that the first bishop shall have had some author or predecessor from the apostles, or apostolic men, who continued constantly with the apostles; for in this manner the apostolic churches deduced their own genealogies; thus the church of Smyrna, having Polycarp, relate that he was located there by John; thus the church of Rome, having Clement, put forth that he was ordained by Peter; in the same manner, also, other churches present those whom, placed in the episcopacy by the apostles, they account the propagators of the apostolic cion." The originality of doctrines was to be proved by that of the churches; and this could be shown by the successions of the presiding officers.

The preservation of the names and successions of all the presbyters for a century, might have been impracticable; yet the strength of the argument for the sameness of doctrines, chiefly depended upon this circumstance, that the presbytery of each church, at any given period, secured the orthodoxy of each successive pools, presiding, presbyter, whom Tertullian denominates bishop.

Inveighing against the irregularities of the heretics, he observes, "One is the bishop to day, to-morrow, another, alius hodie episcopus, cras alius; to day he is a deacon, who is a reader to-morrow, hodie diaconus, qui cras lector; to-day a presbyter, who is a layman tomorrow, hodie presbyter, qui cras laicus; for they also impose sacerdotal functions on the laity." Individual assemblies are here the allusion, as in all other parts of his writings; if one to-day acted as the bishop in public worship, and to-morrow another, it must have been intended of one man's leading in the ordinances on one day, and another on the next, which is no more than the office of the pоso7ws, president; except that with heretics, the duty belonged to no one permanently. This passage also proves, that reading was no part of the deacon's office; that elders were not laymen; and that

p Ib. vol. ii. p. 39.

the latter ought not to have performed clerical duties in the church.

When arguing the truth of the common doctrines against Marcion, from their priority, after mentioning the churches of Corinth, Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus and Rome, he observes, "we have also the churches nourished, alumnas, of John; for if Marcion rejects also his Apocalypse, nevertheless, the series of the bishops, ordo tamen episcoporum, reckoned up to their commencement, will stand upon John their founder. In the same manner also, the genuieness of the other churches is recognized." The enumerations of the presiding presbyters, which have formerly occurred, render this passage perfectly clear, and vastly different from the modern import of the phrase order of bishops. He sometimes also means by ordo, the bench of presbyters which sat in every organized church. "Ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est consessus, where there is not a presbytery, offers et tingis, you administer the eucharist, and baptize, &c." This is the plain testimony of Tertullian," that there was but one kind of ecclesiastics in every church, who were called an order, because they sat in a row; of these there was one, who by custom, from the apostle's days, presided; and the series of such presidents, up to the apostles, was also denominated the order of the bishops of that particular congregation; but we have not found a word concerning lay-presbyters, in all his writings.

a Ib. vol. iii. p. 119.

The piece on the Trinity appearing among the works ascribed to Tertullian, has been referred by Jerom to Novatian, who lived until about the middle of the third century. In like manner the treatise on Jewish meats, among the works of Tertullian, is ascribed to Novatian; and also the 30th letter in the works of Cyprian. Neither Novatian nor Hilary, the deacon, are accounted authors, their writings having been incorrectly assigned to others.

SECTION VI.

Ignatius wrote epistles; the Latin are given up, and the larger Greek generally: the smaller are liable to many objections. They sustain not the character given by Polycarp, were opposed to Arianism, which was long after his day; differ in style; were written when the government was parochial episcopacy. The word eixos had not been substituted for

προεστώς

in the days of the martyr, as these letters represent.-The writer's principal object was to enhance the power of parochial bishops, which had not commenc ed then. They allege he saw Christ, which would make him too old in 116 to have walked and acted as described.-There is mention of an error, which arose long after his martyrdom.-Their description of the church as Catholic, the worship as at an altar, and in a temple, and the bread as if transubstantiated, are arguments against them.—Other objections.

THAT Ignatius was sentenced by Trajan, whilst at Antioch on his way to the East, in his fourth year, A. D. 116, to be carried to Rome, and there given to wild beasts, which was accordingly done, is sufficiently certain. The account of his martyrdom, which has been defended as ancient and authentic, disagrees with the relation Eusebius has given of his progress to Rome. The former declares that he sailed from Seleucia to Smyrna, thence to Troas, and from thence to Neapolis. The latter relates that he passed through Asia, and confirmed the congregations throughout every city where he came, preaching the word of God, &c. Whoever compares the seven larger Greek epistles which bear the name of Ignatius, with the account which Eusebius has given of the epistles of that apostolic father, will find such an agreement as will establish a strong probability that they are the same. Yet this argument is nearly the same in favor of the smaller which are chiefly preferred. The Latin epistles, and the larger Greek ones, are now generally, if not universally given up. The larger epistles are

evidently tinctured with Arian opinions, which Eusebius held. His approbation of the epistles which he had, is some evidence that they were the larger ones. The question is, whether those letters, which Eusebius saw, were genuine epistles of that martyr. If the larger be claimed, their Arianism militates against their genuineness; if the smaller, their opposition to that doctrine must equally prove them supposititious. The writings of twelve Christian fathers, all born after the death of Ignatius, and dead before the birth of Eusebius, have reached our times. Clemens Romanus died before Ignatius; Polycarp survived him long. His letter to the Philippians appears perfectly in character for that excellent man, and entirely consistent with the circumstances of his day, and the condition of the churches. That letter does mention letters of Ignatius, but except the message to the people of Antioch, the description of their contents by Polycarp, as those "from which the Philippians would be able to derive great advantage, as containing faith and patience, and all that edification which brings us to our Lord," is greatly different from the tenor of those which are now offered to the world.

That which purports to have been written toPolycarp differs in style, but accords with the strain of the other six, the obvious design and the main scope of which, were to enhance clerical authority and popular subjugation; evils of a date long after the days of Ignatius. Speaking to the people through Polycarp, he is made to say, "Attend unto the bishop, that God may also to you; my soul for theirs, who shall be subject to the bishop, presbyters, and deacons." We should have expected from the venerable martyr, on

8 Εξ ων μεγάλα ωφεληθῆναι δυνησεσθε. Περιέχουσι γαρ πιστιν και υπομονην, και πασαν οικοδομην την εις τον κυριον ημων ανήκουσαν. 1 §6. Τῳ επισκοπῳ προσέχετε, ινα και θεος υμιν, Αντιψυχον εγω των υπολασσομένων τῷ επισκοπῳ πρεσβυτεριῳ διακανοις. In the larger epistle it is πρεσβυτερια και διάκονοις. The Latin translator has rendered Auxor unanimis, but that is the force of the word quofuxos. The English translation has, "My soul be for theirs," &c.

his way to the amphitheatre, where he was to be eaten by wild beasts, that he should have breathed far other language. Eusebius has mentioned a quotation by Irenæus of a sentiment, which is found in the letter supposed to have been written by Ignatius to the Romans. Irenæus mentions not the name of Ignatius, but says: "As one of ours, adjudged to wild beasts for his testimony unto God, said." Irenæus's book was written more than a hundred years, and the expression of Ignatius, as spoken or written, two hundred before the time when Eusebius wrote. This was probably the evidence by which this credulous historian received those letters. If he had had other proofs, he would probably have given them. But there existed prior to his day, in the writings of Origen also a proof, which extends further than the passage in Irenæus, inasmuch as it both mentions the name of Ignatius, and gives a sentiment which is found in that epistle, which is directed to the Ephe sians.d Thus Irenæus and Origen in these scanty references to the venerable martyr Ignatius, furnished, as far as we know, all the foundation upon which those seven epistles, which may have existed in the days of Eusebius, could have then claimed to be those mentioned by Polycarp. If false men have produced

€ § 4. Σίλος ειμι του θεου και δι' οδονίων θηρίων αληθομαι να καθαρος αρτος (θεον, in the larger epistle) ευρεθω (του χριστου is not in Irenæus. I am God's grain, and am (now to be) ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I may be proved to be the pure bread (of Christ.)

d Καί, ελαθεθε τον άρχοντα του αιώνος τούτου η παρθενία Μαρίας, &c. (6th hom. on Luke, Compar. with Ep. ad Ephes. § 19.) And the virginity of Mary was hidden from the ruler of this world. Also Origen quoted the words, Ο εμος έρως εσταύρωται, Ad. Rom. § 7.

e Feeble as this evidence is, which establishes no more than that, if a forgery, it was committed prior to the time in which Eusebius wrote his Ecclesiastical History. It might pass unsuspected, if the strain of the letters suited the character of the martyr, and the condition of the churches in his day. They do evince that they were written before the diocesan episcopacy was introduced; and in this they establish a claim of antiquity, but other circumstances place them after the period they arrogate to themselves.