edge, the vile to the righteous. Their maxims, he says, are of the following nature: "Do not examine, but believe!' "Your faith will save you." "The wisdom of this life is bad, but foolishness is a good thing."1 "Those who invite to a participation in other mysteries," he continues, "make proclamation as follows: 'Every one who has clean hands and a prudent tongue;' others, again, thus: He who is pure from all pollution, and whose soul is conscious of no evil, and who has lived well and justly.' Such is the proclamation made by those who promise purification from sins. But let us hear what kind of persons these Christians invite. Every one, they say, who is a sinner, who is devoid of understanding, who is a child, and, to speak generally, whoever is unfortunate, him will the kingdom of God receive." The number of parties, or factions, found among the Christians is also cited as a ground of reproach.3 2 Many of the objections of Celsus, it is to be observed, were really of the nature of compliments to Christianity. They serve to illustrate how far the plane of the Christian religion is above that of an unspiritual philosophy, since they originated in the inability of the pagan critic to appreciate either the nobility of the Divine condescension, or the fitness of human condescension to men of low estate. An attack in a somewhat profounder spirit came from Porphyry of Tyre, a representative of Neo-Platonism in the latter part of the third century. This was the philosophy of the heathen revival, which began in the latter half of the second century, and its character cor 1 Cont. Cel., i. 9; iii. 18, 44. 2 iii. 59. 8 iii.10. Unlike the responded to its age and associations. earlier philosophies, it assumed a distinctively religious cast; it patronized the heathen religion, and sought a rational interpretation of its mythology; it recognized man's craving after the supernatural, and was possessed with a spirit of ready assent to what appeared to be tokens of the supernatural. Eclectic in spirit, it did not shun to borrow, to a certain extent, from Christianity. Still, it was radically hostile to Christianity. It favored the persecuting policy of the Roman government. One of its representatives, Hierocles, was a prominent instigator and agent of the Diocletian persecution. It treated with scorn the claim for exceptional reverence toward Christ, and sought to exhibit the religious heroes of heathenism as being still more deserving. Thus the life of the philosopher and magician Apollonius of Tyana was idealized and set forth as something rivalling the life depicted in the gospel history. Hierocles openly drew the parallel in the early part of the fourth century, with the design of exhibiting the superiority of the heathen teacher and wonderworker. The same design, as many critics conclude, lay at the basis of the biography of Apollonius, which Philostratus wrote near the beginning of the third century.2 A like interest may perhaps be detected in the endeavor of Porphyry and Jamblichus to exalt Pythagoras beyond measure. Unlike Celsus, Porphyry ascribed to Christ the char 1 Lactantius, Inst. Div., v. 2, 3. 2 Opinion is not unanimous as to the conscious intent of Philostratus. A brief summary of the evidence in favor of the conclusion expressed above may be found in Pressensé, Martyrs and Apologists, Book III., chap. i.; J. H. Newman, Historical Sketches, vol. ii. acter of a noble and sincere teacher of the truth. We are not to calumniate him, but only to pity those, who, in pursuance of a delusion which fate has brought upon them, worship him as God since his exaltation to heaven. From such fragments as remain of his work against Christianity, Porphyry seems to have made a special effort to invalidate the authority of Scripture, and to disparage the apostles as compared with their Master. He denied the genuineness of the Book of Daniel, emphasized the disagreement between Peter and Paul at Antioch as being contradictory to the authority of their teaching,1 alleged that the repudiation of sacrifices by Christians was out of harmony with their prescription in the Old Testament,2 and questioned whether the doctrine of eternal punishment could be reconciled with the rule of proportionate penalty which Christ himself enunciated. He also intimated that the late appearance of Christ in the history of the race agrees ill with the supposition of necessary dependence upon him for salvation.4 Hierocles, who wrote in the time of the Diocletian persecution, though assuming to deal with Christianity in a friendly and candid way, was less remote than Porphyry from the tactics of Celsus. As Lactantius represents, he ventured to assail Christ himself, as well as his followers, with odious accusations.5 1 Jerome, Epist., cxi. 6 (Migne). 2 Augustine, Epist., cii. 4 Ibid. Compare Jerome, Epist., cxxxiii. 5 Inst. Div., v. 2, 3. See also Euseb., Adv. Hieročiem. 8 Ibid. IV. CHRISTIAN APOLOGY. The early Christians were ready to give a reason for their faith and their conduct. Celsus spoke slanderously when he said of them that they reprobated investigation, and cried only, "Believe!" A long list of apologists, held in honor by the Church, refutes the charge. A narrow-minded party may have depreciated any argumentative defence of Christianity; but those who embodied the enlightened sentiment of the Church were willing to take their cause before the bar of reason, and attest its divinity by argument, as well as by holy living and patient suffering. "The representatives of the new religion did not allow a single accusation, a single objection, to fall to the ground: they overcame pagan philosophy with its own weapons." 1 Soon after the days of the apostles, apologetic treatises began to appear. Some of the earlier are known only by reputation, or by brief citations. This is true of the apologies of Quadratus, Aristo, Miltiades, and Apollinaris of Hierapolis. The apology of Aristides was recently discovered in Syriac, and a large part of the Greek text identified. Of Melito's numerous writings little remains. The so-called apology which has been found under his name in a Syriac version appears not to have been the apology which is quoted by Eusebius, and indeed, according to the verdict of some of the most competent investigators, is not to be assigned to Melito at all. The anonymous epistle to Diognetus was prob ably one of the earliest specimens of the extant apologetic literature. Near the same time, appeared the 1 Pressensé. writings of Justin Martyr, defending Christianity before the bar both of heathenism and Judaism. Then followed, in the Greek Church, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen. In the Latin Church, Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Cyprian, and Arnobius were the most conspicuous in this order of writing. Lactantius was also a noted apologist; but, as a Christian writer, he belonged to the beginning of the next period. The apologists differed noticeably among themselves as respects their appreciation of heathen culture. Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Athenagoras, and Minucius Felix are examples of the most favorable estimate. Writers of this class conceived that the divine Word, the universal Reason, which appears full-orbed in the Christian revelation, has shed some rays of light into the souls of all men. Especially in the Greek philosophers they recognized men who had been enriched with genuine glimpses of spiritual truths. They were not unconscious of the mass of errors with which these germs of truth were mingled; still, they took pleasure in pointing out the instances in which philosophy appeared to coincide with Christianity. That the noblest sayings of the philosophers had a certain affinity with the Christian religion, was, in their view, a valuable evidence for the supreme reasonableness of that religion. As examples of a less favorable estimate of heathen culture, we have Tatian among the Greeks, and Tertullian among the Latins. The latter, with his strongly marked characteristics, might be regarded as the founder of a special type of apologetics. He, too, honored the reason in man, but his confidence was |