the other insisting that it should be kept by all.1 In his opinion, it was right to commune with the former class, though some, as he states, thought differently. Near the end of the fourth century, reference appears to a Jewish party, located mainly in Syria, bearing the name of Nazarenes.2 No definite record of their antecedents is given. The conjecture, however, lies near at hand, that they were not without historical connection with the more liberal of the Judaizers referred to by Justin Martyr, and the more orthodox of the Ebionites described by Origen. 2. THE SYSTEM OF CERINTHUS. This errorist, educated, according to Hippolytus and Theodoret, in Egypt, was a contemporary of the Apostle John, and began to spread his views in Asia Minor during the lifetime of the apostle. He might in some respects be classed with the Gnostics. His separation of God from the world, his interposition of intermediate beings, his characterization of the world-maker as an unconscious agent of the Most High, and his distinction between. Jesus and the heavenly Christ, the former being the son of Mary and Joseph, while the latter was a superior being who was joined with Him in the interval between His baptism and His passion,—were quite in the Gnostic vein. At the same time he coincided with the stringent Judaizers in asserting the continued obligation to keep the Mosaic law, and in proclaiming a thousand years' 1 Dial cum Tryph., xlvii. - 2 Augustine, De Bap. Cont. Donat., vii. 1. Epiphanius, Hær., xxix. Jerome, Comm. in Isaiam, Lib. x. cap. 31; De Vir. Illustr., iii.; Epist., cxii. 13. Theodoret, Hær. Fab., ii. 2. reign of the Messiah on earth, with Jerusalem as the centre of His kingdom.1 3. THE PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE SYSTEM. Not far from the middle of the second century there appeared a work embodying a peculiar phase of Jewish speculation. This work, which is known as the Clementine Homilies, purported to give an account, by the hand of Clement of Rome, of the conversion of the author, of his experience in company with Peter, and of the apostle's sermons and disputations with Simon Magus. The work having a kindred subject-matter, and also imputed to Clement, namely, the Recognitions, was probably of a somewhat later origin than the Homilies. The former is the less remote from Catholic teaching. Both exhibit no little art in the combination of vivid narrative and scene-painting with the exposition of doctrinal beliefs. Besides these two writings, there is an Epitome of the Homilies. The system contained in the Homilies cannot be imputed in its entirety to any known sect. While the materials were for the most part at hand, the peculiar combination of them which is here presented was due to an individual mind. However, some of the leading features of the system are supposed to have been entertained by the Elkesaites, an obscure sect that arose in the neighborhood of the Dead Sea. This sect took its name from one Elxai, or Elchesai, who claimed to be a 1 See Irenæus, Cont. Hær., i. 26. 1; Hippolytus, Phil., vii. 21, x. 17 ; Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., iii. 28, vii. 25; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., ii. 3; Epiphanius, Hær., xxviii. prophet, and wrote a book for which he asserted divine inspiration.1 The Homilies place the Jewish emphasis upon the unity of God, but fall quite below the best Jewish thought as respects His spirituality. God, it is represented, dwells on high in bodily form, the image of which is seen in man. He is the centre of the universe; and from Him, as such, life-giving power emanates in every direction.2 No second being or person stands in the place or bears the name of God. At the same time it is conceded that there is a species of duality in Him. He has, so to speak, His feminine side. "His wisdom was that with which He himself always rejoiced as with His own spirit. It is united as soul to God, but it is extended by Him as hand fashioning the universe." 3 A dualistic view of the world is strongly emphasized. "God has distinguished," say the Homilies, "all principles into pairs and opposites. . . . The present world is female, as a mother bringing the souls of her children; but the world to come is male, as a father receiving his children." To every order of good there is a corresponding evil. Next to Adam, the father of the good, stands Eve, the mother of the evil; next to the righteous Abel, the unrighteous Cain; next to the pious Jacob, the profane Esau; over against the true prophets, the false; over against the true apostles, the deceiving apostles; over against the Christ, the Antichrist. 1 Hippolytus, Philos., ix. 8-12; Euseb., vi. 38; Epiphanius, Hær., xix., xxx. 3, 17. 2 Hom., xvi. 19; xvii. 7-10. 8 Hom., xvi. 12; xi. 22. Indeed, in this world evil is foremost: good holds the second place in the several pairs.1 The highest expression of good on earth is the prophetic spirit. This has re-appeared again and again. It operated in Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. Jesus Christ is the last and perfect embodiment of this spirit. He is simply the ideal Prophet, the infallible Teacher. Christ is a Saviour only in virtue of being man's teacher. He saves by enlightening.2 The freedom of the will is asserted in sufficiently explicit terms. But the general system is too strongly tinged with dualism to be favorable to real freedom. It is even said that God determined that the present kingdom should be given to the Evil One,3 and that this Evil One is God's left hand, an agent for accomplishing His will.4 In his treatment of the Old Testament, the author of the Homilies pursues a very free method, rejecting as lying interpolations every thing that does not accord with his views. He represents Peter as saying that some of the Scriptures are true and some false, and that one must distinguish between them as a good moneychanger distinguishes between coins.5 He idealizes the character of Adam and the patriarchs, and denies the 1 Hom., ii. 15-17, 33; iii. 22-27; xx. 2. Compare Recognitions, iii. 59, 61. 2 Hom., ii. 6, 10, 12; iii. 11-20; xviii. 13, 14. receives similar emphasis in the Recognitions. The teaching function "All evil," it is said, sins imputed to them.1 Sacrifices are discarded,2 and circumcision is not inculcated. Still, Christianity is essentially identified with Judaism; and it is stated that one may be equally approved, whether he follows the guidance of Moses or of Jesus.3 The ecclesiastical stand-point of the work is hierarchical. Great importance is attached to baptism and episcopacy. But James rather than Peter is represented as the head of the hierarchy, the highest authority in the Church. "Remember," Peter is made to say, "to shun apostle or teacher or prophet who does not first accurately compare his preaching with that of James, who was called the brother of my Lord, and to whom was intrusted to administer the Church of the Hebrews in Jerusalem." 4 Paul is unmentioned, and in a few instances there is reason to suspect that a side thrust was aimed at him.5 But the brunt of the author's polemic was not so much against the teaching of Paul as against the anti-Judaic Gnosticism of Marcion. III.-GNOSTICISM. 1. ORIGINATING CAUSES OF GNOSTICISM. - Three causes were especially operative in giving rise to Gnosticism. The first of these was that spirit of intellectual aristocracy which dominated so largely the ancient world. Priesthoods and philosophers embraced the theory that the great mass of men were without capacity for the higher grades of religious as well as of 1 Hom., iii. 20, 21. 2 Hom., iii. 45. 3 Hom., viii, 6, 7. |