Christian Churches of God No. 202

The Nicolaitans

(Edition 2.0 19970524-19970722-20091101) The doctrines of the Nicolaitans are condemned in Revelation 2:6 in the message to the Ephesian Church, which did not have the doctrines and hated them. The Pergamos Church was censured because it had those among it that held the doctrines of Balaam and the doctrines of the Nicolaitans (often spelt Nicolaitanes) which Christ states he hates. Who are they and what were their doctrines? Does modern Christianity understand the ramifications of this condemnation by Christ?

Christian Churches of God PO Box 369, WODEN ACT 2606, AUSTRALIA Email: [email protected]

(Copyright  1997, 2009 Wade Cox)

This paper may be freely copied and distributed provided it is copied in total with no alterations or deletions. The publisher’s name and address and the copyright notice must be included. No charge may be levied on recipients of distributed copies. Brief quotations may be embodied in critical articles and reviews without breaching copyright. This paper is available from the World Wide Web page: http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.org Page 2 The Nicolaitans

The Nicolaitans

Introduction him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the The doctrines of the Nicolaitans are hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and condemned by Messiah in Revelation in his in the stone a new name written, which no man message to the Churches. We see that the knoweth saving he that receiveth it. (KJV) Church condemned the doctrines in the time of the Ephesians but by the time of The Nicolaitans are an enigmatic sect Pergammos they had penetrated the Church. mentioned only here. Who were they? What Revelation 2:1-7 Unto the angel of the church of did they teach that was condemned so Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth strongly? The answer is found in the maze of the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in history. 2 the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: The Historical Record Regarding and thou hast tried them which say they are the Nicolaitans 3 apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: The first mention we have of them from the And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my 4 traditional authorities is in the writings of name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted. Ignatius. He is accredited as the disciple of Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, 5 John with Polycarp. He is dated 30-107 CE because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and, hence, he, while he was a child, is and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee claimed to have seen Christ according to later quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his legends. He was bishop of the Church from 6 place, except thou repent. But this thou hast, that the death of John. He was martyred and thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I bequeathed his spirit to Polycarp who assumed 7 also hate. He that hath an ear, let him hear what leadership of the Church. He was also called the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that Theophorus which from his writings shows overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, how deeply the early Christians felt the which is in the midst of the paradise of God. (KJV) The Tree of Life has meaning in relation to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (2Cor. 6:16). In Gnostic doctrines and the Mystery cults. Ignatius’ letter to the Trallians (Ch. XI, see ANF, Vol. I, p. 71) we see that Simon is Here, the Church is praised for resisting, to the condemned here as the firstborn son of Satan, point of hatred, the doctrines of the together with Menander and Basilides. These Nicolaitans. Thus they must have been present were Gnostics and this epistle was written at at an early point in the history of the Church. the end of Ignatius’ life and before Basilides They seemed to grow and penetrate the went to Alexandria where he prospered under Church from Pergammos. the reigns of the emperors Adrian and

Revelation 2:12-17 And to the angel of the church Antoninus Pius circa 120-140 CE. Epiphanius in Pergamos write; These things saith he which says he was from Antioch and a disciple of 13 hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy Menander, but Eusebius and Theodoret state works, and where thou dwellest, even where he was an Alexandrian by birth. Ignatius thus Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and shows he was active as a disciple of Menander hast not denied my faith, even in those days and, therefore, Simon Magus in Antioch and wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was hence Epiphanius is correct (ibid., cf. J P slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. 14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast Arendzen, Cath. Encyc., art. Basilides, Vol. II, there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who p. 326. Arendzen probably drew the taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the conclusion he did in order to reject the long children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto epistle of Ignatius which is not Trinitarian and 15 idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou at odds with his position). also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, 16 which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come Thus the time frame we have of the unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with 17 Nicolaitans is at least prior to 107 CE from the the sword of my mouth. He that hath an ear, let early days of Gnosticism. The Nicolaitans Page 3

After condemning the Ebionites, he proceeded Ignatius in the long epistle says: to condemn the Nicolaitans but seems to Flee also the Nicolaitanes, falsely so-called, who ignore Ignatius’ comment and accept the are lovers of pleasure and given to calumnious origin of the sect as from Nicolas. This is speeches (ANF, ibid.). probably an assumption. He says: 3. The Nicolaitanes are the followers of that We deduce three things from this statement. Nicolas who was one of the seven first ordained to Firstly, the Nicolaitans were incorrectly the diaconate by the apostles [the ANF note 1 says named. The deductions made or attributed to this is disputed by other ancient authorities]. They them as disciples of Nicolas, deacon of the lead lives of unrestrained indulgence. The character of these men is very plainly pointed out in the Church, is false. We will examine this later. Apocalypse of John [when they are presented], as teaching that it is a matter of indifference to Secondly, the Nicolaitans were lovers of practice adultery, and to eat things sacrificed to pleasure and, thirdly, they were given to idols. Wherefore the Word has also spoken of them calumny in speeches. In other words, they thus: “But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds accused and vilified their opposition. Thus, the of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate.” writing of accusatory works falls into the Irenaeus identifies from Chapter XXII the root category of the deeds of the Nicolaitans. of the heresies as being with the Gnostics and stemming from Simon and Menander – as Ignatius again mentions them in his epistle to does Ignatius. Unlike Ignatius, however, he the Philadelphians. Ignatius says there that the seems to accept that Nicolas was the Nicolaitan (falsely so-called) sees the end of progenitor of the Nicolaitans. The probable all as pleasure and sees unlawful unions as a truth is that a particular view of leniency was good thing. Thus, the end of action is pleasure taken to extremes and the branch of the (as a Hedonist would see it). From Ignatius’ Church under Nicolas in which it first comments we might deduce that the unlawful appeared became corrupt and withdrew. This unions may have exceeded simple fornication is the sense we see in the letters of John. In and, indeed, as we will see, adultery was of no 1John 2 we see the division in the Church that consequence to them. The comments from stems from this doctrine of the Godhead and Chapter VI of this epistle also indicate that the transgression of the law. It is possible that there was a problem in their view of the John was writing to correct the doctrines that incarnation. Ignatius denies the doctrine that sought to assert that the humanity and divinity God the Word dwelt in a human body – being of Christ were separated and also that the law within it as the Word and not as a human soul. was diminished as we see in the doctrines that He seems to state it was as a human soul. emanated from the eastern Gnostics from Thus, the Nicolaitans are the precursors of the Simon through Menander and the Nicolaitans. Trinitarians from this text. That factor This text struck at the very heart of the probably explains why the epistle was trinitarian structure and so they had to alter the shortened and rewritten at a later date. doctrine of Antichrist found in 1John 4:1-2. The Trinitarians altered the text to read: From this earliest of insights into the 1John 4:1-3 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but Nicolaitans we go to Irenaeus who was the try the spirits whether they are of God: because 2 next line of succession, being trained by many false prophets are gone out into the world. Polycarp and hence once removed from Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that Ignatius, being born probably between 120 confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is and 140 CE. of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and Irenaeus, disciple of Polycarp, who was the this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is disciple of John wrote concerning the it in the world. (KJV) Nicolaitans in Against Heresies, Ch. XXVI (ANF, Vol. I, pp. 351-352). The original text however appears in Ireneaus and is written thus: Page 4 The Nicolaitans

Hereby know ye the spirit of God: Every spirit that reduced to this sense quoting Matthew 6:24 confesseth Jesus Christ came in the flesh is of God; and Luke 16:13 noting “convenientir Domini and every spirit which separates Jesus Christ is not of God but is of Antichrist. Praecepto, ‘duobus dominis servire’, voluptati et Deo”. We might render it “You cannot Socrates the historian says (VII, 32, p. 381) serve two masters, voluptuousness and God”. that the passage had been corrupted by those who wished to separate the humanity of Jesus Clement reduces, in this text, the heretics to Christ from his divinity. two classes. The first class under which he places the Nicolaitans are those who have a It seems, therefore, we are dealing with the reckless mode of life and the second class are Nicolaitans or a branch of them that those who impiously affect continence or introduced two specific heretical views. One celibacy. This is the major reason the work concerned the Godhead and the other remains in Latin and is not rendered in concerned the introduction of anti-nomianism English. The compilers of the Ante-Nicene touching also on the concept of love. Whilst Fathers did this deliberately as we see from the doctrine came to be modified in that the note 1 to page 381: After much consideration, the Editors have deemed more gross and anti-social elements of sin it best to give the whole of this Book in Latin. [In were refined, the basic tenets of the elevation the former Book, Clement has shown, not without and separation of the humanity and divinity of a decided leaning to chaste celibacy, that marriage Christ were retained. The doctrine was finally is a holy estate, and consistent with the perfect man absorbed in the Trinity and became more in Christ. He now enters upon the refutation of the false-Gnostics and their licentious tenets. aberrant as anti-nomianism in the sects but Professing a stricter rule to begin with and established as the grace eliminating law despising the ordinances of the Creator, their result argument that is a function of modern was the grossest immorality in practice. The mainstream Christianity. There are other melancholy consequences of an enforced celibacy aspects of the doctrines which we shall also are, here, all foreseen and foreshown; and this examine. Book, though necessarily offensive to our Christian tastes, is most useful as a commentary upon the history of monasticism, and the celibacy of priests, We know from the writings of Clement of in the Western Churches. The resolution of the Alexandria that the Carpocratians also took up Edinburgh editors to give this Book to scholars the view that the Nicolaitans had abused the only, in the Latin, is probably wise. I subjoin a name and words of the deacon Nicolas (see succinct analysis in the elucidations.] (ANF, Vol. II, p. 381). ANF, Vol. II, p. 385; also Elucidation, IV, p. 404). This text was left in the Latin seemingly to protect the great unwashed against their own In the Stromata or Miscellanies Book III ignorance or, more likely, the celibate clergy (which is the only one not translated into against the condemnation their non-biblical English) at Chapter IV, we see Clement deal aberration so richly deserved. with the Carpocratians and the misuse of the teachings of Nicolas by the Nicolaitans. In the Clement condemns the Gnostic arguments first section, he deals with the comments of regarding celibacy as well as licentiousness Christ allegedly to Phillip made in Matthew and notes Peter as being married and also the 8:22 and Luke 9:60. deacon Philip having married daughters and Let the dead bury their dead as for you follow supposes Paul to have been married also (see me. Elucidations, VII, p. 405). [Quod si usurpent vocem Domini, qui dicit Phillipo “Sine mortuos sepelire mortuos suos, There is no doubt that Clement saw the tu autem sequere me”.] Nicolaitans as misusing the teachings of the deacon Nicolas and that they are classed with From this form, the argument regarding the the profligate sect of heretics. Both of these corruption of the body seems to be deduced. classes he refuses to grant the title Gnostic The argument against the Nicolaitans is because Clement was himself a quasi-Gnostic The Nicolaitans Page 5 and saw the title as one of honour concerning early disciples, it came to be accepted as a knowledge of the faith bordering on the teaching arising from him. esoteric. It appears to form the basis of the heresy with The next time we come upon the doctrine of which John had to combat in his epistles to the the Nicolaitans is in the writings attributed to Parthians and was not simply confined to Tertullian (see S Thelwell’s translation of the licentious behaviour but also to a view of the appendix Against All Heresies, ANF, Vol. III, Godhead that sought to place the humanity p. 649). Thelwell relegates it as a spurious and divinity of Christ on levels such that God treatise attributed to Tertullian written as the Word entered the body and somehow [according to Oehler] by Victorinus the humanity of Christ was altered. This, of Petavionensis, i.e. Victor, bishop of Pettaw on course, resulted in the trinitarian structure the Drave, in Austrian Styria. Jerome states which altered the view of the structure of the distinctly that Victorinus did write adverus humanity and divinity of the incarnation. For omnes Haeresies. Allix is uncertain as to its this reason the comments in 1John 4:1-3 were authorship. If Victorinus wrote it, then it is altered to obscure the text. still ante-Nicene as he was martyred in Diocletian’s persecution circa 303 CE. Augustine holds that the epistle of John was written to the Parthians (see Nicene and Post Whether by Tertullian or Victorinus, the text Nicene Fathers (NPNF), Series 1, Vol. VII, p. states, after listing the history and views of the 459). We will examine the significance of this schools from Simon Magus through Menander elsewhere but the scope of the Gnostic heresy to Basilides: was thus extensive as was the Church shown A Brother heretic emerged in Nicolaus. He was one to be lodged within the Parthians. of the seven deacons who were appointed in the Acts of the Apostles [Acts 6:1-6]. He affirms that Darkness was seized with a concupiscence - and Hippolytus mentions the Nicolaitans also (in indeed, a foul and obscene one - after Light: out of The Refutation of all Heresies, Book VII, Ch. this premixture it is a shame to say what fetid and XXIV, ANF, Vol. V, p. 115) with the section unclean (combinations arose). The rest (of his on the Melchisedekians. He says of Nicolas: tenets), too, are obscene. For he tells of certain But Nicolaus has been a cause of the wide-spread Aeons, sons of turpitude, and of conjunctions of combination of these wicked men. He, as one of execrable and obscene embraces and premixtures the seven (that were chosen) for the diaconate [the [see n. 7 to p. 650], and certain yet baser outcomes seven at Acts 6:5], was appointed by the Apostles. of these. He teaches that there were born, (But Nicolaus) departed from correct doctrine, and moreover, daemons, and gods, and spirits seven, was in the habit of inculcating indifferency of both and other things sufficiently sacrilegious alike and life and food. And when the disciples (of Nicolaus) foul, which we blush to recount, and at once pass continued to offer insult to the Holy Spirit, John them by. Enough it is for us that this heresy of the reproved them in the Apocalypse as fornicators and Nicolaitans has been condemned by the eaters of things offered unto idols [Rev. 2:6]. Apocalypse of the Lord with the weightiest The details are taken through a progression to authority attaching to a sentence, in saying, this point from Irenaeus, I, 26; Tertullian “Because this thou holdest, thou hatest the doctrines of the Nicolaitans, which I too hate”. Praescript., cxiv; Epiphanius Haer., cxxv; Eusebius Hist. Eccles., iii, 29; Theodoret The text then goes into the description of the Haer. Fab, I, 15; and then to Augustine Haer., Ophites who venerated the serpent because it cv. was the serpent that gave man the knowledge of good and evil. We see the gradual twist of the argument from the false attribution to Nicolas and the twisting Thus, we are seeing that the position of the of the doctrines concerning the Godhead and doctrine is a development of anti-nomian or the law to the indulgence in sin and licentious Gnosticism. Originally attributed to promiscuity with no mention of the Godhead a development of Nicolas one of the original and the law which was a central issue when it deacons, an assertion which was denied by the was first discussed. Page 6 The Nicolaitans

We get the idea, however, when we examine the one epistle combining it also with the the section in Clement of Alexandria doctrine of love. These three elements were concerning the Nicolaitans where (in the combined in the heresy which attacked the Stromata or Miscellanies at Book II, Ch. XIX, Church and could only have been a ANF, Vol. II, p. 373) he says: development of this Gnostic heresy which Such also are those who follow Nicolaus, quoting became the progenitor of the mainstream an adage of the man, which they pervert, “that the Christian church. It seems most probable from flesh must be abused.” But the worthy man showed that it was necessary to check pleasures and lusts, an examination of the history of the doctrine and by such training to waste away the impulses that we are looking at the refutation of the and propensities of the flesh. But they abandoning Gnostic doctrines later called Nicolaitan in the themselves to pleasure like goats, as if insulting the epistle of 1John and that this heresy first split body, lead a life of self indulgence; not knowing the Church. It later became the founder of the that the body is wasted, being by nature subject to more moderate mainstream Christian system dissolution; while their soul is buried in the mire of vice; following as they do the teaching of pleasure which adopted the duality of the ascetic and itself, not of the apostolic man. liberal systems combining them within the church in the priest/laity distinctions as we We see, therefore, that the teachings of the also saw in Manichean dualism and deacon Nicolas in overcoming the lusts of the Montanism (see also the paper Vegetarianism flesh were misused by the Gnostic intruders and the Bible (No. 183)). into the Church. These Nicolaitans, as they called themselves, attacked the nature of God This view then leads into another important and the law and thus regressed to sin. The aspect that is taken on into trinitarian or reason the arguments have never been mainstream Christianity which is attendant expressed by the theologians in their true vein upon, or which can be extracted from, the is simple. Clement shows the intent in the next meaning of the name. The Nicolaitans carried sequence with the words: the view of law and grace and it became ... Wherefore the divine law appears to me modified as with all aspects of the syncretic necessarily to menace with fear, that, by caution Babylonian system of the whore. and attention, the philosopher may acquire and retain absence of anxiety, continuing without fall and without sin in all things. For peace and The name is allegedly derived from Nicolas freedom are not otherwise won, than by ceaseless but it is perhaps as appropriate to examine the and unyielding struggles with our lusts. For these structure from the original Greek. stout and Olympic antagonists are keener than wasps, so to speak; and Pleasure especially, not by Before we examine the structure of the name, day only but by night, is in dreams with witchcraft ensnaringly plotting and biting. How, then, can the another aspect to be considered about them is Greeks any more be right in running down the law, that Fleury says about them: when they themselves teach that Pleasure is the Les Nicolaites donnaient une infinité de noms slave of fear? ... barbares aux princes et aux puissances qu’ils mettaient en chaque ciel. Ils en nommaient un Here, we see the centre of the argument is the calaucauch, abussant d’un passage d’Isaie, où se lisent ces mots hebreux: cau-la-cau, cau-la-cau, law and its reduction in anti-nomianism. Thus, pour representer l’insolence avec laquelle les the Godhead had to be reduced and Christ impies se moquaient du prophète, en répétant elevated in order to reduce or eliminate the plusiers fois quelques-unes de ses paroles (ANF, laws of the Old Testament and of God. This Vol. V, p. 154) reading: doctrine has not been adequately expounded The Nicolaitans gave an infinity of barbarous names to the princes and powers whom they place because it is the centre of the grace-law in each heaven (lit. sky). They named one of them arguments of mainstream trinitarian Caulaucauch, misusing a passage from Isaiah, Christianity. They cannot expose it or they where these Hebrew words may be read: “cau-la- expose themselves and, so, little is actually cau, cau-la-cau,” representing the insolence with written on the doctrine. which the impious mock the prophet, by repeating several times some of his words (tr. Walter Steensby, Carole Dailley, ed. Wade Cox). This is the reason that John wrote on the nature of sin and the doctrine of Antichrist in The Nicolaitans Page 7

This reference relates to the refutation of the woman than her to whom he was married, and that, doctrines of the Naasseni by Hippolytus (The so far as his children are concerned, his daughters continued in a state of virginity until old age, and Refutation of All Heresies, ANF, Bk. V, Ch. his son remained uncorrupt. If this is so, when he III, p. 52). brought his wife, whom he jealously loved, into the midst of the apostles, he was evidently renouncing The three terms were Caulacau, Saulasau and his passion; and when he used the expression ‘to Zeesar meaning, respectively, hope, abuse the flesh,’ he was inculcating self-control in tribulation and hope as yet little (see n. to p. the face of those pleasures that are eagerly pursued. For I suppose that, in accordance with the 52 and to Irenaeus, ANF, p. 350). The command of the saviour, he did not wish to serve comments refer to Isaiah 28:10. This text is two masters, pleasure and the Lord. directed against Judah who is like Samaria in its unrestrained Hedonism and this is the basis This teaching is a reference to Matthew 6:24 of the reaction to the text among the licentious as we see also from the reference in the Gnostics such as the Nicolaitans. Knowledge Stromata by Clement above. Eusebius also is gained precept upon precept, line upon line holds that Matthias taught the same way and – hence, the repetition in Saulasau and this is noted in the NPNF note 5 to page 161 Caulacau. Precept here is SHD 6673 tsav as which refers back to the gospel of Matthias an injunction meaning a commandment and, mentioned by Eusebius in Chapter XXV. It is hence, a law or precept. The anti-nomians also mentioned by Origen (Hom in Lucam I), were striking at the law and calling it by Jerome (Paef in Matt), and by other later tribulation. Line upon line is SHD 6957 kav or writers. The gospel is no longer extant. kawv hence line upon line or kawv-la-kawv. It Clement preserves some fragments in is a cord used for measuring and also a Stromata II. 9; III. 4; VII. 13. This gospel musical string and, hence, accord. It is from emphasised asceticism. Little is known about this sense a line. By the law all was measured it but Lipsius holds that it was “identical with and this is the sense of the text in Isaiah and the [paradoseis Marthion] which were in high thus ridiculed by the Naasseni and featured in regard in Gnostic circles, and especially the cosmology of the Nicolaitans. The among the Basilideans” (see Lipsius, Dict. of Gnostics and, here, also the Nicolaitans were Christ. Biog., II, p. 716; cf. NPNF, ibid., p. thus the progenitors of the grace not law 157 n. 30). argument of modern anti-nomian Trinitarians who are their logical descendants. It is not difficult to see that Eusebius of Caesaria, writing from the distance of several We see the history of the Nicolaitans listed in centuries, still saw that these people were of Eusebius (Church History, NPNF, Series 2, Gnostic influence and that they rightly Vol. 1, p. 161). After dealing with Cerinthus belonged to the categories of Gnostics that he says: stemmed from Syria and the Samaritans At this time the so-called sect of the Nicolaitans Simon Magus and his disciple Menander from made its appearance and lasted for a very short Caparattea (NPNF, ibid., p. 158), and which time. Mention is made of it in the Apocalypse of John. They boasted that the author of their sect was were passed on to Basilides and the Nicolaus, one of the deacons who, with Stephen, Nicolaitans who were more correctly Syrian were appointed by the apostles for the purpose of free living Gnostics who took the name ministering to the poor. Clement of Alexandria in Nicolaitans probably from a desire to invade his third book of his Stromata, relates the following and disrupt the Church as we see from John, things concerning him [see Stromata III. 4]. “They say that he had a beautiful wife, and after the but who were forced out. Eusebius seems to ascension of the saviour, being accused by the think that they did not last long for, by the apostles of jealousy, he led her into their midst and time he came to write, the system had been gave permission to any one that wished to marry adapted and taken over to a large extent by a her. For they say that this was in accord with that syncretic form of Gnosticism which combined saying of his that one ought to abuse the flesh. And those that have followed his heresy, imitating both liberal and ascetic Gnostic views in two blindly and foolishly that which was done and said, levels of development. commit fornication without shame. But I understand that Nicolaus had to do with no other Page 8 The Nicolaitans

Mosheim (Ecclesiastical History, Pt. II, Ch. 25) who described the Nicolaitan heresy as the V, fourth edition, William Tegg, London, justification of clerical marriage. 1865, p. 49) is of the view that the Nicolaitans originally may have been a different group This view of Humbert was officially than the sect referred to by the later second recognised at the Council of Piacenza (March century writers from Irenaeus, Tertullian and 1095). Clement of Alexandria but this does not take into account the work of Ignatius. It is most What we are seeing is the emergence of the likely that Mosheim is quite correct in linking Nicolaitan priest/laity system of mainstream them with the Gnostic doctrines developed as Christianity dedicated ultimately to the Mother we have seen and that they did not arise with Goddess system as Mariolatry and attendant Nicolas the deacon. Mosheim’s view pseudo-celibacy derived from Gnostic sources. regarding the reproach of Christ not charging them with errors in matter of faith is On Marriage and the Early insupportable and assumes no sense of Church Doctrines prophecy in the texts in Revelation. His comments on the Nicolaitans are considered Eusebius, in his history, refers to Clement and superficial. He also places Menander as a confirms that Peter and Philip not only were madman rather than a heretic and seems to married but had children and he holds that: Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to hold a lesser connection between Simon greet his wife, whom he did not take about with Magus and Menander than the early writers him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his assumed. ministry.

According to the later writer pseudo- He notes also Clement’s notation that Peter’s Dorotheus there was a Nicolas, bishop of wife was martyred in Peter’s sight and he Samaria, who fell into heresy and evil ways called encouragement to her. His daughter is under the influence of Simon Magus and he is attributed as Petronilla but probably thought to have given his name to the sect. But incorrectly from the grave of Aurelia he is considered a late and untrustworthy Petronilla filia dulcissima buried in the witness (ERE, art. ‘Nicolaitans’, Vol. 9, p. Christian cemetery of Flavia Domitilla. This 364). The same is said of pseudo-Abdias view is based on the incorrect assumption that (Acta Apost. Apoc.) who introduces another Petronilla is a diminutive of Petrus. His Nicolas converted by the apostle Andrew after children’s names are not known with certainty. a life of self indulgence (ibid.). The ERE is of the view that we are looking at a libertine It is assumed by the editors of the NPNF that Gnostic sect (ibid., p. 363). They are Philip the apostle is confounded with Philip condemned for eating things sacrificed to idols the evangelist as Acts 21:9 shows Philip the and for gross immorality (ibid., cf. Rev. evangelist has four daughters who were 2:14,20). The view of Moss (ERE, ibid., p. virgins. Clement tells us that they were later 365) is that the later Gnostic sect of the married if we assume he is speaking of the Nicolaitans at the beginning of the third same Philip, but Polycrates tells us that two at century in Asia Minor (Epiphanius Haer., least remained unmarried (see NPNF, ibid., p. XXV; cf. pseudo-Tert. adv. omn. Haer., 1 and 162 n. 3,4). We might therefore be speaking of Hipp. Haer., VII, 24) was unrelated. Their two different Philips, the apostle and the worship was of the Mother Goddess and the evangelist. Goddess of Heaven and its attendant prostitution. Such argument ignores the Regarding Paul, the answer is most likely that continuity of the history. Paul was either single but contemplating marriage when Corinthians was written and In the later disputes on the doctrines, the the reference in Eusebius and Clement is to married priests were attacked as immoral by another epistle which names his wife. This the proponents of celibacy. The argument was may be Romans written two years or so after used by Cardinal Humbert (Contra Nicetam Corinthians and, if this is the case, Chapter 16 The Nicolaitans Page 9 may refer to his wife. Rufus and his mother of every Church as witnesses and blood may be his brother-in-law and mother-in-law relatives of Jesus Christ through the reign of with a female beloved as his wife. He may Domitian until at least the reign of Trajan also have been widowed. Whatever the case, when Symeon was martyred before Atticus the history refutes celibacy in the elect governor of the time (see Eusebius, ibid., p. apostles and elders who were all faithful 164). Eusebius also confirms that Ignatius was husbands and fathers and deals with the facts bishop of Antioch and second in succession to that the Nicolaitans were falsely attributed to Peter (following Enodius) (see NPNF, ibid., p. the deacon Nicolas and were anti-nomian 166 and n. 4). Gnostics. These blood relatives of Jesus Christ were It was understood by Clement, and also here called the desposyni meaning literally in by Eusebius, that Paul was married and this is Greek Belonging to the Lord. This name was attributed to 1Corinthians 9:5 by the NPNF reserved exclusively for his blood relatives which holds that 1Corinthians 7:8 seems to and for the first century and a half was highly imply the opposite. The answer might be in respected and esteemed. The entire ancient the structure of the texts. Certainly, from Jewish Christian Church had always been 1Corinthians 9:5, we know that Peter and the ruled by their own desposynos and each one brothers of the Lord were all married and Paul carried the names traditional in Jesus’ family: demands the right that they be able to be Zachary, Joseph, John, James, Joses, Simeon, accompanied by their wives as these and the Matthias and so on but no one was ever called other apostles also do. Jesus or Yehoshua, i.e. Joshua. There were three well known and authentic lines of It is thus thought for several centuries that all legitimate blood descendants from Jesus’ own of the apostles including Paul were married. family. The Roman Catholic historian Malachi Also, Judas the brother of Christ was married Martin attempts to confine these lines of and had sons. Christ’s brothers are Judas, desposyni as follows. These were: James, Joses and Simon (Matt. 13:55). one from Joachim and Anna, Jesus’ maternal grand Christ’s uncle Clopas was also married to parents. One from Elizabeth, first cousin of Jesus’ mother, Mary, and Elizabeth’s husband Zachary. Mary mother of James the Less and Joses. He And one from Cleophas and his wife who was also was also held to be father of Symeon, second a first cousin of Mary (M Martin Decline and Fall bishop of Jerusalem. It is this similarity of of the Roman Church, Secker and Warburg, names which gives rise to the Catholic claim London, 1981, p. 42). that Christ’s brothers were really his cousins. However, the brother of Christ was He acknowledges that there were numerous distinguished as James the Just, not Little blood descendants of Joseph (p. 43) but, as all James as his cousin was called. Eusebius Roman Catholics, he seems to attempt to deny himself a Unitarian Subordinationist alleges their direct lineage from Mary, even though he that Hegesippus records that Clopas was the acknowledges they had clung to the Church brother of Joseph (Eusebius, ibid., Ch. XI, p. throughout the early years. 146; cf. Bk. IV, Ch. 22). Martin records that the descendants, as leaders John 19:25 states clearly that Mary the wife of of the Church, held a meeting with Sylvester Clopas was the sister of Mary mother of bishop of Rome about the whole nature of the Messiah. Thus, we have either two brothers Church in the year 318 CE (ibid.). The marrying two sisters or the record by emperor provided sea transport as far as Ostia Hegessipus is misconstrued to show that for eight of them and then they rode on Clopas was the brother of Joseph. donkeys to Rome and the Lateran where Sylvester now lived in splendour. They wore James the Just and the Symeon, Christ’s rough woollen clothes, with leather boots and cousin, were martyred (see also Eusebius, hats. The conversation was in Greek as they ibid., Bk. IV, XXII, p. 199). At this time the spoke Aramaic and had no Latin, and sons of Judas brother of Messiah took the lead Sylvester spoke no Aramaic. Martin considers Page 10 The Nicolaitans it probable that Joses the oldest of the and he insisted they accept the Greek bishops Christian Jews spoke on their behalf. to lead them.

Martin claims that the first split in 49 CE was This was the last known dialogue with the over the circumcision issue where Peter and Sabbath-keeping church in the east led by the Paul had broken with them insisting that they disciples who were descended from blood were bound by the Torah. This, of course, is a relatives of Messiah. In Martin’s words: false assertion based on Catholic grounds but By his adaptation, Sylvester, backed by it demonstrates the problem that we see Constantine, had decided that the message of Jesus was to be couched in Western terms by Western developing through these Gnostic intrusions minds on an imperial model (ibid., p. 44). and finally by 318 CE had resulted in the glaring discrepancy between the way the Martin records that from this time they had no Church was governed by the original Jewish place in such a church structure. They descendants of Christ and the so-called managed to survive until the first decades of orthodox Catholic Church. Since Hadrian’s the fifth century but, one by one, they conquest of Jerusalem in 135 CE, all Jews and disappeared. Some reconciled themselves with thus all Jewish Christians had been forbidden the Roman church but only as individuals. to enter Jerusalem. Thus, the doctrinal position Some passed into the anonymity of the Eastern of the original system was excluded from rites. The rest were hunted as outlaws. But Jerusalem which was seen as central to the most of them died by the sword hunted by faith. The Jewish Christians had comprised the Roman garrisons as outlaws or by starvation only Christian Church in Jerusalem until 135 when they were deprived of their small farms CE. They had left it only once, before the and were forced into the cities to be controlled capture of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 CE, where and to be reduced to zero birthrate. they fled to Pella under Simeon according to Martin (ibid.). In 72 CE they returned to From 318 CE, the Nicolaitans had emerged Jerusalem until Hadrian’s ban in 135 CE. victorious over the descendants of blood They set up Christian churches all over relatives of Messiah. Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia but they came into conflict with the Greek Christian Their inheritors were forced underground as churches because of the problems with the the Paulicians and in Europe where they observance of the law or Torah. This is became persecuted as Vallenses (see the paper thought by modern Catholicism to be because The Role of the Fourth Commandment in the Peter and Paul had set up a separate system History of the Sabbath-keeping Churches of with the Greek, but that was not the case. God (No. 170)). Their system of government based on that of the congregation was also in issue. In 318 CE The Victory of Nike and the they asked Sylvester, who now had Roman Mysteries patronage, to revoke his confirmation of the A new system of government had been authority of the Greek Christian bishops at inflicted on the church which has its place in Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Ephesus, and in the Gnostic and Phrygian Mystery systems. Alexandria, and to name desposynos bishops in their stead. In addition, they asked that the The Phrygians developed the Mystery cults practice of sending cash to Jerusalem as the which also entered Rome with pirates captured mother church be resumed. This practice is by Pompey circa 64 BCE. This introduced the easily recognisable as the tithe of the tithe Mithras system and the sun cults to Rome and, system which had been in force in the Church later, to Christianity. The Phrygians’ cults until emperor Hadrian’s ban in 135 CE. called their leaders papa or father and this is the reason Christ forbade anyone to be called Sylvester dismissed their claims and said that, father on earth (Matt. 23:9). Father became a from now on, the mother church was in Rome rank of the Mithras system (with Lion and Raven etc.) from the Phrygians (who also The Nicolaitans Page 11 developed augury by the flight of birds; ANF, Thus, the term Papa is applied to the perfect Vol. II, p. 65) and entered Catholicism as a man and belongs simultaneously to all modification of that pagan system. creatures celestial, terrestrial and infernal. The Phrygians held that on death every man enters The Phrygian Mother was Cybele (ANF, Vol. this gate into heaven and becomes a god VI, p. 462). It was a centre of the Mysteries (ANF, Vol. V, p. 54). (ibid., Vol. VI, p. 497). The Phrygians had their effect on Christianity through Gnosticism Thus we are dealing with the Gnostic system and through Tertullian and the Montanists (see of entry to heaven on death and the denial of Vol. II, ibid., p. 62). the physical resurrection. These heavenly series of the Aeons were also found among The god Attis was loved by the Mother of the each of these groups. The Phrygian doctrines Gods. The abstinence from wine in the ascetic concerning the intercourse of male and female cults comes from the fact that Attis disclosed as of the goat system aipolis was linked to the the secrets of Acdestis under the influence of concept of feeding not that which is holy to wine and, hence, it is unlawful for those who dogs (or swine) (see ANF, ibid., p. 55). drink to come into his sanctuary. This element of the Mysteries from the Phrygians In similar manner, the Naasseni hold the concerning the worship of the god Attis and perfect man as “a green ear of corn reaped” the Great Mother (who ultimately became (ibid.). From this system we see that the identified with Mary) and the decoration of the Gnostic systems in Asia Minor saw in sacred pine with flowers etc. (i.e. the Christianity a reflection of the Mystery Christmas tree) entered Christianity through systems and replaced Attis with Christ. In the Gnostic asceticism (see also the papers same way the Athenians, like the Phrygians, Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183) and initiated people into the Eleusinian Mysteries. The Cross: Its Origin and Significance (No. The ear of corn reaped was the initiation into 39); cf. ANF, Vol. VI, p. 492). the highest levels of these Mysteries (ibid.). Thus the Wave-sheaf was taken over and, According to Asterius Urbanus, the Montanist finally, Easter took over the Passover system. heresy first arose in Phrygia and this also is Thus the Mystery systems, of which the not surprising given what we have seen to date Nicolaitans were but a manifestation of one and of the Gnostic nature of the heresy. John’s element holding doctrines common to all, epistle to the Parthians is important in this entered Christianity. The Nicolaitans were regard also. probably the element openly expressing the sensual elements we see in the Mysteries It was from here also, with the rise of the probably around Aphrodite (cf. ANF, ibid., p. Montanists that speaking in tongues as strange 55). utterances contrary to the prophetic tradition of the Church in this matter first occurred Hippolytus holds that the Mysteries of the (ANF, Vol. VII, pp. 335 ff.). Phrygians have a joint object of worship with the Naasseni. He holds that the Naasseni The Phrygians and the Naasseni held similar allegorise the scriptural account of the Garden doctrines on the resurrection and we have seen of Eden and then apply the allegory to the life that the early Church linked the Nicolaitans of Jesus (ibid., Ch. IV, p. 56). with the Naasseni in their doctrines. Hippolytus does this and expounds the heresy The whole system takes the father of the of the Phrygians and the Naasseni in the Universe as the pre-existent Amygdalus and resurrection to the perfect man. They held that from him takes a theory of progression. The the title Papa was to apply to the perfect man theory that angels are of a lower order than the who was to enter in to the true gate. They saw elohim or theoi as sons of God is a belief of in Jesus this gate. Entering through this gate, the Gnostics from the Phrygian Mysteries one is born again. called the Mysteries of the Great Mother, carrying within them the names of the Page 12 The Nicolaitans associated deities from Attis to Apollo, Adonis, Jupiter, Osirus, and on to Papa or Nike is usually seen as another epithet of pope, corpse and god or green ear of corn (cf. Athene, goddess of war, where Nike is ibid., pp. 56-57). goddess of victory. Athene-Nike had an altar and shrine on the bastion south of the entrance The entire system is one and the same with to the Acropolis. It was erected at the time of manifestations of different phases of the Perikles to commemorate the victory of the Mysteries emerging so that the continuous Greeks over the Persians. Nike is seen as the whole is not readily understood by the messenger rather than the giver of the victory uninitiated observer. The Nicolaitans did not and so the association with the Logos function die out – they simply merged with the other is logically taken up (cf. ERE, Vol. XII, p. Gnostic elements and then went underground 695). with the more anti-social aspects of their behaviour. In time, the entire system was Archemos of Chios is held to be the first absorbed. Greek sculptor to represent Nike with wings and she represents the victories. She was This leads us into another aspect of the placed on the outstretched right hands of the meaning of the name Nicolaitan or giant gold and ivory statues of Zeus and Nicolaitane. There is a reason why they would Athene at Olympia and Athens by Phidias. Iris have chosen this name and then tried to derive as a messenger of the gods is hardly descent from the centre of the elect. distinguished from Nike except in relation to the rainbow (ERE, Vol. XII, p. 741). Again we The name of the Nicolaitans is derived from associate the Logos function. two words:  Nike meaning conquest or, more SGD 2992 laos means a people in general particularly, personified victory (see ERE, rather than one’s own people. indexes; I 328a; IX 794; XII 695 [wings VII 136; XII 741]) and which is itself a The name, therefore, is a combination of two deity; and words which convey the concept of the victory  laos meaning people. over the people.

The name Nicolas is thought to be derived Thus, the name was probably chosen for its from the concept of victory over the people mystical allegorical associations. The concept but it is much more than that. For example, of the division of the classes within the system Nike is a name which is used to define a into the priesthood who adopted the classic concept of a deity which is itself derived from doctrines of the ascetic Mystery cults and even the elementary divinities whose natures are assumed the titles of Papa or father together identical. Thus, Nike and Zelos are identified with the ascetic rather than the licentious with Phobos, Deimos, Kydoimos and with aspects of the Nicolaitans is a development of Uranus, Gaia, Demeter and Chaos. All are the association of the two aspects of the figures which in the later evolution unite Mystery systems. themselves to the elementary divinities (see ERE, Vol. I, art. ‘Allegory’, p. 328). This process developed into one of the division of the body into discrete classes and Nike has hardly any particular place in myth the terms ministry and laity were coined to and when she is worshipped it is usually as a describe or regularise a situation that derived particular form of another divinity usually from these systems. Athene, Artemis or Aphrodite (see ERE, art. Personification (Roman), Vol. IX, p. 794) and, The Sabbath-keeping churches from the time thus, Nike is linked here to the Mystery of Christ and his immediate family in the system of the Phrygians. That is the Church has not accepted such a system. fundamental concept underlying the choice of the name in Gnostic Christianity. The Nicolaitans Page 13

The doctrine of the Nicolaitans, therefore, is his family is those who do the will of his much more involved and longstanding than we Father (Matt. 12:46-50). might have imagined. This doctrine was coupled with that of the The desposyni were also allowed to be doctrine of Balaam which Christ also destroyed as a system because they, too, had condemned but they were not the same become tainted. This concept is the true doctrines, and they will be dealt with meaning behind the statement by Christ that separately. q