a b 'Anatolius,' says Eusebius, did not write many books: however, from those which have come down to us may be perceived both his eloquence and his extensive knowledge and learning, particularly from his work concerning Easter.' The same Anatolius left also the Principles of arithmetic in ten books, and likewise some other works, monuments of his dili gence in studying the divine scriptures, and of his understanding therein.' с Eusebius has inserted in his Ecclesiastical history a long passage of Anatolius's book upon Easter, or his Paschal canons, as he there calls it: and Ægidius Bucherius has published the same work in an ancient Latin version said to be Rufinus's; which is generally allowed to be, for the main at least, the genuine work of Anatolius. It is thought by some, that there are remaining fragments of his other work, the Institutions of arithmetic. Fabricius has published some fragments in Greek, which he supposed to be of Anatolius. e f d There were others of this name, which ought to be distinguished from our Anatolius. Fabricius has mentioned several. Cave also well argues, that our Anatolius is different from him whom & Eunapius speaks of as master of Jamblichus: though Valesius confounded them; and Basnage is pleased to signify his approbation of Valesius's opinion. k h Anatolius, in the passage cited by Eusebius from his Paschal canons, mentions several Jewish writers; Philo, Josephus, Musæus, and others more ancient; two of the name Agathobulus, called rabbins, or masters; and Aristobulus, one of the seventy translators of the Old Testament, or part of it. He likewise mentions some book of Enoch: and in that part of his work, which we have in Latin only, very honourable mention is made of" Origen. II. As there remains but a small part of the work of Anatolius, except what is the Latin translation, a brief account of his testimony to the scriptures will suffice. 1. He quotes as from the gospel" these words: Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him; "Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?" Matth. xxvi. 17. And see Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii. 7. words of the Lord; "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto And in the same manner and in the same place, the words of 2. He quotes also those death." Matth. xxvi. 38. Luke xv. 6. P 3. He expressly mentions John the evangelist, the same that leaned on the Lord's breast. 4. He quotes very respectfully the direction of the apostle in Rom. xii. 15, intimating that it ought to be attended to as spoken by the Lord himself. 5. In the passage of the Paschal canons, preserved by Eusebius, there is a manifest reference to the latter part of the third chapter of St. Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians: But,' says he, all these proofs are not necessary for those from whom the veil of the law of Moses is taken off; who may with "open face" always "behold as in a glass Christ," and the things of Christ, both his doctrine and his sufferings:' see 2 Cor. iii. 14-18: and in the Latin translation of this work we find the words of 2 Cor. vi. 14. t 6. He speaks with respect of the Old as well as the New Testament. • Ου μεν εν εσπεδάσθη πλεισα των Ανατολιῳ συγΓράμματα· τοσαυτα δ' εις ήμας ελήλυθε, δι' ών αυτα καταμαθειν δυνατον όμε το, τε λόγιον και πολυμαθες· εν οἷς μαλιςα τα περι τα πασχα δοξανία παρισησιν. ib. p. 286. Β. C. 6 Και αριθμητικας δε καταλελοιπεν ὁ αυλος εν όλοις δεκα συγγραμμασιν εισαγωγας, και αλλα δειγμαία της περι τα θεία σχολής τε αυτό και πολυπειρίας. ib. p. 287. D. 288. Α. - Εκ των περὶ το πασχα Ανατολία κανόνων. κ. λ. p. 286. C. D. et p. 287. d Bib. Gr. 1. iii. c. xi. T. ii. p. 275-278. f Hist. Lit. T. i. p. 136. h Ann. in Euseb. p. 158. k Eus. p. 287. 1 Παρατατικά και τα εν τῳ Ενωχ μαθηματα. ib. p. 287. D. m Sed et Origenes, omnium doctissimus, et calculi componendi perspicacissimus (quippe qui et xaxxeuls vocatus,) libellum de Paschate luculentissime edidit. Anatol. ap Bucher. p. 439. " Contra evangelii dictum, dicentis: Primâ autem die azymorum accesserunt discipuli ad Jesum. Quin dubium non est, quin xiv. dies sit in quo discipuli Dominum interrogaverunt, secundum morem antiquitus sibi constitutum : Ubi vis paremus tibi comedere Pascha? p. 443. sub. fin. 0 • Aliud enim est secundum quod ab apostolo, imo a Domino præceptum est, cum contristato contristari [Rom. xii, 15] et cum cruce passo compati, ipso dicente: Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem: aliud cum victore inimicum antiquum triumphante, ac summo triumpho devicto adversario lætante collætari, ipsomet præcipiente: congratulamini mihi, quia inveni ovem quam perdideram. Anatol. ib. p. 445. P Quorum exemplum sequentes usque hodie omnes Asiæ episcopi (quippe qui et ipse ab auctore irreprehensibili, Joanne scilicet evangelista, et pectoris Domini incubatore, doctrinarum sine dubio spiritualium potatore,) regulam susceperunt. ib. p. 44. See before note °. • Παριγμι δε τας τοιαυίας των αποδείξεων ύλας απαίτων, ων περιῃρηται μεν το επι τε Μωϋσεως νομῳ καλυμμα ανακεκαλυμ μενῳ δε τω προσωπῳ λοιπον ηδη Χρισον και τα Χριςε άει xalonlp.sota, atquala тe xai watuala. Eus. ib. p. 267, D. • Quia solemnitas Dominicæ resurrectionis lux est. Et non est communicatio luci cum tenebris. Anat. ap. Bucher. p. 443. 'Quod in veteri quidem testamento non potest probabiliter inveniri, Domino per Möysen præcipiente: Septem diebus commedetis azyma, &c. ib. p. 443. a 7. He says of some, that they can by no means prove their point by the authority of the divine scripture. 8. Though this be little, here is sufficient to shew that this learned Alexandrian concurred with other Christians in a high respect for the scriptures of the Old and New Testament: and it is likely that his canon was much the same with that of Origen. III. It may be proper to take notice here of Eusebius, not only because he was predecessor of Anatolius in the see of Laodicea, but also because he was of Alexandria, and they were intimate friends whilst they lived in their native city. Though Eusebius was not an author, and therefore is wanting in Jerom's Catalogue, and in many other histories or ecclesiastical writers, he was a man of no small consideration, and is mentioned as an eminent person in Eusebius's or Jerom's Chronicle. b It is likely my readers may remember that this Eusebius has been already mentioned with honour in this work, in our history of Dionysius of Alexandria. Eusebius was then a deacon in that church. The words of Dionysius speaking of the state of affairs there in the persecutions of Decius and Valerian, and which were formerly cited, are these: the deacons that survive after those that have died of the plague are Faustus, Eusebius, Chæremon: Eusebius, I say, whom God qualified from the beginning [referring here, it is likely, to his conduct in the Decian persecution], • and furnished with great resolution and ability for fulfilling the office of ministering to the con⚫fessors in prison, and for burying the bodies of the perfect and blessed martyrs, not without the • utmost peril.' d Our historian, having finished his quotation of that letter of Dionysius, adds: It ought to ⚫ be observed that Eusebius, whom Dionysius calls deacon, was afterwards bishop of the church ' of Laodicea in Syria.' Eusebius, still deacon, accompanied Dionysius when he made his confession before Emilian the præfect of Egypt în 257, as formerly shewn. f His settlement in Laodicea is related by his namesake, the ecclesiastical historian, in this manner: Socrates was succeeded in the care of the church of Laodicea by Eusebius a native of the city of Alexandria. The occasion of his removal was the affair of Paul. Passing through ⚫ Syria upon that account he was seized by those who were concerned for the interest of religion in those parts, who would by no means let him return home. He was succeeded by Anatolius; 'one good man coming after another, as the saying is.' It may be well supposed that the time of Eusebius's going into Syria was the year 264, or thereabout, when the first council was held at Antioch upon the case of Paul of Samosata: then Eusebius entered upon this see, and was succeeded by Anatolius about the year 270. IV. After the death of Anatolius,' as we are informed by our historian, Stephen was advanced to the presidentship of that church, and was the last bishop there before the persecu'tion: he was admired by many for his eloquence, and philosophy, and Greek learning. How'ever, when the persecution broke out he did not behave like a philosopher; but shewed himself ' rather to be a dissembler, and mean spirited.' What was his fault is not certainly known: we may be disposed to think that he apostatized, and renounced the Christian religion; though Eusebius does not expressly say it: thereby, as I apprehend, shewing both his sincerity as an historian, and his tenderness for the reputation of a brother, and a fellow-creature, overcome by temptation. h V. Eusebius proceeds: Nevertheless that church did not fall to ruin: it was restored to its wonted splendour by Theodotus, who was designed bishop of that church by God himself, the Saviour of all men. He by his actions shewed himself to be what his name signified [a man given of God], and a true bishop. He was an excellent physician for the body; but for the cure of souls he had not his equal: such were his humanity, his integrity, his compassion for the afflicted, and his diligence in relieving those who needed his assistance: with which was joined uncommon skill in the divine scriptures, or the things of religion.' Nam qui ab ætate lunæ Pascha definiunt posse celebrari, non solummodo illud auctoritate divinæ scripturæ affirmare non possunt, sed et―animarum periculum incurrunt. ibid. Eusebius Laodicenus insignis habetur. Chron. p. 177. init. 'P. 65, & Eus. H. E. 1. vii. c, xi. p. 261, B. d See before, Vol. i. p. 613, & Eus. 261, C. • See Vol. i. P: 610. f Eùs. H. E. 1. vii. c. 32, p: 284, D. hib. Η πολυ δε ην αυτῳ και το περι τα θεια μαθηματα συνήσκης MEVOY. ib. p. 288, C. a To this person Eusebius inscribed his Evangelical preparation; there styling him beloved of God, and an ornament to the episcopal office.' b What Eusebius says of his being an excellent physician for the body has induced Fabricius to put Theodotus into his Catalogue of ancient physicians. C This bishop of Laodicea, so much commended by our Eusebius is reputed an Arian by several learned moderns, to whom I shall refer in the margin; as Vigerus, editor of Eusebius's Preparation, Pagi, and Tillemont. d с f h And there is more than a little ground for that supposition; for Arius in his letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia names Theodotus among others his favourers; Theodoret intimates that the same persons defended the Arian doctrine at the council of Nice. In another place he mentions Theodotus among those who had imbibed the Arian principle, and were its principal patrons: he likewise says that he came to Antioch with Eusebius of Nicomedia in 331, to depose Eustathius. Athanasius affirms that Theodotus, and others whom he names, had written the like things with Arius before the council of Nice: not to insist upon the letter of Constantine in Gelasius Cyzicenus, written to him after the council of Nice. i K When Theodotus entered upon the episcopate is not certainly known: Vigerus, in the preface before cited, says he succeeded Stephen about the third year of Constantine, or the year of Christ 308; which is not altogether improbable, it being evident from Eusebius that Stephen was bishop before the persecution, and for some time after it began: but the exact time of Stephen's death or removal, and of the accession of Theodotus, I think cannot be determined. However, Pagi well observes that Theodotus died before the council of Jerusalem in 336, because Sozomen mentions George, then bishop of Laodicea, as present at it. m Theodotus is wanting in Cave and Du Pin, not being generally reckoned an author: but perhaps he might be justly so esteemed, considering what is said of him by Athanasius. It is true, Athanasius does not quote Theodotus as he does some others; but the reason was, that the letters were not at hand, as he says; which he mentions by way of excuse for sending more out of them: for which cause he omitted to cite several, whom by name he charges with having written the like things with Arius. This chapter began with Anatolius, whose history was the principal design of it: however, we have been led to take notice of several others mentioned by Eusebius; and I presume it may not be unacceptable to any, as it serves to represent the state of Christianity at that time. CHAP. LII. THEOGNOSTUS. I. His history. II. His testimony to the books of the New Testament. THEOGNOSTUS, an ancient writer, no where mentioned by Eusebius or Jerom, flourished, as Cave thinks, about the year 282; and, though we have not now any certain proofs of his exact a την δε σοι, θείον επισκόπων χρημα, Θεόδοίε, φιλη θεω και ιερα κεφαλη, συν ευχαίς επεφωνησα. Præp. Εν. cap. 1. init. Vid. Bib. Gr. T. xiii. p. 433. c Hunc ego non alium arbitror, quam Laodicenum episcopum, qui-Stephano in episcopatu successit, Ariana impietatis fautorem acerrimum. Viger. in Præf. ad fin. d Ann. 318, n. xvii. et xviii. e See his history of the Arians, art. 4, and note 2, and elsewhere. Mem. T. vi. Ap. Thdrt. 1. i. cap. 5, p. 21. A. et Epiph. H. 69, n. vi. s Thdrt. l. i. c. 7, p. 26. A. h Id. 1. 5. c. 7. * Και τας μεν επιςολας αυτών εκ ἔσχον εν έτοιμῳ, ώσε και aπOSEλal. Athan. ib. p. 731. D. Concerning this writer may be seen Cav. Hist. Lit. Du Pin. Bib. des Aut. Ecc. Tom. i. Bull. Def. Fid. Nic. Sect. ii. cap. 10, sect. vii. Dodwell. Diss. Iren. in Append. p. 511. Fabric. Bib. Gr. lib. v. cap. 1, p. 276. Tillemont, Origene, art. 37. Mem. Ecc. T. iii. P. 3, p. 269, 270, and some other authors to be hereafter mentioned in this chapter. P Vid. Cav. Hist. Lit. T. i. p. 146, 147. Oxon. age, that computation cannot be very erroneous; as may appear from what we shall observe presently. a с Theognostus is mentioned by Athanasius, Philip Sidetes, Stephen Gobar, and Photius. Athanasius has spoken of him in two of his works; in the first he quotes him against the Arians, to shew that the fathers of the Nicene council did not first begin to use the expression, Of the substance,' it having been before used in the same subject by Theognostus; whom Athanasius here calls a learned or an eloquent man. b In the other work Athanasius mentions Theognostus together with Origen: he gives Theognostus the character of an admirable man, and worthy of esteem: he speaks of them both in an admirable manner, and as ancient men. In that same work he afterwards alleges a passage from Theognostus, which I intend to make use of by and by. Stephen Gobar says that Athanasius had often mentioned Origen and Theognostus in an honourable manner: whether he means only these two places, or whether there were still some more in which Theognostus was mentioned by Athanasius, we cannot say positively. e In the Fragment of Philip Sidetes, published by Mr. Dodwell, it is said that Theognostus was president of the Christian or catechetical school at Alexandria. The order of those presidents, according to that writer, is this: Origen was the fourth: after Origen, Heraclas; after him Dionysius; after him Pierius; after Pierius, Theognostus. What regard ought to be had to Philip, I cannot certainly say; but as we are not able to disprove what he writes, so I think likewise that it is not safe to depend entirely upon him. From Photius we learn that Theognostus published a work called Hypotuposes, or Institu tions, in seven books or discourses. The title of the work in Photius's copy was this: The ⚫ Institutions of the blessed Theognostus, an Alexandrian, and Exegetes;' which last word I find rendered by some learned men commentator and interpreter of the sacred books: but that meaning appears to me at least doubtful; nor can I assign any other with which I am fully satisfied. Mr. Dodwell, in his notes upon the forecited passage of Philip, says that the title of the work was borrowed from Clement, and that the title given the author denotes his public office of teaching in the school at Alexandria. k Photius says, that in the first book Theognostus discourseth of the Father, and endeavours to prove him creator, even against those who supposed matter coeternal with God.' One may be apt to think that this part of our author's work was very curious and philosophical. After. wards Photius expresseth his dislike of the doctrine of the first six books of the Institutions in several respects, saying that the author speaks of the Son as a creature; that he too closely followed Origen in some of his peculiarities, which may be found in his books of Principles; and that with him he supposeth angels and dæmons to have certain fine bodies. With the seventh or last book Photius appears well enough satisfied. He gives an agreeable character of this writer's style: it is, he says, full and expressive, and yet has nothing redundant: he has the Attic purity and elegance without affectation; and in the greatest plainness and perspicuity there is nothing mean and vulgar. If we had had Photius's extract entire, we should not have been at a loss about the exact age of Theognostus; for he put down the time when he flourished: but the last words of the extract are wanting. We may however conclude, from what we have seen, that Theognostus was an Alexandrian, and that he flourished some time after Origen, before the end of the third century. Eusebius's silence about this writer has occasioned divers surmises and speculations. Baro μαθετε τοίνυν, ω χρισόμαχοι Αρειανοι, ότι Θεόγνωςος, ανήρ λογιος, ο παρῄλησαίο το εκ της ουσίας ειπείν. Ath. de Decret. Nic. Syn. p. 230. B. * Παλαιοι μεν εν ανδρες, Ωριγένης ὁ πολυμαθής και φιλοπονος, και Θεογνωσος ὁ θαυμάσιος και σπεδαίος. Id. Ep. 4. ad Serap. p. 702. C. ib. p. 703. B. C. D. * Ότι Ωριγένην και Θεογνωσιν ό, τε μέγας Αθανάσιος ὁ Αλεξανδρειας εν πολλοις απεδεχείο λογοις. ap. Pivot. Cod. 232, P. 904. e * τέταρτος προεσε της Χρισιανικής διατριβης Ωριγενής Μετα Ωριγένη,μετα Πιέριον Θεόγνωρος. Fragm. Ph. Sid. ap. Dodw. Diss. Iren. p. 488. VOL. II. f See before, chap. 18. vol. i. p. 377. 8 Ανεγνώσθησαν Θεωγνώς ο Αλεξανδρέως λόγοι επτα ὧν ἡ επιγραφή, το μακάριο Θεογνως ο Αλεξανδρέως και εξήγησε ὑποτυπώσεις. Phot. Cod. cv. 280. in. Ipsum illius operis titulum a Clemente sumptum decessore constat. Et quidem locum illum scholæ catecheticæ magistra❤ lem denotat, docendique munus publicum vox illa εys. Dodwell. ut supr. p. 512. · εν μεν εν τω πρωτῳ λόγῳ διαλαμβάνει περί τε πατρός, και ότι εσι δημιεργός, επιχειρών δεικνύναι, και κατα των ὑπολι θενίων συναίδιον όλην τω Θεώ. Phot. ib. p. 280. in. και υίαν δε λόγων, κλισμα αυτον αποφαίνει. ib. M C nius cannot help thinking it happened, not without a malicious and fraudulent design, to bury in oblivion, the name and writings of a strenuous assertor of the consubstantial doctrine: Huet is almost of the same mind, and suspects that these Institutions had been interpolated by the Arians in the space of time between Athanasius and Photius: but Tillemont is not convinced by their reasonings. Indeed, he who carefully compares Athanasius and Photius will perceive that they both read exactly one and the same work; and that the Institutions were as uncorrupted in the time of the latter, as of the former. Athanasius found in them somewhat to his purpose; but there were other things he did not like. He says that, in what he alleges out of the second book of the Institutions, Theognostus speaks his own sentiments; but there were other things proposed only in the way of argument and disputations. In like manner, Photius is not positive that the things he condemns were the real sentiments of the author of the Institutions; at least he is aware of this apology for him: but he disallows it, and says such things ought not to be published to the world in writing at any rate. Mr. Dodwell ascribes £ Eusebius's silence to nothing but negligence, and supposeth him less accurate in matters near his own time than elsewhere. Certainly Eusebius did not know every thing; nor had he a fair opportunity, or sufficient leisure, to bring every thing he knew into his writings. It must be reckoned very probable that Jerom was unacquainted with this writer's works, though they have been so expressly cited by Athanasius. g There is yet another way of accounting for the seeming inconsistence between the commendations Theognostus had received from Athanasius, and the censure passed on him by Photius: it is that taken by Du Pin, who supposeth that in several ages there have been differences of expression about the same doctrine: he therefore says that Photius is to blame for accusing Theognostus of error upon the divinity of the Son, purely because of some ways of speaking that did not entirely agree with those of his own age; not considering that, though the ancients have expressed themselves differently the doctrine was always the same at the bottom; and that it would be unjust to expect of them that they should speak as exactly, and with as much precaution, as they who came after the rise and condemnation of heresies. As the Institutions of Theognostus have been so little taken notice of by the several sects of Christians in past ages, it may be thought that this work of our author was not necessary; however, it might be useful: and the curious and judicious, I believe, would read it with satisfaction and improvement if it were now in being. h II. We are obliged to Athanasius for the passages he has cited: I am now to observe one of them. Athanasius is treating of the sin against the Holy Ghost: he first quotes Origen and then Theognostus; he informs us, that Theognostus, in confirmation of what had been before asserted by him, alleges those words of our Saviour spoken to the disciples: "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now: howbeit, when the Holy Ghost is come he will teach you:" John xvi. 12, 13. Then he adds: as our Saviour speaks to such as are not yet able to receive those things that are perfect, he condescends to their weakness; but the Spirit is given to those that are perfect. No man therefore ought to say, that the teaching of the Spirit excels the doctrine of the Son: but whereas the Son condescends to the imperfect, the Spirit is the seal of those who are perfected. Wherefore it is not because of any superior excellence of ⚫ the Spirit above the Son, that the blasphemy against the Spirit is inexpiable and unpardonable; a Et, ut omittamus de aliis dicere, nonne dolo malo Theognosti, theologorum celeberrimi, nomen atque scripta silentio obyoluta reliquit, quod consubstantialis nominis esset assertor? At is non præteriit Athanasium.. Baron. Ann. 109. lix. Sane studiosissimum virum, et disertum, et admirandum eum appellat Athanasius: atque idcirco prætermissam ab Eusebio mentionem illius probabile est, quod ab Arianis partibus fuerit alienus. Quapropter corruptas ejus Hypotyposes ab hujus sectæ patronis, quemadmodum et Clementis librum eodem titulo inscriptum, non immerito Andreas Schottus con'jectat. Huet. Origen. lib. i. sect. i. num. 3. Néanmoins S. Athanase marque assez, que dès son temps il y avoit des choses difficiles dans cet auteur sur la divinité de Jésus-Christ. Mais il dit, que ce n'étoit que comme pour discuter la verité, et qu'il exprimoit ensuite son vrai sentiment. Tillem. ib. 269. d μεν εν Θεογνωςος τα πρότερα ως εν γυμνασία εξέτασας, ύσερον την έαυτε δοξαν τιθεις, οὕτως ειρηκεν. Ath. de Decret. Nic. Syn. p. 230. C. • είτε (ώς αν τις ειποι) εκβιασάμενος την ύπερ αυτ8 απολογίαν, εν γυμνασίας λογῳ και 8 δόξης ταυτα προτίθεις εγγραφε δε λογο και κοιν8 προκείσθαι μελλοντος νόμε τοις πασιν, ει τις της εν αυτω βλασφήμιας την προειρημένην εις αθώωσιν επιφέρει απολογίαν, εις ασθενη κατέδραμε συνηγορίαν. Phot. ib. p. 280. f -quamquam ejus nullus meminit Eusebius, in rebus sui temporis minus profecto, quam in reliquis, accuratus. Dodw. ib. P. 512. 8 Du Pin. ib. p. 192. h Ath. Ep. 4, ad Serap. p. 703. B. C. i τοις δε τελειωμενοις συγγινεται το πνεύμα το άγιον, και εδήπε τις εκ τείων αν φαίη την τε πνευμαῖος διδασκαλίας Tegaλ Tys Te vie didaxys. ibid, C. |