apostles, or soon after, the fourth and sixth days of the week were observed as fasts, are not, it must be acknowledged, destitute of specious arguments in favour of their opinion.°

CHAPTER V.

CONCERNING THE DIVISIONS AND HERESIES WHICH TROUBLED THE CHURCH DURING THIS CENTURY.

time of the

apostles,

I. THE Christian church was scarcely formed, when, in Sects are different places, there started up certain pretended formed in the reformers, who, not satisfied with the simplicity of that religion which was taught by the apostles, meditated changes of doctrine and worship, and set up a new religion drawn from their own licentious imaginations. This we learn from the writings of the apostles, particularly from the epistles of St. Paul, where we find that some were for forcing the doctrines of Christianity into a conformity with the philosophical systems they had adopted," while others were as studious to blend with these doctrines the opinions, customs, and traditions of the Jews. Several of these are mentioned by the apostles, such as Hymenæus, Alexander, Philetus, Hermogenes, Demas, and Diotrephes; though the four last are rather to be considered as apostates from the truth, than as corrupters of it."

and grow im

II. The influence of these new teachers was but inconsiderable at first. During the lives of the apostles, perceptibly their attempts toward the perversionof Christianity were attended with little success, and the number of their followers was exceeding small. They, however, acquired credit and strength by degrees; and even from the first dawn of the gospel, laid, imperceptibly, the foundations of those sects, whose animosities and disputes produced afterward such trouble and perplexity in the Christian church. The true state of these divisions is more involved in darkness than any other part of ecclesiastical history; and this obscurity proceeds partly from the want of ancient records,

o See Beverege's Vindication of the Canon, in the second volume of his edition of the Apostolic Fathers, p 166.

P1 Tim. vi. 20. 1 Tim. i. 3, 4. Tit. iii. 9. Col. ii. 8.

92 Tim ii. 18, and in other places. See also the accurate accounts given of these men by Vitringa, Observ. Sacr. lib. iv. cap. ix. p. 952. Ittigius, De hæresiarchis ævi Apostol. i. cap. viii. p. 84. Buddeus, De Ecclesia Apostolica, cap. v. p. 292, &c.

partly from the abstruse and unintelligible nature of the doctrines that distinguished these various sects; and finally, from the ignorance and prejudices of those who have transmitted to us the accounts of them which are yet extant. Of one thing indeed we are certain, and that is, that the most of these doctrines were chimerical and extravagant in the highest degree; and so far from containing any thing that could recommend them to a lover of truth, that they rather deserve to occupy a place in the history of human delusion and folly."

The sect of

III. Among the various sects that troubled the tranquillity of the Christian church, the leading one was that of the gnostics. These enthusiastic and self suffi- the gnostics, cient philosophers boasted of their being able to restore mankind to the knowledge, gnosis, of the true and Supreme Being, which had been lost in the world. They also foretold the approaching defeat of the evil principle, to whom they attributed the creation of this globe, and declared in the most pompous terms, the destruction of his associates and the ruin of his empire. An opinion has prevailed, derived from the authority of Clemens the Alexandrian, that the first rise of the gnostic sect is to be dated after the death of the apostles, and placed under the reign of the emperor Adrian; and it is also alleged that, before this time, the church enjoyed a perfect tranquillity, undisturbed by dissensions or sects of any kind. But the smallest degree of attention to the language of the holy Scriptures, not to mention the authority of other ancient records, will prevent our adopting this groundless notion. For, from several passages of the sacred writings, it evidently appears that even in the first century, the general meeting of Christians was deserted, and separate assemblies formed in several places by persons infected with the gnostic heresy; though, at the same time, it must be acknowledged, that this per

Certain authors have written professedly concerning the sects that divided the church in this and the following century, such as Ittigius in his treatise, De hæresiarchis avi Apostolici et Apostolico proximi, printed at Leipsic in 1690, and also in the appendix to the same work, published in 1696. Renatus Massuet. in bis Dissertations prefixed to Irenæus, and Tillemont, in his Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire de l'Eglise. But these authors, and others whom we shall not mention, have rather collected the materials, from which a history of the ancient sects may be composed, than written their history. Hinckelman, Thomasius, Dodwell, Horbius, and Basnage, have some of them promised, others of them attempted, such a history; but none of them have finished this useful design. It is therefore to be wished,that some eminent writer, who, with a competent knowledge of ancient philosophy and literature is also possessed of a penetrating and unbiassed judgment, would undertake this difficult, but interesting work.

1 John ii. 18. 1 Tim. vi, 20. Col. ii. 8.

nicious sect was not conspicuous, either for its number or its reputation, before the time of Adrian. It is proper just to observe here, that under the general appellation of. gnostics are comprehended all those who, in the first ages of Christianity, corrupted the doctrine of the gospel by a profane mixture of the tenets of the oriental philosophy, concerning the origin of evil and the creation of the world, with its divine truths.

the oriental

Iv. It was from this oriental philosophy, of which the leading principles have been already mentioned, sprung from that the Christian gnostics derived their origin. philosophy; If it was one of the chief tenets of this philosophy, that rational souls were imprisoned in corrupt matter, contrary to the will of the Supreme Deity; there were, however, in this same system, other doctrines which promised a deliverance from this deplorable state of servitude and darkness. The oriental sages expected the arrival of an extraordinary messenger of the Most High upon earth; a messenger invested with a divine authority, endowed with the most eminent sanctity and wisdom, and peculiarly appointed to enlighten, with the knowledge of the Supreme Being, the darkened minds of miserable mortals, and to deliver them from the chains of the tyrants and usurpers of this world. When, therefore, some of these philosophers perceived that Christ and his followers wrought miracles of the most amazing kind, and also of the most salutary nature to mankind, they were easily induced to believe that he was the great messenger expected from above, to deliver men from the power of the malignant genii, or spirits, to which, according to their doctrine, the world was subjected, and to free their souls from the dominion of corrupt matter. This supposition once admitted, they interpreted, or rather corrupted, all the precepts and doctrines of Christ and his apostles, in such a manner, as to reconcile them with their own pernicious te

nets.

occasions ma

errors concer.

tures and other

v. From the false principle above mentioned arose, as it was but natural to expect, a multitude of senny pernicious timents and notions most remote from the tenor ning the Scrip- of the gospel doctrines, and the nature of its precepts. The gnostic doctrine, concerning the creation of the world by one or more inferior beings of an evil, or at least of an imperfect nature, led that sect to deny the divine authority of the books of the Old Testa

matters.

ment, whose accounts of the origin of things so palpably contradicted this idle fiction. Through a frantic aversion to these sacred books, they lavished their encomiums upon the serpent, the first author of sin, and held in veneration some of the most impious and profligate persons, of whom mention is made in sacred history. The pernicious influence of their fundamental principle carried them to all sorts of extravagance, filled them with an abhorrence of Moses and the religion he taught, and made them assert that, in imposing such a system of disagreeable and severe laws upon the Jews, he was only actuated by the malignant author of this world, who consulted his own glory and authority, and not the real advantage of men. Their persuasion that evil resided in matter, as its centre and source, prevented their treating the body with that regard that is due to it, rendered them unfavourable to wedlock, as the means by which corporeal beings are multiplied, and led them to reject the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, and its future reunion with the immortal spirit. Their notion, that malevolent genii presided in nature, and that from them proceeded all diseases and calamities, wars and desolations, induced them to apply themselves to the study of magic, to weaken the powers, or suspend the influences of these malignant agents. I omit the mention of several other extravagances in their system, the enumeration of which would be incompatible with the character of a compendious history.

nions concern

VI. The notions of this sect concerning Jesus Christ were impious and extravagant. For, though they considered him as the Son of the Supreme God Their op sent from the pleroma, or habitation of the Ever- ing Christ. lasting Father, for the happiness of miserable mortals; yet they entertained unworthy ideas both of his person and offices. They denied his deity, looking upon him as the Son of God, and consequently inferior to the Father; and they rejected his humanity, upon the supposition that every thing concrete and corporeal is in itself essentially and intrinsically evil. From hence the greatest part of the gnostics denied that Christ was clothed with a real body, or that he suffered really, for the sake of mankind, the pains and sorrows which he is said to have sustained, in the sacred history. They maintained that he came to mortals with no other view, than to deprive the tyrants of this world of their influence upon virtuous and heaven

born souls, and, destroying the empire of these wicked spirits, to teach mankind how they might separate the divine mind from the impure body, and render the former worthy of being united to the Father of Spirits.

doctrines.

VII. Their doctrine relating to morals and practice was Their moral of two kinds, and those extremely different from each other. The greatest part of this sect adopted rules of life that were full of austerity, recommended a strict and rigorous abstinence, and prescribed the most severe bodily mortifications, from a notion that they had a happy influence in purifying and enlarging the mind, and in disposing it for the contemplation of celestial things. As they looked upon it to be the unhappiness of the soul to have been associated, at all, to a malignant, terrestrial body; so they imagined, that the more that body was extenuated, the less it would corrupt and degrade the mind, or divert it from pursuits of a spiritual and divine nature; all the gnostics, however, were not so severe in their moral discipline. Some maintained that there was no moral difference in human actions; and thus, confounding right with wrong, they gave a loose rein to all the passions, and asserted the innocence of following blindly all their motions, and of living by their tumultuous dictates. There is nothing surprising or unaccountable in this difference between the gnostic moralists. For, when we examine the matter with attention, we shall find that the same doctrine may very naturally have given rise to these opposite sentiments. As they all in general considered the body as the centre and source of evil, those of that sect, who were of a morose and austere disposition, would be hence naturally led to mortify and combat the body as the enemy of the soul; and those who were of a voluptuous turn, might also consider the actions of the body, as having no relation, either of congruity, or incongruity, to the state of a soul in communion with God.

How their doctrines were supported.

VIII. Such extraordinary doctrines had certainly need of an undoubted authority to support them; and as this authority was not to be found in the writings of the evangelists or apostles, recourse was had to fables and stratagems. When the gnostics were challenged to produce the sources from whence they had drawn such strange tenets, and an authority proper to justify the

↑ See Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromatum, lib. iii. cap. v. p. 529, edit. Potter.