In uninspired writers we should have detected the prejudices of their education and of the age in which they lived. We should have found some extravagant eulogies of martyrdom; some fanciful notions respecting spiritual beings; some captious and scrupulous objection to practices in themselves indifferent. And, in their public defences of the faith before their adversaries, we should have perceived them, not only speaking boldly, as they ought to speak, but sometimes displaying a subtilty too nearly allied to the craftiness of the disputer of this world; and on other occasions indulging in sarcasm or invective against the various errors of Heathen worship.

In the Scriptures of the New Testament, we find none of these faults: they are uniformly dignified, simple, reasonable. But a very limited acquaintance with the writings of those who endeavored to follow their steps will show that, if the Apostles and Evangelists were preserved from such extravagance and error, they owed it to a wisdom which was not of this world.

The works, which have been chosen for the present purpose, are the Epistle of CLEMENT OF ROME to the Corinthians; that of POLYCARP; the genuine Epistles of IGNATIUS, with the Accounts of the Martyrdom of Ignatius and Polycarp: the first Apology of JUSTIN MARTYR; and the Apology of TERTULLIAN.*

These Epistles, and the short histories of the Martyrdoms, have been long known to the English reader, in Archbishop WAKE's very valuable translation. It may appear presumptuous to have changed, in any degree, language which is at once so faithful and so scriptural as that which he has employed. And no

* [The two last named works are not included in the present edition; being reserved for a subsequent volume of the series.]

b*

alteration has been made, except after due deliberation. In Archbishop WAKE's translation, however, the quotations from the Scriptures are given in the words of the authorized English version. Now the original quotations from the Old Testament are often taken from the Septuagint or some other version, so as to differ considerably from the Hebrew text, and consequently from the English version: and in other instances, references are made to the Old and New Testaments in such a manner as to express the general sense of passages, rather than the words. As the intention of this work is to give as accurate a representation of these writings of the Fathers as the difference of idiom will admit, it seemed advisable to translate these quotations also as faithfully as possible, even in the instances in which they deviate from the literal sense of the original Scriptures. It is not always easy to determine how closely a writer intended to quote a passage; and in many cases, such references may be regarded as a kind of comment upon the text to which allusion is made.

a

EPISTLE OF CLEMENT..

IT is a happy circumstance, that of the very few remains of the writings of the first century, except the books of the New Testament, we should possess the truly Apostolical Epistle of CLEMENT OF ROME.

b

CLEMENT is believed, upon the general testimony of Ecclesiastical historians, to have been the same whom St. Paul mentions among "his fellow-laborers, whose names are written in the book of life." Of his early

It is perhaps the only remaining writing of the first century. The Epistle, ascribed to BARNABAS, and the Shepherd of HERMAS, existed in the second century: but probably were written after the apostolic age.

b EUSEBIUS Hist. Eccles. iii. 12.

.Phil. iv. 3.

years little is certainly known. It is believed, however, that he was born of a noble family at Rome, and sent to Athens for the purpose of education: that his conversion to Christianity arose from unsuccessful inquiries into which he had been led respecting the immortality of the soul; that he was instructed and baptized by St. Peter, and for some time continued to be his disciple.

That Clement was bishop of Rome is a fact which is not disputed but the time of his accession to that see is variously computed. IRENEUS and EUSEBIUS mention Clement to have been the third in succession from the Apostles: and EUSEBIUS expressly states the twelfth year of Domitian's reign, A. D. 92, as the year in which Clement succeeded Anencletus. TERTULLIAN' says that he was ordained bishop by St. Peter; whence it has been supposed that Linus was ordained bishop of the Gentile Church of Rome by St. Paul, and Clement, bishop of the Church of Jewish converts by St. Peter; that Linus was succeeded by Anencletus or Anacletus, and at his death, about A. D. 91, the two Churches were united, and the episcopacy of Clement over them both began. This is by many considered the most probable way of reconciling the difficulties which exist in determining the succession of the first bishops of Rome;" and was the opinion of CAVE, when he wrote the Life of Clement. But at a subsequent period, he adopted the conclusion of DODWELL, that Linus and Anencletus lived as bishops of Rome but a very short time, and that

d IRENEUS adv. Hæres. iii. 3. EUSEB. Hist. Eccles. v. 6.

• EUSEBIUS Hist. Eccles. iii. 13-15. See LARDNER, Credibility of the Gospels, Part ii. c. 2.

f TERTULLIAN, De Prescriptione Hæreticorum, c. 32.

See note (a) on his Epistle, Sect. 54. p. 33.

h CAVE'S Lives of the Fathers.

i Historia Literaria, 65.

DODWELL, Disputatio Singularis de Romanorum Pontificum Successione.

Clement succeeded them about A. D. 64 or 65, and continued to the year 81. Bishop PEARSON' concludes that Clement was bishop of Rome from A. D. 69 to 83.

It is

The date of the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians is involved in equal uncertainty. Archbishop WAKE" supposes it to have been written soon after the termination of the persecution under Nero, between the years 64 and 70. LARDNER" refers it to the year 96. There are but few internal marks of time in the Epistle itself, and none which can be regarded as decisive. plain that it was written at the close of some persecution; for, at the beginning of it, the Church of Rome refers to "the sudden and repeated dangers and calamities which had befallen them." Persecution however, for the sake of the Christian faith, was already so common, that it cannot be certainly said whether these words are an allusion to some local distress, or to a general persecution. But they might refer either to A. D. 64, at the end of the persecution under Nero, or to A. p. 94, after that under Domitian.

In favor of the earlier of these dates, Clement in Sect. 5. seems to speak of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, as having been recently put to death. The expressions in Sect. 41. respecting the Temple at Jerusalem, seem to countenance the opinion, that the Temple was still standing, and that the Jewish war, which began A.D. 67, had not yet broken out. The Fortunatus also, whose name is found in Sect. 59. is conceived to have come from Corinth, and to have been the same, who is mentioned by St. Paul together with Stephanus, whose

Disputatio de Successione primâ Romanorum Pontificum.

m See also DODWELL, Addit. ad PEARSON. Dissert. ii. c. 24. CAVE Hist. Literar. 65.

house was the first fruits of Achaia. If this supposition be correct, it is a presumption in favor of the earlier date: since at the later date, Fortunatus, if alive, could hardly have been capable of undergoing so long a journey.

On the other hand, in Sect. 44. Clement seems to speak as if there had been a succession of intermediate persons in the Church, between himself and the Apostles.

The phrase "in the beginning of the Gospel," and the appellation of "ancient Church," applied to the Corinthians, have also been adduced as favoring a later date.

The high value which the ancient Christian Church set upon this Epistle of Clement is ascertained by the commendations which they bestow upon it. IRENEUS describes this Epistle as having been written by the Church of Rome under Clement, to the Corinthians, and speaks of it as a most powerful Epistle. EUSEBIUS * denominates it "a great and admirable Epistle." Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, about the year 170 testifies to the fact that this Epistle was read in the Church of Corinth from ancient times: and other writers show that it was publicly read in other Christian Churches. EUSEBIUS observes also that there is a great similarity in the style of this Epistle and that of the Epistle to the Hebrews: and that Clement on several occasions quotes that book of the New Testament.

t

Notwithstanding the great esteem in which the primitive Church held this Epistle of Clement, and the

▸ Sect. 47.

Adv. Hæres, iii. 3. EUSEB. Hist. Eccles. v. 6. Hist. Eccles. iii. 16. .EUSEBIUS Hist. Eccles. iv. 23. EUSEBIUS Hist. Eccles. iii. 16. JEROME de Viris Illustribus, c. 15. EPIPHANIUS Hæres. xxx. Num. 15. PHOTIUS, Biblioth, Cod, 123,