ページの画像
PDF
ePub

2. Clemens Alexandrinus never cited or appealed to this Gospel. This indeed does neceffarily follow from the former head, but will more clearly appear, if we confider, that all the feveral fragments of it, that are extant in Clemens, were produced by the hereticks, against whom he is difputing, not by him, as will appear by a bare reading the places cited: fo the first pallage, page 445, he premifes ἔπειτα καὶ διασρεπλέον, αὐτὲς τὰ ὑπ ̓ αὐτῶν φερόμενα διαλύοντας, ὧδέ πως, τῇ Σαλώμῃ ὁ Κύριος, ὅτε. Now I muft overthrow and confute the things urged or cited by them out of the Gospel of the Egyptians, &c. So likewise in the next pallage, p. 452. Οἱ δὲ ἀντιτασσόμενοι τῇ κλίσει το Θεό και κεῖνα λέγεσι τὰ πρὸς Σαλώμην εἰρημένα, ὧν πρότερον ἐμνήθημεν, &c. They who oppose the designs of God's creation by their specious pretences to celibacy, cite thofe things, which our Saviour spake to Salome, which I have above mentioned, &c. Again in the third paffage, P. 453. He premifes, οὐχὶ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς τῶν πρὸς Σαλώμην εἰτ xai guéiwy impéphor, &c. The things which follow, spoken to Salome, they cite, who had rather use any books than the Canonical ones, &c. Once more p. 465. he particularly mentions the person who cited this Gofpel, Διὰ τῦτό τοι ὁ Κασσιανὸς φησὶ, πυνθανομένης Tūs Zaλwμns, &c. Wherefore Caffianus faith, when Salome afked Chrift, &c. So that nothing can be more manifest, than that Clemens himself does not cite or appeal to this Apocryphal piece, but only cites the writings of hereticks, in which appeals were made to it.

But, 3. Clemens was fo far from citing it, or approving the Gospel of the Egyptians, that he utterly rejects it, as an impious, heretical, and Apocryphal book. This will be manifeft, if we obferve, that the only defign of Clemens, in producing these paffages out of the hereticks' books, is to confute them, and their ridiculous notions of the unlawfulness of all forts of marriages. Hence he begins with this introduction, p. 445. "As for those who by fpecious pretences of continency think "impiously both of the creation, and the Holy Creator, the only Almighty God, and say, that no marriages are lawful,

k

nor procreation of children; that we ought not to bring "others into the world to be unhappy, nor fatisfy the cruelty “of death, I have the following things to say; first, that of

"John

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"John, And now, there are many Antichrifts, whence we know "the later times are come. They went out from us, but were "never of us, for if they had been of us, then they would have « continued with us. Ἔπειτα καὶ διασρεπλίου αὐτὲς, τὰ ὑπ ̓ αὐτῶν σε φερόμενα διαλυόντας, ὧδέ πως, τῇ Σαλώμη, &c. In the next place "I must confute thofe things, which they cite (out of the Gof"pel of the Egyptians) in this manner, When Salome asked "Chrift, &c. p. 445." Which when he had confuted, he introduces the next paffage thus: " They who by their plausible celibacy oppofe the creation of God, urge the things spoken by "Chrift to Salome, &c. p. 452." And in the next page, though he does not call this Gospel in so many words Apocryphal, yet he plainly does in other words: Ouxi nai rà i§ñs τῶν πρὸς Σαλώμην εἰρημένων, ἐπιφέρεσιν, οἱ πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ κατὰ τὴν αλήθειαν εὐαγγελικῷ τοιχήσαντες Κανόνι, φαμένης γὰρ αὐτῆς, 96. The things which follow, spoken to Salome, they cite, who had rather follow any thing than the true Canon of the Gospel, &c. p. 453. Once more, when he is about to answer the fragment urged out of this Gospel, he reasons against it thus: Ipro pèr år, iv τοῖς παραδιδομένοις ἡμῖν τέταρσιν Εὐαγ[ελίοις οὐκ ἔχομεν τὸ ῥητὸν, αλλ' iv tŷ nat' Aiyumlíes. First, fays he, this saying is not in either of the four Gofpel which have been (received) delivered to us, but in that according to the Egyptians, p. 465. He who will lay these things together without prejudice, muft evidently perceive, that as Clemens never faw, fo he utterly rejected the authority of this Gospel, and esteemed it no other than a vile forgery of fome impious hereticks. I with Dr. Grabe had well confidered these things, before he gave this Gospel fo high a character; but prejudice ftrangely blinds the greatest men; and it is easy to fee that Dr. Grabe's circumftances, when in England, inclined him to a too fond affection for Apocryphal books: fo that I think Le Clerc did him no injuftice, when he lately ftyled him Apocryphorum nimis fludiofus.

Hiftor. Eccl. de Afcenf. Chrift. ad Ann. 29. not. ad. §. 13. p. 333.

OBSERY,

OBSERV. III. The Gospel of the Egyptians feems to have beon compofed by fome very early hereticks to support their doctrines of celibacy and abftemiousness, and very probably by those of Egypt: To confirm this conjecture, I obferve,...

First, That there were in the very infancy of Christianity great numbers of perfons called Chriftians, who afferted the unlawfulness of marriages, and professed a great abftemiousness in their manner of life. Against thefe St. Paul writes in feveral of his Epiftles; for instance, those words, 1. Cor. vii. 1. It is good for a man not to touch a woman; which are not St. Paul's words, (as our Tranflation makes them to be, and most persons think) but their words to him, intimating a question that had been started by fome hereticks among them, whether it was lawful to marry? In his first Epistle to Timothy, (c. iv. 3.) he more plainly mentions them as departers from the faith, giving beed to feducing Spirits, and doctrines of Devils-forbidding to marry, and commanding to abftain from meats, &c. And again, in his Epistle to the Coloffians, (c. ii. 21.) he blames them for being influenced by the doctrines which commanded them to touch not, tafte not, and handle not, i. e. not touch women, but abstain from marriages, and certain fort of meats. In these places the Apoftle is guarding his converts against the artful infinuations of those who declared it was unlawful for a man to marry, or have any concern with a woman; and thus those, who lived near the Apostle's time, and while these foolish tenets were yet in esteem, understood him. So Clemens Alexandrinus in the forecited book intèrprets both those last paffages of Paul, concerning those who abhorred matrimony, περὶ τῶν βδελυσσομένων γάμον ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος λέγει ; and Tertullian expounds the paffage in Tim. iv. 3. The Apostle, fays he, writes against them who forbad marriage, &c. But befides the Apostle's mentioning this, we find it in the writings of the first Fathers continually fo; in the Epiftle under the name of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, we read, if any one call lawful marriage and the begetting of children corruption and pollution, or think any fort of food abominable, such person b. De Monogam. c. 15.

a P. 447. See also

VOL. I.

p. 462.

P

b

has

1

has the apoftate dragon dwelling within hima. Though it is obfervable, that in another part of that fame Epiftle, the author gives no small encomium to the virgins in the Church of Philadelphia, who were like Elijah, Jofhua, Melchifedeck, Elifha, Jeremiah, John Baptift, Timothy, Titus, Euodius, and Clement, who lived all their days in celibacy.

Irenæus, in his account of the herefy and followers of Saturninus, tells us, it was their opinion, that marrying and begetting children was from the Devil, that they abftained from living creatures, and by their pretended fanctity and abftemioufnefs induced many to follow them. The fame he afferts was the doctrine of the Encratites, who fprang from Marcion, and Saturninus of Tatian, and his followers. Tertullian ! affirms the fame of Marcion often f. Clemens Alexandrinus has wrote a whole book against this doctrine of the Marci-onites and Gnofticks, viz. that, in which the Gospel of the Egyptians is mentioned. In fhort, we find this doctrine profeffed not only by the forementioned, but the Manichees, Apoftolicks or Apotacticks, Origenians, and most of the hereticks of thofe primitive times of the Church. I will only add, that in the fpurious book, called The Conftitutions of the Apoftles, there is alfo frequent mention of this doctrine *; all which laid together will fufficiently confirm the truth of my -observation, that there were in the infancy of Christianity many perfons called Chriftians, who denied the lawfulness of marriage.

A

[ocr errors]

Secondly, Thefe heretical opinions prevailed in a very remarkable degree in Egypt. This I gather,

[ocr errors]

1. From the common opinion of the antients, that the Thera-> I peutæ or Effenes (for it cannot be reasonably doubted but they were the fame persons), of whom and their opinions : Philo has wrote a whole book, were no other than fome imper-fect Chriftians. Eufebius has largely attempted the proof of

[blocks in formation]

this, and that by no contemptible arguments. He firft pofitively afferts, that after St. Mark had preached up and down in Egypt, and even planted Churches in the city of Alexandria, there were immediately a great number of converts, who entered upon a rigid abftemious life. This I take as a fact most certain, because it is by him so positively afferted, and not a conjecture drawn from Philo, who never mentions any thing of St. Mark. After this he produces a great part of Philo's book concerning the Effenes in Egypt, and their various fentiments, endeavouring to fhew, they were no other than Chrif tians, and that their antient facred books were the Prophets of the Old Teftament, the Gospels and Epiftles of the New Teftament. Jerome had the fame opinion of Philo's book: he fays in the Life of Mark, that he went with his Gospel, which he had wrote, inta Egypt, and that he first preached Chrift there, and conftituted a Church; that he was fo remarkable in the abftemiousness of his life, that he obliged all his converts to follow his example; infomuch that Philo, the most eloquent of all the Jewish writers, when he saw the first (Christian) Church at Alexandria ftill obferving the Jewish customs, thought it would be to the honour of his nation, (viz. the Jews) to write a book concerning their way of life; and as Luke fays, the Chriftians at Jerufalem had all things common, fo he relates that it was at Alexandria under Mark's inftructions. And to the fame purpose a little after, in his Life of Philo, Jerome faith, that he placed Philo among the Church writers, because, by writing a book concerning the firft Church of Mark at Alexandria, he has faid much in commendation of the Chriftians: he not only mentions fuch as being there, but in many other provinces, and calls their places of abode monafteries; from whence it appears, that the first Chriftians, who believed there on Chrift, were fuch as the monks now pretend and defire to be, viz. to have all things common, &c.

[ocr errors]

Epiphanius alfo followed Eufebius in his opinion", and makes Philo's Effenes at Alexandria not only to be Mark's

Hift. Ecclef. lib. 2. c. 16, 17. ⚫ Catal. Viror. Illuftr. in Marco.

Ibid. in Philone. d Hæref. 29. §. 4.

P 2

converts

« 前へ次へ »