shall probably be enabled to conclude with some degree of certainty in what these celebrated secrets consisted. The above named school is known to have been distinguished for philosophizing upon the doctrines of Christianity, and searching the Scriptures, even in historical parts, after traces of a hidden and higher sense, an acquaintance with which they declared to be a secret knowledge, (Gnosis,) to which every one could not attain.* Hence, the writings of Clemens and Origen are full of allegorical interpretations, and far-fetched philosophemes, and in these respects they had learned predecessors at Alexandria, particularly Philo the Jew, who makes this allegorical and philosophizing mode of explaining the Scriptures the main source of the secrets of which he so often speaks. If now we compare the passages in which Clemens and Origen

make mention of the secrets said to have been received from Jesus and preserved by oral tradition, it will appear to the highest degree probable, that they understood nothing more by them than that spiritual meaning of the Scriptures, which can be apprehended by those only who are capable of penetrating beyond the letter.† Hence, it is so natural for these men to refer to this higher sense, and that too with a mysterious air, and a kind of reserve which seems unwilling to reveal too much, that they do so throughout their writings. On the other hand, we do not find in them the least indication of a secret society which governed in silence, exerted an especial influence upon the church, and took the lead in its affairs.

*Grabe, Spicilegium S. S. Patrum, Tom. I. p. 328, and Mosheim, De rebus Christianorum ante Constant. M., p. 629 seqq. [Neander's K. G., I. 3. 942, 947 ff.]

t Vid. Mosheim's note to his translation of Origen against Celsus, B. VI. S. 599 ff., to which add Semler's suspicion founded in truth, that Clemens had some predilection for the philosophemes of the Gnostics, Histor. Einleitung zu Baumgartens Untersuchung theologischer Streitigkeiten, Th. I. S. 181, and every thing will be rendered still more intelligible. The Gnostics, as will be remarked farther on, were in the habit of announcing their fanciful conceits to be secret doctrines which they had received by means of oral tradition. Comp. Irenaeus, Advers. Haeres., 1. III. c. 2. p. 174, 175, Massuel. ed.

51. Admitting the above view to be correct, nothing farther remains in ancient history which can be looked upon as such an indication, except what is said of the Gnostic parties. Here and there we actually discover allusions to them, giving us to understand that the very secrets which Jesus deposited in the bosom of a secret order, had for a long time been preserved by these sects. It cannot be denied indeed that most of the Gnostic parties had something mysterious in them.* Hence the reason why many of them, particularly the Valentinians, exercised such caution in the choice of persons to be admitted into their fraternities, and maintained a greater reserve in gradually imparting their secrets to new members, than any other secret societies that have ever existed. Moreover they had much to do with symbols, as is evident from what has come down to us respecting the Ophitest and Basilidians. Indeed, the principal cause of the impenetrable obscurity in which the doctrines of all the Gnostic sects are veiled, and in which their opinions appear to us to be a most intricate tissue of senseless dreams, is unquestionably to be sought for in the mystical language which they employed. It was not understood even by those ancient writers, whose accounts we are obliged to follow in tracing the history of the Gnostics, and of course we shall be far less able fully to decipher it. Some however are

* Some of them went so far as to appeal to the fact that their system of truth was a secret which Jesus had intrusted to but a few. Comp. Mosheim, Ueber die Ophiten, § LIV. S. 106, and De Rebus Christ. ante Constant., Sec. 1. § LXIII. p. 185.

+ Vid. Walch, Entwurf einer vollständigen Historie der Kätzereyen, Th. I. S. 380-382,

Compare Walch's work just quoted, Th. I. S. 290 ff.

§ Mosheim, Versuch einer unpartheyischen und gründlichen Kätzergeschichte, und Schumacher, Erläuterung der dunkeln und schweren Lehrtafel der alten Ophiten oder Schlangenbrüder, nach den geheimen Grundsätzen der Kabbalisten abgefasst, belong to this place.

Many of them maintained expressly that Jesus imparted secret doctrines to his apostles, with a commission to make them known to but a few, trusty persons. Vid. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., 1. 1. e. 24. p. 104; [also, II. 46. p. 172. Grab.]

inclined to admit without any proof, that these sects were branches of a secret society established by Jesus himself. Every thing that has been preserved of their doctrines and opinions is certainly very obscure, and their modes of representation appear at first glance to agree very little together. It can be made quite evident, however, that the main object of all these sects was, to substitute rational religion instead of revealed.* Now who that has read the writings of the apostles, can admit this to have been our Saviour's object? These societies, for the most part, thought very meanly of the writings of Christ's apostles, treated them in a very capricious manner, and, under a veil of obscure figures and difficult symbolical representations, labored with especial diligence to extend the quite abortive speculations of reason respecting the origin of the world and the evil it contains. Could they possibly have been the continuation of an institution established by Jesus, of which the apostles were the oldest members? The foreign origin of all these sects is also immediately betrayed by the figures and modes of representation which they had in common; for the manner in which they clothed and delivered their instructions, bears not the least resemblance to that of the friends of Jesus. Moreover it can be proved that the chief dogmas of the Gnostics existed before Christianity and prevailed in the East. These

* 1. Comp. Semler, Geschichte der Christlichen Glaubenslehre, in the first part of Baumgarten's Untersuchung theologischer Streitigkeiten, S. 121 ff.

2. Mosheim in his work, Ueber die Schlangenbrüder, declares himself in the most decided manner opposed to the opinion here quoted, and maintains that in regard to the Gnostics, every thing must be understood literally. § XXVII-XXX. S. 44 ff. [Comp. also Neander, Gnost. Systeme, S. 94 ff. 235. 260. 264.] .

+ Vid. Michaelis, De indiciis Gnosticae philosophiae tempore LXX. interpretum et Philonis Judaei, in the Syntagma Commentationum, Tom. II. p. 251 seqq., where also is to be found a lecture upon this subject very much to the purpose, by Walsch, De philosophia orientali, Gnosticorum systematum fonte et origine. The latter upon the subject is also to be seen in the Entwurf der Kätzerhistorie, Th. I. S. 241 ff.; [Neander, Gnost. Systeme, Einleitung, Elemente der Gnosis im Philo, S. 1-27.]

sects, therefore, could not have been the keepers of the genuine principles delivered by Jesus. On the other hand, they took their rise in opinions altogether at variance with Christianity, and of course, while they retained what was consistent with their own strange conjectures, they in a great measure rejected its real and demonstrable doctrines. On this point the primitive Christians were unanimous ; for they considered all the Gnostics as errorists, very far removed in their views and feelings from the doctrines taught in the Gospel. Indeed the writings of the apostles bear no very obscure traces of having been written on purpose to controvert many of the positions afterwards maintained by these parties. This, in particular, appears to have been a principal object of John in all his writings; some leading doctrines of this kind having even then been partially blended with Christianity, though none who advocated them bore the name of Gnostics.* This circumstance in this matter is perfectly decisive; for we must either maintain that the apostles were ignorant of the object which their teacher had in view, (and from whom with confidence can we expect a true explanation of Christ's intentions, if not from them?) or we must admit that the Gnostic sects, whose leading doctrines they rejected, were the remnants of a secret society which understood Christ's genuine meaning, and was to execute his plan.

52. We have now examined every thing which appears to contain any marks or traces of a secret order formed by Jesus for the execution of his plan, and shown that nothing is to be found which can be considered as substantial proof that such an order ever existed. This of itself would be sufficient even now to justify us in declaring every thing that has been said respecting an association by means of which Jesus intended to operate, to be empty fiction. We shall

*

Comp. Michaelis, Einleitung in die göttlichen Schriften des neuen Bundes, Th. II. § 149 u. 150. [Marsh's Michaelis, Vol. III. Chap. VII. Sec. V. TR. ;] and a learned and circumstantial confirmation of this affair in Storr's work, Ueber den Zweck der evangelischen Geschichte und der Briefe Johannis, S. 43 ff.

be able however to draw this conclusion with far greater certainty, if some additional things and circumstances be pointed out, which are very clearly opposed to the position that Jesus intended to make use of such means.

Here Christ's own language may be quoted. In more than one instance, his very expressions are of such a character as directly to contradict the idea, that he operated by means of private institutions. He told his friends explicitly, that they should resemble a city set on a high hill, which, on account of its position, cannot be hid; that they should be a light for illuminating the whole world; and ought never to think of keeping any thing secret, Matt. 5: 13, 16. He announced to them in plain terms, that the extension of his doctrines would excite great commotions, and draw down severe persecutions upon his friends, Matt. 10: 21-32. Had it been his intention to advance his object by secret springs, he must have charged his apostles to avoid all public curiosity, and shun the very appearance of general movements. Instead of doing so, however, and making it their duty to maintain a suspicious reserve and operate in secret, he commanded them to teach every thing that he had delivered to them, with boldness, and preach what he had told them in the ear, upon the house-top, Matt. 10: 26, 27. Stronger expressions could not well have been employed for showing that he wished them to act with perfect frankness, and avoid every thing like mystery. Of the same character is all the instruction which Jesus imparted to his apostles in his last familiar discourses with them, John XIV. XVI., respecting the manner in which they were to labor for the accomplishment of his object after his death. They were to do every thing in public, and without a shrinking reserve. They were not to hesitate, should they be complained of, persecuted, and oppressed, for their candid and open efforts. They were to remember that his frankness of action had drawn down upon him the same fate, John 15: 18-21, and that the object before them was to effect a radical improvement, which could not be done without great public commotion, John 16: 8-11. It appears