The Original of This Book Is in the Cornell University Library. There
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092340771 A LITERARY HISTORY OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY. A LITERARY HISTORY OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY: INCLUDING THE FATHERS AND THE CHIEF HERETICAL WRITERS OF THE ANTE-NICENE PERIOD. jfor tbe 1llse of Stu~ents ant, General 1Reabers. BY CHARLES THOMAS QRUTTWELL, M.A. RECTOR OF KIBWORTH, LEICESTER, AND RURAL DEAN; FORMERLY FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD. AUTHOR OF "A HISTORY OF ROMAN LITERATURE," ETC. S-n ttwo IDoiumes. VOL. I. NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 743 & 745 BROADWAY. 1893. -:\ilJ TO THE MOST REVEREND EDWARD. LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. VISITOR OF MERTON COLLEGE, WHOSE PROFOUND LEARNING IS NOWHERE MORE AT HOME THAN AMONG 'Ube Bnctent jfatbets, THIS HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE OF THE EARLY CHURCH. IS. BY HIS PERMISSION RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED. PREFACE. THE encouraging reception given to my " History of Roman Literature," published in I 877, suggested the extension of the same plan to the more complicated field of the Literature of the early Church. So far as I am aware, there is no English work which exactly covers the same ground ; and I hope that the present volume may be found to supply a real want, both for students of theology and for general readers who desire to see for themselves what the first exponents of Christian doctrine after the Apostles believed and taught. Upwards of seven years have been spent in collecting the materials for this work. The original authorities have in all cases been carefully studied, and, in addition, information has been gathered from such of the best known and most recent Church histories, dictionaries, and monographs as were within my reach. Where more than the general out lines of the thought have been borrowed, I have sought in every instance to acknowledge my indebtedness. The purpose I have had in view is mainly literary-that is, I have endeavoured to point out the leading intellectual con ceptions which animate the various writers, to indicate the degree of success attained by each, and to estimate the permanent value of each one's contribution to the growing edifice of human thought and knowledge. The student will find included in the list of Christian writers, besides the Church Fathers, a considerable number vii V!ll PREFACE. of heretical teachers whose works have perished, but whose icleas are more or less correctly preserved in the controver sial treatises of their opponents. Though rightly repudiated as heretical, these speculations entered so closely into the Church's claily life, and both by attraction and repulsion influeucecl so strongly the statements of Catholic doctrine, that it was felt impossible to pass them by with a mere cursory notice. It is hopecl that the analysis of them, remote and fantastic as they seem to us, will not prove wearisome to the reacler. The Ante-:~"icene period is, on the whole, more ,aried in character than that which immediately follows it. The two main stre:-ims of Christian thought, represented respectively by the Greek and Latin Churches, ha,-e already begun to diverge from their common watershed. In Origen and Ter tullian they haYe hewn out valleys which he who climbs the intervening heights can still simultaneously survey, but they have not yet become two rivers watering different regions, as is the case when we come to compare, let us say, Athanasius with Augustine. At the present clay, the most fruitful Christian thought is moving on the lines of the Greek Fathers. The controversies which have attended the publication of Luic Jfundi have suggested to men's minds the inadequacy of the Augustinian theology to satisfy the desire for spiritual enlightenment. A deeper, wider, more truly human theology is required. In the pages of Clement of Alexandria, of Origen, aud especially of Athanasius, such a theology is already provided. The Incarnation, as the self-revealing of Di,-ine wisdom and love in terms of a nature fitted by its kinship to the Deity to be the vehicle of such revelation-this is the central truth of Christianity as apprehended by the great thinkers of Alex andria. Christ the Redeemer of all hnmanitr.-hnmanity PREFACE. IX recalled to its true self in and by Ohrist,-the will once more set free by the living power of an indwelling Spirit, Who opens out infinite possibilities of development by revealing to man the true law of his being-such are some of the inspir ing thoughts of Greek theology, which respond to our purest aspirations, and reconsecrate man's intellect to the service of God. An able writer 1 has taken exception to the clothing of the Church's doctrine in the forms of Greek metaphysics. But we may fairly ask: In what other form could it have been clothed? The intuitions of Revelation, to be presented to the universal consciousness, must needs be recast in the form of thought which nearest approaches universality. And the world has yet to devise an instrument better fitted to achieve this lofty task than the language of Greek philosophy, fashioned to the processes of exact thought by the continuous labour of the highest minds for nine centuries, and, for Christians at least, stamped with the inspired approval of the disciple whom Jesus loved. The answer to Dr. Hatch's objection can hardly be better expressed than in the words of an American writer: 2 "The influence of Hellenic specula tion in determining the true nature of the Person of Christ is not a thing smuggled surreptitiously into the domain of Christian thought-an alien element, to be carefully elimi nated, if we would understand the original revelation in its simplicity and purity. It enters into the Divine process of preparation for the Advent of Christ as a constituent factor; it is essential to a right interpretation of the Christian Idea in its widest and highest application." The interpretation of revelation is a process continuous with revelation itself. It is vain to wish for the establish- 1 The late Dr. Hatch, in his Hibbert Lect·ui·es. 2 Professor Allen, in his Continuity of Christian Thought. X PREFACE. ment in theology of the simple, instinctive religious language of the Old and New Testaments. This language always will be, as it always has been, the spontaneous expression of devout souls as they address their prayers or praises to the All-Merciful Father. But until the modern world can achieve, as perhaps it may, on the basis of inductive science, a meta physical terminology superior to that of ancient Greece, we may well be content to accept the historic definitions of the Church, only removing what can be proved to be adven titious or unwarranted by the sense of Scripture. This was indeed the professed object of the leaders of the Reformation, but they were not able sufficiently to disengage themselves from their environment to perceive that the views they received as primitive were in truth largely coloured by an Augustinian medium, which refracted and often obscured the light. The process which they inaugurated was in its very nature incomplete, and it would neither be possible nor desirable to arrest its course. In taking her stand upon Holy Scripture as distinct from any special reading of its sense, the Anglican Church admits the possibility of a progressive interpretation corresponding to the infinite fecundity of Scripture itself. And the true successors of the great divines of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are surely those who are turning upon Holy Scripture the entire light of the purified human intelligence, and trying to make it speak for itself in those clear tones to which, once heard, the mind of man cannot but respond. No reverent soul will presume to limit the meaning of Scripture to that primary sense historically present to the mind of the writer, which it is the mission of our present Biblical criticism incontrovertibly to establish and uniquely to emphasise. If it could be so limited, Scripture would cease PREFACE. XI to be for us what it undoubtedly is, the Word of Gon. But it is surely a fallacy to conclude that those who bid us study the Bible as we study any other book, mean also to assert that the Bible is nothing more than any other book. They are really reverting under changed conditions of thought to the example of the Greek Fathers, who brought to the study of Scripture those canons of interpretation which the highest science of their day applied to all the noblest products of the human mind, to Homer, to the poetic Cycle, to the entire lore of the antique world. No doubt their method was imperfect, transitory, destined to be superseded ; but the principle on which they acted, that of employing the highest available culture in the task of interpreting Scripture, was true and valid, and therefore sure to reappear when the course of intellectual development made its reappearance possible. The methods at present in favour, no doubt, appear to those engaged in applying them as wholly satisfying and final. And the language used by many Biblical critics undoubtedly justifies a cautious attitude with regard to a subject so momentous on the part of those who are respon sible for the custody of the body of doctrine handed down to them. At the same time, since it is by reason and reason alone that the words of Scripture as of all other literature must be judged, the instructed Christian will not mistrust the disciplined use of that divine gift which then is most truly free when it serves most impersonally in the cause of truth.