THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES FROM THE LIBRARY OF ERNEST CARROLL MOORE ;, r Tt : CHRISTIAN PLATONISTS OF ALEXANDRIA BIGG Yorfe MACMILLAN AND CO. 112, FOURTH AVENUE THE CHRISTIAN PLATONISTS OF ALEXANDRIA EIGHT LECTURES PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD IN THE YEAR 1886 ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE LATE REV. JOHN HAMPTON, M.A. CANON OF SALISBURY CHARLESlBIGG, D.D. ( , -* Assistant Chaplain of Corpus Christi College, formerly Senior Student of Christ Church, Oxford OXFpRD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS NEW^YORK MACMILLAN AND CO. ' i 886 [ All rights reserved ] EXTRACT FROM THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, CANON OF SALISBURY. " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to the " Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford " forever, to have and to hold all and singular the said Lands or " Estates upon trust, and to the intents and purposes hereinafter " mentioned ; that is to say, I will and appoint that the Vice- " Chancellor of the University of Oxford for the time being shall " take and receive all the rents, issues, and profits thereof, and " (after all taxes, reparations, and necessary deductions made) " that he pay all the remainder to the endowment of eight " Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be established for ever in the " said University, and to be performed in the manner following: " I direct and appoint, that, upon the first Tuesday in Easter ' Term, a Lecturer may be yearly chosen by the Heads of Col- " leges only, and by no others, in the room adjoining to the " Printing-House, between the hours of ten in the morning and "two in the afternoon, to preach eight Divinity Lecture " Sermons, the year following, at St. Mary's in Oxford, between "the commencement of the last month in Lent Term, and the "end of the third week in Act Term. -2298 vi Extract from the Rev. John Bamptons Will. " Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity Lecture " Sermons shall be preached upon either of the following " Subjects to confirm and establish the Christian Faith, and "to confute all heretics and schismatics upon the divine "authority of the holy Scriptures upon the authority of the "writings of the primitive Fathers, as to the faith and practice " of the primitive Church upon the Divinity of our Lord and " Saviour Jesus Christ upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost "upon the Articles of the Christian Faith, as comprehended in " the Apostles' and Nicene Creed. "Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity Lec- " ture Sermons shall be always printed, within two months after " they are preached ; and one copy shall be given to the Chan- " cellor of the University, and one copy to the Head of every " College, and one copy to the Mayor of the city of Oxford, and "one copy to be put into the Bodleian Library; and the " expense of printing them shall be paid out of the revenue of " the Land or Estates given for establishing the Divinity Lecture " Sermons; and the Preacher shall not be paid, nor be entitled " to the revenue, before they are printed. " Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be qualified "to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, unless he hath taken " the degree of Master of Arts at least, in one of the two Uni- "versities of Oxford or Cambridge; and that the same person " shall never preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons twice." PREFACE. NOT many words will be necessary by way of Prole- gomena to this book. A glance at the Synopsis will explain what I have undertaken; and the Lectures themselves will prove with what means, in what spirit, and with what success, the undertaking has been achieved. A Bampton Lecturer labours under some peculiar difficulties. His eight discourses eight Stromatcis or . Carpet Bags, if I may use the quaint phrase of Clement will not pack away more than a limited, if somewhat elastic, number of articles. I have preferred to omit what could not comfortably be included, rather than force things in, to the destruction of their proper shape and utility. It is better to travel expcditus than to carry about a mere collection of samples. But then it becomes necessary to keep to the main lines of country, and not wander off into every tempting nook, or down each shadowy lane. The voyager may do this with safety, if he makes careful note of the finger-posts and by-roads, which others with more leisure and ampler means may wish to investigate. I trust I have given such landmarks as may enable the reader to check my own aberrations from the king's highway, and to gather for himself any further information that he may desire. viii Preface. The accomplished student will notice other deficiencies of a more serious kind ; and here again the high-sounding title of Bampton Lecturer entails a penalty. Quid dignum tanto feret hie promissor hiatti ? I wish I could take for my motto the words of Clement (Strom. i. i. 1 7), ' No book can be so fortunate, but that some will find fault ; and that may be reckoned to have fared not ill, which none can with justice censure.' It was a wise as well as a graceful practice of older times to begin every preface with the address Lectori Benevolo. All I can hope is that my shortcomings are not due to slack- ness or indolence, to want of consideration for my readers, or of reverence for those bright stars of holiness, of wisdom, of erudition, whose names occur in the following pages. Here I may observe that the Bishop of Durham's monumental work on Ignatius did not come into my hands till too late to be of much service. I had deferred the perusal till the completion of my own task should have set me at freedom once more to become a learner, not anticipating (as I ought to have done) that it would in so many ways shed light upon my theme. It is necessary to mention this, lest the reader should suspect me, on one or two points, of a desire to controvert, with- out reason given, the opinion of so illustrious a scholar. One such point arises out of a passage in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans (chap. 7) : ($>v yap y/3ao> vy.lv ep<3i> TOV aiiodavtlv. 6 e/zos epcos eoravpcorai, /cat OVK CVTIV v fj.ol irvp (J)iX6v\ov, v$b)p 8e &v nal \a\ovv ey e/xoi, eo-oo0eV juoi \iyov' Aevpo Ttpbs TOV Trarepa. Origen (see Lecture V. p. 1 88) translated the words 6 e/xo? Preface. ix ' Meus autem Amor crucifixus est.' Dr. Zahn objects to this ; ' Non Christum, quern solum amet, crucifixum esse dicit Ignatius, quemadmodum plerique post Origenem intellexerunt, nee vero eum, qui crucifixus est amorem suum vocavit, sicuti graecorum verborum ignari nonnulli halucinati sunt, sed suam rerum terrestrium cupiditatem quasi crucifixam esse profitetur (cf. Gal. vi. 14).' It did not appear to me that a comment, which attributed ignorance of Greek to Origen, called for special notice. But as Dr. Zahn's conclusion has been adopted and supported by the high authority of the Bishop of Durham, it is no longer safe or respectful to pass over the matter in silence. It is not indeed a necessary part of my task to consider whether Origen was right or wrong. Nevertheless as the Commentary on the Song of Songs fostered, if it did not initiate, a remarkable change in the expression of Christian love, it is of interest to trace this change as near the fountain-head as possible. I do not quite understand the point of Dr. Zahn's assertion that Origen's rendering is bad Greek. He may mean that e/xos ought not to be confounded with dyaTrrj. Or he may mean that e/xos, which signifies the passion of love, or the god by whom the passion was supposed to be inspired, does not signify the object of the passion, the darling or beloved one. To the first question it is almost sufficient to reply, that whether the confusion of epo>s and aya-nt] ought to have been made or not, it certainly was made, not only by Origen but by Clement (6 epao-ros of Christ, Strom, vi. 9. 72). And if by them why not by Ignatius? Origen, a x Preface. good Greek scholar pace Dr. Zahn, asserts that Ignatius employed this hyperbole in the present passage. And what other sense can the words convey? Can epo)?. when used without limiting additions, signify ' earthly passions,' ' carnal appetites ? ' Like our ' love,' of which it is almost an exact equivalent, it may be applied to base uses, but it is not, like k-iiiBv^ia, a base word. From the time of Parmenides it had been capable of the most exalted signification ; it is introduced here by the participle ep<3i> in the sense of ardent spiritual desire ; it is opposed in true Platonic fashion to TrCp i\6vXov (we have other Platonic phrases in this same Epistle : chap, iii, ovSey ijnuv6ftPOV K.aX6v : chap, vi, /xTjSe v\r] KoA.a/cevo-rjre). The second point is but a trivial one. It has been remarked that epto? is almost an exact equivalent of 'love.' The exception is that in classical Greek it perhaps never signifies 'the beloved.' Yet it may be urged that all words indicative of strong feeling may be used to denote the person by whom the feeling is aroused my life, my joy, my dread, and so on and it certainly would not be a very hazardous stroke to employ in the same manner, though the usual term is 6 or 6 epacrros. Thus Fritzsche explains Theoc. ii. 151, aiev Ipcoro? d/cparco e7rex*~o, and, even if this instance is dubious, phrases like that of Meleager, Anthol. Pal. v. 166, 77 vtos aAAos epco?, via vaiyvia, or that of Euripides, Oed. frag. 551, Bind., fvbs 5' e/xoro? ovros ov pC 77801/7], show how difficult it is to keep the senses apart. Again, we have the closely allied words e/xoriAos (Theoc. iii. 7), epom's (Theoc. iv. 59), and the common Preface. xi proper names Erotion (Plautus, Men. i. 2. 60 ; Martial, v. 34 ; 37 ; x. 61) and Eros (Martial, x. 80 ; other instances in Pape and Benseler), all blending in the same way the ideas of ' love,' ' Cupid,' ' darling ; ' and the latter at least denoting not sexual passion but the love of parent for child (cp. Eurip. Erech. frag. 360, Dind., epare /^Tjrpo's, TratSes, a>? OVK ear' Ipcos rotoCros aA.A.09 oorts fjbtav epay). Lastly, in Alciphron, Epp. i. 34, we have the very phrase of which we are in quest, 6 ejuos epcos Evdvbr]iJ.e. If then there is any violation of usage in the expression of Ignatius (on the supposition that Origen is right), it is but slight, and cannot cause surprise in the case of a writer who treats grammar like a slave. The Bishop of Durham does not, as I understand him, deny that Origen's rendering is admissible as a question of Greek, but maintains that it ' tears the clause out of the context.' But is this so? What is Ignatius saying ? ' For I that write unto you am living, but in love with death. My Love is crucified, and in me there is no earth-fed fire, but living water speaking in my heart and saying Come hither to ne Father.' Why is he in love with death? Because Christ, his Beloved, is crucified, and perfect union with Him will be attained by death, a martyr death like His. Because, his heart being with Christ, there is no fire of sin to drown the voice that calls him. If we translate as proposed by Dr. Zahn and the Bishop of Durham, we not only do great violence to the word epco?, but lose an impassioned phrase quite in harmony with the general colour of this highly figurative and enthusiastic passage. xii Preface. Origen rarely misunderstands, except where some strong prepossession deflects his judgment, and here his mind was biassed rather in the other direction. Not- withstanding the difference of time he was a strong con- servative precisely where Ignatius was a bold innovator, but in this one instance he sanctioned the new modes of expression, which, as Liicke pointed out, were brought into vogue largely through the influence of the martyrs, and of Ignatius above all. It remains only to express my gratitude to those who have helped me on my way; to the authorities of the Bodleian ; to Corpus Christi College (my alma nutrix to whom I am indebted not merely for the loan of books but for the will and power to profit by them) ; to the Librarian of Christ Church, whose iron discipline has been relaxed in my behalf ; and to many friends whose advice, assistance and sympathy have been of supreme value to me. One there is in particular, of a communion, alas, that is not my own, on whose patience and erudition I have been suffered to make prodigal drafts. To him I could have wished to dedicate this book, Quicquid hoc libelli Qualectmque, did I not know too surely that there is much in it of which he cannot approve, and that I should vex the modesty, which veils learning that would grace a professed theologian, by adding his name. CHARLES BIGG. OXFORD : Sept.1%, 1886. SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS. LECTURE I. INTRODUCTION. PHILO AND THE GNOSTICS. PAGE THE MUSEUM OF ALEXANDRIA i Influence of the Pagan University upon Christian thought only distant and indirect ....... THE EGYPTIAN JEWS were the active mediators between European and Oriental ideas ...... 2 Their wealth, numbers, and privileges ..... 3 The Septuagint and consequent outbreak of literary Activity . Propaganda 4 Hellenism Aristeas , 6 Aristobulus ........ Greek Philosophy ' stolen ' from the Jew . Logos Doctrine before Philo ..... PHILO Opposition to Anthropomorphism 7 Negative Conception of Deity 8 Limitation of the Analytic Method in Philo ... 9 Evil of Matter ......... 1 1 Hence Creation and Providence delegated to Subordinate Powers ......... Relation of Powers to Angels, Logoi, Ideas, Demons . 1 2 The Two POWERS of GOODNESS and JUSTICE Their indistinct Personality . . . . . . 13 Relation to earlier Jewish speculations . . . . 14 The LOGOS History of the Term 15 Relation of the LOGOS to GOD Wisdom .......... 1 6 Intelligible World xiv Synopsis of Contents. Schechinah ......... Eldest Son Second God ......... 17 Relation of the LOGOS to the Two POWERS .... Book of Creation ........ King's Architect Charioteer ......... Relation of the LOGOS to the World Seal. Divider. Bend ....... High Priest's Vesture Creator 18 Helmsman, Pilot of Creation ...... Vicegerent of God Relation of the LOGOS to Man Heavenly Man Mediator as Prophet and Law 19 as High Priest and Atoner .... The Two LIVES, corresponding to the distinction between GOD and the LOGOS 21 Faith and Wisdom. The Sensible and the Ideal The Three Paths ........ 22 Vision, Ecstasy ........ Relation of Philonism to historic Judaism . . . . 23 Relation of Philonism to the Christian Church ... 24 Facilitated the definition of the Trinity . . . . 25 Impeded the understanding of the Atonement . Intellectualism its good and evil . . . . . 26 THE GNOSTICS Subordinate interest of Gnostic Metaphysics . . . . 27 Their predominant Ethical motive 28 Plutarch and the Heathen Gnostics . . . . . 29 The Chiistian Gnostics ......... Their Dualism ......... 30 Their Exegesis . . Their Theory of Salvation ...... Christology of Theodotus . . . . . . 31 The Three Natures of Man 32 Eschatology 33 Relation of Gnosticism to Platonism 34 Mazdeism ..... Ebionitism St. Paul General Character and Effects of Gnosticism .... 35 Synopsis of Contents, xv LECTURE II. CLEMENT. THE ALEXANDRINE CHURCH ...... Founded according to tradition by St. Mark .... 36 Its wealth and importance at the end of the second century Its conservatism in ritual and discipline 38 Changes effected by Demetrius . ... The College of Presbyters . . . . . . 39 The Suffragan Bishops ....... 40 The CATECHETICAL SCHOOL Object of the Institution 41 Course of Instruction 43 The first Master ATHENAGORAS (?) . . . . 43 PANTAENUS T. FLAVIUS CLEMENS ....... His Life 45 His Character and Attainments . . . . . . 46 His Love of Literature And of PHILOSOPHY ........ Unity of Truth . 48 Science a Covenant of God Apologists not unfriendly to Philosophy ^ 49 Philosophy brought into discredit by the Gnostics . Clement proclaims its necessity to the Church . . 50 His position on one side Rationalist, on another M) stic . 5 1 The CANON OF SCRIPTURE How far settled in Clement's time . . . . . 52 'Paulinism' . 53 The Unity of Scripture Denied on moral grounds by the Ebionites . . 54 and by the Gnostics Clement defends the Moral Law by maintaining the essential identity of Justice and Goodness . . 55 And the Sacrificial Law on the ground of its per- manent doctrinal value 56 ALLEGORISM the Key to the Unity of Scripture General character of Alexandrine Allegorism . Opposition to popular Theology .-7 Reserve . . 5^ xvi Synopsis of Contents. PAGE THE HOLY TRINITY Universal admission of the doctrine in some shape or other . 59 Previous Speculation on the subject. Emanationism. Modalism Difference between the Philonic and the Christian Logos Doctrine .......... 60 The Prophoric Logos ........ 61 THE FATHER . . Method of Clement The Revelation of Scripture 62 Analysis or Elimination ....... The Monad 63 The Son the Consciousness of God 64 Kelation of Clement to Neo-Platonism .... Futility of his Method 65 THE SON His Personality. Coequality. Coetemity ... 66 Terminology of Clement . . . . . . . 67 Use of Philonic phraseology Clement rejects the term ' Prophoric Logos ' . 68 Subordinationism strictly secondary in Clement . . 69 THE HOLY SPIRIT His Personality not yet clearly defined .... 70 How far explained by Clement Office of the Holy Spirit Jealousy of Pantheism . . . . . . . 71 THE INCARNATION AND REDEMPTION . The Human Soul of Jesus Semi-Docetism The Passion of Jesus undesigned by God .... 72 Christ the Light of the World Hellenism in Clement's view of Redemption .... 73 The Ransom Forgiveness .......... Reconciliation and Propitiation . . . ' . . 74 Clement's Typology Manifestation of Christ as Man in the Lower Life, as Physician, Shepherd, Tutor, Lawgiver ...... In the higher Life as God, as Light, Truth, Life ... 75 As High Priest Redemption the consummation of the spiritual development of mankind Synopsis of Contents. xvii LECTURE III. CLEMENT. PAGE CREATION Denial of Pre-existence and of Eternity of Matter ... 76 The Six Days allegorised . . . . . The Soul of Man . 77 THE ORIGIN OF EVIL Opposition to Gnosticism . . . . THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL 78 Departure from Plato and St. Paul 79 Rejection of Determinism ....... Indifferentism Doctrine of ORIGINAL SIN unknown to Clement .... 80 Adam potentially not actually perfect The Soul does not descend from Adam Allegorism of the Fall 8 r Infant Baptism not the rule at Alexandria .... FAITH AND GRACE 82 THE BAPTISM OF REGENERATION 83 THE Two LIVES Historical Conditions of Clement's view Gnosticism and Paulinism Legalism ......... Necessity of Discipline enhanced by the rapid expansion of the Church 84 Social, moral, spiritual inequality amongst the brethren . 85 Distinction between Visible and Invisible Church not yet familiar ......... Documentary sources of his view Heathen Philosophy 86 Apostolic Fathers ........ Scripture Characteristic Notes of the Two Lives Faith, Fear, Holiness Knowledge, Love, Righteousness ..... The Compromise between the Church and the World . . 87 Criticism of this VIA MEDIA How different from Gnosticism Breach of continuity between the Two Lives . Egotism 88 Clement's treatment of Faith And of Hope And of Fear 89 b xviii Synopsis of Contents. PAGE THE LOWER LIFE as described in the Pedagogue .... Stoicism .......... 90 Aristotelianism THE HIGHER LIFE Described in terms borrowed from the Greek Mysteries . 91 Knowledge. Gnosis. The true Gnostic . Indefectibility of Knowledge ...... Object of Knowledge 92 Holiness the indispensable condition of Knowledge . Connection with Allegorism ...... Necessity of mental cultivation 93 Love Relation to Knowledge How affected by Stoicism and Platonism . . Apathy Disinterested Love 94 Relation of Clement's view to Mysticism .... 95 Stress laid upon Holiness And upon Righteousness 96 And upon due use of the Means of Grace . . . 97 Silent Prayer The indefectibility of Gnosis excludes Ecstasy ... 98 Connection of Christian Mysticism with the Song of Songs 99 THE CHURCH One 100 Holy , The Priesthood The Gnostic the only Hiereus 101 Sacrifice. Altar. Incense Penance Spiritual Direction 102 The Eucharist . Not separate at Alexandria from the Agape . . . 103 The Public Agape The Aoxi? ......... The House-Supper The Eucharistic Grace 105 It is Gnosis ESCHATOLOGY .... Resurrection Pagan doctrine of Immortality 108 Variety of opinion in the Church Synopsis of Contents. xix PAGE Resurrection of ' this flesh ' ... . 109 Chiliasm . . . . . . . Belief in the nearness of the End of the World . Various opinions as to Rewards and Punishments . no Prayers for the Dead ...... Clement's own view in The glorified body ....... The double office of Fire Punishments .......... Spiritual in nature ........ The prayers of the Saints . , , . . . 112 Possibility of Repentance till the Last Day The State of the Blessed All purged by Fire 113 The Seven Heavens ........ The Ogdoad of Rest . 114 The Poena Damni The Beatific Vision . LECTURE IV. ORIGEN. His LIFE AND CHARACTER 115-123 His WORKS Textual Criticism .,.,..... The New Testament . 123 The Hexapla 125 Origen's knowledge of Hebrew The Controversy with Africanus . . . . 126 Exegesis The Scholia 127 The Homilies Church-buildings, Liturgy, Character of the Congre- gation 128 Origen as a Preacher 129 The Commentaries Their general plan 131 Origen's services as an Expositor of the real sense of Scripture ........ ALLEGORISM General difference between Clement and Origen . . 134 ba xx Synopsis of Contents. The Law of Correspondence The Three Senses of Scripture 136 How distinguished ....... The Negative use of Allegorism . . . . 137 Denial of the Literal Sense Reasons for this 138 Biographical interest of Origen's view . . 139 The Positive use of Allegorism The Discovery of Mysteries Economy or Reserve . . . . . . 141 The Two Lives in Origen Scope and Purpose of Alexandrine Reserve Erroneous inferences that have been drawn from it 143 How far capable of defence . . . . 144 Objections to the Alexandrine method of Allegorism It is seen at its worst on its Apologetic side . . 146 May be charged with dishonesty Reasons for modifying this judgment Its Positive use . . Differing judgments 148 In application to the Old Testament it confounds symbol with proof In application to the Church of the Present it is the expression of spiritual freedom and enlightenment . 150 In application to the Church of the Future it is open to the charge of presumption .... But this may be extenuated .... LECTURE V. ORIGEN. The Regula Fidei .... ^ .... 152 Anxiety of Origen to keep within the Canon His teaching always Scriptural 154 The Three Methods of Pagan Theology 155 The Christian Method THE NATURE OF GOD. The Negative Attributes ....... The Positive Attributes 157 God not Impassible 158 Our knowledge of Him inadequate but true Synopsis of Contents. xxi PAGE God is Perfect, not Absolute . . . . . . . 159 Limitation of Creation Eternity of Creation . Optimism ......... 160 Divine Power conditioned by Goodness and Wisdom . 161 THE HOL Y TRINITY Theodotus 162 The Noetians Hypostasis. Ousia. Person. Substance .... 163 The Mystery of the Economy . ...... 166 THE FATHER 167 THE SON His Hypostasis . Coeternity. Coequality ........ Epinoiai of the Son 168 Essential Wisdom, Word, Light, Truth .... 169 Accidental Propitiation, Redemption, Mediation . In what sense the office of Mediation ceases . . . 1 70 THE HOLY SPIRIT 171 His Relation to the other Persons undetermined The title ' God ' 172 Coeternity and Coequality . . . . . . . 173 His Office . THE UNITY IN TRINITY The Translations of Rufinus . . . . . 1 75 Persons numerically but not locally distinct . . . . 1 76 The Allegorism of the Shew Bread The Eternal Generation 177 Rejection of the terms ' Projection," ' Prophoric ' . . 178 UNITY OF PERFECT HARMONY UNITY OF SUBSTANCE The term Homoousios 1 79 UNITY OF DERIVATION 180 Subordinationism Origen's view Scriptural, not Metaphysical . . 181 His object is to restrict the ancient idea of Subordina- tion and expand that of the Equality of the Persons 182 Prayer to the Son 183 How limited by Origen ..... Conservatism of his language . . . . 1 86 Influence of his Commentary on the Song of Songs . . . . . . J 88 xxii Synopsis of Contents. THE INCARNATION Tscj The God-Man The Human Soul of Jesus ....... The Flesh of Jesus 190 The last trace of Docetism 191 The Humanity of Jesus eternal . . . . 192 LECTURE VI. ORIGEN. CREATION 193 The Eternity before and after this World .... Disorder of Creation 194 Injustice, Inequality 195 Pre-existence The First Heaven and Earth 196 Free Will. The Fall 197 The Visible Heaven and Earth The Soul of Man 199 Philosophical objections to Origen's theory Scriptural objections Predestination ........ 200 Grace . 201 Original Sin 202 Origen did not at first hold this tenet Grounds of his later belief Infant Baptism Law of Purification ...... 203 ' Families ' in earth and Heaven ' Seed of Abraham ' 204 Fall of Adam Descent of Sinless Souls . . . . . 205 The ' Reign of Death ' . . . Sense of Guilt stronger in Origen than in Clement 206 THE FOUR REVELATIONS THE NATURAL LAW 207 Position of the Gentiles THE LAW OF MOSES 208 Not the cause of Sin Idea of Development not so clear in Origen as in Clement Synopsis of Contents. xxiii THE GOSPEL The Two Lives Faith and Wisdom 209 The object of Faith. ' Jesus my Lord and Saviour '. 210 The Epinoiai in their subjective aspect Levitical Typology Ransom. Redemption Propitiation . . . . . . . 211 The Duplex Hostia 212 The Church One and Catholic 213 The Promise to Peter Rome ........ The Clergy 214 Symbolised by the Mosaic Hierarchy The Dominion of Grace 215 Confession 216 Penance. Absolution .... History of the Question .... Origen's View 217 The Eucharist . . . . . . . . 219 Growing sense of reverence and mystery In what sense the Eucharist is a Mystery . . 220 The Presence of Christ, in what sense Real . 221 THE ETERNAL GOSPEL 222 The Spiritual Church Meaning and scope of the Eternal Gospel . . . 223 Hades and Paradise 224 The Day of Judgment The Resurrection of the Flesh 225 The ' Germinative Principle ' Details of his View 226 The Aeons to Come 227 Enduring Freedom ....... Rise and Fall of the Soul 228 Uncertainty of Origen's opinion The ' Refiner's Fire' 229 Punishment, its nature and object General Principles of Origen . . . . 230 Scriptural basis The word ' Eternal ' 231 The voice of Scripture .... Vacillation of Origen. The Wedding Guest 232 The Demons . xxiv Synopsis of Contents. PAGE The Consummation of All Things 233 The Beatific Vision . . . . . . . 234 The Poena Damni . LECTURE VII. THE REFORMED PAGANISM. The Second Century an Age of Revival 235 ORIENTAL HENO THEISM 236 MlTHRA 237 Previous history of Mithraism ...... Redemption ....,.,... 238 Atonement * The Taurobolium. Regeneration The Mithraic Messiah Mithraic Eschatology 239 Hierarchy. Sacraments SARAPIS Connection with Ebionitism and Valentinianism And with Christianity 240 THE PHILOSOPHERS The Belief in the Immortality of the Soul THE PYTHAGOREANS 241 Their General Character Their Rivalry with Christianity , . . . 242 THE LIFE OF APOLLONIUS ...... 243 Its Origin and Purpose 244 Outline of the Book 245 The Imperial Eirenicon ..... 247 THE TRINITARIAN PLATONISTS .... 248 History of the Platonic Trinity .... The Platonic Letters 249 Platonic Monotheism, Ditheism, Tri theism . 250 NUMENIUS OF APAMEA His Trinity 251 His Obligation to Philo 252 And to Christianity His relation to Plotinus 253 Synopsis of Contents. xxv THE UNITARIAN PLATONISTS .... CELSUS 254 The True Word Origan's Reply Celsus not an Epicurean His character, attainments, and temper . . . 255 Legal position of Christianity at this time . . 256 His criticism of the Gospel and the Law . The One God 257 The Demons .258 Special Providence Mediation. Revelation. Miracles . The Two Lives ...... 260 Chief Points in the Debate ..... Knowledge of God in Christ. The Incarnation A Priori Objections of Celsus . . . 261 Answer of Origen ....... Historical Objections of Celsus . . . 262 Answer of Origen. Christian Evidences . 263 The Word of God .... Miracles Prophecy 264 Sufferings of the Apostles . Nature and Origin of Evil Resurrection of the Body 265 Celsus' attempt at Reconciliation . . . . 266 Why not serve Two Masters ? . . . . The real difficulty ; Form and Matter . . 268 LECTURE VIII. SUMMARY. CLEMENT His after History The Index of Gelasius 269 Photius 270 Neglect of Clement's Writings . . . 271 Clement VIII erases his name from the Martyrology . 272 Benedict XIV defends and maintains the erasure Is Clement a Saint ? . .... xxvi Synopsis of Contents. PAGE ORIGEN 273 His books condemned by Theophilus and Epiphanius . 275 And by Pope Anastasius and others .... Condemnations of the Home Synod and the Fifth Council 2 76 Treatment of his Name . . . . . . 277 Importance of the Historical point of view . . . 279 ALEXANDRINE EXEGESIS 281 In what sense it survived ....... SPECIAL DOCTRINES PRE-EXISTENCE . . , , , , . . 282 PAULINISM How far understood by the Alexandrines . . . 283 FREE WILL AND GRACE Doctrine of the Alexandrines 284 Doctrine of Augustine ...... 285 Confusions of Augustine's treatment of the Will Superiority of his view of Grace . . . 288 Errors arising out of the incompatibility of Augustine's doctrine of Grace with his general ecclesiastical theory . . . . . 289 REDEMPTION 290 Doctrine of Origen ....... of Augustine ...... of Anselm RESURRECTION 291 RESTITUTION ..,.,.... Clement and Origen not strictly speaking Universalists 292 In what sense Punishment is Eternal Other opinions on the subject ..... 293 The Monks of Egypt and Palestine . Diodorus and Theodore The two Gregories ...... Jerome 294 The Doctrine of Purgatory ..... In the Greek Church 295 In the Roman Church Distinction between the Doctrine of Purgatory and the speculations of Origen . , . . 296 Relation of Origenism to our own belief . . . 298 Morality of the Alexandrine speculations . . . 299 Synopsis of Contents. xxvii PAGE QUIETISM Relation of the Quietists to Clement . . . 300 Substantial justice of their condemnation . . . 30 1 GENERAL MERITS OF THE ALEXANDRINES . . 302 Reasonableness Services against Gnosticism, Chiliasm, and Montanism . 303 Their Preaching of the Fatherhood of God LECTURE I. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and* the Word was God. ST. JOHN i. i. I PROPOSE to offer in the Lectures, which I am to have the privilege of delivering, a contribution towards the history of Alexandrine Platonism in the Christian Church. It will be my endeavour to sketch the con- ditions out of which it arose in the teaching of Philo and the Gnostics, to describe its full development in Clement and Origen, to measure its reflex action on Pagan religion and philosophy, and in conclusion to estimate the value of its results, to ascertain, as far as may be, the services it was enabled to render to the Church and to humanity. It is not possible within the limited time at my command to reap the whole harvest of a field so large and so fruitful. But I shall be able at any rate to show what profit is to be looked for. And though we can only follow the main outlines of the subject, we shall succeed perhaps in gaining a just conception of a great crisis in the history of the Church, and of the great men who played a conspicuous part in it. It was not without reason that the first systematic attempt to harmonise the tradition of faith with the free conclusions of human intellect was made neither at Rome nor at Athens, but in Egypt. Yet it is not to the famous University that we must look for its 2 The Pagan University. [Lect. source l . Alexandria still possessed its three great royal foundations, the Museum, the Serapeum, and the Sebastion ; its three libraries, its clerical heads, its well-endowed staff of professors and sinecure fellows. Nor did these misuse their advantages. Though the hope of imperial favour drew the more ambitious teachers of philosophy and rhetoric irresistibly towards Rome, letters were still cultivated, and the exact sciences flourished as nowhere else by the banks of the Nile. But the influence of the Pagan University upon Christian thought was distant and indirect. The Greek professor, throned beneath the busts of Homer and Plato, regarded himself as an apostle of Hellenic culture in the midst of an alien and barbarous race ; and though a few, like Chaeremon 2 , may have bestowed serious attention upon the monuments of the Pharaohs, the impulse would scarcely have passed the limits of a learned curiosity had it acted upon the Greeks alone. It was in the mind of the Jew that Eastern and Western ideas were first blended in fruitful union. The Jews of Egypt, if we may credit Philo, numbered not less than a million souls. In no city of the Empire were they so wealthy or so powerful as at Alexandria. Of the five regions of the town two were almost entirely given up to them, and they swarmed in the other three. 1 The history of the Alexandrine University may be read in Matter, Histoire de tcole (T Alexandrie, 2nd ed., Paris, 1840, or in Parthey's excellent little book, Das Alexandrinische Museum, Berlin, 1838. There is some interesting information in Mommsen's fifth volume. The ' sinecure fellows ' are the dre\fis t\6croei) that Schiirer (p. 830) cannot be right in doubting whether that philosopher was really the author of the phrase. 3 Siegfried, p. 223 : ' Dass er auch hierin Vorganger hatte, deutet er selbst an. So erwahnt er de somn. i. 19 (i. 638) eine altere Auslegung von Gen. xxviii. n, welche den TOKOS auf den Logos bezog.' Zeller, iii. p. 628, insists upon the remarkable passage in de Cherubim, 9 (i. 143) where Philo speaks of both doctrines, that of the Two Powers and that of the Logos, as given to I.] Philo. 7 It is only in a peculiar sense that Philo is to be called a philosopher l . His works form a discursive commentary upon the Law, taking up point after point, not in their natural order, but as they spring out of the text before him. And his object is not to investigate but to har- monise. The idealism of Plato is to be discovered in the history of the Patriarchs and the precepts of the Law, and amalgamated with the products of Rabbinical speculation. The religious interest is with Philo the predominant ; hence he starts not with the analysis of the act of knowledge, but with the definition of God. On this theme two very divergent views were entertained. Some of the Rabbis, relying upon those passages of the older Scriptures, where the Deity is spoken of as wearing the form and actuated by the feelings of humanity, were Anthropomorphists 2 , and expressed this opinion in the simplest and most direct fashion. Others, following the him by special revelation. Philo, however, may mean only that the convic- tion of their truth and the sense of their full import were imparted to him in a divine ecstasy, as the knowledge of Christ was given to St. Paul in the same way. 1 My guides to the understanding of the text of Philo have been Dahne, GeschichtlicheDarstellungderjiidisch-alexandrinischen Religions-philosophic, Halle, 1834 ; Grossmann, Quaestiones Philoneae ; Zeller ; and Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria, Jena, 1875. The last is excellent and indispensable. All other authorities on the subject will be found in Siegfried or in Schiirer, by whom the list of German literature is continued down to the present year. I have seen also the French writers Reville, Soulier, Vacherot, Simon. For the relation between Philo and Rabbinical speculation, a point on which I cannot pretend to form an independent judgment, I have relied implicitly on Siegfried, with some assistance from Gfrorer and Maybaum. I may refer the reader also to Dr. Edersheim's forthcoming article in the Dictionary of Christian Biography, the proof-sheets of which I have been enabled to use by the kindness of the learned author. Zeller rates him higher than Dahne; iii. p. 594, ed. 1852: 'Was den Philo von semen Vorgangern unterscheidet ist die Vollstandigkeit und Folgerichtigkeit, mit der er ihren Standpunkt zum System ausgefuhrt hat.' 2 See Gfrorer, Das Jahrhundert des Heils, Stuttgart, 1838, i. p. 276 sqq. 8 Pkilo. . [Lect. lead of the Prophets, and developing the conception of the Ineffable Name, refused to think or speak of Jehovah except as a pure spirit. ' God sees,' said one, ' and is not seen ; so the soul sees and is not seen V For the Hellenist truth lay wholly in the latter con- ception, which was maintained by the Peripatetic Aristo- bulus, and developed by the Platonist Philo. In one remarkable passage he comments upon the words 'it repented God that He had made man 2 .' To accept such language in its literal sense is impiety greater than any that was drowned in the Flood. In truth God is not as man, is not as the world, is not as heaven. He is above space, being Himself Space and Place, inasmuch as He embraces all things and is embraced of none; above time, for time is but the register of the fluctuations of the world, and God when He made the world made time also. His Life is Eternity, the everlasting Now, wherein is neither past, present, nor future. He is unchanging, for the Best can change only by becoming worse, which is inconceivable. Change, again, is the shifting of rela- tions, the flux of attributes, and God has neither relations nor attributes. Hence He has no name. Man in his weakness is ever striving to find some title for the Supreme. But, says Philo, 'names are symbols of created things, seek them not for Him who is uncreated.' Even the venerable and scriptural titles of God and Lord are inadequate, must be understood as metaphors, and used with reserve. The phrases that Philo himself prefers to employ are ' the One/ ' He that is/ ' Himself.' 1 Gfrorer, Das Jahrhundert des Heils, i. p. 289. 7 Qtiod Dcus Immtitabilis, 5 (i. 275) sqq. But I need not give detailed references for this section. See Siegfried, 199 sqq. ; Dahne, i. 118 sqq. I.] The Deity. 9 From all this it follows that God is incomprehensible. , We know that He is, to know what He is transcends the powers vouchsafed to man. Thus in the extravagance of his recoil from materialism Philo transformed the good Father and Lord of the Bible into the Eternal Negation of dialectics. But Philo, though he marked out the way for later transcenden- talism, does not himself push his argument to its extreme conclusion. He does not mean all that he appears to say 1 . The analytic method is Aristotelian rather than Platonic, and the influences of the Timaeus, of Stoicism, of the Bible, all combine as yet to modify its rigour. When Philo tells us that God has no qualities, we are to understand that He is immaterial, and can therefore experience none of those passions that attach to the body 2 . Hence again He cannot be said to possess any of those virtues, that depend upon the regulation of the passions by the reason. But reason itself He possesses in the same sense as man 3 . If He has no relations, this 1 Dahne, i. p. 127 sqq., regards Philo's conception of God as practical Atheism. ' Er philosophirte aber auch gar nicht (wenigstens nicht znerst) im Interesse des menschlichen Geschlechts, dem er freilich auf diese Weise seinenGott raubte, sondern lediglich im Interesse dieses Gottesselbst' (p. 136). Siegfried too thinks that he was only able to save religion by a want of philosophic perspicacity, which enabled him to mix up the Stoic doctrine of the Immanence of God with this theory of the Absolute without perceiving that the two were irreconcileable. It is certain that Philo often speaks in Stoic language of God, advancing at times to the very verge of Pantheism ; Siegfried, p. 204 ; Dahne, i. 280 sqq. But he never for a moment ceases to think of God in Platonic fashion as pure Spirit opposed to Matter. Whereas to the Stoic Matter and Spirit were at bottom the same thing ; all is ulti- mately resolved into Matter; Zeller, vol. iii. p. 77, ed. 1852. On the side of theology Philo was no more really Stoic than St. Paul, who also did not hesitate to use the language of Aratus. Those who wish to see what theology becomes in the hands of a Stoic should read the Homilies. 2 See especially Quod Dtus Imm. n (i. 280). 3 See especially QuodDeus Imm. 6 (i. 276). God is changeless, not because IO Philo. [Lect. merely means that He wants nothing, and depends on nothing, because He is perfect and the source of all that is 1 . Philo does not intend to exclude the relation of subject and object like Plotinus, who denies that God can be said to think 2 . Again, if God is One, is incom- prehensible, so too is the human mind. Of this also, though it is our self, we know only that it is 3 . ' God,' says Philo, ' possesses not intelligence only but reasoning, and using these powers He ever surveys all that He has made, suffering nothing to transgress its appointed order V Neo-Platonism is already in view, but between Plotinus and Philo there are several stages to be passed. One of these is marked by the name of Basilides, another by that of Clement. It is evident that Philo was not prevented by any metaphysical bar from attributing the work of Provi- dence, or even of Creation, to the Deity. There was however a grave moral difficulty. For the world was He is a blank, but because He is perfect. ' Since then the soul of man by the soft breezes of science and wisdom calms the surge and seething, roused by the sudden bursting of the fierce blast of vice, and allaying the swelling billows reposes in sunny and windless calm, canst thou doubt that the In- corrupt and Blessed, He who has girded Himself with the might of the virtues and perfection itself and happiness, suffers no change of mind ? ' He is by no means the Aristotelian Deity who ' thinks Himself.' ... ' It is clear then that the father must know his children, the artist his works, the steward his charge, and God is in truth Father, Artist, Steward of all that is in heaven or in the world.' Consciousness of the external does not in Philo 1 s view imply change in God, who sees not as man sees in time, but in eternity. 1 The idea of Relation is defined De mutatione Nominum, 4 (i. 583). 2 Enn. iii. 9. 3. 3 Legis Alleg. i. 30 (i. 62) : '/COTODS ovv o 'ASa.fi, rovreanv 6 vovs, roi, 6 5e iepos Xoyos ayyeXovs ticaOe KaXfTv. 3 As Ideas certainly: see note above. Zeller, p. 619. De proftigis, 18 (i. 560) Philo counts six powers corresponding in number to the Cities of Refuge. His enumeration is: (i) 6tios \6yos; (2) fj TTOITJTIKTI 8vva/us; (3) jy fiaaiXiKr] ; (4) ^ i\eajs ; (5) 77 vop,o&fTiuri ; (6) 6 Koapos vot)T6s. 2 and 4 belong to Goodness, 3 and 5 to Justice, 6 is a mere etcetera = all the Ideas. I.] The Powers. 1 3 Justice of the Eternal 1 . The former, the older and stronger Power, is generally intended in Scripture by the word God, the latter by the word Lord, which Philo apparently did not understand to be used merely as a substitute for the Ineffable Name 2 . If it be asked whether the Powers are persons or not, it is difficult to find a satisfactory reply. In one point of view they are mere abstractions. But in the mind of the Jew these scholastic entities tend inevitably to become things, living beings. The Powers are ideas, but then again they are God's agents, who create the ideas, and stamp them on matter. They are the two Cherubim 3 who keep the gates of Paradise, the two Angels who entered Sodom 4 . Yet Philo never for a moment regards them as existing apart from their source. They are the breath of God's mouth. They are as rays of the sun, which at first are pure, and as incomprehensible as their source, but, as they shoot down through the dim air, lose their fire while retain- ing their light. Otherwise they would destroy what their mission is to cherish and preserve 5 . 1 The names vary. The First, the better and elder, is Of 6s, i) notrjTticri, dyaOorrjs, x a pi aTlK '']i fvtpftns ; the Second is Kiipios, i) fiaaiXtKT), dpxf],fovcria, TI vofio0(Tiieri, % KoKaariKT]. Siegfried, p. 213; Dahne, i. 231. 2 Siegfried, p. 203. '' De Cherub. 9 (i. 144). 4 De Abr. 24. 25 (ii. 19). In Gen. xvii. i the words uxpOrj icvpios are explained to mean that the @aai\iitT) Svvafus appeared to Abraham. In Gen. xviii. 2 the three men are 6 0efo 8opvXV> de SS. Abelis et Caini, 15 (i. 173). 5 Leg. Alleg. i. 13 (i. 51); Quod Deus Im. 17 (i. 284) ; Sieg. p. 216. A ^ point which makes against the personality of the Powers is the way in which they can be broken np and combined ; see Dahne, i. p. 242 sqq. ; 14 P/lllo. [Lect. In all this Philo was following in the track of earlier Jewish speculation 1 . The Rabbis of Palestine had made many efforts to penetrate the mystery of the creatures who in Ezekiel's vision sustain the chariot- throne of the Almighty, and found in them a symbol of the divine justice and goodness. The subject was treated as a profound mystery, and there was a party which discouraged all attempts to pry into it. Only four men, it was said, had penetrated this magic garden, and one only, the great Akiba, had returned in safety. But the Hellenists of Alexandria were more audacious. They had ' eaten too much honey/ and intoxicated by the sweets, of which they had ' rifled the hives of the Greeks, they dared to speak of the Powers in a way that seemed to impair the unity of God. They had ventured even farther. The duality of Persons did not satisfy their craving for philosophic completeness. Behind this pair of persons, or personifications, there must be one more puissant Being, one more compre- hensive generalisation. This was the Logos, a term which Philo found already in use. Logos 2 is a phrase of the Hellenic schools. It has a Gfrorer, Philo, p. 239. The fact is that Philo wavers between the one mode of conception and the other. This applies to the Logos also. See Zeller, iii. 626. 1 For this section see Siegfried, p. 211 sq. 2 An excellent account of those Jewish speculations which paved the way for the Alexandrine Logos theory will be found in Siegfried, pp. 219 sqq. The actual title Logos comes to Philo in a direct line from the Greek Pantheists Heraklitus and the Stoics. The reason why he preferred this title to that of Idea is to be found in the Biblical ' Word of God.' To the Stoic the \6yos Koiv6s, the \6yos ffirtpiMTiKos is the Divine Force, the Anima Mundi of which Virgil sings Aen. vi. 724 : ' Principio caelum ac terras . . ' Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet.' It is resolvable ultimately into the Divine Matter. ' Es durfte nur dieser stoischen Logoslehre durch die Unterscheidung des Logos I.] The Logos. 1 5 long history, and had already gathered round itself many associations, that fitted it for the new part it was now to assume. It denotes with equal facility the uttered word, ' the reasoning mind, or again a plan, scheme, system. It is the Platonic Idea of Good, the Stoic World-Spirit, or Reason of God, immanent in creation which it fosters and sustains. Round this heathen stem clustered a number of ideas that were floating in solution in the schools of the Jews the Shechinah, the Name of God, the Ten Words of Creation that might perhaps be One, the great Archangel and chief of the Chariot-bearers, Metatron, the Heavenly Man, the High Priest. Philo has gathered together from East and West every thought, every divination, that could help to mould his sublime con- ception of a Vicegerent of God, a Mediator between the Eternal and the ephemeral. His Logos reflects light from countless facets. It is one of those creative phrases, struck out in the crisis of projection, which mark an epoch in the development of thought. What the Logos became in the hands of Philo we shall see most clearly by considering him in his fourfold relation to God to the Powers to the World and to Man. In his relation to God he is first of all Wisdom l . von der Gottheit ihr pantheistisches, durch seine Unterscheidung von dem gebildeten Stoff ihr materialistisches Geprage abgestreift warden, und der Philonische Logos war fertig' (Zeller, iii. 630). The word is emptied, that is to say, of its true Stoic significance, and becomes partly the Idea, partly the Agent by whom the idea is impressed upon matter. 1 The precise relation of Wisdom to the Logos is by no means without difficulty, for here as everywhere Philo's language fluctuates. Some have maintained that they are identical. Dahne, i. p. 221, thinks that Sophia is ^ a ' theilkraft ' of the Logos ; so that Logos may always be used for Sophia, but not the reverse. But Siegfried points out (p. 222, cp. p. 215) that Sophia is sometimes spoken of as the higher principle, the Fountain or 1 6 Philo. Already, in the Book of Proverbs 1 , Wisdom appears as the eternal Assessor of the Most High ' When He prepared the heavens I was there.' In the Alexandrine Book of Wisdom 2 , written probably under Stoic influ- ences, this Power assumes new titles and significance. He is 'the loving Spirit of the Lord that filleth the earth,' holy, only-begotten, ' the brightness of the ever- lasting light, the unspotted mirror of the Power of God, the image of His Goodness.' Philo is but translating this hymn of praise into scientific terminology, when he calls the Word the Intelligible World, that is the sum of the thoughts of God, or again the Idea of Ideas, which imparts reality to all lower ideas, as they in turn to all sensible kinds 3 . The Word is the whole mind of God, considered as travelling outside itself, and expressing itself in act. Hence he is styled its Impress, its Like- ness, its House. This is his abstract Greek side. In his more realistic Hebrew aspect he is the Schechinah or glory of God ; or again, as that glory falls upon our sight only veiled and dimmed, he is the Shadow of God. And Mother, of the Logos. The differing gender of the two words in Greek, the one being feminine and the other masculine, was a difficulty. This Philo endeavoured to solve in the curious allegorism on the name of Bethuel, De Prof. 9 (i. 553). Bethuel signifies 'daughter of God,' that is, Wisdom. But this virgin daughter is father of Rebecca, that is, Patience. So all the virtues have feminine names (in Greek), because in relation to God they are derivative and receptive. But in relation to us they are mas- culine. Hence we may say that Wisdom, the daughter of God, is a man and a father, begetting in the soul knowledge, understanding, and all good and praiseworthy actions. The drift of this passage is no doubt to blend the Logos with Sophia. The confusion of gender with sex offers a curious instance of the tendency of Philo's mind to turn abstractions into things. 1 viii. 27. 2 i. 6, 7 5 vii. 22 sqq. * De Mundi Opif. 6 (i. 5). For the numerous other passages referred to in this account of the Logos it is sufficient to refer generally to Siegfried and Grossmann. L] The Logos. 17 growing ever more definite and personal, he is the Son, < the Eldest Son, the Firstborn of God. Many of the divine titles are his by right. He too is the Sun, the Darkness, the Monad, God 1 , the Second God. In his relation to the other Powers, again, there is the same graduated ascent from the abstract to the real. If * the Powers are Ideas, the Word is their .Sum. He is the Book of Creation, in which all the subordinate essences are words. But, again, he is their Creator, the King's Architect, in whose brain the plan of the royal city is formed. He stands between them divid- ing, yet uniting, like the fiery sword between the Cherubim at the gates of Eden. He is their leader, their Captain, their Charioteer, the. Archangel of many names. As regards the world he is on the one side the Arche- typal Seal, the great Pattern according to which all is made. He is the Divider, in so far as he differentiates, and makes each thing what it is. He is the Bond, in so far as all existence depends on the permanence of form. Hence in him both worlds, the intelligible and the sen- sible, form one great whole, a figure of which is the vesture of the High Priest. On the head is the plate of gold with its legend ' Holiness to the Lord ; ' the blue, the purple, the scarlet of the robe are the rainbow web of Nature ; the bells about the feet, whose silver sound is heard when Aaron goeth into the Holy Place, signify the rapt joy of the human spirit when it penetrates into the divine mysteries. The robe is woven of one piece, and may not be rent, because the Word binds all 1 &fos, but not 6 Qe6s, De Somn. 39 (i. 655) ; the distinction recurs in Origen. 1 8 PJlllo. [Lect. together in life and harmony 1 . So far we are still breathing Greek air. But then again the Word is the Instrumental Cause, the Organ of Creation. He is the Creator, the Helmsman, and Pilot of the universe. ' God with justice and law leads His great flock, the four elements and all that is shaped thereof, the circlings of sun and moon, the rhythmic dances of the stars, having set over them His upright Word, His Firstborn Son, who will receive the charge of this holy flock as a Vicegerent of the Great King 2 .' Here Philo is thinking, not of Wisdom, but of the mighty ' God said ' of the Book of Genesis. The word is, not the Spirit only, or the Mind, but the Will of God 3 . But the crowning interest of these speculations depends on their relation to human life. What is this Son of God to us ? The answer is given by the peculiar position of the Logos, who stands between God and Man partaking of both natures. For Man, as regards his reason, is the image of the Logos, as the Logos is the image of God. Hence the Logos is the Mediator, the Heavenly Man 4 , who represents in the eyes of God the whole family upon earth. He is not indeed the point of union, because we may rise above him. The knowledge which 1 See the beautiful passage in De migrat. Abr. 18 (i. 452). Cp. De Vita Mas. iii. 14 (ii. 155). 2 De Agric. 12 (i. 308). 3 Canon Westcott {Introd. to the Gospel of St. John, p. xvi) maintains that the Logos of St. John is derived , not from Philo, but from the Palestinian Schools, mainly on the ground that in Philo Logos is Reason and not Will. But to a Platonist like Philo there is no difference between Reason and Will. And the passages referred to in the text are sufficient to show that the Logos of Philo is conceived of as ' a divine Will sensibly manifested in personal action.' * Siegfried, p. 221. I.] The Logos. 19 he gives is a lower knowledge, the knowledge of God in Nature, and our allegiance to him is therefore but temporary and provisional. But he is necessary as the door, through which we must pass to direct communion with his Father. Here Philo could borrow no light from the Greeks, to whom the idea of Mediation was foreign ; though, as we shall see, there were elements in the current Platonism, which were readily adapted to this end J . The Logos then is first the Prophet of the Most High, the Man whose name is the Dayspring, the Eternal Law. He is the Giver of the divine Light and therefore the Saviour, for to the Platonist sin is dark- ness. But it is not enough that our eyes should be opened. For the visual ray within us is weakened or quenched by vice, our rebellions have alienated us from God. We need therefore an Atonement. Still more do we need strength and sustenance. All these requirements are satisfied by the Logos. For his atoning function Philo found a fitting symbol ready to hand in the High Priest 2 , who since the days of the Exile, in the abeyance of the throne, had risen in Jewish eyes to a dignity almost superhuman. His vesture, as we have seen, was the type of the whole world, for which he interceded with its Maker. He alone 1 See the doctrine of the Demons in Lecture vii. 2 See Siegfried, p. 221. The four prayers uttered by the High Pnest on the Day of Atonement, ' most precious fragments of the Liturgy of the Old Testament Temple worship,' will be found in Delitzsch (Zur Geschichte der Jiid. Poesie, pp. 184 sqq.). The first three, pronounced by the High Priest with his hand on the head of the sin offering, were (i) for himself and family ; (ii) for the sons of Aaron ; (iii) for the whole people. The fourth was uttered immediately on leaving the Holy of Holies. In each the Ineffable Name was pronounced three times. c a 2O Philo. [Lect. might pronounce the Ineffable Name. He alone might enter into the Holy of Holies, behold the glory of God, and yet live. He held this high prerogative, because when he entered into the sanctuary he was, says Philo with an audacious perversion of the text, ' not a man V The true High Priest is sinless; if he needs to make an offering and utter prayer for himself, it is only because he participates in the guilt of the people, whom he represents. Thus the Word is the Supplicator, the Paraclete, the Priest who presents the soul of man ' with head uncovered ' before God 2 . He is figured by Aaron, who stands with burning censer between the living and the dead. ' I stand,' Philo makes him say, ' between the Lord and you, I who am neither un- created like God nor created like you, but a mean between the two extremes, a hostage to either side 3 .' And as he teaches, as he atones, so he feeds and sus- tains his people, falling upon every soul as the manna fell like dew upon the whole earth. In this sense he is Melchisedech, priest of the Most High God, King of Salem, that is of peace, who met Abraham returning from his victory over the four kings, and refreshed him with the mystic Bread and Wine 4 . 1 De Somn. ii. 28. (i. 684) : orav yap, r]criv, elairj (is rcL ayia rwv dylaiv 6 apxiepevs, avQpcaitos OVK ecrrai (Lev. xvi. 17). Tis ovv el ^7) avOpairos ; apd ye 0e6s ; 2 De Cher. 5 (i. 141). 3 Quis Rerum Div. Her. 42 (i. 502). * Ammon (= Sense) and Moab (=the Intellect divorced from God) refused Israel bread and water. ' But let Melchisedec give wine instead of water, and refresh the soul with pure juice of the grape, that it may be possessed by divine intoxication, more sober than sobriety itself. For he is the Priest Word,' Leg. Alleg. iii. 26 (i. 103). Ibid. 56 (i. 119) Philo goes on to explain what is this heavenly food of the soul. It is Light, true Education, the knowledge of God, which is given by the Word. The passage is referred to by Clement, Strom, iv. 26. 161. I.] The Two Lives. 21 Such a division in the divine nature leads to a corresponding distinction in the moral and spiritual life. To know God in His Powers is one thing, to know Him in Himself is another and a higher. The first is the life of Faith, Hope, Discipline, Effort, the second is that of Wisdom, Vision, Peace. Those who are still struggling upwards in obedience to the Word are servants, whose proper food is milk ; those who have emerged into the full light are grown men, the friends of God, the seeing Israel l . ' How terrible is this place,' cried Jacob awaking from his dream, ' this is none other than the House of God.' So the soul starting up from the sleep of indifference 1 Philo divides men into two great classes, in each of which there are several subdivisions. I. The godless, the non-moral, the Fool. His guide is the lower intelligence ; see De Migr. Abr. 1 2 (i. 446) : iropevtrai 81 6 afypajv SL aptporepcav, QVJJ.OV re /cal fTridvpias dei, firjSfva Sia\(iTTCtii' \povov, rbv f/vioxov /ecu ftpaptvTrjv \6-yov airo^a\wv. His highest faculty is lost or debased ; he has nothing but the vovs jrjtvos, (pi\offufMTos, (f>i\oira.0-fis. To this class belong the Sensualist, such as Ham ( = 6ep/j,Tj, Fever) ; the vain Sophist, such as the ' archer ' Ishmael ; the Sceptic, such as Cain ; the self- seeking politician, such as Joseph. II. The Moral, Spiritual Life. This has two stages that of the Babe, that of the Perfect. De Migr, Abr. 9 (i. 443) : erfpos vrjiriajv KOI tripos TfXtiwv xupos fffnv, & piy oco/iafd/wi/os aatcrjais, 6 Se Ka\ov]j.evos cro5iv ai Tt\flaif 6 irpSiros. The difference between the knowledge of God in His works and the knowledge of God in Himself (the latter Philo calls the Great Mysteries) is explained in the sublime passage beginning Leg. Alleg. iii. 31 (i. 106). I.] Ecstasy. 23 dry and barren, and renounced the task in despair. At other times, though I came empty, I was suddenly filled with thoughts showered upon me from above like snow- flakes or seed, so that in the heat of divine possession I knew not the place, or the company, or myself, what I said, or what I wrote V Here then, but still in a singularly cool and tem- perate form, we have the second great doctrine of Neo- Platonism Ecstasy, the logical correlative of the Absolute God. As held by Numenius and his fol- lowers it is certainly derived from Philo, though here again there was in Paganism a germ, which only needed fertilisation. The idea of a personal Revelation comes to Philo from the Prophetic Vision of the Old Testa- ment. It is already found in Plutarch 2 , by whom it is connected with the frenzy of the Pythoness or the Corybant. But its later systematic form and scientific grounding are historically connected with the specula- tions of the Alexandrine Jew. Such was the teaching of Philo so far as it falls within our present scope. We need not dwell upon its rela- tion to historic Judaism. Philo remained to the last a devout 'and trusted Jew. Yet he placed a new re- ligion, a Greek philosophic system, above the faith of 1 De Migr. Abr. 7 (i. 441). See also the account of the ' divine in- toxication ' of Samuel's mother, De Ebrietate, 36 (i. 380) ; Quis Rerum Div. Heres. 14 (i. 482). De Vita Contemp. 2, 3 (ii. 473, 475) actual vision seems to have been enjoyed by the Therapeutae only in dreams. De Cher. 9 (i. 144) Philo says that he had learned the significance of the two Cherubim and the fiery sword : irapa if/vxfjs ^775 elaiOvias rcL iroX\ci OfoKrj'nrfiaOai. 2 See De Pythiae Orac. 21, 22 ; De def. Orac. 48 ; Amatorius, xvi. 4. Plutarch recognises only the official ecstasy of priest and prophetess. His attitude is apologetic; he has to explain how it is that the revelation is sometimes imperfect, deceitful, impure. Enthusiasm is a part of his religion, but not of his philosophy. See Zeller, vol. iii. 24 Philo. [Lect. his fathers. He retained the Law as the worship of the Logos ; high over this stands the free spiritual worship of the Eternal. The one is but the preparation, and in its ancient national form not even a necessary preparation, for the other. It will be obvious how this facilitated the task of the Christian teacher 1 . But what concerns us at present is his direct influence upon the Church. This falls into two branches, for it is probable that Philonism coloured the New Testament itself, and it is certain that it largely affected the after development of Christian doctrine. The first conse- quence is no doubt capable of exaggeration. The ideas of the purely Palestinian schools coincided in many points with those of the Alexandrines, of which they formed the basis, and it is perhaps by this fact rather than by any immediate contact that we should explain the resemblances of St. Paul, St. James, and even of the Epistle to the Hebrews, with Philo. But there can be little doubt that St. John acquired from Alexandria that conception of the Word, which first brought Christian theology within the sphere of metaphysics 2 . 1 Siegfried, pp. 157 sqq. " Not necessarily from Philo, if, as seems probable, the Logos dqctrine is somewhat older than Philo's time. The question turns mainly upon (i) the exact significance and (ii) the date of the Memra of the Targums. May- baum, Die Anthropomorphien und Anthropathien bei Onkelos, Breslau, 1870, maintains that in Onkelos 'Word of God' is a mere periphrasis for God, and is never regarded as having a hypostatic existence. Gfrorer, Jahrhundert des Heils, i. 310 sqq., maintains the opposite, but regards the idea as unquestionably Alexandrine in origin. With this agrees the view of Dr. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. i. pp. 46, 56. Siegfried (p. 317) asserts that 'it is universally acknowledged that John borrowed from Philo the name of Logos to express the manifestation of God.' He refers to Ballenstedt, Dahne, Gfrorer, Liicke, de Wette-Briickner, Dorner, Neander, Tholuck, Lutterbeck. Nevertheless his language is too peremptory. Ewald (v. 153 sqq. ; vi. 277) holds that the doctrine of the I ] Influence of Ms Teaching. 25 Philo's influence upon the mind of post-apostolic times was partly helpful, partly detrimental. It was given to the Alexandrine Jew to divine the possibility and the mode of an eternal distinction in the Divine Unity, and in this respect the magnitude of our debt can hardly be overestimated. How large it is we may measure in part by the fact that the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, which has no place in his system, remained for a long time meagre, inarticulate, and uncertain. But the Logos is not Christ, is not the Messiah l . Far less is he Jesus, for from the Platonic point of view the Incar- nation is an impossibility. Hence though Philo supplied the categories, under which the work of Jesus continued to be regarded, his influence on this side was upon the Word grew up among the Jews and had become an article of the popular belief as well as a tenet of the schools. And that the book of Enoch shows that before the beginning of the second century B.C. the Word was identified with the Messiah. (Other authorities however regard the Book of Enoch as, in part at any rate, Christian.) Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, p. 79, note, says, ' Die Auffassung des Verhaltnisses von Gott und Welt im vierten Evangelium ist nicht die Philonische. Daher ist auch die Logos- lehre dort im wesentlichen nicht die Philo's.' This is maintained at length by Dr. Westcott, Introduction to the Gospel of St. John, pp. xv. sqq., and by Schanz,a recent Roman Catholic editor of the same Gospel. But the difference, while sufficient to show that St. John is applying a partially heathen phrase to a wholly Christian conception, is byno means such as toexclude the possibility of connection, and in any case very little weight can be attached to this line of argument in default of proof that a homegrown Logos doctrine existed in Palestine before the time of St. John. Some importance is perhaps to be attached to the fact that in the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, a work which seems to be built upon a Palestinian system, we have God and the Two Powers but not the Logos. Yet the writer was acquainted with St. John, and would surely have given this title to the Son if he had found it current in the Palestinian schools. 1 The traces of a Messianic hope in Philo are very indistinct. De Execr. 9 (ii. 436) the dispersed of Israel shall return from exile : tv ayovptvot irpos nvot OfioTtpas $ Kara 37> 5%- Mr. Mill himself rejected the Dualistic solution; ibid. p. 185. * Basilides accepted the whole of the Gospel narrative, Philos.\\\. 27. So did Theodotus. Tertullian, Adv. Val. i : ' Si subtiliter tentes per ambiguitates bilingues communem fidem adfirmant.' Irenaeus, Preface, 2 : ovs v\&aativ irafrfifytXtttv r^uv Kvpios o/xofa (itv \a\ovvTas, dt/6fj.oia 5% Qpovovvras. See the accounts of Cerdon, Irenaeus, iii. 4. 3, and Apelles, Eusebius, H. E. v. 13 ; Harnack, Dogmengesch. p. 186. 5 De Iside et Osiride, 45 sqq. 3O Gnostic Exegesis. [Lect. From Plutarch sprang a succession of purely heathen Gnostics, against whom, more than a century later, Plotinus felt it necessary to take up the pen l . Between these and the Gnostics known to Christian controversy there is no essential difference. Both start from the same terrible problem, both arrive at the same conclu- sion, the existence of a second and imperfect God. They identified this Being with the Creator or Demi- ' urge, and ascribed to him the authorship of the whole, or the greater part, of the Old Testament. For, though they allegorised the New Testament, the Gnostics did not, in any of their voluminous commentaries, apply this solvent to the Hebrew Scriptures. These they criticised with a freedom learned from the Essenes 2 . They found there, side by side with the eternal spiritual law, the code of an imperfect and transient morality ; worse than all, they found there passion, revenge, and cruelty ascribed to the Most High. It is not possible to read the remarkable letter of Ptolemy to Flora, without perceiving that Old Testament exegesis was the real strength of Gnosticism. It was so power- ful because it was so true. On this one point they retained their advantage to the last. The facts were in the main as they alleged, and the right explanation depended on principles equally foreign, at that time, to Gnostic and to orthodox. Their views of religion, of salvation, were as various as their strange and perplexing cosmogonies. We may 1 Porph. Vita Plotini, 16. 3 Compare the exegesis of the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies with that of Ptolemy's Epistle to Flora. The author of the Homilies considered that he was refuting Gnosticism, but there was certainly a historical connection between his views and those of the Valentinians. See below, p. 34. I.] Gnostic Christology. 31 leave out of sight the Paulinism of Marcion, and take as a type the system of Theodotus, a leader of the Eastern Valentinians, with whose writings Clement had an in- timate acquaintance *. Christ came, he taught, not for our redemption alone, but to heal the disorders of the whole universe. For Earth, and Heaven, and even God Himself, were diseased by the revolt of Wisdom, who in blind presumption had given birth to she knew not what. But for man's sake Christ became Man 2 , taking 1 It is doubtful what the Excerpta ex Theodoto really are. ' Descripta videntur ex libris Hypotyposeon,' says Valesius on Eus. H. E. v. n. 2. Zahn, Forschungen zurGesch. des N. T. Kanons, Erlangen, 1884, vol. iii. p. 122, thinks that they are a collection of extracts from the eighth book of the Stromateis. Renan, Marc-Aurtle, p. 118, regards them as a collection of extracts from the writings of the Valentinian Theodotus made by Clement for his own use, and this seems the best view. It is doubtful again who Theodotus was. Neander and Dorner think him the same as Theodotus the money-changer. Zahn inclines, rather fancifully, to identify him with the Theodas (if that is the right name ; the reading is doubtful) of Strom, vii. 1 7. 106, the disciple of Paul and teacher of Valentinus, and thinks that there may have been a book bearing the name of this supposed pupil of the Apostle. It should be added that Theodotus is referred to by name only five times, and that much of the information for which Clement refers vaguely to ' the Valentinians ' may come from some other source. The text is ex- ceedingly obscure and corrupt. Bunsen, Anal. Ante-Nic. vol. i, gives the conjectural emendations and Latin translation of Bernays. The accusations brought byPhotius against the orthodoxy of Clement may rest in part upon a misunderstanding of this curious and difficult treatise. See also Dr. West- cott's article, Clement of Alexandria, in the Dictionary of Christian Biography. 2 The Christology of Theodotus diners somewhat from that ascribed to Valentinus by the author of the Philosophumena. (i) The Only-Begotten God ( 6 ; this is I suppose the earliest authority for this reading in John i. 1 8), Nous, Aletheia, Logos, Zoe appear to be only different names for the Spirit of Knowledge, the irpo^oAiy, or externalised thought of God. (ii) Christ is a irpof)o\T) of exiled Wisdom who returns to the ir\r)paifjia to beg aid for his mother, is detained there, and apparently united to the Only-Begotten; 23, 39, 44. (iii) Jesus the rrpo/SoAij of all the Aeons is sent forth to comfort Wisdom ; 23. (iv) Jesus is never separated from the Only-Begotten ; 7, 43. (v) Jesus descends to the world through the realm of Space, that is the Demiurge, and takes to himself the Psychic 32 The Gnostics. The Three Natures. [Lect. upon Him our threefold nature, body, soul, and spirit, though His body was spiritual, not gross as ours. Yet He is not the Saviour of all, but of those only who can receive Him, and in so far as they can receive Him 1 . Some there are who cannot know Him. these are they who have flesh but not soul, who perish like the beasts. Some again, the spiritual, are predestined to life eternal 2 . They are akin to the light, knowledge once given leads them on inevitably to perfection, annihil- ating all their earthly passions. Between these hover 'the psychic,' the feminine souls, to whom faith is granted, but not knowledge. Before the coming of Christ these were creatures of destiny, the sport of evil angels, whom they could not resist 3 . But the Incarna- tion and Baptism of our Lord broke their bonds, and by faith and discipline they become capable of eternal life 4 . In that future existence the soul needs no body, for . Christ, 59, the irpo0o\^ of the Demiurge, 47 that is to say, his vovs assumes a tyvxfi and weaves for Himself a body tic rfjs dtyavovs if/vxtieijs ovalas, 59. (vi) He was born of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin; 23. The whole of the Gospel narrative then follows. 1 7 : 6 8 CLVTOS tan TOIOVTOS wv tKaaTca otos Kfx<*>pi]ffOvati aca^ofitvov, TO Se if/vxticov avTf ovffiov ov firiTijStioTTjTa % irpos T6 irianv KOI atyOapaiav Kal npbs aTriariav KOI <}>6opav KO.TCL rf)v oiKtlav aiptfftv, TO Si v\mov fj.a and passes through the Veil, 27, taking with him His children, His Body, the Church, 42. Till then the elect await Him in the Ogdoad, the eighth heaven, the changeless region of the fixed stars, 26, 63, becoming Words, Intelligent Aeons, \6yoi, aluves voepoi, 27, 64. At the same time the Psychic rise from the Kingdom of the Demiurge to the Ogdoad, 63. a The barbaric cast of their Philosophy may be seen in the grotesque character assumed by the Logoi or Aeons in the popular systems, in the crude description of the Non-Existent God by Basilides, and generally in the Gnostic incapacity for abstract ideas. Thus the inner Veil which divides the Ogdoad from the Pleroma, the world of Ideas, is Heaven. But one derivation given for the word ovpavos is opos, a boundary or division. Horos might mean a pole, such as Greeks employed to mark the limits of a field. Hence the upper firmament might be called ^ravpos, the Cross which divides believers from unbelievers ; Excerpta, 42. The passions were conceived of in Stoic fashion as actual bodies hanging on to the soul, the Trpoffaprrj/Mra or Trpoffipvrjs tyvxh- Man thus becomes, says Clement, a kind of Trojan Horse; Strom, ii. 20. 112 sqq. As to the Mazdeism, there is clear historical proof of the connection of Gnosticism with the system of Zoroaster ; cp. Lect. vii, the passages referred to above from Plutarch and Porphyry, Duncker, vol. v. pp. 53 sqq. of the English translation. As to Ebionitism, I notice the following points of resemblance between Theodotus and the Homilies Anthropomorphism the Syzygies the antitheses of Male and Female, Fire and Light, Right and Left the union of the soul with its Angel the idea that the Water of Baptism quenches the fire of sin, suggesting or suggested by the ancient reading in I.] Results of Gnosticism. 35 was held in high esteem by these sectaries, and to their sinister admiration is largely due the neglect of his special teaching in the early Church. This Dualism, this Fatalism, for the three natures are a modified fatalism, are vain and worse than vain. They belong to a lower stage of religious life, above polytheism, yet far- below Christianity. From this semi-barbarism spring all the faults of Gnosticism, its conceit, its uncertain morality, its chimeras, its peremp- tory solutions of the insoluble. Like all half-truths it perished self-convicted, melting away like Spenser's woman of snow in presence of the living Florimell. It left a certain mark upon Catholicism, and partly by shaking the older faiths, partly by preparing men's minds for a better belief, partly by compelling the leaders of the Church to ask what they believed and why they believed it, aided not inconsiderably in the triumph of the Gospel, and in the development of the Creed 1 . But in the second century, while it was yet living and aggressive, it constituted a danger greater than the Arian controversy, greater than any peril that has ever menaced the existence of the Faith. Matt. iii. 15, which tells how a fire shone in the Jordan at the baptism of Jesus. Lastly, the doctrine of several Incarnations of Jesus is found in the Excerpta, 19. Zahn is therefore mistaken in saying (p. 123) that there is no trace of Ebionitism in the Christology of Clement's Theodotus. 1 The first philosophical statement of the Real Presence is to be found Excerpta, 82. To Gnostics is due the importation of the words ovaia, vwoffraols, 0/j.oovatos into theology. They held the Virgin in high honour ; Kenan, Marc-Aurele, p. 145. They were the first to speculate on the date of the Nativity, Strom, i. 21. 145, and to attempt the portraiture of Christ ; Iren. i. 25. 6. Beyond this I see nothing but the influence of antagonism. See however Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, pp. 185 sqq. D 2 LECTURE II. That -was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. ST. JOHN i. 9. ACCORDING to the earliest tradition, that which is preserved in the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, Chris- tianity was first preached in the streets of Alexandria by Barnabas a . But for ages the Egyptians have attri- buted the foundation of their Church to St. Mark, the interpreter of St. Peter. At a later date the Patriarchs of Alexandria were elected beside the tomb of the Evangelist in the great church of Baucalis, the most ancient ecclesiastical edifice in the city, in close prox- imity to the wharves and corn-magazines of the crowded harbour.- At the close of the second century the Church of Alexandria was already a wealthy and flourishing com- munity. Its warfare is said to have been comparatively bloodless. Three times within a hundred years Egypt had endured all the horrors of unsuccessful rebellion, and once a sanguinary riot had been occasioned by the dis- 1 Horn. i. 8 sqq. The claims of Mark find no support from Clement. But Bishop Lightfoot thinks there is no reason to doubt the tradition ; Philippians, p. 223, ed. 1873. See Redepenning, Origenes, i. p. 185, note. The sources employed for this sketch of the history of the Alexandrine Church are Contextio Gemmarum sive Eutychii Pair. Alex. Annales, Pocock, Oxford, 1656 ; Eutychii Origines Eccl. Alex., Selden, London, 1642 ; Le Quien, Oriens Christianus ; Renaudot, Historia Patriarcharum Alex. Jacobitarum ; Neale, Holy Eastern Church. Some information is to be gathered from the Oracula Sibyttina, see Excur. in Alexandre's ed., and much from Clement. Origen's church was that of Palestine. The letter of Hadrian to Servianus in Vopiscus, Vita Saturnini, is regarded as a forgery by Mommsen, v. p. 579 note. . T/ie Alexandrine Church. 37 covery of the Apis bull *. Amid scenes like these the Christians no doubt bore their full share of suffering. But down to the time of Severus there appears to have been no definite persecution of the faith 2 . The execu- tion of Christians was in general a concession to the mob, and it is probable that in Alexandria in ordinary times the populace was held down by a much more severe restraint than elsewhere, the Emperors being always nervously apprehensive of any disturbance by which the supply of corn might be interrupted. Under these favouring circumstances the Church had spread with great rapidity. Already the house-church of the first age had been replaced by buildings specially con- structed for the purposes of Christian worship 2, and it would seem therefore that the right of holding land was enjoyed, perhaps under some legal fiction, by the Alexandrine, as it certainly was by the African and Roman communities 4 . In other matters the Egyptian 1 In 115 the Jews of Egypt and Cyrene revolted, and were quelled by Marcius Turbo. The rebellion of Barcochba extended to Egypt, and in the reign of Marcus occurred the insurrection of the Bucoli ; see Mommsen, v. 581. The Apis sedition is recorded in Spartian's Life of Hadrian, 12. 2 Clement says (Strom, ii. 20. 125), fjfuv Se a'/>*> ^ ayopds IJKOVTCI, but does not like Origen refer to the arrangements of the building. See on this subject Probst, Kirchliche Disciflin, pp. 181 sqq. * ' Areae Christianorum ' are mentioned by Tertullian, Ad Scapulam, 3. 38 The Alexandrine Church. [Lect. Church seems to have moved less rapidly than its neigh- bours. The traces of a written liturgy in Clement are scanty and vague 1 . The Eucharist was not yet disjoined from the Agape. Infant Baptism was not yet the rule. Discipline was not so severe as elsewhere. The Bishop was not yet sharply distinguished from the Presbyter, nor the Presbyter arfd Deacon from the lay-brother. The fidelity, with which the Alexandrines adhered to the ancient democratic model, may be due in part to the social standing and intelligence of the congregation. The same reason may account for their immunity from many of the ecclesiastical storms of the time. Gnosti- cism indeed was rampant in this focus of East and West. But of Noetianism, of the Easter controversy, of Montanism hardly a sound is to be heard 2 . About the same time Callistus was overseer of the cemetery at Rome ; Philos. ix. 12. 1 Probst (Liturgie, p. 9) gives reasons for supposing that the first sketch of a written Liturgy existed in the middle of the second century, and (ibid. pp. 135 sqq.) finds in Clement traces of a Liturgy resembling in its main out- lines that given in the eighth book of the Apostolical Constitutions. It is most difficult to say what precise facts underlie Clement's allusive phrases. The only passages, so far as I know, in which written formularies may be re- ferred to are Strom, vii. 12. 80, where TO. 0)0 TO. Sofu\oya TO. Sia 'Haaiov dA- XTjyopovufva seem to allude to the Trisagion uttered by the Cherubim and Seraphim (Renaudot, Liturgiarum Orient. Collectio,\. p. 46), and Protrep. xi. in, where the 'outstretched hands of Christ' may be explained by a phrase in the ancient Alexandrine Liturgy translated by Ludolfus, from the Ethiopic (in Bunsen, Hippolytus, iv. p. 242), ' ut impleret voluntatem tuam et populum tibi efficeret expandendo manus suas.' For the Agape and Infant Baptism, see next Lecture. 2 Of Noetianism Clement does not speak. He wrote a treatise Ilfpt TOV ndffxo-, in which he considered the relation of St. John's narrative to that of the Synoptists ; see the Fragments, the best account is that of Zahn, Forsch- ungen, iii. p. 32) ; and the Kavuv iKKXrjaiaariKbs TJ irpbs TOUS lovSai^ovras may have been directed against the Quartodecimans (see Zahn, ibid. p. 35). The Treatises (Sermons, Zahn thinks) on Fasting and the promised but not written treatise on Prophecy were certainly aimed at the Montanists, whom he mentions with forbearance, Strom, iv. 13. 93; vi. 8. 66. But ii.] The Alexandrine Church. 39 Nevertheless wealth and numbers brought dangers of their own, and Alexandria was driven along the same road which other Churches were already pursuing. The lowering of the average tone of piety and morals among the laity threw into stronger relief the virtues of the clergy, and enabled them with a good show of justice and necessity to claim exclusive possession of powers, which had originally been shared by all male members of the Church. We can still trace the incidents, by which this mo- mentous change was effected. The most interesting feature in the Alexandrine Church was its College of twelve Presbyters, who enjoyed the singular privilege of electing from among themselves, and of consecrating, their own Patriarch l . They were the rectors of the twelve city parishes, which included certain districts he does not seem to have been troubled at home by either Montanism or Judaism. 1 Contextio Gemmarum, p. 331 : ' Constituit autem Evangelista Marcus, una cum HananiaPatriarcha, duodecimPresbyteros, qui nempe cum Patriarcha manerent, adeo ut cum vacaret Patriarchatus unum e duodecim Presbyteris eligerent, cujus capiti reliqui undecim manus imponentes ipsi benedicerent et Patriarcham crearent ; deinde virum aliquem insignem eligerent quern secum Presbyterum constituerent loco eius qui factus est Patriarcha, ut ita semper extarent duodecim. Neque desiit Alexandriae institutum hoc de Presbyteris, ut scilicet Patriarchas crearent ex Presbyteris duodecim, usque ad tempora Alexandri Patriarchae Alexandrini qui fuit ex numero illo cccxvin. Is autcm vetuit ne deinceps Patriarcham Presbyteri crearent et decrevit ut mortuo Patriarcha convenirent Episcopi qui Patriarcham ordinarent. . . . Atque ita evanuit institutum illud antiquius.' In Selden, p. xxxi. Cp. Jerome, Ep. 146 (in Migne), Ad Evangelum : ' Nam et Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam et Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant : quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faciat.' Eutychius also tells us that Demetrius was the first to appoint Suffragans. See Bishop Lightfoot, Philippians, Excursus on the Christian Ministry. The inference that there was a prolonged struggle between the two orders is Ritschl's Entstehung dcr Altk. Kirchc, 2nd ed. p. 432. 4O The Alexandrine Church. [Lect. outside the walls. Even in the time of Epiphanius they exercised a sort of episcopal jurisdiction 1 . They formed a chapter, of which the Patriarch was President, and to this chapter all provincial letters were addressed. But towards the close of the second century their chief and distinguishing prerogative had been lost. While the Patriarch Julian lay upon his death-bed, he was warned by an angel in a vision, that the man, who next day should bring him a present of grapes, was destined to be his successor. The sign was fulfilled by Deme- trius, an unlettered rustic, and, what to later ages seemed even more extraordinary, a married man. In obedience to the divine warning Demetrius was seated almost by force in the throne of St. Mark. He proved a stern and enterprising ruler. He stripped the people of one of their few remaining privileges by the censure, which he pronounced on Origen for preaching while yet a layman, and he broke the power of the Presbyteral College by the appointment of a number of Suffragan Bishops, whom he afterwards persuaded to pass sentence of degradation upon Origen, a sentence which the Pres- byters had refused to sanction 2 . From this time the Chapter never succeeded in regaining its prerogative, though the struggle appears to have been protracted till the incumbency of the Patriarch Alexander. Thus was finally abolished this most interesting relic of a time, when there was no essential difference between . Bishop and Priest, and of a later but still early time, when the Bishop was chairman or life-president of a 1 Epiph. Ixix. I. 2 Redepenning, Origenes, i. p. 412 ; Huet, Origeniana,'\. 2. 12 (Lomm. xxii. 44) ; Photius, cod. cxviii. II.] The Catechetical School. 41 council of Priests, by whom the affairs of a great city- church were administered in common. A large and rich community, existing in the bosom of a great University town, could not long submit to exclu- sion from the paramount interests of the place. Their most promising young men attended the lectures of the heathen professors. Some like Ammonius relapsed into Hellenism, some drifted into Gnosticism like Ambrosius, some like Heraclas passed safely through the ordeal, and as Christian priests still wore 'the pallium, or philoso- pher's cloak, the doctor's gown we may call it of the pagan Academy. Learned professors like Celsus, like Porphyry, began to study the Christian Scriptures with a cool interest in this latest development of religious thought, and pointed out with the acumen of trained critics the scientific difficulties of the Older Testament and the contradictions of the New. It was necessary to recognise, and if possible to profit by, the growing con- nection between the church and the lecture-room. Hence the catechetical instruction, which in most other communities continued to be given in an unsystematic way by Bishop or Priest, had in Alexandria developed about the middle of the century into a regular institu- tion. This was the famous Catechetical School 1 . It still continued to provide instruction for those desirous of admission into the Church, but with this humble routine it combined a higher and more ambitious function. It was partly a propaganda, partly we may regard it as a 1 Schools of a similar description existed at Antioch, Athens, Edessa, Nisibis ; Gnerike, De Schola Alex. p. 2 ; Hamack, Dogmengeschichte, 501 sqq. 42 The Catechetical School. [Lect. denominational college by the side of a secular univer- sity. There were no buildings appropriated to the purpose. The master received his pupils in his own house, and Origen was often engaged till late at night in teaching his classes or giving private advice or in- struction to those who needed it. The students were of both sexes, of very different ages. Some were con- verts preparing for baptism, some idolaters seeking for light, some Christians reading as we should say for orders or for the cultivation of their understandings. There was as yet no rigid system, no definite classifica- tion of Catechumens, such as that which grew up a century later. The teacher was left free to deal with his task, as the circumstances of his pupils or his own genius led him. But the general course of instruction pursued in the Alexandrine school we are fortunately able to discover with great accuracy and fulness of detail. Those who were not capable of anything more were taught the facts of the Creed, with such comment and explanation as seemed desirable. Others, Origen tells us, were taught dialectically. The meaning of this phrase is interpreted for us by Gregory Thaumaturgus, one of the most illustrious and attached of Origen's disciples. At the outset the student's powers of reasoning and exact observation were strengthened by a thorough course of scientific study, embracing geometry, physiology, and astronomy. After science came philosophy. The writ- ings of all the theological poets, and of all the philoso- phers except the 'godless Epicureans,' were read and expounded. The object of the teacher was no doubt in part controversial. He endeavoured to prove the need of revelation by dwelling on the contradictions and imper- II.] The Catechetical School. 43 factions of all human systems, or he pointed out how the partial light vouchsafed to Plato or Aristotle was but an earnest of the dayspring from on high. But the attitude of Clement or Origen towards Greek thought was not controversial in any petty or ignoble sense. They looked up to the great master-minds of the Hellenic schools with a generous admiration, and infused the same spirit into their disciples. Philosophy culminated in Ethics, and at this point began the dialectic training properly so called. The student was called upon for a definition of one of those words that lie at the root of all morality, Good or Evil, Justice or Law ; and his definition became the theme of a close discussion conducted in the form of question and answer. In the course of these eager systematic con- versations every prejudice was dragged to light, every confusion unravelled, every error convicted, the shame of ignorance was intensified, the love of truth kindled into a passion. So far the course pursued did not differ essentially from that familiar to the heathen schools. But at this point the characteristic features of the Chris- tian seminary come into view. We find them in the consistency and power, with which virtue was represented as a subject not merely for speculation but for practice in the sympathy and magnetic personal attraction of the teacher but above all in the Theology, to which all other subjects of thought were treated as ancillary x . It may be doubted whether any nobler scheme of Christian education has ever been projected than this, 1 The materials for this account will be found in Guerike and the Panegyric of Gregory Thaumaturgus (in Lomm. xxv. 339). Gregory is describing the teaching of Origen as he had profited by it in Caesarea. But the description will hold good of his earlier work at Alexandria. 44 Clement. [Lect. which we find in actual working at Alexandria at the end of the second century after Christ. I have dwelt upon it at some length, partly because of the light it throws upon the speculations of the great Alexandrine divines, partly in view of the charges of ignorance and credulity so often levelled at the early Christians. The truth is, that so far as the Church differed from the rest of society it differed for the better. Whatever treasures of knowledge belonged to the ancient world lay at its command, and were freely employed in its service, and it possessed besides the inestimable advantage of purer morals and a more reasonable creed. The first master of the Alexandrine school is said to have been the Apologist Athenagoras. But the state- ment rests upon evidence so insufficient that we may be permitted to disregard it 1 . The teacher, under whom the institution first attains to a place in history, is Pantaenus, a converted Stoic philosopher 2 , who in the course of a mission journey to India is said to have discovered a Hebrew version of the Gospel of St. Mat- thew. He was an author of some eminence, but all that we possess of his writings is a fragment of some half-dozen lines, containing however a sensible and valuable remark on the relations of the Greek and the Hebrew verb. His pupil and successor was the more famous Clement. . Titus Flavius Clemens was a Greek, and probably an Athenian 3 . He was born about the middle of the 1 The name of Athenagoras is found first in the list of masters of the Alexandrine school given by Philippus Sidetes in a fragment discovered by Dodwell. Guerike inclines to accept the statement. Redepenning, i. 63, regards it as highly doubtful. See also Otto, Proleg. to Athenagoras, p. xxii. 2 See Guerike, Routh. 3 Epiph. xxxii. 6 : KAiy/x^s ov a0i Ttv 'A.\(av8p(a trtpoi 5 'AOrjvaTov, It II.] His Life. 45 second century, and inherited his name in all likelihood from an ancestor enfranchised by Vespasian or his son. He was the child apparently of heathen parents l , and Eleusis and the Schools had been to him the vestibule of the Church. Like many another ardent spirit in that restless age he wandered far and wide in quest of truth, till at last in Egypt he ' caught ' Pantaenus, ' that true Sicilian bee,' hidden away in modest obscurity, and in his lessons found satisfaction alike for soul and mind. Here at Alexandria he made his home. He received priestly orders 2 , and was appointed master of the Cate- chetical School, at first probably as assistant to Pan- taenus. He appears to have fled from the persecution of Severus in 203, and did not return to Egypt. After this date we catch but one uncertain glimpse of him 3 , and it would seem that he died about 213. It is not an eventful biography. Clement was essen- tially a man of letters, and his genial contemplative seems a natural inference from the account of his wanderings in Strom, i. i. ii that he was not a native Alexandrine, and that his starting-point was Hellas. The statement that he was an Athenian is rendered probable by the character of his style, which is deeply tinged with Homeric phrases and bears a strong resemblance to that of Philostratus and the Sophists whom Philostratus describes, and again by his familiarity with Attic usage. See for this last point Paed. i. 4. n ; 5. 14; ii. n. 117; 12. 122. But Dindorf, Preface, p. xxvii, tries to make him more Attic than he is. For the special bibliography of Clement the reader may consult Guerike, Dr. Westcott in Dictionary of Christian Biography, Jacobi's article in Herzog, and Dr. Harnack's Dogmengeschichte. 1 Eus. Praep. Ev. ii. 2. 64, iravrtav fiev 5id irdpas (\0iijv avr/p, Odrr6v ye nty rfjs Tr\avrjs dvavevoas. We may perhaps infer from the knowledge of the Mysteries displayed in Protrep. ii. that he had been initiated. But the teachers to whom he expresses his obligations in Strom, i. i. n were all Christians. See the note in Heinichen's Eusebius, H.E.v.ii. 3. 8 Paed. i. 6. 37. 3 Heinichen's Eus. H. E. vi. n. 6. For further information as to the life of Clement see Guerike or Dr. Westcott's article in Dictionary of Christian Biography. 46 Clement. [Lect. temper rendered him averse to direct controversy and the bustle of practical life. His writings are the faithful mirror of his studies and thoughts, but tell us little of incident. In later times he was considered a marvel of learning. Nor was this estimate ill-grounded, for the range of his acquaintance with Greek literature, eccle- siastical T , Gnostic, and classical, was varied and extensive. There are indeed deductions to be made. His citations are often taken at second-hand from dubious sources, and he did not sift his acquisitions with the scholar's in- stinct 2 . He passes many a sharp remark on the rhetori- 1 Clement was acquainted with Barnabas, Hermas, Clemens Romanus, with Melito, Irenaeus (Eus. H. E. vi. 13. 9; compare Strom, vii. 18. 109 with Irenaeus v. 8, and perhaps Protr. xi. in with Irenaeus iii. 22. 4; in both Adam is created as a child, and Eve is at first his playmate), possibly with Papias (but the ^oi/ew iroiKi\ai may come from Irenaeus v. ad Jin. or elsewhere ; see Routh, Papias, frag. 5) and Tatian. With Justin (or the author of the Cohort, ad Gentiles and de Man.} and Athenagoras he has certain quotations in common. These however are probably drawn by all three from Hecataeus; cp. Strom, v. 14. 113. He has no knowledge of Ignatius or Tertullian. Of other books quoted I may name the Gospels according to the Hebrews and Egyptians, the Revelation of Peter, the Preaching of Peter, the Preaching of Paul (a distinct book), the Acts of Peter (?), the Assumption of Moses (Adumb. p. 1008), the Syllogisms of Misael, the Ji/larOiov TrapaSoaeis, Doctrina Apostolomm, Duae Viae, Enoch (Adttmb. 1008), Sophonias (Strom, v. II. 77). Others, the prophecies of Ham, Nicolaus, Parchor, &c., seem to be distinctively Gnostic. References will be found in editions of the Pp. App., Hilgenfeld, Bryennius, &c. I think it probable that he had read the Homilies. See Lardner, Credibility, vol. 2. A list of quotations from unknown Apocryphal sources will be found in Bishop Kaye. 2 On the cucpiaia of Clement see Dindorf, Preface, xxii. Even when he quotes KO.TCL \fw there can be no doubt that he is generally following some secondary authority, often dishonest Jews, Hecataeus or Aristobulus. Anthologies abounded at Alexandria, and often bore fanciful names, such as \ei/jui>v, f\ifsut>, KTjpiov, irtTr\os, irapdSficros (Strom, vi. i. 2). A mere refer- ence to the indices will show that Clement's knowledge of the dramatists is not to be compared with that of Athenaeus. The lengthy passage begin- ning Strom, i. 21, with all its imposing array of authorities, is compiled from Tatian and Casianus. Lastly, though Clement refers to Varro and to Roman ii.] His Learning and Character. 47 cians l , but at bottom he is himself a member of their guild, cloudy, turgid, and verbose. But Theology had not yet driven out the Muses. His love of letters is sincere, and the great classics of Greece are his friends and coun- sellors. Even the comic poets are often by his side. If we look at his swelling periods, at his benignity and liberality and the limitations of his liberality, at his quaint and multifarious learning, at his rare blending of gentle piety and racy humour, we shall find in him a striking counterpart to our own author of the Liberty of Prophesying. Clement is not a great preacher, for he has neither acted nor witnessed such a soul's tragedy as that dis- closed by Augustine in his Confessions. He is no such comforter for the doubting and perplexed as the fearless Origen. Still less is he one of those dialecticians who solace the logical mind with the neatness and precision of their statements. He is above all things a Mis- sionary. For one thus minded the path of success lies in the skill, with which he can avail himself of the good, that lies ready to his hand. He must graft the fruitful olive on to the wild stem, and aim at producing, not a new character, but a richer development of the old. This is his guiding principle. The Gospel in his view is not a fresh departure, but the meeting-point of two customs and history in four or five places, he seems to have been almost wholly ignorant of the West. 1 They are ' a river of words, a drop of sense,' or like old boots of which all but the tongue is worn out (Strom, i. 3. 22), full of quibbles and disputes about shadows (Strom, vi. 18. 182 ; Strom, i. 5. 29). Clement says of those who give themselves up to Rhetoric, ' as most do,' that they have fallen in love with the handmaid and neglect the mistress. This last figure is from Philo, De Congr. Erud. Grat. 27 : the handmaid is Hagar, secular knowledge ; the mistress Sarah, divine philosophy. He disparages style, Strom, i. 10. 48 ; ii. i. 3. 48 Clement. converging lines of progress, of Hellenism and Judaism. To him all history is one, because all truth is one. ' There is one river of Truth,' he says, ' but many streams fall into it on this side and on that V Among Christian writers none till very recent times, not even Origen, has so clear and grand a conception of the development of spiritual life. The civilisation of the old world had indeed led to idolatry. But idolatry, shameful and abominable as it was, must be regarded as a fall, a corruption 2 . The fruits of Reason are to be judged not in the ignorant and sensual, but in Hera- clitus, in Sophocles, in Plato. For such as these Science had been a covenant of God 3 , it had justified them as the Law justified the Jew 4 . He still repeats the old 1 Strom, i. 5. 29. So a drachma is one and the same, but if you give it to a ship-captain it is called ' fare,' if to a revenue officer ' tax,' if to a land- lord ' rent,' if to a schoolmaster ' fee,' if to a shopkeeper ' price ;' Strom, i. 20. 97, 98. Truth is like the body of Pentheus, torn asunder by fanatics, each seizes a limb and thinks he has the whole ; Strom, i. 13. 57. This last famous simile is borrowed from Numenius, Eus. Praep. Ev. xiv. 5. 7. 8 It was a corruption of Star- worship which God gave to the Gentiles as a stepping-stone to a purer religion ; Strom, vi. 14. no sq. This idea, which is also found in Origen (Redepenning, ii. 27), is based partly on a mis- interpretation of Deut. iv. 19 (see Potter's Note), partly on the history of Abraham as told by Philo. The origin of Mythology Clement has analysed with considerable skill ; Protrep. ii. 26. But in general he hovers between the two views prevalent in the early Church. Sometimes he speaks of the gods, with Euemerus, as ' dead men,' sometimes as ' demons.' Athenagoras, Tertullian, Minucius Felix combine these two beliefs and represent the gods as dead men whose temples, images, and tombs were haunted by the demons for the sake of the steam and blood of the sacrifices. 3 Strom, vi. 8. 67. 4 Strom, i. 5. 28 ; vi. 5. 42 sqq. Philosophy is an imperfect gift bestowed ov irpoi]yov/j.tvcas dAAd tear' eira.KO\ovOr)na, i. e. not by special revelation but as a natural consequence of the possession of reason. Hence its right- eousness is imperfect and preparatory, and cannot avail those who deli- berately reject the Gospel ; Strom, i. 7. 38. It justified the Philosopher when it led him to renounce idolatry, vi. 6. 44. and carry his principles into practice, vi. 7. 55. But Sixaios Sixaiov icaOo 8iKcu6s ((pet, vi. 6. 47. II.] Value of Philosophy. 49 delusion that the Greek philosopher had ' stolen ' his best ideas from the books of Moses 1 . But his real belief is seen in the many passages where he maintains that Philosophy is a gift not of devils 2 but of God through the Logos, whose light ever beams upon his earthly image, the intelligence of man. 'Like the burning glass, its power of kindling is borrowed from the sun 3 .' It was not only a wise but a courageous view. The Apologists had not as a rule been hostile to secular learning, but they made little use of it. Pleading for toleration, for life, to educated men they laboured to prove that the Christian doctrines of God, the Word, Virtue, Immortality, are those of all true philosophy, that Revelation is the perfection of Common Sense 4 . But they did not go beyond this ; their object was not to set out the whole of Christian teaching, still less to coordinate it. The Gnostics alone had attempted this. But the Gnostics endeavoured to combine the Evan- gelical theory with wholly alien beliefs. Hence, rejecting the Old Testament, they denied what all Chfistians Christ preached in Hades not only to Jews but to Greeks ; it would be ' very unfair,' Tr\foveias ov rrjs rvxovarjs fpyov, that the latter should be condemned for ignorance of what they could not know. See for other quotations, Guerike, Redepenning, Origenes, i. 139 sqq. 1 Clement refers to the Greek Philosophers the words of onr Lord, John x. 8. Yet all their knowledge was not 'stolen;' Strom. i. 17. 87. But he maintains the hypothesis of ' theft ' at great length, v. 14. 89 sqq. 3 Here too Clement vacillates. Strom, v. I. 10 he adopts the doctrine of the Homilies (or Enoch?) that the fallen angels betrayed the secrets of heaven to their earthly wives. Elsewhere philosophy is a fruit of the in- dwelling of the divine spirit, the lnq>var\\w., Protr. vi. 68 ; Strom, v. 13. 87. Its doctrines are kvava^ara riva rov \6yov, Protr. vii. 74. Or it is given by the good Angels, Strom, vi. 17. 156 sqq. 3 Strom, vi. 17. 149. Strom, i. 5. 37 it is finely compared to God's rain which falls upon all kinds of soil and causes all kinds of plants to grow. * See Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, pp. 379 sqq. E 50 Clement. [Lect. regarded as the principal evidence of the Divinity of Christ, their Docetism reduced Redemption to a purely moral and intellectual process, their Dualism cut away the testimony of Scripture and of experience to the existence and character of God 1 . There arose a violent reaction. Irenaeus maintains that God has given to us two infallible criteria, our own senses and Scripture, and that all beyond is superfluous and fallacious. Tatian inveighs against the Schools with fierce derision. Her- mias and Tertullian 2 assert with the Book of Enoch that Greek Science is the invention of devils, the bridal gift of the fallen Angels to the daughters of men. This opinion was strongly represented at Alexandria, which was indeed the hotbed of Gnosticism. The ruling party there was that of the Orthodoxasts, whose watchword was ' Only believe/ who took their stand upon the Creed and refused to move one step beyond 3 . Even in that age and place Clement saw and dared to proclaim, that the cure of error is not less knowledge but more. Hence he strenuously asserted not only the merits of Philosophy in the past but its continuous necessity in the Church 4 . Not merely does learning 1 This argument against Dualism is nowhere so forcibly expressed as by the ingenious editor of the Recognitions, i\. 52 : 'Aperi nobis . . . quomodo tu ex lege didiceris deum quern lex ipsa nescit.' Ibid. 60 : ' Da ergo nobis . . . sensum aliquem novum per quem novum quern dicis deum possimus agnoscere ; isti enim quinque sensus, quos nobis dedit creator deus, creatori suo fidem servant.' Simon Magus replies that the sixth sense required is Ecstasy, and Peter in answer finely exposes the vanity of such a source of knowledge. 2 See Irenaeus, ii. 26, 27; Tert. Apol. 35; De Idol. 9; Hermias, ad init. (cp. Otto's Prolegomena, pp. xliii. sqq.); Tatian, 25 sqq. 3 The opOoSoaffrai, Strom, i. 9. 45. He calls them also i\e'yK\ri(j.ovfs, ifttxpoSfets. They demand tyiXriv rrjv vianv, i. i. 18 ; 9. 43. For a lively but malicious picture of this party by the hand of a clever unbeliever, see Origen, Contra Celsum, iii. 44-78. 4 Strom, i. 5. 28. II.] Value of Philosophy. 51 grace the preacher, not merely does it impart clearness, security, elevation to the convictions, but it is essential to conduct. For Christianity is a reasonable service. The virtue of Justice in particular is impossible without intelligence. Science is the correlative of Duty. And though Scripture is the all-sufficient guide, even here the Christian must borrow assistance from the Schools. For Philosophy is necessary to Exegesis. ' Even in the Scriptures the distinction of names and things breeds great light in the soul 1 .' Thus, however much the field of enquiry is limited by Authority, learning is still indispensable as the art of expression, as logic, as ethics, as sociology, as philology. But the Alexandrines went further. They professed and exhibited the most entire loyalty to the Creed. But outside the circle of Apostolical dogma they held themselves free. They agreed with the Orthodoxasts that Scripture was inspired. But their great Platonic maxim, that ' nothing is to be believed which is un- worthy of God,' makes reason the judge of Revelation 2 . They held that this maxim was a part of the Aposto- lical tradition, and accordingly they put the letter of the Bible in effect on one side, wherever, as in the account of Creation or of the Fall, it appeared to conflict with the teaching of Science. But though there is in them a 1 Strom, i. 2. 19, 20; 20. 99, too; vi. 6 sqq., 10 sqq. The Lord an- swered Satan with a play upon the word ' bread,' i. 9. 44, ' and I fail to see how Satan, if he were, as some consider, the inventor of philosophy and dialectics, could be baffled by the well-known figure of amphiboly.' For the relation of Science to Duty see especially Strom, i. 9. 43 ; 10. 46 ; for its service to Exegesis, i. 9. 44 sq. ; vi. 10. 82. 2 This maxim is enunciated by Clement, Strom, vi. 15. 124 ; vii. 16. 196, and lies at the root of Allegorism. It is the guiding principle also of the Homilies (ii. 40, vdv \(x Gtv % "ffMvpZv Kara rov Qtov ifsfvSos effriv), and of the Gnostics. E 2 52 Clement. [Lect. strong vein of Common Sense or Rationalism, they were not less sensible of the mystic supernatural side of the religious life than Irenaeus. The difference is, that with them the mystical grows out of the rational, that they think always less of the historical fact than of the idea, less of the outward sign than of the inner truth. Their object is to show, not that Common Sense is enough for salvation, but that neither Faith without Reason nor Reason without Faith can bring forth its noblest fruits, that full communion with God, the highest aim of human effort, can be attained only by those who in Christ have grown to the stature of the perfect man, in whom the saint and the thinker are blended together in the unity of the Divine Love. Hence they represent on one side the revolt of Pro- testantism against Catholicism, on the other that of Mysticism against Gnosticism. And their great service to the Church is, that they endeavoured faithfully to combine the two great factors of the spiritual life. The Canon of Scripture had already assumed very nearly its permanent form *. Gradually, with infinite care and discussion, those documents, which could be 1 See Dr. Westcott, On the Canon, pp. 354 sqq., ed. 1881 : 'Clement it appears recognised as Canonical all the books of the New Testament except the Epistle of St. James, the second Epistle of St. Peter, and the third Epistle of St. John. And his silence as to these can prove no more than that he was not acquainted with them.' Most of the references to James given in the Index are doubtful. But in Strom, vi. 18. 164 there seems to be a clear allusion to the ' royal law ' of love. And the mention of James with Peter, John, and Paul as the founders of Christian Gnosis, Strom, i. i. n ; vi. 9. 68, would be very remarkable unless James were known to Clement as a Canonical writer. Again, Eusebius (H. E. vi. 14) and Cassiodorius both testify that James was commented upon in the Hypoty- poses. On the authority attributed by Clement to Barnabas and the Revelation of Peter (both were included in the Hypotyposes), see Dr. West- cott, App. B. ii.] The Canon. 53 regarded as possessed of Apostolical authority, had been set apart to form the New Testament. And as the circle was drawn closer, as the living voice of Prophecy died away, so the reverence for the canonical books grew higher, till they were regarded as inspired in the same sense as the older Scriptures. But, as soon as men began to read the New Testament as a divinely given whole, they could not fail to be struck by the violent contrast between the teaching of St. Paul and the whole system of the existing Church. Down to this time no trace of ' Paulinism ' is to be found, except among the Gnostics. Even Clement apologises for treating ' the noble Apostle 1 ,' as he calls him, with the same deference as the Twelve. But he does so without hesitation, and the working of the new leaven is seen at once in his view of Knowledge, of the Resurrection, of Retribution. Indeed, we may characterise this period as the first of those Pauline reactions, which mark the critical epochs of theology. It is the age of Irenaeus and the Alexandrines. But while the leading motive of the former is the Incarna- tion, the mystical saving work of Christ, the guiding principles of the latter are the goodness of God and the freedom of Man. Hence Paulinism assumed very 1 'O dirooroAos, 6 waXoj, Oecrirefftos, fevvaios dir6ffTo\os. The passage referred to is Strom, iv. 21. 134, 'Icrrtov fj.fvroi on, el leal 6 IlauAos rofy Xpovois vtdfi evOiis /tera TTJV TOV Kvpiov dvd\r]tyiv dn/jtaffas, d\\d ovi> 17 ypcupfl a\ni (K TTJS im\aids ^prrjrat SiaOrjKijs Ket0fv dvairvfovffa /cal \a\ovffa. Clement maintains against the Ebionites that St. Paul is in complete accordance with the Jewish Scriptures. At the same time he regards him, like Origen, as one of the chief authorities for the use of Allegorism. On the terms 'Judaism,' 'Jewish Christian,' 'Paulinism,' see Dr. Harnack's excellent remarks (Dogmengeschichte, pp. 215 sqq.). Dr. Harnack also sets the Simon Magus myth in a true historical light (ibid. p. 179). It is cheering to notice the dying away of the wilful Tubingen theories, on which so much erudition and ingenuity have been wasted. 54 Clement. [Lect. different shapes in the Western and the Eastern doctors *. In the former the antithesis of the First and the Second Adam is already pointing the way to the Augustinian doctrine of Grace, in the latter the vision of the great day, when Christ shall deliver up the kingdom to His Father, leads on to Universalism. The second great question arising out of the com- pletion of the Canon was that of the Unity of Scripture. This the Catholic strenuously asserted, the Gnostic denied or admitted only with large reservations. What is the relation of the Old Testament to the New? What is that Law which Jesus came not to destroy but to fulfil ? The Ebionites replied that it was the Spiritual Law, that is to say the Moral Law, with the addition of certain positive precepts circumcision, the sabbath, abstention from blood 2 . The general body 1 Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, pp. 424 sqq. 2 I refer to the Homilies. Circumcision is there regarded as of eternal obligation ; thus in the Epistle of Peter and The Contestation it is ordered that the sacred books of the sect shall be entrusted to none but a circumcised believer. In the body of the work this condition is not insisted upon. But Clement had become a Jew at Rome; iv. 22. The observation of the Sabbath, again, is not insisted upon, but it underlies the effSonaSos itvarriptov of xvii. i o. The precepts of the Spiritual Law are given in vii. 4. Abstention from blood was the law of the whole Church (see Or. Sibyllina, ii. 96 ; viii. 402 ; Eusebius, H. E. v. i. 26 ; Tert. Apol. 9 ; Clement, Paed. ii. i. 17 ; Origen, In Rom. ii. 13, Lorn. vi. 1 28). It was falling into desuetude in the time of Augustine ; see note in Heinichen on Euseb. H. E. v. i. 26. The Sabbath was kept as a holy day ; see Bingham, xiii. 9. 3. It was still necessary to argue the higher sanctity of the Lord's Day, the eighth day. Hence the earnest iteration with which Clement dwells on the 'Oyoodoos fjvffrripiov, Strom, iv. 17. 109; v. 6. 36 ; 14.106; vi. 14. 108 ; 16. 138. In the last passage he argues that Light was created on the first day, then follow six days of creative work, then the eighth a repetition of the first. I may notice here that in one passage (Strom, v. ii. 74) Clement speaks of the Law as actually forbidding Sacrifice. This is the view of the Homilies, of Barnabas, ii. 9, of the Epistle to Diognetus, iii. iv, and of the Praedicatio Petri apud Strom, vi. 5. 41. It is a good instance of Clement's erudite uncertainty. II.] Unity of Scripture. 55 of the Church differed from this definition only in so far as they rejected the rite of circumcision. But the Ebion- ites went on to declare, that the whole of the Old Testa- ment, so far as it was not in strict agreement with this standard, is a forgery of the Evil Spirit. They involved in one sweeping condemnation the Temple ritual, the history of the wars, and the Monarchy, and a large part of the prophetic writings 1 . This was in substance the view of the Gnostics also. These maintained that the Author of the Old Testament is described sometimes as evil, sometimes as imperfect, commanding fierce wars of extermination, caring for sacrifice, governing by pay- ment and punishment. He is Just, they said, at best, but surely not Good. Clement, whose intellect is penetrating but not syste- matic, did not grasp the whole range of the problem before him. He leaves for Origen the task of dealing with those passages, in which, as the Gnostics aiftrmed, the Scriptures attribute direct immorality to Jehovah, and confines himself to the proposition that goodness is not inconsistent with severity, that He who teaches must also threaten, and He who saves correct. Justice, he insists, is the reverse side of Love. ' He, who is Good for His own sake, is Just for ours, and Just because He is Good 2 .' The moral Law then, though inferior to the Gospel Law, because it works by fear and not by love, and reveals God as Lord but not as Father, is yet one 1 Not all the prophets; see the references in Lagarde's edition of the Homilies. In particular, Is. vii. 6, ix. 6 are applied to Christ, Horn. xvi. 14, from which it would seem that the first chapter of Matthew was not omitted by the Ebionites. This was quite consistent with a denial of Chribt's Divinity, as in the case of Theodotus of Byzantium ; Philos. vii. 35. 2 Paed. i. 10. 88 ; the theme is dwelt upon at great length in this book from chap. 8 onwards. Cp. Strom, i. 27. 171 ; ii. 7. 32 sqq. ; iv. 3. 9. 56 Clement. [Lect. with it in the way of development, as a needful prepara- tory discipline, as a step in the divine education of the world, or of the individual 1 . The rest of the Old Testa- ment, though in one sense transient, has yet an eternal significance as the shadow of good things to come, as revealing Christ throughout, though but in riddles and symbols. It has therefore a high doctrinal value for those who can read it aright. Already the Sacrificial Law was looked upon as the charter of the Christian hierarchy 2 . But this opinion, so pregnant of conse- quences in later times, Clement deliberately rejects. In this point he differs from Origen, by whom the Priest and Levite are regarded as types of the Christian Presbyter and Deacon, though even he does not carry the parallel so far as was afterwards done. The method by which this inner harmony is discover- able, the key to the riddles of the Old Testament, is Alle- gorism. What this singular system effected in the hands of the Alexandrine Jew, we have already seen. By the Christian it was adapted to fresh purposes the explana- tion of Prophecy and of the .New Testament itself. It was in universal use, and was regarded by all as one of the articles of the Ecclesiastical Canon or Tradition 3 . 1 For the unity of Inspiration, and so of all Scripture, see Strom. ii. 6. 29 ; iii. n. 76 ; iv. 21. 132 ; iv. 22. 135 ; vi. 13. 106 ; vi. 15. 125; vii. 16. 95 ; vii. 18. 107. The Law is inferior to the Gospel as teaching only abstinence from evil, yet this is the way to the Gospel and to well-doing ; iv. 21. 130. The Law and Prophets taught in riddles what the Gospel teaches clearly; vi. 7. 58; 15. 123. The Law governs by fear, ii. 6. 30, and reveals God as Lord, i. 27. 173, a very Philonic passage. 2 In the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs. See Lightfoot, Philip-biuns, pp. 252 sqq. 3 Origen, De Princ., Preface, 8. Clement appears to distinguish between two traditions, the Ecclesiastical and the Gnostic, the KO.VWV TTJS tKKkrjaias, Strom. i. i. 15 ; 19. 96 ; vii. 15. 90 ; 16. 95, 104, and the yvaiffTiKr) TrapaBoais, ii.] Alkgorism. 57 We shall be compelled to revert to this topic at a later period, and it will be sufficient here to notice, that the Alexandrines differed from their contemporaries in three important points. They regarded Allegorism as having been handed down from Christ and a few chosen Apostles, through a succession, not of Bishops, but of Teachers 1 . They employed it boldly, as Philo had done before them, for the reconciliation of Greek culture with the Hebrew Scriptures. And lastly they applied it to the New Testa- ment, not merely for the purpose of fanciful edification, but with the serious object of correcting the literal, mechanical, hierarchical tendencies of the day 2 . This is in truth the noblest side of Allegorism, for here it deals with cases, where the antithesis of letter and spirit is most real and Strom, i. i. 15, or yi-cuais, iv. 15. 97. The latter was communicated by Christ to James, Peter, John, Paul, and the other Apostles, vi. 8. 68, but only to the Four, i. i. n ; cp. iv. 15. 97. The former is the Little, the latter the Great Mysteries. The former gives the facts of the Creed, and Faith and Obedience, being ' watered ' by Greek philosophy, lead up to the spiritual interpretation of the facts. See the opening of Strom, i. generally. The Gnostic tradition is secret in so far as all Christians do not as a matter of fact understand it, yet not secret in so far as all ought to understand it. Hence Clement, Paed. i. 6. 33, denies that the Church has SiSaxas a\\as airopprjTovs, while he yet speaks of TO rrjs yvwpTjs aTrupprjTof, Quis Dives Salmis, 5; Strom, i. i. 13. The difference between this teaching and Origen's is merely verbal. 1 See Strom, i. i. n ; vi. 9. 68. 2 I may notice here that Clement speaks of Four Senses of Scripture. The MS. reading Tfrpax^s in Strom, i. 28. 1 79 is quite right, in spite of the doubts of Bishop Potter and Sylburg. Compare 176, 17 ptv ovv Kara Mcavaea tdopa, rpiaSos airij\\a"fr). The form of the antithesis seems to imply that the Three Namls were already spoken of as a Trias. 1 The Homilies afford perhaps the most striking of all external proofs of the authenticity of the Baptismal Formula. The Son, one of the two powers of God, is emphatically ' not God.' The Holy Spirit is a mere occasional emanation, ' a hand put forth ' for the purpose of creation and then ' drawn back again,' xvi. 12 ; 15 ; xx. 8. Yet the sect which adhered to this Jewish ante-Philonie system baptised in the Triple Name, ix. 19, and used the doxology, iii. 72. The point is urged by Dorner, vol. i. p. 168 of the English translation. A widely different view is maintained by Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, p. 56 ; Scholten, Die Taufformel. * The Son, Justin, Trypho, 128 (p. 458 in Otto's ed.). This passage is wrongly referred to by Bishop Potter, and apparently by Siegfried, p. 334, as giving Justin's own opinion. The Holy Spirit, Athenagoras, p. 48 of Otto's ed. 3 Perhaps the Alogi, see Domer ; but Dr. Schaff (Diet, of Christian Biog. t Alogians) doubts this. The Monarchians, Neander, ii. p. 295 of the English 60 Clement. [Lect. the Deity and Personality of the Son, and, though with less unanimity, those also of the Holy Ghost, and spoke of the Three as united in Power or in Spirit. The Christian doctrine differed from that of Philo in many important features. In the latter, as we have seen, a certain doubt hangs over the number and even the existence of the Powers. They are a divination, a poet's vision of what may be, of what must be, but hardly more. And, because they form an indefinite series, the Powers are essentially inferior to their source. The Divine Energy is degraded as it approaches the sphere of material existence, the Logos has the light but not the fire of God. It is because he is inferior that he is the Demiurge, the Eternal Himself may not be brought into contact with evil. But the Christian held that God made the world out of nothing, and made it good. Hence the concrete is no longer polluted, and creation is a mark rather of the exaltation than of the inferiority of its Agent. ' In Him was Life.' Thus there remains no other difference between the Father and the Logos than that between the One and the Many, an eternal antithesis, which in Clement's view implies the mutual necessity of the two terms, in that of Origen, who lays more stress upon the idea of causation, a distinction of dignity but not of nature. This mode of thought was immensely strengthened by the Incarnation, by which translation. Monarchianism was especially strong in Rome, Ens. H. E. v. 28 ; Philos. ix ; Tert. Adv Prax. It is to be regarded neither as the pre- vailing view of the Roman Church, nor as a heresy introduced at a late date, but as an ancient opinion which had always existed side by side with the belief in a Personal Trinity. The incompatibility of the two modes of conception was not distinctly realised till towards the end of the second century. The chronology and details of the history of Monarchianism are very obscure. See Harnack, 564 sqq. ii.] Previous Speculations. 61 humanity is taken up into the bosom of the Divine, and the deepest humiliation becomes a gauge of the Love and Wisdom that prompted it. Again in Philo there is scarcely a trace of any Messianic hope, while, in the belief of the Christian, Christ is at once the Giver, the Sum, and the Accomplisher of all Revelation. Other functions, that especially enhance the distinction between the two points of view, are those of Pardon and of Judgment. On the other hand, in one remarkable point the ideal of Christianity was in danger of falling below that of Philo. For there was a tendency in less philosophical minds to distinguish between the unspoken and the spoken Word, to conceive of the Son, the Divine Reason or Logos, as at first immanent in the mind of the Father and assuming hypostasis for the purpose of Creation 1 . It is at this point that Clement takes up the thread. But it must be observed, that he is never controversial nor even historical in his method. His horizon is limited by the Eastern world. He never glances at Monarch- ianism, which was already perhaps the subject of fierce debate in Rome. Hence it is difficult to trace the exact relation of his ideas to those of his predecessors or contemporaries. The knowledge of God is necessarily the starting-point of the religious philosopher. But how is God to be known? Philo dwells upon the lessons to be learned from the order and beauty of Creation. These give a true though inadequate picture of Jehovah, and form the 1 Philo does not apply to the Divine Logos the distinction of evdidOeros and irpoopiKos. It is employed by Theophilus, Ad Aut. ii. 10. 22, by Tertullian, Adv. Prax. 5, and the author of the Philos. x. 33. Irenaeus rejects these terms as Gnostic, ii. 28. 6. See Baur, Dreieinigkeit, pp. 163 sqq. ; Lehrb. der Chr. Dogmengesch, p. 105. 62 Clement. [Lect. creed of the lower life, of those who have not risen above the guidance of the Logos. But Clement knows the world only through books, and hardly touches upon this fruitful and persuasive theme 1 . For him the channels of revelation are only Scripture and abstract reason. He ought on his own principle to have regarded the second as merely ancillary to the first. This however is far from being his real view. Scripture gives us such an idea of God, as is sufficient to start and guide us in our efforts to attain moral purity. But purity is only a negative state, valuable chiefly as the condition of insight. He who has been purified in Baptism and then initiated into the Little Mysteries, has acquired that is to say the habits of self-control and reflection, becomes ripe for the Greater Mysteries 2 , for Epopteia or Gnosis, the scientific know- ledge of God. From this point he is led on by the 1 He touches upon it, Protrep. i. 5 ; iv. 63. But we should notice that the Protrepticus is addressed to the unconverted heathen. 2 The three stages are represented loosely by the three surviving treatises of Clement. The Protrepticus is an exhortation to the heathen world to turn to the Word, the Light, and leads up to Baptism. The Paedagogus shows how the baptised Christian is further purified by discipline which eradicates passion = r . Clement's mode of statement is such as to involve necessarily the Unity, Equality, and Eternity of the First and Second Persons 4 . It has been asserted, that 1 Strom, v. ii. 74. Direct Vision is granted only in heaven ; the instru- ment of knowledge in this life is Dialectic. See next Lecture. 2 The allusion is to Dean Hansel's Limits of Religious Thought, the Bampton Lectures for 1858. The reader who is interested in the discussion of the point should refer also to the controversy between Dean Mansel and Mr. Goldwin Smith, and to F. D. Maurice's What is Revelation ? Cambridge, 1859; and Sequel to the Inquiry what is of Revelation, Cambridge, 1860. with the Reply of Dean Mansel. 3 The distinction between having virtue and being virtue is applied, not to God but to the Gnostic,' Strom, iv. 6. 40 ; vii. 7. 38. God is vovs ; Pro- trep. x. 98 ; Strom, iv. 25. 155 ; vi. 9. 72 : is good, just, beneficent, omniscient ; v. 14.141; vi. 15. 141; 17. 155. * See passages in Bull, ii. 6. ii.] The Son. 67 he hardly leaves sufficient room for a true distinction of Hypostasis x . But, though he possesses no technical name either for Substance or Person 2 , there is no doubt that the latter conception was clearly present to his mind. 'O mystic wonder,' he exclaims, ' One is the Father of All, One also the Word of All, and the Holy Ghost is One and the same everywhere 3 .' His method of developing this proposition is determined partly by language inherited from his predecessors, partly by veins of thought afterwards seized and expanded by Origen. But he differs in a marked degree both from his pupils and his teachers. Many of the phrases which he applies to the Son the Name, the Face, the House of God, and so on are 'borrowed from Philo 4 . From Christian writers he had learned to speak of Christ as ' begotten of the Will of 1 Dorner, vol. i. p. 288 ; Cognat, Clement d" 1 Alexandrie, p. 448. 2 Substance is T& dpprjrov, nvtvfui, Averts. But the word ovaia. is already emerging into use as the distinctive expression. See note above, p. 63. Strom, vi. 16. 138. Person is (pvais, Strom, vii. 2. 5 ; ri tv, Paed. i. 6. 42 ; and even viroaraais, Strom, ii. 18. 96 : TTJS Tpirys TjSrj /j.ovfjs (so we should read, not IJIOVTJS, as Potter, Klotz, Dind.) awairTovaqs tnl rrjv rov Kvpiov 7TapTrjv vnoaraaiv. The third 'mansion' is Charity, which joining on to the Person of the Lord makes up the rerpas of Virtues. Potter is quite mistaken in explaining this obscure passage so as to make Tfraprrj viroaraats signify ' humanam Christi naturam quae cum tribus divinis personis numerata quaternionem quodammodo efficit.' 3 Paed. i. 6. 42 ; iii. 12. 101 ; Strom, vi. 7. 58. 4 Name of God, Strom, v. 6. 38 : Face, Paed. i. 7. 57 ; Strom, v. 6. 34 : Image, avOpco-nos diraGr]*, Heavenly Man, Paed. i. 12. 98 ; Strom, v. 14. 94 : High Priest, Strom, v. 6. 32: Charioteer, Paed.\\\. 12. 101 : Pilot (perhaps directly 1'rom Numenius), Strom, vii. 2.5: Idea or Sum of Ideas, Strom. v. 3. 16: Sum of the Powers, Paed. i. 8. 74; Strom, iv. 25. 156: House of God, Paed. i. 9. 81 : Melchisedech, Strom, iv. 25. 161 : The Mystic Angel, Paed. i. 7. 56 sqq. Ebionite is the identification of Christ with ' the Beginning,' Strom, v. 6. 38 ; vi. 7. 58. Valentinian probably is the Angel of the Great Council, Paed. i. 5. 24, cp. Excerpta, 43 and the representation of Christ as chief of the Seven Protoctists, Strom, v. 6. 32, 35 ; vii. 6. 143. F 2 68 Clement. [Lect. the Father,' as 'coming forth for the sake of creation 1 .' But to Clement such words could only mean, that the difference of Persons is first manifested in their external relations. He rejects the distinction between the Spoken and the Unspoken Word 2 . There was no doubt in his mind as to the timeless Personality of the Logos. ' If God is Father,' he says, ' He is at the same time Father of a Son 3 .' Again God is Just from all eternity because the Son is in, yet distinct from, the Father, so that the ' equipoise ' of knowledge and love between the Two is the first idea of justice 4 . He does not indeed shrink from giving expression to the ministerial capacity implied in the very name of Son. In a famous passage of the Stromateis 5 all rational existence is figured as a vast and graduated hierarchy, like a chain of iron rings, each sustaining and sustained, each saving and saved, held together by the magnetic force of the Holy Spirit, which is Faith. It is the belief in the solidarity of all that thinks and feels, which was afterwards the master-thought of Origen. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are succeeded by the orders of Angels, and these in their turn by men. If we look upwards, the Son is ' next to the Almighty,' ' a kind of Energy of the Father.' If we look downwards, He is the Great High Priest, in whom all are reconciled 1 Strom, v. 3. 16. Similar language is used by Tatian, Ad Graecos, 5 ; Theophilus, Ad Aut. ii. 22 ; Tertullian, Adv. Prax. 5. 2 Strom, v. i. 6 ; Nitzsch, Dogmengesch. i. 203 ; Redepenning, Origenes, i. 112. But Zahn, Forsch. iii. 145 note ; Harnack, Dogmengesch. 531 note, explain the passage differently. In Strom, vii. 2. 5, the words OVK cnro- T(fa>6fjievos imply a rejection of the word wpooAij by which the Generation of the Son was sometimes described. 8 Strom, v. i. i. 4 See the three remarkable passages, Paed. i. 8. 71, 74 ; 10. 88. s vii. 2. 9. II.] The Son. 69 to God. But the idea of subordination is strictly secondary in Clement. The text ' none is good save One' does not mean to him, what it meant to his scholar 1 . Always he recurs to the essential Unity of the Father and the Son. He has no scruple about prayer to the latter 2 . ' Let us pray to the Word Be propitious, O Teacher of thy children, Father, Chario- teer of Israel, Son and Father, Lord who art Both/ So complete is the union, that he does not hesitate to transfer to the Son the peculiar titles of the Father. If the one is ' beyond all intelligible,' so also is the other, if the one is Almighty, so also is the other, and, following the example of Philo and Justin. Clement applies to the Son passages of the Old Testament, where Lord is employed as the substitute for Jehovah 3 . 1 Paed. i. 8. 74. * Paed. iii. 12. 101 ; Strom, vii. 12. 72. See also the first Hymn to the Saviour Christ appended to the Pedagogue. It is probably genuine ; Rede- penning, i. 121. 3 The Son is eirticfiva rov vorjrov, Strom. \. 6. 38. He is TTO.VTOK pinup, Paed. i. 5. 24 ; iii. 7. 39 ; Protrep. viii. 81 ; Strom, iv. 3. 148 : Kvptos, Paed. i- 7- 56, 57 : the Father alone is perfect, for in Him is the Son, and in the Son the Father, Paed. i. 7. 53. The passages usually quoted as showing Clement's tendency to Subordinationism are Strom, vii. I. 2, irpea&vrepov iv yeveaei ; vii. 2. 5, the Father is 6 /twos -aa.vroKpa.rsap \ Strom, v. I. 6, the Son is a tivvapis, vii. 2. 8 an ivfpyeia, Paed. iii. i. 2 a Statcovos of the Father; Protrep. x. no He is made equal to the Father; Paed. iii. 12. 98 He is the dyaOov ^ovX^na of the Father; Strom, vi. 7. 59 Creation runs up to the Father, Redemption to the Son. Rufinus, Epil. in Apol. Pamphili, Clement sometimes ' filium Dei creaturam dicit.' This must refer to the word Krifav used of Wisdom (Prov. viii. 22), Strom, v. 14. 89. Even iroitTv might be used, Strom, vi. 7. 58 (in a quotation from the Herpov ljp.), 6s apx^v rwv airavTfuv tiroirjaev. Cp. Adumb. in i Joan. p. 1009, ' hae namque primitivae virtutes ac primo creatae ' of the Son and Holy Spirit. On the interpretation of this passage of the Book of Proverbs, see Huet, Origeniana, ii. 2. 21 (Lomm. xxii. 176); Rosenmiiller, Hist. Interp. iii. 216, 229; Baur, Dreieinigkeit . Bull and Domer do not regard Clement as a Subordina- tionist. Huet maintains the opposite view. Redepenning occupies an intermediate position. The statement of Photius that Clement spoke of two 70 Clement. The Holy Spirit. [Lect. Down to this point the expansion of Christian doc- trine had been facilitated by the speculations of Philo. But here the light of philosophy fails. Philo had no Trinity, unless the World be counted as the third term. Hence perhaps it resulted, that a certain doubt hangs over the Personality of the Holy Spirit in Hermas, in Athena- goras, and even m Hippolytus 1 , not to speak of later times. Clement proposed to enter at length upon the subject in a separate treatise, perhaps with a special view to Montanism 2 . But the plan was never carried out. Hence, though there is no doubt that he regarded the Spirit as a distinct hypostasis 3 , we cannot state with precision how he considered the Third Person to be related to the First and Second. It is the Holy Spirit, equally with the Logos, who speaks by the Prophets 4 . It is He, as we have seen, who binds together the Church Visible and Invisible 5 . It is He whose ' dew' washes away our sins, and sanctifies both soul and body 6 . Out of this last office of sancti- fication arises the only point, that Clement has deemed it needful to define. The Third Person of the Platonic Trinity is the World Spirit, of which the soul of man is a part or effluence. Clement is jealous of the slightest approach to Pantheism, and takes occasion more than once to warn his readers, that the Holy Spirit, though Logi must rest upon a blunder ; see Dr. Westcott, Clement of Alexandria, in Diet. Christ. Biog. ; Zahn, Forsch. iii. 144 ; and Lect. viii. 1 See the commentators on Hermas, Sim. v. 6 ; Athenag. Supplicatio, 10 ; Hippolytus, Contra Noetum, 14. p. 52, ed. Lagarde. The author of the Philosophumena in the sketch of vital Christian doctrine with which he concludes his work omits all mention of the Holy Spirit. 2 Strom, v. 13. 88. 3 Paed. i. 6. 42 ; iii. 12. 101 ; Strom, v. 14. 103 ; vii. 2. 9 ; Redepenning, i. 122; Guerike, ii. 134. * Protrep. i. 8 ; viii. 79. 5 Strom, vii. 2. 9. 6 Quis D. Salvus, 34; Strom, iv. 26. 163. ii.] The Incarnation. 71 said to be breathed into the believer, is present in the soul not as a part of God, not in essence, but in power. What he means he explains by a quotation from the Apostolic Barnabas. 'Wherefore in us as in a temple God truly dwells. But how ? By the word of His faith, by the calling of His promise, by the wisdom of His statutes, by the precepts of His doctrine 1 .' We have yet to speak of the Incarnation and the redeeming work of Jesus. The Word, the whole Word, took flesh of the Virgin Mary, and became Man. Jesus alone is both God and Man 2 . He who is God became Man, that we might become gods 3 . It has been doubted whether Clement ascribed to the Lord a human soul, but without reason, for it is the soul of Jesus that was our Ransom 4 . But His Flesh was not wholly like ours, inasmuch as it was exempt from all carnal desires and emotions, even the most necessary and innocent 5 . And as his Platonic dis- 1 Strom, vii. 14. 87 ; vi. 16. 138 ; ii. 20. 117 ; v. 13. 88. 2 See esp. Strom, iii. 17. 102 ; Protrep. i. 7 ; x. 106 ; Quis D. Salvus, 37. In the last very striking passage the words TO app^Tov aiiTov irar^p, TO 81 TJIUV ovfjaraGls ytyovt nrjTrjp refer to the Eternal Generation, from which Clement passes on to the Incarnation. 3 Protr. i. 8 ; cp. Strom, iv. 23. 152 ; vii. 3. 13; 10. 56 ; 13. 82, referring to John x. 34. The same strong phrase is used by the author of the Philos. x. 34, yeyovas yap 6e6s . . . ov yap iiTaixfvfi 0efc Kal at Qfbv iroi^aas is 86av avTov. It is a favourite with Origen also. 4 Redepenning, i. 401 : ' Clemens nur von einer Verbindnng des Logos mit einem menschlichen Korper ohne Seele weiss.' But Paed. i. 2. 4, He is arrowy TTJV tyvxf)v ; cp. ibid. i. 9. 85, 6 T& pfyiffTov iiir^p i^Miv T^V ifjv\^if OVTOV (iriSiSovs, and Q. D. S. 37. Clement probably held with Origen that the Ransom was specially the Soul and not the Body of Christ. * Strom, vi. 9. 71, He was diraaw\cvs aira&ris, and ate and drank only to forestall Docetism. Strom, iii. 7. 59 the opinion of Valentinus is quoted, apparently with approval. Indeed the view of Clement differs but little from that of Valentinus and Apelles, who held that the Saviour's body was propriae qualitatis, Tert. de Res. Carnis, 2 ; Adv. Marc. iii. 1 1 ; Philos. vii. 72 Clement. [Lect. like of the body has led Clement here, though no Docetist, perilously near to the confines of Docetism, so another Platonic theory, that all suffering is corrective, has induced him to speak of the Passion of Jesus as undesigned by God. ' We must say then that God did not prevent it, for this alone saves both the providence and the goodness of God.' But in truth Clement has saved neither. What he has done is to introduce dis- sension into the counsels of the Most High 1 . Clement's Christology is often spoken of as meagre and unsatisfactory. In one aspect this is unjust. For Clement's idea of the Saviour is larger and nobler may we say less conventional ? than that of any other doctor of the Church. Christ is the Light that broods over all history, and lighteth every man that cometh into the world. All that there is upon earth of beauty, truth, goodness, all that distinguishes the civilised man from the savage, the savage from the beasts, is His gift. No later writer has so serene and hopeful a view of human nature as Clement, and though this may seem to depress his estimate of the Redeemer, it surely exalts in the same measure his belief in the fostering bounty of the Eternal Word. Especially is the goodness of Christ manifested towards His Church, to whom He has given a life, and promised a future, which He alone can bestow. But if we ask why the Birth, the Passion, the Cross ? why Jesus redeemed us in this way, and no other? Clement has no answer. It may be urged that all 38. This was also the teaching of Theodotus, see above, p. 32. The curious tradition recorded Adumb. in Epist.Joan. i. p. 1009 refers apparently to the flesh of Jesus after the Resurrection, but it is doubtful whether this pas- sage is not an interpolation. See Dr. Zahn's note. 1 Strom, iv. 12. 86. II.] Redemption. 73 answers are but formal. Or that Clement speaks the language of the whole sub-apostolic age. But this is only partially true. The spirit of Hellenism lies heavier on Clement than on others, and led him to draw a line between the Cross and the Ascension, between the 'death unto sin' and the 'new life unto righteousness,' which though it has connections with Scripture, is yet not Scriptural. We shall see farther on how he regards the Passion of our Lord, Redemption, as the source of Fear and Hope, but most strangely not of Love. By His death Christ Ransoms us from the powers of evil 1 , and bestows upon us Forgiveness, relieving us thereby not merely from the punishment, or guilt, but from the ignorance, which is the power of sin. Forgive- ness was undoubtedly a most difficult idea to the Alex- andrines, who believed firmly in the changelessness of God, and carried their faith in the wholesome necessity of correction so far, that they admitted a quantitative relation between the offence and its chastisement. They, held that Pardon can be freely bestowed only in Baptism, and that the Christian should be taught to look, not upon the Crucified, but upon the Risen Lord, the fountain not of pardon, but of life 2 . Jesus again reconciles us to God. 1 For the \vrpov, see Q. D. S. 37 ; 42 ; Paed. i. 5. 23, and elsewhere. Clement does not say expressly to whom the ransom is paid ; see however Protrep. xi. in. Distinguish from anoKinpoiais, complete emancipation from sin, perfected only in the other life, Strom, vii. 10. 56. 3 The free pardon purchased for us by Christ is expressly limited to actual sin committed before Baptism, Q. D. S. 40, raiv plv ovv trpoyfyefrjfj.evajv Oeos SiSaiatv d and Barnabas, except when authorised by the New Testament. Hence the only sacrificial title, which he distinctly applies to our Lord, is that of the Lamb of God 2 . To the Christian pilgrim, in the lower life, Christ manifests Himself as Physician, Shepherd, Tutor, Law- giver, calming the fever of passion by gentle words of admonition or bitter roots of fear. This He does as Man, by virtue of His humiliation and perfect obedience hence for this no remedy is necessary except light. In all other cases the penalty is itself the earnest of forgiveness. 1 He rarely touches upon this aspect of Redemption. Paed. iii. 12. 98, Kai avr&s l\aap.6s tan irtpl rwv a/jiapTiwv rifJ-uv, us 6pos KO.L 8iaX\aT7)s teal aaiTrjp fip.Siv \6yos. Paed. iii. I. 2, neaiTrjs yap 6 \6yos. Everywhere the barrier is not God's wrath, but man's impurity. 2 Paed. i. 5. 24, Christ is afivbs TOV Oeov in respect of His innocence : Strom. v. 6. 32, He is the Lamb with seven eyes of Rev. v. 6 : Strom, v. n. 70 ; vii. 3. 14, He is 6\oKapira)fM, in the latter passage littp -fjiMuv ifpfvOtvra. : Paed. i. 5. 23, Isaac is Itpeiov us 6 icvpios : Paed. i. 6. 47, the blood of Abel is a type : Paed. i. 8. 61, Joshua : Paed. i. n. 97, Christ is our Itpttov : Protr. xi. in, the outstretched hands of Moses are a type : Paed. ii. 8. 75, the burning bush foreshadows the crown of thorns: Paed. ii. 9. 81, Lot the Just: Paed. iii. 12. 85, (\vrpwOr}fiev . . . TI/J.'IO> ai'nan us apvov a/j.cu/j.ov ai affiri\ov Xpiffrov (Peter i. i. 19) : Strom, v. n. 72, the Tree of Life : v. i. 8, Abraham, the Elect Father of Sound, is the Logos (from Philo) ; Strom. vi. ii. 84, the 318 servants of Abraham signify Christ (from Barnabas ; this is the only passage where Clement appears to imply literal inspiration ; 318, in Greek writing TIH, denotes the Cross and the name IH2OT2) : iii. 12. 86, Land of Jacob (from Barnabas; another very forced allegory) : v. 6. 32, the High Priest's Mitre signifies Christ the Head of the Church (adapted from Philo) : vi. n. 88, David's lyre is a type : iv. 25. 161, Melchisedech (from Philo). ii.j Redemption. 75 unto death 1 . Gradually He makes Himself known to us in the higher life as God, feeding us in the Eucharist, or Agape, with His Body and Blood, the sacred food of Gnosis, becoming our Light, our Truth, our Life, bestow- ing upon us the Adoption of Sons, binding us in closest unity with the Spirit, leading us on to the holy mountain, the better Cithaeron, the spiritual Church 2 . Clement speaks of Jesus as our High Priest, but only in the Philonic sense, as our Representative and Intercessor 3 . The idea of the 'Recapitulation' of all men in Christ as the second Adam, so fruitful in the brooding soul of Irenaeus, is strange to him. He looks upon Redemption, not as the restitution of that which was lost at the Fall, but as the crown and consummation of the destiny of Man, leading to a righteousness such as Adam never knew, and to heights of glory and power as yet un- sealed and undreamed. 'The Word of God became Man, in order that thou also mayest learn from Man, how man becomes God V 1 Protrept. i. 7, r& <3 tfjv e8iSaev eTrupavels us 5i5dcr/caA.os, tVa rb del fjv varepov us Oebs X o P r rfh vffi)fta in Philonic language. In the latter consists the likeness to God, or rather to the Son ; Protrept. x. 98 ; Paed. i. 3. 7 ; Strom, ii. 19. 102 ; v. 13. 87 ; vi. 9. 72. It is to be distinguished from the Holy Spirit which is said irpoatinirvtiaBat., Strom, v. 13. 88. M. Denis is quite mistaken in ascribing the error of Tatian to Clement, Philosophic cTOrigtne, p. 225. 1 Paed. i. 3. 7, the (nvar)na is a (pi\rpov which makes man dear to God for his own sake. See also Protrept. x. 100, irityvnt yap d\\eas 6 dvOpoJiros oiKdais ex 6 "' W P S & f v ' Strom, v. 13. 87, man has an ffupaau 0eov i(vrat TOV (pcuvofitvov dyaOov, TTJy Se avraaias ov icvpioi, dAA" oirotos iro&' ttcaaros ton TOIOVTO Kal TO re'Aos faivtrai avrw, K,T.\. 1 The Gnostics went so far as to assert that 6 JIT) euAus VTTO rfjv TOV 'Aocifi viroiriirTtaKtv apav TO jtTjSlv fvfp-yrjffav. (v) The causes of sin are v\rjs affOtveta and ayvoia, Strom, vii. 3. 16. Yet Adam is the type, though not the source, of sin, Protrept. xi. ill. So also Adumb. in Ep. Judae, p. 1008, 'Sic etiam peccato Adae sub^icemus secundum peccati similitudinem,' where the negative is omitted, as by Origen, in the well-known verse, Rom. v. 14. But I doubt very much whether this passage, which goes on to lay down the doctrine of Reprobation, is from the hand of Clement. 2 Strom, iii. 9. 65 : vii. 3. 13 : iv. 25. 157. 3 Strom, ii. 4. 14: iii. 7. 57. G 8 2 Clement. [Lect: felicity, which yet we can only attain by grasping the Divine Hand outstretched to lift us up. ' Not without special grace does the soul put forth its wings V The secrets of this diviner life cannot be expressed in rules and formulas. But there is a point where grace and nature meet, which is the proper field of discipline. Knowledge must be gradually assimilated. Love must creep before it can fly. Christ has revealed to us all truth, but truth is precept before it is conviction. It is by obedience to Authority, that the carpenter and the pilot acquire their skill. So the Christian life begins in Faith 2 , that is belief in the desirability of the End, and willing submission to the Means in their regular pro- 1 The ball-player, Strom, ii. 6. 25. So in Paed. i. 6. 28 regeneration is compared to waking or the removal of a cataract ; we open our eyes and the light streams in. The words 'no man can come to Me except my Father draw him,' Clement explains differently at different times, Strom, iv. 22. 138 ; v. 13. 83. In the latter passage he quotes with approval the saying of Plato in the Meno, that virtue comes to those to whom it comes, Oficf, po'ipa. Compare also v. I. 7 ; vi. 6. 45 ; Q. D. S. 10, 21. 2 See especially Strom, ii. 2, 3, 4. Clement was very anxious to connect Faith, the Christian watchword, with philosophy. Plato, who refers it (Rep. vi. adfineni) to the T///*a TOV al