Plato as wiser than all the rest, and as especially remarkable for treating the Deity, the soul, and things remote from sense, so as to suit the Christian scheme.1 § 7. This [eclectic] mode of philosophising received some modification, when Ammonius Saccas, at the close of the century, with great applause, opened a school at Alexandria, and laid the foundation to that sect which is called the New Platonic. This man, originally a Christian, and perhaps a pretender to Christianity all his life, being recommended by great fecundity and extent of genius, undertook to bring all systems of philosophy and religion into harmony. In other words, he was bold enough to broach a philosophic system which should embrace and join together all the philosophers, and every religion, the Christian not excepted. And here, especially, lics the difference between this new sect and the eclectic philosophy which had before flourished in Egypt. For the Ecclectics held that there was a mixture of good and bad, true and false, in all [This cultivation of philosophy by Christian teachers greatly displeased those who were attached to the ancient simple faith, as taught by Christ and his apostles; for they feared, what afterwards actually happened, that the purity and excellence of divine truth would suffer by it. Hence the Christians were divided into two parties, the friends of philosophy and human learning, and the opposers of them. The issue of the long contest between them was, that the advocates of philosophy prevailed. · Traces of this controversy may be seen in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. v. c. 28, and in Clemens Alex. Stromat. lib. i. cap. 1-5.-See Mosheim, de Rebus Christ. ante Constant. M. p. 276, &c. Tr.] [The history of the philosopher Ammonius is involved in great obscurity. All that could be gathered from antiquity respecting him, is given by Brucker, Historia Crit. Philos. tom. ii. p. 205. See also J. A. Fabricius, Biblioth. Græca, lib. iv. c. 26. Whether Ammonius continued a professed Christian, or apostatized, has been much debated. Porphyry, who studied under Plotinus, a disciple of Ammonius, (as quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. vi. c. 19,) says, that he was born of Christian parents, but when he came to mature years, embraced the religion of the laws; i. e. the pagan religion. Eusebius taxes Pophyry with falsehood in this; and Je says, that Ammonius continued a Chris- the systems; and therefore they selected out of all what appeared to them consonant with reason, and rejected the rest. But Ammonius held that all sects professed one and the same system of truth, however they might differ in their mode of stating it, and in certain minute opinions; so that by means of suitable explanations, they might with little difficulty be brought into one body. He moreover held this new and singular principle, that the prevailing religions, and the Christian also, must be understood and explained according to this common philosophy of all the sects, and that not only the fables of the vulgar pagans and their priests, but also the interpretations of the disciples of Christ, ought to be separated from their respective religions. § 8. The grand object of Ammonius, to bring all sects and religions into harmony, required him to do much violence to the sentiments and opinions of all parties, philosophers, priests, and Christians, and particularly by allegorical interpretations, to remove very many impediments out of his way. The manner in which he prosecuted his object, appears in the writings of his disciples and adherents, which have come down to us in great abundance. To make the arduous work more easy, he assumed that philosophy was first produced and nurtured among the people of the East; that it was inculcated among the Egyptians by Hermes1, and thence passed to the Greeks; that it was a little obsured and deformed by the disputatious Greeks; but still, that by Plato, the best interpreter of the principles of Hermes and of the ancient oriental sages, it was preserved for the most part entire and unsullied 5: that the religions received by the various nations of the world were not inconsistent with this most ancient philosophy; yet it had most unfortunately happened, that what the ancients taught by symbols and fictitious histories, according to the oriental fashion, had been understood literally by the people and the priests; and thus the ministers of Divine Providence, those demons whom the supreme Lord of all had placed over the various parts of our world, had erroneously been converted into gods, and had been worshipped with many vain ceremonies; that, therefore, the public religions of all nations should be corrected by this ancient philosophy; and that it was the sole object of Christ to set bounds to the reigning superstition, and correct the errors which had crept into religion, but not to abolish altogether the ancient religions." § 9. To these assumptions he added the common doctrines of the Egyptians, (among whom he was born and educated,) concerning the universe and the Deity, as constituting one great whole [Pantheism"]; concerning the eternity of the world, the nature of the soul, providence, and the government of this world by demons, and other received doctrines, all of which he considered as true and not to be called in question. For it is most evident that the ancient philosophy of the Egyptians, which they pretended to have learned from Hermes, was the basis of the New Platonic or Ammonian; and the book of Jamblichus, de Mysteriis Ægyptiorum, in particular, shows this to be the case. In the next place, with these Egyptian notions, he united the philosophy of Plato; which could be done with little difficulty, by distorting some of the principles of Plato, and putting a false construction on his language. Finally, the dogmas of the other sects he construed, as far as was possible, by means of art, ingenuity, and the aid of allegories, into apparent coincidence with Egyptian and Platonic principles. 8 § 10. To this Egyptiaco-Platonic philosophy, the man's [The practical operation of this principle appears in that compromise with paganism which distinguishes the Romish church. But although Romanists have borrowed many usages, and some opinions (purgatory for instance), from pagans, they have not contented themselves within the limits prescribed by Ammonius. Their saints, to whom are assigned peculiar offices over men and their affairs, really receive much of the honours which were considered as erroneously given to the corresponding demons (Saíuoves) of Gentilism. Ed.] [On this principle the whole philosophy of the ancient Egyptians was founded; and on it Ammonius erected his system. The book which goes under the title of Hermetis Trismegisti Sermo de Natura Deorum, ad Asclepium, which is extant in Latin among the works of Apuleius, the supposed translator, is evidence of this fact. See also Eusebius, Præparatio Evangel. lib. iii. c. 9, and Mosheim's notes on Cudworth's Intellectual System, tom. i. p. 404, &c. And the same fundamental principle is assumed by Plotinus, Proclus, Simplicius, Jamblichus, and all the New Platonics. See, for example, Porphyry, in his Life of Plotinus, cap. 2, p. 94. Schl.] 8 [The principle of the Ammonian and Egyptian philosophy, that God and the world constitute one indivisible whole, it cost him much labour to reduce to harmony with the system of Plato; who, as we learn from his Timæus, taught the external existence of matter, as a substance distinct from God. See Proclus on the Timaus of Plato. Schl.] powerful genius and fanaticism joined a moral discipline apparently of high sanctity and austerity. He, indeed, permitted the common people to live according to the laws of their country, and the dictates of nature; but he directed the wise, by means of contemplation, to raise their souls, which sprang from God himself, above all earthly things, at the same time weakening and emaciating the body, which is hostile to the spirit's liberty, by means of hunger, thirst, labour, and other austerities. Thus they might, even in the present life, attain to communion with the Supreme Being, and ascend, after death, active and unencumbered, to the universal Parent, and be for ever united with him. And these precepts, Ammonius, like one born and educated among Christians, was accustomed to embellish and express by forms of expression borrowed from the sacred Scriptures, which has caused such language to occur abundantly in the writings of his followers. With his austere discipline he connected the art of so purging that faculty of mind which receives the images of things, as to make it fit for seeing demons, and for performing many wonderful feats by their assistance. His followers called this art Theurgy. It was not, however, cultivated by all the philosophers of his school, but only by the more eminent.3 2 § 11. That the prevailing religions, and particularly the Christian, might not appear irreconcileable with his system, Ammonius first turned the whole history of the pagan gods into 9 [See Porphyry, de Abstinentia, lib. i. c. 27, &c. p. 22-34. Schl.] [See examples in Hierocles, on the Golden Verses of Pythagoras; and in Simplicius and Jamblichus. See also Mosheim's Diss. de Studio Ethnicorum Christianos imitandi, in vol. i. of his Diss. ad Hist. Eccles. pertinent. p. 321. Schl.] 2 [This worthless science is very similar to what has been called allowable magic, and which is distinguished from necromancy, or unlawful magic. It was undoubtedly of Egyptian origin. As the Egyptians imagined the whole world to be full of good and evil spirits, they might easily be led to suppose that there must be some way to secure the favour of these demons. Sec Augustine, de Civit. Dei, 1. x. c. 9. Opp. tom. ix. p. 187. Schl. Theurgy is the science of the gods and the various classes of su 66 perior spirits, of their appearing to men, and their operations; and the art, by certain acts, habits, words, and symbols, of moving the gods to impart to men secrets which surpass the powers of reason, to lay open the future to them, and become visible to them. This theurgy, which goes farther, and rises higher than philosophy, was first imparted and revealed to men by the gods themselves, in ancient times, and afterwards preserved among the priests. So it is described in the book which bears the name of Jamblichus, de Mysteriis, Ægyptiorum, lib. i. c. 26-29." Staeudlin, Geschichte der Moralphilosophie, p. 462. Tr.] [See concerning the moral system of the new Platonics, in all its material parts, Stacudlin, Geschichte der Moralphilosophie, p. 435, &c. Tr.] 6 allegory1, and maintained that those, whom the vulgar and the priests honoured with the title of Gods, were only the ministers of God, to whom some homage might and should be paid, yet short of the superior homage which was due to the Supreme God; and then he acknowledged that Christ was an extraordinary man, the friend of God, and an admirable Theurge. But he denied that Christ aimed wholly to suppress the worship of demons, ministers as they were of Divine Providence; his real object only being to wipe away the stains contracted by the ancient religions: but he charged his disciples with corrupting and vitiating the system of their master. 8 § 12. This new species of philosophy, imprudently adopted by Qrigen and other Christians, did immense harm to Christianity. For it led the teachers of it to involve in philosophic obscurity many parts of our religion, which were in themselves plain and easy to be understood; and to add to the precepts of the Saviour no few things, of which not a word can be found in the holy Scriptures. It also produced for us that gloomy set of men called mystics, whose [See, for example, Porphyry, de Antro Nymphar. apud Homerum, de Styge, &c. Schl.] 5 [Paul Orosius, Historia, lib. vi. cap. 1, p. 364, 365. Schl.] 6 [It cannot be denied that the sect of Ammonius embraced some, who were enemies of Christ and the Christians. The emperor Julian, and some others, are proof of this. But Ammonius himself honoured Christ. And Augustine contended against some philosophers of his time, who, as followers of Ammonius, honoured Christ, yet maintained that the Christians had corrupted his doctrine; de Consensu Evangelistarum, Opp. tom. iii. pt. ii. lib. i. c. 6, § 11, p. 5, and c. 8, § 14, p. 6, and c. 15, p. 8. Schl.] 7 [Augustine, de Consensu Evangel. lib. i. c. 16, p. 8, and c. 24, p. 18. Yet they admitted that Christ abolished the worship of certain demons of an inferior order, and enjoined upon men to pray to the celestial gods, and especially to the Supreme God. This is evident from a passage of Porphyry, quoted by Augustine, de Civitate Dei, lib. xix. c. 23, § 4, Opp. tom. vii. p. 430. Schl.-This principle applies directly to the saint-worship of Romanists. The better informed system, if divested of its Pla-` among them keep within the bounds which Ammonius approved, the less informed naturally fall into the excesses which he pronounced blemishes of the pagan system. Ed.] What we have stated in these sections respecting the doctrines of Ammonius we have collected from the books and discussions of his followers, who are called New Platonics. Ammonius himself left no writings; and he forbade his followers from ever publishing his doctrines, but they did not obey him. See Porphyry, Vita Plotini, cap. iii. p. 97, ed. Fabricii, lib. iv. Biblioth. Græca. Yet there can be no doubt, that all we have stated was invented by Ammonius himself, whom the whole family of the New Platonics constantly affirm to have been the author of their philosophy. — [Dr. Mosheim, in his Commentarii de Rebus Christ. ante Constantin. M. § 27-32, p. 280-298, has given a more full account of Ammonius and his doctrines, and has cited, particularly, his chief authorities; but the substance of his statements is contained in the preceding sections, and his most important authorities are referred to in the notes of Schlegel, which are all here preserved. Tr.] |