lit’-er-a-tur, sub-ap-os-tol’-ik (Christian):<br /><br />

I. EPISTLE OF CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS<br /><br />

1. Authorship and Date<br /><br />

2. Occasion and Contents<br /><br />

3. Apologetic Testimony<br /><br />

4. Doctrinal Testimony<br /><br />

5. Office-Bearers and Organization<br /><br />

6. Ritual<br /><br />

II. THE DIDACHE<br /><br />

1. Disappearance and Recovery<br /><br />

2. Date<br /><br />

3. Standpoint, Authorship and Object<br /><br />

4. Testimony to <span class="auto-link">[[New Testament]]</span> Writings

5. Contents and Notabilia<br /><br />

III. EPISTLES OF IGNATIUS<br /><br />

1. Author and Date<br /><br />

2. Genuineness<br /><br />

3. Leading Ideas<br /><br />

4. Other Notabilia<br /><br />

IV. EPISTLES OF POLYCARP<br /><br />

1. Date and Genuineness<br /><br />

2. Occasion and Contents<br /><br />

3. Notabilia<br /><br />

V. PAPIAS FRAGMENTS<br /><br />

1. Author and Date<br /><br />

2. Testimony to Matthew and Mark<br /><br />

3. Other Notabilia<br /><br />

VI. EPISTLE OF BARNABAS<br /><br />

1. Authorship<br /><br />

2. Date<br /><br />

3. Object and Contents<br /><br />

4. Notabilia<br /><br />

VII. PASTOR (SHEPHERD) OF HERMAS<br /><br />

1. Authorship and Date<br /><br />

2. Object and Contents<br /><br />

3. Notabilia<br /><br />

VIII. SECOND EPISTLE OF CLEMENT<br /><br />

1. Nature and Document<br /><br />

2. Date and Authorship<br /><br />

3. Contents<br /><br />

4. Notabilia<br /><br />

IX. APOLOGY OF ARISTIDES<br /><br />

1. Recovery and Date<br /><br />

2. Contents<br /><br />

3. Notabilia<br /><br />

X. JUSTIN MARTYR<br /><br />

1. Incidents of Life<br /><br />

2. First Apology<br /><br />

3. Second Apology<br /><br />

4. Dialogue with Trypho the Jew<br /><br />

5. Notabilia<br /><br />

XI. EPISTLE TO DIOGNETUS<br /><br />

1. Date and Authorship<br /><br />

2. Contents<br /><br />

LITERATURE<br /><br />

The Sub-apostolic Age is usually held to extend from the death of John, the last surviving apostle, about 100 AD, to the death of Polycarp, John’s aged disciple (155-56 AD). The Christian literature of this period, although as a whole of only moderate intrinsic value, is of historical interest and importance. This is owing to the light which it throws back on apostolic times, and the testimony borne to Christian life, thought, worship, work and organization during an age when the church was under the guidance, mainly, of men who had been associated with the apostles and who might be supposed, therefore, to know their mind. Some writings are omitted from this review, having been dealt with in previous articles. For the <span class="auto-link">[[Protevangelium of James]]</span> and the Gospel and <span class="auto-link">[[Apocalypse of Peter]]</span> see [[Apocryphal Gospels]]; [[Apocryphal Acts]]. For an account of extant fragments of Basilides and Valentinus, see [[Gnosticism]]. For pseudo-Clementine writings see [[Epistles of Peter]]; [[Simon Magus]].<br /><br />

I. Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians.<br /><br />

1. Authorship and Date:<br /><br />

Only the larger part had previously been extant, when the complete epistle was recovered in 1875 by Bryennios, bishop of Nicomedia. The high honor in which it was held by early Christendom is attested<br /><br />

(1) by its position in Codex Alexandrinus, at the end of the New Testament, and in an ancient Syriac MS, between the Catholic and <span class="auto-link">[[Pauline Epistles]]</span>;

(2) by its being publicly read in many churches down to the 4th century.<br /><br />

(Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 16). The work is anonymous, but sent in the name of the Roman church. Dionysius of Corinth (170 AD) refers to it as written by the agency of (dia) Clement (Historia Ecclesiastica, IV, 23); <span class="auto-link">[[Clement of Alexandria]]</span> states distinctly the Clementine authorship (Strom., iv.17). The writer is evidently leading office-bearer of his church, and is identified with the Clement whom Eusebius designates as third "bishop" (or chief presbyter) of Rome after Peter, and as holding office between 92 and 101 AD (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 34). Clement is further identified by Origen (Commentary on John) and in HE, III, 15 with the Clement of <bibleref ref="Phil.4.3">Php 4:3</bibleref>; but the name is too common and the interval too long to render this identity more than possible. Some conjecture the writer to be the consul, Flavius Clemens, whom Domitian (his cousin) put to death in 95 AD for alleged "atheism," i.e. probably, profession of Christianity (see Harnack, Gesch. Lit., I, 253, note 1). But Clement the "bishop" is never otherwise referred to as a martyr, and a member of the imperial family would hardly have been head of the Roman church without so signal a fact being noted by some contemporary or later writer. Lightfoot, with some probability, supposes (<span class="auto-link">[[Apostolic Fathers]]</span>, I, 61) that Clement was a "freedman or the son of freedman, belonging to the household of Flavius Clemens." From Paul’s time (<bibleref ref="Phil.4.22">Php 4:22</bibleref>) the imperial household included Christians; and many slaves were men of culture. To such a Christian freedman’s influence the consul’s conversion may have been due. Internal evidence points to Clement having been a Hellenist Jew or proselyte of Judaism; for he writes with some classical culture and with knowledge of <span class="auto-link">[[Old Testament]]</span> history and of the Septuagint; his style, moreover, has a "strong Hebraistic tinge" (Lightfoot, p. 59). The date of the epistle is fixed approximately by a reference to a persecution at Rome in progress or very recent; this persecution (during Clement’s "episcopate") was doubtless that by Domitian in 95 AD. Clement’s Epistle is thus not strictly within the Sub-apostolic Age, but it is uniformly included in sub-apostolic literature.<br /><br />

2. Occasion and Contents:<br /><br />

The occasion was a church feud at Corinth, and the expulsion of some faithful presbyters. The writer seeks to procure their restoration and to heal the dissension. He quotes Old Testament examples of the evil issue of envy and strife, and of the blessedness of humility, submission and concord. He adduces as a pattern the peace and harmony of Nature. In this connection occurs an anticipation of geographical discovery, when the author writes (chapter xx) of "the impassable ocean and the worlds beyond it" (compare Seneca, Medea ii.375; Strabo i.4; Plut. Mor. ix.41). Paul’s warnings in 1 Corinthians about party spirit are recalled; a not unworthy echo of <bibleref ref="1Cor.13.1-1Cor.13.13">1Co 13</bibleref> is embodied; and the erring community is solemnly monished.<br /><br />

In the course of the letter, with obvious reference to <bibleref ref="1Cor.15.1-1Cor.15.58">1Co 15</bibleref>, Clement introduces the resurrection, for which he argues from the Old Testament and from natural analogies. He refers to the phoenix which lives 500 years, and, when dissolution approaches, builds a nest of spices into which it enters to die. As the flesh decays, however, a "worm is generated, which is nurtured from the dead bird’s moisture and putteth forth wings." The fable is mentioned by Herodotus and Pliny.<br /><br />

A lengthy prayer of intercession for "all sorts and conditions of men" is abruptly introduced near the end, in order, presumably, to imbue Corinthian Christians with that charity which they needed and which is the chief incentive to intercession. The epistle closes with a hopeful anticipation of restored concord and peace.<br /><br />

3. Apologetic Testimony:<br /><br />

Apologetic testimony is found to (1) books of the New Testament, namely, to the Pauline authorship of I Corinthians; to Mark’s Gospel, through which (chapter xv) he quotes <bibleref ref="Isa.29.13">Isa 29:13</bibleref>, reproducing Mark’s variations from the Septuagint; to Acts, through which he similarly quotes (chapter xviii) <bibleref ref="1Sam.13.14">1Sa 13:14</bibleref>; to Romans, Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, James, 1 Peter (chapters xxxv, xlvi, xxi, ii, xlvi, xlix, respectively). The parallels between Clement and He are so numerous that the latter work has from early times been ascribed to him by some (Historia Ecclesiastica, VI, 25). But the general type both of thought and of diction is dissimilar; (2) against the Tubingen theory of essential divergence between the doctrine of Peter and of Paul. The chief presbyter of Rome could not have been ignorant of such divergence; yet he refers the partisanship of which the two apostles were victims entirely to the Corinthians, not at all to the apostles (chapter xlix).<br /><br />

4. Doctrinal Testimony:<br /><br />

Doctrinal testimony is found:<br /><br />

(1) to the Trinity, "As God liveth and the Lord <span class="auto-link">[[Jesus Christ]]</span> liveth, and the <span class="auto-link">[[Holy Spirit]]</span>" (chapter lviii);

(2) to the personality of Christ, "The Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory and the majesty forever." In union and communion with Christ we have life, are sanctified, possess love, manifest godliness (chapter i, xxxvi);<br /><br />

(3) to the atonement: Clement ascribes to Christ’s death not merely subjective moral influence, but objective vicarious efficacy in securing our salvation, without any attempt, however, to explain the mystery. Christ hath "given his flesh for our flesh, his life for our lives" (chapter xlix);<br /><br />

(4) to justification which is distinctly enunciated as before God through faith (chapter xxxii). But this faith (as in Paul’s writings) is a "faith which worketh" (chapter xxxv), and such justification is consistent with our being justified by works before men;<br /><br />

(5) to the inspiration of Scripture, which is real ("the Holy Spirit saith"), but not verbal; for quotations are often inexact. Apocryphal books are quoted, but not with a formula indicating Divine authority.<br /><br />

5. Office-Bearers and Organization:<br /><br />

(1) The basis of authority is not sacerdotal, but a combination of official succession and popular call; office-bearers are appointed "by the apostles or afterward by men of repute with consent of the whole ecclesia."<br /><br />

(2) Clement indicates no distinction between presbyter and bishop. Office-bearers designated as presbyters (chapters xlvii, liv) are referred to (chapters xlii, xliv) as filling the office of bishop. Addressing a church on congregational strife and insubordination, he refers to no single bishop in authority over the church. Had the episcopate, in the post-New Testament sense of mono-episcopate, been apostolically enjoined, surely the injunction would have been obeyed or enforced in Corinth.<br /><br />

(3) None the less we discern in Clement’s own position and action the anticipation of the later episcopate. Clement is an example of how, through the personal qualities and ecclesiastical services of the man, the status of presiding presbyter developed out of seniority into superiority, out of representativeness into official authority.<br /><br />

(4) The early germ of the papacy is disclosed in the passage: "If certain persons should be disobedient unto the words spoken by God through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and peril" (chapter lix). Such assumption by a revered man like Clement might give no offense, and the Corinthians plainly needed correction. Still we have here the first stage in the process which ultimately issued in the Roman claim to universal spiritual supremacy. The assumption, however, is not grounded on Clement’s own official position (he speaks always in the 1st person plural), but on the superior dignity of the Roman church. The later theory of supremacy builds Roman authority on the primacy of Peter and his successors; but here the authority of the leading presbyter, in dealing with a provincial church, rests on the suggested primacy of the ecclesia in which he presides.<br /><br />

6. Ritual:<br /><br />

(1) The long prayer (chapters lix-lxi) bears internal evidence of liturgical character, through its balanced and rhythmical style, its somewhat remote relevance to the special object of the ep., and greater suitability for congregational worship, than as part of a counsel to a sister church. This internal testimony is confirmed by the correspondence of the prayer in certain verbal details with the earliest extant liturgies, particularly those of Mark and James, pointing to the early use in the Roman church of forms of prayer afterward incorporated into these liturgies. While there is evidence that down at least to the time (148 AD) of Justin’s 1st Apology (chapter lxvii) a minister offered up prayers of his own composition, this prayer of Clement’s Epistle indicates that before the close of the <span class="auto-link">[[Apostolic Age]]</span>, forms of supplication had begun to be introduced, not to the exclusion of "free prayer," but simply as a mode of congregational devotion countenanced by a venerated leader of the church at Rome.<br /><br />

(2) In chapter lvi Clement writes about "compassionate remembrance of them (i.e. the erring brethren) before God and the saints." By the saints, however, are most probably meant, not the beatified dead, but the living Christian brotherhood, as in <bibleref ref="1Cor.1.2">1Co 1:2</bibleref>; <bibleref ref="2Cor.8.4">2Co 8:4</bibleref>.<br /><br />

This epistle leaves on readers’ minds two different yet mutually compatible impressions--impressions both apparently made on the early church, by which the letter was widely read at public worship and yet excluded from the Canon of Scriptures. We realize, on the one hand, the inferiority of this writing to epistles of apostles. Clement’s mind is receptive, not creative; and the freshness of thought characteristic of New Testament writers is absent. What New Testament book, moreover, contains such a foolish legend as that of the phoenix? On the other hand, this epistle breathes much of the spirit, as it adopts in considerable measure the phraseology and style of apostolic writings. It is as if, although the sun of special inspiration had sunk below the horizon, there remained to the church for a while a spiritual afterglow.<br /><br />

II. The "Didache"<br /><br />

1. Disappearance and Recovery:<br /><br />

The "Didache" or Teaching (longer title, "The Teaching of the Lord, by (dia) the Twelve Apostles, to the Gentiles").--This work is quoted as "Scripture," without being named, by Clement of Alexandria (circa 170 AD, in Strom., i.20). It is mentioned in HE, III, 25 as the "Teachings so-called of the Apostles," "recognized by most ecclesiastical writers," although "not a genuine" composition of apostles. Athanasius (Fest. Epistle, 39) denies its canonicity, but acknowledges its utility. The latest ancient reference to the work from personal knowledge is by Nicephoros (9th century) who includes it among apocryphal writings. Thenceforth it disappears until its recent recovery in 1875 by Bryennios.<br /><br />

2. Date:<br /><br />

There is no reliable external testimony to date. Resemblances too considerable to be accidental exist between the Didache and the <span class="auto-link">[[Epistle of Barnabas]]</span>; but opinion is divided as to priority of composition. Lightfoot and others favor a common lost source. As to internal evidence the simplicity of the Eucharist and of baptism as here described, with no formal admission to the catechumenate (chapter vii); the use of "bishop" to denote the same office-bearer as presbyter; and the expectation of an impending Second Advent--point to an early date. On the other hand it is unlikely that a writing which professes to give the Teaching of the Twelve would be issued until all or most apostles had passed away; and the writer seems to be acquainted with writings of John (Didache, ix.2; x.2; x.5; see Schaff, Oldest Church Manual, 90). Probably the document went through a series of recensions (Harnack in Sch-Herz; Bertlet in DB, V), and the date or dates of composition may be put between 80 and 120 AD.<br /><br />

3. Standpoint, Authorship and Object:<br /><br />

The work does not profess to be written by apostles; but the author seems to be a Jewish Christian, for he calls Friday "<span class="auto-link">[[Preparation Day]]</span>," and the style and diction are Hebraic. The work is neither Judaistic nor Ebionite: circumcision, the Sabbath, and special Mosaic observances, are ignored. From the book in whole or in part being addressed specially, although not exclusively, to Gentiles, we infer that the community among whom it was composed, while mainly Jewish Christian, made special provision for conversion and instruction of Gentiles. The doctrinal standpoint is neither Pauline nor anti-Pauline, but resembles that of Jas. Canon Spence (Teaching) conjectures plausibly that the author may be Simeon, cousin of James the Lord’s brother, who became chief presbyter of the Jewish Christian community, first at Jerusalem, afterward at Pella, until his martyrdom in 107 AD.<br /><br />

4. Testimony to New Testament Writings:<br /><br />

Mt was certainly in the writer’s hands; for the Didache contains 22 quotations from, or reminiscences of, that Gospel, extending over ten chapters of it. Particularly notable is Didache, viii.2, "Neither pray ye as the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in His Gospel; after this manner pray ye, Our Father," etc. (see also vii.1; ix.5; xvi.6). There are also references to the <span class="auto-link">[[Gospel of Luke]]</span> (Didache, iii.5, 16); John’s writings (see above); Ac (Didache, iv.8), Romans (Didache, iv.5), 2Th (Didache, xiv.1), 1Pe (Didache, i.4). No extra-canonical saying of our Lord is recorded.<br /><br />

5. Contents and Notabilia:<br /><br />

The contents and notabilia may be examined as follows:<br /><br />

(1) Didactic (Chapters i through vi):<br /><br />

Intended for catechumens in preparation for baptism. This catechetical manual (the earliest of its kind) opens with the words: "There are two ways: one of life and one of death" (suggested probably by <bibleref ref="Jer.21.8">Jer 21:8</bibleref>). From this text the writer gives a summary of Christian duty especially toward our neighbor, based on the Decalogue, the Golden Rule, and the <span class="auto-link">[[Sermon on the Mount]]</span>, which is frequently quoted.

Among notable precepts is a command to fast as well as pray for enemies; a warning against infanticide which, in the case of sickly infants, heathenism approved, and against augury and astrology as generating idolatry; an admonition not to" stretch out one’s hands for receiving and to draw them in for giving"; an injunction to " share all things with thy brethren, and not to say that they are thine own"; a command to "love some above thine own life"; and a quaint corrective against indiscriminate and ill-informed beneficence: "Let thine alms sweat into thy hands until thou know to whom thou shouldest give." A precept to "give with thy hands a ransom for sin" may not mean more than that sinful habits are subdued by good works, but it suggests and paves the way for the error of the atoning efficacy of almsgiving. The summary of duty relates chiefly to the second Table of the Law; duty toward God is afterward (so far) dealt with under "worship." This may account for obedience to parents being strangely omitted; for among the Jews the Fifth Commandment was included in the First Table.<br /><br />

(2) Devotional: Worship and Rites (Chapters vii through x, xiv).<br /><br />

<span class="auto-link">[[The Lord's Prayer|The Lord’s Prayer]]</span> is to be used thrice a day. "Heaven" and "debt" are found instead of "heavens" and "debts." The Doxology is added (with "kingdom" omitted)--its earliest recorded use in this connection. Christians are to fast on Wednesday and Friday, the days of the betrayal and crucifixion. Fasting is enjoined for a day or two before baptism, both on baptizer and on baptized; it is recommended to "others who can." There is no mention of oil, salt, or exorcism. The baptismal formula, "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the <span class="auto-link">[[Holy Ghost]]</span>," is commanded, confirming the historical trustworthiness of <bibleref ref="Matt.28.19">Mt 28:19</bibleref>. Triple immersion in "living water" is assumed to be normal; but where this is impracticable, other water and affusion are permitted (see [[Trine Immersion]]). The <span class="auto-link">[[Lord's Supper|Lord’s Supper]]</span> is dealt with only on its eucharistic side, the writer’s object being not to expound the nature of the rite, but to give models of thanksgiving.

The phrase, "after being filled give thanks," suggests that the Agape was still associated with the sacrament: the dissociation had begun when Pliny wrote to Trajan in 112 AD. A liturgical element in sacramental worship is indicated by the prescription of forms of thanksgiving for the cup, the broken bread, and spiritual mercies. "Give thanks thus." The thanksgiving for the cup is as follows: "We give thanks to thee our Father, for the holy vine of David, thy servant, which thou hast made known to us through Jesus Christ." But nothing suggests that the entire service is liturgical, and the forms supplied are not rigidly imposed; for prophets are to offer thanks in such terms as they choose. On the <span class="auto-link">[[Lord's Day|Lord’s Day]]</span> congregational worship and eucharistic bread-breaking, after confession to God and reconciliation with men, are distinctly enjoined.<br /><br />

(3) Ecclesiastical (Chapters xi through xiii, xv).<br /><br />

Of church office-bearers, two classes are mentioned, ordinary and extraordinary. Of the former (essential to congregational organization) only bishops and deacons are mentioned, i.e. those entrusted with rule and oversight, with their assistants. Presbyter and bishop appear to be still identical, as the former is not specified (compare <bibleref ref="Phil.1.1">Php 1:1</bibleref>). Popular election of these functionaries is indicated: "Elect for yourselves"; without denial, however, of those already in office having a share in the settlement. In the second class, apostles, prophets and teachers are included. "Apostle" is used, not in the narrower sense of men called to the office personally by Christ, but in the wider sense which embraces all whose call to be His ambassadors has been signalized by Divine gifts-specially accredited evangelists unconnected with any particular community. (Among Jewish Christians the designation survived to the 4th century, for the Theodosian Code of that period refers to Jewish presbyters and to those "quos ipsi apostolos vocant.") These apostles were to be received as the Lord," and hospitably entertained; but, unlike apostles in the special sense, they were not to remain anywhere longer than "one or two days." Their function was to scatter the seed widely, and any expression of desire to remain longer was to be discouraged, while a demand for salary from a particular community would be evidence of false apostleship. The special function of prophets and teachers, on the other hand, was the instruction and comfort of church members. They accordingly might be encouraged to settle in a community and receive "first-fruits" for their support. These prophets and teachers, however, were not to supersede the "bishops" or presbyters in ruling, but were to undertake only those functions for which they were specially qualified. On the other hand, bishops and deacons were not to be excluded from preaching and teaching by the settlement of prophets and official teachers in particular communities; and in the Didache may be traced the transition, then being gradually accomplished, of the preaching and teaching functions from extraordinary to ordinary office-bearers. "They also (the bishops and deacons) minister to you the ministry of prophets and teachers: therefore despise them not." Even before the close of Paul’s ministry, the episkopos, whose essential function was rule and oversight, was expected, if not required, also to be didatikos, "qualified to teach," i.e. along with teachers specially set apart for the purpose (<bibleref ref="1Tim.3.2">1Ti 3:2</bibleref>; <bibleref ref="1Tim.5.17">5:17</bibleref>). By the middle of the 2nd century, the prophets had disappeared, and their preaching function had been vested in the office of bishop or presbyter, assisted by the diaconate.<br /><br />

(4) Eschatological (Chapter xvi).<br /><br />

This concluding section consists chiefly of exhortations to watchfulness in view of the Second Advent. The premonitory signs of that Coming are given, with reminiscences from Christ’s eschatological discourses, namely, rise of false prophets, decline of love, persecution, lawlessness, and the appearance of Antichrist, who is designated the World-deceiver. Without definitely stating chiliastic doctrine, the writer suggests it; for in referring to the immediate signals of Christ’s advent (opening in heaven, voice of trumpet, resurrection of dead) he is careful to add "Not of all the dead; but the Lord shall come, and all the saints with Him"--implying that the general resurrection would take place at an after-stage, presumably, as Millennialists held, after the 1,000 years had expired. Without dogmatic authority, and with only moderate spiritual value, the Didache is important historically as a witness to the church’s beliefs, usages and condition during the transition between the Apostolic and the Post-apostolic Age. During that transition period, we see much of the freedom of primitive Christianity mingled with rudiments of ecclesiastical regulations and formularies; and while we cannot assume that every belief and usage recorded in the Didache were sanctioned by apostles, we may reasonably ascribe them to apostolic times, and regard them as not opposed by those apostles within whose view they must have come.<br /><br />

III. Epistles of Ignatius.<br /><br />

1. Author and Date:<br /><br />

Ignatius was bishop of Antioch early in the 2nd century Origen (Hom. vi on Luke) refers to him as "second after Peter"; Euodius came between (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 22). As he calls himself ektroma, "untimely born" (compare <bibleref ref="1Cor.15.8">1Co 15:8</bibleref>), he was probably converted in mature life: the legend of his being the "child" of <bibleref ref="Matt.18.3">Mt 18:3</bibleref> rests on misinterpretation of his designation "Theophotos." Traditions current in the 4th century represent him as a disciple of John (Eusebius, Chron.) and ordained by Paul (<span class="auto-link">[[Apostolical Constitutions]]</span>, vii.46).

The Martyrium of Ignatius (6th century) dates his trial at Antioch in the 9th year of Trajan’s reign (107-8 AD) and represents it as conducted before the emperor. Only one visit, however, of Trajan to Antioch is known, in 114-15; neither any Ignatian letter nor Eusebius, nor any other early writer refers to so memorable a circumstance as the presidency of an emperor over a Christian’s trial, and Ignatius speaks of a proposed attempt by Roman friends to secure a reversal of the sentence, which would have been impossible had Trajan personally pronounced it. His alleged presence, therefore, must be rejected as a later embellishment.<br /><br />

The epistles, so far as genuine, were written after Ignatius’ condemnation, on his way to martyrdom at Rome.<br /><br />

2. Genuineness:<br /><br />

The epistles are extant in 3 editions:<br /><br />

(1) the longer Greek, of 15 letters now admitted to be largely spurious;<br /><br />

(2) a Syriac recension of three letters, now generally held to be a mere epitome;<br /><br />

(3) the shorter Greek edition, containing 7 letters of intermediate length, to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Philadelphians, Smyrneans, Romans, and Polycarp. Lightfoot, Zahn, and most recent critics accept the substantial genuineness of these seven.<br /><br />

The chief external evidence is that of Polycarp (Phil., xiii), who, soon after Ignatius’ death, writes of a letter addressed to himself, of another to the Smyrneans, and of "all the rest which we have by us." Now 2 Ignatian epistles are addressed to Polycarp and the Christians of Smyrna, while 4 profess to be written by Ignatius at Smyrna, harmonizing well with copies of these being in Polycarp’s possession.<br /><br />

Further external evidence is supplied by Irenaeus (v.29) who quotes a saying from Ignat., Romans, iv, as that of a martyr, and who uses 8 notable phrases borrowed apparently from Ignatius. This external testimony (only got rid of by an arbitrary assumption of Polycarp’s Epistle being wholly or partly spurious) is supported by strong internal and cumulative evidence:<br /><br />

(1) Frequent Grammatical Dislocation:<br /><br />

Natural in letters written on a journey but unaccountable on the supposition of a later forgery (Rom., i; Mag., ii; Eph., i).<br /><br />

(2) Geographical Particulars:<br /><br />

E.g. Ignatius goes by land from Antioch to Smyrna--an unusual route which a forger would hardly invent.<br /><br />

(3) Historical Illustrations:<br /><br />

E.g. conveyance of prisoners from distant provinces to Rome harmonizes with the account by Dion Cassius (lxviii.15) of the magnitude of amphitheatrical exhibitions under Trajan causing extensive orders for human victims from all parts.<br /><br />

(4) Theological Evidence:<br /><br />

E.g. these epistles refer to Judaistic error combined with a type of doctrine denying any real incarnation--a combination which ceased after Ignatius’ time.<br /><br />

(5) Ecclesiastical Usage:<br /><br />

Thus, the Agape still includes the Eucharist (Smyr., viii), whereas soon after Ignatius’ death these were separated (Pliny, Epistle 96; Just., 1 Ap., 65,67).<br /><br />

(6) Personal References.<br /><br />

The writer shows an excess and affectation of self-depreciation--"last of Antiochene Christians" (Trall., xiii) "not worthy to be counted one of the brotherhood" (Rom., ix)--such as a later forger would hardly have introduced.<br /><br />

3. Leading Ideas:<br /><br />

(1) Joy and Glory of Martyrdom.<br /><br />

Heroic courage and loyalty to Christ are united with fanatical craving after a martyr’s death: "I would rather die for Christ than reign over the whole earth" (Rom., vi); "He who is near the sword is near to God" (Smyr., iv). This is noble; but when he writes, "Entice wild beasts to become my sepulchre" (Rom., iv); "May I have joy of the wild beasts and find them prompt"; "Though they be unwilling I will force them" (Rom., iv.5), we realize how Aurelius (recalling perhaps some such case) was moved to write that "death was to be encountered, not as by the Christians like a military display, but solemnly, and not as if one acted in a tragedy" (Med. xi.3).<br /><br />

(2) Evil and Peril of Heresy and Schism.<br /><br />

"Abstain from heresy"; "These heretics mix up Jesus Christ with their own poison" (Trall., vi); "Flee those evil outshoots, which produce death-bearing fruit" (Trall., xi); "Avoid all divisions as the beginning of evils"; "Nothing is better than unity" (To Polyc., i; Phil., iii).<br /><br />

(3) Submission to Office-Bearers, Especially to the Bishop.<br /><br />

"Do nothing without your bishop, and be subject to the presbyters" (Mag., vii); "Be on your guard against heresy: and this will be, if ye continue in intimate union with Christ and with the bishop"; "He who does anything without the bishop’s knowledge serveth the devil" (Smyr., ix). The bishop here is higher than "primus inter pares"; he is a new and separate office-bearer. Yet, without going beyond these epistles, we discern that such an episcopate was not an express apostolic institution. For had Ignatius been able to magnify the office as apostolically enjoined, so zealous a champion of episcopal authority would have adduced such injunction as the most cogent reason for submission. His zeal for the episcopate apparently sprang only from its high ecclesiastical expediency as the most effective agency for maintaining the church’s unity against heresy and schism.<br /><br />

4. Other Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) References to the <span class="auto-link">[[Gospel of John]]</span>.

The Gospel of John is never quoted, but numerous phrases suggest that it was in the writer’s hands. He speaks of Christ "proceeding from the Father," "doing nothing without the Father," "in all things pleasing Him who sent Him." Christ is the "Door of the Father" and "Living water." Satan is the" Prince of this world." "The Holy Spirit knoweth whence He cometh and whither He goeth."<br /><br />

(2) Doctrine.<br /><br />

Ignatius asserts emphatically Christ’s true Divinity: "Our God" (Eph., xviii; Trall, vii). The Trinity is frequently suggested, although not expressly affirmed. Christians are "established in the Son, the Father, and the Spirit"; "subject to Christ and the Father, and the Spirit." With strong support of episcopal authority no sacerdotalism is united. "Priest" occurs only once, "The priests are good: but Christ, the <span class="auto-link">[[High Priest]]</span>, is better." Here, as the context shows, the imperfect Levitical priesthood is contrasted with perfect high-priesthood of Christ.<br /><br />

(3) Ecclesiastical Usage.<br /><br />

Ignatius contains one of the latest references to the Agape as still conjoined with the Eucharist. The letter to Polycarp (chapter iv) contains the earliest allusion to the practice of redeeming Christian slaves at the cost of the congregation. Slaves are not to "long to be set free," thus implying that such emancipation, while not required as a duty, was often conferred as a privilege.<br /><br />

(4) General Characteristics.<br /><br />

Ignatius presents striking contrast, as a writer, to Clement. Clement is calm, cultured, chaste in diction, but somewhat commonplace and deficient in originality; his best passages are echoes of Scripture. The diction and style of Ignatius are impassioned, rugged, turgid, but pithy, fresh and individualistic.<br /><br />

IV. Epistles of Polycarp.<br /><br />

1. Date and Genuineness:<br /><br />

Polycarp was born not later, perhaps considerably earlier, than 70 AD; for at his martyrdom, of which the now accepted date is 155 or 156 (Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, II, i, 629), he declared, when invited to abjure his faith, that he had "served Christ for 86 years" (Mart. Pol., ix). He was disciple of John, who ordained him as bishop or leading presbyter of Smyrna before 100 AD (Iren., iii.3, 4). Of several letters by Polycarp, only this epistle remains: it professes (chapter xiii) to have been written soon after the martyrdom of Ignatius. The genuineness of the letter is attested by Irenaeus, Polycarp’s own disciple (in the place cited), whose evidence cannot be set aside on the ground of its testimony to the Ignatian letters without an obvious begging of the question. The supposition that the Ignatian letters and Polycarp’s Epistle are parts of one great forgery is otherwise negatived by the very marked difference of style and standpoint between those writings (Lightfoot, l.c., 577).<br /><br />

2. Occasion and Contents:<br /><br />

The epistle replies to a letter from the Philippian church inviting his counsel, and asking for epistles of the recently martyred Ignatius. He acknowledges their kind ministry to that martyr and to others, "entwined with saintly fetters," who had "set a pattern of all patience." He sends what he has of the letters of Ignatius and asks in return for any information which they might possess. He commends to their careful study Paul’s epistle to themselves, acknowledging his inability to attain to the apostle’s wisdom. With much Scripture language, interwoven with his own matter, and giving to his letter the semblance of an apostolic echo, he exhorts his readers to righteousness and godliness, charity and mercy, and warns them against covetousness, evil-speaking and revenge. He dwells on the mutual relations and obligations of presbyters and deacons, on the one hand, and of the congregation on the other. He repeats John’s admonition against teachers who denied the reality of the incarnation: "Every spirit that confesseth not," etc. (1 <bibleref ref="John.4.3">Joh 4:3</bibleref>). He grieves over the lapse of a Philippian presbyter, Valens, who, along with his wife had flagrantly sinned; but he bids his readers not count such as enemies, but seek to recall them from their wanderings.<br /><br />

3. Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) Polycarp mentions only one book of the New Testament, namely, Philippians, but within the brief compass of 200 lines he quotes verses or reproduces phrases from 12 New Testament writings, Matthew, 1 Peter, 1 John, and 9 Pauline Epistles, including three whose early date has been disputed in modern times (1 and 2 Timothy and Ephesians). The absence of any quotation from the Gospel of John is notable, considering his relation to the apostle; but the shortness of the letter prevents any conclusion being drawn against the authenticity of that Gospel; and he quotes (as we have seen) from 1 John, which is a kind of appendix to the Gospel (Lightfoot).<br /><br />

(2) At a time when Ignatius had been emphasizing the paramount duty of submission to the bishop, Polycarp, even when enjoining subjection to presbyters, does not mention a bishop. These two inferences are irresistible:<br /><br />

(a) there was then no episkopos, in the post-New Testament, sense, at Philippi;<br /><br />

(b) Polycarp did not consider the defect (?) sufficiently important to ask the Philippians to supply it.<br /><br />

Had John instituted the mono-episcopate as the one proper form of church government, surely his disciple Polycarp would have embraced the opportunity, when the Philippians invited his counsel, to inform them of the apostolic ordinance, and to enjoin its adoption.<br /><br />

V. Papias Fragments.<br /><br />

1. Author and Date:<br /><br />

Papias is called by his younger contemporary Irenaeus (v.33) a "disciple of John and friend of Polycarp." Eusebius writes (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 36) that he was episkopos of Hierapolis in Phrygia. The <span class="auto-link">[[Chronicon Paschale]]</span> (7th century, but embodying materials from older documents) states that he was martyred about the same time as Polycarp (155-56). His work, Exposition of our Lord’s Sayings, was extant in the 13th century, but only fragments quoted by Irenaeus, Eusebius, etc., remain. These bear out the twofold description of Papias by Eusebius, as a "man of little judgment" yet "most learned and well acquainted with the Scriptures" (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 39, 36). (But the words of praise in verse 36 may be a gloss.) Papias states that he subjoins to his expositions "whatsoever I learned carefully from the elders and treasured up in my memory .... I was wont to put questions regarding the words of the elders (i.e. presumably men of an earlier generation), what Andrew or Peter said, or what Philip or Thomas, or James, or what John or Matthew, or any other of the Lord’s disciples said, as well as regarding what Aristion, and the presbyter John, the disciple of the Lord, have to say."<br /><br />

It is disputed whether Papias here refers to two Johns, the apostle and another disciple of the same name; or to John the apostle in two different relations, i.e. first as one about whose testimony Papias heard from others, and second, as one with whom, also, he held personal communication. In favor of the first view is,<br /><br />

(1) Eusebius’ own opinion (in the place cited);<br /><br />

(2) the alleged unlikelihood of the same John being twice mentioned in one sentence;<br /><br />

(3) a statement by Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 39) that in his day two monuments (mnemata) of "John" existed at Ephesus.<br /><br />

For the latter view is,<br /><br />

(1) no other writer until Eusebius hints the existence of a presbyter John distinct from the apostle;<br /><br />

(2) the change in the quotation from "said" to "say" seems to give a reason for John being twice mentioned; some things stated by John having been heard by Papias through "elders," others having been told him by the apostle himself.<br /><br />

The fact that John is called presbyter, instead of apostle, is no insuperable objection, since John so designates himself in 2 John and 3 John; and Jerome denies that the two mnemata were both tombs. See Lightfoot, Essay on Papias, and Nicol, Four Gospels, 187 if, who come to divergent conclusions.<br /><br />

2. Testimony to Matthew and Mark:<br /><br />

On the testimony to Matthew and Mark see <em>MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL OF</em>; <em>MARK, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO</em>.<br /><br />

3. Other Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) According to Eusebius, Papias relates the story of "a woman accused before our Lord"--the story, presumably, which eventually crept into <bibleref ref="John.8.1-John.8.59">Joh 8</bibleref>; so that to him, in part, is due the preservation of a narrative, which, whether historical or not, finely illustrates the union in our Lord of holy purity and merciful charity.

(2) Papias is quoted by the Chronicler Georgius Hamartolos (in a manuscript of the 9th century) as declaring in his Expositon that John "was put to death by the Jews," and a similar quotation is made by Philip of Side (Epitome manuscript of the 7th-8th centuries). On the bearing of this upon the question of the apostle’s residence at Ephesus see [[John, the Apostle]].<br /><br />

(3) Irenaeus (v.32) quotes Papias as writing about a Post-resurrection millennium, and as reporting, on John’s authority, how the Lord said, "The days will come when vines shall grow having each 10,000 branches, and on each branch 10,000 twigs, and on each twig 10,000 shoots," etc. This may be an exaggerated record (misunderstood by Papias) of some parabolic utterance of Christ, indicating prophetically the wonderful extension of the church.<br /><br />

VI. Epistle of Barnabas.<br /><br />

1. Authorship:<br /><br />

This book is first expressly quoted by Clement of Alexandria (circa 190 AD) as the composition of Barnabas, companion of Paul (Strom., ii.6). Origen concurs, and calls it a "Catholic ep." (Con. Celsum, i.63), thus suggesting canonical position; Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 25) testifies to the widespread ascription of it to this Barnabas, although he himself regards it as "spurious." Codex Sinaiticus places it immediately after the New Testament, as being read in churches, and thus suggests its composition by a companion at least of apostles. Against this external testimony, however, to authorship by the Barnabas of Acts, is strong internal evidence:<br /><br />

(1) apostolic sinfulness prior to discipleship is spoken of in exaggerated terms hardly credible in a writer who knew the Twelve--"exceedingly lawless beyond all (ordinary) sin" (chapter v)--an echo apparently of Paul’s "sinners of whom I am chief";<br /><br />

(2) ignorance of Jewish rites incomprehensible in a Levite who had lived in Jerusalem, e.g. the priests are said to eat goat’s flesh on the great <span class="auto-link">[[Day of Atonement]]</span>;<br /><br />

(3) extreme anti-Judaism (see below), inconsistent with the representation of Barnabas in Ac and Galatians.<br /><br />

The writer may have been some other Barnabas, a converted Alexandrian Jew, or, more probably, a converted Gentileproselyte, trained in Philo’s school, but ignorant of Jewish rites as practiced at Jerusalem, and possessing little real sympathy with Judaism.<br /><br />

2. Date:<br /><br />

The epistle must be dated after 70 AD, as the destruction of Jerusalem is referred to (chapter xvi); also after the publication of the Gospel of Jn, of which there are several reminiscences. But the absence of any reference to the rebuilding of Jerusalem under Hadrian, in 120 AD, in a passage (chapter xvi) where such allusion might have been expected, suggests a date prior to that year. We may place the writing between 90 and 120 AD.<br /><br />

3. Object and Contents:<br /><br />

The object is to deter both Jewish and Gentile Christians from Judaistic lapse by a bold application of the allegorizing method to the Old Testament, far beyond what Philo would have sanctioned. Jewish sacrifices, festivals, Sabbath enactments, temple-worship, distinction of clean and unclean food, are not only not of perpetual obligation, but never were binding at all, even on Jews. Belief in their obligatoriness rests on a slavishly liberal exegesis of the Old Testament, which, properly interpreted, is not a preparation for Christ but Christianity itself in allegorical disguise.<br /><br />

Ceremonies are simply allegorical enforcements of spiritual worship; distinctions of clean and unclean are merely pictorial representations of the necessity of separation from vice and vicious men; interdict of swine’s flesh means no more than "associate not with swinish men." The only circumcision really commanded by God is circumcision of the heart. Barnabas ignores what Paul realized, that Jewish laws and rites, even literally interpreted, are a Divine discipline of wholesome self-restraint, neighborly consideration and obedience to God. Barnabas not only explains away Old Testament enactments, but finds in trivial Old Testament statements Christian fact and truth. Thus, in Abraham’s circumcision of the 318 men of his house, the 10 and 8 are significantly denoted by the Greek letters "I" and "H", the initial letters of Iesous (Jesus); while the 300 represented by the Greek "T", points to the cross. The writer self-complacently intimates that "no one has been admitted by me to a more genuine piece of knowledge than this!" (chapter ix).<br /><br />

When Barnabas, however, leaves obscure allegory for plain exhortation, he writes effectively of the "two ways" of light and darkness. Among edifying admonitions the following are outstanding: "Thou shalt not go to prayer with an evil conscience"; "Thou shalt not let the word of God issue from lips stained with impurity"; "Be not ready to stretch forth thine hands to take, while thou contractest them to give"; "Thou shalt not issue orders with bitterness to thy servant, lest thou fail in reverence to God who is above you both"; "Thou shalt not make a schism, but shalt bring together them who contend"; "The way of darkness is crooked"; "In this way are (among others mentioned) those who labor not to aid him who is overdone with toil" (chapters xix, xx).<br /><br />

4. Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) The <span class="auto-link">[[Divinity of Christ]]</span> is emphasized: "Lord of all the world"; "Joint Creator, with the Father, of mankind" (chapter v). (2) The writer, while following the Alexandrian method of allegorical interpretation, is free from the Alexandrian doctrine of the essential evil of matter; the necessity of a real incarnation is affirmed (chapter v). (3) In chapter xi, he writes, "We go down into the water full of sins and filth, and come up bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear of God and trust in Jesus in our spirit." This has been interpreted as involving the doctrine of baptismal regeneration; but the reference may be rather to the regeneration which baptism symbolizes. (4) In chapter xv, the words, "We keep the 8th day with joy, the day on which Jesus rose again," are the earliest express testimony that the observance of the Lord’s Day was a memorial of our Lord’s resurrection. This observance is distinguished from Jewish Sabbath-keeping which is called an error; the Sabbath really intended to be kept being a period of 1,000 years after the 6,000 years in which all things will be finished (chapter xv). (5) Testimony to New Testament Books,<br /><br />

(a) the existence and canonical authority of the Gospel of Mt are attested (chapter iv) by the quotation of <bibleref ref="Matt.22.14">Mt 22:14</bibleref>, "Many are called, but few chosen," introduced by the formula, "It is written";

(b) various passages taken together testify to the writer having the Gospel of John in his hands: "Whoso eateth of these shall live for ever" (chapter xi and <bibleref ref="John.6.58">Joh 6:58</bibleref>); "Abraham looking before in Spirit to Jesus" (chapter ix and <bibleref ref="John.8.58">Joh 8:58</bibleref>); "the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ" (chapter ii and <bibleref ref="John.13.34">Joh 13:34</bibleref>); a reference to the brazen serpent as a type of Christ’s suffering, glory and healing power (chapter xii and <bibleref ref="John.3.14">Joh 3:14</bibleref>);

(c) "Thou shalt not say that anything is thine own" (chapter xix) appears to be a reminiscence of <bibleref ref="Acts.4.32">Ac 4:32</bibleref>; (d) the passage in xv, "The day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years," seems to be an echo of <bibleref ref="2Pet.3.8">2Pe 3:8</bibleref>, and, if so, is the earliest testimony to the existence of that writing, and thus proves its great antiquity, although not its canonicity.<br /><br />

VII. Pastor (Shepherd) of Hermas.<br /><br />

1. Authorship and Date:<br /><br />

This work is the earliest example, on a large scale, of Christian allegory, and was hardly less popular in the early church than the Pilgrim’s Progress in later times. It was reckoned by many almost, by some altogether, as "Scripture." Irenaeus quotes it as "Scripture" (iv.20); Clement of Alexandria refers to it as "containing revelations Divinely imparted" (Strom., i.29); Origen regards it as "Divinely inspired" (Commentary on Romans 16:14). It is placed with the Epistle of Barnabas in the Codex Sinaiticus at the close of the New Testament, and was read in many churches down to Jerome’s time (Works, II, 846). The writer represents himself as a slave sold to a Roman Christian lady. He afterward obtained freedom, lived with his family in Rome, became earnestly religious, and saw visions which he imparted the community in this book with a view to repentance and spiritual well-being.<br /><br />

Origen (followed by Eusebius, Jerome, etc.) ascribes the work to the Hermes of <bibleref ref="Rom.16.14">Ro 16:14</bibleref>; but his opinion is pure conjecture (puto). The Canon Muratori (170 AD) of Italian authorship describes the work as "recently composed at Rome by the brother of Plus during the latter’s episcopate" (137-54). This distinct local testimony has been widely accepted (Hefele, Lightfoot, Charteris, Cruttwell, etc.). Yet the writer represents himself (Vision, ii.4) as enjoined to send his book to Clement as man in authority in the church, whom it is natural to identify with the chief presbyter of Rome between 92 and 101. This reference, along with the absence of any allusion to Gnosticism or to the mono-episcopate, has led Schaff, Zahn, and others to fix the date of the work at about 100 AD. The external and internal evidence, thus apparently divergent, may be reconciled by supposing (with Kruger and Harnack) that the book was not "written in a single draft"; that portions were issued successively during Clement’s episcopate; and that under Plus (circa 140) the separate issues were gathered into a volume under the title of The Pastor. In Rome, where the author was known, the Canon Muratori attested at once its religious usefulness as a "book to be read" and the absence of any claim to canonical authority.<br /><br />

2. Object and Contents:<br /><br />

The purpose of the book is not doctrinal but ethical; it is an allegorical manual of Christian duty with earnest calls to individual repentance and church revival in view of the near Advent.<br /><br />

The book consists of<br /><br />

(1) Five Visions,<br /><br />

(2) Twelve Mandates,<br /><br />

(3) Ten Similitudes or Parables.<br /><br />

In (1) the church appears’ to the writer as a venerable matron, then as a tower near completion, thereafter as a Holy Virgin. In the last vision, the Angel of Repentance, in pastoral garb, delivers to him the Mandates and Similitudes. The Mandates deal with chastity, truth, patience, meekness, reverence, prayer, penitence, and warn against grieving the Spirit. In the similitudes the church is again a tower whose stones are examined for approbation or reprobation. Similitudes are also drawn from trees. The vine clinging to the elm signifies union of rich and poor in the church; a large willow from which a multitude receive branches or twigs, some of these blossoming or fruit-bearing, others dry or rotten, symbolizes the diverse effect of law and gospel on different souls. The author, although a Gentile, writes from the standpoint of James rather than of Paul. The closing words summarize his combined ethical and eschatological purpose: "Ye who have received good from the Lord, do good works, lest while ye delay, the tower be completed, and you be rejected."<br /><br />

3. Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) Montanistic Affinity.<br /><br />

Hermas, indeed, differs from Montanists in permitting, though not encouraging, second marriage, and recognizing one possible repentance after post-baptismal flagrant sin; but he is also their fore-runner, through his disallowance of readmission after second lapse, through emphatic expectation of an impending Advent, and through his rigorous view of fasting: "On the fast day taste nothing but bread and water."<br /><br />

(2) Fasting, However, Is Regarded Not as an End but as a Means<br /><br />

A discipline toward humility, purity, charity. Fasting for charity is illustrated by the injunction (Sim., v.3) to "reckon up the price of what you meant to eat, and give that to one in want."<br /><br />

(3) Absence of Names "Jesus" and "Christ."<br /><br />

The names" Jesus and "Christ" never occur. He is "<span class="auto-link">[[Son of God]]</span>" and "Lord of His people," whom "God made to dwell in flesh," by whom "the whole world is sustained," who "endured great sufferings that He might do away with the sins of His people" (Sim., .v.6; ix. 14).

(4) Church Organization.<br /><br />

Hermas is charged (Via., ii.4) to "read his writings to (or along with) the presbyters who preside over the church" in Rome. It is reasonable to conclude that no one in that community could then be called "bishop" in the later sense of the holder of an office distinct from and superior to the presbyterate. Episkopoi ("bishops") are mentioned (Sim., ix.27) as "given to hospitality," the description of the episkopos in <bibleref ref="1Tim.3.2">1Ti 3:2</bibleref>, where admittedly bishop = presbyter.

VIII. Second Epistle of Clement.<br /><br />

1. Nature of Document:<br /><br />

This writing is doubly miscalled: it is neither an epistle nor a composition of Clement. Style, thought, and standpoint differ from those of the accepted Ep., and HE, III, 38, suggests that the Clementine authorship was not generally recognized. The recent recovery by Bryennios of the previously lost conclusion proves that the writing is a sermon (chapter xix).<br /><br />

Antiquity is indicated by (1) the use, as an authority, of the lost heretical <span class="auto-link">[[Gospel of the Egyptians]]</span>, which by the time of the Canon Muratori (175 AD) had ceased to be regarded as Scripture by Catholics; (2) the adoption, without Gnostic intention, of phrases which became notably associated, after 150 AD with Gnosticism: "God made male and female: the male is Christ, the female, the church" (chapter xiv).<br /><br />

2. Date and Authorship:<br /><br />

The date usually assigned is 120-150 AD (Lightfoot, Part I, volume II, 201). The author is a Gentilepresbyter; he had "worshipped stocks and stones." The sermon was probably preached at Corinth, for the preacher describes many arriving by sea for the race-course, without mentioning a port, which would be appropriate in a sermon preached to Corinthians.<br /><br />

3. Contents:<br /><br />

No text is given, but the sermon starts from <bibleref ref="Isa.54.1">Isa 54:1</bibleref>, without express quotation; this chapter had probably been read at the service. The discourse, without great literary merit, is earnest and practical. There are exhortations to repentance and good works, to purity, charity, prayer and fasting, with special reference to coming judgment. The standpoint is that of James. "Be not troubled (so the sermon concludes) because we see the unrighteous with abundance, and God’s servants in straits. Let us have faith, brethren and sisters. Had God recompensed the righteous speedily, we should have had training not in piety but in bargaining; and our uprightness would be a mere semblance, since our pursuit would be not of godliness but of gain."<br /><br />

4. Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) The sermon is the oldest extant in post-New Testament times, and appears to have been read (chapter xix) to a congregation.<br /><br />

(2) Sayings of Christ not in our Gospels are quoted:<br /><br />

(a) "The Lord, being asked when His kingdom would come, answered: When the two shall be one (i.e. when harmony shall prevail?), and when the outside shall be as the inside (i.e. when men shall be as they seem?); and the male with the female, neither male nor female" (interpreted by this preacher ascetically as discountenancing marriage, presumably because "the time is short," but explained mystically by Clement of Alexandria in Strom., iii.13, as indicating the abolition of all distinctions in God’s kingdom). Clement assigns the passage to the lost Gospel of the Egyptians.<br /><br />

(b) "The Lord saith, ye shall be as lambs among wolves. Peter answered: What if the wolves tear the lambs? Jesus said: Let not the lambs fear the wolves: and ye, also, fear not them which kill you, and can do nothing more to you."<br /><br />

(3) No episcopate, apparently, in the post-New Testament sense, existed in the church where this sermon was delivered. Unfaithful men are represented as confessing, "We obeyed not the presbyters when they told us of salvation." Had a bishop in the later sense been head of the community, obedience to his admonitions would surely have been inculcated.<br /><br />

(4) The Christology is high; "We ought to think of Christ as of God"; "When we think mean things of Christ, we expect to receive mean things" (chapter i).<br /><br />

IX. <span class="auto-link">[[Apology of Aristides]]</span>.

1. Recovery and Date:<br /><br />

Aristides was an Athenian philosopher, who (according to HE, IV, 3) presented an Apology to Hadrian, presumably when the emperor was at Athens (125 AD). After disappearance in the 17th century, a fragment in an Armenian version was discovered in 1878, and the entire Apology in Syriac was found in 1889. It was then found that almost the whole treatise was imbedded anonymously in a Greek medieval romance, Barlaam and Josaphat. The Apology in the Syriac is inscribed to Antoninus; it may have been addressed to both emperors successively, or the real date may be 137, when they were colleagues in the empire.<br /><br />

2. Contents:<br /><br />

The treatise refers to oppression, imprisonment, and other maltreatment endured by Christians, and pleads for their protection against persecution, because of their true and noble creed, and their pure and benevolent lives. The writer compares the Christian doctrine of Godhead with that of barbarians, Greeks, Egyptians, Jews, and dwells on the elevating influence of Christian belief in Jesus Christ and in a future life. He refers to the abstention of Christians from unchastity, dishonesty and other vices; to their abounding charity and brotherliness which are shown particularly to the widow, the orphan, the poor, the stranger, the oppressed, and even their oppressors. All who become Christians, of however low a station, are brethren. This bright picture has, however, its shadows: "If Christians see that one of their number has died in his sins, over him they weep bitterly as over one about to go into punishment." This frank acknowledgment of some black sheep gives point to his general testimony, "Blessed is the race of Christians above all men."<br /><br />

3 Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) A distinct reference to a collection of Christian writings, and especially of Gospels, designated the Gospel, and indicating the existence of a kind of rudimentary <span class="auto-link">[[New Testament Canon]]</span>.

(2) Similar indication of a rudimentary <span class="auto-link">[[Apostles' Creed|Apostles’ Creed]]</span>. Christians are said to believe in God, "the Maker of Heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ who was born of a Hebrew virgin, who was transfixed by the Jews; he died and was buried; and Christians state that after three days he rose again and ascended into heaven." In this early time the virgin birth was apparently a settled matter--part of the Creed.

(3) Aristides describes a familiar custom among poor Christians of fasting two or three days, so as to supply with needful food Christians poorer still (Compare Hermas).<br /><br />

(4) The Apology is interesting as the earliest known literary tribute of a philosopher to Christianity, and probably the earliest extant defense of the faith, if the Epistle to Diognetus be not ancient. It is notable also as a treatise on Christian evidence drawn not from miraculous credentials, but from the self-evidencing excellence and effect of Christianity.<br /><br />

Finally, it is interesting as the earliest detailed record of harvest reaped at Athens from seed sown by Paul 80 or 90 years before. Athens appeared at first a barren soil; but by and by this church in a university city took the lead, as this treatise and another lost apology by Quadratus show, in the literary defense of the Christian faith. Quadratus is stated in HE IV, 3, to have presented his Apology to Hadrian, and is described by Jerome as "a disciple of the apostles." In a fragment preserved in HE, he attests the survival ("to our own day") of some whom Christ had healed.<br /><br />

X. <span class="auto-link">[[Justin Martyr]]</span>.

1. Incidents of Life:<br /><br />

Born of pagan parents at Flavia Neapolis (Nablous), in Samaria about 100 AD--a seeker for truth, who, after trying Stoic, Peripatetic, Pythagorean and Platonic philosophies, found in Christ and Christianity the satisfaction of philosophic cravings and spiritual needs. He became a Christian apostle and apologist, wearing still the philosopher’s mantle in token of continued quest after wisdom, but making it now his life-work, not as presbyter, but as itinerating Christian teacher, to impart to pagan, to Jew and also to heretic the truth which he himself had found and prized. After long Christian service, he suffered martyrdom under Aurelius in 166 AD.<br /><br />

2. First Apology:<br /><br />

It is addressed to Antoninus and dated 138-48. He approaches the emperor without flattery, and asks judgment after searching inquiry. He answers three charges against Christians:<br /><br />

(1) atheism: Justin replies that Christians were atheists only as Socrates was; they disbelieved in so-called gods who were wicked demons or humanly fashioned images; but they worshipped the Father of Righteousness;<br /><br />

(2) immorality: Justin admits the existence of pretended Christians who are evil-doers; but Christianity makes the evil good, the licentious chaste, the covetous generous, the revengeful forgiving;<br /><br />

(3) disloyalty: this is calumny based on the preaching of Christ’s kingdom which is spiritual, not temporal.<br /><br />

Christians are taught and are wont to pay tribute promptly and to pray for rulers regularly. Justin then sets forth the credibility and excellence of Christianity, adducing,<br /><br />

(1) its pure morality as contrasted with vices condoned by heathens,<br /><br />

(2) its noble doctrines--immortality, resurrection, future judgment, incarnation,<br /><br />

(3) Old Testament prophecy regarding the Divinity and sufferings of the Christ. His reference to the prediction of a virgin bringing forth Emmanuel (chapter xxxiii) shows that in his day the virgin birth was accepted, although Jews understood by virgin (in Isaiah) merely a young woman,<br /><br />

(4) foreshadowings of Christian truth by philosophy, referring especially to Plato’s teaching about the Divine Logos and judgment to come.<br /><br />

To refute prevalent calumny Justin describes Sunday service and administration of sacraments in his time. On the Lord’s Day Christians assembled for worship; prophetic Scriptures and "memoirs" by apostles and their followers were read; prayers and thanksgivings were offered and an address delivered by the "president"; bread and wine were distributed and sent by deacons to those absent; and an offering for charitable purposes was made. "As many as believe what is taught, and undertake to live accordingly, are, after prayer and fast, baptized" (chapters lxv, lxvii).<br /><br />

3. Second Apology:<br /><br />

This is probably a postscript to the first; Eusebius quotes from both as from one work. After a protest against a recent summary execution of three Christians without proper trial, Justin deals with two popular taunts:<br /><br />

(1) "If at death they went to heaven, why did they not commit suicide?": "We do not shrink from death but from opposing God’s will."<br /><br />

(2) "If God is really on the Christians’ side, why does He allow them to be persecuted?": "The world by Divine decree is meanwhile under the dominion of angels who have become demons." Justin here contrasts Christ with Socrates, whom yet he describes as a preacher of the "true but then unknown God" (chapter x): "No one put such faith in Socrates as to die for his convictions." Christ hath won the faith, "not only of philosophers, but of simple folk who through faith can despise death." Justin, however, testifies clearly and warmly to the Christian element by anticipation, in the higher teachings and aspirations of heathen philosophy through an implanted seed of the Divine Logos; and he recognizes thus a pre-advent ministry of the Son of God, not only in the sheltered fold of Judaism, but in the broad open of heathendom.<br /><br />

4. Dialogue with Trypho the Jew:<br /><br />

This Dialogue indicates the attitude of some cultured Jews of that day to Christianity, and the mode in which their objections to it were met. Trypho argued that Jesus did not fulfill Old Testament prophecy which represented the Messiah as establishing a glorious and everlasting kingdom; whereas Jesus was a humble peasant who died an ignominious death; Justin pleads <bibleref ref="Isa.53.1-Isa.53.12">Isa 53</bibleref>. Trypho charges Christianity with treason to theocracy through exalting Jesus to Godhead, thus trenching on the Divine unity, and also through repudiating the perpetual obligation of the Law. Justin, in reply, quotes Genesis, "Let us make man," and also Psalms 45, 72, 110, with <bibleref ref="Isa.7.1-Isa.7.25">Isa 7</bibleref> about Emmanuel. The Mosaic Law was intended to be temporary, and was now superseded by the Law of Christ; moreover, the destruction of Jerusalem rendered complete fulfillment of the Jewish Law impracticable. The disputants part on friendly terms, "I have been particularly pleased with this conference," says Trypho. "If we could confer oftener we should be much helped in reading the Scriptures." "For my part," replies Justin, "I would have wished to repeat our conference daily; but since I am about to set sail, I bid you give all diligence in this struggle after salvation." Of other works ascribed to Justin, two (On the Resurrection and Appeal to the Greeks) may or may not be genuine; the others are spurious.<br /><br />

5. Notabilia:<br /><br />

(1) Justin’s Quotations:<br /><br />

Bearing of Justin’s quotations from "memoirs" on the Age of Our Gospels (see [[Gospels]]).<br /><br />

(2) Testimony to Harmony of Apostolic Doctrine.<br /><br />

Justin is a disciple of Paul, and a strong anti-Judaist; yet he recognizes thoroughly the Twelve as the true source of Christian teaching, "sent by Christ to teach to all the Word of God" (1 Ap., 39,49; Dial., 42, 109).<br /><br />

(3) Diffusion of Christianity:<br /><br />

From personal knowledge as a traveler, Justin testifies to the wide diffusion of Christianity: "No race of men exists among whom prayers are not offered up to the Father through the name of the crucified Jesus (Dial., 117).<br /><br />

(4) Authorship of Revelation:<br /><br />

"John, one of the apostles, prophesied, by a revelation made to him, that believers would dwell 1,000 years in Jerus" (Dial., 81)--the earliest direct witness to Johannine authorship, by one who had resided at Ephesus.<br /><br />

(5) Belief of the Primitive Church in Our Lord’s True Divinity:<br /><br />

Writing in the name of Christians as a body, he declares, "Both Him (the Father) and the Son who came forth from Him we adore" (1 Ap., 5). He speaks also of some "who held that Jesus was a mere man" as a small and heretical minority (Dial., 48). He writes elsewhere (1 Ap., 13) of the Son as the object of worship "in the second place"; but this statement, made long before the Arian Controversy necessitated precision of language, does not invalidate his other testimonies.<br /><br />

(6) The Holy Spirit:<br /><br />

As to the Holy Spirit, Justin refers to baptism as administered in "the name of Father, Son, and Spirit" (1 Ap., 61), implying the Divinity of the Third Person; although elsewhere he appears to subordinate Him to the Son, as the Son to the Father. He is to be "worshipped in the third order" (1 Ap., 13).<br /><br />

(7) Millenarianism:<br /><br />

"I and others are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead and 1,000 years in Jerusalem which will be built, adorned and enlarged" (Dial., 80). He admits, however, that many pure and pious Christians think otherwise.<br /><br />

(8) Future punishment: On this subject Justin speaks with two voices. In 1 Ap., 8, he writes of "condemned souls suffering eternal punishment, not for a millennial period only." But in Dial., 5, he introduces an old man who was the immediate means of his conversion as saying that "the wicked shall be punished as long as God shall will them to exist."<br /><br />

(9) Angel-worship:<br /><br />

In 1 Ap., 6, Justin, when refuting the charge of atheism, writes: "We reverence and worship the Father, and the Son, and the host of other good messengers (or angels), and the Prophetic Spirit." The context, however, shows that this cult does not necessarily amount to what is usually meant by worship, but simply to veneration and homage. The Greek words here, sebomai and proskuneo, are often used in this lower sense; and the train of thought seems to be this: "You call us atheists; the charge is not true, for we not only believe in one God and Father of all, but in one who is preeminently the Son of God, who was sent by God. We believe further in other heavenly messengers from God, a host of angelic spirits; yea we believe in one who is preeminently God’s Spirit, by whom prophets were inspired. All these are the object in different degrees of our veneration and homage." Undoubtedly, however, the statement is at best unguarded and misleading.<br /><br />

(10) Doctrine of the Sacraments:<br /><br />

Justin uses "regenerate" as the synonym of "baptized" (1 Ap., 61), but he identifies the two, not as essentially inseparable, but as uniformly associated. As regards the Lord’s Supper, while emphasizing the ideas of commemoration, communion, and thanksgiving, he in one place speaks of the bread and wine being the flesh and blood of the Incarnate Jesus, "from which, by a transmutation, our flesh and blood are nourished" (1 Ap., 66). These words tend to transubstantiation; but, in the absence of any controversy at the time, may be no more than a strongly figurative representation of a spiritual participation.<br /><br />

XI. Epistle to Diognetus.<br /><br />

1. Date and Authorship:<br /><br />

This short apologetic work is mentioned by no ancient writer, and was unknown until its discovery in 1592 by Henry Stephens in a manuscript which perished in the Strassburg fire of 1870. The manuscript appears to ascribe it to the author of another work (To the Greeks); and this, again, is attributed with some probability on the authority of a Syriac document (600-700 AD) to one Ambrosius, "chief among the Greeks" otherwise unknown (see Birks in DCB, "Ep. to D."). If genuinely ancient, the epistle probably belongs to the Sub-apostolic Age, for it refers to Christianity as "having only now entered the world, not long ago"; and in chapter xi (written, however, by a different hand or at a different time) the author calls himself a "disciple of the apostles." Diognetus was a very common Greek name, so that his identification with the tutor of <span class="auto-link">[[Marcus Aurelius]]</span> (130-40 AD) is a mere conjecture. Donaldson (Chr. Lit., II, 142) inclines to the belief that the work was composed by one of the many Greeks who came westward in the 14th century and that the author intended merely to write a "good declamation in the old style." The smart but superficial way in which heathenism and Judaism are dealt with is more befitting a medieval rhetorical exercise than the serious treatment, by a cultured writer, of prevalent religions.

2. Contents:<br /><br />

The author, after welcoming the inquiry of Diognetus about Christianity, pours contempt on the pagan worship of gods of wood, stone and metal, without any apparent realization that for cultured heathens of that time such images were not objects, but only symbolic media of worship; and he ridicules Mosaic observances without any recognition of their significance as a Divine educative discipline. But when he proceeds (chapters vii through xii) to describe Christianity, the work merits Hefele’s designation, praestantissima Epistola. Into a world, yea, into human hearts, which had become degenerate and wicked, "God sent no mere servant or angel, but His own Son," and Him, not as a condemning Judge, or fear-inspiring Tyrant, but as a gracious Saviour. To the inquiry, "If Christianity is so precious, why was Christ sent so late?" the author replies: "In order first to bring home to mankind their unworthiness to attain eternal life through their own works" and their incapacity for salvation apart from Him "who is able to save even what it was impossible (formerly) to save." But faith in the Son of God now revealed, would lead to "knowledge of the Father"; knowledge of God to "love of Him who hath first so loved us"; and love of God to "imitation of Him and of His lovingkindness." And wherein consists such imitation? Not in "seeking lordship over those weaker," or in "showing violence toward those below us"; but in "taking on oneself the burden of one’s neighbor," even as "God took on Himself the burden of our iniquities, and gave His own Son as a ransom for us." "He who in whatsoever he may be superior is ready to benefit another who is deficient; he who, by distributing to the needy what he has received from God, becomes a god to those who receive his benefits: he is an imitator of God."<br /><br />

LITERATURE.<br /><br />

Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, larger and smaller editions; in Clark’s "Ante-Nicene Libary," Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, and Recently Discovered Additions to Early Christian Literature (American edition, The Ants-Nicene Fathers); Eusebius, HE, particularly McGiffert’s translation with excellent notes; James Donaldson, Critical History of Christian Literature; Cruttwell, Literary History of Early Christianity; Kruger, History of Early Christian Literature, translation by Gillett; Harnack, Geschichte der altchr. Litt.; Zahn, Geschichte des New Testament Kanons; Forschungen zur Gesch. des New Testament Kanons und der altchr. Lift.; Robinson, Texts and Studies, Aristides; Schaff, Oldest Christian Manual: H.D.M. Spence, Teaching of the Twelve Apostles; Bartlet, article on "Didache" in HDB; Cunningham, Epistle of Barnabas; articles in DCB (Smith and Wace).<br /><br />

Henry Cowan<br /><br />

Sub-apostolic Literature