενου μεν προ καταβολης κοσμου, φανερωθεντος δε +επ' εσχατου των χρονων δι' 'υμας τους δι αυτου πιστους εις θεον τον +εγειραντα αυτου εκ νεκρων και δοξαν αυτω δοντα, 'ωστε την πιστιν +'υμων και ελπιδα ειναι εις θεον. Here we find a conception of +the pre-existence of Christ which is not yet affected by cosmological +or psychological speculation, which does not overstep +the boundaries of a purely religious contemplation, and which +arose from the Old Testament way of thinking, and the living +impression derived from the person of Jesus. He is "foreknown +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page324" id="page324"></a>[pg 324]</span> +(by God) before the creation of the world", not as a +spiritual being without a body, but as a Lamb without blemish +and without spot; in other words, his whole personality together +with the work which it was to carry out, was within God's +eternal knowledge. He "was manifested in these last days for +our sake", that is, he is now visibly what he already was +before God. What is meant here is not an incarnation, but +a <i>revelatio</i>. Finally, he appeared in order that our faith and +hope should now be firmly directed to the living God, <i>that</i> +God who raised him from the dead and gave him honour. +In the last clause expression is given to the specifically +Christian thought, that the Messiah Jesus was <i>exalted</i> after +crucifixion and death: from this, however, no further conclusions +are drawn.</p> + +<p>But it was impossible that men should everywhere rest +satisfied with these utterances, for the age was a theological +one. Hence the paradox of the suffering Messiah, the certainty +of his glorification through the resurrection, the conviction of +his specific relationship to God, and the belief in the real +union of his Church with him did not seem adequately expressed +by the simple formulæ προεγνωσμενος, φανερωθεις. In reference +to all these points, we see even in the oldest Christian writings, +the appearance of formulæ which fix more precisely the nature +of his pre-existence, or in other words his heavenly existence. +With regard to the first and second points there arose the view +of humiliation and exaltation, such as we find in Paul and in +numerous writings after him. In connection with the third +point the concept "Son of God" was thrust into the foreground, +and gave rise to the idea of the image of God (2 +Cor. IV. 4; Col. I. 15; Heb. I. 2; Phil. II. 6). The fourth +point gave occasion to the formation of theses, such as we +find in Rom. VIII. 29: πρωτοτοκος εν πολλοις αδελφοις, Col. I. +18: πρωτοτοκος εκ των νεκρων (Rev. I. 5), Eph. II. 6 +συνηγειρεν +και +συνεκαθισεν εν +τοις +επουρανιοις +'ημας εν +Χριστω Ιησου, I. 4: +'ο θεος εξελεξατο 'ημας εν Χριστω προ καταβολης κοσμου, I. 22: 'ο +θεος εδωκεν τον Χριστον κεφαλην 'υπερ παντα τη εκκλησια 'ητις εστιν +το σωμα αυτου etc. This purely religious view of the Church, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page325" id="page325"></a>[pg 325]</span> +according to which all that is predicated of Christ is also applied +to his followers, continued a considerable time. Hermas declares +that the Church is older than the world, and that the world +was created for its sake (see above, p. 103), and the author +of the so-called 2nd Epistle of Clement declares (Chap. 14) +... εσομεθα εκ της εκκλησιας της πρωτης της πνευματικης, της +προ 'ηλιου και σεληνης 'εκτισμενης ... ουκ οιομαι δε 'υμας αγνοειν, +'οτι εκκλησια ζωσα σωμα εστι Χριστου. λεγει γαρ 'ηγραφη. Εποιησεν +'ο θεος τον ανθρωπον αρσεν και θηλυ. το αρσεν εστιν 'ο Χριστος το +θηλυ 'η εκκλησια. Thus Christ and his Church are inseparably +connected. The latter is to be conceived as pre-existent quite +as much as the former; the Church was also created before +the sun and the moon, for the world was created for its sake. +This conception of the Church illustrates a final group of +utterances about the pre-existent Christ, the origin of which +might easily be misinterpreted unless we bear in mind their +reference to the Church. In so far as he is προεγνωσμενος προ +καταβολης κοσμου, he is the αρχη της κτισεως του θεου (Rev. III. +14), the πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως etc. According to the current +conception of the time, these expressions mean exactly +the same as the simple προεγνωσμενος προ καταβολης κοσμου, as +is proved by the parallel formulæ referring to the Church. +Nay, even the further advance to the idea that the world was +created by him (Cor. Col. Eph. Heb.) need not yet necessarily +be a μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος; for the beginning of things +αρχη and their purpose form the real force to which their +origin is due (principle αρχη). Hermas indeed calls the Church +older than the world simply because "the world was created +for its sake."</p> + +<p>All these further theories which we have quoted up to this +time need in no sense alter the original conception, so long +as they appear in an isolated form and do not form the basis +of fresh speculations. They may be regarded as the working out +of the original conception attaching to Jesus Christ, προεγνωσμενος +προ καταβολης κοσμου, φανερωθεις κ.τ.λ.; and do not really +modify this religious view of the matter. Above all, we find +in them as yet no certain transition to the Greek view which +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page326" id="page326"></a>[pg 326]</span> +splits up his personality into a heavenly and an earthly portion; +it still continues to be the complete Christ to whom all +the utterances apply. But, beyond doubt, they already reveal +the strong impulse to conceive the Christ that had appeared as a +divine being. He had not been a transitory phenomenon, but has +ascended into heaven and still continues to live. This post-existence +of his gave to the ideas of his pre-existence a support and +a concrete complexion which the earlier Jewish theories lacked.</p> + +<p>We find the transition to a new conception in the writings +of Paul. But it is important to begin by determining the relationship +between his Christology and the views we have been +hitherto considering. In the Apostle's clearest trains of thought +everything that he has to say of Christ hinges on his +death and resurrection. For this we need no proofs, but see, +more especially Rom. I. 3 f.: περι του 'υιου αυτου, του γενομενου +εκ σπερματος δαυειδ κατα σαρκα, του 'ορισθεντος 'υιου θεου εν δυναμει +κατα πνευμα αγιωσυνης εκ αναστασεως νεκρων, Ιησου Χριστου του +κυριου 'ημων. What Christ became and his significance for us +now are due to his death on the cross and his resurrection. +He condemned sin in the flesh and was obedient unto death. +Therefore he now shares in the δοξα of God. The exposition +in 1 Cor. XV. 45, also ('ο εσχατος Αδαμ εις πνευμα Ζωοποιουν, +αλλ' ου πρωτον το πνευματικον αλλα το ψυχικον, επειτα το πνευματικον. +'ο πρωτος ανθρωπος εκ γης χοικος 'ο δευτερος ανθρωπος εξ +ουρανου) is still capable of being understood, as to its fundamental +features, in a sense which agrees with the conception +of the Messiah, as κατ' εξοχην, the man from heaven who was +hidden with God. There can be no doubt, however, that this +conception as already shewn by the formulæ in the passage +just quoted, formed to Paul the starting-point of a speculation, +in which the original theory assumed a completely new shape. +The decisive factors in this transformation were the Apostle's +doctrine of "spirit and flesh", and the corresponding conviction +that the Christ who is not be known "after the flesh", +is a spirit, namely, the mighty spiritual being πνευμα ζωοποιουν, +who has condemned sin in the flesh, and thereby enabled +man to walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page327" id="page327"></a>[pg 327]</span> + +<p>According to one of the Apostle's ways of regarding the +matter, Christ, after the accomplishment of his work, became +the πνευμα ζωοποιουν through the resurrection. But the belief +that Jesus always stood before God as the heavenly man, +suggested to Paul the other view, that Christ was always a +"spirit", that he was sent down by God, that the flesh is +consequently something inadequate and indeed hostile to him, +that he nevertheless assumed it in order to extirpate the sin +dwelling in the flesh, that he therefore humbled himself by +appearing, and that this humiliation was the deed he performed.</p> + +<p>This view is found in 2 Cor. VIII. 9: Ιησους Χριστος δι' +'υμας επτωχευσεν πλουσιος ων; in Rom. VIII. 3: 'ο θεος τον 'εαυτου +'υιον πεμψας εν 'ομοιωματι σαρκος 'αμαρτιας και περι 'αμαρτιας κατεκρινε +την 'αμαρτιαν εν τη σαρκι; and in Phil. II. 5 f.: Χριστος +Ιησους εν μορφη θεου 'υπαρχων ... 'εαυτον εκενωσεν μορφην δουλον +λαβων, εν 'ομοιωματι ανθρωπων γενομενος, και σχηματι 'ευρεθεις 'ως +ανθρωπος εταπεινωσεν 'εαυτον κ.τ.λ. In both forms of thought Paul +presupposes a real exaltation of Christ. Christ receives after +the resurrection more than he ever possessed (το ονομα το 'υπερ +παν ονομα). In this view Paul retains a historical interpretation +of Christ, even in the conception of the πνευμα Χριστος. +But whilst many passages seem to imply that the work of +Christ began with suffering and death, Paul shews in the verses +cited, that he already conceives the appearance of Christ on +earth as his moral act, as a humiliation, purposely brought +about by God and Christ himself, which reaches its culminating +point in the death on the cross. Christ, the divine spiritual +being, is sent by the Father from heaven to earth, and +of his own free will he obediently takes this mission upon +himself. He appears in the 'ομοιωμα σαρκος αμαρτιας, dies the +death of the cross, and then, raised by the Father, ascends +again into heaven in order henceforth to act as the κυριος +ζωντων and νεκρων and to become to his own people the principle +of a new life in the spirit.</p> + +<p>Whatever we may think about the admissibility and justification +of this view, to whatever source we may trace its origin +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page328" id="page328"></a>[pg 328]</span> +and however strongly we may emphasise its divergencies from +the contemporaneous Hellenic ideas, it is certain that it approaches +very closely to the latter; for the distinction of +spirit and flesh is here introduced into the concept of pre-existence, +and this combination is not found in the Jewish +notions of the Messiah.</p> + +<p>Paul was the first who limited the idea of pre-existence by +referring it solely to the spiritual part of Jesus Christ, but at +the same time gave life to it by making the pre-existing Christ +(the spirit) a being who, even during his pre-existence, stands +independently side by side with God.</p> + +<p>He was also the first to designate Christ's σαρξ as "assumpta", +and to recognise its assumption as in itself a humiliation. To +him the appearance of Christ was no mere φανερουσθαι, but a +κενουσθαι, ταπεινουσθαι and πτωχευειν.</p> + +<p>These outstanding features of the Pauline Christology must +have been intelligible to the Greeks, but, whilst embracing +these, they put everything else in the system aside. Χριστος +'ο κυριος 'ο σωσας 'ημας, 'ων μεν το πρωτον πνευμα, εγενετο σαρξ και +'ουτως 'ημας εκαλεσεν, says 2 Clem. (9. 5), and that is also the +Christology of 1 Clement, Barnabas and many other Greeks. +From the sum total of Judæo-Christian speculations they only +borrowed, in addition, the one which has been already mentioned: +the Messiah as προεγνωσμενος προ καταβολης κοσμου is +for that very reason also 'η αρχη της κτισεως του θεου, that is +the beginning, purpose and principle of the creation. The +Greeks, as the result of their cosmological interest, embraced +this thought as a fundamental proposition. The complete +Greek Christology then is expressed as follows: Χριστος, 'ο +σωσας 'ημας, 'ων μεν το πρωτον πνευμα και πασης κτισεως αρχη, +εγενετο σαρξ και 'ουτως 'ημας εκαλεσεν. <i>That is the fundamental +theological and philosophical creed on which the whole Trinitarian +and Christological speculations of the Church of the succeeding +centuries are built, and it is thus the root of the orthodox +system of dogmatics</i>; for the notion that Christ was the αρχη +πασης κτισεως necessarily led in some measure to the conception +of Christ as the Logos. For the Logos had long been +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page329" id="page329"></a>[pg 329]</span> +regarded by cultured men as the beginning and principle of +the creation.<a id="footnotetag452" name="footnotetag452"></a><a href="#footnote452"><sup>452</sup></a></p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page330" id="page330"></a>[pg 330]</span> + +<p>With this transition the theories concerning Christ are removed +from Jewish and Old Testament soil, and also that of +religion (in the strict sense of the word), and transplanted to +the Greek one. Even in his pre-existent state Christ is an +independent power existing side by side with God. The pre-existence +does not refer to his whole appearance, but only to +a part of his essence; it does not primarily serve to glorify +the wisdom and power of the God who guides history, but +only glorifies Christ, and thereby threatens the monarchy of +God.<a id="footnotetag453" name="footnotetag453"></a><a href="#footnote453"><sup>453</sup></a> The appearance of Christ is now an "assumption of +flesh", and immediately the intricate questions about the connection +of the heavenly and spiritual being with the flesh +simultaneously arise and are at first settled by the theories of +a naive docetism. But the flesh, that is the human nature +created by God, appears depreciated, because it was reckoned +as something unsuitable for Christ, and foreign to him as a +spiritual being. Thus the Christian religion was mixed up +with the refined asceticism of a perishing civilization, and a +foreign substructure given to its system of morality, so earnest +in its simplicity.<a id="footnotetag454" name="footnotetag454"></a><a href="#footnote454"><sup>454</sup></a> But the most questionable result was the +following. Since the predicate "Logos", which at first, and +for a long time, coincided with the idea of the reason ruling +in the cosmos, was considered as the highest that could be +given to Christ, the holy and divine element, namely, the +power of a new life, a power to be viewed and laid hold of +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page331" id="page331"></a>[pg 331]</span> +in Christ, was transformed into a cosmic force and thereby +secularised.</p> + +<p>In the present work I have endeavoured to explain fully +how the doctrine of the Church developed from these premises +into the doctrine of the Trinity and of the two natures. I +have also shewn that the imperfect beginnings of Church doctrine, +especially as they appear in the Logos theory derived +from cosmology, were subjected to wholesome corrections—by +the Monarchians, by Athanasius, and by the influence of +biblical passages which pointed in another direction. Finally, +the Logos doctrine received a form in which the idea was +deprived of nearly all cosmical content. Nor could the Hellenic +contrast of "spirit" and "flesh" become completely developed +in Christianity, because the belief in the bodily resurrection +of Christ, and in the admission of the flesh into heaven, +opposed to the principle of dualism a barrier which Paul as +yet neither knew nor felt to be necessary. The conviction as to +the resurrection of the flesh proved the hard rock which shattered +the energetic attempts to give a completely Hellenic +complexion to the Christian religion.</p> + +<p>The history of the development of the ideas of pre-existence +is at the same time the criticism of them, so that we need +not have recourse to our present theory of knowledge which +no longer allows such speculations. The problem of determining +the significance of Christ through a speculation concerning +his natures, and of associating with these the concrete +features of the historical Christ, was originated by Hellenism. +But even the New Testament writers, who appear in this respect +to be influenced in some way by Hellenism, did not really +speculate concerning the different natures, but, taking Christ's +spiritual nature for granted, determined his religious significance +by his moral qualities—Paul by the moral act of humiliation +and obedience unto death, John by the complete dependence +of Christ upon God and hence also by his obedience, as well +as the unity of the love of Father and Son. There is only +one idea of pre-existence which no empiric contemplation of +history and no reason can uproot. This is identical with the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page332" id="page332"></a>[pg 332]</span> +most ancient idea found in the Old Testament, as well as that +prevalent among the early Christians, and consists in the religious +thought that God the Lord directs history. In its application +to Jesus Christ, it is contained in the words we read +in 1 Pet. I. 20: προεγνωσμενος μεν προ καταβολης κοσμου, φανερωθεις +δε δι' 'υμας τους δι' αυτου πιστους εις θεον τον εγειραντα +αυτον εκ νεκρων και δοξαν αυτωι δοντα, 'ωστε την πιστιν 'υμων και +ελπιδα ειναι εις θεον.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote452" name="footnote452"></a><b>Footnote 452:</b><a href="#footnotetag452"> (return) </a><p> These hints will have shewn that Paul's theory occupies a middle +position between the Jewish and Greek ideas of pre-existence. In the canon, +however, we have another group of writings which likewise gives evidence +of a middle position with regard to the matter, I mean the Johannine writings. +If we only possessed the prologue to the Gospel of John with its "εν αρχη +ην 'ο λογος," the "παντα δι' αυτου εγενετο" and the "'ο λογος σαρξ +εγενετο" we +could indeed point to nothing but Hellenic ideas. But the Gospel itself, as +is well known, contains very much that must have astonished a Greek, and +is opposed to the philosophical idea of the Logos. This occurs even in the +thought, "'ο λογος σαρξ εγενετο," which in itself is foreign to the +Logos conception. +Just fancy a proposition like the one in VI. 44, ουδεις δυναται ελθειν +προς με, εαν μη 'ο πατηρ 'ο πεμψας με ελκυση αυτον, or in V. 17. 21, engrafted on +Philo's system, and consider the revolution it would have caused there. No +doubt the prologue to some extent contains the themes set forth in the +presentation that follows, but they are worded in such a way that one +cannot help thinking the author wished to prepare Greek readers for the +paradox he had to communicate to them, by adapting his prologue to +their mode of thought. Under the altered conditions of thought which now +prevail, the prologue appears to us the mysterious part, and the narrative +that follows seems the portion that is relatively more intelligible. But to +the original readers, if they were educated Greeks, the prologue must have +been the part most easily understood. As nowadays a section on the nature +of the Christian religion is usually prefixed to a treatise on dogmatics, in +order to prepare and introduce the reader, so also the Johannine prologue +seems to be intended as an introduction of this kind. It brings in conceptions +which were familiar to the Greeks, in fact it enters into these more +deeply than is justified by the presentation which follows; for the notion +of the incarnate Logos is by no means the dominant one here. Though +faint echoes of this idea may possibly be met with here and there in the +Gospel—I confess I do not notice them—the predominating thought is +essentially the conception of Christ as the Son of God, who obediently +executes what the Father has shewn and appointed him. The works which +he does are allotted to him, and he performs them in the strength of the +Father. The whole of Christ's farewell discourses and the intercessory +prayer evince no Hellenic influence and no cosmological speculation whatever, +but shew the inner life of a man who knows himself to be one with +God to a greater extent than any before him, and who feels the leading +of men to God to be the task he had received and accomplished. In this +consciousness he speaks of the glory he had with the Father before the +world was (XVII. 4 f.; εγω σε εδοξασα επι της γης, το εργον τελειωσας 'ο δεδωκας +μοι 'ινα ποιησω; και νυν δοξασον με συ, πατερ, παρα σεαυτω τη δοξη 'η ειχον προ του +τον κοσμον ειναι, παρα σοι). With this we must compare verses like III. 13: +ουδεις αναβεβηκεν εις τον ουρανον ει μη 'ο εκ του ουρανου καταβας, 'ο 'υιος +του ανθρωπου, +and III. 31: 'ο ανωθεν ερχομενος επανω παντων εστιν. 'ο ων εκ της γης εκ +της γης +εστιν και εκ της γης λαλει 'ο εκ του ουρανου ερχομενος επανω παντων εστιν (see also +I. 30: VI. 33, 38, 41 f. 50 f. 58, 62: VIII. 14, 58; XVII. 24). But though the +pre-existence is strongly expressed in these passages, a separation of +πνευμα (λογος) and σαρξ in Christ is nowhere assumed in the Gospel +except +in the prologue. It is always Christ's whole personality to which every +sublime attribute is ascribed. The same one who "can do nothing of +himself", is also the one who was once glorious and will yet be glorified. +This idea, however, can still be referred to the προεγνοσμενος προ καταβολης +κοσμον, although it gives a peculiar δοξα with God to him who was foreknown +of God, and the oldest conception is yet to be traced in many +expressions, as, for example, I. 31: καγω ουκ ηδειν αυτον, αλλ' 'ινα φανερωθη +τω +Ισραηλ δια τουτο ηλθον, V. 19: ου δυναται 'ο υιος ποιειν αφ' εαυτου ουδεν αν +μη τι +βλεπη τον πατερα ποιουνται, V. 36: VIII. 38: 'α εγω 'εωρακα παρα τω πατρι λαλω, +VIII. 40: την αληθειαν 'υμιν λελαληκα 'ην ηκουσα παρα του θεου, XII. 49: +XV. 15: +παντα 'α ηξουσα παρα του πατρος μου εγνωρισα 'υμιν.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote453" name="footnote453"></a><b>Footnote 453:</b><a href="#footnotetag453"> (return) </a><p> This is indeed counterbalanced in the fourth Gospel by the thought +of the complete community of love between the Father and the Son, and +the pre-existence and descent of the latter here also tend to the glory of +God. In the sentence "God so loved the world" etc., that which Paul +describes in Phil. II. becomes at the same time an act of God, in fact +the act of God. The sentence "God is love" sums up again all individual +speculations, and raises them into a new and most exalted sphere.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote454" name="footnote454"></a><b>Footnote 454:</b><a href="#footnotetag454"> (return) </a><p> If it had been possible for speculation to maintain the level of the +Fourth Gospel, nothing of that would have happened; but where were +there theologians capable of this?</p></blockquote> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page333" id="page333"></a>[pg 333]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="APPENDIX_II" id="APPENDIX_II"></a>APPENDIX II.</h2> + +<h3><i>Liturgy and the Origin of Dogma.</i></h3> + + +<p>The reader has perhaps wondered why I have made so little +reference to Liturgy in my description of the origin of dogma. +For according to the most modern ideas about the history of +religion and the origin of theology, the development of both +may be traced in the ritual. Without any desire to criticise +these notions, I think I am justified in asserting that this is +another instance of the exceptional nature of Christianity. For +a considerable period it possessed no ritual at all, and the +process of development in this direction had been going on, +or been completed, a long time before ritual came to furnish +material for dogmatic discussion.</p> + +<p>The worship in Christian Churches grew out of that in the +synagogues, whereas there is no trace of its being influenced +by the Jewish Temple service (Duchesne, Origines du Culte +Chrétien, p. 45 ff.). Its oldest constituents are accordingly prayer, +reading of the scriptures, application of scripture texts, and +sacred song. In addition to these we have, as specifically +Christian elements, the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and +the utterances of persons inspired by the Spirit. The latter +manifestations, however, ceased in the course of the second +century, and to some extent as early as its first half. The +religious services in which a ritual became developed were +prayer, the Lord's Supper and sacred song. The Didache had +already prescribed stated formulæ for prayer. The ritual of +the Lord's Supper was determined in its main features by the +memory of its institution. The sphere of sacred song remained +the most unfettered, though here also, even at an early period—no +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page334" id="page334"></a>[pg 334]</span> +later in fact than the end of the first and beginning of +the second century—a fixed and a variable element were +distinguished; for responsory hymns, as is testified by the Epistle +of Pliny and the still earlier Book of Revelation, require to +follow a definite arrangement. But the whole, though perhaps +already fixed during the course of the second century, still bore +the stamp of spirituality and freedom. It was really worship +in spirit and in truth, and this and no other was the light in +which the Apologists, for instance, regarded it. Ritualism did +not begin to be a power in the Church till the end of the +second century; though it had been cultivated by the "Gnostics" +long before, and traces of it are found at an earlier period in +some of the older Fathers, such as Ignatius.</p> + +<p>Among the liturgical fragments still preserved to us from +the first three centuries two strata may be distinguished. Apart +from the responsory hymns in the Book of Revelation, which can +hardly represent fixed liturgical pieces, the only portions of +the older stratum in our possession are the Lord's Prayer, originating +with Jesus himself and used as a liturgy, together +with the sacramental prayers of the Didache. These prayers +exhibit a style unlike any of the liturgical formulæ of later +times; the prayer is exclusively addressed to God, it returns +thanks for knowledge and life; it speaks of Jesus the παις θεου +(Son of God) as the mediator; the intercession refers exclusively +to the Church, and the supplication is for the gathering +together of the Church, the hastening of the coming of the +kingdom and the destruction of the world. No direct mention +is made of the death and resurrection of Christ. These prayers +are the peculiar property of the Christian Church. It cannot, +however, be said that they exercised any important influence +on the history of dogma. The thoughts contained in them +perished in their specific shape; the measure of permanent +importance they attained in a more general form, was not preserved +to them through these prayers.</p> + +<p>The second stratum of liturgical pieces dates back to the +great prayer with which the first Epistle of Clement ends, for +in many respects this prayer, though some expressions in it +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page335" id="page335"></a>[pg 335]</span> +remind us of the older type (δια του ηγαπημενου παιδος σου +Ιησουν Χριστου, "through thy beloved son Jesus Christ "), already +exhibits the characteristics of the later liturgy, as is shewn, +for example, by a comparison of the liturgical prayer in the +Constitutions of the Apostles (see Lightfoot's edition and my +own). But this piece shews at the same time that the liturgical +prayers, and consequently the liturgy also, sprang from +those in the synagogue, for the similarity is striking. Here +we find a connection resembling that which exists between +the Jewish "Two Ways" and the Christian instruction of catechumens. +If this observation is correct, it clearly explains the +cautious use of historical and dogmatic material in the oldest +liturgies—a precaution not to their disadvantage. As in the +prayers of the synagogue, so also in Christian Churches, all +sorts of matters were not submitted to God or laid bare before +Him, but the prayers serve as a religious ceremony, that is, +as adoration, petition and intercession. Συ ει 'ο θεος μονος και +Ιησους Χριστος 'ο παις σου και 'ημεις λαος σου και προβατα της +νομης σου, (thou art God alone and Jesus Christ is thy son, and +we are thy people and the sheep of thy pasture). In this +confession, an expressive Christian modification of that of the +synagogue, the whole liturgical ceremony is epitomised. So +far as we can assume and conjecture from the scanty remains +of Ante-Nicene liturgy, the character of the ceremony was +not essentially altered in this respect. Nothing containing a +specific dogma or theological speculation was admitted. The +number of sacred ceremonies, already considerable in the second +century (how did they arise?), was still further increased in +the third; but the accompanying words, so far as we know, +expressed nothing but adoration, gratitude, supplication, and +intercession. The relations expressed in the liturgy became +more comprehensive, copious and detailed; but its fundamental +character was not changed. The history of dogma in the first +three centuries is not reflected in their liturgy.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page336" id="page336"></a>[pg 336]</span> + + + + +<h2><a name="APPENDIX_III" id="APPENDIX_III"></a>APPENDIX III.</h2> + +<h3>NEOPLATONISM.</h3> + + +<p><i>The historical significance and position of Neoplatonism.</i></p> + +<p>The political history of the ancient world ends with the +Empire of Diocletian and Constantine, which has not only +Roman and Greek, but also Oriental features. The history of +ancient philosophy ends with the universal philosophy of Neoplatonism, +which assimilated the elements of most of the +previous systems, and embodied the result of the history of +religion and civilisation in East and West. But as the Roman +Byzantine Empire is at one and the same time a product of +the final effort and the exhaustion of the ancient world, so +also Neoplatonism is, on one side, the completion of ancient +philosophy, and, on another, its abolition. Never before in the +Greek and Roman theory of the world did the conviction of +the dignity of man and his elevation above nature, attain so +certain an expression as in Neoplatonism; and never before +in the history of civilisation did its highest exponents, notwithstanding +all their progress in inner observation, so much undervalue +the sovereign significance of real science and pure knowledge +as the later Neoplatonists did. Judged from the stand-point +of pure science, of empirical knowledge of the world, the +philosophy of Plato and Aristotle marks a momentous turning-point, +the post-Aristotelian a retrogression, the Neoplatonic a +complete declension. But judging from the stand-point of religion +and morality, it must be admitted that the ethical temper which +Neoplatonism sought to beget and confirm, was the highest +and purest which the culture of the ancient world produced. +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page337" id="page337"></a>[pg 337]</span> +This necessarily took place at the expense of science: for on +the soil of polytheistic natural religions, the knowledge of +nature must either fetter and finally abolish religion, or be +fettered and abolished by religion. Religion and ethic, however, +proved the stronger powers. Placed between these and +the knowledge of nature, philosophy, after a period of fluctuation, +finally follows the stronger force. Since the ethical itself, +in the sphere of natural religions, is unhesitatingly conceived +as a higher kind of "nature", conflict with the empirical +knowledge of the world is unavoidable. The higher "physics", +for that is what religious ethics is here, must displace the +lower or be itself displaced. Philosophy must renounce its +scientific aspect, in order that man's claim to a supernatural +value of his person and life may be legitimised.</p> + +<p>It is an evidence of the vigour of man's moral endowments +that the only epoch of culture which we are able to survey +in its beginnings, its progress, and its close, ended not with +materialism, but with the most decided idealism. It is true +that in its way this idealism also denotes a bankruptcy; as +the contempt for reason and science, and these are contemned +when relegated to the second place, finally leads to barbarism, +because it results in the crassest superstition, and is exposed +to all manner of imposture. And, as a matter of fact, barbarism +succeeded the flourishing period of Neoplatonism. Philosophers +themselves no doubt found their mental food in the +knowledge which they thought themselves able to surpass; +but the masses grew up in superstition, and the Christian +Church, which entered on the inheritance of Neoplatonism, was +compelled to reckon with that and come to terms with it. +Just when the bankruptcy of the ancient civilisation and its +lapse into barbarism could not have failed to reveal themselves, +a kindly destiny placed on the stage of history barbarian +nations, for whom the work of a thousand years had as yet +no existence. Thus the fact is concealed, which, however, does +not escape the eye of one who looks below the surface, that +the inner history of the ancient world must necessarily have +degenerated into barbarism of its own accord, because it ended +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page338" id="page338"></a>[pg 338]</span> +with the renunciation of this world. There is no desire either +to enjoy it, to master it, or to know it as it really is. A new +world is disclosed for which everything is given up, and men +are ready to sacrifice insight and understanding, in order to +possess this world with certainty; and, in the light which radiates +from the world to come, that which in this world appears +absurd becomes wisdom, and wisdom becomes folly.</p> + +<p>Such is Neoplatonism. The pre-Socratic philosophers, declared +by the followers of Socrates to be childish, had freed themselves +from theology, that is, the mythology of the poets, and +constructed a philosophy from the observation of nature, without +troubling themselves about ethics and religion. In the systems +of Plato and Aristotle physics and ethics were to attain to +their rights, though the latter no doubt already occupied the +first place; theology, that is popular religion, continues to be +thrust aside. The post-Aristotelian philosophers of all parties +were already beginning to withdraw from the objective world. +Stoicism indeed seems to fall back into the materialism that I +prevailed before Plato and Aristotle; but the ethical dualism +which dominated the mood of the Stoic philosophers, did not +in the long run tolerate the materialistic physics; it sought +and found help in the metaphysical dualism of the Platonists, +and at the same time reconciled itself to the popular religion +by means of allegorism, that is, it formed a new theology. +But it did not result in permanent philosophic creations. A +one-sided development of Platonism produced the various forms +of scepticism which sought to abolish confidence in empirical +knowledge. Neoplatonism, which came last, learned from all +schools. In the first place, it belongs to the series of post-Aristotelian +systems and, as the philosophy of the subjective, +it is the logical completion of them. In the second place, it +rests on scepticism; for it also, though not at the very beginning, +gave up both confidence and pure interest in empirical +knowledge. Thirdly, it can boast of the name and authority of +Plato; for in metaphysics it consciously went back to him and +expressly opposed the metaphysics of the Stoics. Yet on this +very point it also learned something from the Stoics; for the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page339" id="page339"></a>[pg 339]</span> +Neoplatonic conception of the action of God on the world, +and of the nature and origin of matter, can only be explained +by reference to the dynamic pantheism of the Stoics. In other +respects, especially in psychology, it is diametrically opposed +to the Stoa, though superior. Fourthly, the study of Aristotle +also had an influence on Neoplatonism. That is shewn not +only in the philosophic methods of the Neoplatonists, but also, +though in a subordinate way, in their metaphysics. Fifthly, +the ethic of the Stoics was adopted by Neoplatonism, but this +ethic necessarily gave way to a still higher view of the conditions +of the spirit. Sixthly and finally, Christianity also, +which Neoplatonism opposed in every form (especially in that +of the Gnostic philosophy of religion), seems not to have been +entirely without influence. On this point we have as yet no +details, and these can only be ascertained by a thorough examination +of the polemic of Plotinus against the Gnostics.</p> + +<p>Hence, with the exception of Epicureanism, which Neoplatonism +dreaded as its mortal enemy, every important system +of former times was drawn upon by the new philosophy. But +we should not on that account call Neoplatonism an eclectic +system in the usual sense of the word. For in the first place, +it had one pervading and all predominating interest, the religious; +and in the second place, it introduced into philosophy +a new supreme principle, the super-rational, or the super-essential. +This principle should not be identified with the "Ideas" +of Plato or the "Form" of Aristotle. For as Zeller rightly +says: "In Plato and Aristotle the distinction of the sensuous +and the intelligible is the strongest expression for belief in +the truth of thought; it is only sensuous perception and sensuous +existence whose relative falsehood they presuppose; but +of a higher stage of spiritual life lying beyond idea and thought, +there is no mention. In Neoplatonism, on the other hand, it +is just this super-rational element which is regarded as the +final goal of all effort, and the highest ground of all existence; +the knowledge gained by thought is only an intermediate stage +between sensuous perception and the super-rational intuition; +the intelligible forms are not that which is highest and last, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page340" id="page340"></a>[pg 340]</span> +but only the media by which the influences of the formless +original essence are communicated to the world. This view +therefore presupposes not merely doubt of the reality of sensuous +existence and sensuous notions, but absolute doubt, +aspiration beyond all reality. The highest intelligible is not +that which constitutes the real content of thought, but only +that which is presupposed and earnestly desired by man as +the unknowable ground of his thought." Neoplatonism recognised +that a religious ethic can be built neither on sense-perception +nor on knowledge gained by the understanding, and +that it cannot be justified by these; it therefore broke both with +intellectual ethics and with utilitarian morality. But for that +very reason, having as it were parted with perception and +understanding in relation to the ascertaining of the highest +truth, it was compelled to seek for a new world and a new +function in the human spirit, in order to ascertain the existence +of what it desired, and to comprehend and describe that of +which it had ascertained the existence. But man cannot +transcend his psychological endowment. An iron ring incloses +him. He who does not allow his thought to be determined +by experience falls a prey to fancy, that is, thought, which +cannot be suppressed, assumes a mythological aspect: superstition +takes the place of reason, dull gazing at something +incomprehensible is regarded as the highest goal of the spirit's +efforts, and every conscious activity of the spirit is subordinated +to visionary conditions artificially brought about. But +that every conceit may not be allowed to assert itself, the +gradual exploration of every region of knowledge according +to every method of acquiring it, is demanded as a preliminary—the +Neoplatonists did not make matters easy for themselves,—and +a new and mighty principle is set up which is +to bridle fancy, viz., <i>the authority of a sure tradition</i>. This +authority must be superhuman, otherwise it would not come +under consideration; it must therefore be divine. On divine +disclosures, that is revelations, must rest both the highest +super-rational region of knowledge and the possibility of knowledge +itself. In a word, the philosophy which Neoplatonism +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page341" id="page341"></a>[pg 341]</span> +represents, whose final interest is the religious, and whose +highest object is the super-rational, must be a <i>philosophy of +revelation</i>.</p> + +<p>In the case of Plotinus himself and his immediate disciples, this +does not yet appear plainly. They still shew confidence in the +objective presuppositions of their philosophy, and have, especially +in psychology, done great work and created something new. But +this confidence vanishes in the later Neoplatonists. Porphyry, before +he became a disciple of Plotinus, wrote a book περι της εκλογιων +φιλοσοφια; as a philosopher he no longer required the "λογια." +But the later representatives of the system sought for their philosophy +revelations of the Godhead. They found them in the religious +traditions and cults of all nations. Neoplatonism learned from +the Stoics to rise above the political limits of nations and states, +and to widen the Hellenic consciousness to a universally human +one. The spirit of God has breathed throughout the whole +history of the nations, and the traces of divine revelation are +to be found everywhere. The older a religious tradition or +cultus is, the more worthy of honour, the more rich in thoughts +of God it is. Therefore the old Oriental religions are of special +value to the Neoplatonists. The allegorical method of interpreting +myths, which was practised by the Stoics in particular, +was accepted by Neoplatonism also. But the myths, spiritually +explained, have for this system an entirely different value from +what they had for the Stoic philosophers. The latter adjusted +themselves to the myths by the aid of allegorical explanation; +the later Neoplatonists, on the other hand, (after +a selection in which the immoral myths were sacrificed, see, +<i>e.g.</i> Julian) regarded them as <i>the proper material and sure +foundation of philosophy</i>. Neoplatonism claims to be not only +the absolute <i>philosophy</i>, completing all systems, but, at the +same time, the absolute <i>religion</i>, confirming and explaining all +earlier religions. A rehabilitation of all ancient religions is +aimed at (see the philosophic teachers of Julian and compare his +great religious experiment); each was to continue in its traditional +form, but, at the same time, each was to communicate +the religious temper and the religious knowledge which Neoplatonism +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page342" id="page342"></a>[pg 342]</span> +had attained, and each cultus is to lead to the high +morality which it behoves man to maintain. In Neoplatonism +the psychological fact of the longing of man for something +higher, is exalted to the all-predominating principle which explains +the world. Therefore the religions, though they are to be +purified and spiritualised, become the foundation of philosophy. +The Neoplatonic philosophy therefore presupposes the religious +syncretism of the third century, and cannot be understood +without it. The great forces which were half unconsciously at +work in this syncretism, were reflectively grasped by Neoplatonism. +It is the final fruit of the developments resulting from the +political, national and religious syncretism which arose from +the undertakings of Alexander the Great, and the Romans.</p> + +<p>Neoplatonism is consequently a stage in the history of religion; +nay, its significance in the history of the world lies in the fact +that it is so. In the history of science and enlightenment it +has a position of significance only in so far as it was the +necessary transition stage through which humanity had to pass, +in order to free itself from the religion of nature and the depreciation +of the spiritual life, which oppose an insurmountable +barrier to the highest advance of human knowledge. But as +Neoplatonism in its philosophical aspect means the abolition +of ancient philosophy, which, however, it desired to complete, +so also in its religious aspect it means the abolition of the +ancient religions which it aimed at restoring. For in requiring +these religions to mediate a definite religious knowledge, and +to lead to the highest moral disposition, it burdened them with +tasks to which they were not equal, and under which they could +not but break down. And in requiring them to loosen, if not +completely destroy, the bond which was their only stay, namely, +the political bond, it took from them the foundation on which +they were built. But could it not place them on a greater +and firmer foundation? Was not the Roman Empire in existence, +and could the new religion not become dependent on this in +the same way as the earlier religions had been dependent on +the lesser states and nations? It might be thought so, but it +was no longer possible. No doubt the political history of the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page343" id="page343"></a>[pg 343]</span> +nations round the Mediterranean, in their development into the +universal Roman monarchy, was parallel to the spiritual history +of these nations in their development into monotheism and a +universal system of morals; but the spiritual development in +the end far outstripped the political: even the Stoics attained +to a height which the political development could only partially +reach. Neoplatonism did indeed attempt to gain a connection +with the Byzantine Roman Empire: one noble monarch, Julian, +actually perished as a result of this endeavour: but even before +this the profounder Neoplatonists discerned that their lofty +religious philosophy would not bear contact with the despotic +Empire, because it would not bear any contact with the "world" +(plan of the founding of Platonopolis). Political affairs are at +bottom as much a matter of indifference to Neoplatonism as +material things in general. The idealism of the new philosophy +was too high to admit of its being naturalised in the despiritualised, +tyrannical and barren creation of the Byzantine Empire, +and this Empire itself needed unscrupulous and despotic police +officials, not noble philosophers. Important and instructive, +therefore, as the experiments are, which were made from time +to time by the state and by individual philosophers, to unite the +monarchy of the world with Neoplatonism, they could not but +be ineffectual.</p> + +<p>But, and this is the last question which one is justified in +raising here, why did not Neoplatonism create an independent +religious community? Since it had already changed the ancient +religions so fundamentally, in its purpose to restore them, since +it had attempted to fill the old naive cults with profound +philosophic ideas, and to make them exponents of a high morality, +why did it not take the further step and create a +religious fellowship of its own? Why did it not complete and +confirm the union of gods by the founding of a church which +was destined to embrace the whole of humanity, and in which, +beside the one ineffable Godhead, the gods of all nations could +have been worshipped? Why not? The answer to this question +is at the same time the reply to another, viz., why did the +Christian church supplant Neoplatonism? Neoplatonism lacked +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page344" id="page344"></a>[pg 344]</span> +three elements to give it the significance of a new and permanent +religious system. Augustine in his confessions (Bk. VII. 18-21) +has excellently described these three elements. First and above +all, it lacked a religious founder; secondly, it was unable to give +any answer to the question, how one could permanently maintain +the mood of blessedness and peace: thirdly, it lacked the means +of winning those who could not speculate. The "people" could +not learn the philosophic exercises which it recommended as +the condition of attaining the enjoyment of the highest good; +and the way on which even the "people" can attain to the +highest good was hidden from it. Hence these "wise and +prudent" remained a school. When Julian attempted to interest +the common uncultured man in the doctrines and worship of +this school, his reward was mockery and scorn.</p> + +<p>Not as philosophy and not as a new religion did Neoplatonism +become a decisive factor in history, but, if I may say so, as a +frame of mind.<a id="footnotetag455" name="footnotetag455"></a><a href="#footnote455"><sup>455</sup></a> The feeling that there is an eternal highest +good which lies beyond all outer experience and is not even +the intelligible, this feeling, with which was united the conviction +of the entire worthlessness of everything earthly, was produced +and fostered by Neoplatonism. But it was unable to describe +the contents of that highest being and highest good, and therefore +it was here compelled to give itself entirely up to fancy and +aesthetic feeling. Therefore it was forced to trace out "mysterious +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page345" id="page345"></a>[pg 345]</span> +ways to that which is within", which, however, led nowhere. +It transformed thought into a dream of feeling; it immersed +itself in the sea of emotions; it viewed the old fabled world +of the nations as the reflection of a higher reality, and transformed +reality into poetry; but in spite of all these efforts it +was only able, to use the words of Augustine, to see from afar +the land which it desired. It broke this world into fragments; +but nothing remained to it, save a ray from a world beyond, +which was only an indescribable "something."</p> + +<p>And yet the significance of Neoplatonism in the history of +our moral culture has been, and still is, immeasurable. Not only +because it refined and strengthened man's life of feeling and +sensation, not only because it, more than anything else, wove +the delicate veil which even to-day, whether we be religious or +irreligious, we ever and again cast over the offensive impression +of the brutal reality, but, above all, because it begat the consciousness +that the blessedness which alone can satisfy man, is +to be found somewhere else than in the sphere of knowledge. +That man does not live by bread alone, is a truth that was +known before Neoplatonism; but it proclaimed the profounder +truth, which the earlier philosophy had failed to recognise, that +man does not live by knowledge alone. Neoplatonism not only +had a propadeutic significance in the past, but continues to be, +even now, the source of all the moods which deny the world +and strive after an ideal, but have not power to raise themselves +above æsthetic feeling, and see no means of getting a clear notion +of the impulse of their own heart and the land of their desire.</p> + +<hr /> + +<p><i>Historical Origin of Neoplatonism.</i></p> + +<p>The forerunners of Neoplatonism were, on the one hand, +those Stoics who recognise the Platonic distinction of the sensible +and supersensible world, and on the other, the so-called +Neopythagoreans and religious philosophers, such as Posidonius, +Plutarch of Chæronea, and especially Numenius of Apamea.<a id="footnotetag456" name="footnotetag456"></a><a href="#footnote456"><sup>456</sup></a> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page346" id="page346"></a>[pg 346]</span> +Nevertheless, these cannot be regarded as the actual Fathers +of Neoplatonism; for the philosophic method was still very +imperfect in comparison with the Neoplatonic, their principles +were uncertain, and the authority of Plato was not yet regarded +as placed on an unapproachable height. The Jewish and Christian +philosophers of the first and second centuries stand very +much nearer the later Neoplatonism than Numenius. We +would probably see this more clearly if we knew the development +of Christianity in Alexandria in the second century. But, unfortunately, +we have only very meagre fragments to tell us of +this. First and above all, we must mention Philo. This philosopher, +who interpreted the Old Testament religion in terms +of Hellenism, had, in accordance with his idea of revelation, +already maintained that the Divine Original Essence is supra-rational, +that only ecstasy leads to Him, and that the materials +for religious and moral knowledge are contained in the oracles +of the Deity. The religious ethic of Philo, a combination of +Stoic, Platonic, Neopythagorean and Old Testament gnomic +wisdom, already bears the marks which we recognise in Neoplatonism. +The acknowledgment that God was exalted above +all thought, was a sort of tribute which Greek philosophy was +compelled to pay to the national religion of Israel, in return +for the supremacy which was here granted to the former. The +claim of positive religion to be something more than an +intellectual conception of the universal reason, was thereby +justified. Even religious syncretism is already found in Philo; +but it is something essentially different from the later Neoplatonic, +since Philo regarded the Jewish cult as the only +valuable one, and traced back all elements of truth in the Greeks +and Romans to borrowings from the books of Moses.</p> + +<p>The earliest Christian philosophers, especially Justin and +Athenagoras, likewise prepared the way for the speculations +of the later Neoplatonists by their attempts, on the one hand, +to connect Christianity with Stoicism and Platonism, and on +the other, to exhibit it as supra-Platonic. The method by +which Justin, in the introduction to the Dialogue with Trypho, +attempts to establish the Christian knowledge of God, that is, the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page347" id="page347"></a>[pg 347]</span> +knowledge of the truth, on Platonism, Scepticism and "Revelation", +strikingly reminds us of the later methods of the Neoplatonists. +Still more is one reminded of Neoplatonism by the speculations +of the Alexandrian Christian Gnostics, especially of Valentinus +and the followers of Basilides. The doctrines of the Basilidians(?) +communicated by Hippolytus (Philosoph. VII. c. 20 sq.), read +like fragments from the didactic writings of the Neoplatonists: +Επει ουδεν ην ουχ 'υλη, ουκ ουσια, ουκ ανουσιον, ουχ 'απλουν, ου +συνθετον, ουκ ανοητον, ουκ αναισθητον, ουκ ανθρωπος ... ουκ ων +θεος ανοητως, αναισθητως αβουλως απροαιρετως, απαθως, ανεπιθυμητιος +κοσμον ηθελησε ποιησαι ... 'Ουτως ουκ ων θεος εποιησε κοσμον +ουκ οντα εξ ουκ οντων, καταβαλομενος και 'υποστησας σπερμα +τι εν εχον πασαν εν 'εαυτω της του κοσμου πανσπερμιαν. Like the +Neoplatonists, these Basilidians did not teach an emanation from +the Godhead, but a dynamic mode of action of the Supreme +Being. The same can be asserted of Valentinus who also +places an unnamable being above all, and views matter not as +a second principle, but as a derived product. The dependence +of Basilides and Valentinus on Zeno and Plato is, besides, undoubted. +But the method of these Gnostics in constructing +their mental picture of the world and its history, was still an +uncertain one. Crude primitive myths are here received, and +naively realistic elements alternate with bold attempts at +spiritualising. While therefore, philosophically considered, the +Gnostic systems are very unlike the finished Neoplatonic ones, +it is certain that they contained almost all the elements of +the religious view of the world, which we find in Neoplatonism.</p> + +<p>But were the earliest Neoplatonists really acquainted with +the speculations of men like Philo, Justin, Valentinus and +Basilides? were they familiar with the Oriental religions, especially +with the Jewish and the Christian? and, if we must +answer these questions in the affirmative, did they really learn +from these sources?</p> + +<p>Unfortunately, we cannot at present give certain, and still less +detailed answers to these questions. But, as Neoplatonism originated +in Alexandria, as Oriental cults confronted every one +there, as the Jewish philosophy was prominent in the literary +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page348" id="page348"></a>[pg 348]</span> +market of Alexandria, and that was the very place where scientific +Christianity had its headquarters, there can, generally speaking, +be no doubt that the earliest Neoplatonists had some acquaintance +with Judaism and Christianity. In addition to that, we have +the certain fact that the earliest Neoplatonists had discussions +with (Roman) Gnostics (see Carl Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften +in koptischer Sprache, pp. 603-665), and that Porphyry entered +into elaborate controversy with Christianity. In comparison +with the Neoplatonic philosophy, the system of Philo and the +Gnostics appears in many respects an anticipation, which had +a certain influence on the former, the precise nature of which +has still to be ascertained. But the anticipation is not wonderful, +for the religious and philosophic temper which was only gradually +produced on Greek soil, existed from the first in such philosophers +as took their stand on the ground of a revealed religion of +redemption. Iamblichus and his followers first answer completely +to the Christian Gnostic schools of the second century; +that is to say, Greek philosophy, in its immanent development, +did not attain till the fourth century the position which some +Greek philosophers, who had accepted Christianity, had already +reached in the second. The influence of Christianity—both +Gnostic and Catholic—on Neoplatonism was perhaps very little +at any time, though individual Neoplatonists since the time of +Amelius employed Christian sayings as oracles, and testified +their high esteem for Christ.</p> + + +<p><i>Sketch of the History and Doctrines of Neoplatonism.</i></p> + +<p>Ammonius Saccas (died about 245), who is said to have been +born a Christian, but to have lapsed into heathenism, is regarded +as the founder of the Neoplatonic school in Alexandria. As +he has left no writings, no judgment can be formed as to his +teaching. His disciples inherited from him the prominence +which they gave to Plato and the attempts to prove the harmony +between the latter and Aristotle. His most important +disciples were; Origen the Christian, a second heathen Origen, +Longinus, Herennius, and, above all, Plotinus. The latter was +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page349" id="page349"></a>[pg 349]</span> +born in the year 205, at Lycopolis in Egypt, laboured from +224 in Rome, and found numerous adherents and admirers, +among others the Emperor Galienus and his consort, and died +in lower Italy about 270. His writings were arranged by his +disciple, Porphyry, and edited in six Enneads.</p> + +<p>The Enneads of Plotinus are the fundamental documents +of Neoplatonism. The teaching of this philosopher is mystical, +and, like all mysticism, it falls into two main portions. The +first and theoretic part shews the high origin of the soul, and +how it has departed from this its origin. The second and +practical part points out the way by which the soul can again +be raised to the Eternal and the Highest. As the soul with +its longings aspires beyond all sensible things and even beyond +the world of ideas, the Highest must be something above +reason. The system therefore has three parts. I. The Original +Essence. II. The world of ideas and the soul. III. The world +of phenomena. We may also, in conformity with the thought +of Plotinus, divide the system thus: A. The supersensible world +(1. The Original Essence; 2. the world of ideas; 3. the soul). +B. The world of phenomena. The Original Essence is the One +in contrast to the many; it is the Infinite and Unlimited +in contrast to the finite; it is the source of all being, therefore +the absolute causality and the only truly existing; but +it is also the Good, in so far as everything finite is to find +its aim in it and to flow back to it. Yet moral attributes +cannot be ascribed to this Original Essence, for these would +limit it. It has no attributes at all; it is a being without +magnitude, without life, without thought; nay, one should not, +properly speaking, even call it an existence; it is something +above existence, above goodness, and at the same time the +operative force without any substratum. As operative force +the Original Essence is continually begetting something else, +without itself being changed or moved or diminished. This +creation is not a physical process, but an emanation of force; +and because that which is produced has any existence only +in so far as the originally Existent works in it, it may be +said that Neoplatonism is dynamical Pantheism. Everything +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page350" id="page350"></a>[pg 350]</span> +that has being is directly or indirectly a production of the +"One." In this "One" everything so far as it has being, is +Divine, and God is all in all. But that which is derived is +not like the Original Essence itself. On the contrary, the +law of decreasing perfection prevails in the derived. The latter +is indeed an image and reflection of the Original Essence, +but the wider the circle of creations extends the less their +share in the Original Essence. Hence the totality of being +forms a gradation of concentric circles which finally lose themselves +almost completely in non-being, in so far as in the last +circle the force of the Original Essence is a vanishing one. +Each lower stage of being is connected with the Original +Essence only by means of the higher stages; that which is +inferior receives a share in the Original Essence only through +the medium of these. But everything derived has one feature, +viz., a longing for the higher; it turns itself to this so far as +its nature allows it.</p> + +<p>The first emanation of the Original Essence is the Νους; +it is a complete image of the Original Essence and archetype +of all existing things; it is being and thought at the same time, +World of ideas and Idea. As image the Νους is equal to the +Original Essence, as derived it is completely different from it. +What Plotinus understands by Νους is the highest sphere which +the human spirit can reach (κοσμος νοητος) and at the same +time pure thought itself.</p> + +<p>The soul which, according to Plotinus, is an immaterial substance +like the Νους,<a id="footnotetag457" name="footnotetag457"></a><a href="#footnote457"><sup>457</sup></a> is an image and product of the immovable +Νους. It is related to the Νους as the latter is to the +Original Essence. It stands between the Νους and the world +of phenomena. The Νους penetrates and enlightens it, but it +itself already touches the world of phenomena. The Νους is +undivided, the soul can also preserve its unity and abide in +the Νους; but it has at the same time the power to unite +itself with the material world and thereby to be divided. +Hence it occupies a middle position. In virtue of its nature +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page351" id="page351"></a>[pg 351]</span> +and destiny it belongs, as the single soul (soul of the world), +to the supersensible world; but it embraces at the same time +the many individual souls; these may allow themselves to be +ruled by the Νους, or they may turn to the sensible and be +lost in the finite.</p> + +<p>The soul, an active essence, begets the corporeal or the world +of phenomena. This should allow itself to be so ruled by the +soul that the manifold of which it consists may abide in fullest +harmony. Plotinus is not a dualist like the majority of +Christian Gnostics. He praises the beauty and glory of the +world. When in it the idea really has dominion over matter, +the soul over the body, the world is beautiful and good. It is +the image of the upper world, though a shadowy one, and the +gradations of better or worse in it are necessary to the harmony +of the whole. But, in point of fact, the unity and harmony +in the world of phenomena disappear in strife and opposition. +The result is a conflict, a growth and decay, a seeming +existence. The original cause of this lies in the fact that a +substratum, viz., matter, lies at the basis of bodies. Matter +is the foundation of each (το βαθος 'εκαστου 'η 'υλη); it is the +obscure, the indefinite, that which is without qualities, the +μη ον. As devoid of form and idea it is the evil, as capable +of form the intermediate.</p> + +<p>The human souls that are sunk in the material have been +ensnared by the sensuous, and have allowed themselves to be +ruled by desire. They now seek to detach themselves entirely +from true being, and striving after independence fall into an +unreal existence. Conversion therefore is needed, and this is +possible, for freedom is not lost.</p> + +<p>Now here begins the practical philosophy. The soul must +rise again to the highest on the same path by which it descended: +it must first of all return to itself. This takes place +through virtue which aspires to assimilation with God and +leads to Him. In the ethics of Plotinus all earlier philosophic +systems of virtue are united and arranged in graduated order. +Civic virtues stand lowest, then follow the purifying, and finally +the deifying virtues. Civic virtues only adorn the life, but do +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page352" id="page352"></a>[pg 352]</span> +not elevate the soul as the purifying virtues do; they free +the soul from the sensuous and lead it back to itself and +thereby to the Νους. Man becomes again a spiritual and permanent +being, and frees himself from every sin, through asceticism. +But he is to reach still higher; he is not only to be +without sin, but he is to be "God." That takes place through +the contemplation of the Original Essence, the One, that is +through ecstatic elevation to Him. This is not mediated by +thought, for thought reaches only to the Νους, and is itself +only a movement. Thought is only a preliminary stage towards +union with God. The soul can only see and touch the Original +Essence in a condition of complete passivity and rest. Hence, +in order to attain to this highest, the soul must subject itself +to a spiritual "Exercise." It must begin with the contemplation +of material things, their diversity and harmony, then +retire into itself and sink itself in its own essence, and thence +mount up to the Νους, to the world of ideas; but, as it still +does not find the One and Highest Essence there, as the call +always comes to it from there: "We have not made ourselves" +(Augustine in the sublime description of Christian, that is, +Neoplatonic exercises), it must, as it were, lose sight of itself +in a state of intense concentration, in mute contemplation and +complete forgetfulness of all things. It can then see God, the +source of life, the principle of being, the first cause of all +good, the root of the soul. In that moment it enjoys the +highest and indescribable blessedness; it is itself, as it were, +swallowed up by the deity and bathed in the light of eternity.</p> + +<p>Plotinus, as Porphyry relates, attained to this ecstatic union +with God four times during the six years he was with him. +To Plotinus this religious philosophy was sufficient; he did not +require the popular religion and worship. But yet he sought +their support. The Deity is indeed in the last resort only the +Original Essence, but it manifests itself in a fulness of emanations +and phenomena. The Νους is, as it were, the second +God; the λογοι, which are included in it, are gods; the stars +are gods, etc. A strict monotheism appeared to Plotinus a +poor thing. The myths of the popular religion were interpreted +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page353" id="page353"></a>[pg 353]</span> +by him in a particular sense, and he could justify even magic, +soothsaying and prayer. He brought forward reasons for the +worship of images, which the Christian worshippers of images +subsequently adopted. Yet, in comparison with the later Neoplatonists, +he was free from gross superstition and wild fanaticism. +He cannot, in the remotest sense, be reckoned among +the "deceivers who were themselves deceived," and the restoration +of the ancient worships of the Gods was not his chief aim.</p> + +<p>Among his disciples the most important were Amelius and +Porphyry. Amelius changed the doctrine of Plotinus in some +points, and even made use of the prologue of the Gospel of +John. Porphyry has the merit of having systematized and +spread the teaching of his master, Plotinus. He was born at +Tyre, in the year 233; whether he was for some time a Christian +is uncertain; from 263-268 he was a pupil of Plotinus at +Rome; before that he wrote the work περι της εκ λογιων φιλοσοφιας, +which shews that he wished to base philosophy on +revelation; he lived a few years in Sicily (about 270) where +he wrote his "fifteen books against the Christians"; he then +returned to Rome where he laboured as a teacher, edited the +works of Plotinus, wrote himself a series of treatises, married, +in his old age, the Roman Lady Marcella, and died about the +year 303. Porphyry was not an original, productive thinker, +but a diligent and thorough investigator, characterized by great +learning, by the gift of an acute faculty for philological and +historical criticism, and by an earnest desire to spread the true +philosophy of life, to refute false doctrines, especially those of +the Christians, to ennoble man and draw him to that which is +good. That a mind so free and noble surrendered itself entirely +to the philosophy of Plotinus and to polytheistic mysticism, is +a proof that the spirit of the age works almost irresistibly, and +that religious mysticism was the highest possession of the time. +The teaching of Porphyry is distinguished from that of Plotinus +by the fact that it is still more practical and religious. The +aim of philosophy, according to Porphyry, is the salvation of +the soul. The origin and the guilt of evil lie not in the body, +but in the desires of the soul. The strictest asceticism (abstinence +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page354" id="page354"></a>[pg 354]</span> +from cohabitation, flesh and wine) is therefore required +in addition to the knowledge of God. During the course of +his life Porphyry warned men more and more decidedly against +crude popular beliefs and immoral cults. "The ordinary notions +of the Deity are of such a kind that it is more godless to +share them than to neglect the images of the gods." But +freely as he criticised the popular religions, he did not wish to +give them up. He contended for a pure worship of the many +gods, and recognised the right of every old national religion, +and the religious duties of their professors. His work against +the Christians is not directed against Christ, or what he regarded +as the teaching of Christ, but against the Christians of his day +and against the sacred books which, according to Porphyry, were +written by impostors and ignorant people. In his acute criticism +of the genesis or what was regarded as Christianity in +his day, he spoke bitter and earnest truths, and therefore acquired +the name of the fiercest and most formidable of all the enemies +of Christians. His work was destroyed (condemned by an edict +of Theodosius II. and Valentinian, of the year 448), and even +the writings in reply (by Methodius, Eusebius, Apollinaris, +Philostorgius, etc.,) have not been preserved. Yet we possess +fragments in Lactantius, Augustine, Macarius Magnes and +others, which attest how thoroughly Porphyry studied the +Christian writings and how great his faculty was for true historical +criticism.</p> + +<p>Porphyry marks the transition to the Neoplatonism which +subordinated itself entirely to the polytheistic cults, and which +strove, above all, to defend the old Greek and Oriental religions +against the formidable assaults of Christianity. Iamblichus, the +disciple of Porphyry (died 330), transformed Neoplatonism "from +a philosophic theorem into a theological doctrine." The doctrines +peculiar to Iamblichus can no longer be deduced from scientific, +but only from practical motives. In order to justify superstition +and the ancient cults, philosophy in Iamblichus becomes a +theurgic, mysteriosophy, spiritualism. Now appears that series +of "Philosophers", in whose case one is frequently unable to +decide whether they are deceivers or deceived, "decepti deceptores," +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page355" id="page355"></a>[pg 355]</span> +as Augustine says. A mysterious mysticism of numbers +plays a great rôle. That which is absurd and mechanical is +surrounded with the halo of the sacramental; myths are proved +by pious fancies and pietistic considerations with a spiritual +sound; miracles, even the most foolish, are believed in and +are performed. The philosopher becomes the priest of magic, +and philosophy an instrument of magic. At the same time, +the number of Divine Beings is infinitely increased by the further +action of unlimited speculation. But this fantastic addition which +Iamblichus makes to the inhabitants of Olympus, is the very +fact which proves that Greek philosophy has here returned to +mythology, and that the religion of nature was still a power. +And yet no one can deny that, in the fourth century, even the +noblest and choicest minds were found among the Neoplatonists. +So great was the declension, that this Neoplatonic philosophy +was still the protecting roof for many influential and earnest +thinkers, although swindlers and hypocrites also concealed themselves +under this roof. In relation to some points of doctrine, +at any rate, the dogmatic of Iamblichus marks an advance. +Thus, the emphasis he lays on the idea that evil has its seat +in the will, is an important fact; and in general the significance +he assigns to the will is perhaps the most important advance +in psychology, and one which could not fail to have great +influence on dogmatic also (Augustine). It likewise deserves +to be noted that Iamblichus disputed Plotinus' doctrine of the +divinity of the human soul.</p> + +<p>The numerous disciples of Iamblichus (Aedesius, Chrysantius, +Eusebius, Priscus, Sopater, Sallust and especially Maximus, the +most celebrated) did little to further speculation; they occupied +themselves partly with commenting on the writings of the earlier +philosophers (particularly Themistius), partly as missionaries of +their mysticism. The interests and aims of these philosophers +are best shewn in the treatise "De mysteriis Ægyptiorum." +Their hopes were strengthened when their disciple Julian, a +man enthusiastic and noble, but lacking in intellectual originality, +ascended the imperial throne, 361 to 363. This emperor's +romantic policy of restoration, as he himself must have seen, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page356" id="page356"></a>[pg 356]</span> +had, however, no result, and his early death destroyed ever +hope of supplanting Christianity.</p> + +<p>But the victory of the Church, in the age of Valentinian +and Theodosius, unquestionably purified Neoplatonism. The +struggle for dominion had led philosophers to grasp at and +unite themselves with everything that was hostile to Christianity. +But now Neoplatonism was driven out of the great arena of +history. The Church and its dogmatic, which inherited its +estate, received along with the latter superstition, polytheism, +magic, myths and the apparatus of religious magic. The more +firmly all this established itself in the Church and succeeded +there, though not without finding resistance, the freer Neoplatonism +becomes. It does not by any means give up its +religious attitude or its theory of knowledge, but it applies +itself with fresh zeal to scientific investigations and especially +to the study of the earlier philosophers. Though Plato remains +the divine philosopher, yet it may be noticed how, from about +400, the writings of Aristotle were increasingly read and prized. +Neoplatonic schools continue to flourish in the chief cities of +the empire up to the beginning of the fifth century, and in +this period they are at the same time the places where the +theologians of the Church are formed. The noble Hypatia, +to whom Synesius, her enthusiastic disciple, who was afterwards +a bishop, raised a splendid monument, taught in Alexandria. +But from the beginning of the fifth century ecclesiastical fanaticism +ceased to tolerate heathenism. The murder of Hypatia +put an end to philosophy in Alexandria, though the Alexandrian +school maintained itself in a feeble form till the middle +of the sixth century. But in one city of the East, removed +from the great highways of the world, which had become a +provincial city and possessed memories which the Church of +the fifth century felt itself too weak to destroy, viz., in Athens, +a Neoplatonic school continued to flourish. There, among the +monuments of a past time, Hellenism found its last asylum. +The school of Athens returned to a more strict philosophic +method and to learned studies. But as it clung to religious +philosophy and undertook to reduce the whole Greek tradition, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page357" id="page357"></a>[pg 357]</span> +viewed in the light of Plotinus' theory, to a comprehensive +and strictly articulated system, a philosophy arose here +which may be called scholastic. For every philosophy is +scholastic which considers fantastic and mythological material +as a <i>noli me tangere</i>, and treats it in logical categories and +distinctions by means of a complete set of formulæ. But to +these Neoplatonists the writings of Plato, certain divine oracles, +the Orphic poems, and much else which were dated back to +the dim and distant past, were documents of standard authority, +and inspired divine writings. They took from them the material +of philosophy, which they then treated with all the instruments +of dialectic.</p> + +<p>The most prominent teachers at Athens were Plutarch (died +433), his disciple Syrian (who, as an exegete of Plato and +Aristotle, is said to have done important work, and who +deserves notice also, because he very vigorously emphasised the +freedom of the will), but, above all, Proclus (411-485). Proclus +is the great scholastic of Neoplatonism. It was he "who +fashioned the whole traditional material into a powerful system +with religious warmth and formal clearness, filling up the gaps +and reconciling the contradictions by distinctions and speculations," +"Proclus," says Zeller, "was the first who, by the +strict logic of his system, formally completed the Neoplatonic +philosophy and gave it, with due regard to all the changes +it had undergone since the second century, that form in which +it passed over to the Christian and Mohammedan middle ages." +Forty-four years after the death of Proclus the school of Athens +was closed by Justinian (in the year 529); but in the labours of +Proclus it had completed its work, and could now really retire +from the scene. It had nothing new to say; it was ripe for +death, and an honourable end was prepared for it. The words +of Proclus, the legacy of Hellenism to the Church and to the +middle ages, attained an immeasurable importance in the +thousand years which followed. They were not only one of +the bridges by which the philosophy of the middle ages returned +to Plato and Aristotle, but they determined the scientific +method of the next thirty generations, and they partly produced, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page358" id="page358"></a>[pg 358]</span> +partly strengthened and brought to maturity the mediæval +Christian mysticism in East and West.</p> + +<p>The disciples of Proclus, Marinus, Asclepiodotus, Ammonius, +Zenodotus, Isidorus, Hegias, Damascius, are not regarded as +prominent. Damascius was the last head of the school at +Athens. He, Simplicius, the masterly commentator on Aristotle, +and five other Neoplatonists, migrated to Persia after Justinian +had issued the edict closing the school. They lived in the +illusion that Persia, the land of the East, was the seat of wisdom, +righteousness and piety. After a few years they returned +with blasted hopes to the Byzantine kingdom.</p> + +<p>At the beginning of the sixth century Neoplatonism died +out as an independent philosophy in the East; but almost +at the same time, and this is no accident, it conquered +new regions in the dogmatic of the Church through the +spread of the writings of the pseudo-Dionysius; it began +to fertilize Christian mysticism, and filled the worship with a +new charm.</p> + +<p>In the West, where, from the second century, we meet with +few attempts at philosophic speculation, and where the necessary +conditions for mystical contemplation were wanting, Neoplatonism +only gained a few adherents here and there. We +know that the rhetorician, Marius Victorinus, (about 350) translated +the writings of Plotinus. This translation exercised decisive +influence on the mental history of Augustine, who borrowed +from Neoplatonism the best it had, its psychology, introduced +it into the dogmatic of the Church, and developed it still further. +It may be said that Neoplatonism influenced the West at first +only through the medium or under the cloak of ecclesiastical +theology. Even Boethius—we can now regard this as certain—was +a Catholic Christian. But in his mode of thought he was +certainly a Neoplatonist. His violent death in the year 525, +marks the end of independent philosophic effort in the West. +This last Roman philosopher stood indeed almost completely +alone in his century, and the philosophy for which he lived +was neither original, nor firmly grounded and methodically +carried out.</p> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page359" id="page359"></a>[pg 359]</span> + + +<p><i>Neoplatonism and Ecclesiastical Dogmatic.</i></p> + +<p>The question as to the influence which Neoplatonism had +on the history of the development of Christianity, is not easy +to answer; it is hardly possible to get a clear view of the +relation between them. Above all, the answers will diverge +according as we take a wider or a narrower view of so-called +"Neoplatonism." If we view Neoplatonism as the highest +and only appropriate expression for the religious hopes and +moods which moved the nations of Græco-Roman Empire +from the second to the fifth centuries, the ecclesiastical dogmatic +which was developed in the same period, may appear +as a younger sister of Neoplatonism which was fostered by +the elder one, but which fought and finally conquered her. +The Neoplatonists themselves described the ecclesiastical theologians +as intruders who appropriated Greek philosophy, but +mixed it with foreign fables. Hence Porphyry said of Origen +(in Euseb., H. E. VI. 19): "The outer life of Origen was that +of a Christian and opposed to the law; but, in regard to his +views of things and of the Deity, he thought like the Greeks, +inasmuch as he introduced their ideas into the myths of other +peoples." This judgment of Porphyry is at any rate more +just and appropriate than that of the Church theologians about +Greek philosophy, that it had stolen all its really valuable +doctrines from the ancient sacred writings of the Christians. +It is, above all, important that the affinity of the two sides +was noted. So far, then, as both ecclesiastical dogmatic and +Neoplatonism start from the feeling of the need of redemption, +so far as both desire to free the soul from the sensuous, so +far as they recognise the inability of man to attain to blessedness +and a certain knowledge of the truth without divine +help and without a revelation, they are fundamentally related. +It must no doubt be admitted that Christianity itself was already +profoundly affected by the influence of Hellenism when it began +to outline a theology; but this influence must be traced back +less to philosophy than to the collective culture, and to all +the conditions under which the spiritual life was enacted. When +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page360" id="page360"></a>[pg 360]</span> +Neoplatonism arose ecclesiastical Christianity already possessed +the fundamental features of its theology, that is, it had developed +these, not by accident, contemporaneously and independent of +Neoplatonism. Only by identifying itself with the whole history +of Greek philosophy, or claiming to be the restoration of +pure Platonism, was Neoplatonism able to maintain that it had +been robbed by the church theology of Alexandria. But that +was an illusion. Ecclesiastical theology appears, though our +sources here are unfortunately very meagre, to have learned +but little from Neoplatonism even in the third century, partly +because the latter itself had not yet developed into the form +in which the dogmatic of the church could assume its doctrines, +partly because ecclesiastical theology had first to succeed in +its own region, to fight for its own position and to conquer +older notions intolerable to it. Origen was quite as independent +a thinker as Plotinus; but both drew from the same tradition. +On the other hand, the influence of Neoplatonism on the Oriental +theologians was very great from the fourth century. The more +the Church expressed its peculiar ideas in doctrines which, +though worked out by means of philosophy, were yet unacceptable +to Neoplatonism (the christological doctrines), the more +readily did theologians in all other questions resign themselves +to the influence of the latter system. The doctrines of the +incarnation, of the resurrection of the body, and of the creation +of the word, in time formed the boundary lines between the +dogmatic of the Church and Neoplatonism; in all else ecclesiastical +theologians and Neoplatonists approximated so closely +that many among them were completely at one. Nay, there +were Christian men, such as Synesius, for example, who in +certain circumstances were not found fault with for giving a +speculative interpretation of the specifically Christian doctrines. +If in any writing the doctrines just named are not referred to, +it is often doubtful whether it was composed by a Christian +or a Neoplatonist. Above all, the ethical rules, the precepts +of the right life, that is, asceticism, were always similar. Here +Neoplatonism in the end celebrated its greatest triumph. It +introduced into the church its entire mysticism, its mystic exercises, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page361" id="page361"></a>[pg 361]</span> +and even the magical ceremonies, as expounded by Iamblichus. +The writings of the pseudo-Dionysius contain a Gnosis +in which, by means of the doctrines of Iamblichus and doctrines +like those of Proclus, the dogmatic of the church is changed +into a scholastic mysticism with directions for practical life and +worship. As the writings of this pseudo-Dionysius were regarded +as those of Dionysius the disciple of the Apostle, the scholastic +mysticism which they taught was regarded as apostolic, almost as +a divine science. The importance which these writings obtained +first in the East, then from the ninth or the twelfth century +also in the West, cannot be too highly estimated. It is impossible +to explain them here. This much only may be said, that +the mystical and pietistic devotion of to-day, even in the Protestant +Church, draws its nourishment from writings whose +connection with those of the pseudo-Areopagitic can still be +traced through its various intermediate stages.</p> + +<p>In antiquity itself Neoplatonism influenced with special directness +one Western theologian, and that the most important, +viz., Augustine. By the aid of this system Augustine was freed +from Manichæism, though not completely, as well as from +scepticism. In the seventh Book of his confessions he has acknowledged +his indebtedness to the reading of Neoplatonic writings. +In the most essential doctrines, viz., those about God, matter, +the relation of God to the world, freedom and evil, Augustine +always remained dependent on Neoplatonism; but at the same +time, of all theologians in antiquity he is the one who saw +most clearly and shewed most plainly wherein Christianity and +Neoplatonism are distinguished. The best that has been written +by a Father of the Church on this subject, is contained in +Chapters 9-21 of the seventh Book of his confessions.</p> + +<p>The question why Neoplatonism was defeated in the conflict +with Christianity, has not as yet been satisfactorily answered +by historians. Usually the question is wrongly stated. The +point here is not about a Christianity arbitrarily fashioned, +but only about Catholic Christianity and Catholic theology. This +conquered Neoplatonism after it had assimilated nearly everything +it possessed. Further, we must note the place where the +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page362" id="page362"></a>[pg 362]</span> +victory was gained. The battle-field was the empire of Constantine, +Theodosius and Justinian. Only when we have considered +these and all other conditions, are we entitled to enquire +in what degree the specific doctrines of Christianity contributed +to the victory, and what share the organisation of the church +had in it. Undoubtedly, however, we must always give the +chief prominence to the fact that the Catholic dogmatic excluded +polytheism in principle, and at the same time found a means +by which it could represent the faith of the cultured mediated +by science as identical with the faith of the multitude resting +on authority.</p> + +<p>In the theology and philosophy of the middle ages, mysticism +was the strong opponent of rationalistic dogmatism; and, in +fact, Platonism and Neoplatonism were the sources from which +in the age of the Renaissance and in the following two centuries, +empiric science developed itself in opposition to the +rationalistic dogmatism which disregarded experience. Magic, +astrology, alchemy, all of which were closely connected with +Neoplatonism, gave an effective impulse to the observation of +nature and, consequently, to natural science, and finally prevailed +over formal and barren rationalism Consequently, in +the history of science, Neoplatonism has attained a significance +and performed services of which men like Iamblichus and +Proclus never ventured to dream. In point of fact, actual +history is often more wonderful and capricious than legends +and fables.</p> + +<p><i>Literature</i>—The best and fullest account of Neoplatonism, +to which I have been much indebted in preparing this sketch, +is Zeller's, Die Philosophie der Griechen, III. Theil, 2 Abtheilung +(3 Auflage, 1881) pp. 419-865. Cf. also Hegel, Gesch. d. +Philos. III. 3 ff. Ritter, IV. pp. 571-728: Ritter et Preller, +Hist. phil. græc. et rom. § 531 ff. The Histories of Philosophy +by Schwegler, Brandis, Brucker, Thilo, Strümpell, Ueberweg +(the most complete survey of the literature is found here), +Erdmann, Cousin, Prantl. Lewes. Further: Vacherot, Hist, de +l'ecole d'Alexandria, 1846, 1851. Simon, Hist, de l'école +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page363" id="page363"></a>[pg 363]</span> +d'Alexandria, 1845. Steinhart, articles "Neuplatonismus", +"Plotin", "Porphyrius", "Proklus" in Pauly, Realencyclop. +des klass. Alterthums. Wagenmann, article "Neuplatonismus" +in Herzog, Realencyklopädie f. protest. Theol. T. X. (2 Aufl.) +pp. 519-529. Heinze, Lehre vom Logos, 1872, p. 298 f. Richter, +Neuplatonische Studien, 4 Hefte.</p> + +<p>Heigl, Der Bericht des Porphyrios über Ongenes, 1835. +Redepenning, Origenes I. p. 421 f. Dehaut, Essai historique +sur la vie et la doctrine d'Ammonius Saccas, 1836. Kirchner, +Die Philosophie des Plotin, 1854. (For the biography of Plotinus, +cf. Porphyry, Eunapius, Suidas; the latter also in particular +for the later Neoplatonists). Steinhart, De dialectica +Plotini ratione, 1829, and Meletemata Plotiniana, 1840. Neander, +Ueber die welthistorische Bedeutung des 9'ten Buchs in der 2'ten +Enneade des Plotinos, in the Abhandl. der Berliner Akademie, 1843. +p. 299 f. Valentiner, Plotin u.s. Enneaden, in the Theol. Stud. u. +Kritiken, 1864, H. 1. On Porphyrius, see Fabricius, Bibl. gr. +V. p. 725 f. Wolff, Porph. de philosophia ex oraculis haurienda +librorum reliquiæ, 1856. Müller, Fragmenta hist. gr. +III. 688 f. Mai, Ep. ad Marcellam, 1816. Bernays, Theophrast. +1866. Wagenmann, Jahrbücher für Deutsche Theol. Th. XXIII. +(1878) p. 269 f. Richter, Zeitschr. f. Philos. Th. LII. (1867) p. +30 f. Hebenstreit, de Iamblichi doctrina, 1764. Harless, Das +Buch von den ägyptischen Mysterien, 1858. Meiners, Comment. +Societ. Gotting IV. p. 50 f. On Julian, see the catalogue +of the rich literature in the Realencyklop. f. prot Theol. Th. +VII. (2 Aufl.) p. 287, and Neumann, Juliani libr. c. Christ, +quæ supersunt, 1880. Hoche, Hypatia, in "Philologus" Th. XV. +(1860) p. 435 f. Bach, De Syriano philosopho, 1862. On Proclus, +see the Biography of Marinus and Freudenthal in "Hermes" +Th. XVI. p. 214 f. On Boethius, cf. Nitzsch, Das System des +Boëthius, 1860. Usener, Anecdoton Holderi, 1877.</p> + +<p>On the relation of Neoplatonism to Christianity and its significance +in the history of the world, cf. the Church Histories +of Mosheim, Gieseler, Neander, Baur; also the Histories of +Dogma by Baur and Nitzsch. Also Löffler, Der Platonismus +der Kirchenväter, 1782. Huber, Die Philosophic der Kirchenväter, +<span class="pagenum"><a name="page364" id="page364"></a>[pg 364]</span> +1859. Tzschirner, Fall des Heidenthums, 1829. Burckhardt, +Die Zeit Constantin's des Grossen, p. 155 f. Chastel, +Hist. de la destruction du Paganisme dans l'empire d'Orient, +1850. Beugnot, Hist. de la destruction du Paganisme en Occident, +1835. E. V. Lasaulx, Der Untergang des Hellenismus, +1854. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria 1886. +Réville, La réligion à Rome sous les Sévères, 1886. Vogt, +Neuplatonismus und Christenthum, 1836. Ullmann, Einfluss +des Christenthums auf Porphyrius, in Stud, und Krit., 1832 On +the relation of Neoplatonism to Monasticism, cf. Keim, Aus dem +Urchristenthum, 1178, p. 204 f. Carl Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften +in Koptischer Sprache, 1892 (Texte u. Unters. VIII. I. 2). +See, further, the Monographs on Origen, the later Alexandrians, +the three Cappadocians, Theodoret, Synesius, Marius Victorinus, +Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius, Maximus, Scotus Erigena and +the Mediæval Mystics. Special prominence is due to: Jahn, +Basilius Plotinizans, 1838. Dorner, Augustinus, 1875. Bestmann, +Qua ratione Augustinus notiones philos. Græcæ adhibuerit, 1877. +Loesche, Augustinus Plotinizans, 1881. Volkmann, Synesios, +1869. On the after effects of Neoplatonism on Christian Dogmatic, +see Ritschl, Theologie und Metaphysik. 2 Aufl. 1887.</p> + + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote455" name="footnote455"></a><b>Footnote 455:</b><a href="#footnotetag455"> (return) </a><p> Excellent remarks on the nature of Neoplatonism may be found in +Eucken, Gött. Gel. Anz., 1 März, 1884 p. 176 ff.: this sketch was already +written before I saw them. "We find the characteristic of the Neoplatonic +epoch in the effort to make the inward, which till then had had alongside +of it an independent outer world as a contrast, the exclusive and all-determining +element. The movement which makes itself felt here, outlasts +antiquity and prepares the way for the modern period; it brings about +the dissolution of that which marked the culminating point of ancient life, +that which we are wont to call specifically classic. The life of the spirit, +till then conceived as a member of an ordered world and subject to its +laws, now freely passes beyond these bounds, and attempts to mould, and +even to create, the universe from itself. No doubt the different attempts +to realise this desire reveal, for the most part, a deep gulf between will +and deed; usually ethical and religious requirements of the naive human +consciousness must replace universally creative spiritual power, but all +the insufficient and unsatisfactory elements of this period should not obscure +the fact that, in one instance, it reached the height of a great philosophic +achievement, in the case of Plotinus."</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote456" name="footnote456"></a><b>Footnote 456:</b><a href="#footnotetag456"> (return) </a><p> Plotinus, even in his lifetime, was reproached with having borrowed +most of his system from Numenius. Porphyry, in his "Vita Plotini", +defended him against this reproach.</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote class="footnote"><a id="footnote457" name="footnote457"></a><b>Footnote 457:</b><a href="#footnotetag457"> (return) </a><p> On this sort of Trinity, see Bigg, "The Christian +Platonists of Alexandria," p. 248 f.</p></blockquote> +<hr class="full" /> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of History of Dogma, Volume 1 (of 7), by +Adolph Harnack + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF DOGMA, VOLUME 1 (OF 7) *** + +***** This file should be named 19612-h.htm or 19612-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/1/9/6/1/19612/ + +Produced by Dave Maddock, David King, and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> |