early began to mingle itself with Christianity. Thus much we know, that Apollos, a cultivated Alexandrian Jew, was the first who looked at Christianity from a more speculative point or view, and first preached it in this form with great eloquence at Corinth. Little as he desired to appear in an antagonist position to Paul, the latter declined in reputation, notwithstanding, among many of the Corinthians, and divisions arose in the church (1 Cor. 1-4).5 Paul wishes to leave it to time to discover the value of such a philosophical system erected on the foundation of Christian faith (1 Cor. iii. 11 ff.); but he blames the divisions occasioned by it, agreeably to his manner of inculcating toleration even in regard to errors, provided they be not practically scandalous or claim for themselves exclusive adoption (Rom. xiv. 1 ff.). Afterwards, however, there appeared among the Gentile Christians actual errors, and those too of an important moral bearing, which Paul was obliged to combat with all his might. The Christians considered themselves, in opposition to the rest of the world (ὁ κόσμος, ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος, under the κοσμοκράτωρ, Eph. vi. 12, the feds Toû alŵvos ToÚTOV 2 Cor. iv. 4) hastening in their perversity to destruction, a chosen people dedicated to God, ayı, ἐκλεκτοί, κλητοί. In these appellations there was no claim to moral perfection, but a remembrance of their high calling in Christ. Though it is certain that Christianity in its first beginning imparted spiritual enlightenment to many of its adherents, and transformed them in a moral view, yet it could so much the less purify them all from the imperfections of the education belonging to their nation and time, because it is certain that many of them had been led to embrace it by superstitious, or other interested motives. This explains the reason why Paul found that he had c. p. 423 ff. 5 Comp. in addition to the commentators, Baur on the Christ-party, in the Tübingen Zeitschr. für Theol. 1831, iv. 83. Comp. 1836, iv. Neander's apost. Kirche, i. 292. Dan. Schenkel de ecclesia Corinthiaca primaeva factionibus turbata, Basil. 1838, 8. A. F. Dähne die Christuspartei in d. apost. Kirche zu Korinth, Halle 1841, 8. Die Parteiungen in d. Gem. zu Korinth, v. F. Becker, Altona 1842, 8. Th. F. Kniewel ecclesiae Corinthiorum vetustissimae dissensiones, Gedani 1842, 4. [Eclectic Review, May 1846.] As the later Jews pppy Dan. viii. 24, cf. vii. 18 ss. 7 One-sided laudatory descriptions are given in William Cave's Primitive Christianity, or the religion of the ancient Christians in the first continually to contend with even gross vices among the Gentile Christians, particularly at Corinth (1 Cor. v. 6), and in Crete (Titus i. 10 ff.); why James saw himself obliged to condemn the moral abuse of the Pauline doctrine relative to the power of faith, as that alone which brings blessing (Ep. of James); and why the Apocalypse (written 69 A.D.) denounces seducers in Pergamus (the Nicolaitanes), who paid no regard to the regulations respecting food enjoined on the Gentile Christians, nor even to the prohibition of lewdness (Acts xv. 29). But, after a philosophical treatment of Christianity had procured friends to the Gentile Christians in many churches, the superstitious philosophy of the times also speedily crept in among the Christians, first of all, as, it would appear, in Asia Minor, and threatened morality with still greater danger by recommending chimerical, mysterious doctrines, and an arbitrary asceticism, as the true mode of purifying the soul. Against such errorists as united a ages of the Gospel. ed. 5, Lond. 1689 (translated into German by Frauendorf, Leipz. 1694 and 1723, 8), and Gottfr. Arnold's erste Liebe, d. i. wahre Abbildung der ersten Christen, Frankf. 1696, fol. Leipz. 1732, 4. Sometimes unjust to the Christians, but otherwise worth reading, is L. A. Paetz comm. de vi, quam religio christ. per. iii. priora saecula ad hominum animos, mores, ac vitam habuit, Gotting. 1799, 4. Comp. A. Neander das christl. Leben der drei ersten Jahrhunderte, in his Denkwürdigkeiten aus d. Gesch. des. Christenth. Bd. 1, Berlin 1823. J. G. Stickel et C. F. Bogenhard biga commentationum de morali primaevorum Christianorum conditione, Neostad. ad Orlam 1826, 8. 8 Apoc. ii. 6, 14, 15. Those who κρατοῦντες τὴν διδαχὴν Βαλαὰμ (cf. Numb. xxxi. 16,) and those who κρατοῦντες τὴν διδαχὴν τῶν Νικολαϊ τῶν are the same. even among the ,בְּלַע עַם is derived from בִּלְעָם Rabbins. Buxtorf. lex. talmud. p. 314: to which corresponds vậy TẬP λαόν. So first Chr. A. Heumann in Actis erudit. an. 1712, p. 179. Ejusd. Poecile, ii. 392. Münscher in Gabler's Journal für theol. Liter. v. 17. Eichhorn and Ewald in their Commentaries on Apoc. ii. 6. Hence the appellation Nicolaitanes was not the common name for a sect, but one used by the Apocalyptic writer. As the names of sects were usually formed after the name of the founder, the fathers thought of Nicolaus, Acts vi. 5, who, according to Irenaeus, i. 26. iii. 11, and Tertullian de praescr. haer. c. 46, is said to have been the founder of the party; but according to Clemens Alex. Strom. ii. p. 490, iii.p. 522, he was merely the unconscious cause of the appellation on account of his words which were misunderstood by others, ὅτι παραχρήσασθαι τῇ σαρκὶ δεῖ. σapki dei. (Tapaxâoba is, 1. to abuse, used particularly, according to Suidas de concubitu immodico; 2. equiv. to daxpaobai, to put to death, as Justin. apol. mag. c. 49.) Jewish-heathen asceticism with a peculiar philosophy, Paul had first to warn the Colossians (Col. ii. 8, 16, ff.).9 The same tendency spread itself as far as Ephesus, where it manifested itself in high-flying speculations, in prohibitions of marriage and meats (1 Tim. i. 5—7 ; iv. 3, 7; vi. 20), and manifestly contributed to the immorality of that place (2 Tim. iii. 6). The attempt, also, of Hymeneus and Philetus to explain spiritually (2 Tim. ii. 18) the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, so offensive to the heathen (1 Thessal. iv. 13 ff.; 1 Cor xv. 12, 35, ff.), an attempt that proceeded from the same tendency, was not destitute of a moral influence at this time, when the doctrine was most intimately connected with that of retribution. 10 That Paul did not reject philosophy as such, he has proved in his conduct towards Apollos; the philosophy against which he warns his readers (Col. ii. 8) is that science, falsely so called (1 Tim. vi. 20), which, as Paul had before judged, became now, for the first time, the source of still greater errors, of the later gnostic reveries (2 Tim. iii. 1 ff.)." 9 Matth. Schneckenburger über die Irrlehrer zu Colossä, annexed to his treatise Ueber das Alter der jüd. Proselytentaufe, Berlin 1828, 8. S. 187 ff. The same author's Beiträge zur Einl. ins N. T., Stuttgart 1832, S. 146. The same author's Bemerkungen über die Irrlehrer zu Colossä, theol. Studien u. Krit. 1832, iv. 841. Neander apost. K. i. 374. F. H. Rheinwald de pseudodoctoribus Colossensibus, Bonnae 1834, 4. Osiander über die colossichen Irrlehrer, in the Tübingen Zeitschrift f. Theol. 1834, iii. 96. [Eclectic Review, March 1845.] 10 That consciousness and feeling could not be conceived of apart from bodies, was a very common notion of antiquity. Comp. the Epicurean Vellejus in Cic. de nat. deor. ii. c. 12: Quod (Plato) sine corpore ullo Deum vult esse-id quale esse possit, intelligi non potest. Careat enim sensu necesse est, careat etiam prudentia, careat voluptate. The heathen Caecilius in Minucius Felix, c. 11, says: Vellem tamen sciscitari, utrumne sine corpore an cum corporibus, et corporibus quibus, ipsisne, an innovatis, resurgatur? Sine corpore? hoc, quod sciam, neque mens, neque anima, nec vita est. Ipso corpore? sed jam ante dilapsum est. Alio corpore? ergo homo novus nascitur, non prior ille reparatur. Justini dial. c. Tryph. c. 1: ảπatès yàp тò dowμатov. Tertulliani apologeticus, c. 48 Ideo repraesentabuntur et corpora, quia neque pati quicquam potest anima sola sine stabili materia, i. e. carne caet. 11 The traces of Gnosis in the N. T. are exaggerated, particularly by Henr. Hammond diss. de Antichristo (in his diss. iv. quibus episcopatus jura adstruuntur. Lond. 1651), and in his Annot. ad N. T. (lat. per. J. Clericum. Amst. 1698, fol.) But, on the other side, C. Chr. Tittmann tract. de vestigiis Gnosticorum in N. T. frustra quaesitis. Lips. 1773, 8). goes too far. Comp. Joh. Horn über die biblische Gnosis, Hannover 1805, 8. In strong relief to these defects of the time, the brotherly love the benevolence (2 Cor. viii. 1 ff.; Heb. vi. 10; xiii. 1 ff.), the patient endurance of the hostility of the unbelieving (Phil. i. 29; 1 Thess. i. 6; ii. 14; 2 Thess. i. 4 ff.; Heb. x. 32 ff.), and the holy zeal for Christianity, form the bright part of the picture presented by the first Christians. The church at Philippi, in its tender attachment to the apostle Paul, appears to us particularly attractive. Comp. the Ep. to the Philippians.) § 30. CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH. Die Anfänge d. christl. Kirche u. ihrer Verfassung von R. Rothe, Bd. I. The new churches out of Palestine formed themselves after the pattern of the mother church in Jerusalem. Their presidents were the elders (πрEσẞÚTEρoi, éπlσкоoi), officially of equal rank, al 1 That both appellations are the same follows from Acts xx. 17, 28; Tit. i. 5, 7; Phil. i. 1; 1 Tim. iii. 1, 8. Acknowledged by Hieronymus Epist. 82, (al. 83) ad Oceanum: apud veteres iidem episcopi et presbyteri, quia illud nomen dignitatis est, hoc aetatis. Epist. 101, ad Evangelum, see below § 34, not. 2.-Idem ad Tit. i. 7. Idem est ergo presbyter, qui episcopus: et antequam diaboli instinctu studia in religione fierent, et diceretur in populis: ego sum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego autem Cephae, communi presbyterorum consilio ecclesiae gubernabantur. Postquam vero unusquisque eos, quos baptizaverat, suos putabat esse, non Christi; in toto orbe decretum est, ut unus de presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris, ad quem omnes ecclesiae cura pertineret, et schismatum semina tollerentur. Putat aliquis non scripturarum, sed nostram esse sententiam, episcopum et presbyterum unum esse, et aliud aetatis, aliud esse nomen officii: relegat apostoli ad Philippenses verba, dicentis. Here follow the above cited passages; then: Haec propterea, ut ostenderemus, apud veteres eosdem fuisse presbyteros, quos et episcopos paulatim vero ut dissensionum plantaria evellerentur, ad unum omnem sollicitudinem esse delatam. Sicut ergo presbyteri sciunt, se ex ecclesiae consuetudine ei, qui sibi praepositus fuerit, esse subjectos: ita episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine, quam dispositionis dominicae veritate, presbyteris esse majores, et in commune debere ecclesiam regere. Augustini epist. 82, ad Hieron. c. 33: Quamquam secundum honorum vocabula, quae jam ecclesiae usus obtinuit, episcopatus presbyterio major sit: tamen in multis rebus Augustinus Hieronymo minor est. Cf. Chrysostomi hom. i. in Ep. ad Philipp. Theodoret. comm. in though in many churches, individuals among them had a personal Philipp. i. 1. It is remarkable how long afterwards persons maintained this view of the original identity of bishops and presbyters. Isidorus Hispal. etymol. vii. c. 12, transcribes that passage from Hieron. epist. ad Oceanum. Bernaldus Constantiensis (about 1088) the most zealous defender of Gregory VII. appeals on this subject in his de presbyterorum officio tract. (in monumentorum res Allemannorum illustrantt. S. Blas. 1792, 4. T. ii. p. 384 ss.) to the New Testament and Jerome, and then continues: Quum igitur presbyteri et episcopi antiquitus idem fuisse legantur, etiam eandem ligandi atque solvendi potestatem et alia nunc episcopis specialia habuisse non dubitantur. Postquam autem presbyteri ab episcopali excellentia cohibiti sunt, coepit eis non licere, quod licuit, videlicet quod ecclesiastica auctoritas solis pontificibus exequendum delegavit. Even a pope, Urbanus II., in Conc. Benevent. ann. 1091, can. 1: Sacros autem ordines dicimus diaconatum et presbyteratum. Hos siquidem solos primitiva legitur ecclesia habuisse: super his solum praeceptum habemus apostoli (pretty nearly the same words_are found in Petri Lomb. sentent. lib. iv. dist. 24, c. 8). Hence even Gratian receives the above passages of Jerome ad Tit. i. (dist. xcv. c. 5), epist. ad Evangel. (dist. xciii. c. 24) u. Isidori Hisp. (dist. xxi. c. 1) without scruple. The same view is maintained by the Glossa ad Gratiani decret. dist. xciii. c. 24, Cardinalis S. Marci at the Costnit Concilium 1414 (v. d. Hardt. Conc. Const. ii. 228), Nicolaus Tudeschus, archiep. Panormitanus (about 1428) super prima parte Primi, cap. 5 (ed. Lugdun. 1547, fol. 112, b.: olim Presbyteri in commune regebant ecclesiam et ordinabant sacerdotes), Nicolaus Cusanus (about 1435) de concordantia cath. lib. iii. c. 2, (in Schardii syntagma tractatuum, p. 358), where he remarks, in opposition to the genuineness of the Pseudo-Isidore letters of Clement: Invenitur insuper in ipsis epistolis de episcoporum a sacerdotibus differentia, quae longo tempore post hoc, ut Hieronymo placet et Damaso, in ecclesia orta est. Even the papal canonist Jo. Paul Lancelottus, in his Institutt. juris canon. lib. i. Tit. 21, § 3, unfolds the same view (1563) with a sunt, qui affirment, without adding anything in refu tation of it. Since no value was set, during the middle ages, on the distinction between the institutio divina and ecclesiastica, a distinction on which modern Catholics insist, ecclesiastical practice could not disturb that view. But after the Council of Trent, sess. xxiii. (45th July 1563) cap. 4, had declared, episcopos, qui in apostolorum locum successerunt, -positos a spiritu sancto, regere ecclesiam Dei, eosque presbyteris superiores esse, etc. the old view became suspicious, although the council did not expressly or definitely maintain the institutio divina. Michael de Medina (about 1570) de orig. sacr. homin. did not hesitate to declare, illos patres materiales fuisse haereticos, sed in his patribus ob eorum reverentiam hoc dogma non esse damnatum. But Bellarmin de clericis, lib. i. c. 15, calls this sententiam valde inconsideratam, and would rather resort to the expedient of an interpretation. Although, afterwards, among Catholic theologians Edmundus Richerius (defensio libelli de eccles. et polit. potest. T. ii. p. 52 ss.) defended the view of Jerome, and John Morin (de sacris ecclesiae ordinationibus, p. iii. Exerc. iii. c. 3) asserted, that the opinion was at least not heretical, episcopos |