Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

measure (on the life of Christ); and Paschalis Operis libri v. in prose. An Exposition of all the Epp. of Paul is falsely ascribed to him. The works of Sedulius have been published repeatedly, and are to be found in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. vi.

Valerianus, a bishop in the maritime Alps; flourished A. D. 439, and was alive in 455. His 20 Homilies and an Epistle were published by Ja. Sirmond, Paris, 1612, 8vo; also in the Bibliotheca Patrum, tom. viii.

Eustathius, flourished A. D. 440, the neat Latin translator of St. Basil's nine Homilies on the Hexaëmeron; extant among the works of Basil the Great.

Philippus, a presbyter, and disciple of Jerome; flourished A. D. 440, and died A. D. 455. He wrote a Commentary on Job, in three books; published, Basil, 1527, 4to and fol. It has been ascribed both to Beda and to Jerome.

Idatius, or Hydatius, a Spanish bishop, who flourished A. D. 445, and died, A. D. 468. He wrote a Chronicon, from A. D. 379 to A. D. 428; and afterwards continued it to A. D. 467; first published, entire, by Ja. Sirmond, Paris, 1619, 8vo; and since, in the Works of Sirmond, Paris, 1696, and Venice, 1729. It is barbarous in style, and frequently inaccurate as to facts; yet affords valuable aid in tracing the movements of the Goths and Suevi.

Zachæus, the reputed author of three books of discussion, between Zachæus a Christian, and Apollonius a pagan, in regard to Christianity. The book was probably written about A. D. 450; and is published in L. Dacherii Spicilegium,

tom. x.

Salonius, son of Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, and himself a Gallic bishop, flourished A. D. 453. He wrote an Exposition of the Parables of Solomon; and a Mystical Paraphrase on Ecclesiastes: both extant, in the Orthodoxographia, and in Biblioth. Patr. tom. viii.

Victorius, or Victorinus, a Gallic mathematician; flourished A. D. 457; author of a Paschal Canon, in two parts; the first part exhibits the principles and the method of calculating Easter; the second is a table of Easter days from A.D. 28 to A. D. 457. This Canon was recommended by the council of Orleans, A.D. 541, and was first published by Egid. Bucherius, Antw. 1634. fol.

Hilary, bishop of Rome, A. D. 461— 467. He was the bishop of Rome's

legate to the council of Ephesus in 449. Twelve of his Epistles are extant.

Paulinus Petricordius, or Vesuntius, (i. e. of Besançon,) a Gallic poet, who flourished A. D. 461, and is often confounded with Paulinus of Nola. He wrote, de Vita Sti Martini, libri vi., an uninteresting poem, extant in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. vi. and published by Daunius, with notes, Lips. 1686, 8vo.

Claudius Mamertus, a Gallic poet, a presbyter, and assistant to the bishop of Vienne; flourished A. D. 462. He wrote de Statu Animi, libri iii.; two Epistles; a Poem against various errors; and a Hymn on the Crucifixion; all extant in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. vii.

Simplicius, bishop of Rome, A. D. 467 -483. He was much engaged in contests with the eastern patriarchs; and has left us nineteen Epistles; extant in Concilior. tom. iv.

Ruricius, senior, bishop of Limoges, in France; flourished A. D. 470, but was alive in 506. He has left us two books of Epistles; published by H. Canisius, Antiq. Lectiones, tom. v. (or tom. i. of new ed.) and in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. viii.

Remigius, bishop of Rheims, A. D. 471 -533. He baptized Clovis, king of the Franks, with many of his lords; was a man of note; and has left us five Epistles, together with his Will. The Exposition of Paul's Epistles, attributed to him, is not his.

Faustus, abbot of Lerins, and then bishop of Riez, in France, A. D. 472— 480, or 485; a Semi-Pelagian. His works are, de Gratia Dei et Libero Arbitrio, libri ii. with several Sermons, Epistles and Tracts; collected in Biblioth. Patr. tom. viii.

Felix, bishop of Rome, A. D. 483— 492; was much in controversy with the eastern patriarchs. Fifteen of his Epistles are extant.

Victor Vitensis, an orthodox African bishop, who fled to Constantinople A.D. 487, and there composed a History of the Persecutions in Africa, under Genseric and Hunneric, kings of the Vandals. It was published with Optatus Milevitanus, Paris, 1659, 8vo; with Vigilius Tapsensis, Dijon, 1664, 4to; and in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. viii.

Alcimus Ecdicius Avitus, bishop of Clermont, A. D. 490-523. He has left us five poetic books, On the Creation and Fall of Man, the Flood, and the Passage of the Red Sea; a poem in praise of Virginity; eighty-seven Epistles; and some

Sermons; published by Ja. Sirmond, Paris, 1643; and in the Biblioth. Patr. tom. ix.

Gelasius, bishop of Rome, A. D. 492— 496. Sixteen of his Epistles, and fragments of various other works, are extant. The famous decree of a Roman council, A. D. 494, de Libris Canonicis, Ecclesiasticis, et Apocryphis, ascribed to Gelasius, is of dubious authenticity.

Gennadius, a presbyter of Marseilles, flourished A. D. 495; and wrote de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, or a catalogue of authors, continuing Jerome's catalogue, from the year 393 to A. D. 495. His book de Fide, and his Life of Jerome, are also extant. But his eight books against all the heresies, his six books against Nestorius, his three books against Pelagius, his Tract on the Millennium,

and his translations from the Greek fathers, are lost.

Rusticus Elpidius, physician to Theodoric, king of the Goths; flourished about A. D. 498; and has left twentyfour Epigrams on Scriptural facts, and a Poem on the Benefits of Christ.

Julianus Pomerius, of Mauritania; a teacher of rhetoric at Arles, and a presbyter there; flourished A. D. 498. His eight books de Anima, and several smaller works, are lost. But his three books de Vita Contemplativa, are extant among the works of Prosper; to whom they have been wrongly ascribed.

Symmachus, bishop of Rome, A. D. 498 -514; famous for his excommunication of the emperor Anastasius; has left us twelve Epistles. Tr.]

CHAPTER III.

HISTORY OF THEOLOGY.

§ 1. Many points in theology better ascertained.—§ 2. Increase of superstition.— § 3. Interpretation of the Scriptures.-§ 4. Most of the interpreters incompetent. -§ 5. Some were more able.-§ 6. State of dogmatic theology.-§ 7. Theological disputants. § 8. Their faults.-§ 9. Hence supposititious books.-§ 10. Moral writers. § 11. Mystics. § 12. Superstition of the Stylites. § 13. Further defects of the moralists.-§ 14. Jerome's controversy with Vigilantius.-§ 15. Controversies respecting Origen.

§ 1. In the controversies which in this century agitated nearly all Christendom, many points of theology were more fully explained, and more accurately defined, than they had been before. Thus it was with the doctrine concerning Christ, his person and natures; and those concerning the innate depravity of the human soul, the natural ability of men to live and act as the law of God requires, the necessity of divine grace in order to salvation, human liberty, and the like. For that devout and venerable simplicity of the first ages of the church, which made men believe when God speaks, and obey when he commands, was thought by the chief doctors of this age to be only fit for clowns. Many of those, however, who attempted to explain and

[blocks in formation]

illustrate these doctrines, rather opened ways for disputing than for believing wisely, and living religiously; nor did they so much explain divine mysteries, as involve them in the perplexing folds of subtleties, ambiguous terms, and nice distinctions. To this posterity owes that most abundant crop of ills, contentions, and animosities, which almost baffles human powers. It might be remarked, besides, that some, while pressing adversaries too far, incautiously fell into errors the opposite of theirs, but not less dangerous.

§ 2. The superstitious notions and human devices by which religion was before much clogged, were very considerably augmented. Innumerable suppliants implored the aid of blest spirits which were thought to live with God: no one censuring this preposterous piety. Nor did the question, which afterwards occasioned much debate, namely, in what way the prayers of mortals could reach the ears of residents in heaven, present any difficulties to the Christians of those times. For they did not suppose the souls of saints to be so confined above, as to want means of visiting mortals at their pleasure, and of travelling over various regions. No where, however, were disembodied spirits believed to be more willing and frequent visiters, than in the places where their bodies were interred. And this opinion, which Christians had received from the Greeks and Romans, drew a great conflux of supplicants to the sepulchres of the saints.2 The images of those who were in reputation for sanctity while alive, were now honoured with extraordinary devotion in several places; nor were those wanting who thought such figures kindly graced by the presence of the heavenly personages whom they represented: the very doctrine which pagan priests had formerly applied to statues of Jupiter and Mercury.3 Than the bones of martyrs and the sign of the cross,

[Extracts containing calls upon the saintly dead, may be seen in the Centuria Magdeburgenses, cent. 4, col. 296. Nevertheless, the practice was so unauthorised, and liable to such palpable objection, from reasonable doubts as to the omniscience of the spirits invoked, that the church was rather cautious in committing herself to it. Her first approaches were prayers to God, that the saints might be found intercessors, not prayers to the venerable dead themselves. Ed.]

Lactantius, Divinar. Instit. lib. i. p. 164. Hesiod, Opp. et Dier. v. 122. With which compare Sulpitius Severus, Epist. ii. p. 371. Dial. ii. c. 13, p. 474. Dial iii. p. 512. Eneas Gazæus, Theophrastus, p. 65. Macarius, in Ja. Tollii Insignia Itineris Italici, p. 197, and other writers of that age.

3 Clementina, Homil. x. in Patr. Apostol. tom. i. p. 697. Arnobius, adv. Gentes, lib. vi. p. 254, &c. Casp. Barthius, ad Rutilium Numantian, p. 250.

hardly any thing was believed more powerful to repel the assaults of evil spirits, and calamities of every kind, or to heal, not only bodily diseases, but likewise those of the mind. On the public processions, the holy pilgrimages, the superstitious services paid by the living to the souls of the dead, the multiplication and extravagant veneration of temples, chapels, and altars, and innumerable other proofs of degenerate piety, I forbear to speak particularly. As no one in those times prohibited Christians from retaining and transferring the opinions of their pagan ancestors respecting the soul, heroes, demons, temples, and the like, and transferring them into their devotions; as no one proposed utterly to abolish the ancient pagan institutions, but only to alter them somewhat, and purify them; it was unavoidable, that the religion and worship of Christians should be contaminated by these faults. This also I will add, that the doctrine of some sort of fire to purge souls after death, which eventually gained so much wealth for the sacred order, now came forth with a publicity and authority hitherto unknown. 6

Prudentius, Hymn. xi. de Coronis, p. 150, 151. Sulpitius Severus, Epist. i. p. 364. Eneas Gazæus, Theophrastus,

p. 173, ed. Barth.

5

[These pilgrimages were then so common, that some Christians fell into absurdities truly ridiculous. They journeyed quite to Arabia, in order to see the dunghill on which the diseased Job sat, and to kiss the ground which had absorbed his precious blood; as Chrysostom describes it, (Homily v. to the Antiochians,) where he says, in his rhetorical way, that the dunghill of Job was more venerable than the throne of a king. Schl.]

On this subject, Augustine deserves especially to be consulted, de Octo Quæstionibus ad Dulcitium Liber, c. xiii. Opp. tom. vi. p. 128; de Fide et Operibus, c. xvi. p. 182; de Fide, Spe, et Caritate, § 118. p. 222; Exposition of Psalm xxxv. § iii. &c. [The well-known passage of Virgil shows no less clearly than finely, the pagan origin of this purgatorial doctrine.

Quin et, supremo cum lumine, vita reliquit,
Non tamen omne malum miseris, nec fun-

ditus omnes

Corporea excedunt pestes; penitusque ne

cesse est

Multa diu concreta modis inolescere miris.

[blocks in formation]

That the lingering infection of human wickedness was to be burnt out by fire, became at length the prevailing hypothesis. Christians were Scripturally taught, 2 Pet. iii. 10, to expect a final conflagration, and pagan prepossessions led them to give this the same purifying properties that had been usually given to the Deluge, only much more complete. One opinion was, accordingly, that all mankind will have to pass through the final conflagration to judgment, and will suffer more or less individually, in proportion to the degrees of iniquity waiting to be burnt out. In time, the difficulties in the way of this hypothesis displaced it by the general belief of a permanent purgatory, in which the process of burning out worldly pollution may be constantly going on. Ed.]

1

§ 3. The number of those who devoted their talents to the explanation of the Scriptures, was not so great as in the preceding century, when there was less of controversy among Christians; and yet the number was not small. I merely name such as expounded only one or a few books of Scripture, namely, Victor of Antioch, Polychronius, Philo of Carpathus, Isidore of Cordova, Salonius, and Andreas of Cæsarea. The two most distinguished interpreters of this century, and who explained a great part of the sacred volume, and not altogether without success, were Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, and Theodore of Mopsuestia. Both excelled in genius and learning, and would not follow in the footsteps of those who preceded them without some reason. The expositions of the former are before the public; those of the latter lie concealed in the East, among the Nestorians, and are worthy, for various reasons, to see the light. Cyril of Alexandria deserves a place among the interpreters; but a far more honourable one is due to Isidore of Pelusium, whose epistles contain various things extremely useful for understanding and explaining the sacred books.9

§ 4. Most of these interpreters, whether Greek or Latin, constantly re-echo Origen's old note, and hunt for abstruse meanings, or, as the Latins of those times commonly say, mysteries, in the plainest expressions and sentences, taking no notice whatever of the force and power in the words themselves. Some of the Greeks, indeed, and in particular Theodoret, laboured not unsuccessfully in explaining the pages of the New Testament: which we may ascribe to their acquaintance with the Greek language, with which they had been familiar from their infancy. But upon the Hebrew Scriptures, neither the Greeks nor the Latins cast much light. Nearly all who attempted to explain them, making no use of their judgment, applied the whole either to Christ and his benefits, or to Anti-Christ and his wars and desolations, and to the kindred subjects.

§ 5. Here and there one, however, more sagacious and wiser

"See Rich. Simon, Histoire Critique des Principaux Commentateurs du Nouveau Test. cap. xxii. p. 314, and Critique de la Bibliothèque Ecclésiast. de M. du Pin, tom. i. p. 180, [and note 6, p. 435, above. Tr.]

Jos. Sim. Asseman, Biblioth. Oriental. Clement. Vaticana, tom. iii. § ii. p. 227. Rich. Simon, Critique de la Biblioth.

Ecclésiast. par M. du Pin, tom. i. p. 108. 677. [See also note, p. 437, above. Tr.]

9

Concerning both, see Rich. Simon, Histoire des Principaux Commentateurs du Nouveau Test. c. xxi. p. 300, &c. [For some account of Cyril, see note 5, p. 434, and concerning Isidore, note, p. 436, above. Tr.]

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »