there were among the bishops, and of their pride, ambition, and other faults, to the neglect of their charge, and the great offence of good men.

6. Another thing very observable in Sulpicius Severus is, that he was against all persecution, and disliked the interposition of magistrates in things of religion: this I suppose to have appeared in the extracts formerly made from him in the history of Priscillianism. It has been confirmed also by a passage, since taken notice of in the chapter of St. Jerom; which passage I would now transcribe more at large, by way of proof of the same thing: it is in one of the Dialogues of our author, particularly mentioned among his works by Gennadius, in his chapter transcribed

above.

с

d

b

The Dialogue was composed about the year 405: Postumian and Gallus are the speakers, and Sulpicius presides. Postumian had made a voyage into the east; he embarked at Narbone, and arrived at Alexandria in 401, or 402; he was three years in Egypt and Palestine: being returned into Gaul, he gives his friends an account of what he had met with in the several parts of his voyage.

Thenceforward,' says Postumian, we had a prosperous voyage to Alexandria, where were very disagreeable disputes between the bishops and the monks; for there had been 'several synods, in which it was decreed, that none might either read or keep the works of Origen, who was esteemed a most skilful interpreter of the sacred scriptures. But the bishops had observed wild notions in his works: which his friends, not daring to defend, said, they had • been fraudulently inserted by heretics; and therefore, they said, it was improper to condemn all the rest, because there were some things liable to just reprehension. Men might still be entrusted with the reading of his works; for, with due care and discretion, they might easily distinguish the interpolated opinions, from what was said agreeably to the catholic doctrine: nor was it very wonderful to find some heretical opinions foisted into late writings, when some had attempted to corrupt the scriptures. But the bishops were peremptory, that the good and the bad ought to be all condemned together with the author: they said that there were more than enough books allowed by the church; and that the reading of such books ought to be pro⚫hibited which might be more hurtful to ignorant people than profitable to the knowing. As for myself, who have had the curiosity to read his works, I must say, that very many things pleased me; but I observed some things in which undoubtedly he was mistaken; which his

⚫ friends affirm to be interpolations. I wonder how one and the same man could be so diffe

a This vol. chap. cvii.

b Page 537, of this volume.

Pagi Ann. 401. n. xx.

S. Sulp. Severe. art. 8. T. xii. Tillem.

...

prosperoque cursu septimo die Alexandriam pervenimus, ubi fœda inter episcopos et monachos certamina gerebantur, ex eâ occasione, quia congregati in unum sæpius sacerdotes frequentibus decrevisse synodis videbantur, ne quis Ori genis libros legeret, aut haberet: qui tractator sacrarum scripturarum peritissmus habebatur. Sed episcopi quædam in libris ipsius insanius scripta memorabant, quæ adsertores ejus defendere non ausi, ab hæreticis potius fraudulenter inserta dicebant: et ideo non propter illa, quæ in reprehensionem merito vocarentur, etiam reliqua esse damnanda, cum legentium fides facile possit habere discrimen, ne falsata sequeretur, et tamen catholice disputata retineret. Non esse autem mirum, si in libris neotericis et recens scriptis fraus hæretica fuisset operata, quæ in quibusdam locis non timuisset incidere evangelicam veritatem. Adversum hæc episcopi obstinatius renitentes pro potestate cogebant recta etiam universa cum pravis et cum ipso auctore damnare; quia satis superque sufficerent libri, quos ecclesia recepisset: respuendam esse penitus lectionem, quæ plus esset nocitura insipientibus, quam profutura sapientibus. Mihi autem ex illios libris curiosius indaganti admodum multa placuerunt: sed nonnulla deprehendi, in quibus illum prava sensisse non dubium est, quæ defensores ejus falsata contendunt. Ego miror unum eumdemque hominem tam diversum a se esse potuisse, ut in eâ parte, quâ probatur, neminem post apostolos habeat æqualem; in eâ vero, quà jure reprehenditur, nemo deformius doceatur errâsse. Nam cum ab episcopis excerpta in libris illius multa

legerentur, quæ contra catholicam fidem scripta constaret, locus ille vel maximam parabat invidiam, in quo editum legebatur, quia Dominus Jesus, sicut pro redemtione hominis in carne venisset, crucem pro hominis salute perpessus, mortem pro hominis æternitate gustâsset, ita esset eodem ordine passionis etiam diabolum redemturus; quia hoc bonitati illius pietatique congrueret, ut qui perditum hominem reformâsset, prolapsum quoque angelum liberaret. Cum hæc atque alia ejusmodi ab episcopis proderentur, ex studiis partium orta est seditio. Quæ cum reprimi sacerdotum auctoritate non posset, scævo exemplo ad regendam ecclesiæ disciplinam Præfectus adsumitur, cujus terrore dispersi fratres, ac per diversas oras monachi sunt fugati, ita ut propositis edictis in nullâ consistere sede sinerentur. Illud me admodum permovebat, quod Hieronymus, vir maxime catholicus, et sacræ legis peritissimus, Origenem secutus primo tempore putabatur, quum nunc idem præcipue vel omnia illius scripta damnaret. Nec vero ausus sum de quoquam temere judicare. Præstantissimi tamen viri et doctissimi ferebantur in hoc certamine dissidere. Sed tamen sive error est, ut ego sentio, sive hæresis, ut putatur, non solum non reprimi non potuit multis animadversionibus sacerdotum, sed nequâquam tam late se potuisset effundere, nisi contentione crevisset. Istiusmodi ergo turbatione cum veni Alexandriam, fluctuabat. Me quidem episcopus illius civitatis benigne admodum, et melius, quam opinabar, excepit, et secum tenere tentavit. Sed non fuit animus ibi consistere, ubi recens fraternæ cladis fervebat invidia. Nam etsi fortasse videantur parere episcopis debuisse, non ob hanc tamen causam multitudinem tantam sub Christi confessione viventem, præsertim ab episcopis, oportuisset affligi. Dial. i. cap. 3. al. c. 6, 7.

• rent from himself: where he is in the right, he has not an equal since the apostles; where he is in the wrong, no man has erred more shamefully. Among all his opinions, contrary to the catholic doctrine, which have been extracted out of his works by the bishops, nothing has given so much offence, as his notion concerning the recovery and salvation of the devil. On account of this, and other such like things, taken notice of by the bishops, disputes have arisen. And when the bishops were not able to compose them, by a very wrong management, the Præfect [" meaning the Augustal Præfect at Alexandria "] has been called in to govern the church; by whose armed force our friends the monks have been dispersed, and driven into several countries: nor can they any where find a resting place, all people being 'prohibited by edicts to receive them. One thing affected me very much, that Jerom, a true catholic, and well acquainted with the Christian doctrine, who, in former times was reckoned a follower of Origen, should now, with much earnestness, condemn all his writings: nor did I dare hastily to pass my own judgment. But it was said, that very learned and very excellent men differed upon this occasion; but whether it be an error, as I think, or a heresy, as others say, it not only could not be suppressed by many censures of the bishops, but has spread itself far and wide, and has increased by opposition abundantly more than it could have done otherwise: this is the disturbance with which Alexandria was agitated when I arrived there. The bishop of the city received me very courteously, beyond my expectation, and would have detained me with him; but I had no mind to stay in a place where our friends had been so lately injured: for though perhaps it may seem, that they ought to have obeyed the bishops; nevertheless, it was by no means fit, that for this cause so many men, professing Christianity, should be so grievously treated, especially by bishops.'

This is the passage at full length: every candid and understanding reader is able to judge, whether it proves what it is alleged for. Mr. Tillemont, speaking of our author's Dialogues, having commended the purity of the style, and the art with which they are written, adds: It' is also observed, that the judgment which he passes upon the disturbances raised in the east, * upon the occasion of Origen, is very wise and very moderate.'

CHAP. CXXI.

b

CHROMATIUS, BISHOP OF AQUILEIA.

1. CAVE says, that Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia, flourished about 401, and died about the year 410. But he must have been a man of note, and probably bishop, before the end of the fourth century: for Rufinus had been baptized in 370, or thereabout, by Chromatius, then presbyter, under Valerian, bishop of Aquileia. We gave an account of Fortunatianus, another bishop of Aquileia, some while ago.

с

2. Chromatius was one of Jerom's friends. He desired Jerom to translate the Hebrew scriptures of the Old Testament into Latin; which, I think, is much to his honour. To him'

d P. 443.

e' Si Septuagarta Interpretum pura, et ut ab eis in Græcum versa est, editio permaneret, superflue me, mi Chromati, episcoporum sanctissime atque doctissime, impelleres, ut Hebræa volumina Latino sermone transferrem. Præf. in Paralip. T. i. p. 1022. Conf. Eund. Adv. Ruf. 1. ii. T. iv. p. 425.

f Primum, Chromati, episcoporum doctissime, scire nos convenit, corrupte apud Græcos et Latinos nomen Ambacum prophetæ legi, qui apud Hebræos dicitur Abacuc. Pr. in Ab. T. iii. p. 1591.

Jerom inscribed his Commentaries upon the prophet Habakkuk, and some other works; and he calls him, more than once, a most learned and holy bishop. Rufinus likewise dedicated to him some of his works, particularly his Latin translation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, not published by him till after the year 400. Indeed Chromatius was friend of both: and, when they fell out, he endeavoured to moderate, or reconcile the difference between them. There is a letter of Chrysostom to him, which is much in his praise. I omit divers things that might be mentioned, referring to others, and particularly to Tillemont, whose account of Chromatius is the fullest and exactest that I have seen.

d

3. Neither Jerom, nor Gennadius, nor any other ancient writer, speaks of any works published by Chromatius. Nevertheless there are some pieces generally received as his, they being ascribed to him in the manuscript copies; particularly, Homilies, or tracts upon the eight beatitudes, the rest of the fifth chapter of St. Matthew, and part of the sixth, and upon Matth.

iii. 14.

с

4. I observe only a few things: Here are quoted most of the generally received books of the New Testament; in particular, the Acts of the apostles, the epistle to the Hebrews, and the Revelation.

h

5. He has also expressly quoted the epistle of James.

6. He several times quotes the first epistle of Peter, and the first epistle of John, as if they were their only epistles: nevertheless, it may be reckoned probable, or even unquestioned, that he received more.

7. Explaining the Lord's Prayer, in Matthew vi. he the end.

k

takes no notice of the doxology at

8. He quotes Eph. iv. 30, after this manner: "And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, wherewith," or whereby, "ye were sealed in the day of redemption." We saw that text quoted in the same manner by St. Cyprian.

n

m

9. He compares the scripture to a lamp, which ought not to be hid: but forasmuch as Jews and heretics are apt to render it obscure by misinterpretations, it ought to be set up in the church; that thereby all may be enlightened, and guided in the way of salvation.

CHAP. CXXII.

A COMMENTARY UPON ST. MARK'S GOSPEL, ASCRIBED TO VICTOR, PRESBYTER OF ANTIOCH.

1. THERE is a Commentary upon St. Mark's gospel, generally ascribed to Victor, presbyter of Antioch, placed by Cave at 401. Concerning which, I would refer to several, and among them to R. Simon, who, beside other things, says, That in most manuscripts it is said to be • Victor's, in some Origen's, in others, Cyril's of Alexandria; but that it is not Origen's, nor

P

Unde et apostolus ait: Nolite contristare Spiritum Sanctum, in quo signati estis in die redemtionis. p. 983. A. m See p. 21.

" quod non aliquo cæcæ mentis velamine operiendum est vel obscurandum, ut Judæi et hæretici faciunt, qui perspicuam lucem prædicationis divinæ pravis interpretationibus obtegere et occultare nituntur.... Unde lucerna hæc legis ac fidei non occultanda nobis est, sed ad salutem multorum semper in ecclesiâ, velut in candelabro constituenda, ut veri tatis ipsius luce et nos fruamur, et omnes credentes illuminentur. p. 981. A. B.

• Cav. H. L. T. i. Fabr. Bib. Gr. T. v. p. 232, 233. et T. vii. p. 769. Huet Origenian. 1. iii. p. 274, 275. Du Pin. Bib. T. iii. P. ii. 74.

P Hist. Crit. des Comment. du N. T. ch. 5. p. 79, 80. ch. 30. p. 426, &c.

4 L

Cyril's, nor Victor's, nor any other particular author's; but is a collection out of many fathers:" which way of speaking seems to me not to be exact; for though it be a collection out of several, and a kind of chain, that collection was made by some one author. And since it is evident, that it is not Origen's; and very probable, that it is not Cyril's; it may be fitly allowed to be Victor's, to whom it is ascribed in most manuscripts.

2. There are in it divers things which to me appear well worthy of notice. Du Pin says: This author confines himself to the literal and historical sense, which he illustrates by very solid • and judicious remarks.' There has been an edition of it in Greek and Latin; but as I have it not, I must content myself with the Latin translation, in the Bibliotheca Patrum.

a

3. At the very beginning, the author owns, that his Commentary was collected out of several. Many, he says, had written Commentaries upon the gospels of Matthew and John; a few only upon Luke's; none at all upon Mark's, so far as he could find, upon careful enquiry into the writings of the ancients: he determined, therefore, to put together, in a short compass, what ecclesiastical writers had occasionally said in their works, by way of explication of this gospel.

d

4. That is a good testimony to the four gospels. The composer of this work then proceeds: This Mark, called also John, who wrote a gospel after Matthew, was son of Mary, mentioned in the Acts of the apostles, in whose house at Jerusalem the apostles were wont to meet. [See Acts xii. 12...17.] For a while, as appears from the same book of the Acts, he accompanied his relation Barnabas, and Paul; but when he came to Rome, he joined Peter, and followed him; for which reason he is particularly mentioned by Peter in his canonical epistle. [1 Pet. ' v. 13.] Mark is also mentioned by Paul in his epistle to the Colossians [iv. 10.]; and in his second to Timothy. [2 Tim. iv. 11.] Mark, therefore, for a while dispersed the seed of the heavenly doctrine, which he had received from the apostles, as elsewhere, so also at Rome; but when he was obliged to go from thence, and was earnestly desired by the believers at Rome to write a history of the preaching of the heavenly doctrine, he readily complied with their request. This is said to have been the occasion of writing the gospel according to Mark.' 5. Here we see whom this writer thought the evangelist Mark to be. He agrees with with many ancient writers, whom we have already consulted, in saying, that Mark wrote his gospel at Rome, at the earnest request of the believers there; and he confirms the supposition of the late date of Mark's gospel, in that it was not written till after his acquaintance with the apostle Peter at Rome.

6. This Commentary contains many observations for reconciling the several evangelists; which seems to be the main design of it.

7. The author supposes Mark to write by inspiration. After which he presently adds an observation from Origen, upon the words of ver. 2, of this gospel: "As it written in the prophets:" or, as in some copies, in Isaiah the prophet.'

f

8. He says, that Levi, in Mark ii. 14, and Luke v. 27, is the same with Matthew, as he calls himself, Matth. ix. 27.

9. Upon Mark iii. 7, 8, where it is said: "And a great multitude followed him from Galilee, and from Judea," and other places, he observes, that the evangelists did not aim to

Vid. Fabric. Bib. Gr. T. v. p. 235.

Victor, Presbyter Antiochenus, in sacrosanctum J. C. Evangelium secundum Marcum. Ap. Bib. PP. Lugdun. T. iv. p. 370... 414.

Quandoquidem permulti in Matthæi et Joannis, pauci vero in Lucæ, nulli autem omnino, ut equidem arbitror, in Marci evangelium scripserunt: (Certe veterum monumentorum indices studiose evolvens, nullum qui illud disseruisset, in hodiernum usque diem comperi :) visum est mihi, quæ ecclesiæ doctores sparsim et per partes in præsentem evangelistam annotârunt, in unum quasi corpus redigere, succinctamque in hoc ipsum quoque evangelium explanationem conscribere. Ibid. p. 370. G.

d Cæterum Marcus hic, qui alio nomine Joannes appellatus est, post Matthæum evangelii historiam contexuit.... Et quidem initio, ut in iisdem illis apostolorum Actis proditum exstat, adhærebat Barnabæ cognato suo et Paulo. Verum ubi Romam venisset, secutus est Petrum. Quare is in priori suâ canonicâ ad hunc modum de illo scribit. ... Marcus itaque cœlestis doctrinæ semen, quod ab apostolis hauserat,

g

cum alibi, tum Romæ quoque; ad tempus proseminavit. At vero cum alio jam avocaretur, ab iisque, qui Romæ Christo per fidem adjuncti fuerunt, ut salutaris prædicationis seriem scripto exponeret, enixe rogaretur, haud gravatim annuit. Atque hinc evangelium, quod secundum Marcum inscribitur, natum traditur. Ibid. H.

e Evangelista Marcus, Spiritu illo, qui e sublimi in hominum corda demittere solet, afflatus, a prophetico oraculo evangelium orditur. In Marc. cap. 1. ib. p. 371. A.

f Est autem Levi hic idem omnino cum evangelistâ Matthæo. Et quidem Marcus et Lucas nomen, quod illi familiare erat, primævâ appellatione obnubunt. At ipse vero Levi, dum evangelii historiam contexit, palam quæ ad se pertinebant, denuntiat. Ait enim: Cum transiret Jesus, &c. p. 375. B.

Cum Evangelista Marcus magnam hominum turbam Christum a Galilæâ consecutam dicit, brevi compendio multa simul comprehendit. Neque enim ambitiose, magnoque verborum apparatu et pompâ verba de Christo facere soliti sunt evangelista, singula videlicet quæ vel dicta vel facta

'aggrandize Christ, their master, by writing prolixly every thing said and done by him; but have omitted many of his words and works; and have used a concise and compendious manner ' of writing.'

a

b

10. Here are many good observations upon the history of the cure of the dæmoniae, related Mark v. 1......20. When the dæmoniac answered, his name was Legion; he says, that word should not be understood to denote any certain number, but many, or a great multitude. 11. In his remarks upon the history of the woman with the hemorrhage, related ch. v. 21-34, he observes, that Mark has particulars omitted by Matthew.

с

12. Upon Mark vi. 7-13, particularly ver. 13, he says, that the like history is in Luke; but that Mark is the only evangelist who speaks of the disciples "anointing with oil them 'that were sick:" which method of healing is also mentioned by James, in his epistle.' See

James v. 13—15.

e

13. Upon ch. v. ver. 39, he says: It was owing to modesty that our Lord said of Jairus's daughter; "She is not dead, but sleepeth:" though she was really dead, and he intended to raise her up to life.'

f

14. He particularly considers the history in Mark x. 35-40. I put in the margin a part of his observations: The sum of what he says upon ver. 39, 40, is, that Christ is the judge, and the dispenser of all rewards; but the first places in his heavenly kingdom will not be disposed of by affection and favour, but shall be given to the most virtuous.

15. Upon Mark xi. 15-17, he argues, that Christ twice drove the buyers and sellers out of the temple. But some, it seems, thought that this was done by our Lord but once only; and at the time mentioned by St. John at the beginning of his gospel.

h

16. The evangelist John is here called the Divine.

i

17. The composer of this work seems not to have had, in his copies, our conclusion of St. Mark's gospel; for he explains the beginning of the sixteenth chapter of St. Mark's gospel to the end of the eighth verse, and no farther; there ends his commentary: nevertheless, he was acquainted with the remainder. And in his remarks upon the first verse of the 16th chapter, he says: In some copies of Mark's gospel it is said: "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene:" and what follows. But that seemed to be contrary to what is said by Matthew ch. xxviii. 1: therefore, some had supposed Mark's gospel to have been interpolated: but he thinks there is no necessity for admitting that suppo⚫sition; and he proposes a method of reconciling the difference.'

Somewhat like this may be seen in an * Oration of Gregory Nyssen upon Christ's Resurrec

b Et dicit ei: Legio mihi nomen est.' Non dicit numerum præcise, sed simplici voce magnam adesse multitudinem indicat; siquidem exacta numeri discussio nihil ad rei quæ quærebatur notitiam faciebat. p. 381. E.

Quin hoc quoque signum Matthæus compendio absolvit. Multa namque prætermittit ille, quæ Marcus addit. Marcus enim præter alia scribit, Dominum retro conversum, quisnam illum tetigisset, sciscitatum, mulieremque exterritam, trementemque seipsam prodidisse, atque ita tandem a Christo Domino audivisse: Fides tua te salvam fecit. p. 382. B.

His similia exponit Lucas quoque. Verum quod de mysticâ unctione et olei usu hic subjungitur, hoc inter evangelistas solus Marcus commemorat. Interium quæ apostolus Jacobus in suâ canonicâ narrat, ab his non dissentiunt. [Jac. v. 14, 15.] In Marc. cap. 6. ver. 13. p. 383. F.

Quin per hoc quoque, quod puellam extinctam dormire asserit, neque statim se illam exsuscitaturum promittit, omnem fastum, omnemque inanem jactantiam ab opere illo secludit. Ille ergo omni superbià vanâque gloriâ vacuitatem consectatur. At vero operis excellentia famam illius longe lateque diffundit. p. 382. F. G.

Quod itaque Christus dicit, ejusmodi est. Moriemini quidem mei causâ, eritisque in passione socii. At hoc interim sat non est, ut primas sedes jure vobis vindicetis. Si enim

alius quispiam accesserit, qui una cum martyrio omnem aliam virtutem secum deportaverit, aut certe multo plura, multoque excellentiora virtutum ornamenta in medium attulerit, quam vos, ille utique præcedet. Neque enim quia vos amo, aliisque certâ quadam ratione antepono, ob id opulentiore repulso, primatum vobis assignabo. Illis igitur ejusmodi primatus paratus est, qui per illustriora opera primis sedibus capessendis præ cæteris idoneos se reddiderunt, &c. p. 397. D. E.

.... Sunt tamen qui dicant, tres evangelistas, dum Christi ad Hierosolymorum civitatem, ejusdemque in templum ingressum describunt, accuratâ temporis ratione missa, renr ipsam tantum prosecutos esse: Joannem vero, qui historiam illam cæteris diligentius enarrat, satis aperte insinuare, Christum Dominum ea primo ascensu patrasse, quae reliqui paullo ante mortem contigisse commemorant, &c. p. 398. F. G. Ut Joannes theologus loquitur. p. 376. G.

ves

At quia in quibusdam evangelii Marci exemplaribus habetur: Surgens autem Jesus mane primo Sabbati, apparuit primo Mariæ Magdalenæ,' &c. Hoc autem illi adversari videtur quod legitur apud Matthæum. Hic enim 'pere Sabbati' Dominum resurrexisse scribit. Propterea comperti sunt, qui hunc Marci locum a falsariis vitiatum existiment. Verum, ne ad hic confugere videamur, ad quod cuivis confugere proclive est, Marci contextum uno duntaxat commate ab eâ quam offert difficultate vindicare possumus. p. 414. A. B.

* De Chr. Resurr. Orat. 2. p. 411. Tom. iii.