THE APOSTLES THE WRITINGS OF ERNEST RENAN Translated by Joseph Henry Allen, D.D. HISTORY OF THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL. 5 vols. THE LIFE OF JESUS, i vol. THE APOSTLES: Including the Period from the Death of Jesus until the Greater Missions of Paul, i vol. ANTICHRIST, i vol. THE FUTURE OF SCIENCE, t vol. THE APOSTLES INCLUDING THE PERIOD FROM THE DEATH OF JESUS UNTIL THE GREATER MISSIONS OF PAUL BY ERNEST RENAN AUTHOR OF "THE HISTORY OF THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL" "LIFE OF JESUS," "ANTICHRIST," ETC. TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY JOSEPH HENRY ALLEN, D.D. LATE LECTURER ON ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY BOSTON LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY 1903 Copyright, 1898, BY ROBERTS BROTHERS. AU rights reserved. SSntoersitg JOHN WILSON AND SON, CAMBRIDGE, U.S.A. EDITOR'S PREFACE. IN the three volumes of this series, now consisting of eight, which it has been my task to execute, it has been my first endeavour to give an absolutely faith- ful transcript of the form and colour of the writer's thought, while reserving entire freedom as to both grammatical structure and the .rendering of special phrases. The first is the translator's evident duty ; the other is his necessary privilege. The task, done in my 78th year, has been found unexpectedly labori- ous ; for a time, indeed, the strain upon nerve and eyesight threatened to make it impracticable. At the same time, I have found great joy in the execution of it, with an increasing sense of the grandeur and nobility of the theme, the establishment of Chris- tianity as a moral power in the world, to a right understanding of which it has been the chief aim and hope of my working years to contribute, however humbly. In this task I have sought aid from the best authorities within my reach. These have been, in addition to a score or two of Greek and Latin texts, the standard lexicons of those tongues, to- gether with Sophocles', of later Greek, and Gesenius', of Hebrew ; the great " Century " dictionaries, Smith's vi EDITOR'S PREFACE. of Classical Antiquities, and McClintock and Strong's Biblical Encyclopaedia. For special renderings I have relied on Littre (manual ed.), and have received help from the vast and inestimable encyclopaedic dictionary of Larousse. Except this last, these have all been kept at my side, and habitually in use. The author's very numerous references to the New Testament have been ordinarily verified by comparison with the Greek original and the various readings in Schulz. Where as in the volume entitled "Antichrist" entire passages have been quoted, I have preferred to follow the author's French, as a guide to an inde- pendent translation directly from the Greek, rather than to copy from the Revised Version, whose great value as textual commentary should not excuse its infelicities of diction and its errors of grammatical construction. 1 It is probable that so complete a picture of the moral and social condition of the world at a great historical epoch has never been elsewhere given, as will be found in the concluding chapters of the pres- ent volume. To the completeness and vivacity of this picture three qualities have much contributed, which, it may be thought, have greatly impeded the writer's reputation as an historian and a critic. These are, first, an artist's imagination, which puts him under 1 See " Unitarian Review " for June, 1888, p. 553. For example, to translate ToX/*, in Romans v. 7, by " would dare," is grammatically im- possible. The revisers have here retained the old error. The correct meaning is, "one readily dares," etc. (See id. for Oct. 1888, p. 307.) EDITORS PREFACE. vii the constant temptation to give more definite form and colour to the figures on his canvas than can always be strictly verified from our rather meagre sources of information; then, a curious faculty of historic sym- pathy, which insists on studying the race, temperament, and even the passing mood of his actors, with the very play of their passion and motive, making (so to speak) the moral atmosphere of their acts ; finally, a familiar- ity with the Catholic tradition which gives the key to numberless characters and transactions that would be unintelligible without such aid. With these qualities, he has often been disparaged as a writer of sentimental romance rather than an historian. Without them, he would descend to the level of his critics ; and no one who has studied him (as we study Gibbon) in his foot- notes can doubt that here he might well compete for the epithet " dry-as-dust," and hold his own with the best and dullest of them. Some persons find it hard to believe that an artist may also be an anatomist ; but, in this case, we may be content to accept the verdict of Mommsen, who said that Renan was " a true scholar, in spite of the beauty of his style." It is, per- haps, needless to say that there are some things in each volume from which I totally dissent ; but it is no part of my present business, as I conceive it, to suppress or to controvert them. Respecting the marginal references, especially to such writers as Tacitus, Suetonius, and Josephus, I will only say that I have verified enough of them to viii EDITOR'S PREFACE. satisfy me of the author's general care and accuracy, and here I think it is best to stop, leaving the respon- sibility with his own edition, the thirteenth. I have, however (while giving the full sense of every note), transcribed the minuter references so fully in detail that the curious student, with the wealth of a great library at command, need not be at a loss in tracing to its source any mention of the obscurest inscription, coin, or anecdote. J. H. A. CAMBRIDGE, MASS., February, 1898. CONTENTS. PAGE IXTRODUCTIOlSr : A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. A. D. 33 41 THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. A. D. 33 60 THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM. A. D. 34 73 DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. A. D. 34 81 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. A. D. 35 . . 94 JEWISH CONVERTS AND PROSELYTES. A. D. 36 . . . 113 CHARITABLE ACTS AND INSTITUTIONS. A. D. 36 . . 122 FIRST PERSECUTION AND THE DEATH OF STEPHEN. A. D. 37 137 FIRST MISSIONS ; PHILIP THE DEACON. A. D. 38 . . 148 THE CONVERSION OF PAUL. A. D. 38 157 THE CHURCH IN JUD^A. A. D. 38-41 ....... 177 ANTIOCH. A. D. 41 194 BARNABAS ; A MISSION TO THE GENTILES. A. D. 42-44 204 PERSECUTION UNDER HEROD AGRIPPA. A. D. 44 . . 213 SIMON OF GITTON (SIMON MAGUS). A. D. 45 ... 226 GENERAL COURSE OF CHRISTIAN MISSIONS. A. D. 45. 237 GENERAL CONDITION OF THE WORLD. A. D. 45 . . 255 LAWS AFFECTING RELIGION. A. D. 45 283 THE FUTURE OF MISSIONS. A. D. 45 296 INDEX 313 INTRODUCTION. A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. THE first volume of these " Beginnings of Christian History " 1 has followed the course of events as far as the death and burial of Jesus. We have now to take up the narrative at this point, namely, Saturday, the 4th of April, A. D. 33. For some time yet it will be, in a way, a continuation of the " Life of Jesus." After those months of intoxicating joy, during which the great Founder laid the groundwork for a new order in human affairs, these succeeding years are the most decisive in the world's history. The same Jesus who, by the sacred spark of life which he kindled in the heart of a few friends, created the most august of human institutions, still stirs and renews the hearts of men, stamping that divine seal upon them all. Under that influence, ever active and victorious over death, we shall see confirmed faith in the resurrection, in the agency of the Holy Spirit, in the gift of tongues, in the authority of the Church. We shall trace the organising of the Church at Jerusalem, its first trials, its early conquests, the primitive missions proceeding from its bosom. We shall follow the swift progress of Christianity through Syria as far as Antioch, where a second capital is founded, in one sense more important than Jerusalem, and destined to supplant it. In this new centre, where Pagan converts make the major- ity, we shall see Christianity definitely part company with Judaism, and take a distinctive name. Above all, we shall 1 " Life of Jesus," published in this series in 1896. 2 INTRODUCTION. witness the birth of that grand idea of distant missions, which are to carry the name of Jesus into the Gentile world. We shall pause at the solemn moment when Paul, Barnabas, and John Mark set forth for the execution of this great design. Here we shall suspend our story, to throw a glance upon the world whose conversion is the aim of these bold messengers; and shall try to make clear to ourselves the intellectual, political, moral, religious, and social condition of the Roman Empire about the year 45, the probable date of Saint Paul's departure on his first mission. Such is the subject of this second volume. I call it " The Apostles," because it sets forth the period of action in com- mon, while the little household of Jesus walks together, and is morally grouped about the one centre, Jerusalem. The third will carry us beyond this "upper room," and show Saint Paul almost alone upon the stage, the man who more than any other represents Christianity as a conqueror and wayfarer. Paul, though after a certain crisis he assumed the name Apostle, by no means had the same title to it with the Twelve. 1 He is a labourer who has come in at the second hour, almost an intruder. The condition of the documents that have come down to us tends to deceive us on this point. Since we know far more facts relating to Paul than to the Twelve, and since we have his own writ- ings, with very exact memorials on various incidents of his career, we ascribe to him the very highest importance, almost higher than that accorded to Jesus. This is an error. Paul is a very great man, whose share in the founding of Chris- tianity was of the utmost value. But he is not to be com- pared with Jesus, or even with the immediate disciples of Jesus. Paul had never seen the Master, or tasted the fra- grance of the ministry in Galilee. The most ordinary man who had shared in that heavenly manna is, in that one thing, the superior of one who has savoured only (as it were) an aftertaste of it. Nothing is more false than a view which 1 The writer of Acts never once gives this name to Paul, reserving it exclusively to the members of the central group at Jerusalem. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 3 has come into fashion in our day: that Paul was the real founder of Christianity. Jesus was the real Founder. The highest place after him is to be reserved for those great but obscure companions of his, those impassioned and loyal women, who even in spite of death believed in him. Paul was in the first century, so to speak, a man apart. He left no established school. On the contrary, he left eager adver- saries, who after his death desired to exclude him from the Church, and to put him upon the footing of Simon Magus. 1 He was bereft even of that which we hold to have been his special work, the conversion of the Gentiles. 2 The church at Corinth, which he alone had founded, 3 claimed that is origin was due both to him and to Peter. 4 In the second century, Papias and Justin do not once speak his name. Afterwards, when oral tradition was no longer anything, when scripture was all, Paul took leading rank in Christian theology. He had, in short, a theology, which Peter and Mary Magdalen had not. He has left writings of importance; those of the other Apostles cannot contend with his in weight or in authenticity. At first view, the documents for the period embraced in this volume are few and quite unsatisfying. First-hand evidence is found only in the earlier chapters of " Acts ; " and the historical value of these is open to grave objections. The obscurity is, it is true, partly dispelled by the closing chapters of the Gospels, and especially by Paul's epistles. An ancient writing serves, first, to make the period of its composition known, and, secondly, that which was just before. Every written document, in fact, suggests infer- ences as to the social condition out of which it has sprung. The epistles of Paul, dictated from A. D. 53 to 62, or there- 1 Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, xvii. 13-19. 2 Justin, Apol. i. 39. The idea also predominates in Acts that Peter was the Apostle to the Gentiles : see, especially, chap. x. and compare 1 Pet. i. 1. s 1 Cor. iii. 6, 10; iv. 14, 15; ix. 1, 2; 2 Cor. xi. 2-4. 4 Letter of Dionysius of Corinth, in Euseb. ii. 25. 4 INTRODUCTION. about, are full of information as to the first years of Chris- tian history. Since, moreover, we have to treat of great foundations without precise data, our first task is to show the conditions under which they took shape. As to this I have to say, once for all, that the dates I have given to these chapters are only approximate. There are few fixed points of chronology in these early years. Still, thanks to the care taken by the writer of " Acts " to keep the true succession of events, thanks to "Galatians," in which we find some numerical hints of the highest value, and to Josephus, who supplies the dates of secular events con- nected with the apostolic history, we can stretch a reason- ably probable canvas for our story, in which the chances of error are kept within very narrow limits. Here I will say again what I said in the preface to the "Life of Jesus." 1 In histories like this, where we can be sure only of the main fact, while all details are more or less open to doubt from the legendary character of the documents, hypothesis is unavoidable. Hypothesis has no place regard- ing periods wholly unknown. An attempt to reconstruct a group of ancient statuary which we are sure once existed, but of which no remnant and no written description survives, is a purely arbitrary task. But what can be more legitimate than an attempt to reconstruct the pediments of the Par- thenon from the portions which still exist, with the aid of ancient descriptions, drawings of the seventeenth century, and information of every sort, in a word, by catching the inspiration of the style of these inimitable fragments, and trying to seize their soul and life? We cannot say that, with all this, we have rediscovered the work of the ancient sculptor, but we have done what we could to come near it. Such a process is the more permissible in history, inasmuch as language allows degrees of precision which marble does not. We may even grant the reader his free choice among various suppositions. The writer's conscience may be at ease when he has stated as certain what is cer- 1 See p. 29 of the American translation. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 5 tain, as likely what is likely, as possible what is possible. Where the footing is unsteady between history and legend, he can aim only at the general result. In the succeeding volume, that devoted to Saint Paul, for which we have documents perfectly historical, and may paint characters from the life and tell facts just as they took place, we stand on firmer ground, while yet the general aspect of that period is none the clearer. Established facts speak louder than all biographical details. We know very little of those incom- parable artists who created the masterpieces of Greek art. But these masterpieces tell us more of the person of their creators, and of the public that understood them, than could be told in the most circumstantial story or the best authen- ticated texts. For the critical incidents that took place in the first days alter the death of Jesus, our authorities are the closing chapters of the Gospels, which relate the apparitions of the risen Christ. 1 I need not repeat here what has been said in the Introduction to the " Life of Jesus " as to the historical value of such documents. In this portion of our history we are fortunate in having a parallel account which we too often lack in that which precedes. This is the very signi- ficant passage of Paul in "First Corinthians," xv. 5-8, which asserts: 1. The reality of the apparitions; 2. their long continuance, contrary to the account in the Gospels ; 3. the several places where they took place, contrary to the accounts of Mark and Luke. A study of this fundamental text, with other considerations, confirms me in the view I have before expressed as to the relation of the Fourth Gospel to the Synoptics. Regarding the account of the resurrection and the apparitions, the Fourth Gospel retains its usual superiority over the other evangelists. It is here, if anywhere, that we should seek a connected and logical narrative, permitting a probable conjecture as to what, apart 1 For the discussion and comparison of the several narratives, see Strauss, "Life of Jesus," sect. iii. chap. 4, 5; also his " Xew Life of Jesus," i. 46 et seq. ; ii. 97 et seq. 6 INTRODUCTION. from all illusions, really took place. Here I touch on the hardest question of all, referring to the beginnings of Chris- tian history, What is the historical value of the Fourth Gospel ? The use made of it in my " Life of Jesus " is the point of most of the objections raised by my enlightened critics. Almost all scholars who deal with the history of religious opinion by a rational method reject the Fourth Gospel as wholly apocryphal. I have carefully reviewed my ground as to this question, and have not shifted it to any noticeable extent. Still, as I vary from the common opinion upon this point, I have felt it my duty to set forth in detail the reasons for adhering to my former position. These reasons will be found in the Appendix to the later and revised editions of the "Life of Jesus." The most important document for the period now under review is the "Acts of the Apostles." Here I must make clear my view regarding the character of this composition, its value as historical evidence, and the use which has been made of it. Without doubt the book of " Acts " was written by the author of the Third Gospel, and is a continuation of it. This point needs no proof, and has never been seriously disputed. 1 The prefaces to these two documents, the dedi- cation of each to Theophilus, and the perfect likeness in style and ideas, are ample proof. Another point, not so certain but still quite probable, is that the writer of "Acts" was a companion of Paul, who attended him in many of his journeyings. At first glance, this view seems unquestionable. In many passages, begin- ning with xvi. 10, the writer uses in his account the pronoun "we," thus showing that, for the time at least, he was of the company gathered about Paul. This seems ample proof. The only escape from the force of this argument is to sup- pose the passages containing the pronoun " we " to have been 1 It was early accepted by the Church as self-evident : see the Canon of Muratori (Antiq. Ital. iii. 854), collated by Wieseler and restored by Laurent (Neutest. Studien, Gotha, 1866), lines 33 et seq. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 7 copied by the latest compiler of "Acts" from an earlier account in the memoir of some original disciple of Paul, Timothy, for example, the compiler neglecting to supply, in place of "we," the writer's name. This can hardly be admitted ; such negligence would be intelligible only in the rudest of compilations. But the Third Gospel and the " Acts " form together a well-conceived work, composed with thought and skill, written by one hand upon a coherent plan. 1 The two, when put together, make up one whole, exactly in the same style, showing the same favourite expressions and the same way of quoting Scripture. So shocking a fault in com- position as that supposed would be unaccountable. Thus we are irresistibly led to conclude that the beginning and end of the book were written by the same hand, and that he who has spoken in the first person in some passages is the author of the whole. This becomes the more convincing when we call to mind the circumstances under which the narrator is found in Paul's company. This, as we have seen, is just when Paul is going over to Macedonia for the first time (" Acts " xvi. 10), and the expression " we " continues until his departure from Philippi. It is resumed when Paul, on his second visit to Macedonia, passes again through Philippi (id. xx. 5, 6), and after this, the writer remains with Paul to the end. If we remark, besides, that the chapters showing this companion- ship have a special character of precision, we no longer doubt that the writer was a Macedonian, probably of Philippi, 2 who preceded Paul to Troas on his second mission, remained at Philippi when the apostle left for Athens, and rejoined him for good when on his third mission he passed by way of Philippi. Can we suppose that a compiler, writing at a distance, allowed himself to be thus controlled by another man's recollections? These would only make an awkward patch upon the work. The writer speaking in the first person would have his own style, his peculiar forms of 1 Compare the Introductions : Luke i. 1-4 ; Acts i. 1. 2 See in particular Acts xvi. 12. 8 INTRODUCTION. expression ; l he would speak more after the manner of Paul than would the compiler. But this is not the case. The work is perfectly harmonious and self-consistent. It may perhaps be matter of surprise that a point appar- ently so clear should ever have been doubted. But a critical study of the New Testament writings shows us many an example ^ of apparent certainty which proves on examination to be full of doubt. Whether as to style, thought, or doctrine, we do not find in "Acts " what we should look for from a disciple of Paul. The book is in no respect like the Pauline epistles. Not a trace of that haughty assertion of opinion which gives to the Apostle of the Gentiles so marked originality. Paul's temperament is that of a Protestant, stiff and independent; the writer of "Acts" makes us think of a good Catholic, docile and optimistic, who speaks of every priest as "a holy priest," calls every bishop "a great bishop," and is ready to accept any fiction rather than admit that these holy priests and great bishops dispute among themselves with sharp attack and obstinate defence. While professing the highest admiration for Paul, the writer of "Acts" is careful not to give him the title of "apostle," 2 and holds that it was Peter who first began the conversion of Gentiles. He may be termed, in short, a disciple of Peter rather than of Paul. It will soon appear that in more than one instance his conciliatory temper has led him seriously to distort the personal history of Paul ; he is guilty of inac- curacies, 8 and still more of omissions, which would be strange indeed as coming from one of Paul's disciples. 4 He never speaks of one of the epistles, and he is strangely 1 The poverty of expression with the writers of the New Testament, as we know, is such that each may be said to have his own limited vocabu- lary. This makes a serviceable rule in fixing the authorship of the briefer compositions. 2 In chap. xiv. 4, 14, where Paul and Barnabas are called " apostles," the expression is loose and indirect. 8 Compare Acts xvii. 14-16, xviii. 5, with 1 Thess. iii. 1, 2. 4 1 Cor. xv. 32 ; 2 Cor. i. 8 ; xi. 23-28 ; Rom. xv. 19 ; xvi. 3-7. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 9 silent on points most requiring explanation. 1 Even when he would seem to have been Paul's companion, he is sometimes curiously dry, ill-informed, and unobservant. 2 In short, the smooth vagueness of certain portions, the conventional tone observable here and there, would lead us to suppose a writer who had nothing to do with the Apostles, directly or indi- rectly, but wrote somewhere about the year 100 or 120. Should we stop short at these objections ? I do not think so. I still hold that the latest compiler of "Acts" is really the disciple of Paul, who says " we " in the final chapters. All the difficulties, unanswerable as they may seem, should be at least held in suspense, if not wholly put aside by a consideration so decisive as the use of "we." Further, in ascribing this book to a companion of Paul, we throw light on two essential points: first, the disproportion of parts, more than three-fifths of the entire book being devoted to Paul alone; and again, a like disproportion in Paul's own life, his first mission being treated with extreme brevity, while the second and third, and especially his last journey- ings, are told in minute detail. A writer wholly unfamiliar with the apostolic story would surely not have been thus unequal. His work would have been better planned as a whole. A history constructed from written documents is distinguished from a history wholly or in part original by this very disproportion. The closet-historian takes for his ground-plan events as they have actually occurred; the writer of memoirs takes for his ground-plan his own recol- lections, or at least his personal relations. A church his- torian, writing about 120, would have left us a book quite differently put together from that which we find in "Acts " after the thirteenth chapter. The strange way in which the book quits at this point the orbit in which it has hitherto revolved, can, as I think, be explained only by the special position of the writer, and his relations with Paul. And this view will be strengthened if, among the known fellow- 1 Thus, compare Acts xvi. 6 ; xviii. 22, 23, with Galatians. 2 Thus the stay at Csesarea is left quite in the dark. io INTRODUCTION. labourers of Paul, we find the name of the writer to whom tradition has ascribed this book. This is in fact the case. Tradition and manuscript author- ity both name as author of the Third Gospel one Lucanus 1 or Lucas. From what has been already said it follows that, if Lucas is really the writer of the Third Gospel, he is equally the writer of "Acts." Now this name is found as that of a companion of Paul in "Colossians," iv. 14, in "Philemon," ver. 24, and in "Second Timothy," iv. 11. The last is of more than doubtful genuineness. "Colos- sians" and "Philemon," again, though probably genuine, are yet not among the more unquestioned writings of Paul. But in any case, .these epistles belong to the first century; and that is enough to prove, without question, that there was a Lucas among Paul's disciples. The composer of the epistles to Timothy was, at any rate, not the same with the composer of those to the Colossians and to Philemon, supposing these latter to be apocryphal, which I do not think. It is little likely that the author of a forged docu- ment would have attributed to Paul an imaginary com- panion ; certainly different forgers would not have happened upon the same name. Two observations greatly strengthen this view. First, the name Lucas or Lucanus is very rare among the earliest Christians, so that we are never led to confuse two of that name ; secondly, the " Luke " of the epistles has no celebrity apart from this mention. To put a well-known name at the head of a composition, as was done with the second epistle of Peter, and (very probably) with the Pauline epistles to Timothy and Titus, was in no way repugnant to the manner of the time. But to put to such use a name not only false but obscure, would be inconceivable. Was it the intention of the falsifier to give his book the authority of Paul? But then why not take Paul's own name, or at least that of Timothy or Titus, who were far better known as his disciples ? Luke had no stand- ing in tradition, legend, or history. The three passages of 1 Mabillon, Museum Ilalicum, i. 109. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. n the epistles just referred to could not, of themselves, give him a warrant accepted by everybody. The epistles to Timothy and Titus were probably written later than "Acts." The mentions of Luke in "Colossiaus" and "Philemon" are in truth but one, since both these epistles make up one message. I think, then, that the writer of the Third Gospel and of "Acts " is really Luke, the disciple of Paul. This very name, Luke or Lucan, and the character of physician held by Paul's disciple of that name (Col. iv. 14), well correspond with the hints as to authorship to be found in the books themselves. It has been shown above (page 7) that the writer of the Third Gospel and of "Acts" was probably from Philippi, a Roman colonial town, where the Latin element predominated. 1 Besides, this writer was ill- informed as to Judaism and matters in Palestine ; 2 he knew little of Hebrew; 3 he was acquainted with the ideas of the pagan world, as we see in his speech at Athens (chap. xvii. 22-28), and writes Greek quite correctly. He wrote at a distance from Judaea for persons ill-acquainted with its topog- raphy, 4 who cared nothing for rabbinical learning or Hebrew names. 6 His leading idea is that, if the common people had been free to follow their own choice, they would have embraced the faith of Jesus, but were prevented by the 1 Almost all the inscriptions at Philippi, and at Neapolis (Cavala) are in Latin (Heuzey, Mission de Macedoine, p. 11). The acquaintance with seamanship shown by the writer of " Acts," especially in chaps, xxvii. xxviii., would suggest that he was from Xeapolis. 2 See Acts v. 36, 37 ; x. 28. 8 The hebraisms of his style might come from the diligent reading of the Old Testament in Greek translations, and particularly of writings composed by his fellow-religionists in Palestine, whom he copied word for word. His citations from the Old Testament (as in Acts xv. 16, 17) are made without knowledge of the original. 4 See Luke i. 26 ; iv. 31 ; xxiv. 13 ; and compare the note on Emmaus in chap, i., below. 6 Luke i. 31, compared with Matt. i. 21. The name Joanna, known only to Luke, is very doubtful. There seems to have been at this time no female name corresponding to John (but see Babyl. Talm., Sota, 22 a). 12 INTRODUCTION. Jewish aristocracy. 1 The word "Jew" is always taken by nim in ill part, as synonymous with "enemy of the Chris- tians," 2 while he appears well disposed to the heretical Samaritans. 3 To what date can we refer this important document? Luke first appears in Paul's company during his first journey to Macedonia, about A. D. 52. Suppose him to have been at this time twenty-five years old, there would be nothing unusual if he were living at the end of the century. The narrative of "Acts" closes in 63. But its composition was evidently later than that of the Third Gospel, whose date is pretty certainly fixed in the years immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem (A. D. 70). 4 The composition of "Acts" cannot, therefore, have been earlier than 71 or 72. We might rest here if it were sure that "Acts " was written directly after the Gospel. But here is room for doubt. We are led to think that there was some interval between the two. In fact, we note a marked contradiction between the last chapters of the Gospel and the first of "Acts." In the former the ascension of Jesus would seem to have taken place on the same day with the resurrection ; 6 while in the latter (" Acts " i. 3, 9), it is stated to have been forty days later. This last shows us clearly a more developed form of the legend, suggested doubtless by the need of finding space for the several apparitions, and giving full and logical sequence to the events following the entombment. This new mode of conception, as we may suppose, did not occur to the writer before the interval between the two compositions. In any event, it is singular that the writer, a few lines later on, finds himself obliged to expand the earlier narrative, adding 1 Acts ii. 47 ; iv. 33 ; v. 13, 26. 2 Acts ix. 22, 23; xii. 3, 11; xiii. 45, 50, and many other passages. It is the same with the Fourth Gospel, which also was composed away from Syria. 8 Luke x. 33-35; xvii. 16 ; Acts viii. 5-8. So in the Fourth Gospel: John iv. 5-30, as contrasted with Matt. x. 5, 6. 4 See " Life of Jesus," In trod. p. 45. 6 Luke xxiv. 50 ; so too in Mark xvi. 19. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 13 further circumstances. If the former composition was still in hand, why not make in that those additions which, sepa- rated as they are, have so awkward a look? Still, this is not conclusive ; and the preface to the Gospel, which seems common to both books, especially the phrase, " things most surely received among us," might well make us think that Luke conceived the plan as a whole from the outset. The contradiction just indicated may, it is true, be explained as simply neglect to give a strict record of the times, whence the several accounts of what befell after the resurrection are in such complete disaccord. Accurate history was so little cared for that there was no scruple in setting forth, one after the other, two views of the event irreconcilably at variance. The three accounts of Paul's conversion in chapters x. xxii. , and xxvi. show also slight variations, which prove merely the writer's disregard of accurate detail. We shall not be far from the fact if we suppose the book of " Acts " to have been composed about A. D. 80. The spirit of the book answers well to the early years of the Flavian emperors. The writer seems to shun everything that might offend the Romans. He likes to show how Roman officials favoured the new sect, sometimes even joined it, as in the case of the centurion Cornelius, and of the proconsul Sergius Paulus ; how they at least protected it against the Jews, how equitable was imperial justice, and how superior to the passions of local powers. 1 He particu- larly insists on the advantage which Paul found in his claim to Roman citizenship. 2 He cuts his narrative short off at the moment of Paul's arrival at Rome, apparently so as not to have to relate the cruelties of Nero toward the Christians. 3 The Apocalypse shows a striking contrast. 1 See Acts xiii. 6-12 [at Paphos] ; xviii. 12-17 [at Corinth] ; xix. 35-41 [at Ephesus] ; xxiv. 7, 17 [at Jerusalem] ; xxv. 9, 16, 25 [before Festus]; xxvii. 2; xxviii. 17, 18 [at Rome], 2 Acts xvi. 37-40; xxii. 26-29. 8 These precautions were not rare. The Apocalypse and First Peter speak of Rome in disguised phrase [as " Babylon "]. 14 INTRODUCTION. Written in the year 68, four years after the Neronian per- secution, and amid the agonies of the Jewish terror, it is full of the memories of Nero's enormities, full of a deadly and despairing hate against Rome. Here, on the contrary, we find a man of gentle temper, who lives in a season of calm. From about the year 70 until the end of the first century, the situation was fairly favourable to the Christians. Members of the Flavian household were found in their com- munity. Who knows but that Luke was acquainted with Flavius Clemens, nay, even one of his household ; whether the "Acts" were not written for this potent magistrate, whose official rank demanded some reverence of speech? Certain indications have led to the belief that the book was written at Rome, and that the conditions of life to the church in Rome weighed heavily on the author. This church had from the first the political and hierarchal character which has belonged to it ever since. Luke, a man of kindly spirit, may well have been influenced by this. His ideas on church authority are very advanced: we see already sprouting in him the germs of the episcopate. He writes history in the tone of an apologist at all hazards, which is just that of the official historians of the Roman See. He does just what an Ultramontane of the time of Clement XIV. would have done, one who would praise alike the pope and the Jesuits, and would fain persuade us, by an emotional tale, that the rules of brotherly love are equally kept on both sides in the debate. In two centuries more it will be held that Cardinal Antonelli and his bitter opponent, M. de Me'rode, loved each other like brothers. The writer of "Acts" with a simple good faith no longer found was the first of these "reconciling" narrators, blissfully content with the situation, and resolute to find all within the Church going on in true gospel-fashion. Too loyal to condemn his master Paul, too orthodox not to side with the official opinion then prevalent, he wipes out the difference of doctrine so as to show only the common end in view, which these exalted founders pursued by paths so opposite and through rivalries so keen. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 15 Now it is clear that one who has committed himself on system to such a determination of mind is the least capable of men to exhibit things as they really were. To historic fidelity he is quite indifferent; edification is all he really cares for. Luke makes no secret of this. He writes that Theophilus may " know the certainty of those things he has been instructed in by the catechist" [KarrjxijOrjs] . It thus appears that there was already a system of church history- agreed upon and officially taught, whose groundwork, as well as that of the Gospel story itself ("Acts " i. 22), was most likely already fixed. The leading trait in "Acts," as in the Third Gospel, is a tender piety, a warm sympathy for gen- tiles, as shown in the story of Cornelius, a reconciling temper, a great predilection for the supernatural, tenderness to the poor and humble, a strongly democratic feeling, or rather a persuasion that the common people are naturally Christians, prevented only by the rich and mighty from fol- lowing their right, proper instincts, an exalted notion of the power of the Church and its leaders, with a very remarkable inclination to communistic life. 1 The methods of composi- tion are likewise the same in the two works, so that, regard- ing the apostolic history, we are just where we should be regarding the gospel narrative if the Gospel according to Luke were our only text. The disadvantage of this position is evident. The life of Jesus, as derived from the Third Gospel alone, would be extremely defective and incomplete. This we understand, because for the life of Jesus the comparison can actually be made. Along with Luke, we have to say nothing of the Fourth Gospel both Matthew and Mark, who, as compared with Luke, are (in part at least) original authorities. We put our finger on that very violent process by which Luke rends anecdotes apart or mixes them together, the way in which he alters the colouring of certain facts to fit his personal 1 These traits will appear in the following passages : Acts ii. 44, 45- 47; iv. 33, 34-37; v. 1-11 (story of Ananias and Sapphira), 13, 26: comp. Luke xxiv. 19, 20. 16 INTRODUCTION. view, the pious legends which he has appended to the more authentic tradition. Is it not clear that we should find the like defects and errors in the "Acts" if we could make the like comparison? The earlier chapters would most likely appear to us even inferior to "Luke," since they were prob- ably composed from fewer and less universally received authorities. Here, indeed, a fundamental difference is to be admitted. In respect of historic value, we find " Acts " divided into two portions, one containing the first twelve chapters and relat- ing the more important events in the history of the primitive Church, while the other contains the sixteen remaining chapters, which are wholly devoted to the missions of Paul. In the second portion, again, are two classes of narrative: in one the narrator gives himself out as an eye-witness of the facts ; in the other he only reports what he has been told. Even in the latter case his authority is unquestionably great, his information often coming from Paul's own conversations. Especially towards the close, the narration has a surprisingly precise and lifelike air. The last pages of " Acts " are, in fact, the only passages completely historical in all the early Christian history. The earlier ones, on the contrary, are the most vulnerable in all the New Testament. It is espe- cially here that the writer yields to the preconceived opinions which he follows in his Gospel, and here they are even more "misleading. His theory of the forty days; his account of the ascension of Jesus, closing that life of wonders with a mysterious disappearance and a certain theatrical pomp ; his manner of relating the descent of the Spirit and the inspired address which follows ; his way of understanding the " gift of tongues, " so different from that of Paul, l in all these we discern the preconceived opinions of a lower period, when the legend is already full-grown, and, as it were, rounded out to its complete proportions. Everything, with this writer, goes on with a singular stage effect, and a great display of 1 Compare Mark xvi. 17; Acts ii. 4, 13; x. 46; xi. 15; xix. 6, with 1 Cor. chaps, xii.-xiv. 'REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 17 the marvellous. We must recollect that he writes a full half-century after the events, far from the region where they took place, about facts which he has not seen, which his instructor is just as ignorant of as he, following traditions partly fabulous or at least transfigured. Not only Luke belongs to another generation than the first founders of Christianity: he is of another world; he is a Hellenist, hardly at all a Jew, almost a stranger to Jerusalem and the inner life of Judaism; he was never in touch with the primitive Christian community; he has known scarce any- thing of its later representatives. In the miracles he relates we seem to find outright inventions rather than a transform- ing of real facts, those ascribed to Peter and to Paul making two successions of corresponding incidents. 1 The leading characters are just alike : Peter noway differs from Paul, or Paul from Peter. The discourses put in the mouth of one or another Christian orator, though skilfully adapted to the circumstances, are all in the same style, and belong more to the historian than to the speaker. They even contain impos- sibilities, as when Gamaliel, about A. D. 36, speaks of Theudas, whose revolt is expressly said (v. 36, 37) to have been earlier than that of Judas the Gaulonite, being in fact as late as 44, while that of the Gaulonite was some time before. 2 "Acts," in short, is a dogmatic history, shaped to confirm the orthodox opinion of the day, or to instil the views most harmonious with the writer's piety. I may add that it could not well be otherwise. The birth of a religion is known only through the accounts given by its believers. 1 Compare Acts iii. 2-10 [healing of the lame man at the Temple] with xvi. 8-12 [the cripple at Lystra]; ix. 36-40 [raising of Tabitha] with xx. 9-12 [revival of Eutychus]; v. 1-11 [story of Ananias and Sapphira] with xiii. 8-12 [blindness of Elymas] ; v. 15, 16 [miracles at Jerusalem] with xix. 11, 12 [at Ephesus]; xii. 7-11 [deliverance of Peter] with xvi. 26-34 [Paul at Philippi]; x. 44 with xix. 6 [gifts of the Spirit to gentiles]. 2 Compare Josephus, Antiq. xx. 5: 1 with id. xviii. 1: 1, and War, ii. 8:1. 2 1 8 INTRODUCTION. It is only the critical inquirer, the "sceptic," who writes history for the sake of giving the facts (ad narrandum). These are not mere suspicions, conjectures of a too dis- trustful criticism. They are solid inductions. Wherever we have it in our power to check the narrative of "Acts," we find it deceptive and composed upon a theory. The check which we cannot seek in the synoptic Gospels we may look for in Paul's epistles, especially in "Galatians." It is evident that, where the " Acts " and the Epistles dis- agree, the preference must always be given to the latter, whose text is absolutely genuine, is the older, is perfectly single-minded, and is unaffected by legend. In history, a document is of the more weight in proportion to its lack of historic form. The authority of all chronicles must yield before that of a single inscription, medal, charter, or genuine epistle. In this view, letters of a known writer, or of a sure date, are the very foundation of the earliest Christian his- tory. Without these, it may be said that the very life of Jesus would be assailed and overwhelmed by doubt. Now, in two very important particulars, the epistles throw strong light on the personal motives and views of the writer of "Acts," and on his desire to obliterate every trace of the divisions that existed between Paul and the apostles at Jerusalem. 1 At the outset, the writer of "Acts" represents Paul, after the events at and near Damascus (ix. 19-25 ; xxii. 17-21), as having come to Jerusalem, while his conversion was still almost unknown; as having made the acquaintance of the apostles and lived with them and the brethren on terms of cordial intimacy; as having disputed publicly with the Hellenistic Jews; and as compelled by a plot fomented by them against him, and by a revelation from heaven, to with- 1 Those unable to follow in detail the studies of the German critics Baur, Schneckenburger, De Witte, Schwegler, and Zeller on the ques- tions bearing on Acts, and leading to a.more or less definite solution, will find advantage in the writings of Stap (Etudes historiques), Nicolas (Etudes critiques'), Reuss (Hist, de la theol. Chre'tienne), and various essays of Kayser, Scherer, and Reuss, in the Revue de Theologie (Strasburg, 1 Ser. vols. ii., iii. ; 2 Ser. vols. ii., iii.) REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 19 draw from Jerusalem. Now Paul himself tells us that the course of events was wholly different. To prove that he is not indebted to the Twelve, but to Jesus alone, for his doc- trine and mission, he asserts (Gal. i. 11-17) that after his conversion he took no counsel with any one whatever, 1 and did not go near Jerusalem or to those who were apostles before him ; that he went and preached in Hauran of his own accord, without waiting any one's commission; that three years later, indeed, he took the journey to Jerusalem to make the acquaintance of Cephas; that he remained with him fifteen days, but saw no other apostle excepting James "the Lord's brother," so that his face was unknown to the churches of Judaea. Here we plainly see an attempt to smooth away the asperities of the rude apostle, to represent him as labouring together with the Twelve, and acting in concert with them at Jerusalem. Jerusalem is made his capital and his point of departure. His doctrine is made out to be so exactly identical with that of the Twelve that he can, in some sense, take their place in the office of preaching. His first apostleship is carried back to the synagogues at Damas- cus, and he is represented as having been a hearer and disciple, which he assures us on oath he never was. 2 The interval between his conversion and first visit to Jerusalem is shortened, and his stay in Jerusalem where he preaches to the general satisfaction is lengthened out. It is asserted that he lived on terms of intimacy with the apostles, though he himself assures us that he saw only two of them. The brethren at Jerusalem are represented as watching over him, while he declares that they did not so much as know his face. The same desire to exhibit Paul as an assiduous visitor in Jerusalem which induced the writer to anticipate and prolong his first stay in this place after his conversion, 1 " I conferred not with flesh and blood." For the shade of meaning here implied, compare Matt. xvi. 17: "flesh and blood hath not re- vealed it." 2 " Before God I lie not," Gal. 1. 20. Read the whole of the first and second chapters. 20 INTRODUCTION. seems to have led to the interpolating of one more missionary journey. According to this account, Paul came to Jerusa- lem with Barnabas, to carry a charitable gift to the brethren during the famine of 44 (xi. 30; xii. 25). Now Paul ex- pressly declares in " Galatians " (chaps, i. and ii.) that he never once went to Jerusalem between the time of his first visit, three years after his conversion, and that made [about 50] to discuss the question of circumcision, thus formally denying any such journey between " Acts " ix. 26 and xv. 2. If, against all reason, one should deny that the journey spoken of in the second chapter of " Galatians " is the same with that mentioned in the fifteenth of "Acts," the contradiction re- mains equally explicit. "Three years after my conversion," says Paul, " I went up to Jerusalem to make the acquaintance of Cephas. Fourteen years later I went again to Jerusalem." We may doubt here whether the "fourteen years" are to be reckoned from his conversion, or from the journey taken three years after it. Taking the former supposition, which is the more favourable to the account in "Acts," there would then be at least eleven years, according to Paul, between his first and second visit to Jerusalem. But, surely, there are not eleven years between the account in " Acts " ix. 26-30 and the incident told in xi. 30. Or, if this should be maintained, against all probability, we should then run against another impossibility. The incident in "Acts " xi. 30 is contempora- neous with the death of James, the son of Zebedee (xii. 1), which gives us the only sure date in the entire book, since it took place just before the death of Herod Agrippa I., which was in the year 44. 1 Since Paul's second visit was at least fourteen years after his conversion, if he had really made it in 44, this would carry back the date of his conversion to A. D. 30, which is absurd. 2 It is thus impossible to hold, as fact, to the journey related in " Acts " xi. 30, xii. 25. 1 Josephus, Antiq. xix. 8:2; War, ii. 12: 6. 2 This absurdity is, however, accepted by Harnack, who makes it the point of departure for his chronology of the New Testament writings (1896). ED. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 21 These comings and goings seem to have been very inaccu- rately related. Comparing "Acts " xvii. 14-16, xviii. 5 with 1 Thess. iii. 1, 2, concerning the presence of Silas and Timothy with Paul at Corinth, we find another disagree- ment. But, as this does not turn on any point of doctrine, I pass it by. As bearing on the subject now in hand, the historical value of the "Book of Acts," a decisive light is thrown by a com- parison of the passages in "Acts" xv. and "Galatians" ii., relating to the question of circumcision. According to the former, when certain brethren from Judaea had come to Antioch [where Paul was preaching], and insisted on the need of circumcising pagan converts, a deputation consist- ing of Paul, Barnabas, and sundry others, was sent to Jerusalem to consult the apostles and elders on the subject. Here they were warmly welcomed by everybody, and a great assembly was held. Scarcely any difference of opinion appears, smothered as it was under the effusive brotherly love of all parties and the joy of finding themselves in com- pany. Peter sets forth the opinion which we might have expected from the lips of Paul, namely, that pagan con- verts are not subject to the Mosaic code. To this opinion James makes only a slight reservation. 1 Paul does not speak at all, and in truth has no need to speak, since his own opinion is put into Peter's moujiL. Ko one. defends the view of the Jewish brethren. ^ formal decision is) made in con- formity with that of James Y" ami this decision is forwarded to ~^N the churches by deputies expressly chosen for that purpose. Now let us compare the account given by Paul in "Gala- tians." He represents that his journey to Jerusalem at this time was undertaken _ojL-h is own motion,, aad was even prompted by a revelation. Coming to Jerusalem, he imparts his gospel to those entitled to such communication; in par- ticular, he has interviews with those who appear to be men 1 His citation of Amos ix. 11, 12, quoting the Greek version, which varies from the Hebrew, clearly shows that this speech is a fabrication of the writer. 22 INTRODUCTION. of importance. No criticism whatever is passed upon him ; no communication is made to him; nothing is required of him ; he is only counselled to keep in mind the poor of Jerusalem. If Titus, who is with him, submits to be cir- cumcised, 1 it is out of regard for certain "false brethren who have intruded." Paul makes the passing concession, but in no way yields to them. As to those "who seem to be pillars," Paul always speaks of these men with a shade of irony, they have taught him nothing new. Still further, when^Cephas came afterwards to Antioch, Paul "withstood him to his face, because he was in the wrong." At first, indeed, Cephas ate with all, making no distinction; but, on the coming of emissaries from James, he holds himself aloof, avoiding those uncircumcised. "Seeing that he did not walk in the straight path of the gospel truth," Paul publicly appeals to him, and reproves him sharply for his conduct. We see the difference. By one account there is a formal agreement; by the other, there is bitterness ill -suppressed and excessive touchiness. In one there is a sort of council; in the other, nothing like it. In one, a formal decree given out by a recognized authority ; in the other, differing opinions fronting one another, with no yielding on either side except, it may be, for form's sake. It is needless to say which account is to be preferred. That in " Acts " is scarcely probable, since according to this the occasion of the council is a dis- pute, of which we see not a trace as soon as the council is got together. The two speakers express themselves in a way quite opposed to what we know from other sources to have been their real position. The decree which the counsel is stated to have passed is certainly pure fiction. If this decree, which James is said to have dictated, was really proclaimed, whence those moods of the timid and soft-hearted Peter before the envoys sent by James ? Why does he keep in the dark ? He and the Christians of Antioch were acting 1 I shall show hereafter that this is the true sense of the passage. In any case, a doubt as to the fact, whether he was circumcised or not, does not touch the present line of argument. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 23 in perfect agreement with the decree whose terms were fixed by James himself. This affair of circumcision took place ahout 51. A few years later, about 56, the dispute that should have been ended by this decree is hotter than ever. The Church of Galatia is troubled by new emissaries sent from the Jewish party at Jerusalem. 1 Paul replies to this new attack by his stormy epistle. If the decree reported in the fifteenth chapter of " Acts " had any real existence, Paul needed only to refer to it to put a stop to the debate ; but all that he says assumes that there was no such decree. In 57, writing to the Corinthians, Paul again ignores the decree and violates its terms. It had required abstinence from meats sacrificed to idols; but Paul, on the contrary, holds that such meats may very well be eaten if no one is scandalised thereby, while in case of scandal they should be avoided. 2 In 58, again, during Paul's last visit to Jerusalem, James is more obstinate than ever. 3 One of the characteristic features of "Acts," proving that the writer has it less in view to give the historical truth or even a coherent story than to serve the edification of pious readers, is this very thing, that the ques- tion of admitting the uncircumcised is always being decided and never settled. It turns up first in the case of baptising the chamberlain of Queen Candace, then in that of the cen- turion Cornelius, both miraculously prescribed ; then in the founding of the church at Antioch (xi. 19-21); then in the fictitious council at Jerusalem, all which does not pre- vent the question being in suspense among the latest events of the book (xxi. 20, 21). In truth, it always remained in suspensg.__The_two parties of the primitive church were never fused together^ The^TinTy^seTtTement^was that the party which kept the Jewish usages remained sterile and went out in the dark. Paul was so far from being accepted by all, that after his death a Christian party especially the 1 Compare Acts xv. 1. with Gal. i. 7; ii. 12. 2 1 Cor. viii. 4, 9 ; x. 25-29. 8 Acts xxi. 20-25. 24 INTRODUCTION. Ebionites still anathematised him and hounded him with its calumnies. 1 The fundamental question involved in these curious inci- dents will be fully treated in the volume of this series entitled "Saint Paul." I have desired to give here only a few specimens of the way in which the writer of " Acts " understands history, his system of conciliation and his preconceived ideas. Are we to conclude from this that the earlier chapters of his work are devoid of authority, as some eminent critics think ? that fiction here goes so far as to make " out of the whole cloth " such characters as the chamberlain of Queen Candace, the centurion Cornelius, and even the protomartyr Stephen and the pious Tabitha? So I by no means think. It is likely that the writer has not invented a single person of the story, though I should be glad to abandon Ananias and Sapphira, but he is a skilful advocate who writes to prove his point, and who takes advantage of things he has heard spoken of to argue for his favourite positions: namely, the lawfulness of the calling of the gentiles and the divine establishment of the hierarchy. Such a document requires to be used with extreme care ; but to reject it abso- lutely is as uncritical as it would be to follow it blindly. And besides, some paragraphs even of the earliest portion have a value which all admit, as representing authentic memoirs culled by the late compiler. The substance of the twelfth chapter, in particular, is of genuine value, and would seem to have come from John Mark. It is obvious what our difficulty would be if we had for the materials of our history only a book so legendary. Happily we have other sources, which (it is true) bear more directly upon the topic of a later volume, but throw much light meanwhile upon this. These are the epistles of Saint Paul. That to the Galatians, especially, is a genuine store- house of information, the groundwork of all the chronology of this period, the master-key that unlocks every door, a 1 Seethe Pseudo-Clementine Homilies; Irenaeus, Adv. hcer. i. 26: 2; Epiphanius, Adv. hcer. *YJT. ; Jerome, In Matt. xii. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 25 testimony which must give confidence even to the most sceptical as to the reality of things that might be held in doubt. I beg the candid reader, who might be tempted to regard me as too venturesome or too credulous, to read over again the first two chapters of this remarkable epistle. They are, without any doubt whatever, the two most important pages that exist regarding the early Christian history. One incomparable advantage, indeed, the writings of Paul possess as touching this history: namely, that they are absolutely genuine. No question has ever been raised by serious criti- cism against the genuineness of "Galatians," of "First" and "Second Corinthians," or of "Romans." The grounds on which the two epistles to the Thessalonians and that to the Philippians have been assailed are worthless. The more specious though still indecisive objections raised against "Colossians" and "Philemon," the special problem offered in "Ephesians," and the strong reasons for rejecting the epistles to Timothy and Titus will be considered in the intro- duction to my third volume. Those which I shall have occa- sion to use in this volume are unquestionably genuine ; or, at least, inferences which may be drawn from the others are independent of any question whether they were or were not dictated by Paul himself. There is no need to repeat here what has already been said in the Introduction to the "Life of Jesus," of the rules of criticism followed in this work. The first twelve chapters of " Acts " are, in fact, a document of the same class with the Synoptic Gospels, and are to be treated in the same way. Such compositions are half historic, half legendary, and cannot be treated as if they were strictly one or the other. Almost everything in them is untrue in detail, and yet one may infer from them inestimable truths. Merely to translate these tales is not to write history. In many cases they are, in fact, contradicted by better authorities. Consequently, even where we have but a single text, we always have ground to fear lest this might be disproved if we had others. In relat- ing the ministry of Jesus, " Luke " is constantly checked and 26 INTRODUCTION. corrected by the other Synoptic Gospels and by the Fourth. Is it not likely, I ask again, that if we had the means of similar comparison, " Acts " would be put in the wrong on many points as to which we have no other testimony ? The case will be quite different when I come to speak of Paul, when we shall be in the field of positive history, and have in hand materials both original and at times autobiographical. When Paul himself tells us the story of some incident in his life, which he had no interest to set in this or that particular light, it is clear that our proper business is to copy his own statement word for word, as Tillemont has done. But when we have to do with a narrator who takes his personal view for granted, and writes in order to give currency to particu- lar ideas, touching up his story in this childish way, with outlines vague and soft, with colours hard and fixed, such as legend always shows, the critic's duty is not to keep to the text ; it is rather to attempt the discovery of what truth may be in the story, without being ever sure that he has found it. To deny to the critic the employment of such a method would be as irrational as to require an astronomer to confine himself to the visible aspect of the sky. Is it not, on the contrary, the very business of astronomy to allow for the angle of sight (parallax) caused by the observer's posi- tion, and thus construct the actual condition from that which is only apparent? And then, how pretend to follow to the letter documents which contain impossibilities? The first twelve chapters of " Acts " are a tissue of miracles. Now an absolute rule of criticism is to give no place to the miraculous in an historical recital. This is not a rule imposed by any philosophic system; it is purely a matter of observation. Facts of that class are not capable of proof. All asserted miracles when brought to the test are resolved into illusion or imposture. If a single miracle were proved, we could not reject in a mass all those of ancient historians ; for, granting that ever so many of them are false, we might still admit that some of them may be true. But it is not so. All miracles that can REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 27 be tested vanish. Are we not right, then, in asserting that miracles hundreds of years away, which cannot thus be challenged, are equally unreal ? In other words, there is no miracle excepting where it is believed: the supernatural is the creation of faith. Catholicism, which asserts that the power of miracle still remains within it, yields to the influ- ence of this law. The miracles it claims to work do not happen where they are needed. With such an easy way of proof, why not bring them out into the daylight? A miracle at Paris, before a competent body of scientists, would put an end to so many doubts. But, alas! this never happens. Never a miracle in presence of the public needing to be con- vinced, I mean the sceptics. The one essential condition is the credulity of the witness. No such thing has ever been done in view of those who could discuss and question it. To this there is not a single exception. Cicero, with his usual good sense and keenness, said (De div. ii. 57), " How long is it since this mysterious power disappeared? Was it not when men became less credulous ? " "But," you may say, "if it is impossible to prove that a supernatural fact ever happened, it is equally impossible to prove that it never did. The scientist who denies the supernatural does it just as gratuitously as the believer who asserts it." Not at all. The burden of proof is with the one who asserts. He to whom the assertion is made has only to wait for proof, and yield to that if it is sound. If Buffon were told to make room in his " Natural History " for sirens and centaurs, he would have said, " Show me a centaur or a siren, and I will let them in, but till then they do not exist forme." "But prove that they do not exist!" "It is for you to prove that they do." In matters of science, the burden of proof is with those who assert the fact. Why do men no longer believe in angels or demons, though number- less historic documents speak of them ? Because their exist- ence has never been shown to be a fact. To uphold the reality of miracle, appeal is made to phe- nomena which, it is said, could not have taken place in the 28 INTRODUCTION. regular course of nature, the creation of man for example. This, it is claimed, could never have come to pass without the direct intervention of the Deity; and why may not this intervention have taken place at other critical moments of the universal evolution ? I do not urge the strange philosophy and the petty notion of a Deity implied in this reasoning, for history must have its method independent of any phi- losophy. Without entering in the least upon the ground of theodicy, it is easy to show the defect of such reasoning. It is the same as to say that anything is miraculous which no longer comes to pass in the present system of things, or which cannot be explained in the present condition of our science. But then the sun is a miracle, since science is far from having explained the sun ; so is conscious intelligence, or an act of conception, since both are to us pure mystery; every living thing is a miracle, for the origin of life is a problem as to which we have at present hardly any data. If we reply that all life, all mind, is of an order above nature, we but play with words. We are quite willing to understand it so; but then you must explain what you mean by miracle. What manner of miracle is that which happens every day and every minute ? Miracle is not the unexplained ; it is a formal exclusion from the general law by a special act of will. What we deny is the miracle as an exception from the common rule ; as a particular intervention, as if a clockmaker should make a very fine clock, which he must put his hand into from time to time, to remedy the lack of a proper wheel. That God is continually in all things, especially in all that lives, is precisely what I think. I only say that exceptional interventions of supernal power have never been properly verified. I deny the reality of the special supernatural act until a fact of that sort has been duly proved. To look for such an act before the creation of man, to flee, in order to shun inquiry into the miracles of history, beyond the field of history, where investigation is impossible, is to take refuge behind a cloud; it is to explain an obscure thing by some- thing still more obscure ; it is to allege a known law to account REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 29 for an unknown fact. Miracles are appealed to which are asserted to have happened before there was any witness, because none can be alleged to which there is sufficient witness. No doubt things have happened in the universe, in remote periods, which do not happen now, at least on the same scale. But they had their sufficient cause in the condition of things when they did happen. We find in the geological formations many minerals and gems which seem no longer to be naturally produced. Yet certain chemists Mitscherlich, Ebelmen, Sdnarmont, Daubre'e have artificially recomposed many of these minerals and gems. If we may still doubt their power to produce life artificially, this is because we can probably never, by any human means, bring back the cir- cumstances under which life began, if it did begin. How restore a condition of the planet which passed away millions of years ago ? How make an experiment that must last for centuries? Diversity of environment, centuries of slow evolution these we forget when we call miraculous what took place in former time and never happens now. Very possibly, in some celestial body there may be going on things that have ceased in our world countless ages ago. Surely, the making of mankind is the most shocking thing in the world to our reason, if we think of it as sudden, instantaneous. Without ceasing to be mysterious, it withdraws into world- wide analogies as soon as we see it as the outcome of a slow, continuous advance lasting through incalculable periods of time. We cannot apply to embryonic life the laws of mature growth. The embryo develops its organs successively, one by one; the grown man no longer puts forth organs. He creates no longer, because he is past the creative stage, as language is no longer invented because it is invented already. But why follow up an adversary who only begs the question ? We demand a miracle of history clearly proved; our oppo- nents answer by saying there were such before history began. Surely, if we needed proof that supernatural beliefs are required by certain conditions of mind, we should find 30 INTRODUCTION. it in this, that minds of clear perception in everything else can rest the edifice of their faith on so hopeless a course of reasoning. Others, abandoning miracles of the physical order, fall back on that miracle of the moral order without which, as they assert, these events cannot be explained. Unquestion- ably, the growth of Christianity is the grandest fact in the religious history of mankind. Yet it is not a miracle. Buddhism and Babism have had their martyrs, as numerous, as exalted, as resigned, as those of Christianity. The mir- acles at the origin ^of Islamism were of another sort, and I admit that they impress me very little. Still, I may remark that the Moslem doctors argue upon the birth of Islam, its spread as by a sweep of flame, its swift conquests, and the force that gives it everywhere a sway so absolute, exactly as the Christian apologists do upon the founding of Christian- ity, claiming to show plainly the finger of God in it. Grant, if you insist, that the founding of Christianity is a fact wholly unique. Still, we find another wholly unique thing in Hellenism, understanding by this term the ideal of per- fection in literature, art, and philosophy, realised by Greece. Greek art surpasses all other art as much as Christianity surpasses other religions. The Acropolis of Athens, a col- lection of masterpieces beside which all others are but awk- ward fumbling or more or less successful imitation, is perhaps the one thing which, in its own kind, most defies compari- son. Hellenism, in other words, is as much a miracle of beauty as Christianity is a miracle of holiness. A thing unique is not of course a thing miraculous. God exists, in various degrees, in all that is beautiful, good, and true. But he exists in no one of his manifestations so exclusively as that the presence of his spirit in a religious or philosophical movement should be regarded as an exclusive or even an exceptional privilege. I hope that the interval which has passed since the publi- cation of the " Life of Jesus " may have brought certain readers to meet these questions in a cooler temper. Relig- REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 31 ious controversy is always touched with ill-faith, without either knowing or intending it. What it generally takes in hand is not impartial discussion or anxious search for truth, but to maintain a fixed opinion, or to make out the dissenter to be either ignorant or dishonest. To one who thinks he holds in his hand the interests of absolute truth nothing will come amiss, calumny, prevarication, falsifying of opinions, misquotation of authorities', declamatory refutation of things the opponent never said, shouts of victory over errors of which he was never guilty. I should have been quite igno- rant of history if I had not looked for this beforehand. I am cool-tempered enough not to be much hurt by it, and have a sufficiently keen perception in matters of faith to be warmly touched, at times, by the genuine feeling which has inspired my assailants. Often, when I have seen such innocency, such piety of assurance, anger so frankly uttered by such good and tender souls, have I said like John Huss, when he saw an aged woman toiling to bring a fagot to his funeral pile, " Ah, divine simplicity ! " (0 sancta simplicitas /) My regret has been only for certain expressions of temper which could not but be barren. In the noble words of Scripture, "God was not in the whirlwind." One might, indeed, well be comforted under so much uproar, if it all helped in the discovery of truth. But it is not so. Truth is not attain- able for a mind disturbed by passion. It is held in reserve for those who seek it without prejudgment, unconstrained by fixed love or hate, with absolute mental freedom, and void of afterthought as to the effect of truth on human interests. Religious questions make only one class out of the vastly many which fill the world and make the occupation of the curious. It hurts nobody to express an opinion on a point of theory. Those who cling to their belief as a private treasure have a very easy way to protect it, namely, to take no notice of anything that is written at variance with it. The timid in faith would do best not to read at all. There are some, of a practical turn, who ask, concerning any new work of science, what political party the writer aims 32 INTRODUCTION. to serve, or who insist that a poem shall teach a lesson of morality. Such persons do not consent that one shall write unless it be to preach. The idea of art or science, aiming only to find the true or realise the beautiful, apart from all interest of policy, is meaningless to them. Between such persons and ourselves misunderstanding cannot be avoided. "That sort of people," said a Greek philosopher, "take with the left hand what we give them with the right." A heap of letters which I have received, dictated (no doubt) by a worthy sentiment, amount to this : " But what did you want ? What object would you gain?" Well, Heaven knows my motive was the same that one has in writing any history. If I had several lives to dispose of, I would spend one in writing a history of Alexander, another in writing that of Athens, a third in writing that of the French Revolution, or else, it may be, of the Franciscan Order. What end should I have in view in writing these ? Only one : to discover the truth and make it live ; to labour in making these great events of the past as truly known as possible, and in setting them forth in a manner worthy of them. The thought of disturbing any man's faith is thousands of miles away from me. Such tasks should be performed with as absolute impartiality as if one were writing for a deserted planet. Any concession to scruples on a lower level is to be recreant to the true service of art and truth. Who can fail to see that the lack of all motive to influence opinion is both the strength and the weakness of a work composed in such a spirit? In short, the first principle of the critical school is this : that, in matters of faith, every man admits what he finds it needful to admit; that, so to speak, he shapes the bed of his beliefs in proportions to fit his own bulk and stature. Why should we be so senseless as to concern ourselves with what depends on circumstances which nobody can control ? If any one accepts our principles, it is because he has the suitable turn of mind and education to accept them ; all our efforts would not give this education or turn of mind to those who have them not. Philosophy differs from faith in this : that REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 33 faith is supposed to work of itself, independent of any under- standing of the dogma which one receives. We think, on the other hand, that truth is of value only when a man has come to it of himself, when he has in view the whole order of ideas to which it belongs. We do not hold ourselves obliged to keep silence as to those of our beliefs which do not harmonise with those of some among our fellow-creatures. We do not sacrifice anything to the demands of the various orthodoxies. But no more do we think to challenge or to attack them. We simply act as if they were not. For my part, the day that I could be convicted of an attempt to bring over to my way of thinking a single disciple who did not come to it of his own accord, I should feel the keenest pain. I should infer that my mind has allowed itself to be disturbed from its free and quiet pace, or that some heavy weight has fallen upon my spirit, since I am no longer able to content myself with the glad contemplation of the universe. And then, who does not see that, if my object had been to make war on established faiths, I ought to proceed in another way, to attend only to pointing out the impossibilities and contradictions of the dogmas and texts held as sacred. This tiresome task has been done a thousand times, and well done. In 1856, in the preface to "Studies of Religious History," I wrote as follows: "I prolest, once for all, against the false understanding of my labours which would be given by taking as polemical works the various essays I have published or may hereafter publish on the history of religions. Regarded as works of controversy, these essays would be very weak, as I am the first to acknowledge. Con- troversy requires a strategy which I am quite ignorant of: it needs that one should know how to select the weak point of his adversary's position, stick to that, never touch on matters of doubt, never concede anything ; in other words, renounce all that is essential to the scientific spirit. That is not my method. The fundamental question on which religious discussion should turn, the question of revelation and the 3 34 INTRODUCTION. supernatural, I never touch, not that it is not settled in a way quite clear to iny own mind, but because it is not a question of strict science; or rather, because independent science assumes it to be already closed. Indeed, were I to follow any end whatever of polemics or proselytism, it would be a capital error; it would be to carry over to the discussion of delicate and obscure problems a question which would be better treated in the loose terms of the ordinary contro- versialist or apologist. Far from regretting the loss of an advantage, I shall be glad of it if this may convince theo- logians that my writings are of another class than theirs; that they are to be regarded as essays of pure scholarship, exposed to attack as such, in which an attempt is made at times to apply to the Jewish and Christian religion the same principles of criticism that apply in other provinces of history and philology. As to discussions of pure theology, I shall never engage in them, any more than Burnouf, Creuzer, Guigniaut, and so many other critical historians of ancient beliefs have thought themselves obliged to undertake the refutation or defence of the religions they have dealt with. The history of mankind is to me a vast whole, in which all the particulars are irregular and diverse, but where all is of the same order, proceeds from the same causes, and obeys the same laws. These laws I investigate with no other intention than to discover the exact shape and colour of the fact. Nothing will induce me to exchange the obscure but fruitful path of science for the task of a controversialist, an easy task, since it wins sure favour with those who think that war must be met with war. For this quarrel, which I am far from denying to be necessary, but which suits neither my taste nor my abilities, Voltaire is enough. Weak as he is in learning, void as he is of a true feeling for antiquity, in the eyes of those who have learned a better method, Voltaire is yet twenty times told victorious over adversaries still more devoid of critical faculty then he is himself. A new edition of this great writer's works would amply meet the need which the present moment seems to find, of meeting the REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 35 aggressions of theology, a poor thing in itself, but suited to that which needs to be resisted ; a belated retort to a belated science. Let us, who have in us the love and eager desire of the truth, do a better thing. Let us abandon these dis- putes to those who find pleasure in them. Let us toil for the small number of those who walk on the highway of human thought. I know that popularity comes more easily to the writers who, instead of pursuing the higher forms of truth, apply themselves to contending against the opinion of their day. But, in just recompense, they are no longer of any value as soon as the error they fought against has perished. Those who disproved magic and judicial astrology, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, have done vast ser- vice to human reason. Yet their writings are in our day wholly unknown; their very victory has caused them to be forgotten." I shall hold invariably to this rule, the only one suited to the dignity of a man of letters. I well know that inquiries into religious history touch on living problems which seem to need solution. Those unfamiliar with free inquiry do not understand the calm leisure of thought; practical minds are impatient with science, which does not keep pace with their eager temper. Let us keep clear of this idle heat. Let us not aim to found anything new, but stay in our respective churches, profiting by their age-long culture and their tradi- tion of holiness, sharing in their good works, and enjoying the poetry of their past. Let us shun only their intolerance ; rather let us pardon that intolerance, since, like self-love, that is one of the needs of human nature. To suppose that new religious households are to be established in the future, or that among those which now exist one will ever gain much upon another, is to go against appearances. Catholi- cism will soon be tasked with great divisions ; the times of Avignon and the Antipopes, of the Clementines and Urbanists, will come again, and the Catholic Church will have to repeat the story of the thirteenth century; but, in spite of its dissen- sions, it will remain the Catholic Church. It is likely that 36 INTRODUCTION. in another hundred years, the numbers of the Catholics, Protestants, and Jews, will not have altered much. But a great change will be brought about, or rather will become evident to the eyes of all. Each of these religious groups will have two classes of adherents, absolute believers, as in the Middle Age and those who sacrifice the letter, hold- ing only to the spirit. The latter class will be more numer- ous in each communion ; and, as the spirit brings men together as much as the letter holds them apart, those of the spirit in each communion will come so near together that they will care little for outward unity. Fanaticism will be lost in the general tolerance. Dogma will become a mysterious casket which by common consent will remain forever closed. If the casket is empty, what matters it? One religion alone, I fear, will resist this softening away of dogma, Islamism. Among some few Moslems of the old school, among some men of distinction at Constantinople, and above all in Persia, there are germs of a broad and liberal spirit. If these are crushed by the fanaticism of the Ulemas, Islam will pass away. For two things are evident: that modern civilization does not wish that old faiths shall perish utterly; and that it will not submit to be hampered in its work by outgrown religious institutions. Those must yield or perish. Why should pure religion meanwhile, whose claim it is to be neither a sect nor a church apart, suffer the inconvenience of a position of which it shares not the advantages ? Why should it plant flag against flag, knowing as it does that sal- vation is free to all, depending on the intrinsic nobility of each man. In the sixteenth century, as we know, Protes- tantism was forced to an open rupture. It proceeded from a very positive conviction. Far from conforming to a weak- ening of dogma, the Reformation signalled a new birth of the most rigid Christian faith. The religious movement of the nineteenth century, on the contrary, sets out with a spirit the reverse of dogmatism ; its outcome will not separate sects or churches, but will effect a general softening of rigour in every REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 37 church. Sharp divisions increase the fanaticism of orthodoxy and challenge reaction. The followers of Luther and Calvin found themselves confronted by a Caraffa, the Ghislierr, a Loyola, and Philip II. If our own church rejects us, let us not cry out against her. Let us take to heart the mildness of modern manners, which have made such hatred powerless. Let us find comfort in thinking of that church invisible which includes the excommunicated saints, the noblest souls of every age. Exiles from the Church are always the elect of their day. They anticipate the advance of time. The heretics of to-day are the orthodox of to-morrow. And then, what is man's excommunication? Our heavenly Father shuts out from his household only arid minds and narrow hearts. If the priest should refuse to us burial in hallowed ground, let us forbid our families to urge our claim. It is God that judges. The earth is a kindly mother, who receives her children with impartial embrace. A good man's body, cast into an unblessed corner, brings its own bene- diction. Doubtless there are situations where these principles do not easily apply. The spirit " bloweth where it listeth, " and the spirit is liberty. There are men fast bound, as it were, to absolute faith. I mean those engaged in sacred orders, or invested with the cure of souls. Even then, a noble heart finds a way. A worthy rural priest, we will suppose, comes by his solitary studies and the purity of his life to see the impossibility of literal dogma. Shall he grieve those whom he has hitherto consoled, or set forth before the unlearned changes which they can no way understand ? Heaven for- bid! There are no two men in the world whose duties are just alike. The excellent Bishop Colenso did an honest thing, such as the Church has not seen since the beginning, in writ- ing out his doubts as soon as they became clear to him. But the humble Catholic priest, in a narrow-minded and timid district, must hold his peace. Many a faithful tomb, under the shadow of a rustic church, thus hides a poetic reserve, an angelic silence. Shall they whose duty it has been to 38 INTRODUCTION. speak vie with the sanctity of these secrets known to God alone ? 1 Theory is not practice. The ideal must remain in the realm of ideality; it must needs dread a stain from too close touch with rude fact. Ideas which are good for those defended by their own nobility from any moral peril may be found injurious if thrust upon those who have any soil of baseness. Nothing great can be accomplished without some well-defined idea; for human power has its limits; and a man wholly without prepossession would be impotent. Let us enjoy our freedom [of thought] as sons of God, but let us have no hand in that weakening of virtue which would menace society itself if Christianity should be undermined. Where should we be without it? Who would make good the lack of those great schools of sobriety and reverence, such as St. Sulpice, or that devoted service of the Daughters of Charity ? How can we view without alarm the poverty of heart and the meanness of motive which even now invade the world ? Our dissent from those who uphold the dogmatic faith is, after all, a mere difference of opinion ; at heart we are their allies. We have but one enemy, who is also theirs, a vulgar materialism, and the baseness of him who serves himself alone. Peace, then, in God's name! Let the various classes of men live side by side, not by belying their proper genius for the sake of mutual concessions that would belittle them, but by lending one another mutual support. Nothing on earth should reign to the exclusion of its opposite ; no one power 1 Compare Tennyson's Leave thou thy sister, when she prays, Her early Heaven, her happy views; Nor thou with shadow'd hint confuse A life that leads melodious days. Hold thou the good: define it well, For fear Divine Philosophy Should push beyond her mark, and be Procuress to the Lords of Hell. ED. REVIEW OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 39 should suppress the rest. The true harmony of mankind results from the free utterance of the most discordant notes. If orthodoxy should succeed in destroying science we know what would follow. Spain and the Moslem world are perish- ing from having effected that task too scrupulously. If Reason should insist on ruling the world without regard to the religious needs of the soul, we have the experience of the French Revolution to tell us what the consequence would be. The spirit of Art carried to the utmost refinement, without integrity of soul, made Italy of the Renaissance a land of cutthroats, an accursed soil. Barrenness of heart, folly, and mediocrity, are the nemesis which has overtaken some Protestant countries, where, under the pretension of good sense and a Christian spirit, Art has been suppressed and Science reduced to paltry technicality. Lucretius and Saint Theresa, Aristophanes and Socrates, Voltaire and Saint Francis, Raphael and Saint Vincent de Paul, have all a like claim to be. Humanity would be dwarfed if one of the elements which make it up should be lost to it. THE APOSTLES, CHAPTER I. ACCOUNTS OP THE RESURRECTION OP JESUS. A. D. 33. ALTHOUGH Jesus had frequently spoken of the resur- rection and the new life, he had never distinctly said that he should himself rise in bodily form from the grave. 1 At first the disciples had no such definite hope. The feelings which they naturally betray assume a be- lief that all is now over. They bury their beloved companion with grief and tears, if not as an ordinary person, at least as one whose loss is irreparable. 2 They are sad and downcast. The hope they have cherished, that in him the deliverance of Israel would be brought about, is now shown to be vain. They may be spoken of as men who have lost a great and endeared illusion. But enthusiasm and love admit no situation without relief. They mock at impossibility, and, rather than 1 See Mark xvi. 11 ; Luke xviii. 34 ; xxiv. 11 ; John xx. 9, 24-29. The Synoptics admit that, if Jesus did speak of it, his disciples understood nothing of it: Mark ix. 11, 31; Luke xviii. 34 (compare Luke xxiv. 8; John ii. 21, 22. The contrary view found in Math. xii. 40; xvi. 4, 21 ; xvii. 9, 23; xx. 19; xxvii. 32 ; Mark viii. 31; ix. 9, 10, 31; x. 34; Luke ix. 32; xi. 29, 30; xviii. 31-34; xxiv. 6-8; and Justin, Tryph. 106 originated in a later conviction that he must have predicted the event. 2 Mark xvi. 10 ; Luke xxiv. 17, 21. 42 THE APOSTLES. despair, they repudiate the brute fact. Many words of the Master were recalled, chiefly those in which he spoke of his later coming; and these might be ex- plained as a prediction of his rising from the tomb. 1 Such a belief, too, was so natural that the disciples' faith was enough to have created it outright. The great prophets Enoch and Elijah had never tasted death. A belief was coming to prevail that the patri- archs and the chief men under the ancient Law were not really dead ; that their bodies were still living and breathing in their sepulchres at Hebron. 2 That must come to pass in the case of Jesus which has come to pass in the case of all who have drawn upon them- selves the admiring gaze of their fellow-men. The world, which has ascribed to them super-human merit, cannot endure to believe that they have undergone the unjust, unequal, and revolting doom of ordinary death. At the moment that Mahomet expired, Omar rushed from the tent, sword in hand, and declared that he would smite off the head of any who should say that the Prophet was no more. 3 Death is a thing of such unreason, when it strikes a man of genius or of noble heart, that the popular mind does not conceive the possibility of such violation of the truth of nature. The hero does not die. Is not the true life that which still survives in the heart of those who have loved ? For years this adored Master had filled the little world grouped about him with joy and hope. Would they 1 Passages before cited, especially Luke xvii. 24, 25; xviii. 31-34. 2 See Babyl. Talm. Baba Bathra, 58 a, and the passage quoted in Arabic by Abbe Barges in the Bulletin de I'&uvre des pelerinages en terre sainte, Feb. 1863. 8 Ibn-Hisham, Sirat errasoul, ed. Wustenfeld, 1012, 1013. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 43 consent to let him moulder in the tomb? No, he had lived too long in those who followed him, for them not to affirm that after his death he still lived. 1 The day succeeding the burial of Jesus Saturday, the 15th of Nisan, was filled with thoughts like these. All handiwork was forbidden by the Sabbath. But rest was never more fruitful. To the Christian heart there was but one object, the entombed person of the Master. The women, especially, lavished upon him in thought the tenderest attentions. They did not, for a moment, forget that gentle friend whom wicked men had slain, now reposing in his bed perfumed with myrrh attended doubtless, by angels who hid their faces in his winding-sheet. He had said, indeed, that he should die, that his death would be the sinner's ransom, that he would live again in the kingdom of his Father. Yes, he will live again ! God will not leave his soul in hell ; He will not suffer His chosen One to see corruption. 2 What of the ponderous tombstone that rests above him ? He will lift it off ; he will rise and ascend to the right hand of his Father whence he came. We shall see him again. We shall hear his consoling voice. Again we shall have the joy of companion- ship with him, and vainly have men slain him. Belief in the immortality of the soul, which under the influence of Greek philosophy has become a Chris- tian dogma, allows us very easily to deprive death of its meaning, since the dissolution of the body is thus the deliverance of the soul, set free henceforth from the burden that weighed upon its true life. But this view, 1 Luke xxiv. 23; Acts xxv. 19; Jos. Antiq. xviii. 3:3. 2 Psalm xvi. 10. The sense of the Hebrew is slightly different, but we have given the usual translation. 44 THE APOSTLES. making of man a compound of two substances, was not intelligible to the Jew. The kingdom of God, or the kingdom of the Spirit, was to the Jewish mind a com- plete transformation of the world and an annihilation of death. 1 To admit that Death could have the vic- tory over Jesus, who had come to conquer Death, was the height of absurdity. His disciples had once re- volted at the very idea that he could suffer. 2 They had now, therefore, no other choice than keen despair and an heroic resolve. A person of insight might have predicted on that Saturday that Jesus would live again. The little Christian company on that day wrought the true miracle, bringing Jesus back to life in its heart by its own intense affection for him, and resolving that he should not die. In these impassioned souls love was truly mightier than death. 3 And, as impassioned feel- ing is by its own nature contagious, kindling like a torch a flame of similar passion, and thus going on indefinitely, Jesus, in a sense, was already risen from the dead. Once let it appear that his body is no longer here, and faith in the Resurrection is established for perpetuity. This last condition befell under circumstances which, though obscured by the incoherence of tradition and by contradictory accounts, may yet be reconstructed with sufficient probability by a careful study of the accounts in the four evangelists, compared with the celebrated passage of Paul in the fifteenth chapter of " First Corin- thians " (verses 4-8). Very early on Sunday morning, the Galilaean women, 1 1 Thess. iv. 13-18; 1 Cor. chap, xv.; Rev. chaps, xx.-xxii. 2 Matt. xvi. 21-23; Mark viii. 31-33. 8 Joseph'us, Antiq. xviii. 3 : 3. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 45 who on Friday evening had hastily wrapped the body with spices and myrrh, returned to the cave where it had been temporarily left. These were Mary of Mag- dala, Mary, wife of Cleopas, Salome, Joanna, the wife of Chuza, and a few others. 1 They probably came singly ; for, while we can hardly question the account in all the Synoptics that there were several at the tomb, though John (xx. 2) seems to suppose that Mary was not quite alone, it is sure, from the two most authentic narratives, those in John and Mark, that Mary of Magdala acted wholly by herself. 2 Whatever the circumstances, her share at this important moment was apart from the rest. Her we must follow step by step, for during one hour of this day she may be said to have borne the entire burden of the Christian con- science. Upon her testimony rested the faith of the future. Call now to mind that the enclosure in which the body of Jesus had been laid was a cave newly hollowed in the rock, and situated in a garden near the place of execution, 3 a circumstance which determined the choice, since it was late, and it was sought to avoid the violation of the Sabbath. 4 The first evangelist adds that the garden and tomb belonged to Joseph of Ari- 1 Matt, xxviii. 1 ; Mark xvi. 1 ; Lake xxiv. 1 ; John xx. 1. 2 John xx. 1, 2, 11-18; Mark xvi. 9. Note that the closing chapter of Mark, as we have it, is in two distinct portions : xvi. 1-8 and 9-20 ; be- sides two other passages preserved in the Paris MS. L, and the margin of the Philoxenian version [Syriac, of date 508] : see N. T. ed. of Griesbach- Schultz, i. 291; and by Jerome, Adv. Pelag. ii. The later ending (w. 9- 20) is wanting in MS. B (Vatican), in the Sinaitic, and in the more important Greek MSS. It is, however, at all events very old, and its agreement with the Fourth Gospel is striking. 8 Matt, xxvii. 60; Mark xv. 46; Luke xxiii. 53. 4 John xix. 41, 42. 46 THE APOSTLES. mathgea. But, in general, the additions made by this writer to the common tradition are of little value, es- pecially as regarding the account of the later period. 1 The same gospel mentions another detail, which in the silence of the other accounts is improbable, namely, the sealing of the sepulchre and the setting of a guard. 2 Call to mind, besides, that the caverns for burial were low cells, cut in a sloping rock, an upright surface having first been trimmed off. The doorway, usually close to the bottom, was closed by a very heavy stone, fitted to a groove. 8 These cells had no lock closed by a key, the weight of the stone being the only protection against robbers or violators of the tomb ; so that some tool, or the combined effort of several persons, was needed to remove it. All the accounts agree in say- ing that the stone was set to the entrance on Friday evening. Now when Mary Magdalen arrived on Sunday morn- ing, the stone was not in place. The body was no longer there. The idea of a resurrection had as yet been hardly thought of. Her mind was full of a ten- der sorrow and the desire to pay the last burial service to the body of her beloved Master ; and her first feel- ing was that of surprise and pain. Her last hope was gone with the disappearance of the body, which her hand should never touch again. And whither had it gone ? Rejecting the thought of a violated sepulchre, she felt, it may be, an instant's gleam of hope ; and 1 See Life of Jesus," Introd. p. 39. 2 The gospel of the Hebrews may perhaps have contained a similar circumstance : Jerome, De viris illustr. 2. 8 Vogue, Les eglises de la terre sainte, 125, 126. The verb "roll away" (Matt, xxviii. 2; Mark xvi. 3, 4 ; Luke xxiv. 2) shows that this was the arrangement with the sepulchre of Jesus. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 47 without a moment of delay, she ran to the house where Peter and John were met, 1 crying, " They have taken away the Master's body, and we do not know where they have laid him." The two disciples rise in haste and run at speed toward the spot. John, the younger, arriving first, stoops and looks within. Mary was right; the tomb was empty, and the pieces of cloth which had served for the burial were scattered about in the cave. As Peter comes up, the two go in together and look at the pieces of cloth, no doubt blood-stained, remarking in particular the napkin that had been wrapped about the head, in a corner by itself. 2 They then return to their lodgings in extreme perplexity. If they did not actually speak the decisive words, " He is risen ! " we may yet say that the inference was irresistible, and that the belief which was the living germ of Chris- tianity was already fixed. After Peter and John had left the garden, Mary remained near the sepulchre, weeping, her mind filled with the one thought, "Where had the body been laid ? " and her woman's heart simply yearning to 1 In all this account, the Fourth Gospel is greatly superior to the others, and is our chief guide. The passage of Mark (xvi. 7), in MS. L and the Philoxenian version, reads, " to those with Peter." Paul also (1 Cor. xv. 5) speaks only of Peter in this first appearing. Further on, Luke (xxiv. 24) speaks of others who went to the tomb, referring, probably, to successive visits. John may possibly have been influenced by the motive (which appears elsewhere in his Gospel) of showing that he, as well as Peter, had a leading part in the evangelic history. Per- haps, too, his repeated assertion that he was an eye-witness of the essen- tial facts of the Christian faith (John i. 14 ; xxi. 24 ; 1 John i. 1-3 ; iv. 14) may refer to this visit. 2 John xx. 1-10 ; comp. Luke xxiv. 12, 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5; and the pas- sage in Mark. 48 THE APOSTLES. clasp again the beloved form. Suddenly, hearing a slight sound, she turns about and sees a man standing, whom she supposes to be the gardener : " Oh," she cries, " if you have taken him, tell me where you have laid him that I may carry him away." As the only reply, she hears her own name spoken "Mary!" in the very voice, the very tone, so familiar in her memory, and cries, " Oh, my Master ! " pressing for- ward as if to touch him, or with an instinctive gesture to kiss his feet. 1 The vision lightly recedes, and, with the words, " Touch me not," gradually disappears. 2 But the miracle of love is already wrought. Mary has done what Peter could not do ; she has found a living form, a sweet and penetrating voice, by the very border of the tomb. It is no longer a matter of inference or of conjecture : Mary has seen and heard. The Resur- rection has now its first immediate witness. Wild with love and joy, she now returns to the city, saying to the first of the disciples whom she met, " I have seen him ; he has spoken to me." (John xx. 18.) Greatly disturbed in her fancy, with broken and wan- dering speech, 3 she was taken by some of them to be insane ; while Peter and John relate what they have seen, and other disciples go to the tomb and see for themselves. 4 The fixed conviction of all this first group was that Jesus was indeed risen from the dead. Many doubts still remained ; but the strong assurance of Mary, Peter, and John became that of the rest. It 1 See Matt, xxviii. 9, 10; comparing John xx. 16, 17. 2 John xx. 11-17; Mark xvi. 9, 10; compare the parallel but less sat- isfactory accounts in Matt, xxviii. 1-10 ; Luke xxiv. 1-10. 8 Compare Mark xvi. 9 ; Luke viii. 2. 4 Luke xxiv. 11, 24. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 49 was later called " Peter's vision." l Paul, especially, says nothing of what Mary had seen, alleging that the first appearance had been to Peter. But this is inac- curate, since Peter saw only the empty tomb and the gravecloths ; while in Mary alone love was strong enough to go beyond nature, and behold the living form of the divine Master. In such a critical event it is nothing to see after others have already seen. The first witness determines all ; the vision vouchsafed to others is modelled upon a type already existent. The finer organization has the gift to conceive the image on the instant, with the precision of a draughtsman's design. The glory of the Resurrection is accordingly due to Mary Magdalen. Next after Jesus, hers was the most essential part in the founding of Christianity. The image created by her vivid susceptibility still hov- ers before the world. She, as chief and princess among visionaries, has better than any other made the vision of her impassioned soul a real thing to the world's con- viction. That grand cry from her woman's heart, " He is risen ! " has become the mainspring of faith to man- kind. Hence, feeble Reason ! Test not by cold analysis this masterpiece of ideality and love ! If wisdom de- spairs of consolation to the unhappy race of man, aban- doned by destiny, let unreason attempt the venture ! Where is the wise man who has bestowed upon the world so exalted joy as this visionary Mary Magdalen ? Meanwhile the other women who had been at the i Luke xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5; Mark xvi. 7 (MS. L). The fragment of the gospel of the Hebrews (Ignatius, Ep. ad Smyrn. 3; Jerome, De viris illuslr. 16) seems to have put Peter's vision in the evening, confusing it with that of the assembled apostles ; but Paul expressly distinguishes the two incidents. 4 50 THE APOSTLES. sepulchre carried abroad their various reports. 1 They had not seen Jesus, 2 but they spoke of a man clothed in white whom they had perceived in the cave, who had said to them, " He is no longer here ; go back to Gal- ilee : he will go before you, and you will see him there." 3 Their hallucination may have arisen from the view of the white gravecloths ; or they may really have seen nothing, and told of their vision only after Mary Magdalen had related hers. According to one of the more authentic texts (Mark xvi. 8) they were for some time speechless, their silence being ascribed to ter- ror. However this may be, these tales continued to grow larger every hour, and came to be strangely disfigured. The man in white became an angel of the Lord ; it was said that his garment was dazzling like snow, and his face like lightning. Others spoke of two angels, one at the head, the other at the foot, of the place where the body had lain. 4 By evening, many persons no doubt already believed that the women had seen this angel come down from the sky and roll back the stone, while Jesus burst forth with a noise. 5 No doubt their 1 Luke xxiv. 22-24, 34, from which passages we infer that the rumours were carried separately. 2 Mark xvi. 1-8. Matthew (xxviii. 9, 10) says otherwise; but this is out of keeping with the general view of the Synoptics, which holds that the woman saw only an angel. The first evangelist seems desirous to recon- cile this with the fourth, who says that one woman alone beheld the vision of Jesus. 8 Matt, xxviii. 2-7 ; Mark xvi. 5-7 ; Luke xxiv. 4-7, 23. The appa- rition of angels is also found in the account of the Fourth Gospel (xx. 12, 13), which misplaces it, applying it to Mary Magdalen, through unwill- ingness to sacrifice this feature of the tradition. 4 Luke xxiv. 4-7 ; John xx. 12, 13. 5 Matt, xxviii. 1-7. In the account of Matthew the circumstances are most exaggerated. The earthquake and the part taken by the guard are probably late additions. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 51 own testimony varied. 1 Each being under the influence of the imagination of the others, as is always the case with simple folk, they accepted all the embellishments, and took each her part in creating the legend which grew up about them from their words. The day was disturbed and eventful. The little com- pany was widely scattered. Some were already set off for Galilee ; others had hidden themselves in alarm. 2 The melancholy scene of Friday, the harrowing sight they had had before their eyes, beholding one from whom they had hoped so much hanging on the cross while his Father came not to deliver him, had further shaken the faith of many. In some directions the stories told by Peter and the women found only a hardly disguised incredulity. 3 The several accounts crossed with one another ; the women went here and there with strange and incoherent tales, each outbidding the others. The most contrary opinions prevailed. Some still bewailed the so recent tragic event; others already triumphed; all were inclined to accept the most extraordinary tales. Meanwhile the distrust moved by the exalted condition of Mary Magdalen, 4 the slight credence given to the testimony of the women, and the incoherence of their accounts, caused great doubt. They were under expec- tation of fresh visions which must needs come. Their state of mind was thus wholly favourable to the 1 The six or seven accounts which we have of the events of the morn- ing two or three in Mark, an independent one from Paul, besides that in the gospel of the Hebrews are very discordant with one another. 2 Matt. xxvi. 31; Mark xiv. 27; John xvi. 32; Justin, Apol. i. 50; Tryph. 53, 106. Justin implies that at the death of Jesus some of the disciples were out-and-out deserters. 8 Matt, xxviii. 17 ; Mark xvi. 11; Luke xxiv. 11. 4 Mark xvi. 9 ; Luke viii. 2. 52 THE APOSTLES. spread of strange rumours. If all the little church had been assembled, the growth of legend would have been impossible : those^ who knew the secret of the disap- pearance of the body would probably have protested against the error. But in the general confusion the door was open to the most rapid spread of ill-understood reports. For those conditions of mind which give rise to ecstasy and visions are in their nature highly conta- gious. 1 Visions of this sort are quickly caught up and repeated, as the history of every great religious move- ment shows. In a gathering of persons sharing the same beliefs, it is enough for one of them to speak of supernatural visions or voices, when others of the same circle are sure to see and hear the same thing. Among the persecuted Protestants a rumour would spread that angels had been heard singing psalms on the ruins of some chapel just destroyed ; and at once crowds would go and hear the same psalm. 2 In cases of this kind, the most heated fancy is that which gives the rule of credence and sets the standard of the common tem- perature. The rapture of a few spreads among the 1 See for example, Calmeil, De la folie au point de vue pathologique, etc., Paris, 1845, 2 vols. 2 See Jussieu, Lettres pastorales, letters 7 (1st year) and 4 (3d year) ; Misson, Le Theatre sacre des Ce'cennes : London, 1707, 28, 34, 38, 102, 103, 104, 107 ; Memoirs of Court, in Sayous, Hist, de la litter, franfaise a Vetranger, xvii. cent. i. 303; Bulletin de la Socie'te de Vhistoire du protestanlisme Francois, 1862, 174. Stories of similar apparitions are familiar in the reports of the Society for Psychical Research. Upwards of seven hundred cases were submitted to a single expert. (" The Will to Believe," etc., by Prof. William James, p. 311.) I have myself conversed with an intelligent and hard-headed judge of sixty, in a western State, who told me with much precision of apparitions of his deceased wife, with whom, it was further said, he had sometimes divided and partaken food. ED. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 53 rest ; no one wishes to be backward, or to confess that he is less favoured than the others. Those who see nothing are drawn on, and believe at length either that they are less clear-sighted, or took less note of what they saw. At all events they will not make it known, for this would disturb the good feeling, grieve the com- pany, and be an unpleasant part to play. When an apparition is announced in such a gathering, all will generally see it, or at least assent to it. We should remember, too, what was the standard of mental cul- ture among the companions of Jesus. The most ad- mirable goodness of soul often goes along with a weak faculty of judgment. The disciples believed in appari- tions ; 1 they fancied themselves to be in the midst of miracles ; they had no share whatever in the scientific spirit of their time. Science, indeed, existed only among some hundreds of men, here and there, in the countries penetrated by Greek culture. The common people, everywhere, had little or no share in it. Pales- tine was in this regard a very backward country ; the Galilgeans were the most ignorant of Palestinians ; and the disciples of Jesus might count among the simplest of the Galilseans. This very simplicity of theirs had won to them their heavenly calling. In such a com- munity were the most favourable conditions possible for the spread of belief in marvels. When an opinion that Jesus was risen once spread abroad, numerous visions could not fail to follow, as in fact they did. Late in the forenoon of this very Sunday, when the reports of the women had had time to circulate, two disciples, one of them named Cleopas (or Cleopatros) ? went upon a short excursion to a village called Emmaus, i Matt. xiv. 26 ; Mark vi. 49 ; Luke xxiv. 37; John iv. 19. 54 THE APOSTLES. not far from Jerusalem. 1 They were talking together of the events that had just happened, and were full of sadness. On the way, a stranger joined their company, and asked the occasion of their grief. " Are you," said they, " the only stranger in Jerusalem, not to know what has happened there ? Have you not heard of the prophet Jesus of Nazareth, a man powerful in deed and word before God and the people ? Do you not know how the priests and rulers caused him to be condemned and crucified ? We hoped that it was he who should deliver Israel ; and it is now the third day since all this took place. And then, some women of our company threw us into strange perplexity this very morning. Before daylight they were at the tomb ; they did not find the body, but reported that they had seen angels, who told them that he is still alive. Some of our num- ber went afterwards to the tomb, where they found all as the women had said ; but him they did not see." The stranger was a pious man, versed in the Scripture, who quoted from Moses and the prophets. The three soon found themselves good friends. When they came to Emmaus, as the stranger seemed about to continue his journey, the others begged him to remain and share the evening meal with them. Daylight was declining, and their sorrowful recollections grew more bitter. This hour of the evening repast was that which more 1 Mark xvi. 12, 13; Luke xxiv. 13-33; but compare Jos. War, vii. 6 : 6. Luke puts it at sixty furlongs from Jerusalem, Josephus at thirty (sixty, found in some MSS , is a Christian alteration : see Dindorf's ed.). The most probable situation is Kulonie, a pretty place at the entrance to a valley, on the way to Jerusalem. See note on p. 344 of " Antichrist " ; also Sepp, Jerus. und das heilige Land (1863), i. 56 ; Bourquenoud, Etudes rel. hist, et litt. in PP. of the Society of Jesus, 1863, no. 9 ; for the exact dis- tance, H. Zschokke, Das neutest. Emmaus (Shaffhausen, 1865). ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 55 than any other brought back the charm of sad and ten- der memories. How often, at this very hour, had they seen the beloved Master, laying aside the burden of the day in the cheer of friendly conversation enlivened by a sip of the delicious native wine, and speaking- to them of that " fruit of the vine " which he would drink with them anew in his Father's kingdom. The gesture with which he broke and distributed the bread, as the head of the household among the Jews, was deeply graven on their memor}^. Forgetting in their pensive sadness the presence of a stranger, they seemed to see Jesus himself in the act of holding, breaking, and offering the bread ; and they hardly perceived that their companion, in haste to proceed on his way, had already left them. When wakened from their reverie, " Did not we feel," said one to the other, " that there was something strange ? Do you remember how our hearts burned within us by the way while he was speaking with us ? " " And the prophecies which he repeated," returned the other, " surely proved that the Messiah must suffer before he could enter into his glory. Did you not know him when he broke the bread f " " Yes, our eyes were blinded till then, but were opened when he went away." The conviction of the two disciples was that they had really seen Jesus, and they hastily returned to Jerusalem. At this very time the main body of the disciples were met with Peter. 1 Night was now fully come. Each spoke of his own impression, and of the reports which he had heard. The general belief was that Jesus was risen from the dead. When the two disciples came in, i Mark xvi. 14; Luke xxiv. 33-35; John xx. 19, 20; Gospel of the Hebrews, in Ignatius, Ep. ad Smyrn. 3; Jer. De viris ill., 16 ; 1 Cor. xv. 5; Justin, Tryph. 106. 56 THE APOSTLES. they were told at once of what was already called " Peter's vision "(Luke xxiv. 34). They, on their part, told. what had befallen them on the road, and how Jesus had been known to them in the breaking of bread. The imagination of all was greatly stirred. The doors were shut for fear of the Jews. Eastern cities are still after sunset. There was at times deep silence within doors ; any slight chance sound was sure to be understood in the sense of the common expectation. Such expecta- tion will often create its object. 1 In some hush of still- ness, a light breath of air passed over the faces of those present. In these critical moments a current of air, the creak of a casement, a chance murmur, may fix the belief of a people for centuries. As the breath of air was felt, sounds were heard, or fancied. Some said that they had distinguished the word Shalom, that is, " blessing " or " peace." This was the usual salutation of Jesus, the word by which he announced his presence. No doubt could be felt : he was surely present in the gathering. This was that dear voice, to be recognized by all. 2 This fancy was all the easier to accept, since 1 On an island over against Rotterdam, where the population consists of the austerest Calvinists, the peasants are persuaded that Jesus comes to their death-bed to assure his elect of their salvation. Many, in fact, behold him thus. 2 To conceive the possibility of such illusions, we need only call to mind scenes in our own day, where a company of persons insist, with perfect good faith, that they have heard sounds that had no reality. The listening mood, the act of imagination, the disposition to believe, some- times the yielding to others' impressions, may explain such of these illu- sions as are not the direct effect of fraud. Persons of strong conviction, of kindly feeling, reluctant to break the harmony or to embarrass the masters of the house, are responsible for most of such compliances. When one believes in miracle, one often helps it out unconsciously. Doubt and denial are impossible in such companies : they would be an affront to the hospitable entertainer. Thus experiments which succeed in a select ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 57 Jesus himself had said that whenever his disciples were gathered in his name he would be in the midst of them. It was, then, an accepted belief that on the Sunday evening he had appeared before his gathered disciples. Some even thought they discerned in his hands and feet the print of nails, and on his side the scar of a spear- wound. A widely extended tradition held that on this very evening he breathed upon his disciples the Holy Spirit. 1 It was commonly received that his breath had passed over the assembly. Such were the incidents of this day, decisive for the future of humanity. The belief that Jesus was risen was irrevocably fixed. The little group, thought to have been blotted out by the death of its leader, was now secure of a mighty future. A few doubts, however, still remained. 2 The apostle Thomas, who had not been present at the Sunday even- ing gathering, confessed a shade of jealousy toward those who had seen the print of nails and the scar from the spear. It is said that one week later he was satis- fied ; 3 but there still rested on him a slight stain, and a shadow of mild reproach. With a fine instinctive sense, it was felt that the ideal may not be touched with hands, or subjected to experimental tests. " Touch me not " is the watchword of a great affection. The touch leaves nothing to faith. The eye is a purer a nobler organ than the hand : the eye itself unsullied, which sullies nothing, would soon come to be a needless group commonly fail before an audience that pays for admission, and always fail before a scientific committee. 1 John xx. 22, 23; repeated in Luke xxiv. 49. 2 Matt, xxviii. 17 ; Mark xvi. 14 ; Luke xxiv. 39, 40. 8 John xx. 24-29; comp. Mark xvi. 14; Luke xxiv. 39, 40; and the passage of Mark preserved by Jerome, Adv. Pelagium, ii. 58 THE APOSTLES. witness. A curious scruple here begins to betray itself. Any hesitation seems a lack of loyalty and love. One reproaches himself for being behind the rest ; he forbids himself even the wish to see. " Happy are they who have not seen and yet have believed " (John xx. 29) becomes the motto of the situation. It is found that there is something more generous in believing without proof. True friends at heart claim not to have had direct vision: thus we note that John, the assumed relator of the above incident, has no special vision of his own ; l thus, in a later age, Saint Louis refuses to be witness of an eucharistic miracle, lest he deprive himself of the merit of faith. From this time forth, in the matter of credulity, we find an amazing emula- tion, each bidding against the rest. Since merit con- sisted in belief without sight, faith at all costs gra- tuitous or blind faith, faith running into madness was exalted as the first of spiritual gifts. The ground is already laid for the confession, " I believe because it is absurd ; " and the law of Christian dogma be- comes a strange process of advance, which will pause at no impossibility. A sort of chivalrous sentiment forbids the ever looking back. Beliefs dearest to piety, those clung to with the utmost frenzy, are precisely those most repugnant to reason ; and this because of the appealing notion that the moral value of faith in- creases in proportion to the difficulty of belief, arid that to admit what is evident to the mind is no proof of love in the heart. These first days were thus, as it were, a period of burning fever. The faithful, yielding to the common 1 Compare 1 Cor. xv. 5-8. ACCOUNTS OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. 59 intoxication, and imposing each his own dreams upon the rest, vied with one another, and pushed one another on to moods of the highest exaltation. Visions were multiplied without limit. Evening assemblies were the commonest occasions for their occurrence. 1 When the doors were shut, when all were possessed by their fixed idea, the first who thought he heard, softly spoken, the word Shalom, " blessing "or " peace," would give the signal. All listened, and presently all heard the same sound. Then it was a great joy to these confiding souls to know that their Master was in the midst of them. Each tasted the sweetness of this thought, and believed himself favoured with a private interview. Other vis- ions took form upon another pattern, resembling those of the wayfarers toward Emmaus. At the hour of re- past, they would see Jesus appear, take the bread, bless it, break it, and offer it to the one favoured to behold him. 2 Within a few days a complete cycle of accounts, differ- ing widely in detail but inspired by the same spirit of devoted love and faith, took form and currency. It is a most serious error to suppose that legend needs much time for its development. It may even spring forth, full-grown, in a single day. On Sunday evening, the fifteenth of Nisam, the fifth of April, the resur- rection of Jesus was held as an established fact. One week later, the character of the life beyond the grave, in which he was conceived to have his being, was defined in all its essential features. 1 John xx. 26. The passage xxi. 14 assumes, indeed, that there were at Jerusalem only two apparitions before the assembled disciples. But the passages xx. 30 and xxi. 25 allow more latitude of opinion. Comp. Acts i. 3. 2 Luke xxiv. 41-43 ; Gospel of the Hebrews (Jer. De vir. ill. 2) ; closing passage of Mark, in Jer. Adv. Pel. 2. CHAPTER II. THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. A. D. 33. THE livelist desire of those who have lost a dear friend is to revisit the spots made sacred by his memory. It was this motive, doubtless, that led the disciples to return to Galilee a few days after the events now narrated. It is probable that many had taken their way toward the northern districts as soon as Jesus was arrested, or immediately upon his death. Along with the announcement of his resurrection had come a rumour that he would be seen again in Galilee. Some of the 'women who had been at the sepulchre reported that the angel had given them tidings that Jesus had gone thither before them ; others said that he had himself bidden them to follow him. 1 At times they seemed to recall that he had said the same during his lifetime. 2 However this may be, within a few days, perhaps after the Passover season was finished, the dis- ciples fully believed they had a command to return to their native region, and did in fact go thither. 3 It may be that the visions at Jerusalem became less frequent. 1 Matt, xxviii. 7, 10; Mark xvi. 7. 2 Matt. xxvi. 32 ; Mark xiv. 28. 8 Matt, xxviii. 16; John xxi. ; Luke xxiv. 49, 50, 52; Actsl. 3, 4. Luke's account here plainly contradicts Mark (xvi. 1-8) and Matthew. The later verses of Mark (9-20), with those before cited, not in the common text, seem to be fitted to Luke's account. But this has no weight against the general agreement with the Fourth Gospel, and with Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5-8) on the point. THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 61 The disciples were urged by a longing for their old home. Those short-lived apparitions were not enough to fill the great void caused by his absence. They sadly bethought them of that broad lake and those sunny hills where they had tasted the joy of the divine king- dom. The women, especially, longed to return to the scene of those pure delights, and we may note that the signal for departure came from them. 1 The hated city oppressed their spirit, they were eager to see once more the land where the loved Master had been their own, and were sure in advance that they should meet him there. Most of the disciples, accordingly, went back filled with joy and hope, accompanying, perhaps, the caravan of returning pilgrims of the Passover. Their hope was not simply to find in Galilee a renewal of those passing visions, but Jesus himself, abiding with them as of old. This great persuasion filled all their thoughts. Would he restore the sovereignty of Israel, found once for all the kingdom of God, and (as the saying was) " reveal his justice " ? 2 Anything was possible. In fancy they already saw again those smiling landscapes where they had dwelt with him. He had appointed a meeting with them as many thought 3 upon a mountain, the same, no doubt, to which their tenderest memories clung. Never was there a more joyous journey. All their dreams of bliss were now to be fulfilled : they should behold their Lord once more ! And in fact they did behold him. Their visions of peace had scarce come back to them, when they felt 1 Matt, xxviii. 7, 16 ; Mark xvi. 7. 2 See the verses of Mark (just alluded to) in Jerome, Adv. Pel. 2 8 Matt, xxviii. 16. 62 THE APOSTLES. themselves in the full tide of evangelic life. It was near the end of April, when the earth is strewn with the crimson blooms of the anemone, probably those 11 lilies of the field," whose array Jesus had set above the glory of Solomon. At every step they would recall his words, associated as they were with the incidents of the way : " See ! this is the tree, the flower, the sowing of seed, from which he took his parable ; the hillside where his most moving discourse was spoken ; the fish- ing-boat from which he taught." It was like a fair dream begun again, a vision that had vanished, now come back. The enchantment had taken new life. That sweet Galileean "kingdom of God" resumed its course. This bright air, these mornings by the lake- side or on the hills, these nights spent on the wave in watching their nets, were once more filled with visions of glory. Again they saw him wherever they had once lived with him. Doubtless it was not always an un- troubled joy. At times the lake must seem to them very lonely. But a great love is content with little. If, even as we are, we could once a year, at odd mo- ments, see the loved ones whom we have lost long enough to exchange a few words of greeting, death would be no longer death ! Such was the condition of thought in that faithful company, during this short interval while the new faith returned to its birthplace, as it were, to bid it a last farewell. The leaders Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, and the sons of Zebedee, James and John met again at the lakeside, and lived together for a time their old life of fishermen, at Bethsaida or Capernaum, the Gali- laean women, we may suppose, among them. These had been more urgent than any in pressing the return to THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 63 Galilee, the craving of their hearts, and this was their last act in the founding of Christianity. From this time forth they appear no more upon the scene. Faithful to their love, they would not quit again the region where the great blessing of their life had been enjoyed. 1 They were soon forgotten ; and as Galilsean Christianity has left no history, their memory was quite lost in some lines of tradition. Those piteous de- moniacs and converted sinners, those women among; ' O the real founders of Christianity, Mary Magdalen, Mary, wife of Cleopas, Joanna, and Susanna, have shared the destiny of neglected saints. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5-7) knows not of them. The very faith they had created seems to have remanded them to the shadow. We must come down to the Middle Age before the due claim is rendered them, when one of them at least, the Magdalene, takes her lofty rank in the Christian calen- dar of saints. Visions appear to have been quite frequent on the lake shore. Why should not the disciples see their Lord again where they had once been, as it were, in direct touch with Deity? The commonest circum- stance might bring him back. Once they had rowed all night and caught nothing; of a sudden their net was filled with fish ; this was surely a miracle. Some one, they thought, had said, " Cast your net to the right." Peter and John looked at each other : " This is the Lord," says John. Peter, who was without his 1 In Acts i. 14, the women, it is true, are found at Jerusalem at the time of the ascension ; but this is in keeping with the general view of the writer (Luke xxiv. 49 ; Acts i. 1-4), who knows nothing of a return to Galilee after the resurrection, a view opposed to that of Matthew and John. Hence he places the scene of the ascension at Bethany, contrary to all the other traditions. 64 THE APOSTLES. garments, clad himself hastily, and threw himself into the water to meet the unseen prompteur. 1 At other times Jusus would come to partake of their simple meal. One day, as they came in from fishing, they were surprised to find a fire of coals ready kindled, with fish upon it and bread at hand. A quick memory of the pleasant repasts of old flashed upon their mind. Bread and fish were the essential aliment, which had often been offered them by Jesus. When the meal was over they were convinced that he had been seated at their side, and had handed them these viands, to them already eucharistic and sacred. 2 Peter and John were especially favoured by these interviews with the holy apparition. Peter, one day perhaps in a dream ; but was not all their life by the lakeside a continual dream ? fancied he heard Jesus say to him, " Lovest thou me ? " the question being thrice repeated. Filled as he was with a remorseful and tender emotion, his reply was, " Yes, Lord, thou know- est that I love thee ; " and each time the vision said, "Feed my sheep." 3 At another time Peter imparted to John a singular dream : he was walking with the 1 John, chap. xxi. This passage seems to be a postscript to the finished Gospel, but from the same hand. 2 John xxi. 9-44 ; comp. Luke xxiv. 41-43. John unites the two ac- counts in one, which may seem slightly artificial on looking at verses 14, 15. Hallucinations come singly, and not till later are grouped in con- nected stories. We find an example in the same writer of thus joining into one group incidents of months or weeks apart, by comparing Luke xxiv. 50-53 with Acts i. 3, 9. In the one, Jesus ascends to heaven on the day of the resurrection ; in the other, after an interval of forty days. Taking Mark xvi. 9-20 strictly, he ascended on the evening following the resurrection. The example of Luke shows with how little care the ac- counts were pieced together. 8 John xxi. 15-19. THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 65 Master, he said, John following a little behind, when Jesus spoke to him, very obscurely, of a doom of prison or violent death, each time adding, " Follow me ; " upon which, Peter, pointing to John who followed, asked, " And what shall it be with him ? " " If," Jesus an- swered, " I will that he remain till I come, what is that to thee ? Follow me." After Peter's crucifixion John seems to have recalled this dream, finding in it a prediction of his friend's manner of death, and re- lated it to his disciples, who accepted it as an assur- ance that their master would not die until Jesus should finally come. These great melancholy dreams, these interviews continually broken and renewed with the risen Master, seem to have occupied days and months. Sympathy was freshly roused in Galilee for the prophet whom they of Jerusalem had put to death. More than five hundred persons were already gathered about the mem- ory of Jesus (1 Cor. xv. 5). In the absence of their Master, they yielded to the authority of those who most nearly represented him, chiefly Peter. One day when the Galilseans of the brotherhood, following their leaders, had reached one of the heights to which Jesus had often led them, they believed that they saw him again. The air at these elevations, is often filled with strange glimmerings ; and the same illusion which once in the scene of the " transfiguration " had caught the gaze of the nearer disciples, again took place. The gathered crowd thought they saw the godlike form traced in the sky ; all fell upon their faces and wor- shipped. 1 The feeling impressed by these bright moun- i Matt, xxviii. 16-20; 1 Cor. xv. 6; comp. Mark xvi. 15-20 ; Luke xxiv. 44-49. 5 66 THE APOSTLES, tain landscapes is that of the vastness of the world, with the desire to overcome it. From one of the sur- rounding peaks, it was said, Satan had shown to Jesus " the kingdoms of the earth and the glory thereof," promising to give him all if he would worship him the Tempter. At this time, Jesus from these sacred heights pointed out the same splendours to his disciples, bidding them "go forth into all the world and proclaim the gospel to every creature." And they came down, fully persuaded that the Son of God had given them that command, and had promised to be with them till the end of time. Returning from these scenes, they were filled with a mysterious glow, a holy flame, regarding one another as envoys to the world, capable of working every wonder. Paul himself saw many of those pres- ent at this extraordinary scene ; and, at the end of five and twenty years, the impression was still as living and strong as on the first day (1 Cor. xv. 6). Almost a year passed away in this life suspended between heaven and earth. 1 Its charm, instead of 1 John sets no limit to this later phase of the life of Jesus, appearing to suppose it of long continuance. According to Matthew, it seems to have been only enough for the journey to Galilee and the gathering at the appointed mountain. The unfinished account in Mark (xvi. 1-8) appears to take the same view with Matthew. Mark's second ending (xvi. 9-20) with that before cited from Jerome, and that of Luke, appear to limit this period to a single day. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5-8), in agreement with John, would extend it over a term of years, his own vision of Jesus, at the least, five or six years after these events, being spoken of as the last of the series. The same thing may be inferred from the words " five hun- dred brethren ; " for the gathering of disciples directly after the death of Jesus (Acts i. 15) was by no means large enough to furnish forth such a number. Several Gnostic sects, especially the Valentinian and Sethian, reckoned the period of apparitions at eighteen months, even founding mystical theories upon this number (Iren. Adv. kcr.r. i. 3 : 2 ; 30 : 14). Acts alone fixes the limit at forty days (i. 3); but this is weak authority, THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 67 weakening, grew ever stronger. What is really grand and holy continually gains in strength and purity. Our feeling towards the loved and lost is far more fruitful in its influence after the lapse of years than at first ; and, the more remote from the event, so much the more constraining. The grief which at first mingled in and clouded the memory is changed into a pious serenity. The image of the departed is transfigured and ideal- ised; it becomes a new soul in our life, a mainspring of action, a fountain of gladness, an oracle of wise counsel, a consolation for hours of gloom. There can be no apotheosis till after death. So beloved in life, Jesus was far dearer after his parting breath ; or rather, this parting breath became the beginning of his true life in the heart of his Church. He thus came to be the intimate friend, the confidant, the companion by the way, who continues with us at every turning, is our fellow-guest at the board, and makes himself known as at Emmaus when he takes leave of us. The entire void of any scientific scruple in the mind of these new believers suffered no question to rise as to the nature of his being. He was figured to them as incapable of hurt, clad in aerial form, passing through closed doors, now seen, now unseen, but ever living. Sometimes his body was conceived as purely immaterial, a mere shadow or apparition (John xx. 19, 26) ; sometimes as fully ma- especially as being part of an erroneous view (Luke xxiv. 49, 50, 52; Acts i. 4, 12) making this entire period to be passed at Jerusalem. The number " forty " is symbolic as shown by the 40 years' wandering, the 40 days of Moses in the Mount, the 40 days' fast of Elijah and of Jesus, etc. As to the form of narrative in Mark xvi. 9-20, and in Luke, show- ing the limit of a single day, see the previous note (p. 64). The authority of Paul, the earliest and best of all, seems decisively to confirm that of the fourth evangelist. 68 THE APOSTLES. terial with flesh and bones (Luke xxiv. 39), and was bidden by a childlike scruple (as if hallucination itself should guard against self-deception) to partake of food and drink, or allow itself to be felt and handled. 1 All thoughts concerning it were vague and shifting to the last degree. Thus far I have hardly thought of a question idle in itself and impossible to answer. During all this scene of the true resurrection of Jesus, that is, in the heart of those who loved him, while their conviction remained unshaken and the faith of after ages was matured, where did the body lie mouldering in decay which on the Friday night had been laid in the sepulchre ? This will forever remain unknown, for Christian tradition, naturally, has nothing to say upon the subject. " The flesh profiteth nothing ; it is the spirit that giveth life " (John vi. 64). The resurrection was the triumph of idea over fact. Once the idea has become immortal, of what account is the bodily form that held it ? About the year 80 or 85, when the present text of the first evangelist received its last additions, 2 the Jews already had a fixed opinion upon this matter. 3 Accord- ing to their account, the disciples had come at night and stolen away the body. The Christian conscience took alarm at this report, and, to cut it short, invented the circumstance of the armed guards and the sealed sepulchre. 4 As this account is found only in the First Gospel, where it follows incidents of little credibility 1 Matt, xxviii. 9 ; Luke xxiv. 36-43; John xx. 27-29 ; xxi. 4-8 ; Gos- pel of Hebrews : Ignat. Smyrn., 3; Jer. De vir. ill. 16. 2 See the fifth volume of this series, " The Gospels." 8 Matt, xxviii. 11-15 ; Justin, Tryph. 17, 108. 4 Matt, xxvii. 62-66 ; xxviii. 4, 11-15. THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 69 (ver. 2-7), it is by no means to be admitted. But the Jewish explanation, though it cannot be disproved, does not cover the whole case. It is hardly to be supposed that those who so firmly believed the resurrection were the same that stole the body. Feeble as their faculty of reflection may have been, so strange an illusion is scarcely credible of them. The little church, we must remember, was at this time widely scattered. There was no common understanding, no recognised centre, no regular way of communication. Beliefs sprang up independently, and gathered into system as they could. Such contradictions as we find regarding the incidents of the Sunday morning show that rumours spread by divers channels, with no thought of consistency. Very possibly, the body may have been taken away by some of the disciples and conveyed to Galilee, 1 while the others, remaining behind at Jerusalem, knew nothing of it, those who had borne the body to Galilee being equally ignorant of what was going on meanwhile at Jerusalem, so that the news of a belief in the resurrec- tion came to them afterwards as a surprise. They would then have put in no protest ; or, if they had, it would have made no difference. In a question of miracle, after correction is of no account, as we see with the miracles of Salette and Lourdes. 2 Difficulty of fact 1 See a vague hint to this effect in Matt. xxvi. 32 ; xxviii. 7, 10 ; Mark xiv. 28 ; xvi. 7. 2 One of the commonest ways of the growth of miraculous tales is this. A holy person is reputed to be a healer of disease. A sick person is brought, and is relieved by some sudden flow of emotional excitement ; and within a day the story of a miracle will have spread through a circle of twenty or thirty miles. A few days later, the patient dies, but no one talks of it, and on the very hour of his burial the tale of his miraculous cure may be fervently repeated a hundred miles away. Diogenes Laertius (vi. 2 : 59) tells the whole story of such delusions. 70 THE APOSTLES. does not prevent the contagion of feeling, which creates its own legend to meet the demand. 1 In the late story of the miracle at Salette, error or fraud was absolutely proved before the civil tribunal and the court at Gre- noble (May 2, 1855, May 6, 1857) ; but this did not prevent a church from being built, or crowds from thronging to it. We may assume, then, that the disappearance of the body was the act of Jews. They may have thought thus to prevent scenes of tumult which might arise over the body of one so popular, or put a stop to noisy fun- eral obsequies, or the erection of a pompous tomb. Or, again, may not the body have been removed by the owner of the ground, or by the gardener ? 2 The owner was (as I have before hinted), probably a stranger to the sect, this spot having been chosen, in haste, because it was the nearest 3 to his displeasure, so that he took steps at once to remove the body. It is true that the details as to the shroud and the napkin, carefully folded and put aside (John xx. 6, 7), hardly agree with this view : the latter circumstance, indeed, would rather make us think of a woman's hand, perhaps Mary of Bethany, who has no part assigned in the events of the Sunday morning. 4 The five accounts of the visits of 1 A very striking example is found every year at Jerusalem. The orthodox Greeks claim that the fire self-kindled at the holy sepulchre on Good Friday wipes off the sins of those who expose their faces to it with- out scorching them. Thousands of pilgrims make trial of it, and no doubt feel it keenly (their writhings and the smell of singed flesh are enough to prove it) ; but no one ever denies the orthodox belief. This would be a proof that one was weak in faith, or (good heavens!) to confess that the Latin is the true Church ; for by the Greeks the miracle is held to be the strongest proof that theirs is the only true Church. 2 Of which we seem to find a hint in John xx. 15. 8 So stated in John xix. 41, 42. 4 See " Life of Jesus," pp. 332, 344. THE RETREAT IN GALILEE. 71 the women are so confused and uncertain that we may well suspect some obscure misapprehension. An emo- tional nature under strong excitement is subject to the most singular delusions, and becomes an accomplice of its own dreams. 1 No one thinks deliberately of bring- ing about the incidents regarded as miraculous, but everybody is brought involuntarily to connive at them. Mary Magdalene had, in the language of the time, been " possessed by seven demons." 2 Throughout the story we have to bear in mind the extreme mental levity of Eastern women, their total lack of education, and the peculiar quality of their sincerest conviction, which, when raised to a certain pitch, takes them quite out of themselves. When one sees heaven everywhere, one is easily brought to put one's self at times in the place of heaven. Let us draw a veil over these mysteries of the human heart. In a condition of religious crisis, when every- thing is regarded as divine, the pettiest cause may bring- about the grandest result. If we were witnesses of the strange facts that lie near the origin of all acts of faith, we should see in them incidents that would look wholly out of keeping with the gravity of the events they bring about, while some of them would only make us smile. Our old cathedrals are among the noblest structures in all the world. "We cannot enter them without being conscious of a certain intoxication of infinitude. Now these glorious wonders of mediaeval faith are almost always the flowering-out of some petty deception. What matter the special motive that lay behind it ? The result, in such a matter, is all that 1 See remarks in Origen, Contra Celsum, ii. 55. 2 Mark xvi. 9 ; Luke viii. 3. 72 THE APOSTLES. counts. To pure faith all things are pure. The true cause of the resurrection was not this or that outward incident which may have instigated a belief in it. The real power which brought Jesus back from the dead was the power of human love. This was of itself so mighty, that a little chance incident was enough to build the great structure of universal faith. If he had been less beloved, if there had thus been a weaker motive for the faith, all those chance incidents would have been to no effect : nothing whatever would have come of them. A grain of sand may serve to overthrow a mountain when the moment of its fall is come. The greatest events may flow at once from the mightiest sources and from the feeblest. The mighty source is alone the real one ; the feeble may at best decide the where and the when of a result which has already long been predetermined. CHAPTER III. THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM. A. D. 34. MEANWHILE the visions became less frequent and less bright. It must always be so in movements of enthu- siastic faith. The popular imagination is like a con- tagious malady. Its virulence quickly abates, and it takes another form. The activity of these burning souls was already turning towards another object. What they seemed to hear from the lips of their dear risen Lord was the command to go before him, to preach, to convert the world. Whither should they go ? Naturally, to Jerusalem (Luke xxiv. 47). Their return thither was then resolved upon by those who at this moment gave direction to the body. As these journeys were commonly undertaken in company, by caravans, at festal periods, we may assume that the return to Jerusalem took place at the feast of Tabernacles, at the end of A. D. 33, or at the Passover season of A. D. 34. Galilee was thus left behind by the Christian move- ment, and left behind forever. The little church remain- ing there was doubtless still alive, but we hear no more of it. It was probably crushed out, like all else, by the implacable havoc which that region underwent in the war under Vespasian; and fragments of the dis- persed community took refuge beyond the Jordan. After the war, not Christianity but Judaism returned to Galilee. In the second, third, and fourth centuries, 74 THE APOSTLES. Galilee is a country thoroughly Jewish, the centre of Judaism, the home of the Talmud. 1 It was thus but for an hour that Galilee had its part in Christian his- tory ; but that was emphatically the sacred hour, which gave to the new religion its ever-enduring quality, its poesy and charm. The gospel, as we find it in the Synoptics, was the work of Galilee. And, as I shall try to show hereafter, the gospel, so understood, has been the main cause of the triumphs of Christianity, and remains the surest pledge of its future. It is likely that a portion of the little company that gathered about Jesus in the last days of his life had stayed behind in Jerusalem. When the parting took place, belief in the resurrection was already settled ; and this belief naturally developed in two directions, with noticeably different features, thus giving rise to the wide divergence which we find in the accounts. A Galilaean as well as a Jerusalem tradition came to exist ; and according to this all the visions, excepting those at the very first, took place in Galilee, while the other refers them all to Jerusalem or its neighbourhood. 2 The common belief, meanwhile, was confirmed by the agreement of all as to the main fact of the resurrec- tion. The disciples were one in the common faith, and fervently repeated among themselves, " He is risen ! " The joy and enthusiasm of this harmony may have led to other visions ; and to this time we may perhaps 1 As to the name " Galilseans " given to the Christians, see below, p. 207 note 4. 2 Matthew is exclusively Galilsean ; Luke and the second Mark (xiv. 9-20) speak exclusively of Jerusalem; John combines the two. Paul also (1 Cor. xv. 5-8) refers to visions at places widely apart. That seen by " five hundred brethren " (which I have spoken of as if on the " moun- tain in Galilee ") may possibly have taken place at or near Jerusalem. THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM. 75 refer that of James spoken of by Paul (1 Cor. xv. 7). The silence of the others regarding it is best explained by referring it to a period beyond that of their recital ; and this we may infer, too, from the stress which Paul lays on the order of time. James, we may remember, was a brother of Jesus, or at least one of his near kin- dred ; while it does not appear that he was with him during those last days in Jerusalem. He probably went thither with the rest when they returned from Galilee. All the leading apostles had had their vision, and " the Lord's brother" would hardly have been without his own. It was, we may suppose, an " eucharistic " vision, in which Jesus was seen in the act of breaking and dis- tributing the bread. 1 In later years this vision was referred by those of the Christian family who adhered to James (called "the Hebrews") to the very day of the resurrection, and claimed by them to have been the first of all. 2 It is a very notable circumstance that the family of Jesus, several of whom were incredulous or hostile during his life (John vii. 5), now take their place, and a high rank, in the Church. The reconciliation, we may suppose, took place during the retreat in Galilee. The name of their kinsman had of a sudden become famous, and the five hundred who believed in him and asserted that they had seen him after his resurrection, may have had an effect upon their minds. 3 As soon as the apostles are once fixed at Jerusalem, we find among them Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers. 4 Re- 1 See Gospel of the Hebrews in Jerome, De vir. ill. 2 ; also Luke xxiv. 41-43. 2 See Jerome, as above. 8 May Gal. ii. 6 possibly allude to some such change as this ? 4 Acts i. 14. We already note in Luke a tendency to amplify the part borne by Mary : see the first two chapters of his Gospel. 76 THE APOSTLES. garding Mary, John appears to have adopted her and lodged her in his own dwelling (John xix. 25-27), in obedience to a hint given him by his Master ; and he may very probably have brought her back to Jerusalem. Although her personal traits and the part she sustained are very obscurely hinted, she now becomes a person of high consequence. The allusion to her in the blessing pronounced by an unknown woman, addressed to Jesus, " Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the bosom that nourished thee," begin now to be fulfilled. She outlived her son, it is probable, but a few years ; the tradition of her later abode at Ephesus being late and valueless. 1 We are less sure as to the brothers of Jesus. It is true that he had brothers and sisters ; 2 but among those who were later called his " brethren " there were doubt- less more remote relations. The question is of impor- tance only as concerning James the Just, " the Lord's brother," whether a real brother or a cousin, son of Alpheus, who held a very high position in the Church, as we shall see, through the first thirty years of our history. Our sources of information as to this are quite uncertain and contradictory. What we know of James shows an image so widely differing from that of Jesus, that we do not easily think of them as sons of the same mother. While the one was the true founder of Christianity, the other was its most danger- ous foe, nearly ruining it by the narrowness of his spirit. There was, no doubt, a later belief that they were brothers, 3 but this may have been due to some confusion of names. 1 Epiphan. Ixxviii. 11 ; corap. " Life of Jesus," p. 392. 2 See " Life of Jesus," pp. 92, 93. 8 Gospel of the Hebrews, as just cited. THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM. 77 At all events, Jerusalem now becomes the abiding- place of the apostles/ which they quit, hereafter, only for short journeys. They seem to dread dispersion, and would seem to be taking precautions against a second return to Galilee, which would have broken up their little community. A special command of Jesus was reported, forbidding them to leave Jerusalem until the expected manifestations should have taken place. 2 Visions became more and more rare. They were sel- dom spoken of, and the belief began to prevail that the Master would be seen no more until his solemn reap- pearance in the clouds. Imagination dwelt rather on a promise which Jesus was believed to have made. During his life, it was said, he had often spoken of the Holy Spirit, as a personification of Divine Wisdom. 3 He had promised that this Spirit would be his disciples' strength in the conflicts they must encounter, their inspiration in difficulty, their advocate if they should have to meet a public charge. When the visions be- came fewer, they reverted to this Spirit, regarded as a Comforter, as a second self whom Jesus would send to his friends. Sometimes, it was said by way of symbol, Jesus would suddenly appear in the midst of his as- sembled followers, and breathe upon them from his own lips a stream of life-giving air (John xx. 22, 23). Or, again, his disappearance was thought of as the condi- tion of the Holy Spirit's coming (id. xvi. 7). It was believed that in his manifestations he had promised the 1 Acts viii. 1 ; Gal. i. 17-19; ii. 1-5. 2 Luke xxiv. 49 ; Acts i. 4. 8 This thought, it is true, is developed only in the Fourth Gospel (chaps, xiv.-xvi.) ; but it is hinted in Matt. iii. 11 ; Mark i. 8 ; Luke iii. 16; xii. 11, 12; xxiv. 49. 7 B THE APOSTLES, descent of the Spirit ; and many closely associated this descent with the restoring of Israel's kingdom. 1 All that activity of fancy which had gone hitherto to create the legend of the risen Jesus, was now to be applied to the creation of a cycle of pious beliefs concerning the descent of the Holy Spirit among them, and the be- stowal of miraculous gifts. Meanwhile, a sublime manifestation of Jesus appears to have taken place at Bethany, or upon the Mount of Olives. 2 To this manifestation, according to some tra- ditions, belong the final commissions, the promise of the Spirit, and the act investing the disciples with power to remit sins ; while others refer this last gift to a previous vision (John xx. 23). The features in these manifestations become more indistinct, and one is some- times confounded with another, till they cease to attract much attention. Jesus is assumed to be still living; and, this having been sufficiently established, he might be further manifest in partial visions, until his final coming. 3 Thus Paul represents the vision which ap- peared to him near Damascus as one in the same series that has now been related (1 Cor. xv. 8). In any case, the Master was regarded as being still ideally with his disciples, and so to be with them to the end. 4 In the earlier days, since Jesus often manifested himself, he 1 Luke xxiv. 49 ; Acts i. 4, 5-8. 3 1 Cor. xv. 7 ; Luke xxiv. 50-53 ; Acts i. 2-5. We may, indeed, regard the vision at Bethany, related by Luke, as parallel with that upon the mountain told in Matt, xxviii. 16-20 ; but this latter is not accom- panied by the ascension. A like manifestation in Mark xvi. 9-20, with the final commission, is placed at Jerusalem. Paul, again, represents the appearance to " all the apostles " as distinct from that to " five hundred of the brethren" (1 Cor. xv. 5-7). 8 Luke xxiv. 23 ; Acts xxv. 19. * Matt. xxviiL 20. THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM. 79 was conceived as still dwelling upon the earth, more or less under the conditions of earthly life. As the visions became infrequent, he was conceived under another figure, as having entered into his glory, and as seated at the right hand of his Father. The belief about him was, that " he is ascended into heaven." This phrase, indeed, was often used as mere vague imagery or dogma ; 1 but many understood it as signi- fying a material scene, holding that, after his last ap- pearance to all the apostles, and his final commission to them, Jesus in bodily form was taken into heaven. 2 The scene of this was afterwards expanded and made into a complete legend. It was said that celestial per- sonages, in dazzling raiment (recalling the scene of the transfiguration) appeared at the moment when the cloud enfolded him, and consoled the disciples by assuring them that he would return with glory in the clouds just as he had parted from them. The death of Moses had been shrouded by popular imagination in the like mys- tery ; 8 the ascension of Elijah in a fiery chariot was also brought to mind. 4 Luke places the scene of the ascension near Bethany, on the summit of the Mount of Olives, this region being held peculiarly dear among the disciples, because Jesus had lived there. According to the legend, the disciples after this scene of marvel returned to Jerusalem " with great joy " (Luke xxiv. 52). But for us it is a sad thing to take 1 John iii. 13; vi. 62; xvi. 7; xx. 17; Eph. iv. 10; 1 Pet. iii. 22; neither Matthew nor John having related the scene of ascension, while the language of Paul (1 Cor. xv. 7, 8) seems to exclude the very idea. 2 Mark xiv. 19; Luke xxiv. 50-52; Acts i. 2-12; Justin, Apol. i. 50; Asc. of Isaiah, Ethiopia vers. xi. 22 ; Latin vers. (Venice, 1522). Jos. Antiq. iv. 8: 48. 4 2 Kings, ii. 11-13. 8o THE APOSTLES. our last farewell of Jesus, as it has been a consolation to find him once more living in his shadowy life. Pale image as it is of his former existence, it has yet its charm. But henceforth the fragrance of his presence is gone. Borne upon a cloud to his Father's right hand, he leaves us among men : and what a fall is there ! The realm of poetry is past. The Magdalene broods upon her memories in the village to which she is with- drawn. With that unvarying injustice which causes man to claim to himself alone the glory of a task where woman has an equal share, Cephas casts her into the shadow, to be forgotten. No more sermons on the mount ! no more healing of demoniacs, or pardon of the sinful ; no more of those female fellow-workers to whom He never refused a share in the task of redemp- tion. The divinity has disappeared from the scene. Christian history will hereafter tell oftenest how the idea of Jesus has been betrayed. Still, that history is a tribute to his glory. The words and the per- son of the exalted Nazarene remain as a sublime ideal in the midst of boundless wretchedness. We shall better understand his greatness when we contrast it with the littleness of those who called themselves his disciples. CHAPTER IV. DESCENT OF THE HOLT SPIRIT. A. D. 34. PETTY, narrow, ignorant, void of experience, those dis- ciples were, as much as man can be. Their minds were simple and credulous to the last degree. But they had one noble quality ; their affection to their Master was without bounds. His memory had remained the one motive power of their life. By it they were wholly possessed ; and henceforth, it was clear, they would live only through him who for two or three years had so won them and attached them to himself. For minds of the second order unable to find God directly, that is, to know the true or achieve the beautiful or do the good by their own strength salvation must be had by love of some one who shall reflect to them the lustre of the true, beautiful, and good. Most men have need to worship at a little distance. The multitude of adorers need an intermediary between themselves and God. At the death of one who has drawn about him a group of others, closely united in one lofty moral pur- pose, it will often happen that the others, hitherto sun- dered by personal rivalries and -dissent, feel all the more deeply their mutual tie of fellowship. Cherished memo- ries of the departed leader make their common treasure. To love one another is but one form of the love they bore to him; and they crave to meet together, that those precious memories may be renewed. That pro- 6 82 THE APOSTLES. found word of Jesus is literally fulfilled : " Where two or three are met in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matt, xviii. 20). Thus the mutual affection of the disciples was ten- fold what it had been during the Master's life. They formed a little company, apart from others, living exclusively among themselves. About one hundred and twenty of them were in Jerusalem (Acts i. 15). The greater part of the " five hundred " were doubt- less still in Galilee. The later number " three thou- sand" (Acts ii. 41) must be an exaggeration, or at least anticipates the fact. Their piety was zealous, and as yet the form it took was wholly Jewish. The Temple was their chief place of worship. 1 It is certain that they worked for their living ; but, among Jews of that day, manual labour consumed little time. Every one had a trade, which need no way hinder him from being a man of scholarship or breeding. Among us material wants are so hard to satisfy that one living by hand-work is forced to toil twelve or fifteen hours a day. Only the man of leisure can give thought to interests of the soul, and to acquire learning is a rare and costly thing. But in those communities of old of which the East still offers the example, in a climate where nature lav- ishes so much upon man and demands so little from him, the toiler's life left him much time to spare. A kind of instruction open to everybody diffused among all the common stock of thought. Nothing was needed but " food and raiment ; " 2 and these were earned by a very few hours of toil. The rest was given over to dream, 1 Luke xxiv. 53 ; Acts ii. 46 ; comp. Luke ii. 37 ; Hegesippus in Euseb. ii. 23. 8 Deut. x. 18 ; 1 Tim. vi. 8. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 83 to passion ; and in these souls passion bore sway to a degree which we find inconceivable. The Jews of that time so Josephus shows them in his story of their war are in our eyes veritable madmen : each, like a spring let loose in blind recoil, obeys the thought of the instant as it has seized him. The ruling thought in the Christian community at this moment, when visions had but just ceased, was the coming of the Holy Spirit, to be received in the form of a mysterious breath that should pass upon all the company (John xx. 22). All sense of inward comfort, every impulse of courage, every outburst of enthusiasm, every soft and warm emotion of gladness coming one knew not from what source, was the operation of the Spirit. 1 These honest hearts referred (as ever) to an outward source the delicious emotions that sprang up within them. The strange phenomena of illuminism were especially frequent in their assemblies. When all were gathered, silently waiting inspiration from on high, a slight murmur or any sound might make them believe in the coming of the Spirit. It was thus, for- merly, that the presence of Jesus was announced. Now that the current of thought was altered, it was the Divine breath poured out upon the little Church, and filling the place with celestial odours. The symbolic form in which these beliefs were clothed was one familiar in the Old Testament. In Hebraic language, the prophetic spirit is a " breath " which at once penetrates and uplifts. In the noble vision of Elijah, the Lord's presence was expressed by "a still 1 So in the modern hymn : And every virtue we possess, and every victory won, And every thought of holiness, are His alone. ED. 84 THE APOSTLES. small voice" (1 Kings, xix. 12). These old images had brought about, in later times, a belief very like that of the Spiritism of our days. In the "Ascension of Isaiah," early in the second Christian century, the coming of the Spirit is attended by a shaking of the doors (vi. 6). Still oftener, this coming was conceived as a second baptism, that of the Spirit, far superior to that of John. 1 Delusions of touch were very frequent among persons so nervously excited ; and thus the slightest breath of air, with any shiver in the midst of silence, was regarded as the passing of the Spirit. One thinks he feels it ; presently all feel it j 2 and the en- thusiasm spreads from each to the next. We see how like these experiences are to those of visionaries in every age. They are witnessed every day, often the effect of reading the Book of Acts, among the Quakers, English or American, the Jumpers, Shakers, Irvingites, or Mormons, or in American camp-meetings and revi- vals, 8 also among the Spiritists of France. But there is a wide interval between such aimless and endless aberrations as these, and those illusions which came with the establishing of a new gospel for mankind. Among these " descents of the Spirit," which seem to have been numerous, one has left a profound impres- sion upon the Church then coming to its birth. 4 On one occasion a storm burst forth while the brethren were assembled; a strong wind blew open the case- ments, and the sky was as it were in flames. Thunder- 1 Matt. iii. 11; Mark i. 8; Luke iii. 16; Acts i. 5; xi. 16; xix. 4 ; 1 John v. 6-8. 3 Comp. Misson, le Theatre sacr& des Ctvennes, p. 103. 8 Jules Remy, Voyage, etc. i. 259, 260 ; ii. 470 et seq. 4 Acts ii. 1-4; Justin. Apol. i. 50. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 85 storms in this region are accompanied by prodigious flashes of light, and the air seems to be furrowed all about by streaks of flame. Whether the lightning ac- tually passed within the chamber, or a dazzling flash suddenly lighted up the faces of all, they were per- suaded that the Spirit had entered and rested as a " tongue of fire " on each head. 1 The miracle-working (theurgic) schools of Syria held that the entrance of the Spirit is by a divine fire, and under the form of a mysterious gleam. 2 It was as if they were present at the very splendours of Sinai ; 3 the manifestation was, as it were, one of the ancient day. Henceforth, " bap- tism of the Spirit " is also a baptism of fire ; and it is distinctly opposed to and set above John's baptism of water only.* It is given, too, but rarely ; only the apostles, who had shared in the first institution of the Eucharist, were thought to have received it. But the idea that the Spirit had hovered over them in the form of jets of flame, like burning tongues, was the origin of singular ideas, very prominent in the fancies of the time. The tongue of the inspired man was thought to re- ceive a sort of consecration. It was asserted that many prophets, before their mission, had been stammerers ; 6 that the angel of the Lord had touched their lips with a live coal, 6 which removed all impurity and bestowed 1 In Hebrew a "tongue of fire" is simply a flame; see Isa. v. 24; Virgil, JEn. ii. 682-684. 2 See lamblichus, De myst. iii. 6. 8 Comp. Babyl. Talm., Chagiga, 14 b ; Midrashim, Shir hasshirin rabba, 106; Ruth rabba, 42 a; Koheleth rabba, 87 a. 4 Matt. iii. 11 ; Luke iii. 16. 6 Exod. iv. 10 ; Jer. i. 6. 6 Isa. vi. 5 ; Jer. i. 9. 86 THE APOSTLES. the gift of eloquence. In his public appeals the prophet was thought never to speak of himself, 1 his tongue being but the organ of the Deity who inspired him. These tongues of fire were held to be a striking symbol. It was believed that God had chosen thus to signify that he poured out upon the apostles his most precious gifts of eloquence and inspiration. But this was not all. Jerusalem, like most cities of the East, was a city of many tongues. Now difference in speech was one of the gravest difficulties in the spread of a universal faith. Nothing was more alarming to the apostles, setting out on a mission that was to embrace the earth, than the number of languages spoken in it : ever they must question with themselves how they should learn so many dialects. Thus "the gift of tongues" became a miraculous privilege. The preach- ing of the gospel was thus relieved of the obstacle created by diverse idioms. In circumstances of special solemnity, it may be supposed that the bystanders had heard the apostles' preaching each man in his own tongue ; that is, their word translated itself to each one of those present. 2 Sometimes, indeed, it was understood differently : that the apostles, by divine inspiration, had the gift of knowing all languages and speaking them at will. 3 In this there was the hint of a larger freedom. The thought implied in it is that the Gospel has not a spe- cial dialect of its own ; that it may be translated into 1 Luke xi. 12 ; John xiv. 26. 2 Acts ii. 5-13. This is the most plausible understanding of the ac- count, which may, however, mean that each of the dialects was spoken independently by each of the speakers. 8 Acts ii. 4; 1 Cor. xii. 10, 28; xiv. 21, 22. Comp. for illustration Calmeil, De la folie, i. 9, 262; ii. 357 et seq. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 87 every language, and that the translation is as good as the original. But such was not the feeling of Jewish orthodoxy. For the Jew of Jerusalem Hebrew is the one " holy tongue ; " no other can take its place. Trans- lations of the Bible were held in small esteem. While the Hebrew text was scrupulously kept the same, changes and softenings were allowed in translations. Jews in Egypt and Hellenists in Palestine, it is true, allowed themselves more freedom, employing Greek in prayer, 1 and habitually reading Greek translations of the Bible. But the earliest Christian idea was broader yet : that the word of God has no special language, but is free of all linguistic fetters, yielding itself to all of its own accord, and needing no interpreter. The ease with which Christianity released itself from the Sem- itic dialect spoken by Jesus, the freedom which it allowed to every people of forming its own liturgy and its ver- sion of the Bible in its own native tongue, all made a part of this emancipation. It was generally held that the Messiah would bring into one all languages as well as all peoples. 2 The common and indifferent employ- ment of various tongues made the first step toward this grand era of universal peace. But it was not long before the gift of tongues took a new form and ran into the strangest extravagances. A sort of delirium would sometimes lead to ecstasy and prophesying. At such times the true believer, in the seizure of the Spirit, would utter inarticulate and incoherent sounds, which others would take for words in a strange tongue, and attempt in all simplicity to 1 Jerus. Talmud, Sota, 21 b. 2 Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs : Judah, 25. 88 THE APOSTLES. translate their meaning. 1 At other times, it was thought that the person inspired spoke in languages new, hitherto unknown, or even, it might be, in the tongue of angels. 2 In general, these strange scenes did not occur till later ; 3 but it is likely that they were not unknown from the beginning. Visions of the ancient prophets had often been attended by symptoms of ner- vous excitement (1 Sam. xix. 23, 24). The condition called among the Greeks dithyrambic was signalised by like phenomena ; and the Py thia sometimes preferred to use foreign or archaic expressions, which as in the early Church, were called "tongues" (yXwcrcrat). 4 Many cur- rent phrases in primitive Christianity, bilingual or in anagram, such as Abba Father, Anathema Maranathaf may have had their origin in these moments of frenzy, accompanied by sighs, stifled groans, outcries, supplica- tions, and sudden bursts, which were taken to be pro- phetical. It was like a formless music of the soul, uttered in inarticulate sounds, which the hearers tried to render into precise words or images ; 6 or, again, prayers of the spirit, addressed to God in words known to him alone, 7 the person in ecstasy having neither under- standing nor consciousness of what he said. 8 He was 1 Acts ii. 4; x. 44-48; xi. 15; xix. 6; 1 Cor. xii.-xiv. 2 Mark xvi. 17; 1 Cor. xiii. 1 (in connection with what precedes). In Hebrew, as in all ancient languages, the word for "strange" or "foreign tongue" was derived from those meaning "to stammer" or "babble," since to simple peoples the speech of foreigners seems a confused babble- ment. See Isa. xxviii. 11 ; xxxiii. 19 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 21. 1 Cor. xii. 28, 30; xiv. 2-5. 4 Plutarch, De Pyihice oraculis, 24. See also the strange vocables em- ployed by Cassandra in her ravings : JEschylus, Agamemnon, 1072 et seq. 5 1 Cor. xiii. 3; xvi. 22 ; Rom. viii. 15, 23, 26, 27. 8 1 Cor. xiii. 1 ; xiv. 7-11. 7 Rom. viii. 26, 27. 8 1 Cor. xiv. 13, 14, 27-32. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 89 eagerly listened to, meanwhile, and his incoherent utter- ance was explained by such thoughts as might occur at the moment. Each hearer caught at something he might recall in his own provincial speech, to interpret the unintelligible sounds ; and he always succeeded, for better or worse, by supplying to this broken speech the thought that was just then wakened in his mind. The history of the sects of illaminati is full of just such instances. The preachers of the Cevennes ex- hibited many a case of " glossolalia." 1 But the most striking example is that of the Swedish " Readers " of 1841-43. 2 Involuntary words, void of meaning to those who speak them, attended by swooning and convulsions, were long a daily practice in this sect, and grew con- tagious, so as to stir considerable popular excitement. Among the Irvingites the phenomena of tongues re- peated in a very striking way what is told by Luke and Paul. 3 Our own time has witnessed scenes of similar illusion which I need not here recall, since it is always unjust to compare the credulity inevitable in a great religious movement with that which originates in mere emptiness of mind. These strange displays would sometimes find their way out-doors. Enthusiasts, at the moment of their highest, strangest ecstasy, would venture out and exhibit themselves before the crowd, and so were taken to be intoxicated (Acts ii. 13, 15). Jesus, himself, though 1 Jurieu, Lettres pastorales; Misson, le Theatre, etc., pass.; Brueys, Hist, dufanatisme, i. 145 et seq.; Flechier, Lettres choisies, i. 353. 2 K. Hase, Kirchengesch. 439, 458:5; LEsperance (Prot. journal), 1 April, 1847. 3 Hohl, Bruchstiicke, etc., 145, 149 ; Hase, 458 : 4. See also the various accounts of the Mormons and the Convulsionnaires of St. Medard (Remy ; Carre de Montgeron). 90 THE APOSTLES. ordinarily of well-balanced mind, more than once ex- hibited the usual signs of ecstasy. 1 For two or three years the disciples were possessed with these ideas. The exercise of prophecy was reckoned akin to the gift of tongues. 2 Prayer, accompanied with violent gestures, intoning of the voice, profound sighs, lyric enthusiasm, and a chanting method of delivery, 3 was of daily fre- quency. A rich vein of canticles, psalms, and hymns, borrowed from the Old Testament, thus lay open. 4 Heart and lips might join in the act of praise, but at times the lips were silent, the heart alone engaged in prayer. 6 Since no language contained terms to express the new emotion, there came about the practice of an inarticulate stammering, at once childish and sublime, the embryonic condition of what we may call " the Christian language." Christianity, in fact, had broken the mould of the ancient tongues, not finding in them an instrument suited to its needs. But, before it could shape out the idiom it required, centuries must pass, while many of its obscure efforts might be described as an inarticulate moaning. The style of Paul, and that in many of the New Testament writings, suggests that cramped, panting, shapeless improvisation called " the gift of tongues." Ordinary speech breaks down under these men. They know not how to speak, and must begin, like the prophets, by the infant's cry of "Ah ! " (Jer. i. 6). The Greek and the Semitic tongues fail them alike : hence the violences done to language by 1 Mark iii. 21-25; John x. 20, 21 ; xii. 27-29. 2 Acts xix. 6 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 3-5. 8 Acts x. 46 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 16, 26. 4 Col. iii. 16; Eph. v. 19; Luke, chaps, i., ii. (cf. Luke i. 46 with Acts x. 46). 6 1 Cor. xiv. 15; CoL iii. 16 ; Eph. v. 19. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 91 Christianity in its cradle. As in the mouth of one who stammers, the sounds hustle and choke one another, resulting in a confused but very expressive pantomime. All this was far, indeed, from the thought of Jesus ; but such exhibitions had profound meaning to minds steeped in belief of the supernatural. The gift of tongues was regarded, in especial, as an essential sign of the new religion and a witness to its truth (Mark xvi. 17). And in truth great fruits of edification were found in it, with the conversion of many pagans. 1 Until the third century, the gift of tongues continued to be manifest in the way described by Paul, and was re- garded as a permanent miracle. 2 Some of the sublime phrases of Christian imagery had their birth in these " groanings which cannot be uttered " (Rom. viii. 26). Their general effect was to touch and penetrate the soul. Thus to make common property of one's indi- vidual inspirations, submitting them to be interpreted by the general thought, must unfailingly create a pow- erful bond of brotherhood. Like all mystics, these new brethren led a life of fasting and self-denial. 3 Like most Orientals, they ate sparingly, and this aided to sustain their ex- alted mood. The sober Syrian regimen, causing physical weakness, promotes a perpetual condition of fever and nervous susceptibility. That sustained effort of the brain common among us would be impossible under such a regimen. On the other hand, this cere- 1 1 Cor. xiv. 22. " Spirit," in Paul's epistles, is often nearly one with " power." Thus Spiritist phenomena are regarded as miracles. 2 Iren. Adv. hcer. v. 6:1; Tertull. Adv. Marcion, v. 8 ; Constit. A post. viii. i. Luke ii. 37; 2 Cor. vi. 5; xi. 27. 92 THE APOSTLES. bral and muscular debility brings, without apparent cause, alternations of gloom and joy, which incessantly throw the soul back on God. What is called a " godly sorrow" (17 Kara 0tov XV'TTTJ : 2 Cor. vii. 10) was reck- oned a celestial gift. The entire doctrine of the great Eastern Fathers regarding the spiritual life, all the secrets of that great art of dealing with the inward experience, among the most glorious creations of Christianity, may be found in germ in that strange condition of the soul undergone, in their months of anxious waiting, by these illustrious forerunners of "men of the spirit." To us their moral state is a strange thing, living in the supernatural, acting only as in vision, and holding their dreams, the mi- nutest circumstances of their lives, to be monitions from the heavenly powers. 1 Under the phrase " gifts of the Holy Spirit " were thus hidden the rarest and most exquisite conditions of the soul, love, piety, a reverent fear, unbidden sighs, sudden yieldings to emotion, a spontaneous tenderness. Whatever of good is found in man that can be traced to no human source was ascribed to a breath from above. Tears, especially, were held to be a sign of celestial favour. This lovely grace, privilege only of the best and purest souls, belonged to boundless gen- tleness of heart. It is well known what strength deli- cate natures, women especially, have found in the divine gift of copious tears. It is for such one form of prayer, and surely the holiest of prayers. Coming down far into the later Middle Age, to the tear-flooded piety of Saints Bruno, Bernard, and Francis of Assisi, 1 Acts viii. 26-28; x. throughout; xvi. 6, 7, 9, 10 ; Luke ii. 27-32. DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 93 we find again that chastened sadness of the early days, when those words were so proved true, that " they who sow in tears shall reap in joy." "Weeping thus became an act of piety ; and those who had no skill to preach, or speak in tongues, or perform acts of miracle, might at least shed tears. And this they did in prayer, in preaching, in warning ; 1 it was the advent of a reign of tears. One might have said that the very soul was dissolving, and, in lack of a language adequate to the emotion, would spend itself abroad in a living and condensed expression of its whole interior life. 1 Acts xx. 19, 31; Rom. viii. 23, 26. CHAPTER V. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. A. D. 35. THE habit of living together, in one faith and pur- pose, naturally brought about many a common custom. Rules were soon established, which made the primitive Church very like those institutions of monastic life, afterward familiar in Christian history. Many precepts of Jesus led in this direction. The true ideal of life in the gospels is monastic, not a monastery shut in with gratings, a prison, such as in the Middle Age, with sep- aration of the sexes ; but a retreat amid the world, a space set apart for the life of the spirit, a free associa- tion or little intimate brotherhood, fenced about to exclude the anxieties which harm the freedom of the divine kingdom. All lived according^ in common, having but one heart and one mind. 1 No one of them had anything which he called his own. In becoming disciples of Jesus, they sold their goods and brought in the price as a gift to the community, the leaders then distributing the com- mon fund to each according to his need. They lived in a quarter by themselves. 2 They partook of a common meal, still ascribing to it the mystic sense which Jesus had ordained. 3 Long hours were spent in prayers, sometimes uttered aloud, oftener in silent meditation. 1 Acts ii. 42-47 ; iv. 32-37 ; v. 1-11 ; vi. 1-4. 3 Acts ii. 44-47. * Ibid. ii. 46 ; xx. 7, 11. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. 95 Ecstasies were common, and all believed themselves to be continually favoured by divine inspiration. Har- mony was perfect, with no doctrinal dispute and no strife for precedence. All such differences were blotted out by the tender memory of Jesus. In every heart was a deep and living joy. 1 Morality was strict, but softened by a warm and tender feeling. Groups met in private houses for prayer or indulgence of religious emotions. The memory of these two or three first years remained among them as of an earthly paradise, which was henceforth to be sought in the dreams of Christendom, but was never to return. Such an organ- isation, in truth, could be realised only by a very small brotherhood ; though later it was the ideal of monas- tic life, which the Church at large made no effort to attain. It is quite possible that the writer of " Acts," to whom we owe this picture of primitive Christianity, has more or less qualified the colouring, and, in particular, has overstated the community of goods it practised. With this writer, who also composed the Third Gospel, facts are often warped by theory, 2 and the tendency to ebionism 3 that is, absolute poverty is often strongly marked. Still, his account cannot be without founda- tion. Even if Jesus never uttered the communistic max- ims recorded by the third evangelist, it is certain that the renunciation of this world's goods, and almsgiving carried to the extreme of self-denial, were perfectly in keeping with the tone of his discourse. Belief in the 1 In no other literature is the word "joy" so often found as in the New Testament. See 1 Thess. i. 6 ; v. 16; Rom. xiv. 17; xv. 13; Gal. V. 22; Phil. i. 25 ; iii. 1 ; iv. 4 ; 1 John i. 4, etc. 1 See " Life of Jesus," Introd. p. 64. Ibid. p. 211. 96 THE APOSTLES. near end of the world has always had the effect to promote disgust of wealth and a tendency to com- munism. 1 The account in " Acts " is, further, in perfect keeping with what we know of the origin of other ascetic religions, Buddhism, for example, which always begin with cenobitic [or communistic] life, their first adepts being a sort of mendicant monks. A lay body is not apparent in such movements until a later period, or when the religion has conquered an entire political community, in which monastic life is necessa- rily an exception. 2 We find, then, a communistic period in the history of the Church at Jerusalem. Even two centuries later, pagan writers 3 found in Christianity some traces of a communistic sect. It 'is to be remembered that the Es- senes and Therapeutae had already given a model of this way of life, which was a quite legitimate offshoot of Mosaism. Since the Mosaic code was in its essence moral and not political, its natural effect was to yield a social utopia (the church, synagogue, or convent), not a civil State, the nation or municipality. Egypt had for some centuries maintained recluses, some of them at public expense (probably in administering of chari- table endowments) near the Serapeum at Memphis. 4 1 An example [greatly exaggerated by some historians] is found in the " legend" of the year 1000, when acts of donation to monasteries, etc., often began with the formula, " Whereas the end of the world draws near." [But see Revue politique et litteraire for March, 1878.] 2 See Hodgson in the Asiatic Journal of the Society of Bengal, v. 33 et seq. ; Burnouf, Introd. h VJiist. de buddhisme indien, i. 278. 8 As Lucian, in the Death of Peregrinus, 13. * See papyruses at Turin, London, and Paris, collected by Brunet de Presle; Me*m. sur le Serap. de Memphis, Paris, 1852 ; Egger, Mtm. d'hist. anc. et de philologie, 151 ; Notices et extraits, xviii.: ii. 264-369. Christian asceticism, it is to be noted, originated in Egypt. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. 97 Such a life in the East is by no means what it has been among Western peoples. In the East one may well enjoy nature and life without property of any sort. Here man is always free because his wants are few ; the slavery of labour is unknown. It may well be that the communism of the primitive Church was not so rigid as we find it in the Book of Acts. It is, how- ever, sure that there was at Jerusalem a great brother- hood of poor, ruled by the apostles, to which donations were sent from all points where churches were estab- lished. 1 This brotherhood was, no doubt, obliged to establish very strict rules ; and, within a few years, may have been compelled to enforce its regulations by terror. Fearful memories remained, showing that the mere fault of keeping back a part of what one gave to the community was regarded as a capital offence, and was in fact punished by death, as we see in the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts v. 1-11). The porches of the Temple, especially Solomon's Porch, overlooking the valley of Kedron, was the usual place of assembling for the disciples in the daytime, 2 recalling as it did the memory of hours which Jesus had passed there. They were little noticed in the hub- bub that prevailed about the Temple. The galleries that made a feature in the structure were the seats of numerous sects and schools, the scenes of endless dis- putes. The followers of Jesus, too, must have appeared as very strict devotees, for they scrupulously kept the Jewish observances, prayed at appointed hours (iii. 1), and followed the precepts of the Law. They were 1 Acts xi. 29, 30; xxiv. 17; Gal. ii. 10; Rom. xv. 26-29; 1 Cor. xvi. 1-4 ; 2 Cor. viii. ix. 2 Acts ii. 46 ; v. 12. 7 98 THE APOSTLES. Jews, differing from the rest only in the belief that the Messiah had come already. The majority, who knew nothing of their peculiar views, would regard them as a sect of the Hasidim, or "pious." To affiliate with them did not make one a heretic or schismatic, as we see in the case of James, who continued to be a pure Jew all his life, any more than one ceases to be a Prot- estant by becoming a disciple of Spener [the father of Pietism], or a Catholic by joining the order of St. Francis or St. Bruno [founder of the Carthusian order]. They were favourites of the people because of their piety, simplicity, and gentleness, 1 while the aristocrats of the Temple would no doubt regard them with dis- pleasure. But the sect made little noise ; it was left in peace, safe in its obscurity. At night the brethren would return to their quarter and partake of the repast, divided into groups (ii. 46), as a sign of fraternity and in memory of their Master, whom they always beheld as present in the midst. The master of the feast broke the bread, blessed the cup, 2 and passed it, as a symbol of union in Jesus. The com- monest act of life thus became the most august and sacred. These family feasts, always dear to the Jews, 3 were accompanied with prayers, pious ejaculations, and gladness of heart. They felt as if still animated by the presence of Jesus, or in very sight of him ; and the say- ing was early common among them, that Jesus had said, " Whenever you break bread, do it in remembrance of me." Even the bread itself was a symbolic type of 1 Actsii. 47; iv. 33; v. 13,26. 2 1 Cor. x. 16 ; Justin, Apol i. 65-67. 8 Svi/fieiTri/a, Jos. Ant. xiv. 10: 8, 12. 4 Luke xxii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 24-26; Justin, loc. cit. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. 99 him, regarded as the one source of life effective for those who had loved him and still derived their life from him. These repasts, which were always the chief symbol of Chistianity and the soul of its mysteries, for in the year 57 the eucharist had (1 Cor. xi. 17-22) become a practice already old and full of abuses, at first were held every evening. Soon, however, they were restricted to Sunday evening ; * and, later, the mys- tic Supper was transferred to the morning. 2 At the period of time we have now reached, Christians still observed their chief festal rite on Saturday. 3 The apostles chosen by Jesus, and still held to have received from him a special commission to proclaim the divine kingdom to the world, held an unquestioned su- periority in the little community. One of the first cares, as soon as the company found themselves estab- lished at Jerusalem, was to fill up the void in the body left by Judas Iscariot (i. 15-26). It came to be a more and more general opinion that he had betrayed his Master and brought about his death. In this belief legend had its share, and daily some new circumstance came to light which deepened the blackness of his crime. He had, it was said, bought a field near the old burial-ground Akeldama, and was living there in seclu- sion. 4 Such was the strained state of mind in the little community, that to fill his place they had recourse to lot. This method of decision is often resorted to under the stress of religious feeling, in the conviction that 1 Acts xx. 7, 11 ; Pliny, Epist. x. 97; Justin, Apol. L 67. 2 Justin (as above). 8 The contrary cannot be shown from John xx. 26. The Ebionites always observed the Jewish Sabbath (Jer. In Matt. xiii.). 4 See " Life of Jesus," p. 405. ioo THE APOSTLES. nothing happens by chance, that the believer is himself a special object of Divine care, and that, the weaker man is, the larger part is left to God. The only con- dition was that the candidates should be of the older company of disciples, who had witnessed the whole series of events since the baptism of John, the choice being thus among a very few. Only two were upon the list, Joseph Bar-Saba, called "the Just," and Mat- thias. 1 The lot fell to the latter, who thereafter was reckoned among the Twelve. This, however, was the only instance of such a substitution. The apostles were held to have been appointed by Jesus, once for all, to have no successors. A profound instinct averted, for a time, the peril of a permanent college, or commission, holding in itself the life and strength of the whole body. It was long before the Church became thus re- duced within the control of an oligarchy. We must be on our guard, besides, against a misun- derstanding to which the name " apostle " is liable, which it has in fact incurred. In very old time, partly by certain passages of the gospels and still more by the analogies in the life of Paul, the apostles were regarded as essentially travelling envoys, in a sense dividing the world among themselves in advance, and setting forth to conquer all the earth. 2 A cycle of legends arose upon this presumption, and was fastened upon Christian history. 3 Nothing is more contrary to the truth. 4 The Twelve usually abode in permanence at Jerusalem. Until the year 60, or thereabout, the apostles never left that place except for temporary missions : hence the obscurity in which the majority of them remained. 1 See Papias iu Euseb. iii. 39. 8 Pseudo-Abdias, etc. 2 Justin, Apol. i. 39, 50. < 1 Cor. xv. 10 ; Rom. xv. 19. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH A COMMUNITY. lor Few of them had any leading part. They made a sort of sacred college, or senate (Gal. i. 17, 19), to which was intrusted the keeping of the conservative tradition. At length they were relieved of all active responsi- bility, their only function being to preach and pray (Acts vi. 4), and not even the more effective share in preaching fell to them. Their names were hardly known outside of Jerusalem ; and the apostolic lists current in 70 or 80 scarcely agreed excepting as to the best-known names. 1 The " brethren of Jesus " often appear in connection with the " apostles," though they were quite distinct from them ; 2 and their authority was at least equal. The two groups formed a sort of aristocracy in the body, grounded on their greater or less intimacy with the Master. These were the men whom Paul called " pillars " (Gal. ii. 9) of the church at Jerusalem. We see, however, that ranks in the church hierarchy did not yet exist. The title was nothing, personal impor- tance was all. Celibacy in the priesthood already existed in principle, 3 but time was yet needed for its full devel- opment. Peter and Philip were married, and had sons and daughters. 4 The assembly of the faithful was called in Hebrew kahal, which was rendered in Greek by the essentially democratic term e/c/cA/rjcria, ecdesia, which in the old Greek cities signified the summons of the people to their gathering in the Pnyx or Agora. Such terms, used 1 Matt. x. 2-4 ; Mark iii. 16-19 ; Luke vi. 14-16 ; Acts i. 13. 2 Acts i. 14; Gal. i. 19; 1 Cor. ix. 5. 8 See " Life of Jesus," p. 307. 4 See "Life of Jesus," p. 187; Papias in Euseb. iii. 39; Polycrates, ib. v. 24 ; Clem. Alex. Strom, iii. 6, vii. 11. 102 THE APOSTLES. by the Athenian democracy, had come, since the second or third century B. c., to be of a certain common right in the Hellenic tongue; some of them as eVtcr/covro? (bishop), and perhaps K\yjpo