Jewish Synagogues, and it was natural that it should be so; since most of the first converts were Jews; since Christ himself had not laid down any general rules of ecclesiastical polity; and since his Apostles were more intent on enlarging the numbers of the believers, and informing their piety, than on constructing partial laws for the external constitution of a society which was destined to comprehend every race and variety of Man. Over two at least among the original Churches presidents were apostolically appointed under the name of Bishops; and presently, as the Apostles were gradually withdrawn, it is certain that all the principal Churches, with one or two exceptions, elected for themselves a superintendent under the same name. That custom prevailed very commonly even before the death of St. John, and became almost universal before the end of the first century; still, for a certain time longer, the various Churches continued to conduct their own affairs without any mutual dependence, and with little other correspondence than that of counsel and charity; and the Bishop, in almost all matters, acted in concert with the Presbytery in the internal administration of each.

Thus, in the unsettled constitution of the Primitive Church, we may observe the elements of three forms of government subsisting under apostolical direction, the Episcopal, the Presbyterian, and the Independent. But of these the second scarcely survived the departure of the inspired directors, and immediately subsided into a limited episcopacy; and the third, though it continued somewhat longer, so coalesced with the other two, that the greater part, if not the whole, of the Independent Churches during the first half of the second century, were ruled by a Bishop and a Presbytery that is to say, the various societies which constituted the body of Christendom were so ruled, though as yet they exercised no control over each other.

In a very short time, as new circumstances rapidly sprang up, it was found necessary for the common interest to facilitate a more general communication between societies, which, though separate in government, were united by far more powerful ties. This was most reasonably accomplished by the assembling of occasional Councils, called Synods, composed for the most part of Bishops, each of whom represented his own Church, and acknowledged no superiority of power or rank in any of his brethren, These associations of Churches cannot be traced to the first century; but before the time of Tertulliant they were very common and extensive, at least in Greece, and the custom rapidly spread over every part of Christendom. The rules or canons enacted by these Synods were received as laws of the Church throughout the province which had sent its deputies to the meeting; they were frequently published and communicated to other provinces, and the correspondence and co-operation thus created united, in a certain measure, the whole body, and combined the many scattered Churches into that one, which, even in those early days, was called the Catholic Church. But from this description we observe both the independent equality of the members composing it, and also, that

* Perhaps we might even say four-at least those, who maintain the sufficiency of the occasional and spontaneous exhortation of any zealous member of any congregation for spiritual instruction, also seek their authority in the partial and transient practice of the Primitive Church.

+ De Jejuniis. Aguntur per Græcias illa in locis concilia ex universis ecclesiis, per quæ et altiora quæque in commune tractantur, et ipsa repræsentatio totius nominis Christiani magna veneratione celebratur."

See Bingham, Antiq. b. i., c. i. sect. 7.

it had no acknowledged chief or head. For though the Metropolitans might assume, each in his own province, some superiority in rank, perhaps even in authority, yet these among themselves were equal, and their precedence and power were strictly confined to their own district.

The principal bond which united the original Catholic Church was the possession of a common canon or catalogue of sacred books; and thus, when everywhere tried by the same test, the opinions which might be stigmatized as heretical by any one of the Churches were, for the same reason, condemned by the Universal Church; and the spiritual delinquents, who were removed from the communion by a part of the Catholic body, were consequently repudiated by the whole. It is true, that those who combined and directed this external system of Catholicism were the ecclesiastical ministers, and chiefly the Bishops; it is also true, that the influence of all these over the people, and the power of the latter in the government of their dioceses, were augmented beyond their original moderation by the circumstances which led the clergy to so general a co-operation. But, on the other hand, it is extremely doubtful whether, without such a confederation, the faith itself, loosely scattered over so broad a space, could have withstood the various tempests which were levelled against it; and it certainly was not possible, that any general confederation could have been formed among the Churches, unless by the exertions of their directors-and those, too, in each instance invested with some personal authority; so that if there are any who inveigh against the original Catholic Church as the first corruption of Christianity, and the parent of all that have followed, they do not appear sufficiently to consider either the simple objects and character of that Church, or the perilous circumstances under which it coalesced, and combined many defenceless members into one powerful body. Under any circumstances, a close association and unity among religious societies possessing the same canon of faith and the same form of administration would have been natural and desirable; but, under the pressure of common danger and calamity, it was not only reasonable, but necessary*.

The writings of the ante-Nicene fathers contain all the most important

* Semler (Observationes Ncvæ in Historiam III. primor. sæc.) considers it to have been the worst consequence of the formation of the early Church as a single body, that it restrained the liberty of individual judgment, or what he calls internal religion; that it imposed certain rules, both of doctrine and discipline, upon the more ignorant and worldly Christians, and discouraged any laxity, or, as he would say, freedom, of interpretation or practice. And on that principle he exalts the character of the bolder and more mystical writers, Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen, who were not partizans of the Church, at the expense of Tertullian, Cyprian, and others, and praises the independence of the heretics in thinking and reasoning for themselves. We are not, however, able to discover that the expositions of Scripture contained in the Alexandrian, are, upon the whole, more sound and rational than those of the Carthaginian, Fathers, while they certainly abound with many fanciful extravagances from which the latter are free; and we have shown that the tenets of many of the early heretics were incalculably remote from the precincts of reason and Scripture. At the same time, we are willing to agree with Semler, that it were better far for religion to endure all those irregular absurdities, than to support the Unity of the Church as it was proclaimed in the Roman Catholic sense, and as it was upheld by execution and massacre. But it cannot be asserted that the papal system was the necessary offspring of the early Catholic Church; for, if so, it would have arisen in the Eastern as surely as in the Western communion. The worst principles of that system proceeded from causes posterior far to the second century: and the union of the religious societies which at that time constituted the Church was, in our opinion, an instrument in God's hands both for the preservation of sound doctrine amidst the numerous and irrational deviations of heresy, and also for the association of the faithful in discipline, and in devoted resistance to the attacks of persecution.

doctrines of Christianity; but we should vainly search those books for a complete and consistent system of theology. In fact, their writers did not commonly handle the dogmas of faith, unless with a view to the coufutation of some new or prevalent heresy. Thus their arguments were usually directed to a particular purpose, and addressed to the views and prejudices of the time or place in which they were published. Many of them were uninstructed in the art of reasoning, and almost all were, in some degree, infected either with the narrow spirit of Judaism, or the loose and speculative genius of philosophy; so that, in correcting the errors of others, they often deviated very widely from sense and truth themselves †. Those controversies, however, though not always conducted, with becoming moderation, were not, perhaps, without their use even in those days, since they warmed the zeal and animated the industry of the parties without endangering their personal security. And to us their retrospect may bring some increase of charity, if the consideration of the very broad and essential points, on which they turned, should haply lead us to attach less weight to those less momentous differences, which have raised such heats in later times, and which even yet have not entirely lost their bitterness. It is certain that a very important moral improvement was immediately introduced by Christianity, wheresoever it gained footing. The earliest societies of the converts furnished an example of rigid, but simple and unaffected piety, to which the history of man can, perhaps, produce no parallel; and even in the following century we need not hesitate to assert the incomparable superiority of the Christians over their Pagan contemporaries the principles of their religion, the severity of their discipline, the peculiarity of their civil condition, confirm the evidence which assures us that such was the fact. But the golden days of Christianity were confined to its infancy, and it is a great delusion to imagine that its perfect integrity continued throughout the whole period of its persecution, or to refer indiscriminately to the history of the three first centuries for a model of Evangelical purity. We must also be careful not to exaggerate the merits of the early Church, nor to extenuate the abuses which it certainly admitted, nor to exculpate the ministers who created or encouraged them.

So far, indeed, are we from any such intention, that we consider the present as a proper opportunity to examine with more specific notice the innovations which successively appeared either in doctrine or discipline: that we may ascribe to its proper age each of the several abuses which at length combined to deform the structure of the Catholic Church; and that we may perceive how gradual was their growth, and how deep and ancient the root from which many of them proceeded.

That to which we shall first recall the reader's attention (for there are few, if any, of which some mention has not already been made) is the claim to miraculous power, as inherent in the Church, which was asserted by several among the early Christians, from Justin Martyr downwards, and asserted (as evidence and reason have persuaded us‡) without any

'C'est la matière de tous les Sermons des Pères la morale et les hérésies du tems. Sans cette clef souvent on ne les entend pas; ou du moins on ne les peut gouter. Et c'est encore une utilité considérable de l'Histoire Ecclésiastique. Car quand on scait les hérésies qui régnoient en chaque tems et en chaque pais on voit pourquoi les pères reve noient toujours à certains points de doctrine.' Fleury, Disc. 1. sur l'Hist. Eccles., s. xiv. Even Irenæus, almost the earliest among them, is not exempt from this charge; his errors are enumerated by Dupin, Nouv. Biblioth., Vie S. Irénée, vol. i. p. 73. ̧

See Chap. ii. p. 19.

truth. According to the Apologists, and other writers of the second and third centuries, the sick were commonly healed, the dead were raised*, and evil spirits cast out, through the prayers of the faithful in the name of Jesus. Men of unquestionable piety eagerly retailed, and may possibly have believed, each other's fabrications. Visions and dreams became the motives of action or belief, and the commonest feelings and resolutions were ascribed to the immediate impulse and inspiration of the Deity. Some nominal converts may thus have been enrolled under the banners of the Church; but the evil of the practice overbalanced its profit, even its momentary profit; since the minds of men were thereby hurried away from the proper understanding of the Gospel, and the true character of the religion, to gaze after marvels and prodigies, and prepared to ascribe to fallacious impressions a belief, which can only be sound when it is founded in reason. It is proper, however, to point out one general distinction between these early miracles and those which clouded the Church in later ages; for, though it is insufficient to establish their credit, it may lead us to regard their authors with more charity. There appears to have been nothing absurd or superstitious in the manner of their performance, nor base or wicked in their object. They are related to have been usually wrought by the simple invocation of Christ's name; and it does not appear that their accomplishment directly tended to feed avarice or individual ambition-neither to augment the power of the clergy, nor to decide religious controversy, nor to subvert any obnoxious heresy, nor to establish any new doctrine, nor to recommend any foolish practice or superstitious observancet. We can seldom trace them to any other motive than an injudicious zeal for the propagation of the faith.

The triumphs of the Exorcists over the powers of darkness are so loudly and perpetually celebrated by the oldest Church writers, that they may deserve a separate notice. It seems, indeed, probable that the Jews, espe

The following is part of the celebrated testimony of Irenæus (lib. ii. cap. 31 or 57) as cited by Eusebius (lib. v. cap. 7):οἱ μὲν γὰρ δαίμονας ἐλαύνουσι βεβαίως καὶ ἀληθῶς. ὥστε πολλάκις καὶ πιστεύειν αὐτοὺς ἐκείνους καθαρισθέντας ἀπὸ τῶν πονηρῶν πνευμάτων καὶ εἶναι ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ· οἱ δὲ καὶ πρόγνωσιν ἔχουσι τῶν μελλόντων, καὶ ὀπτασίας καὶ ῥήσεις προφητικάς· ἄλλοι δὲ τοὺς κάμνοντας διὰ τῆς τῶν χειρῶν ἐπιθέσεως ἰῶνται, καὶ ὑγιεῖς ἀποκαθιστᾶσιν. ἤδη δὲ καθὼς ἔφαμεν καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγέρθησαν, καὶ παρέμειναν σὺν ἡμῖν ἱκανοῖς ἔτεσι. Καὶ τί γάρ ; οὐκ ἔστιν ἄριθμον εἰπεῖν τῶν χαρισμάτων ὧν κατὰ παντὸς τοῦ κόσμου ἡ ἐκκλησία παρὰ Θεοῦ λαβοῦσα, &c. &c. "Some effectually expel devils, so that the very persons who are cleansed from evil spirits believe and are in the Church; others have foreknowledge of the future, and visions and prophetic declarations; others heal the sick by imposition of hands; and it has happened (as we have said) that the dead have been raised and continued among us for some years. It is impossible to enumerate the grace which the Church throughout the whole world has received from God, &c."

We shall here only remark (as Jortin has remarked before us) that in speaking of resurrection, the writer uses the past tense, while the other miracles are described as in the actual course of present occurrence; yet the words ùv u cannot, without great violence, be understood of any preceding generation, and we doubt not that Irenæus intended to assert that dead persons had been brought to life in his own time. In a subsequent paragraph, that father also claims the gift of tongues for his age. natus xai xohλãv ánovou ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησία προφητικά χαρίσματα ἐχόντων, καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ Πνεύματος hoos. After this passage, there is scarcely any mention made of that gift in ecclesiastical history. We should observe, that Eusebius makes the above citation in proof of his assertion that miraculous powers ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισιν ὑπελέλειπτο as late as the time of Irenæus.' He does not appear disposed to claim them for the Church at any later period.

This subject is very fairly treated by Dr. Jortin in the beginning of his second book.

cially after their intercourse with the Chaldæans during the captivity, attributed to the direct operation of evil spirits a great number of those disorders of which the causes were not obvious; and such particularly as were attended by distortion of body, or extraordinary mental agitation and phrensy*. This delusion necessarily created a large and various multitude of 'Dæmoniacs,' whose manifold diseases could hope for no relief from ordinary remedies, as they proceeded not from human accidents. The language even of Scripture, when literally understood, appears to sauction such an opinion, and the literal interpretation has had its advocates among the learned and pious in every age of the Church. But the notion of real Dæmoniacal agency was carried to an extreme of absurdity, and led, we fear, to many acts of deceit in the second and third centuries. "Oh, could you but hear (says Cypriant) and see those dæmons when they are tortured by us, and afflicted with spiritual chastisement and verbal anguish, and thus ejected from the bodies of the possessed (obsessorum); moaning and lamenting with human voice, through the power divine, as they feel the rods and stripes, they confess the judgment to come. The exorcists rule with commanding right over the whole army of the insolent adversary. Oftentimes the devil promises to depart, but departs not; but when we come to baptism, then indeed we ought to be assured and confident, because the dæmon is then oppressed, and the man is consecrated to God and liberated." The invocation of Christ, attended by the sign of the cross, and pronounced by persons formally appointed to the office, was the method by which those stupendous effects were usually produced; and one among the many evils which proceeded from this absurd practice was an opinion, which gained some prevalence among the less enlightened converts, that the object of Christ's mission was to emancipate mankind from the yoke of their invisible enemy, and that the promised Redemption was nothing more than a sensible liberation from the manifest influence of evil spirits.

Of the literary forgeries which corrupted and disgraced the ante-Nicene Church, we have made frequent and sorrowful mention; and the great number and popularity of such apocryphal works seem indeed to prove that the Canon of the New Testament, though very early received among the clergy, was not in general circulation among the people. They arose in the second, even more, perhaps, than in the following age, and originated partly in the still remaining influence of Judaism, partly in the connexion between Christianity and philosophy, which at that time commenced. Almost all the Church writers partook more or less of one or the other of these tendències; Justin Martyr, Tatian, Irenæus, and even Tertullian himself, were in some degree tainted by the former infection, and Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen were deeply vitiated by the latter. But we do not intend to ascribe the forgeries in question to those respectable fathers, nor even wholly to any members of the Church, though we admit that some of them received undue countenance from that quarter. We shall here only remark, without pausing again to condemn the prin

*See Lightfoot, Hora Hebraicæ.

+ Epist. 76. Both Irenæus and Tertullian are very animated on the same subject. Among these, besides the Epistle to Abgarus, the works ascribed to Hermes Trismegistus, the Sibylline Prophesies, Hydaspis, the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions, we may mention various apocryphal histories of Jesus, of Mary, and his other relatives-of Tiberius, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea-of the Apostles, especially St. Peterthe origin of the Apostles' Creed-the Synods of the Apostles-the Epistle of Seneca to Paul-the Acts of Pilate, &c. &c.