A Source Book for Ancient Church History Part 9

Ch. 31. There were then among the Jews certain men who were prophets of G.o.d, through whom the prophetic Spirit [context shows that the Logos is here meant] published beforehand things that were to come to pa.s.s before they happened. And their prophecies, as they were spoken and when they were uttered, the kings who were among the Jews at the several times carefully preserved in their possession, when they had been arranged by the prophets themselves in their own Hebrew language. They are also in possession of all Jews throughout the world. In these books of the prophets we found Jesus our Christ foretold as coming, born of a virgin, growing up to manhood, and healing every disease and every sickness, and raising the dead, and being hated and unrecognized, and crucified, and dying, and rising again, and ascending into heaven, and both being and also called the Son of G.o.d, and that certain persons should be sent by Him into every race of men to publish these things, and that rather among the Gentiles [than among the Jews] men should believe on Him. And He was predicted before He appeared first 5,000 years before, and again 3,000, then 2,000 then 1,000, and yet again 800; for according to the succession of generations prophets after prophets arose.

Ch. 53. Though we have many other prophecies, we forbear to speak, judging these sufficient for the persuasion of those who have ears capable of hearing and understanding; and considering also that these persons are able to see that we do not make a.s.sertions, and are unable to produce proof, like those fables that are told of the reputed sons of Jupiter. For with what reason should we believe of a crucified man that He is the first-born of the unbegotten G.o.d, and Himself will pa.s.s judgment on the whole human race, unless we found testimonies concerning Him published before He came and was born as a man, and unless we saw that things had happened accordingly?

Chapter II. The Internal Crisis: The Gnostic And Other Heretical Sects

In the second century the Church pa.s.sed through an internal crisis even more trying than the great persecutions of the following centuries and with results far more momentous. Of the conditions making possible such a crisis the most important was absence in the Church of norms of faith universally acknowledged as binding. Then, again, many had embraced Christianity without grasping the spirit of the new religion. Nearly all interpreted the Christian faith more or less according to their earlier philosophical or religious conceptions; _e.g._, the apologists within the Church used the philosophical Logos doctrine. In this way arose numerous interpretations of Christian teaching and perversions of that teaching, some not at all in harmony with the generally received tradition. These discordant interpretations or perversions are the heretical movements of the second century. They varied in every degree of departure from the generally accepted Christian tradition. Some, like the earlier Gnostics ( 21), and even the greater Gnostic systems ( 22), at least in their esoteric teaching, show that their princ.i.p.al inspiration was other than Christian; others, as the Gnosticism of Marcion ( 23) and the enthusiastic sect of the Montanists ( 25), seem to have built largely upon exaggerated Christian tenets, contained, indeed, in the New Testament, but not fully appreciated by the majority of Christians; or still others, as the Encrat.i.tes ( 24), laid undue stress upon what was generally recognized as an element of Christian morality.

The princ.i.p.al source materials for the history of Gnosticism and other heresies of this chapter may be found collected and provided with commentary in Hilgenfeld, _Ketzergeschichte des Urchristenthums_, Leipsic, 1884.

21. The Earlier Gnostics: Gnosticism in General

Gnosticism is a generic name for a vast number of syncretistic religious systems prevalent, especially in the East, both before and after the Christian era. For the most part the movement was outside of Christianity, and was already dying out when Christianity appeared. It derived its essential features from Persian and Babylonian sources and was markedly dualistic. As it spread toward the West, it adopted many Western elements, making use of Christian ideas and terms and Greek philosophical concepts.

Modified by such new matter, it obtained a renewed lease of life. In proportion as the various schools of Gnosticism became more influenced by Christian elements, they were more easily confused with Christianity, and accordingly more dangerous to it. Among such were the greater schools of Basilides and Valentinus (see next section). The doctrines of Gnosticism were held by many who were nominally within the Church. The tendency of the Gnostics and their adherents was to form little coteries and to keep much of their teaching secret from those who were attracted by their more popular tenets. The esoteric element seems to have been the so-called systems in which the fanciful and mythological element in Gnosticism appears. This, as being the most vulnerable part of the Gnostic teaching, was attacked most bitterly by the opponents of heresy. There are no extant writings of the earlier Gnostics, Simon, Menander, or Cerinthus. They are known only from Christian opponents.

Sources for the history of Gnosticism: The leading sources are the Church Fathers Irenus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria (all translated in ANF), Origen (in part only translated in ANF), and Epiphanius. The accounts of these bitter enemies must necessarily be used with caution. They contain, however, numerous fragments from Gnostic writings. The fragments in the ante-Nicene Fathers may be found in A.

Hilgenfeld, _op. cit._, in Greek, with commentary. For the literary remains of Gnosticism, see Krger, 22-31. The more accessible are: _Acts of Thomas_ (best Greek text by Bonnet, Leipsic, 1903, German translation with excellent commentary in E. Hennecke, _Neutestamentliche Apokryphen_, Tbingen and Leipsic, 1904); Ptolemus, _Epistle to Flora_ (in Epiphanius, _Panarion_, Hr. x.x.xIII); _Hymn of the Soul_, from the _Acts of Thomas_ (text and English translation by Bevan in _Text and Studies_, V, 3, Cambridge, 1897, also translated in F. C. Burkitt, _Early Eastern Christianity_, N. Y., 1904).

(_a_) Tertullian, _De Prscriptione Hreticorum_, 7. (MSL, 2:21.)

A wide-spread opinion that Gnosticism was fundamentally a perversion of Christianity finds its most striking expression in the phrase of Harnack that it was the acute secularizing or h.e.l.lenizing of Christianity (_History of Dogma_, English translation, I, 226). The foundation for this representation is the later Gnosticism, which took over many Christian and Greek elements, and the opinion of Tertullian that Gnosticism and Greek philosophy discussed the same questions and held the same opinions. (_Cf._ the thesis of Hippolytus in his _Philosophumena, or the Refutation of All Heresies_; see the Proemium, ANF, V, 9 _f._, and especially bk. VII.) Tertullian, although retaining unconsciously the impress of his former Stoicism, was violently opposed to philosophy, and in his denunciation of heresy felt that it was a powerful argument against the Gnostics to show similarities between their teaching and the Greek philosophy he so heartily detested. It is a brilliant work and may be taken as a fair specimen of Tertullians style.

These are the doctrines of men and of demons born of the spirit of this worlds wisdom, for itching ears; and the Lord, calling this foolishness, chose the foolish things of this world to the confusion of philosophy itself. For philosophy is the material of the worlds wisdom, the rash interpreter of the nature and dispensation of G.o.d. Indeed, heresies themselves are instigated by philosophy. From this source came the eons, and I know not what infinite forms, and the trinity of man in the system of Valentinus; he was of Platos school. From this source came Marcions better G.o.d with all his tranquillity; he came of the Stoics. Then again the opinion that the soul dies is held by the Epicureans. The denial of the resurrection of the body is taken from the united schools of all philosophers. When matter is made equal to G.o.d, you have the teaching of Zeno; and when anything is alleged touching a fiery G.o.d, then Herac.l.i.tus comes in. The same subject-matter is discussed over and over again by the heretics and the philosophers; the same arguments are involved. Whence and wherefore is evil? Whence and how has come man? Besides these there is the question which Valentinus has very recently proposed, Whence comes G.o.d?

(_b_) Irenus, _Adv. Hr._, I, 23. (MSG, 7:670.)

Simon Magus. For additional source material, see Justin Martyr, _Apol._ I, 26, 56, _Dial. c. Tryph._, 120; Hippolytus, _Ref._ VI, 72 _f._ The appearance of Simon in the pseudo-Clementine literature (translated in ANF, VIII), presents an interesting historical problem. The present condition of investigation is given in the article Clementine Literature by J. V. Bartlett, in _Encyc. Brit._, eleventh ed.

Simon the Samaritan, that magician of whom Luke, the disciple and follower of the Apostles, says: But there was a certain man, Simon by name, etc.

[Acts 8:9-11, 20, 21, 23.] Since he did not put his faith in G.o.d a whit more, he set himself eagerly to contend against the Apostles, in order that he himself might seem to be a wonderful being, and studied with still greater zeal the whole range of magic art, that he might the better bewilder the mult.i.tude of men. Such was his procedure in the reign of Claudius Csar, by whom also he is said to have been honored with a statue on account of his magic. This man, then, was glorified by many as a G.o.d, and he taught that it was he himself who appeared among the Jews as the Son, but descended in Samaria as the Father, while he came to other nations in the character of the Holy Spirit. He represented himself as the loftiest of all powers, that it is he who is over all as the Father, and he allowed himself to be called whatsoever men might name him.

Now this Simon of Samaria, from whom all heresies derive their origin, has as the material for his sect the following: Having redeemed from slavery at Tyre, a city of Phnicia, a certain woman named Helena,(38) a prost.i.tute, he was in the habit of carrying her about with him, declaring that she was the first conception [_Enna_] of his mind, the mother of all, by whom he conceived in his mind to make the angels and archangels.

For this Enna, leaping forth from him and comprehending the will of her father, descended to the lower regions and generated angels and powers, by whom, also, he declared this world was made. But after she had generated them she was detained by them through jealousy, because they were unwilling that they should be regarded as the progeny of any other being.

As to himself, he was wholly unknown to them, but his Enna was detained by those powers and angels who had been produced by her. She suffered all kinds of contumely from them, so that she could not return upward to her father, but was even shut up in a human body and for ages pa.s.sed in succession from one female body to another, as from one vessel to another vessel. She was in that Helen on whose account the Trojan War was undertaken; wherefore also Stesichorus was struck blind, because he cursed her in his poems; but afterward, when he had repented and written those verses which are called palinodes, in which he sung her praises, he saw once more. Thus pa.s.sing from body to body and suffering insults in every one of them, she at last became a common prost.i.tute; and she it is who was the lost sheep.

For this purpose he himself had come, that he might win her first and free her from chains, and confer salvation upon men by making himself known to them. For since the angels ruled the world poorly, because each one of them coveted the princ.i.p.al power, he had come to mend matters and had descended, been transfigured and a.s.similated to powers and angels, so that he might appear among men as man, although he was not a man; and that he was supposed to have suffered in Judea, although he had not suffered.

Moreover, the prophets inspired by the angels, who were the makers of the world, p.r.o.nounced their prophecies; for which reason those who place their trust in him and Helena no longer regard them, but are free to do what they will; for men are saved according to his grace, and not according to their righteous works. For deeds are not righteous in the nature of things, but by mere accident and just as those angels who made the world have determined, seeking by such precepts to bring men into bondage. On this account he promised that the world should be dissolved and that those who are his should be freed from the rule of them who made the world.

Thus, then, the mystic priests belonging to this sect both live profligately and practise magical arts, each one to the extent of his ability. They use exorcisms and incantations, love-potions, also, and charms, as well as those beings who are called familiars [_paredri_] and "dream senders" [_oniropompi_], and whatever other curious arts can be had are eagerly pressed into their service.

(_c_) Irenus, _Adv. Hr._, I, 23. (MSG, 7:673.)

The system of Menander. _Cf._ also Eusebius. _Hist. Ec._, III, 26.

The successor of Simon Magus was Menander, a Samaritan by birth, who also became a perfect adept in magic. He affirms that the first power is unknown to all, but that he himself is the person who has been sent forth by the invisible beings as a saviour for the salvation of men. The world was made by angels, who, as he also, like Simon, says, were produced by the Enna, He gives also, as he affirms, by means of the magic which he teaches knowledge, so that one may overcome those angels that made the world. For his disciples obtain the resurrection by the fact that they are baptized into him, and they can die no more, but remain immortal without ever growing old.

(_d_) Irenus, _Adv. Hr._, I, 26. (MSG, 7:686.)

The system of Cerinthus. For additional source material, see Irenus, III, 3, 4; Hippolytus, _Ref._ VII, 33; X, 21; Eusebius, _Hist. Ec._, III, 28.

Cerinthus, again, taught in Asia that the world was not made by the supreme G.o.d, but by a power separated and distant from that Ruler [_princ.i.p.alitate_] who is over the universe, and ignorant of the G.o.d who is above all. He represented Jesus as not having been born of a virgin, for this seemed impossible to him, but as having been the son of Joseph and Mary in the same way that all other men are sons, only he was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. After his baptism Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler; and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and then Jesus suffered and rose again, but Christ remained impa.s.sable, since He was a spiritual being.

22. The Greater Gnostic Systems: Basilides and Valentinus

The Gnostic systems having most influence within the Church and effect upon its development were those of Basilides and Valentinus. Of these teachers and their followers we have not only the accounts of those opponents who attacked princ.i.p.ally their esoteric and most characteristically Gnostic tenets, but also fragments and other remains which give a more favorable impression of the religious and moral value of the great schools of Gnosticism. In their systems of vast theogonies and cosmologies, in their wild mythological treatment of the most abstract conceptions and their dualism, the Church writers naturally saw at once their most vulnerable and most dangerous element.

A. The School of Basilides

The school of Basilides marks the beginning of the distinctively h.e.l.lenistic stadium of Gnosticism. Basilides, its founder, apparently worked first in the East; circa 120-130 he was at Alexandria. He was the first important Gnostic writer. Of his Gospel, Commentary on that Gospel in twenty-four books (_Exegetica_), and his odes only fragments remain of the second, preserved by Clement of Alexandria and in the _Acta Archelai_ (collected by Hilgenfeld, _Ketzergeschichte_, 207-213).

Additional source material: Clement of Alexandria, _Strom._, II, 3, 8, 20; IV, 24, 26 (ANF. II); Hippolytus, _Ref._, VII, 20-27; X, 14 (=VII, 1-15, X, 10, ANF, V); Eusebius, _Hist. Ec._, IV. 7. The account of Hippolytus differs markedly from that of Irenus, and his quotations and references have been the subject of long dispute among scholars.

(_a_) _Acta Archelai_, 55. (MSG, 10:1526.)

The _Acta Archelai_ purport to be an account of a disputation held in the reign of the Emperor Probus (276-282) by Archelaus, Bishop of Kaskar in Mesopotamia, with Mani, the founder of Manichanism.

The work is of uncertain authors.h.i.+p; it belongs to the first part of the fourth century. It is the most important source for the Manichan doctrine (_v. infra_, 54). It exists only in a Latin translation probably from a Greek original.

Among the Persians there was also a certain preacher, one Basilides, of more ancient date, not long after the time of our Apostles. Since he was of a shrewd disposition himself, and observed that at that time all other subjects were preoccupied, he determined to affirm that dualism which was maintained also by Scythia.n.u.s. And so, since he had nothing to advance which he might call his own, he brought the sayings of others before his adversaries. And all his books contain some matters difficult and extremely harsh. The thirteenth book of his Tractates,(39) however, is still extant, which begins thus: In writing the thirteenth book of our Tractates, the word of salvation furnished us with the necessary and fruitful word. It ill.u.s.trates(40) under the figure of a rich [principle]

and a poor [principle], a nature without root and without place and only supervenes upon things.(41) This is the only topic which the book contains. Does it not, then, contain a strange word, as also certain persons think? Will ye not all be offended with the book itself, of which this is the beginning? But Basilides, returning to the subject, some five hundred lines intervening, more or less, says: Give up this vain and curious variation, and let us rather find out what inquiries the Barbarians [_i.e._, the Persians] have inst.i.tuted concerning good and evil, and to what opinions they have come on all these subjects. For certain among them have said that there are for all things two beginnings [or principles], to which they have referred good and evil, holding these principles are without beginning and ingenerate; that is to say, that in the origins of things there were light and darkness, which existed of themselves, and which were not declared to exist.(42) When these subsisted by themselves, they each led its own proper mode of life as it willed to lead, and such as was competent to it. For in the case of all things, what is proper to it is in amity with it, and nothing seems evil to itself. But after they came to the knowledge of each other, and after the darkness contemplated the light, then, as if fired with a pa.s.sion for something superior, the darkness rushed to have intercourse with the light.

(_b_) Clement of Alexandria, _Strom._, IV, 12. (MSG, 8:1289.)

Basilides taught the transmigration of souls as an explanation of human suffering. _Cf._ Origen in _Ep. ad Rom._, V: I [Paul], he says, died [Rom. 7:9], for now sin began to be reckoned unto me.