John KAYE, Ecclesiastical History of the Second and Third Centuries (1845) Chapter 4. pp. 168-197
ON THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH.
FOLLOWING Mosheim's arrangement, we now proceed to inquire, what information can be derived from the writings of Tertullian, respecting the government and discipline of the Church in his day. The edict of 1 Trajan, already alluded to, proves the extreme jealousy with which all associations were regarded by the Roman Emperors. We cannot, therefore, be surprised that the intimate union which subsisted between the professors of Christianity rendered them objects of suspicion and distrust. One point, at which Tertullian aims in his Apology, is to convince the Governors, whom he is addressing, of the injustice of their suspicions, by explaining the nature and purposes of the Christian assemblies. 2 "We form," he says, "a body; being joined together by a community of religion, of discipline, and of hope. In our assemblies, we meet to offer up our united supplications to God----to read the Scriptures----to deliver exhortations----to pronounce censures, cutting off, from communion in prayer and in every holy exercise, those who have been |169 guilty of any flagrant offence. The older members, men of tried piety and prudence, preside; having obtained the dignity, not by purchase, but by acknowledged merit. If any collection is made at our meetings, it is perfectly voluntary: each contributes according to his ability, either monthly, or as often as he pleases. These contributions we regard as a sacred deposit; not to be spent in feasting and gluttony, but in maintaining or burying the poor, and relieving the distress of the orphan, the aged, or the shipwrecked mariner. A portion is also appropriated to the use of those who are suffering in the cause of religion: who are condemned to the mines, or banished to the islands, or confined in prison."
In this brief account of the Christian assemblies,3 Tertullian appears to speak of the Presidentship, as conferred solely in consideration of superior age and piety. It has, therefore, been inferred, either that the distinction between the Clergy and the Laity was not then generally acknowledged in the Church; or at least that its validity was not recognized by our author. |170 Attempts have been made to support the latter inference by an appeal to other passages of his works; the full force of which can only be perceived, by viewing them in connection with the subjects of which he is treating.
We 4 have already noticed, and shall again have occasion to notice, Tertullian's sentiments respecting a second marriage. They who maintained its lawfulness, alleged the 5 passages in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, in which St. Paul enjoins that Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, shall be mia~j gunaiko_j a1ndrej,----that is, according to the interpretation generally received in Tertullian's time, men who had been only once married. They contended, therefore, that, as this restriction applied only to the Clergy, Laymen were at liberty to contract a second marriage. To evade this inference, Tertullian has recourse to the following argument: 6---- "Do not," he says" suppose |171 that what is forbidden to the Clergy is allowed to the Laity. All Christians are priests, agreeably to the words of St. John in the Book of Eevelation----'Christ has made us a kingdom and a priesthood to God and his Father.' The authority of the Church and its honour, which is sanctified by the sitting together of the Clergy, has established the distinction between the Clergy and Laity. In places where there are no Clergy, any single Christian may exercise the functions of the priesthood, 7 may celebrate the eucharist, and baptize. But where three, though Laymen, are gathered together, there is a Church. Every one lives by his own faith, nor is there respect of persons with God; since not the hearers, but the doers of the law are justified by God, according to the Apostle. If, therefore, you possess within yourself the right of the priesthood to be exercised in cases of necessity, you ought also to conform yourself to the rule of life prescribed to those who engage in the priesthood; the rites of which you may be called to exercise. Do you, after contracting a second marriage, venture to baptize or to celebrate the eucharist? How much more heinous is it in a Layman |172 who has contracted a second marriage, to exercise the functions of the priesthood, when a second marriage is deemed a sufficient ground for degrading a priest from his order? But you will plead the necessity of the case as an apology for the act. The plea is invalid, because you were not placed under the necessity of marrying a second time. Do not marry again, and you will not run the hazard of being obliged to do that which a Digamist is not allowed to do. It is the will of God that we should at all times be in a fit state to administer his sacraments, if an occasion should arise." ----We are very far from meaning to defend the soundness of Tertullian's argument in this passage. We quote it because it is one of the passages which have been brought forward to prove that he did not recognize the distinction between the Clergy and Laity; whereas a directly opposite inference ought to be drawn. He limits the right of the Laity to exercise the ministerial functions to extraordinary cases; to cases of necessity. Were they to assume it in ordinary cases, they would be guilty of an act of criminal presumption, 8 as he indirectly asserts in the Tract de Monogamia; where he pursues the very same train of reasoning, in refutation of the same objection. That he recognized the distinction between the Clergy and Laity, is further proved by the fact, that among other accusations which he urges against the Heretics, he |173 states that they conferred 9 orders without making strict inquiry into the qualifications of the candidates; and that they not only allowed, but even enjoined the Laity to assume the sacerdotal office, and administer the ceremonies of religion. In showing that the distinction was recognized by Tertullian, we have incidentally shown that it was generally recognized in the Church; this indeed is implied in the very words Clerus and Ordo Ecclesiasticus, which frequently occur. But what, it may be asked, is Tertullian's meaning, when he says that the distinction between the Clergy and the Laity is established by the authority of the Church? Before we can answer this question, we must ascertain what was his notion of the Church; and for this purpose we will turn to the Tract de Praescriptione Haereticorum, in which he takes a rapid survey of its origin and progress. 10 "Christ," he says, "during his residence on earth, declared the purposes of his mission, and the rule of faith and practice, either publicly to the people or privately to the disciples, of whom he attached twelve more immediately to his person, intending that they should be teachers of the Gentiles. One of them betrayed him; but the remaining eleven he commanded to go and instruct all nations, and to baptize them in the name of the Father, |174 Son, and Holy Ghost. These eleven, having added to their number a twelfth, in the room of him who had been cut off, and having received the promised effusion of the Holy Spirit, by which they were endowed with supernatural powers, first preached the Gospel and founded Churches in Judea: they then went forth to the Gentiles, preaching in like manner and founding Churches in every city. From these Churches others were propagated and continue to be propagated at the present day, which are all reckoned in the number of Apostolic Churches, inasmuch as they are the offspring of Apostolic Churches. Moreover all these Churches constitute 11 one Church; being joined together in the unity of faith and in the bond of peace." In conformity to this view of the origin of the Church, Tertullian never fails, when arguing upon any disputed point of doctrine or discipline, to appeal to the belief or practice of those Churches which had been actually founded by the Apostles; on the ground that in them the faith taught and the institutions established by the Apostles were still preserved. When, therefore, he says that the authority of the Church made the distinction between the Clergy and Laity, the expression in his view of the subject is manifestly equivalent to saying that the distinction may be traced to the |175 Apostles, the founders of the Church. Thus he contends that 12 all virgins should be compelled to wear veils; because such was the practice in those Churches which had been founded either by the Apostles or by Apostolic men; and consequently the probable inference was that it was of Apostolic institution. It is true that, after his separation from the Church, he held a different language. He then began to contend,13 as we have already seen, that wherever three, though Laymen, were gathered together, there was a Church: and in 14 the Tract de Pudicitia, he says that any number of individuals, who meet together under the influence of the Spirit, constitute a church; which is not a number of Bishops, but is the Spirit itself acting through the instrumentality of a spiritual man (pneumatiko_j as opposed to yuxiko_j)----that is, of a man who believed in the revelations and prophecies of Montanus.
At the same time that Tertullian bears testimony to the existence of a distinction between the Clergy and Laity, he bears testimony also to the existence of a distinction of orders among the Clergy. One of |176 his charges against the Heretics is, that they neglected this distinction. 15 "With them," he says, "one man is a Bishop to-day, another to-morrow: he who is today a Deacon, will be to-morrow a Reader; he who is a Priest to-day, will to-morrow be a Layman." In the 16 Tracts de Baptismo and 17 de Fuga in Persecutione, the three orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are enumerated together; and in the former the superior authority of the Bishop is expressly asserted.
The Episcopal office, according to Tertullian, was of Apostolic institution. In the 18 Tract de Praescriptione Haereticorum, he throws out the following challenge to the Heretics. "Let them show," he says, "the origin of their Churches; let them trace the succession of their Bishops, and thus connect the individual who first held the office, either with some Apostle, or some Apostolic man who always remained in communion with the Church. It is thus that the Apostolic Churches show their origin. That of Smyrna traces its Bishops in an unbroken line from Polycarp, who was placed there by St. John: 19 that of Rome from Clemens, who was placed there by St. Peter: and every other Church can |177 point out the individual to whom the superintendence of its doctrine and discipline was first committed by some one of the Apostles." The same statement is repeated 20 in the fourth Book against Marcion.
But how clearly soever the distinction between the Bishops and the other orders of Clergy may be asserted in the writings of Tertullian, they afford us little assistance in ascertaining wherein this distinction consisted. 21 In a passage to which we have just referred, the right of the Priests and Deacons to baptize is said to be derived entirely from the authority of the Bishop; who is styled Summus Sacerdos, the Supreme Priest. 22 Bingham says that Tertullian commonly gives to Bishops the title of presidents or provosts of the Church; but the passages to which he refers, scarcely bear him out in the assertion. 23 One of them we have already considered. 24 In another, Tertullian says that the communicants received the eucharist only from the hands of the presidents; and 25 in a third, that a digamist was |178 not allowed to preside in the Church. But in neither case is it certain that Tertullian meant to speak exclusively of Bishops, since Priests might administer the sacraments; and he 26 says that he had himself known instances of Priests who had been degraded for digamy. The Bishops doubtless presided when they were present: but in their absence the office devolved upon one of the presbyters, 27 The regulation of the internal oeconomy of each particular Church was certainly vested in the hands of the Bishop. 28 He appointed, for instance, days of fasting, whenever the circumstances of the Church appeared to call for such marks of humiliation. In the Tract de Jejuniis, c. 17, we find an allusion to the practice of allotting a double portion to the Presidents in the Feasts of Charity, founded on a misapplication of 1 Tim. v. 17. Ad elogium guise tuae pertinet, quod duplex apud te Praesidentibus honor binis partibus deputetur: quum Apostolus duplicem honorem dederit, ut et fratribus et praepositis.
The passages already alleged sufficiently prove that, in Tertullian's estimation, 29 the Apostolic Churches were independent of each other, and equal in rank and authority. 30 He professes indeed a peculiar respect for the Church of Rome: not, however, because it |179 was founded by St. Peter, but because both that Apostle and St. Paul there sealed their testimony to the Gospel with their blood, and St. John was there thrown into the cauldron of burning oil. 31 From a passage in the Tract de Pudicitia, it appears that the words of our Saviour to St. Peter----"On this rock I will build my Church," and "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven"----were not supposed at that time to refer exclusively to the Church of Rome; but generally to all the Churches of which St. Peter was the founder. Tertullian himself contends that they were spoken by our Saviour with a personal reference to St. Peter, in whom they were afterwards fulfilled. "For he it was who first put the key into the lock, when he preached the Gospel to the assembled Israelites on the day of Pentecost. He it was who opened to them the kingdom of heaven, by baptizing them with the baptism of Christ; and thereby loosing them from the sins by which they had been bound; as he afterwards bound Ananias by inflicting upon him |180 the punishment of death. He it was who, in the discussion at Jerusalem, first declared that the yoke of circumcision ought not to be imposed on the necks of the Gentile brethren; thereby loosing them from the observance of the ceremonial, and binding them to the observance of the moral law."----There is, however, in the 32 Scorpiace a passage in which Tertullian appears at first sight to admit that Christ had transmitted the power of the keys through Peter to his Church. Nam etsi adhuc clausum putas coelum, memento claves ejus hic Dominum Petro, et per eum Ecclesias reliquisse, quas hic unusquisque interrogatus atque confessus ferat secum. But the concluding words show his meaning to have been, not that the power of the keys was transmitted to the Church as a Society; but to each individual member who confessed, like St. Peter, that Jesus was Christ, the Son of the living God: or as he expresses himself in the 33 Tract de Pudicitia, to the spiritual Church of Montanus. For the Scorpiace was, as we have seen, written after he had recognized the divine inspiration of Montanus; though probably before he actually seceded from the Church.
In opposition to the opinion above expressed respecting the independence of the Christian Churches, a passage 34 has been quoted, from which it is inferred that even at that early period, the Bishop of Rome had assumed to himself the titles of Pontifex Maximus |181 and Episcopus Episcoporum. 35 Allix indeed affirms that our author is speaking of an edict promulgated, not by the Roman Pontiff, but by the Bishop of Carthage. In the remarks prefixed to the opinions delivered by the Bishops at the council of Carthage on the subject of Heretical baptism, Cyprian asserts the perfect equality of all Bishops, and uses the following remarkable expressions----"Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit." That this remark is aimed at some Bishop who had called himself Episcopus Episcoporum, cannot, we think, be doubted. The majority of writers apply it to Stephen, Bishop of Rome; from whom Cyprian differed on the point in question. Allix, on the other hand, supposes that Cyprian, having Tertullian's words in his mind, alluded to the pretensions of his predecessor in the See of Carthage; for the express purpose of disclaiming them. He infers also, from a passage in a 36 Letter of Cyprian to Antonianus, that the controversy respecting readmission of adulterers to the communion of the Church was confined to Africa, and that the Roman Pontiff took no share in it. The statements of both parties in this question must be received with some degree of caution: for each writes with a view to a particular object. The Romanists contend that, although Tertullian, then a Montanist, denied the supremacy of the Roman |182 Pontiffs, his words prove that it was openly asserted by them in his day----an inference, which Allix was naturally anxious to controvert, since he maintained that the jurisdiction of the Bishops of Rome did not at that period extend beyond the limits of their own diocese. With respect to the titles then given to Bishops, we may observe that 37 Bingham has produced instances of the application of the title, Summi Pontifices, to ordinary Bishops.
The word Papa occurs in the 38 Tract de Pudicitia, and being coupled with the epithet benedictus, is generally supposed to mean a bishop; and according to the 39 Romanists, the Bishop of Rome. But whatever may be its meaning in this particular passage, it is certain that the 40 title of Papa was at that period given to Bishops in general. After Tertullian's secession from the Church, his respect for the episcopal office, or rather perhaps for the individuals who were in his day appointed to it, appears to have undergone a considerable diminution. 41 He insinuates that they were actuated by worldly motives; and ascribes to their anxiety to retain their power and emoluments a practice, which had been introduced into some Churches, of levying contributions upon the members, for the |183 purpose of bribing the governors and military to connive at the religious meetings of the Christians.
Besides Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, Tertullian mentions an order of Readers, 42 Lectores, whose office it was to read the Scriptures to the people. He speaks also of an order of Widows; and 43 complains that a Bishop, in direct violation of the discipline of the Church, had admitted a Virgin into that order. The third Book of the Apostolic Constitutions is entitled peri\ xhrw~n ----and it is there directed, in conformity to the injunction of 44 St. Paul, that no Widow shall be appointed who has not attained the age of sixty: 45 she was moreover to have been only once married----a restriction also founded on St. Paul's injunctions. Widows who had brought up families appear to have been preferred; because their experience in the different affections of the human heart rendered them fitter to give counsel and consolation to others, and because they had passed through all the trials by which female virtue can be proved. The duty of the Widows consisted in administering to the wants of the poor; in |184 attending upon the sick; in instructing the younger females of the community, in watching over their conduct and framing their morals. 46 They were not allowed to perform any of the ministerial functions; to speak in the Church, to teach, to baptize, &c. They were maintained out of the common stock, and had a higher place allotted them in the public assemblies. St. Paul appears to speak of Widows in the strict sense of the word; afterwards the name was given to females 47 who had led a life of celibacy, and generally to the order of Deaconesses. According to 48 Hammond there were two sorts of xh~rai----that is, as he translates the word, lone women----Deaconesses, who were for the most part unmarried females; and Widows properly so called, who, being childless and helpless, were maintained by the Church; he supposes St. Paul to speak of the latter. 49 Suicer on the contrary says, that the Deaconesses were originally Widows; and that the admission of unmarried females was of a later date. The reader will find in 50 Bingham all the information which Ecclesiastical antiquity supplies on the subject. |185
In addition to the notices which may be collected from the writings of Tertullian respecting the constitution of each particular Church and the distinction of orders in it, 51 we learn from them that Synods were in his time held in Greece, composed of deputies from all the churches; who might be considered as representing the whole body of Christians dispersed throughout Greece. These meetings were always preceded by solemn fasts, and opened with prayer. In them all 52 the more important questions which arose from time to time were discussed; and thus the unity of doctrine and discipline was preserved. Baronius supposes that Tertullian alludes to particular councils which were convened at that time by Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome, for the purpose of condemning the Montanists; others suppose that he alludes to councils held by the Montanists themselves----a supposition which in my opinion is at variance with the whole context. He appears to me to speak without reference to any particular council, and to describe a general custom.
As the converts from Heathenism, 53 to use Tertullian's expression, were not born, but became Christians, they went through a course of instruction in the principles and doctrines of the Gospel, and were |186 subjected to a strict probation, before they were admitted to the rite of baptism. In this stage of their progress they were called Catechumens; of whom, according to 54 Suicer, there were two classes----one called Audientes, who had only entered upon their course, and begun to hear the word of God----the other sunaitou~ntej, or competentes, who had made such advances in Christian knowledge and practice as to be qualified to appear at the font. Tertullian, however, appears either not to have known or to have neglected this distinction; since he applies 55 the names of Audientes and Auditores indifferently to all who had not partaken of the rite of baptism. When the Catechumens had given full proof of the ripeness of their knowledge and of the steadfastness of their faith, they were baptized, admitted to the table of the Lord, and styled 56 Fideles. The importance, which Tertullian attached to this previous probation of the candidates for baptism, appears from the fact that he founds upon the neglect of it one of his charges against the |187 Heretics. 57 "Among them," he says, "no distinction is made between the Catechumen and the faithful or confirmed Christian: the Catechumen is pronounced fit for baptism before he is instructed; all come in indiscriminately; all hear, all pray together."
The teachers, who undertook to prepare the Catechumens for reception at the baptismal font, appear to have pursued the course pointed out by the Baptist, and by our blessed Lord. 58 They began by insisting on the necessiby of repentance and amendment of life. Unfortunately the effect of their exhortations upon the minds of their hearers was frequently counteracted by 59 a fatal perversion of the doctrine of the Church respecting the efficacy of baptism. In every age the object of a large portion of those who call themselves Christians has been, to secure the benefits without fulfilling the conditions of the Christian covenant----to obtain the rewards of righteousness without sacrificing their present gratifications. When, therefore, the proselyte was told, that baptism conferred upon him who received it the remission of all his former sins, he persuaded himself that he might with safety defer the work of repentance; and passed the time allotted for his probation, not in mortifying his lusts and |188 acquiring a purity of heart and affections suitable to his Christian profession; but in a more unrestrained enjoyment of those worldly and sensual pleasures, in which he knew that, after baptism, he could not indulge, without forfeiting his hopes of eternal happiness. So general had this licentious practice become, that Tertullian devotes a considerable portion of the 60 Tract de Poenitentia to the exposure of its folly and wickedness; and the 61 historian of the Roman empire might there have found better arguments, than those which he has extracted from Chrysostom, against the delay of baptism; though our author's attention was not immediately directed to that subject.
While the teacher was endeavouring to impress upon the Catechumen the necessity of repentance and amendment of life, he would at the same time gradually unfold the great truths which constitute the objects of a Christian faith; suiting his instruction to the comprehension and previous acquirements of the proselyte, and proceeding from the simpler to the more sublime and mysterious doctrines of the Gospel. Of some the communication was postponed until the convert had been baptized, and numbered among the members of the Church. But after that rite was conferred, there was no further reserve; and the whole counsel of God was declared alike to all the faithful. |189
62 In our account of Montanus, we stated that part of that knowledge, gnw~sij, which, according to Clemens Alexandrinus, had been communicated by the Apostles to a select few, and through them handed down to his own time by oral tradition, consisted of mystical interpretations of Scripture. We find occasionally, in 63 Tertullian's works, expressions implying that he also admitted the existence of interpretations, the knowledge of which was confined to those whom he terms the more worthy. But he condemns in the most pointed manner, the notion, that the Apostles had kept back any of the truths revealed to them, and had not imparted them alike to all Christians. 64 He applies to it the name of madness, and considers it as a pure invention of the Gnostics; devised for the purpose of throwing an air of mysterious grandeur around their monstrous fictions, and supported by the grossest misrepresentations of Scripture. Having already delivered our opinion respecting the mischievous consequences which have arisen to the Church, from the countenance lent by the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus to the notion of a Disciplina Arcani----we shall now only express our regret that Protestant divines, in their eagerness to establish a favourite |190 point, should sometimes have been induced to resort to it.
In 65 the passage already cited from the Apology, Tertullian states one purpose of the Christian assemblies to have been the maintenance of discipline by pronouncing censures, according to the circumstances of the offence, against those who had erred either in practice or in doctrine. 66 We have seen that the proselyte, before he was admitted to the baptismal font, was subjected to a strict probation. 67 In baptism he received the remission of all his former transgressions, and solemnly renounced all his former carnal desires and impure habits. If, however, through the weakness of human nature and the arts of his spiritual adversary, he was afterwards betrayed into sin, the door of mercy was not closed against him; he might still be restored to the favour of God and of the Church, by making a public confession of his guilt. It was not sufficient that the unhappy offender felt the deepest remorse, and that his peace of mind was destroyed by the remembrance of his transgression:----he was required to express his contrition by some public acts, which might at once satisfy the Church of his sincerity, and deter others from similar transgressions. The name given to this public confession of guilt was Exomologesis; and it consisted in various external marks of |191 humiliation. 68 The penitent was clothed in the meanest apparel----he lay in sackcloth and ashes----he either fasted entirely, or lived upon bread and water----he passed whole days and nights in tears and lamentations----he embraced the knees of the presbyters as they entered the Church and entreated the brethren to intercede by their prayers in his behalf. In this state of degradation and exclusion from the communion of the faithful he remained a longer or a shorter period, according to the magnitude of his offence: when that period had expired, the 69 bishop publicly pronounced his absolution, by which he was restored to the favour of God and to the communion of the Church. Such is the account given by Tertullian of the Exomologesis, or public confession enjoined by the Church for sins committed after baptism. 70 Its benefits could be obtained only once: if the penitent relapsed, a place of repentance was no longer open to him. Although, however, he could not be reconciled to the Church in this world, we must not infer that Tertullian intended to exclude him from all hope of pardon in the next. 71 They indeed who, through false shame or an unwillingness to submit to the penance enjoined them, desperately refused to reconcile themselves to the Church by making a public confession, |192 would be consigned to eternal misery. 72 But our author expressly distinguishes between remission of sins by the Church and by God; and affirms that the sincere penitent, though he may not by his tears and lamentations obtain readmission into the Church, may yet secure his reception into the kingdom of heaven.
In 73 our attempts to distinguish between the works composed by Tertullian before and after his adoption of the opinions of Montanus, we remarked that the Tract de Poenitentia belonged to the former class; and that he 74 there spoke as if all crimes, committed after baptism, might once, though only once, be pardoned upon repentance. But in the Tract de Pudicitia, which was written after he had seceded from the Church, we 75 find him drawing a distinction between greater and less offences----between those which could not, and those which could be pardoned by the Church. If, 76 for |193 instance, a Christian has been excommunicated for being present at a chariot race, or a combat of gladiators, or a dramatic representation, or any gymnastic exercise; for attending any secular game or entertainment, or working at any trade which ministered to the purposes of idolatry, or using any expression which might be construed into a denial of his faith or into blasphemy against Christ----or if from passion or impatience of censure he had himself broken off his connection with the Church----still his guilt was not of so deep a dye, but that he might upon his public confession, be again received into its communion. 77 In a subsequent passage he classes among the venial sins, being angry without a cause, and allowing the sun to go down upon our wrath----acts of violence----evil-speaking----rash swearing ----non-performance of contracts----violations of truth; |194 and among the heinous sins, homicide, idolatry, fraud, denial of Christ, blasphemy, adultery, and fornication. Of these he says that there is no remission; and that even Christ will not intercede for those who commit them. Such were the severe notions of discipline entertained by Tertullian after he became a Montanist. In his Tract de Pudicitia, he applies them to adulterers and fornicators in particular, and 78 even extends them to those who contract a second marriage; branding 79 the orthodox, who recommended a milder course, with the name of yuxikoi\, Animales----that is, men possessing indeed the Anima which God breathed into Adam, thereby constituting him a living soul, but strangers to the influence of that Spirit by which the disciples of the Paraclete were inspired.
We may take this opportunity of observing, that Tertullian's works contain no allusion to the practice of Auricular Confession.
At the end of the chapter on the Government of the Church, Mosheim gives a short account of the Ecclesiastical Authors, who flourished during the century of which he is treating. The notices which the writings of Tertullian supply on this point are very few in number. 80 He alludes to the Shepherd of |195 Hermas in a manner which shows that it was highly esteemed in the Church, and even deemed by some of authority; for he supposes that a practice, which appears to have prevailed in his day, of sitting down after the conclusion of the public prayers, owed its origin to a misinterpretation of a passage in that work. In his later writings, when he had adopted the rigid notions of Montanus respecting the perpetual exclusion of adulterers from the communion of the Church, 81 he speaks with great bitterness of the Shepherd of Hermas, as countenancing adultery; and states that it had been pronounced apocryphal by every synod of the orthodox Churches. 82 Yet the opinions expressed in the Treatise de Poenitentia, written before Tertullian became a Montanist, appear to bear something more than an accidental resemblance to those contained in the Shepherd of Hermas.
We 83 have seen that Tertullian mentions Clemens Romanus as having been placed in the see of Rome, by St. Peter; and Polycarp in that of Smyrna, by St. John.
In 84 speaking of the authors who had refuted the Valentinian heresy, he mentions Justin, 85 Miltiades, and Irenaeus. To them he adds Proculus, supposed by |196 some eminent critics to be the same as Proclus; who is stated 86 by the author of the brief Enumeration of Heretics, subjoined to Tertullian's Treatise de Praescriptione Haereticorum, to have been the head of one of the two sects into which the Cataphrygians or Montanists were divided. He appears to have made a distinction between the Holy Ghost and the Paraclete; the former inspired the apostles; the later spoke in Montanus, and revealed through him more numerous and more sublime truths than Christ had delivered in the Gospel. Proclus did not, however, like Aeschines, the head of the other division of the Cataphrygians, confound the Father and the Son. 87 Eusebius, and after him 88 Jerome and 89 Photius, mention a Proclus or Proculus, who was a leader of the sect of Cataphrygians, and held a disputation at Rome with Caius, a distinguished writer of that day. There is, therefore, no doubt, as 90 Lardner justly observes, that a Montanist of the name of Prooulus or Proolus lived at the beginning of the third century; but whether he was the author mentioned by Tertullian has been doubted: the expression Proculus noster, which is applied to him, inclines me to think that he was. Tertullian 91 speaks of Tatian as one of the heretics who enioined abstinence from food; on the ground that the Creator of this world was a Being at variance with the supreme God, and that it was consequently sinful |197 to partake of any enjoyments which this world affords.
From the manner in which Tertullian 92 speaks of the visions seen by the Martyr Perpetua, I infer that a written account of her martyrdom had been circulated among the Christians. 93 Some have supposed that Tertullian was himself the author of the account still extant of the passion of Perpetua and Felicitas.
[Footnotes have been renumbered and moved to the end]
1. 1 See chap. II. p. 88. note 1.
3. 3 Tertullian's words are, Praesident probati quique Seniores, honorem istum non pretio, sed testimonio adepti:----which Bingham translates, The Bishops and Presbyters, who preside over us, are advanced to that honour only by public testimony, L. iv. c. 3. Sect. 4. He assigns no reason for thus translating the words probati quique Seniores. I am far from intending to say that the Presidents were not Bishops and Presbyters; on the contrary, the following passage in the first Tract ad Uxorem, c. 7. when compared with I Tim. iii. 2. and Titus i. 6. appears to limit the Presidency to them. Quantum detrahant fidei, quantum obstrepant sanctitati nuptiae secundae, disciplina Ecclesiae et praescriptio Apostoli declaret, quum digamos non sinit praesidere. Compare also de Idololatria, c. 7. with de Corona, c. 3. de Jejuniis, c. 17. with I Tim. v. 17. But Bingham ought surely to have explained why he affixed a sense to the words so different from their literal meaning; especially as in another place, L. ii. c. 19. Sect. 19, he speaks of certain Seniores Ecclesiae, who were not of the clergy, yet had some concern in the care of the Church.
5. 5 I Tim. in. 2, 12. Titus i. 6. Bishops and Priests who contracted a second marriage, were sometimes degraded. Usque adeo quosdam memini digamos loco dejectos. De Exhort. Castit. c. 7. Compare de Monogamia, c. II. Our author however complains that there was great laxity of discipline on this point. Quot enim et digami praesident apud vos, insultantes utique Apostolo? De Monogamia, c, 12.
6. 6 De Exhort. Cast. c. 7, referred to Chap. I. p. 3, note 6. I now give the whole passage. Vani erimus, si putaverimus, quod Sacerdotibus non liceat, Laicis licere. Nonne et Laici Sacerdotes sumus? Scriptum est, Regnum quoque nos et Sacerdotes Deo et Patri suo fecit. Differentiam inter Ordinem et Plebem constituit Ecclesiae autoritas, et honor per Ordinis consessum sanctifi-catus.----(I conceive the allusion to be to the higher seats occupied by the Clergy, apart from the Laity, in the places of religious assembly. In the Tract de Fuga in Persecutione, c. 11, Tertullian makes a distinction between Christians majoris et minoris loci; apparently meaning the Clergy by the former, and the Laity by the latter. So in the Tract de Baptismo, c. 17. Sed quanto magis Laicis disciplina verecundiae et modestiae incumbit, quum ea majoribus competant.)----Adeo ubi Ecclesiastici Ordinis non est consessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es tibi solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici; unusquisque enim sua fide vivit, nec est personarum acceptio apud Deum Quoniam non auditores legis justificabuntur a Deo, sed factores, secundum quod et Apostolus dicit. Igitur si habes jus sacerdotis in temetipso, ubi necesse est, habeas oportet etiam disciplinam sacerdotis, ubi necesse sit habere jus sacerdotis. Digamus tinguis? digamus offers? quanto magis Laico digamo capitale est agere pro sacerdoto, quum ipsi sacerdoti digamo facto auferatur agere sacerdotem? Sed necessitati, inquis, indulgetur. Nulla necessitas excusatur, quae potest non esse. Noli denique digamus deprehendi et non committis in necessitatem administrandi quod non licet digamo. Omnes nos Deus ita vult dispositos esse, ut ubique Sacramentis ejus obeundis apti simus. Bennet, in his Rights of the Clergy, &c. has bestowed a whole chapter on this passage.
7. 7 So the word offers must, I think, be translated in this passage.
8. 8 Sed quum extollimur et inflamur adversus Clerum, tunc unum omnes sumus tunc omnes Sacerdotes, quia Sacerdotes nos Deo et Patri fecit; quum ad peraequationem disciplinae sacerdotalis provocamur, deponimus infulas, et impares sumus. De Monogamia, c. 12. We may, however, infer from this passage that in Tertullian's day the validity of the distinction was occasionally questioned.
9. 9 Ordinationes eorum temerariae, leves, inconstantes. Nunc neophytes conlocant, nunc seculo obstrictos, nunc Apostatas nostros. De Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 41. and in the same chapter, Nam et Laicis sacerdotalia numera injungunt. In the Tract de Idololatria, c. 7, Tertullian complains that the artificers of idols were admitted into Orders: Adleguntur in Ordinem Ecclesiasticum Artifices Idolorum.
10. 1 c. 20. Compare cc. 32, 36. Si haec ita se habent, ut veritas nobia adjudicator quicunque in ea regula incedimus quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit, c. 37.
11. 2 On the Unity of the Church, see c. 32. and de Virgin. vel. c. 2. Cum quibus scilicet communicamus jus pacis et nomen fraternitatis. Una nobis et illis fides, unus Deus, idem Christus, eadem spes, eadem lavacri Sacramenta. Simul dixerim, una Ecclesia sumus. This Church Tertullian calls the house of God. De Pudicitia, c. 7. In it were preserved the authentic rule of faith and discipline, and the genuine Scriptures. De Praescript. Haereticorum, cc. 21, 37, et passim. With respect to particular Churches, Tertullian admits by implication that they may fall into error, c. 27.
12. 3 De Virginibus vel. c. 2.
14. 5 Nam et Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est Spiritus, in quo est Trinitas unius Divinitatis, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Illam Ecclesiam congregat, quam Dominus in tribus posuit. Atque ita exinde etiam numerus omnis qui in hanc fidem conspiraverint, Ecclesia ab auctore et consecratore censetur, et ideo Ecclesia quidem delicta donabit: sed Ecclesia Spiritus per Spiritalem hominem; non Ecclesia numerus Episcoporum, c. 21. Compare de Poenitentia, c. 10. In uno et altero Ecclesia est; Ecclesia vero Christus. De Fuga in Peraecntione, c. 14. Sit tibi in tribus Ecclesia. Pamelius, as we observe in Chapter 1. p. 43, n. 3, supposes without sufficient grounds, that, in the Tract de Pudicitia, c. 21, by the three who were to constitute a Church, Tertullian meant Montanus and his two prophetesses. Again in the Tract de Baptismo, c. 6. Quoniam ubi tres, id est, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, ibi Ecclesia quae trium corpus est.
15. 6 Itaque alius hodie Episcopus, eras alius: hodie Diaconus, qui eras Lector: hodie Presbyter, qui eras Laicus. Do Prsescript. Haereticorum, c. 41.
17. 8 c. 11. See also de Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 3.
18. 9 c. 32. See also the Tract de Fuga in Persecutione, c. 13. Hanc Episcopatui formam Apostoli providentius condiderunt.
19. 1 Irenaeus, L. iii. c. 3, says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, Anacletus the second, and Clemens the third; and that the Church of Rome was founded jointly by St. Peter and St. Paul. Bingham reconciles this difference by supposing that Linus and Anacletus died whilst St. Peter lived, and that Clemens was also ordained their successor by St. Peter, L. ii. c. I. Sect. 4. Had the works of Irenaeus and Tertullian proceeded from Semler's Roman Club this apparent contradiction would probably have been avoided.
20. 2 c. 5. sub in. Among other statements contained in the passage is the following: Habemus et Ioannis alumnas Ecclesias. Nam etsi Apocalypsin ejus Marcion respuit, ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem, recensus in Ioannem stabit Auctorem. Sic et caeterarum (Ecclesiarum) generositas recognoscitur. The words in Italics, Bingham has translated, "The Order of Bishops, when it is traced up to its original, will be found to have St. John for one of its authors." L. ii. c. 1. Sect. 3. We do not deny that this inference may be legitimately drawn from Tertullian's words. But by the expression Ordo Episcoporum, he did not mean the Order of Bishops, as distinct from Priests and Deacons, but the succession of Bishops in the Churches founded by St. John.
21. 3 See n. 7, p. 176. Dandi (baptismum) quidem habet jus summus Sacerdos, qui est Episcopus; dehinc Presbyteri et Diaconi, non tamen sine Episcopi auctoritate, propter Ecclesiae honorem. De Baptismo, c. 17.
23. 5 In note 3, p. 169. The passage is in the Apology, c. 39.
24. 6 De Corona Militis, c. 3. Eucharistiae Sacramentum nec de aliorum manu quam de Praesidentium sumimus.
25. 7 Ad Uxorem, L. i. c. 7, also quoted in note 3, p. 169. Quum digamos non sinit praesidere.
26. 8 Be Exhort. Castit. c. 7, quoted in n. 6. p. 170. Quum ipsi Sacerdoti Digamo facto auferatur agere Sacerdotem.
27. 9 De Virginibus velandis, c 9.
28. 1 Bene autem quod et Episcopi universae plebi mandare jejunia assolent, non dico de industria stipium conferendarum ut vestrae capturae est, sed interdum et ex aliqua solicitudinis Ecclesiasticae causa. De Jejuniis, c. 13.
29. 2 We have seen that in one sense our author called all orthodox Churches Apostolic.
30. 3 De Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 36.
31. 4 c. 21. De tua nunc sententia quaero unde hoc jus Ecclesiae usurpas. Si quia dixerit Petro Dominus: Super hanc petram, &c. idcirco praesumis et ad te derivasse solvendi et allegandi potestatem, id est, ad omnem Ecclesiam Petri propinquam, qualis eg evertens atque commutans manifestam Domini intentionem personaliter hoc Petro conferentem? Super te, inquit, aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, et dabo tibi claves, non Ecclesiae; et quaecunque solveris vel alligaveris, non quae solverint vel alligaverint. Sic enim et exitus docet. In ipso Ecclesia extructa est, id est, per ipsum: ipse clavem imbuit: vides quam ----Viri Israelites, aurilus mandate quae dico: Iesum Nazarenum, virum a Deo vobis destinatum, et reliqua (Act. ii. 22). Ipse denique primus in Christi baptismo reseravit aditum coelestis regni, quo solvuntur alligata retro delicta, et alligantur quae non fuerint soluta secundum veram salutem, et Ananiam vinxit vinculo mortis, &c. Compare de Praescriptione Haereticorum, c, 22. Latuit aliquid Petrum aedificandae Ecclesiae petram, dictam, claves regni coelorum consecutum, et solvendi et alligaudi in coelis et in terris potestatem. De Monogamia, c. 8
33. 6 See the passage quoted in note 5, p. 175.
34. 7 Audio etiam edictum esse propositum, et quidem peremptorium, Pontifex scilicet Maximus, Episcopus Episcoporum dicit----"Ego et moechiae et fornicationis delicta poenitentia functis dimitto." De Pudicitia, c. 1.
36. 9 Ep. 55. Ed. Fell. Et quidem apud antecessores nostros quidam de Episcopis istic in Provincia nostra dandam pacem moechia non putaverunt, et in totum poenitentiae locum contra adulteria clauserunt.
38. 2 Bonus Pastor et benedictus Papa concionaris, c. 13.
39. 3 The Romanists cite the following words from the Tract de Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 30, in confirmation of their interpretation. Sub Episcopatu Eleutherii benedicti.
40. 4 See Cyprian's works. Cler. Rom. ad Cler. Carthag. Epp. 8, 23, 31, 36.
41. 5 Hanc Episcopatui formam Apostoli providentius condiderunt, ut regno suo securi frui possent sub obtentu procurandi: scilicet enim talem pacem Christus ad Patrem regrediens mandavit a militibus per Saturnalitia redimendam. De Fuga in Persecutione, c. 13.
42. 6 Hodie Diaconus, qui eras Lector. De Prescript. Haeret. c. 41. See Bingham, L. iii. c. 5.
43. 7 Plane scio alicubi Virginem in Viduatu ab annis nondum viginti collocatam; cui si quid refrigerii debuerat Episcopus, aliter utique salvo respectu discipline praestare potuisset. De Virginibus vel. c. 9. See also de Monogamia, c. 16. Habet Viduam utique, quam adsumat licebit; and de Exhortatione Castitatis, c. 12. Habe aliquam uxorem spiritalem, adsume de Viduis.
44. 8 1 Tim. T. 3 to 11. Titus ii. 3.
45. 9 So Tertullian ad Uxorem, L. i. c. 7. Quum Viduam allegi in ordinem nisi univiram non concedit: and de Monogamia, c. 11. sub in. De Virginibus vel. c. 9. Ad quam sedem praeter annos sexaginta non tantum univirae, id est, nuptae, aliquando eliguntur, sed et matres et quidem educatrices filiorum: scilicet, ut experimentis omnium affectuum structae facile norint caeteras et consilio et solatio juvare, et ut nihilominus ea decucurrerint, per quae foemina probari potest.
46. 1 Non permittitur mulieri in ecclesia loqui (1 Cor. xiv. 34.) sed nec docere, nec tinguere, nec offerre, nec ullius virilis muneris, nedum sacerdotalis officii sortem sibi vindicare. De Virgin. vel. c. 9. One of Tertullian's charges against the Heretics, is that they allowed their females to perform these various acts. De Praescriptione Haeretic. c. 41. Compare de Baptismo, c. 1. sub fine, c. 17. Females, however, might prophesy, agreeably to St. Paul's direction, 1 Cor. xi. 5. Caeterum prophetandi jus et illas habere jam ostendit, quum mulieri etiam prophetanti velamen imponit. Adv. Marcionem, L. v. c. 8.
47. 2 Ignatius ad Smyrnaeos, sub fine.
51. 6 Aguntur praeterea per Graecias illa certis in locis concilia ex universis Ecclesiis, per quae et altiora quaeque in commune tractantur, et ipsa repraesentatio totius nominis Christiani magna veneratione celebratur.----Conventus autem illi, stationibus prius et jejunationibus operati, dolere cum dolentibus et ita demum congaudere gaudentibus norunt. De Jejuniis, c. 13.
52. 7 For instance, it was determined in these councils what writings were and what were not, to be received aa genuine parts of Scripture. De Pudicitia, c. 10.
53. 8 Fiunt, non nascuntur, Christiani. Apology, c. 18.
55. 1 An alius est Intinctis Christus, alius Audientibus? And again, Itaque Audientes optare Intinctionem, non praesumere oportet. De Poenitentia, c. 6. In the same chapter Tertullian speaks of the Auditorum tyrocinia, and applies the title of Novitioli to the Catechumens. In the Tract de Idololatria, c. 24, we find the following distinction. Haec accedentibus ad fidem proponenda, et ingredientibus in fidem inculcanda est; and the following in the Tract de Spectaculis, c. I. Cognoscite, qui quum maxime ad Deum acceditis, recognoscite, qui jam accessisse vos testificati et confessi estis. In the Tract de Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 14, our author distinguishes between Doctores and Quaerentes. Est utique frater aliquis doctor, gratis scientiae donatus: est aliquis inter exercitatos conversatus: aliquis tecum, curiosius tamen, quaerens.
56. 2 Sometimes, however, the word Fideles included also the Catechumens. Thus in the Tract de Corona, c. 2, Neminem dico Fidelium coronam capite nosse alias, extra tempus tentationis ejusmodi. Omnes ita observant a Catechumenis usque ad Confessores et Martyres, vel Negatores.
57. 3 Inprimis quis Catechumenus, quis Fidelis, incertum est: pariter adeunt, pariter audiunt, pariter orant.. And again, Ante sunt perfecti Catechumeni quam edocti. De Prescript. Haeretic. c. 41.
58. 4 See the first five chapters of the Tract de Poenitentia.
59. 5 Tertullian in the following sentence explains the prevalent opinion, at the same time that he points out the qualifications necessary to render baptism efficacious. Neque ego renuo divinum beneficium, id est, abolitionem delictorum, inituris aquam omnimodo salvum esse; sed ut eo pervenire contingat elaborandum est. Quis enim tibi, tam infidae poenitentiae viro, asperginem unam cujuslibet aquae commodabit? De Poenitentia, c. 6.
60. 6 See particularly c. 6, where Tertullian argues that baptism, in order to be effectual to the pardon of sin, presupposes a renunciation of all sinful habits on the part of him who is to receive it. Men are admitted to baptism because they have already repented and reformed their lives; not in order that they may afterwards repent and reform. Non ideo abluimur ut delinquere desinamus, sed quia desiimus.
63. 9 Thus in the Tract de Pallio, where he is speaking of the expulsion of our first parents from Paradise, and of the fig-leaves of which they made aprons: he adds, sed arcana ista, nec omnium nosse, c. 3, and in the Tract de Idololatria, speaking of the brazen serpent set up by Moses in the wilderness, he says, Sive qua alia figurae istius expositio dignioribus revelata est, c. 5.
64. 1 Sed ut diximus, eadem dementia est, quum confitentur quidem nihil Apostolos ignorasse, nec diversa inter se praedicasse; non tamen omnia volant illos omnibus revelasse: quaedam enim palam et universis, quaedam secreto et paucis demandasse. De Praescriptione Haeretic. c. 25. See also c. 26.
65. 2 See p. 169. The sentence was pronounced by the President. Quomodo ut auferatur de medio illorum? Non utique ut extra Ecclesiam detur; hoc enim non a Deo postularetur quod erat in Praesidentis officio. De Pudicitia, c. 14.
67. 4 See the Tract de Poenitentia, cc. 7, 9.
68. 5 Compare de Pudicitia, c. 5. sub fine. c. 13. Et tu quidem poenitentiam moechi ad exorandam fraternitatem; &c.
69. 6 See the passage quoted from the Tract de Pudicitia, c. 14. in n. 2, p. 190. and c. 18. sub fine. Salva illa poenitentiae specie post Fidem, quas aut levioribus delictis veniam ad Episcopo consequi poterit, aut majoribus et irremissibilibus a Deo solo.
70. 7 Collocavit in vestibule poenitentiam secundam, quae pulsantibus patefaciat; sed jam semel, quia jam secundo; sed amplius nunquam, quia proximo frustra. De Poenitentia, c. 7. See also c. 9.
71. 8 De Poenitentia, cc. 10, 11, 12.
72. 9 See de Pudicitia, c. 3. Et si pacem hic non metit, apud Dominum seminat. Tertullian reasons throughout the Tract on the supposition that the more heinous offences, majora delicta, can be pardoned by God alone. See cc. 11, 18, sub fine, 19.
74. 2 See particularly the commencement of c. 8. But at other times Tertullian speaks as if idolaters, apostates, and murderers, were never readmitted to the communion of the Church. De Pudicitia, cc. 5, 9, 12, sub fine. Hinc est quod neque Idololatriae neque sanguini pax ab Ecclesiis redditur. Crimes against nature were also under the same irremissible sentence of exclusion. Reliquas autem libidinum furias impias et in corpora et in sexus ultra jura nature, non modo limine, vcrum omni Ecclesiae tecto submovemus; quia non sunt delicta, sed monstra, c. 4. Et tamen ejusmodi neque congregant neque participant nobiscum, facto per delicta denuo vestri: quando in illis quidem misceamur, quos vestra vis atque saevitia ad negandum subigit. Ad Nationes, L. i. c. 5. See Bingham, L. xviii. c. 4. L. xvi. c. 10. Sect. 2.
75. 3 De Pudicitia, cc. I, 2. Secundum hanc differentiam delictorum poenitentiae quoque conditio discriminatur. Alia erit, quae veniam consequi possit, in delicto scilicet remissibili; alia quae consequi nullo modo potest, in delicto scilicet irremissibili, c 18. sub fine. Haec ut principalia penes Dominum delicta. De Patientia, c. 5.
76. 4 Ita licet dici perisse quod salvum est. Perit igitur et fidelis elapsus in spectaculum quadrigarii furoris, et gladiatorii cruoris, et scenicae foeditatis, et xysticae vanitatis, in lusus, in convivia secularis solennitatis; in officium, in ministerium alienae idololatriae aliquas artes adhibuit curiositatis; in verbum ancipitis negationis aut blasphemiae impegit; ob tale quid extra gregem datus est, vel et ipse forte ira, tumore, aemulatione, quod denique saepe fit dedignatione castigationis abrupit; debet requiri atque revocari. De Pudicitia, c. 7.
77. 5 Cui enim non accidit aut irasci inique et ultra solis occasum, aut et manum immittere, aut facile maledicere, aut temere jurare, aut fidem pacti destruere, aut verecundia, aut necessitate mentiri? in negotiis, in officiis, in quaestu, in victu, in visu, in auditu quanta tentamur! ut si nulla sit venia istorum, nemini salus competat. Horum ergo erit venia per exoratorem Patris, Christum. Sunt autem et contraria istis, ut graviora et exitiosa, quae veniam non capiant, homicidium, idololatria, fraus, negatio, blasphemia, utique et moechia et fornicatio, et si qua alia violatio templi Dei. Horum ultra exorator non erit Christus, c. 19. In the fourth book against Marcion, the enumeration of the delicta majora is somewhat different. Quae septem maculis capitalium delictorum inhorrerent idololatria, blasphemia, homicidio, adulterio, stupro, falso testimonio, fraude, c. 9. On other occasions Tertullian appears to overlook the distinction between greater and lesser offences. Quum----omne delictum voluntarium in Domino grande sit. Ad Uxorem, L. ii. c. 3. In the Tract de Poenitentia Tertullian distinguishes between voluntary sins, and accidental involuntary sins, and sins of ignorance, c. 3.
78. 6 Et ideo durissime nos, infamantes Paracletum disciplinae enormitate, Digamos foris sistimus, eundem limitem liminis moechis quoque et fornicatoribus figimus, jejunas pacis lachrymas profusuris, nec amplius ab Ecclesia quam publicationem dedecoris relaturis. De Pudicitia, c. I. sub fine. They did not allow a convert, who had been married before his conversion and lost his wife, to contract another marriage after his conversion. Dum nec secundas quidem post fidem nuptias permittitur nosse.
79. 7 See Chap. 1. p. 20, note 5. The Tract de Pudicitia was directed against an edict, published by a bishop, (probably of Rome,) and allowing adulterers and fornicators to be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon repentance. See p. 180.
81. 9 Sed cederem tibi, si Scriptura Pastoris, quae sola moechos amat, divino instumento meruisset incidi; si non ab omni Concilio Ecclesiarum etiam vestrarum inter Apocrypha et falsa judicaretur; adultera et ipsa et inde patrona sociorum. De Pudicitia, c. 10. Again in c. 20. Illo Apocrypho Pastore moechorum.
82. 1 Compare de Poenitentia, cc. 7, 8, 9. with the Shepherd of Hermas, Mand. c.3.
83. 2 De Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 32. quoted in p. 176.
84. 3 Adversus Valentinianos, c. 5.
85. 4 See Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. L. v. c. 17.
87. 6 Eccl. Hist. L. vi. c. 20.
88. 7 Catalogus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, Caius.
90. 9 Credibility of the Gospel History, c. 40.
92. 2 De Anima, c. 55. Quomodo Perpetua, fortissima Martyr, sub die passionis in revelatione Paradisi, solos illic commartyres suos vidit?
93. 3 Lardner, Credibility, c. 40.
Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press
SPIonic font, free from here.
This page has been online since 20th March 2003.
| Home | Index of Kaye | About these pages |