after all he simply records the words of Christ, without giving us the interpretation which he put upon them. And in these words it deserves notice that the idea of holiness is so permeating, that the trees are said to desire the blessing of the Lord.

In examining the Ep-Apostolic writings for the sake of their doctrines we have to bring them out of a living practical form into an intellectual lifeless shape. The doctrines thus brought out are found to be the same in the main as those of the New Testament. Nowhere is Christ directly called God in them. Nowhere is a relief from punishment spoken of as the result of his life or death. His work from beginning to end is a purely moral work. There is no curious prying into the peculiar nature of Christ's death. The Spirit is mentioned without precision. The great facts relating to man's sin and salvation are introduced in a broad indefinite real manner. No curious questions are discussed. And the final state of man is set forth in plain undefined easily understood language. The Scriptures of the Old Testament are often referred to. The books of the New are never spoken of as inspired, and never mentioned as authorities in matters of belief.

Some indeed have tried to show that there exist great differences between the beliefs of the Apostles and those of the Apostolical Fathers. They suppose that a degeneracy is clearly traceable in the latter, and that dogmatic theology made an "immense retrograde movement in their hands f." The forms of the beliefs are often the same, but they "reproduce them without entering into their inner sense g." How false these opinions are, we leave the reader to judge from the accounts of their theology which we present.

f Reuss on Clemens: Theolog. Chret. vol. ii. p. 327.

* Pressensé, Histoire des Trois Premiers Siècles de l'Eglise Chrétienne, vol. ii. p. 371.

Literature.

The writings of the Apostolical Fathers have been frequently collected. The first separate collection of them is that of Cotelerius (Paris 1672. II. fol.), which was reprinted and edited with additions by Joannes Clericus, Antwerp 1698. The second edition of Clericus's edition of Cotelerius is the most valuable. It was published at Amsterdam in 1724. It contains the works of Barnabas, Clemens, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, real and spurious, with many prefaces, notes, and dissertations, some of great length, such as Pearson's Defence of the Ignatian Epistles.

The next collection of the Apostolical Fathers was by L. Thomas Ittigius, who prefixed a dissertation on the writers who flourished immediately after the Apostles (Lips. 1699, 8vo). Collections were also edited by Rich. Russel (Lond. 1746, II. 8vo), Frey (Basil 1742, 8vo), Hornemann (Havniæ 1828, II. 8vo), Reithmayr (Munich 1844, 12mo), Grenfell (Rugby 1844), and Muralto (Turici 1847), none of which are of great value. The modern collections which the student will find of great importance are,

1. S. Clementis Romani, S. Ignatii, S. Polycarpi Patrum Apostolicorum quæ supersunt. Accedunt S. Ignatii et S. Polycarpi Martyria ad fidem codicum recensuit, adnotationibus variorum et suis illustravit, indicibus instruxit Guilelmus Jacobson, A.M., editio tertia denuo recognita. (Oxon. 1847.) This work contains a most valuable selection of notes. His recension of Clemens Romanus is the latest and best. He has short prolegomena, consisting of notes to Jerome's notices of the writers. He also gives a very full list of the editions and translations. He does not give the Pastor of Hermas, and only the shorter Greek form of the Epistles of Ignatius.

2. Patrum Apostolicorum Opera, textum ex editionibus præstantissimis repetitum recognovit, annotationibus illustravit, versionem Latinam emendatiorem, prolegomena et indices addidit Carolus Josephus Hefele, SS. Theolog. Doct. ejusdemque in Acad. Tubing. Prof. P.O._(Tubingæ editio tertia,

1847; editio quarta 1855.) Hefele's notes are judicious and valuable. His prolegomena are clear, and contain an admirable summary of the main points discussed by previous writers. He occasionally trusts too much to the learning of others.

3. Patrum Apostolicorum Opera. Textum ad fidem Codicum et Græcorum et Latinorum, ineditorum copia insignium, adhibitis præstantissimis editionibus, recensuit atque emendavit, notis illustravit, versione Latina passim correcta prolegomenis, indicibus instruxit Albertus Rud. Max. Dressel. Accedit Hermæ Pastor ex fragmentis Græcis Lipsiensibus, instituta quæstione de vero ejus textus fonte, auctore Constantino Tischendorf. (Lipsia 1857; editio altera 1863.) Dressel does not stand high as contributing to the illustration of his writers, nor are his prolegomena so clear and well reasoned as they might be. Scholars are immensely indebted to him however for the unedited manuscripts which he has brought to light, and many uncollated ones which he has examined. His work is the most complete collection of the genuine Ep-Apostolic works. The edition of Clericus is the only one that contains almost all the spurious ones.

Besides these editions which throw light on the Apostolic Fathers, mention is to be made here of several important works which have appeared lately in Germany on the state of the Church and of doctrine as exhibited in these writings. The most important are,

1. Rothe: Die Anfänge der Christlichen Kirche und ihrer Verfassung. Ein geschichtlicher Versuch von Richard Rothe. (Wittenb. 1837) Baur's work on the Ursprung des Episcopats is a reply to Rothe.

2. Schwegler: Das Nachapostolische Zeitalter in den Hauptmomenten seiner Entwicklung, von Dr. Albert Schwegler. (Tübingen 1846. 2 vols.)

3. Ritschl: Die Entstehung der alt-Catholischen Kirche; eine kirchen- und dogmengeschichtliche Monographie. (Bonn 1850. Zweite Auflage 1857.)

:

4. Thiersch Die Kirche im Apostolischen Zeitalter. (Frankfurt und Erlangen 1850. Zweite Auflage 1858.)

h I have used the third edition in this work.

5. Lechler: Das Apostolische und das Nachapostolische Zeitalter dargestellt von Gotthard Victor Lechler. Zweite Auflage Stuttgart 1857. The first edition appeared at Haarlem 1851.)

6. Reuss Histoire de la Théologie Chrétienne au Siècle. Apostolique. (Strasburg, 2d ed. 2 vols. 1860.)

7. Hilgenfeld: Apostolische Väter. 1853.

8. Lange: Das Apostolische Zeitalter dargestellt von Dr. J. P. Lange. (Braunschweig 1854.)

9. A popular description of the Apostolical Fathers, their writings, and the circumstances in the midst of which they lived and wrote, is given in "Les Pères Apostoliques et leur Epoque. Par M. l'Abbé Freppel, Professeur à la Faculté de Théologie de Paris. Cours d'éloquence sacrée fait à la Sorbonne pendant l'année 1857-8. (2d ed. 8vo. Paris 1859.) It is strongly Roman Catholic.

There are also three important works on the moral teaching of the Apostolical Fathers.

1. Francisci Jani Jacobi Alberti Junius, Lugduno-Batavi Commentatio de Patrum Apostolicorum Doctrina Morali. (Lugduni Batavorum 1833.)

2. Jani van Gilse Zaandamo-Hollandi Commentatio de Patrum Apostolicorum Doctrina Morali. (Lugduni Batavorum 1833.)

3. Stephani Petri Heyns, ex Promontorio Bona Spei, Commentatio de Patrum Apostolicorum Doctrina Morali. (Lugduni Batavorum 1833.) These three works were prize essays. Besides these there are various separate writings of Bunsen, Baur, and others, which will be mentioned at the proper time.

There is one work in English which treats of the Apostolical Fathers, but by no means in a satisfactory manner. It is, "A History of the Rise and Early Progress of Christianity, by Samuel Hinds, D.D." (Third edition, 1854.) This work has no claims to be regarded as an original production, at least as far as the Apostolical Fathers are concerned. The author is indebted principally to Cave and Bingham, and many of his statements are erroneous and inaccurate.

CHAPTER II.

CLEMENS ROMANUS.

THE first document which comes under our notice is a letter addressed by the Roman Church to the Corinthian. The name of the composer of the letter is not attached to it; but we know what it is most important to know, when we are assured that the sentiments expressed in it are the sentiments of the Roman Church. The composition of the letter was unanimously attributed by the ancients to Clemens Romanus.

Life.

Clemens, called Romanus to distinguish him from Clemens of Alexandria, was an overseer in the Church in Rome. At what period he occupied this position is matter of dispute. The earliest witness on this point is Hegesippus. His testimony admits of a double interpretation. Eusebius a remarks: "And that the divisions among the Corinthians took place in the time of the person mentioned (κατὰ τὸν δηλούμενον), Hegesippus is a trustworthy witness." If we supply to dŋλoúμevov, tòv Kλýμevra, as Lardnerb, Lipsius, Dresseld, and others have done, we get the statement that Clemens was contemporary with the Corinthian disputes. If we supply Xpóvov, as Möhler and Contogones f have done, and as the

Hist. Eccl. iii. 16.

b Credibility, part ii. ch. ii.

c De Clementis Romani Epistola ad Corinthios priore Disquisitio, p. 156. d Patres Apostolici, Prolegg. p. xv.

е

Patrologie, p. 58.

Vol. i. p. 19.