northern coast of Africa. Tertullian is described by Jerome* as a man of eager and violent temper;' and he appears to have possessed the usual vice of such a temperament—inconstancy. The same is the character of his writings; they contain some irregular eloquence, much confidence of assertion, and a mixture of good with very bad reasoning. He wrote many tracts against heretics, and then adopted the opinions of the least rational of all heretics, the Montanists. But in spite

of many imperfections, his genius, his zeal, and his industry place him at the head of the Latin fathers of that period; his moral writings must have been eminently serviceable to [converts who had been educated with no fixed principles of morality; and his "Apology" is among the most valuable monuments of early Christianity. He appears to have been made a presbyter of the Church of Carthage about 192 A. D., at the age of forty-five. His secession from the Church may have taken place seven years afterwards, and some of his most valuable works were probably composed during the period of his heresy.†

The fame of Tertullian was succeeded in the same Church, but not surpassed, by that of Cyprian, an African and a heathen, who was converted to Christianity late in life, and presently raised to the see of Carthage about the year 250. It is said that he was exalted to that dangerous honour rather by the popular voice of the Church than by his own inclination: it is certain that, after a very short and disturbed possession of it, he suffered martyrdom with great fortitude in the reign of Valerian. An interesting and probably faithful account of his sufferings will be found in a later page.

The government of the Church at the beginning of the third century was nearly such as we have described in the last chapter. The more important Churches were severally superin- Government. tended by a bishop, possessed of a certain, but not very definite degree of authority, who ruled in concert with the body of presbyters, and even consulted on matters of great moment the opinion of the whole assembly. The provincial synods, of which we have spoken, composed of those bishops, assisted by a few presbyters, now began to meet with great regularity and to publish canons for the general ordination of ecclesiastical affairs. The Metropolitans gradually rose in consequence. Their dignity seems to have been conferred for life; but their legitimate power was confined to the calling and presiding in councils, and the fraternal admonition of offenders. Still it was the natural consequence of this system, acting on human imperfection, that the occasional presidents insensibly asserted a general pre-eminence over the other bishops, which it became their next step to dispute with each other; and that the other bishops, being now constantly distinguished from their presbyters by these synodical meetings, assumed both over them and the people a degree of ascendency not originally acknowledged, but which it was not difficult *Catalogus Script. Ecclesiast.

We acknowledge great obligations to Bishop Kaye for the manner in which he has brought within the reach of ordinary readers of theology the works of Justin and Tertullian. Whoever shall imitate his example in the treatment of the other principal Fathers, examining with the same learning, judgment, and moderation their merits and defects, and sifting from the various contents of their folios what is really valuable to the history and right understanding of religion, will complete an undertaking of incalculable use in the study of early Christianity. And at the same time he will perform a secondary, but not unworthy, office—that of placing those writers in their just rank in literature—a rank from which they are equally far removed by the enthusiasm of those who reverence them too highly, and by the ignorance of the more numerous party who scorn them altogether. Twice every year-in the spring and autumn.

*

gradually to convert into authority. If we are to bestow on any individual the credit of having accomplished a change so natural and so nearly insensible, that distinction may possibly be due to Cyprian; certain it is, that he pleaded for episcopal supremacy with much more zeal and vehemence than had hitherto been employed in that cause. It seems clear, indeed, from several of his epistles,† especially that addressed to Rogatian, that bishops possessed in his time, or at least in his Church, the power of suspending or deposing delinquents among the clergy; yet even this was liable to some indefinite restrictions as to circumstance and custom, and to a direct appeal to a provincial council. And it does not appear that such power was frequently exerted without the consent of the presbyterial college, or 'senate of the Church. From these facts, compared with the assertions afterwards made by St. Jerome and St. Chrysostom, (which we have already mentioned,) we infer that the actual progress of episcopal usurpation, during the third century, was much less than some have imaginedor at least, that the power of the bishops grew chiefly through the growth of their influence, and was not yet publicly acknowledged by the constitution of the Church.+

We admit, however, with sorrowful reflection, that the individual conduct of some, perhaps many, among the directors of the Church, during the course, and especially the conclusion, of this century, deserved the reprehensions of contemporary and succeeding writers.§ Some assumption of the ensigns of temporal dignity-the splendid throne, the sumptuous garments, the parade of external pomp-indicated a departure from apostolical simplicity; and a contentious ambition succeeded to the devoted humility of former days.. And though we believe this evil to have been exaggerated by all the writers who have dwelt upon it, since the abuses which we have noticed could scarcely be carried to violent excess by an order possessing no legally recognised rights or property, we may still be convinced, by the institution of certain inferior classes in the ministry, such as subdeacons, acoluthi, readers, exorcists, and others, that the higher ranks had made some advances in luxurious indolence.

This deterioration in the character of the ministers was attended by a

Mosh. Gen. Hist. c. iii. p. ii. ch. 2.

† Bingham, Ch. Antiq. b. ii. ch. 3. The apostolical canons confirm these pretensions, and so do certain canons of the councils of Nice, Sardica, Antioch, Chalcedon, and others; but, according to the first and second councils of Carthage, the consent of three bishops was necessary for the censure of a deacon, of six for that of a presbyter, of twelve for that of a bishop. Reliquorum Clericorum causas solus Episcopus loci agnoscat et finiat.'-Conc. Carth. iii. Can. 8. Cyprian himself (Epist. v. p. 11. Ep. xiii. p. 23. Ep. xxviii. p. 29, and in many other places) avows that he cannot act without his council of presbyters and deacons, and the consent of the people. See Mosh. (De Reb. Christ. ant. Const. sec. iii. sec. xxiii. xxiv.) for a full examination of the principles and conduct of Cyprian. The writings of that prelate seem to have been more effectual in exalting the episcopal dignity in following times than during his own.

We are disposed to attribute much of this increase of influence to a cause not sufficiently attended to by ecclesiastical writers,--the judicial, or rather arbitrative, authority originally vested in the bishops by the consent of their people, and which would naturally extend its limits, as it was confirmed by time and usage.

Origen. Comm. in Matthæum, par. i. app. p. 420. 441, 442; Euseb. H. E. 1. viii. c. 1. Cyprian himself rates his contemporary prelates with great severity. (Laps. p. 239, &c.) The language of Mosheim, who is always extremely violent on this subject, will not bear careful examination. Gen. Hist. cent. iii. p. ii. ch. 2. See also Tillem. vol. iii. P. 306. The praise which Origen has bestowed on Christians generally, may be contrasted with his censures on the clergy, and they will serve to moderate each other.

Mosh. de Reb. Ch. ante Const. sec. iii. sect. 23.

corresponding change in the ceremonies of the Church. The division of the people into two classes, the Faithful and the Catechumens, was the practice, if not the invention, of the third Catechumens. century. It was borrowed from the pagan principle of initiation; and the outward distinction between those classes was this: that after the performance of public worship the latter were dismissed, while the former, the true and initiated Christians, remained to celebrate the mysteries of their religion; and this term is by some thought to have expressed not only the administration of the sacraments, but the delivery of some doctrinal instructions. The original simplicity of the office of baptism had already undergone some corruption. The symbol had been gradually exalted at the expense of the thing signified, and the spirit of the ceremony was beginning to be lost in its form. Hence a belief was gaining ground among the converts, and was inculcated among the heathen, that the act of baptism gave remission of all sinst committed previously to it. It was not fit, then, that so important a rite should be hastily performed or inconsiderately received; and, therefore, the new proselytes were, in the first instance, admitted into a probationary state under the name of Catechumens, whence they were chosen, according to their progress in grace, into the body of the Faithful. As long as they remained in that class, great care was taken to instruct them in the important truths, and especially in the moral obligations, of religion; yet doubtless there would be some among them in whom the love of sin survived the practice of superstition, and such would naturally defer their baptism and their pardon until the fear of death, or satiety of enjoyment, overtook them. It is true, that baptism was not supposed to bestow any impunity for future sins; on the contrary, the first offence committed after it required the expiation of a public confession,§ and the second was punished by excommunication. But if the hope and easy condition of pardon for the past tended, as it may have done, to fill the ranks of the catechumens, we may reasonably indulge the belief that the great majority were amended and perfected by the religious instruction which was then opened to them.

About the same time, and from causes connected with this misapprehension of the real nature of baptism, and the division of the converts, a vague and mysterious veneration began to attach itself to the other Sacrament; its nature and merits were exaggerated by those who administered and partook of it; it was regarded with superstitious curiosity by those to whom it was refused; and reports were already propagated of the miraculous efficacy of the consecrated elements.

An opinion at this time became prevalent in the Christian world, that the demons, the enemies of man, were, in fact, the same beings whom the

The term mystery is in the Greek Church synonymous with sacrament. See Semler, Cent. iii. p. 63; and particularly Le Clerc, cent. ii. ann. 101. and ad ann. 118. Neither were the catechumens allowed to use the Lord's Prayer, which was even denominated , the prayer of the faithful. Chrysost. Hom. ii. in 2 Cor. p. 740, and Hom. x. in Coloss. For other references see Bingham, Ch. Antiq. b. i. ch. 4.

+ Cyprian, Epistle 73. It is manifest when and by whom the remission of sins, which is conferred in baptism, is administered. They who are presented to the rulers of the Church obtain, by our prayers and imposition of hands, the Holy Ghost.' See also Euseb. H. E. 1. vii. c. 8. Mosh. c. iii. p. ii. c. 4. Compare Cyprian's language with the passage of Justin Martyr, on the same subject.

Origen, however, assures us, that among his converts there were more who had previously led a moral life than of the opposite description—a fact which may serve as an an swer to one of Gibbon's insinuations. See Cels.1. iii. p. 150, 151. Tillem. Mem. vol. iii. p. 116. § Called εξομολόγησις.

heathen worshipped as gods, who inhabited their temples and animated their statues. It became, therefore, the duty of the soldiers of Christ to assail them under every form, and expel them from every residence. That, indeed, which they are related most frequently to have occupied was the body of man,* and from this refuge they were perseveringly disturbed by the pious exorcisms of the clergy; and this practice was carried to such superstitious excess, that none were admitted to the ordinance of baptism until they had been solemnly delivered from the dominion of the Prince of Darkness. The Sign of the Cross, which was already in much honour in the time of Tertullian,‡ was held to be of great effect in the expulsion of demons, and in other miracles. We also find that the use of prayers for the dead obtained very general prevalence during this age.

A dispute had divided the Church during the second century, as to the propriety of adopting, in its contests with the heathen, the Philosophy. weapons of philosophy, and it was finally decided by the authority of Origen, and the superior loquacity of the philosophical party. By this condescension the Christians gained great advantages in the display of argument, in subtlety of investigation, in plausibility of conclusion, in the abuse and even in the use of reason; but they lost that manly and simple integrity of disputation which well became, in spite of its occasional rusticity, the defender of truth. It is to this alliances that some are disposed to trace the birth of those pious frauds which cover the face of ecclesiastical history. The original source of this evil was at least free from any stain or shame. It had long been a practice among ancient philosophical writers to ascribe their works to some name of undisputed authority, in order to secure attention to their opinions, though the opinions were well known to be only those of the writer; but the consequences which flowed from it have infected the Church of Christ with some of its deepest and most dangerous pollutions. Books written in later ages were zealously circulated as the writings of the Apostles, or of the Apostolical Fathers. The works of these last were altered or interpolated, according to the notions of after times or the caprices of the interpolator; but usually for the purpose of proving the antiquity of some

*Celibacy, though under no circumstances considered as a duty either by clergy or laity, acquired some unmerited honour during this age, through the absurd, but general persuasion, that those who had wives were peculiarly liable to the influence of malignant demons. At least Mosheim (cent. iii. p. ii. ch. 2) asserts this on the authority of Porphyry, gì Amoxйs l. iv. p. 417. In the time of Irenæus, (1. i. c. 24.) the profession of celibacy was a heresy.

+ Mosh. Gen. Hist. cent. iii. p. ii. ch. 4.

De Corona, cap. iii. Semler, Hist. Eccl. cent. iii. cap. 3.

Le Clerc adjudges to an earlier year (ann. 122) the celebrated forgery, under the name of Hermes Trismegistus, of which the object was to trace the doctrine of Christ to a much higher period than his incarnation, and thus to increase its sanctity. The interpolation of the Sibylline Books is referred by the same historian to the year 131. This latter imposture, as foolish as shameful, was warmly patronised by a host of Fathers, including Clemens Alex., Tertullian, Eusebius, Jerome, Augustin, &c. and thus occasioned much scandal to Christians in general among their enemies in that age, and no little disrepute to its ancient patrons among candid writers of every age. See Le Clerc, vol. i. p. 106. Jortin, Remarks, &c. vol. i. P. 188.

Such, in the second century, were the celebrated Apostolical Canons; and, after wards, the Apostolical Constitutions, attributed to the diligence of Clemens Romanus; and such were the False Decretals in the eighth.-Mosh. G. Hist. c. i. p. ii. ch. 2. Le Clerc (sec. i. ad ann. 100) supposes the Canons to be of the third, the Constitutions of a later age. Jortin, supposing that the Canons may have been forged, some in the second and some in the third century, refers the Constitutions to some period after Constantine. vol. i. pp. 152, 185.

new opinion, some innovation in discipline, some usurpation in authority. The practice was justified by the detestable, but popular principle, that truth may be defended by falsehood; it was encouraged by the difficulties of detection in ignorant ages; and it continued for more than six centuries to disgrace the Roman Church. It was the same principle, pushed a little farther, which has stained the writings of so many among the early Fathers with statements at least doubtful, if not with palpable falsehood. But, on the other hand, we should ever recollect that Christianity in those days was chiefly in the hands of Greeks and Africans,* men of subtle intellects and violent passions, whose habits and whose climate too often carried them into the extreme either of metaphysical sophistry or wild enthusiasm— men who could speculate on their faith, or who could die for it, but who were little calculated for the tranquil equanimity of sober and reasonable belief. We should recollect also, that some of our best and commonest principles of action were then unknown or partially received; and that, in fact, many of them are the result of the patient operation of Christianity on the human character, through a long succession of ages. We shall never do justice to the history of our religion, unless we continually bear in mind the low condition of society and morals existing among the people to whom it was first delivered.

During the concluding part of the second century, a philosophical sect arose at Alexandria, who professed to form their own tenets, by selecting and reconciling what was reasonable in the tenets of all others, and rejecting what was contrary to reason-they were called the new Platonics, or Eclectics. What they professed respecting philosophy, they easily extended to religion, since with them religion was entirely founded on philosophical principles. It is strange that the great founder of this sect, Ammonius Saccast, had been educated in Christianity; and he seems never to have abandoned the name of the faith, while he was disparaging its doctrines and its essence. A sect, which was founded on the seductive principle of universal concord, soon made extraordinary progress. In his eminent disciple Plotinus, Ammonius left a successor not inferior to himself in subtlety of genius, and power of profound and abstruse investigation; and next to Plotinus in age and reputation, is the celebrated name of Porphyry§. The efforts of these philosophers were for the most part directed against Christianity, and the contest was waged with great ardour during the third century. But as Origen and his scholars, on the one hand, adopted into the service of religion some of the peculiar principles of their adversaries, so, on the other, certain disciples of Plotinus assumed the name and professed the faith of Christians, on condition that they should be allowed to retain some favourite opinions of their master ||; an

It is certainly very remarkable, that for the first three centuries Rome produced no ecclesiastical writer of any merit, excepting Clement; and the western provinces not one of any description: Rome was very nearly as barren during the three which followed. + Mosh. Gen. Hist. c. ii. p. ii. ch. 1. Mémoires de Tillem. tom. iii. p. 279.

Porphyry asserts that Ammonius deserted Christianity, Eusebius that he adhered to it. To these two opinions, variously advocated by most modern divines, others have added a third, that Eusebius mistook a Christian writer of the same name for the heathen philosopher; and this is warmly maintained by Lardner (Collection of Heathen and Jewish Testimonies.) The question was not worth one page of controversy; and, in our mind, Christian writers would act a more politic, as well as a more manly part, if they at once disclaimed their ambiguous defenders.

§ Mosh. de Reb. Ch. ante Constant. sect. iii., xxi.

August. Epist. 56, ad Dioscor.-Mosh. c. iii. p. ii. ch. 1.