Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

3. He shews what was the common opinion of Christians at that time concerning the fall of the angels.

b

4. Commodian heartily embraced the doctrine of the expected millennium. He deserves to be added to authors formerly mentioned.

с

[ocr errors]

5. He mentions the Lord's day: and, as Rigaltius understands it, the passage shews that Christians had love-feasts upon that day.

6. What he says of antichrist may deserve the notice of the curious.

III. Nothing remains but that we observe the scriptures cited by him.

g

1. Commodian quotes several books of the Old Testament; and in one place Tobit.

h

2. He expressly speaks of the Old Testament, which prophesied of Christ: therefore there was another which was called the New Testament: he likewise in the same place speaks of the old and new law.

3. He quotes or alludes to divers things in the gospels.

[ocr errors]

4. He refers to the history of St. Stephen in the Acts of the apostles.

מן

5. He quotes divers of St. Paul's epistles; as the first to the Corinthians, the " epistle to the Philippians, the " epistles to Timothy and Titus.

6. I cannot well tell whether he refers to the epistle of St. James.

7. He plainly refers to 1 John ii. 15.

8. He very frequently transcribes or refers to the

pressly quotes it.

book of the Revelation, and once ' ex

9. Commodian's respect for the scriptures appears many ways, in frequently adapting the words of it, and in the manner of quoting it.

t

10. He quotes the writings of the blessed Paul as of authority: in one place, Paul, or rather God by him, says. He refers " all men to the law, that is, the scriptures, in order to their understanding religion.

■ Cum Deus Omnipotens exornaret mundi naturam,

Visitari voluit terram ab angelis istam.

Tanta fuit forma feminarum, quæ flecteret illos,

Ut coinquinati non possent cœlo redire. num. iii.

Reddere decrevit nos ipsos in aureo seclo. n. xxix. p. 224. Conf. n. xxxiv. p. 228.

De cœlo descendet civitas in anastasi primâ.

Resurgemus illi, qui fuimus illi devoti.

Recipiuntque bona, quoniam mala passi fuere.

Et generant ipsi per annos mille nubentes.

Comparantur ibi tota vectigalia terræ, &c. n. xliv. p. 237, 238. vid. et n. lxxx.

⚫ See Vol. i.

[blocks in formation]

Excita de turba pauperem, quem ad prandium ducas. num. lxi. p. 254.

Vid; num. xli.

De die Dominicâ quid dicis? Si non ante locavit,

Hic vero locus indicat, ævo Commodiani in ecclesiâ diebus Dominicis agapas in usu fuisse. Rigalt.
Prandia ab eo prospice Tobiâ, qui semper

Omnibus omnino diebus cum paupere sumpsit. num. lxi.

[blocks in formation]

Nam testamentum vetus de illo proclamat. Instr. xxv. p. 220.

i Idcirco cœcus cæcum in fossam deducit. num. xxvii. p. 220.

Unde Deus clamat, stulte, hac nocte vocaris.. n. lxiv. p. 256. Vid. Luc. xii. 20. Vid. n. lv. p. 247, et alibi passim.

In talibus spes est vestra de Christo refecto. n. lxi. vid. Matth. xxv.

* Rectam qui diligit Stephanus sibi vitam in iter. n. lxii. P 254.

1 Crux autem stultitia facta est adulteræ genti. n, xxxvi. p. 229.

m Vobis autem Deus est venter, et præmia jura.

Suggerit hoc Paulus apostolus, non ego duplex. n. xxxi. p. 225. vid. ad Philip. cap. iii.

"Apostolus autem tales jubet esse magistros.

Sit patiens rector, &c. n. lxix. p. 260.

• Maledicti retine linguam, unde Dominum adoras. n. lxiii. p. 255. Vid. Jac. iii. 9.

P Nolite diligere mundum, neque ambitum ejus. n. Ivii. p. 249.

a Vid. Instr. xli. xlii. xliii. Ixxx. et passim.

I -ut ferunt operta Joannis. n. xliii. p. 237.

s Audi vocem, quæ vis Christiani manere,

[ocr errors]

Beatus Paulus qualiter te ornari præcipit. n. Ix. in.

Apostolus Paulus clamat, immo Deus per ipsum. n. lviii. p. 250.
Omnipotentis enim in lege quærite cuncti.

Lex doeet, in medio ciet, consulite pro vobis, n. xxii. p. 217.
VOL. II.

L

11. It is pleasing to observe this high respect for scripture running through the writings of all early Christians in general.

CHAP. L.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

MALCHION.

I. His history, and testimonies to him. II. Remarks, and his testimony to the scriptures.

a

I. SAYS Jerom in his Catalogue: Malchion, a most eloquent presbyter in the church of Antioch, ⚫ who had taught rhetoric in the same city with great applause, held a disputation with Paul of Samosata, bishop of the church of Antioch, who had revived the opinion of Artemon: which disputation was taken down by short-hand writers, and is still extant. There is also another large epistle written by him in the name of the synod, and directed to Dionysius and Maximus, bishops of Rome and Alexandria. He flourished under Claudius and Aurelian.'

So Jerom in the above-mentioned work. Malchion' is again mentioned by him in his letter to Magnus among other ancient Christian authors.

Eusebius, in his account of the last council of Antioch, in the affair of Paul, speaks of Malchion after this manner in his ecclesiastical history: But the person who especially convicted and confuted him, when he endeavoured to conceal himself, was Malchion, an eloquent man, and a sophist, president of the school of Greek literature at Antioch; who for his uncommon 'soundness in the faith of Christ, had the honour to be made a presbyter in that church. Being ⚫ the only person of all present that was able to detect that subtle and deceitful man, he entered into dispute with him: which disputation was taken down by short-hand writers, and we know it to be still extant,'

Theodoret calls this person Malachion: he says that he was formerly a sophist, afterwards ordained presbyter; that he disputed with Paul, and convicted him of holding the opinion he was charged with.

[ocr errors]

These are the principal remaining accounts of Malchion, and testimonies to him; for I think it scarce worth observing, what is said by so late a writer as Trithemius, that Malchion taught rhetoric at Antioch with applause many years: and yet perhaps he concluded as much from an expression off Theodoret. Indeed we do not find much notice taken of Malchion in ancient writers. The Greek Christians however have put him into their calendar for the service he did in opposing Paul of Samosata, as has been observed by Valesius and others.

II. Having put down these testimonies to this author, I propose to mention some observations.

h

1. It is probable that Malchion was originally a heathen: Jerom does not expressly say so; but he says he taught rhetoric at Antioch with reputation; which is near the same with what he says of Cyprian, who certainly was at first a heathen. Nor does Eusebius expressly say it: but

• Malchion disertissimus Antiochenæ ecclesiæ presbyter, quippe qui in eâdem urbe rhetoricam florentissime docuerat, adversum Paulum Samosatenum, qui Antiochenæ ecclesiæ episcopus dogma Artemonis instaurarat, excipientibus notariis Sed et alia disputavit; qui dialogus usque hodie exstat. grandis epistola ex personâ synodi, ab eo scripta, ad Dionysium et Maximum, Romanæ et Alexandrinæ ecclesia episcopos, dirigitur. Floruit sub Claudio et Aureliano. De V. I. cap. 71.

Necnon presbyterorum Pamphili, Pierii, Luciani, Malchionis. ad Mag. Orat. ep. 83, [al_84] p. 656, m.

[ocr errors][merged small]

αυλοθει παροικίας ήξιωμενος. ούτος γελοι, επισημειωμενων ταχυ γράφων, ζήτησιν προς αυτόν ενσησαμενος, ἣν και εις δεύρο φερομενην ίσμεν, μόνος ίσχυσε των άλλων κρυψινεν ονία και απαίηλον φωράσαι τον ανθρωπον. Eus. 1. vii. c. 29.

d

4 Μαλχιώνος δε τινος πρότερον μεν σοφισευσαντος, ύσερον δε το πρεσβύτεξε τιμηθέντος χειροτονία, την προς τον Παύλον ποιησαμενο διαλέξιν, εφωράθη τον Χρισον ανθρωπον λεγων, κ. λ. Theod. Hæret. Fab. L. ii. c. 8. p. 223, B.

-quippe qui rhetoricam in eâdem civitate multis annis florentissime docuit. Trithem. de script. Ecc, cap. 45. εύτερον δε πρεσβύτερο τιμηθενιος χειροτονιᾳ. vid. not. 4. Vales. Annot. in Eus. 1. vii. cap. 29. Vid. et Tillem. Mem. Ec. T. iv. P. ii. Paul de Samosates, art. 5, p. 268. h Vid. de. V. I. cap. 67.

that he taught Greek literature, as I have translated him; or profane learning, as Du Pin renders the same phrase. And Theodoret, as well as Eusebius, says, that Malchion was at first a sophist. I presume these testimonies therefore may afford a probable argument that Malchion was originally a heathen; but whether they are sufficient to put the point beyond dispute I cannot say. 2. Malchion was an author, or a Christian writer. The Disputation or conference, mentioned by Eusebius and Jerom, must be reckoned his. It was, as we may well suppose, published by him, and not by Paul; and both Eusebius and Jerom speak of it as extant in their times; but it appears to me somewhat probable that Eusebius had never read it: he says we know it to be still extant: if he had seen it I suppose he would have expressed himself differently.

b

с

Jerom ascribes likewise to Malchion the epistle of the last council of Antioch, of which we have large fragments in Eusebius's Ecclesiastical history: indeed Cave makes a doubt of this: he suspects that Jerom said it of his own head, without any good authority: but most other learned moderns, whom I have consulted, allow that epistle to have been composed by Malchion: I mean particularly Fabricius, Tillemont, and Fleury. Du Pin does not declare his opinion: he only observes that Jerom says Malchion was also the author of the letter written in the name of the synod against Paul of Samosata. I see no good reason to dispute Jerom's account; and the piece shews its author; Malchion was a sophist, and the epistle is a common place of accusation. We have no certain account of any other works of Malchion, beside the disputation and epistle just mentioned. Jerom mentions these two only, without so much as hinting there were any other. Trithemius indeed says that Malchion composed several excellent works of great use against heretics; but that is a mere flourish: he mentions none by name but the two we have taken notice of already.

d

e

i

3. There is nothing now remaining of Malchion that can be depended on as genuine, beside the fragments of the synodical epistle in Eusebius, of which I gave a large account formerly. It has been observed by ' several learned men, that Leontius of Byzantium, who lived near the end of the sixth century, has quoted two passages of the Disputation or conference with Paul: but Du Pin says it is not altogether certain that they are genuine. Tillemont observes likewise, that there is a passage out of it in the letter of Peter the deacon to Fulgentius, and other African bishops: which Peter flourished in the same sixth century, but earlier than Leontius above-named; it is only a part of what is cited by Leontius. I have not made any use of these fragments in my history of Paul' formerly given: nor do I intend now to take any thing out of them.

[ocr errors]

Trithemius expresseth himself as if that Disputation was in being in his time: but * Fabricius well observes, in a note upon him, that those words mean no more than that it was extant in the time of Jerom, not of Trithemius. The same observation, I suppose, ought to be applied to Bede in the eighth, and Freculph in the ninth, century; who likewise speak of this piece as extant in their times: but they only transcribe Jerom: and it is he in all these places, who is to be understood to say it was then extant; that is, in his time.

[ocr errors]

If the citations of Leontius and Peter the deacon are not to be relied upon, then we have not any certain notice of this work after Eusebius and Jerom: what has been the occasion of so great neglect of this piece I cannot say; but, methinks, it is pity it is not still extant.

4. I would observe, in the fourth place, that Malchion was the principal director of the last council of Antioch concerned about Paul of Samosata. In the first council moderate principles prevailed: in the last council, when Firmilian was dead, and several other eminent bishops absented for some reason or other, very different measures were taken: these, as I formerly' intimated, may be chiefly ascribed to Malchion. We have now seen further proof of that supposition; Eusebius assures us that Malchion only, and no other, was able to detect or confute

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

P.

630.

p. 1166, D.

Paul: and Jerom, besides, informs us that the large epistle written in the name of that council was composed by Malchion: what better evidence can be desired of this matter? Nor is this my thought only. Du Pin, speaking of Malchion, says; he had a famous dispute with Paul of Samosata in the second council of Antioch, held in 270; and, after having detected the errors which that heretic endeavoured to conceal, he caused him to be condemned by the ' council.'

5. I observe, in the fifth place, what was Malchion's opinion concerning the doctrine of the Trinity does not clearly appear. Eusebius speaks of Malchion as a man of uncommon soundness in the faith of Christ: but if Eusebius was an Arian, as some think, and if that character relates to the doctrine of the Trinity, this testimony, instead of assuring us of Malchion's orthodoxy upon that head, may rather occasion a suspicion that he Arianised. There is another thing, which may occasion a doubt whether Malchion held the Nicene faith. The council of Nice established the homousian, or consubstantial doctrine: but it is said that the council of Antioch (in which, as has been shewn, Malchion directed and governed) rejected the word consubstantial as improper. This has been taken notice of by several ancient writers of the fourth century; Athanasius, Hilary of Poictiers, and Basil. This therefore, if the council of Nice be the standard of orthodoxy, casts a suspicion upon that of Antioch; and there is no small difficulty in reconciling these councils: but I may not stay to inquire exactly into that matter: it is sufficient for me at present to give these hints, and refer to those ancient writers above-named, and some ៩ learned moderns of great note, who have endeavoured to reconcile this contradiction, real or apparent; and to shew that, notwithstanding the different sentiments and conduct of these two councils with regard to this word, yet they both held the same doctrine.

d

с

f

h

с

6. With regard to Malchion's canon of scripture: as we have nothing of him remaining besides the above-mentioned fragments in Eusebius, and I have formerly observed the notice taken of scripture in the synodical epistle of the council of Antioch, I have nothing farther to add here upon this head, but only to say, That it ought to be taken for granted that Malchion owned and respected those scriptures which were generally received at that time among Christians: but what was his opinion concerning the books of the New Testament, then doubted of by some, cannot be certainly known.

CHAP. LI.

ANATOLIUS, AND THREE OTHERS, BISHOPS OF LAODICEA.

I. Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, his history and works. II. His testimony to the scriptures. III. Eusebius, likewise bishop of Laodicea. IV. Stephen. V. Theodotus, bishops of the same city.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I. SAYS Jerom: Anatolius, a native of Alexandria, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, flourished under the emperors Probus and Carus. He was exceedingly well skilled in arithmetic, geo

• Du Pin, as before, p. 193.

— il le fit condamner par le Concile, ib.

- Δια τ8τ' εικότως ευλαβηθενίες το τοιέτον σοφισμα το Σα μοσατεως, ειρηκασι, μη είναι τον Χρισον ὁμουσιον. Ath. de Synod. p. 759. B.

d Male homousion Samosatenus confessus est: sed numquid melius Arii negaverunt? Octoginta episcopi olim respuerunt ; sed trecenti et decem octo nuper receperunt, &c. Hil. de Syn. n. lxxxvi. p. 1200. Conf. Facund, 1. x. c. 6.

• Και γαρ τῳ οντι, οἱ ἐπὶ Παυλῳ τῳ Σαμοσατεί συνελθοντες, διέβαλον την λέξιν, ώς εκ ευσημον. Basil. Ep. 52. [al. 300.] p. 145. B.

[blocks in formation]

'metry, astronomy, grammar, rhetoric, logic. The greatness of his capacity may be perceived 'from his work concerning Easter, and from his ten books of institutions of arithmetic.'

[ocr errors]

Probus reigned from 276 to August 282; Carus the remainder of that year, and all 283. Nevertheless, Cave has placed Anatolius as flourishing about the year 270, and not much amiss; Eusebius, whom he succeeded, having died, as is supposed, in 269 or 270; though some think not before 272.

d

b

Anatolius is placed in Jerom's Chronicle at the third year of Probus, the year of Christ 278, after this manner: Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea, well acquainted with all the principles of the philosophers, is now much celebrated.'

Nor did Jerom forget Anatolius in his letter to Magnus.

Jerom undoubtedly was indebted to Eusebius for what he knew of this person. Now there fore we will see what Eusebius himself writes of him in his Ecclesiastical history.

f

He says that Anatolius was an Alexandrian, and bishop of Laodicea after Eusebius; and ⚫that for eloquence, and for skill in philosophy and the Greek literature, he was the most eminent 'person in his time; being a complete master of arithmetic, geometry, and likewise of logic, • natural philosophy, and rhetoric: for the sake of which qualifications, as is said, he was desired by the people of Alexandria to set up a school for the Aristotelian philosophy.'

[ocr errors]

.

When that request was made we cannot say exactly; but, if ever, undoubtedly before he left Alexandria, and was advanced to the episcopal office. Nor is there any certain information given us of his complying with that request: though Fabricius in one place scruples not to say, without hesitation, that he set up such a school at Alexandria. Anatolius and his friend Eusebius performed signal services for the both Christians and others; when Bruchium, or Pyruchium, one of the which too was the citadel, suffered under the extremities of a siege. Bruchium; Eusebius was without among the Romans, the besiegers. particularly related by our ecclesiastical historian, to whom I refer. opportunity to be useful to the public by means of the high esteem he that' with universal consent he had pre-eminence above all the magistrates or senators of Alexandria, that were in Bruchium.

k

h

m

people of Alexandria, quarters of that city, in Anatolius was shut up in One of, those services is Anatolius had the better was in: for Eusebius says,

Learned men find no small difficulty in settling the time of this siege. Tillemont thought it' to be in the reign of Gallienus in 263 or 264; Basnage " in 262 or 263; whose opinions seem to me more probable than their's who place it later.

n

Soon after that siege was over Anatolius left Alexandria.

[ocr errors]

Our historian tells us that Theotecnus, bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine, ordained Anatolius bishop, intending that he should succeed him and it is certain that for a short time they both presided together in that church: but Anatolius, P going to Antioch to be present at the council 'called upon the occasion of Paul of Samosata, as he was passing through Laodicea, was detained 'there by the brethren, Eusebius being dead.'

It is reasonable to think that our historian must mean the last synod in the affair of Paul, which was held in 269. After this he says nothing farther of Anatolius. But here he died for, as the historian adds, he was succeeded by Stephen, the last bishop of Laodicea, before the persecution of Diocletian began.

They who desire to see what learned moderns say of Anatolius may consult Cav. H. Lit. T. i. Tillem. Mem. Ec. T. iv. P. ii. p. 637-643. Fabr. Bib. Gr. T. ii. p. 274, &c. T. v. p. 277.

b See Tillem. Mem. Ec. T. iv. P. ii. p. 641. Basnag. Ann. 269. n. ix. Pagi. Ann. 269. n. ix. Anatolius, Laodicenus episcopus, philosophorum disciplinis eruditus, plurimo sermone celebratur. Chr. p. 177. Ep. 83. [al. 84.]

• Γένος μεν και αυτος Αλεξανδρεύς· λόγων δ ̓ ἕνεκα, και παι δειας της Ελληνων, φιλοσοφίας τε, τα πρώτα των μάλιςα καθ' ήμας δοκιμωτάτων απενεγκάμενος, άτε αριθμητικής, εληλα κως εις άκρον. ὧν ἕνεκα και της επ' Αλεξανδρειας Αρισοτέλες διαδοχής την διατριβήν, λόγος εχει προς των τηδε πολίτων συσήσασθαι αυτον αξιωθήναι. Eus. H. E. I. vii. c. 32. p. 284. D. 285. A:

8 Anatolius-Alexandriæ scholam Aristotelicam constituit, . factus deinde episcopus in Syriâ Laodicenus circa A. Chr. 270.. Bib. Gr. T. ii. p. 274.

hL.. vii. c. 32. p. 285. et 286. A.

i Μύριας μεν εν τόδε και άλλας αρισειας εν τη κατ' Αληξαν. δρειαν το Πυροχεια πολιορκία μνημονευεσιν· άτε των εν τέλει povoμias εEαipETY @pos dпavтшv žiшμsve ib. p. 285. A. Vid. Pagi in Baron. Ann. 269. n. ix. x. xi.

1 See his Hist. des Emp. in Gallien, art. 12. T. iii. P. iii. p. 974, 975, et p. 1175.

m Basn. Ann. 262. n. iii.

[ocr errors]

n Eus. ib. P. 286. B. Τετῳ πρωτος-Θεοτεκνος χειρας εις επισκοπήν επιτέθεικε, ib. p. 288. A. Eus. ib. A. B.

4 Και το Ανατολιε δε τον βιον μεταλλαξανίας, της έκείσε παροικίας ύσατος των προ διωγμός καθίσαται Στεφανος. ib. p. 288. B.

« ElőzőTovább »