The Manichees. Sect. I.

Supposing Mani to have been imprisoned by the king of Persia, it is not easy to conceive how he could escape, and get to Caschar, or Carchar, said to be a city in the Roman Mesopotamia.

a

The writer of the Dispute says, in that city lived a Christian, of great note for wealth and liberality: Mani in Persia heard of his fame, and was very desirous, as is related, to make a convert of him, hoping he might by him gain the whole province; but not chusing to come to him without some previous notice, he deputes one of his disciples, by name Turbo, whom he sends with a letter to that eminent Christian: this letter is fully inscribed: Manichee' to Marcellus.' But could that be safely or prudently done by a man who had escaped out of prison, and every where sought by his sovereign;

с

The messenger who carries back an answer from Marcellus, finds Mani in a castle named " twelve Arabion, a Persian fortress, as it seems, upon the frontier: Mani thereupon comes in great haste to Marcellus at Caschar; and he has in his company two-and-twenty, or, in another copy, young men and virgins; that is, so many men who professed virginal chastity; and he is himHow can it be thought that a person under self dressed very politely after the Persian manner. his prince's displeasure should travel with such attendants?

g

Moreover, when the disputations in the Roman part of Mesopotamia were over, and he was. disagreeable to the people of Caschar and Diodoris, where the conferences were held, he returns to Arabion, where he is taken up by the king's soldiers: but would any man of common sense act in this manner, who was liable to capital punishment for such an offence as is here supposed?

i

peace It it also remarkable that Mani's letter to Marcellus brought by Turbo, begins in this. manner: Manichee apostle of Jesus Christ, and all the saints and virgins with me, send to Marcellus.' Upon all which therefore I again observe, that Mani is said to have been imprisoned on account of the death of the king of Persia's son: but all the following particulars of his history represent him not a prisoner, but at full liberty; for his three chief disciples, who had been sent out into several parts, return to him, and find him in prison, as is pretended: from thence he sends them out again, and they return: after which they are again sent abroad by him to propagate his principles. Soon after this he sends the beforementioned letter to Marcellus by Turbo: which was, as already observed, fully inscribed; and divers people his followers, called saints, join with him in the wish of peace: to this letter he receives an answer from Marcellus, whose messenger has no directions of privacy, nor apprehensions of danger from carrying and delivering a letter to Mani: soon after this he comes to Marcellus with a numerous attendance, and is himself properly and richly habited like a Persian high priest or bishop. Was this man at prisoner? Are these things marks of chains and confinement? Finally, when the disputes in Mesopotamia are over, Mani returns to Arabion, a Persian fortress: that is, he makes the best of his way back again to Persia; which shews that before he made the excursion into Mesopotamia (if ever he made any) he was at full liberty: for he leaves the angry and offended Christians in Roman Mesopotamia, and returns to Persia, his own country, as a place of safety. Since, therefore, we are well assured that Mani was put to death, we may reckon it probable, that in some short time after his return home, he fell under his prince's displeasure, and was condemned by him for some cause or other: nor does any cause of offence appear more likely than his zeal in propagating some speculative opinions.

*Arch. c. 4, p. 5. Marcellus vero, accito uno ex pueris suis, Callisto nomine, præcipit proficisci, qui nihil moratus, illico proficiscitur; et post triduum pervenit ad Manem, quem in castello quodam Arabionis reperit, atque epistolam tradidit. Arch. c. 6,

P. 9.

end.

Concerning Arabion see Tillem. as before, art. 8, at the

Eadem autem ipsâ die adventavit Manes, adducens secum juvenes et virgines electos ad viginti duo simul―et primo

-ad Marcellum ingreditur salutandum. Quo ille viso admiratus est primo habitus indumenta. Habebat enim calceamenti genus, quod quadrisole vulgo appellari solet; pallium autem varium, tamquam ærinâ specie; in manu vero validissimum baculum tenebat ex ligno ebenino. Babylonium vero librum

portabat sub sinistra alâ. Crura etiam braccis obtexerat colore diverso, quarum una rufa, alia velut prasini coloris erat. Vultus vero, ut senis Persæ artificis, et bellorum ducis videbatur. Arch. c. 12, p. 23.

f M. de Tillemont a pris ces vierges pour des filles.-—Je ne sai si ceux de ses disciples, qui l'accompagnoient, étoient de -Ces vierges et ces saints sont les jeunes hommes; mais je suis bien assuré qu' il n'y avoit point de jeunes filles avec eux.mêmes personnes. Aussi trouve-t-on dans un endroit de la hommes. Beaus. T. i. p. 93. version Latine virgines electos, ce qui marque que ce sont des

Sed ille vias, quibus venerat, repetens, transito fluvio ad 6. Arabionis castellum rediit, ubi postea comprehensus, oblatush Ap. Arch. c. 5, est regi. Arch. c. 45, p. 100. For the several following particulars see Arch. c. 53, 54..

p.

The history of Turbo is likewise improbable: this man was a disciple of Mani, and had been* instructed by Addas, one of Mani's chief disciples: nor is it reasonable to think that a man should be employed in such an affair who might not be confided in: but, having delivered his master's letter into the hands of Marcellus, when he is desired to go back with an answer, he excuseth himself; and a servant of Marcellus having been dispatched with the answer, Turbo presently gives Marcellus and Archelaus, bishops of that city, an odious, and perhaps false account, of Mani's doctrine.

Archelaus likewise, at the end of the disputes, appears to have with him one Sisinnius, who is supposed to give him particular information concerning Mani: but Sisinnius, according to Photius, and Peter of Sicily, was a chief disciple of Mani, and sat in the chair after him as his However, whether those authors are to be relied upon as to that particular or not, it is not reasonable to think that Archelaus, a catholic bishop of the Roman Mesopotamia, should have with him at one and the same time two disciples and intimates of Mani, and both deserters.

Sisinnius is a Greek name: I should be glad to know more of him: if ever there was a Manichee of this name, it might perhaps afford some light for clearing up the time of this piece which we have been examining.

f

d

3. Valesius, in his notes upon Socrates, transcribes a passage out of a letter of Libanius to Priscian, president of Palestine: which letter he supposeth to relate to the Manichees in that province, though they are not named: These men worship the sun, but without bloody sacrifices, and honour him as a deity in a secondary sense only. They pinch their belly to a great degree, and look upon the day of their death as the day of their deliverance. They are in many places of the world, but every where a few only: they injure no man, but some there are who give them trouble.'

II. That suits the Manichees; they were in many places, but no where numerous. That they were in many parts of the world may be concluded from the many book's published against them. Fabricius & has a catalogue of ancient authors, who have mentioned the Manichees, or written against them, amounting to more than forty in number; and yet that catalogue might be greatly enlarged.

Epiphanius, in his article of the Manichees, written about the year 376, speaking of authors who had written against them, nameth Eusebius of Cæsarea, Eusebius of Emesa, Serapion of Thmuis, Athanasius of Alexandria, George of Laodicea, Apollinarius of the same place and Titus of Bostra; and he says there were other authors besides these who had written against them.

1. Photius, giving an account of Heraclean, bishop of Chalcedon, whose works he much commends, (whose time however is not now certainly known) says, that, speaking of others who had opposed the same sect before him, he names Hegemonius, who wrote the disputations of Archelaus with Mani; Titus, George of Laodicea, Serapion of Thmuis, and Diodorus, whose work against the Manichees consisted of five-and-twenty books: this work of Diodorus of Tarsus is in Ebedjesu's Catalogue, and therefore must have been translated into Syriac. And Photius in his own work against the Manichees, or Paulicians, mentions Cyril bishop of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Titus of Bostra, Serapion of Thmuis, Alexander of Lycopolis, the twenty books of Heraclean bishop of Chalcedon, upon whom he again bestows great commendations: but we have now nothing of that work remaining beside the extracts made by Photius.

k

2. The piece of Alexander just mentioned, written in Greek, who was of Lycus, a city of

* Accitum unum ex discipulis, Turbonem nomine, qui per Addam fuerat instructus, traditâ epistolâ, abire jubet, ac perferre Marcello. Arch. c. 4 p. 5.

b Vid. Arch. c. 6, 7, et seqq. p. 9, &c.

C

Sed nunc paucissime dicere volentem deprecor, ut cum silentio audiatis, ut agnoscatis, qui sit, et unde, et qualis sit iste, qui advenit; sicut Sisinnius quidam, unus ex comitibus ejus indicavit mihi, quem etiam ad testimonium eorum, quæ a me dicentur, si placet, vocâre paratus sum. Sed ne ipse quidem dicere recusavit eadem quæ nos dicimus, præsente Mane. Credidit enim doctrinæ nostræ supradictus, sicut et apud me alius Turbo nomine. Arch. c. 51, p. 94. 4 Σίσιννιος, ὁ και το αξίωμα αυτό της δυσσεβες διδασκαλίας

d

b

Thebais in Egypt, is still in being. Fabricius supposeth that he was at first a heathen and Manichee, afterwards a catholic Christian. Cave thinks he was originally a heathen, next a Manichee, in the end a catholic: he says that he is a very ancient writer, probably of the fourth century. Photius, as before cited, calls him archbishop of Cyropolis: but Beausobre argues that he was a mere heathen or pagan philosopher, as he calls him. Tillemont likewise says, that by his book he appears to have been a pagan philosopher, who, observing that some of ⚫his fellow disciples embraced the opinion of the Manichees, wrote this piece to confute it by natural and philosophical reasons. He speaks with some respect of Jesus Christ, and prefers the doctrine of the churches [they are his own words] to that of Mani: but it may be perceived by those very places that he is by no means a Christian.' I do not chuse to enter at present into any debate about the character of this writer: the reader, if he pleaseth, may consult the work itself, and the modern authors to whom I have referred: I shall only say that the Manichees were Christians. If ever Alexander was a Manichee he must have been a Christian at that time; what he was afterwards, when he wrote against them, is another question.

3. I do not think it needful to say any thing here particularly of Augustine, whose books however against the Manichees are numerous and still extant, and will be of great use to us, as will appear hereafter. Cassiodorus commends Augustine's writings against the Manichees, as if they were superior to what he had written against other heretics.

4. But there are two catholic writers against the Manichees, Serapion and Titus, of whom I shall here give a distinct account. Their books against the Manichees being their only remaining works, I shall write their history in this place, and observe their testimony to the books of the New Testament.

h

i

k

;

Serapion mentioned by Epiphanius and Heraclean among authors who before them had written against the Manichees, is placed by Jerom in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers where he speaks of him to this purpose: Serapion, bishop of Thmuis, who for his great capacity was called Scholasticus, and was much esteemed by the monk Antonius, published an ex'cellent book against the Manichees, another upon the Titles of the Psalms, and useful epistles to divers persons; and under the emperor Constantius he was famous as a confessor.'

m

Cave speaks of Serapion at the year 347, about which time he is supposed to have been made bishop of Thmuis by Athanasius. Basnage, editor of Serapion's book against the Manichees, placeth him at 340; Cave says he died about the year 358; Valesius" says he died before the year 359: but Tillemont, who thinks he was made bishop about 349, makes a question whether he was not alive in the year 369; Socrates says that about the year 373 Athanasius sent five bishops, and among them Serapion of Thmuis, to wait upon the emperor Constantius in the west.

It has been observed by learned men that Thmuis in the Egyptian language signifies a goat: the city was so called because that animal was the great object of its worship; Jerom says as much in his Commentary upon the forty-sixth chapter of Isaiah.

It is commonly said that Serapion was a great ascetic, and for a good while lived a mortified course of life in the deserts of Thebais. Čave goes into this supposition; but Tillemont disputes it: for he says that the attainments of learning and eloquence, ascribed to Serapion by Jerom and Sozomen, are not the things for which hermits are wont to be commended; nor do those writers any where say that he ever lived such a course of life, though they have mentioned him several times.

d

2

Antonius's respect for this bishop of Thmuis is taken notice of by Athanasius, who also himself had a great regard for him, and addressed several of his works to him in epistles. In Sozomen, Serapion has the character of a man of admirable piety and eloquence; and his name is in Jerom's letter to Magnus. Socrates has preserved a memorable saying of our author, taken from Euagrius of Pontus: The angel of the church of Thmuis said: "the soul that has • drunk in spiritual knowledge is completely cleansed; the parts of the soul fretted with anger are cured by love, and other evil affections are corrected by temperance."

с

No work of Serapion remains beside his book against the Manichees, which is not very large.

As for his testimony to the books of the New Testament, I observe briefly, that he has quoted the gospels, the Acts of the apostles, and divers of St. Paul's epistles, particularly that to the Hebrews, as his; he quotes the epistle to the Romans as an oracle, and in like manner other parts of scripture.

h

The reader may perhaps here recollect that we formerly saw the history of another bishop of this place named Phileas, who suffered martyrdom in the persecution begun by Dioclesian.

5. I shall be obliged to cite Titus of Bostra several times; I therefore here write likewise his history: says Jerom, Titus, bishop of Bostra, in the time of Julian and Jovian, wrote with great strength of argument against the Manichees, and some other volumes: he died under Valens.' This last mentioned emperor reigned from 364 to 378: Titus is remembered again by Jerom in his letter to Magnus.

According to Cave, Titus flourished about 362, and died about 371; in Basnage's edition he is placed as writing about the year 360: Tillemont thinks that "he published his books against the Manichees in the reign of Valens.

Titus fell under the displeasure of Julian, of which Sozomen has left the following account: Julian ordered the people of Bostra to expel the bishop of that church by a public decree, and threatened them, that if any disturbance happened there, he should impute it to the bishop and clergy. Titus thereupon sent a letter to the emperor, assuring him that the Christians were equal in number to the Greeks [or Gentiles;] that they were very quiet; and that, paying a regard to his admonitions, they had no thought of making any disturbance. From those words Julian took occasion to write a letter to the people of Bostra, in order to incense them against Titus, as having accused them, saying: "it was not owing to their own good temper, but to his • exhortations, that they were kept from sedition." The letter, or rescript of Julian, still extant, confirms Sozomen's account.

The books of Titus against the Manichees are taken notice of by many ancient authors; as Epiphanius, Theodoret, Heraclean, Stephen Gobar, Photius; as also by "Trithemius; beside Jerom above transcribed.

We still have three of those books, with the contents of all four: but the fourth and last seems to be irrecoverably lost: and there may be reason to think that the three books which we have are not complete, or that some parts of them are out of place. It seems to me that some words jof Basnage, to whom we are indebted for the publication of Titus in Greek, afford ground for such a suspicion, though he has taken laudable pains to set all right.

x

Some ascribe to Titus a Commentary upon St. Luke, though it is not distinctly mentioned among his works by any ancient author; learned men therefore are divided in their sentiments

Serap. contr. Manich. p. 47. f.

* Contr. Manich. 1. i. cap. xi. " De Script. Ec. cap. 72.,

* Quinimo plurima inverso ordine turbata intricatissima invenimus. Primâ fronte periisse librum tertium autumabam. Sed perlegendo Græca, apparuit nobis ille liber tertius

Ε όταν λέγη Παυλος Πισει Ρααβ ή πορνη 8 συναπώλετο τοις integer, quem primo libro inseruerat amanuensis. Deinde αποιησασι. p. 46, m.

τα δε λόγια βοώντα και λεγοντα. p. 47, supr. m. και βοωσιν οἱ λογοι. p. 47, infr. m. * See p. 126. Titus, Bostrenus episcopus, sub Juliano et Joviano principibus fortes adversum Manichæos scripsit libros, et nonnulla

truncatus multis in locis videbatur primus liber. Sed discerpta resarcire, et in genuinum ordinem restituere conati sumus, non modo argumentorum seriem secuti, sed etiam proposito Serapionis scopo, quem ipse delineaverat, sequentes. Basnag. Animadv. ap. Canis. Lect, T. i. p. 38.

a

Ꮟ

about it. Basnage thinks that Titus wrote such a commentary, and that there are fragments of it remaining: Fabricius is of opinion, that the Commentary upon St. Luke is the work of some other Titus, of the sixth century, or later: Tillemont, beside other material things, observes that no ancient author makes particular mention of any work of Titus, but that against the Manichees: and that the Commentary upon St. Luke, which bears his name, has divers marks of a late age.

с

I shall add here some censures of learned moderns upon Titus; particularly upon that work of his which we have, and is universally received as genuine. Those censures may be of use to assist my readers in forming a right judgment of ancient Christian writers.

Says • Tillemont: He seems to have followed the dangerous error ascribed to Origen, that the pains of the damned, and even those of the dæmons themselves, will not be eternal.'

Du Pin says: It is surprising that Titus had not recourse to original sin for explaining all the difficulties of the Manichees: it might have served him for a general solution of almost all their objections: for there is no longer any difficulty to comprehend, why man is carried to 'evil, why he suffers, why he is subject to hunger, pain, diseases, death, when once original sin ⚫ is admitted: nevertheless he has made no use of this doctrine to explain these questions, but ⚫ examines them like a philosopher. He has not so much as mentioned the grace of Jesus Christ, ⚫ and he seems to have supposed that man can of himself do good as well as evil.'

James Basnage, the first editor of Titus in Greek and Latin, speaks to the like purpose. And indeed it is commonly said that Augustine himself, in his books against the Manichees, spoke of Man's free-will just as Titus and Didymus, and other Greeks did.

I ought now briefly to observe this writer's testimony to the books of the New Testament. He frequently quotes the gospels, and the epistles of St. Paul, particularly that to the Hebrews: he quotes the first words of the epistle, and afterwards, in another place, a large part of the first chapter, expressly as Paul's.

h

k

In one short paragraph he quotes the beginning of St. Matthew's and St. Mark's gospels, and the sixth and seventh verses of the first chapter of St. John, and cites all those several evangelists by name.

Titus likewise quotes the Acts of the apostles. I shall have occasion to take particular notice of the passage hereafter.

He has little or nothing out of the catholic epistles or the Apocalypse.

I have observed in this author these general divisions of scripture; the law and the prophets:' "the law, the gospel, and Paul:' and presently afterwards, the law, our Saviour, and the apostle,' often, law and gospel' for Old and New Testament,

His respect for the scriptures of the Old and New Testament is manifest; I need not allege particular passages. At the beginning of his work he says: We learn the way of truth from the holy scriptures, and the common principles of reason.'

6. This is not a proper time or place for me to give a distinct account of Didymus of Alexandria, who flourished about the year 370, though we still have a tract against the Manichees, and in its original Greek language, which is generally allowed to be his.

I shall only say that here are no hard names, Didymus must have been naturally of a mild temper; or the principles of reason and religion had softened him, and produced in him gentle

* Observandum est igitur, periisse Commentarios Titi in Lucam, sed fragmenta tantum, sive Catenam Græcorum Patrum sub ejus nomine protrudi. Basn. ib. p. 57.

Commentarius in Lucam sub Titi nomine editus--non est hujus Titi, sed scriptoris Cyrillo Alexandrino, ac fortasse sæculo, sexto, junioris, &c. Fabr. Bib. Gr. T. 8, p. 413. Vid. Tillem, ubi supra, p. 670. Tillem. ubi supr. p. 671.

Du Pin Bibl. des Aut. Ec. 2, p. 128, a Amsterdam. 'Non modo siluit de peccato originali, quo facile necessitatem et æquitatem pœnarum firmare poterat; sed virtutem a rationis exercitatione hominisque electione pendere absque ullâ Christi gratiâ affirmabat. Basn. ap. Canis. Lect. T. i. p. 57.

Libertatem arbitrii tam ad bonum quam ad malum homini Japso tribuit [Didymus]: nec mirum, omnes enim adversus Manichæos disputantes, ne Augustino quidem excepto, hanc sententiam propugnaverunt. Id. ib. p. 199.