indignum se fecit, etsi mundum homini, non sibi fecit. Orig. Contra Cels. iv. 74, p. 558, 559, and ibid. 99, p. 576: Κέλσος μὲν οὖν λεγέτω, ὅτι οὐν ἀνθρώπῳ, ὡς οὐδὲ λέοντι, οὐδ ̓ οἷς ὀνομάζει. Ἡμεῖς δ ̓ ἐροῦμεν· Οὐ λέοντι ὁ δημιουργὸς, οὐδὲ ἀετῷ, οὐδὲ δελφῖνι ταῦτα πεποίηκεν, ἀλλὰ πάντα διὰ τὸ λογικὸν ζῶον.

See the objections of Cæcilius, in Minucius Felix, c. 5, ss., and, on the other hand, the oration of Octavius, c. 17, 18, 20, 32, and especially the beautiful passage, c. 33: Nec nobis de nostra frequentia blandiamur; multi nobis videmur, sed Deo admodum pauci sumus. Nos gentes nationesque distinguimus: Deo una domus est mundus hic totus. Reges tantum regni sui per officia ministrorum universa novere: Deo indiciis non opus est; non solum in occulis ejus, sed et in sinu vivimus. Comp. Athen. Leg. c. 22, in calce.

On the opinion of the Gnostic Bardesanes respecting the eluapuévn (fate), and the influence of stars, comp. Photius Bibl. Cod. 223. Euseb. Præp. vi. 10. Neander, Gnostiche Systeme, p. 198. [Neander, History of the Christ. Relig. and Church during the first three centuries, trans. by H. J. Rose, ii. p. 97: "He (Bardesanes), therefore, although, like many of those who inclined to Gnosticism, he busied himself with astrology, contended against the doctrine of such an influence of the stars (ɛiμapuévn) as should be supposed to settle the life and affairs of man by necessity. Eusebius, in his great literary treasure house, the Præparatio Evangelica, has preserved a large fragment of this remarkable work; he here introduces, among other things, the Christians dispersed over so many countries, as an example of the absurdity of supposing that the stars irresistibly influenced the character of a people." Baur, Gnosis, p. 234. C. Kühner, Astronomia et Astrologiæ in doctrina Gnostic. Vestigia, P. I. Bardesanis Gnostici numina astralia. Hildburgh, 1833. [Comp. also Gieseler, 1. c. i. § 46, n. 2, and Burton, Lect. on Ecclesiast. hist. Lect. xx. p. 182, 183.]

6

⚫ Comp. especially the objections of Celsus in the work of Origen: God interferes as little with the affairs of man, as with those of monkeys and flies, etc., especially in lib. iv. Though Celsus was not a disciple of Epicurus, as. Origen and Lucian would have him to be, but rather a follower of Plato (according to Neander), yet these expressions savor very much of Epicureanism. [Comp. Lardner, Works, vii. 211, 212.]

According to Clement, there is no antagonism of the whole and its parts in the sight of God (comp. also Minuc. Fel. note 4): 'A0pówç Tε yàp πάντα καὶ ἕκαστον ἐν μέρει μιᾷ προσβολῇ προσβλέπει, Strom. vi. p. 821. Comp. the work of Origen contra Cels.

The doctrine of the concursus, as it was afterward termed, is found in Clem. Strom. vi. 17, p. 821, ss. Many things owe their existence to human calculation, though they are kindled by God, as if by lightning (7Ìv ĕvavoiv εiλnpóra). Thus health is preserved by medical skill, the carriage of the body by fencing, riches by the industrial art (xpμatiotikǹ téxvn); but the divine πρόνοια and human συνέργεια always work together.

• Comp. § 39, note 8. In opposition to the Gnostics, who derived evil, not from the supreme God, but from the demiurge, Irenæus observes, Adv. Hær. iv. 39, p. 285 (iv. 76, p. 380, Gr.), that through the contrast of good

and evil in the world, the former shines the more brightly. Spirits, he further remarks, may exercise themselves in distinguishing between good and evil; how could they know the former, without having some idea of its opposite But, in a categorical manner, he precludes all further questions: Non enim tu Deum facis, sed 'Deus te facit. Si ergo opera Dei es, manum artificis tui expecta, opportune omnia facientem: opportune autem, quantum ad te attinet, qui efficeris. Præsta autem ei cor tuum molle et tractabile, et custodi figuram, qua te figuravit artifex, habens in temetipso humorem, ne induratus amittas vestigia digitorum ejus.... And further on: Si igitur tradideris ei, quod est tuum, i. e., fidem in eum et subjectionem, recipies ejus artem et eris perfectum opus Dei. Si autem non credideris ei et fugeris manus ejus, erit causa imperfectionis in te qui non obedisti, sed non in illo, qui vocavit, etc. At all events, the best and soundest theodicy! Athenogoras (Leg. c. 24) derives the disorders in the world from the devil and demons (comp. § 51); and Cyprian (Ad Demetrianum) from the very constitution of the world, which begins to change, and is approaching its dissolution. To a speculative mind like that of Origen, the existence of evil would present a strong stimulus to attempt to explain its origin, though he could not but be aware of the difficulties with which this subject is beset. Comp. especially De Princ. ii. 9 (Opp. i. p. 97, Redep. 214, Schnitzer, p. 140); Contra Celsum iv. 62, p. 551 (an extract of which is given by Rössler, vol. i. p. 232, ss.). Different reasons are adduced in vindication of the existence of evil in the world; thus it serves to exercise the ingenuity of man (power of invention, etc.); but he draws special attention to the connection between moral and physical imperfections, evil and sin. Comp. the opinion of Thomasius on the theodicy of Origen, p. 57, 58.

$ 49.

ANGELOLOGY AND DEMONOLOGY.

Suicer, Thesaurus, s. v. άyyeλoç. Cotta, Disputationes 2, succinctam Doctrinæ de Angelis Historiam exhibentes. Tüb. 1765, 4. Schmid, Hist. dogm. de Angelis tutelaribus, in Illgens histor. theol. Abhandlungen, i. p. 24-27. Keil, De Angelorum malorum et Dæmoniorum Cultu apud Gentiles, Opusc. Acad. p. 584-601. (Gaab), Abhandlungen zur Dogmengeschichte der ältesten griechischen Kirche, Jena, 1790, p. 97-136. Usteri, Paulin. Lehrbegriff. 4th edit. Appendix 3, p. 421, ss.-[Dr. L. Mayer, Scriptural Idea of Angels, in Amer. Biblic. Reposit. xii. 356-388. Moses Stuart, Sketches of Angelology in Robinson's Bibliotheca Sacra, No. I. 1843. Kitto, Cyclop. of Bibl. Liter. arts. Angels, Demons, Satan. L. F. Voss, Zeitschrift f. Luther. Theologie, 1855. Lücke, in the Deutsche Zeitschrift, 1851, review of Martensen. Twesten, transl. in Bibliotheca Sacra, by H. B. Smith, vols. i. and ii. 1844, 1845.]

The doctrine respecting Angels, the devil, and demons, forms an important appendix to the statements about creation, providence, and the government of the world; partly because the angels (according to the general opinion) belong as creatures to the creation itself; partly because, as others conceive, they took an active part in the

work of creation, or are the agents of special providence. The doctrine of the devil and demons also stands in close connection with the doctrine of physical and moral evil in the world.

§ 50.

THE ANGELS.

Though the primitive church, as Origen asserts, did not establish any definite doctrine on this subject,' we nevertheless meet with several declarations respecting the nature of angels. Thus many of the earlier fathers rejected the notion that they took part in the work of creation,' and maintained, on the contrary, that they are created beings and ministering spirits. In opposition to the doctrine of emanation and of æons, even bodies were ascribed to them, of finer substance, however, than human bodies. The idea of guardian angels was connected in part with the mythical notion of the genii.' But no sure traces are to be found during this period of a real worship of angels within the pale of the Catholic church.

5

'De Princ. procm. 10, Opp. i. p. 49: Est etiam illud in ecclesiastica prædicatione, esse angelos Dei quosdam et virtutes bonas, qui ei ministrant ad salutem hominum consummandam; sed quando isti creati sint, vel quales aut quomodo sint, non satis in manifesto designatur.

2 "The doctrine respecting angels, though a very wavering element of the patristic dogmatics, is yet handled with manifest predilection," Semisch, Just. Mart. ii. 339. Comp. Athenagoras Leg. 24, and Note 1 to the next

section.

Iren. i. 22 and 24 (against the opinions of Saturninus and Carpocrates), comp. ii. 2, p. 117: Si enim (Deus) mundi fabricator est, angelos ipse fecit, aut etiam causa creationis eorum ipse fuit. III. 8, 3: Quoniam enim sive angeli, sive archangeli, sive throni, sive dominationes ab eo, qui super omnes est Deus, et constituta sunt et facta sunt per verbum ejus. Comp. also iv. 6, 7: Ministrat ei (patri) ad omnia sua progenies et figuratio sua i. e., Filius et Spir. S., verbum et sapientia, quibus serviunt et subjecti sunt omnes angeli. Comp. Duncker, p. 108, ss. and Baur, Dreieinigkeit p. 175. The latter, from the manner in which the earliest fathers frequently bring the angels into close connection with the persons of the Trinity, sees evidence that their views respecting this great mystery itself were yet very indefinite.

4

"Justin M. regards the angels as personal beings who possess a permanent existence," Semisch, ii. p. 341. Dial. c. Tryph. c. 128: "Otɩ μèv ovv εioìv ἄγγελοι, καὶ ἀεὶ μένοντες, καὶ μὴ ἀναλυόμενοι εἰς ἐκεῖνο, ἐξ οὗπερ γεγόνασιν, ἀποδέδεικται. Athenagoras, Leg. c. 10 : Πλῆθος ἀγγέλων καὶ λειτουργῶν φαμεν, οὓς ὁ ποιητὴς καὶ δημιουργὸς κόσμου θεὸς διὰ τοῦ παρ' αὐτοῦ λόγου διένειμε παὶ διέταξε περί τε τὰ στοιχεῖα εἶναι καὶ τοὺς οὐρανοῦς καὶ τὸν κόσμον καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν τούτων εὐταξίαν. Comp. c. 24, and

Clem. Strom. vi. 17, p. 822, 824; according to him the angels have received charge over provinces, towns, etc. Clement, however, distinguishes the ǎyyɛλoç (singular), ;, from the other angels, and connects him in some degree with the Logos, though assigning to him an inferior rank. Comp. Strom. vii. 2, p. 831-833. He also speaks of a mythical Angelus Jesus, Pæd. i. 7, p. 133, comp. G. Bulli Def. Fidei Nic. sect. 1, cap. 1 (de Christo sub angeli forma apparente). Opp. Lond. 1703, fol. p. 9. [Pye Smith, Script. Test. to the Mess. i. p. 445-464].-On the employments of angels comp. Orig. Contra Cels. v. 29. (Opp. i. p. 598), and Hom. xii. in Luc. Opp. iii. p. 945.

Philo had already transformed personal angels (e. g., the Cherubim) into divine powers, see Dähne, p. 227, ss. Justin M. also informs us, that in his time some had compared the relation in which the angels stand to God to that which exists between the sun and its beams (like the Logos); but he decidedly rejects this opinion, Dial. c. Tryph. c. 128. Comp. Tert. Adv. Prax. c. 3 (in connection with the doctrine of the Trinity): Igitur si et monarchia divina per tot legiones et exercitus angelorum administratur, sicut scriptum est: Millies millia adsistebant ei, et millies centena millia apparebant ei: nec ideo unius esse desiit, ut desinat monarchia esse, quia per tanta millia virtutum procuratur, etc.

• Justin M. attaches most importance to the body of angels as analogous to that of man. Their food is manna, Psal. lxxviii. 25; the two angels who appeared to Abraham (Gen. xviii. 1. ss.) differed from the Logos who accompanied them, in partaking of the meat set before them, in reality and after the manner of men, comp. Dial. c. Tryph. c. 57, and Semisch, ii. p. 343. As regards their intellectual powers and moral condition, Justin assigns an inferior position to the angels, Semisch, p. 344, 345. Tertullian points out the difference between the body of Christ and that of the angels, De Carne Christi, c. 6: Nullus unquam angelus ideo descendit, ut crucifigeretur, ut mortem experiretur, ut a morte suscitaretur. Si nunquam ejusmodi fuit causa angelorum corporandorum, habes causam, cur non nascendi acceperint carnem. Non venerant mori, ideo nec nasci. Igitur probent angelos illos, carnem de sideribus concepisse. Si non probant, quia nec scriptum est, nec Christi caro inde erit, cui angelorum accommodant exemplum. Constat, angelos carnem non propriam gestasse, utpote naturas substantiæ spiritalis, et si corporis alicujus, sui tamen generis; in carnem autem humanam transfigurabiles ad tempus videri et congredi cum hominibus posse. Igitur, cum relatum non sit, unde sumpserint carnem, relinquitur intellectui nostro, non dubitare, hoc esse proprium angelicæ potestatis, ex nulla materia corpus sibi sumere. . . Sed et,

....

si de materia necesse fuit angelos sumpsisse carnem, credibilius utique est de terrena materia, quam de ullo genere cœlestium substantiarum, cum adeo terrenæ qualitatis extiterit, ut terrenis pabulis pasta sit. Tatian, Or. c. 15: Δαίμονες δὲ πάντες σαρκίον μὲν οὐ κέκτηνται, πνευματικὴ δέ ἐστιν αὐτοῖς ἡ σύμπηξις, ὡς πυρὸς, ὡς ἀέρος. But these ethereal bodies of the angels can be perceived only by those in whom the Spirit of God dwells, not by the natural man (the psychical). In comparison with other creatures they might be called incorporeal beings, and Ignat. ad Trall. calls them dowμátovs púocis. Clement also says, Strom. vi. 7, p. 769, that they have neither ears, nor tongues, nor lips, nor entrails, nor organs of respiration, etc. Comp. Orig.

Princ., in promm. § 9. On the question, whether the fathers taught the spiritual nature of the angels at all, see Semisch, ii. p. 342.

* This idea is already found in the Shepherd of Hermas, lib. ii. mand. vi. 2 : Δύο εἰσὶν ἄγγελοι μετὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, εἰς τῆς δικαιοσύνης καὶ εἰς τῆς πονηρίας· καὶ ὁ μὲν τῆς δικαιοσύνης ἄγγελος τρυφερός ἐστι καὶ αἰσχυντηρὸς καὶ πρᾷος καὶ ἡσύχιος. Οταν οὖν οὗτος ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν σοῦ ἀναβῇ, εὐθέως λαλεῖ μετὰ σοῦ περὶ δικαιοσύνης, περὶ ἁγνείας, περὶ σεμνότητος καὶ περὶ αὐταρκείας, καὶ περὶ παντὸς ἔργου δικαίου, καὶ περὶ πάσης ἀρετῆς ἐνδόξου. Ταῦτα πάντα ὅταν εἰς τὴν καρδίαν σοῦ ἀναβῇ, γίνωσκε, ὅτι ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς δικαιοσύνης μετὰ σοῦ ἐστιν. Τούτῳ οὖν πίστευε καὶ τοῖς ἔργοις αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐγκρατὴς αὐτοῦ γενοῦ. Ὅρα οὖν καὶ τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῆς πονηρίας τὰ ἔργα. Πρῶτον πάντων ὀξυχολός ἐστι καὶ πικρὸς καὶ ἄφρων, καὶ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ πονηρὰ καταστρέφοντα τοὺς δούλους τοῦ θεοῦ· ὅταν αὐτὸς ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν σοῦ ἀναβῆ, γνῶθι αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ. (Fragm. ex doctr. ad Antioch.) Comp. the Latin text. Justin Mart. Apol. II. 5 : Ὁ θεὸς τὸν πάντα κόσμον ποιήσας καὶ τὰ ἐπίγεια ἀνθρώποις ὑποτάξας τὴν μὲν τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν πρόνοιαν ἀγγέλοις, οὕς ἐπὶ τούτοις ἔταξε, παρέδωκεν. We have already seen (note 4), that Clement and Origen assign to angels the office of watching over provinces and towns; this is connected with the notion of individual guardian angels; comp. Clem. Strom. v. p. 700, and vii. p. 833, and the passages quoted above from Origen. Schmid, u. s.

* Col. ii. 18, mention is made of a θρησκεία τῶν ἀγγέλων which the apostle disapproves; comp. Rev. xix. 10. xxii. 9. The answer to the question, whether Justin M. numbered the angels among the objects of Christian worship, depends upon the interpretation of the passage, Apol. i. 6 : "Αθεοι κεκλήμεθα καὶ ὁμολογοῦμεν τῶν τοιούτων νομιζομένων θεῶν ἄθεοι εἶναι, ἀλλ' οὐχὶ τοῦ ἀληθεστάτου καὶ πατρὸς δικαιοσύνης καὶ σωφροσύης καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀρετῶν, ἀνεπιμίκτον τε κακίας θεοῦ· ἀλλ ̓ ἐκεῖνόν τε καὶ τὸν παρ' αὐτοῦ υἱὸν ἐλθόντα καὶ διδάξαντα ἡμᾶς τοῦτα καὶ τὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἐπομένων καὶ ἐξομοιουμένων ἀγαθῶν ἀγγέλων στρατὸν, πνεῦμά τε το προφητικὸν σεβόμεθα καὶ προσκυνοῦμεν, λόγῳ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ τιμῶντες. The principal point in question is, whether the accusative τὸν τῶν ἄλλων.... στρατὸν is governed by σεβόμεθα καὶ προςκυνοῦμεν, or by διδάξαντα, and, consequently where the punctuation is to fall. Most modern writers adopt the former interpretation, which is probably the more correct one. Thus Semisch, p. 350, ss. Möhler (Patrologie, p. 240) finds in this passage as well as in Athen. Leg. 10, a proof of the Romish Catholic adoration of angels and saints. But Athenagoras (c. 16) rejects this doctrine very decidedly in the following words: Οῦ τὰς δυνάμεις τοῦ θεοῦ προσίοντες θεραπεύομεν, ἀλλὰ τὸν ποιητὴν αὐτῶν καὶ δεσπότην. Comp. Clem. Strom. vi. 5, p. 760. Orig. Contra Cels. v. 4, 5 (Opp. i. p. 580), and viii. 13 (ib. p. 751), quoted by Münscher, ed. by Von Cölln, i. p. 84, 85. [Gieseler, i. § 99, and note 33. * Burton, Testimonies of the Antenic. Fath. to the Trinity, etc., p. 15-23. On the Gnostic worship of angels, comp. Burton, Bampton Lect., note 52.]

* In an earlier essay in the Tübingen Quartalschrift, 1833, p. 53 sq., Möhler rejected the interpretation, that the worship of angels is here spoken of.