With respect to earthquakes, which either have happened or do happen, it is not fitting that ye should regard them with despondency, whatever they may be, comparing ypur own conduct with theirs, and ob- serving how much more confidence they have toward God, than ye. Ye, in fact, at such periods, appear to forget the gods, and neglect your sacred rites. And ye know not the worship which belongs to God; whence * Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. Lib. iv. c. 13, gives this Epistle, as having been written by Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, although in c. 12, he appears to^ ascribe it to Antoninus Pius. Valesius and Scaliger think that it was written by Marcus Aurelius. Halloix, in his life of Justin, c. 5, and Cave, in his life of Justin, c. 10, agree in ascribing the letter to Antoninus Pius.
JUSTIN MARTYR.
JUSTIN MARTYR.
ye envy those who do worship him, and persecute them even unto death. Respecting such men, certain others of the rulers of provinces wrote to my father of blessed memory; to whom also he wrote in reply, that they should in no wise trouble men of that kind, unless they were shown to be making any attempt against the dominion of the Romans. Many too have given in- formation respecting such men to me also, to whom I answered, in conformity with my father’s opinion. If then any one shall bring any charge against one of these men, simply as such, let him who is so accused be released, even if he should be proved to be one of this kind of men: and let the accuser himself be subject to punishment.
Vol IV.— 17 Note ON IGNATIUS’ EPISTLE TO THE MAGNESUNS.
A <5yo$ aiSio;, oIk ffiyrjs rpoiXQm 1.
This passage has given rise to much discussion: some contending that it has reference to the Sige^ or “ Silence,” of Valentinus; others that it relates to the erroneous opinions of other heretics, ante- rior to Valentinus: and others, again, that the words refer to no specific heresy, but simply guard against an error which might arise in consequence of Jesus Christ being styled the Word ef God.
The sense of the passage seems to be this.— 1 ‘ Jesus Christ is the Eter- nal Word, proceeding from the Father. But this procession must not be confounded with any act of the human faculties. The word, by which the thoughts of man are made known, arises in consequence of a previous mental act; and before man’s word goes forth, it is preceded by a state of silence. But, in this respect, the analogy between the procession of the Word from the Father, and the springing forth of the word from the mind of man, entirely fails. The Word dr GOD was Eternal, and there was no period preceding the procession of the Word from the Father, corresponding to the silence which exists before the word of man is pronounced.’
Irenjeus, in exposing the fanciful and impious tenets of the different sects of Gnostics, expresses the same sentiment, on more than one occasion. Thus, Adv. Hccres. Lib. ii. cap. 18, he says, “ Sed quoniam quidem reprobabilis et impossibilis prima Noos, id est census ipsorum, emissio est, manifesto ostendimus. Videamus autem et de reliquis. Ab hoc enim Logon et Zoen fabricatores hujus Pleromatis dicunt emissos, et Logi, id est Verbi, quidem emissionem ab hominum affecti- one accipientes, et addivinantes adversus Deum, quasi aliquid magnum adinvenientes in eo quod dicunt a Nu (No$) esse emissum Logon: quod quidem omnes videlicet sciunt, quoniam in hominibus quidem consequenter dicatur, in eo autem qui sit super omnes Deus, totus Nus, et totus Logus cum sit, quemadmodum prsediximus, et nec aliud antiquius, nec posterius, aut aliud alterius habente in se, sed toto aquali et uno perseverante, jam non talis hujus ordinationis sequetur emissio. Quemadmodum qui dicit eum totum visionem, et totum auditum, (in quo enim videt, in ipso et audit; et in quo audit* in ipso et videt) non peccat: sic et qui ait totum ilium sensum, et totum ver- bum, et in quo sensus est, in hoc et verbum esse, et verbum ejus esse hunc Nun (N ovv) minus quidem adhuc de Patre omnium sentiet, de- cent ior a autem magis quam At, qui lationem prolativi hominum verbi trans/erunt in Dei etemum Verbum, et prolationis initium donantes l et genesin, quemadmodum et suo verbo.”
NOTE ON IGNATIUS’ EPISTLE.
And in a subsequent part of the same chapter; “ Et usque hoc quidem, quemadmodum pnediximus, omnes homi- num affectiones, et notiones mentis, et generationes intentionunl et emissiones verborum conjicientes verisimiliter, non verisiimliter mentiti sunt adversus Deum.”
in another place (Lib. ii. cap. 47) he approaches still more nearly the sense of this passage of Ignatius; “Hffic autem cscitas et stultiloquium inde provenit nobis, quod nihil Deo reservetis; sed et ipsius Dei, et Ennce® ejus, et Verbi, et Vitae, et Christi nativitates et prolationes annunciate vultis: et has non aliunde accipientes, sed ex affectione hominum: et non intelli- gitis quia in homine quidem, qui est compositum animal, capit hujus- modi dicere, sicut pnediximus, (Lib. ii. 16,) sensum horainis, et Ennoeam hominis: et quia ex sensu Ennoea, de Enncea autem Enthymesis, de Enthymesi autem Logos: (quern autem Logon? aliud enim est secundum Graecos Logos, quod est principale quod exco- gitat, aliud organiim per quod emittitur Logos:) et cdiquando qui- dem quiescerc et tacere hominem, aliquando autem loqui et operari. Deus autem cum sit totus mens, totus ratio, et totus spiritus operans, et totus lux, et semper idem et similiter existens, sicut et utile est nobis sapere de Deo, et sicut ex Scripturis discimus, non jam hujus- modi affectus et divisiones decenter erga eum subsequentur. Velocitati enim sensus hominum, proper spiritale ejus, non sufficit lingua deservire, quippe carnalis existens: unde et intus suffugatur verbum nostrum, et profertur non de semel, sicut conceptum est a sensu; sed per partes, secundum quod lingua subministrare pr® valet.”
It has been conceived that Ignatius, i» this passage, had a par- ticular reference to the heresy of Valentinus, whose notions of the procession of the Logos from Sige are well known. This appears highly improbable; although Victorinus and Rupertus say that Valentinus taught his heresy during the life of the Apostle St. John. The latest penod fixed for the death of Ignatius is a. d. 116: and, according to Tertullian de Prcescriptione Hcereticorum, cap. 30, Valentinus was living when Eleutherius was Bishop of Rome, which was at least as late as a. d. 185, or seventy years after the death of Ignatius. Unless, therefore, Valentinus lived to be nearly a hundred years old, he could scarcely have begun to disseminate his doctrines before the death of Ignatius. There is, however, no occasion to make the supposition that Ignatius alludes to the peculiar tenets of Valen- tinus. Iren^us, (Lib. i. 5,) Tertullian, (de Prcescriptione Hcsret. cap. 33, 46, 47, Adversus Valentinianos, cap. 3, 4,) and other autho- rities, show that Valentinus, in many of his absurd notions, merely adopted opinions which had been propagated by the Gnostics, Nico- laitans, Simonians, and other heretics. Eusebius (de Ecclesiastica Theologia, Lib. ii. cap. 9,) expressly alludes to Simon Magus, as holding the impious opinion, that there was a time when 11 God and silence alone were.’* (& ii MdpxsXXos \r6\pa\lirorlQtaQaiy rdXai pev Xlywv sTvat rdv Oedv f teal nva 'Hav^la* &pa rip Oed iiroypd<f><av lavra) tear* airdv CKtivov rdv idiwv alptetwrdv ipxvyiv, 8s r<5 d$ea ioyparl^uv iirt$a(vcro Xiyuv, w Qto S Kal Zty/J.) And that this passage refers to Simon Magus is plain from Euseb. Hist. Eccles. ii. 13, where he speaks of him in the very same terms: raafjg piv oiv hpxyybv atpiaeug rpdrov yhteOai rdv Zipuva rapci\(i<papcv.
NOTE ON IGNATIUS’ EPISTLE.
Bp. Pearson, in his Vindicce Ignatian <s, contends that, although it cannot be positively proved that Ignatius was entirely unacquainted with the tenets of Valentinus himself, yet the words in question have no reference to that heretic, but are aimed at the opinions of the Ebionites, received from the older Gnostics.
Bp. Bull, in his Defensio Fidei Nuance, Sect. iii. cap. 1, examines this passage at length, and arrives at a conclusion somewhat different from that of Bp. Pearson. He is of opinion, that the heresy opposed by Ignatius is that of the Judaizing Gnostics, of whom Cerinthus was the chief. This conclusion is founded upon a most careful investiga- tion of the whole passage. It is plain, he thinks, from the context, that the heretics whom Ignatius opposes are one and the same, through- out the whole of this portion of his Epistle: that, since these heretics maintained that the law of Moses was still binding upon Christians, a tenet never ascribed to Valentinus, they were certainly not Valen- tinians; and although this error was maintained by the Ebionites, yet that there are other points which evidently Tefer to some other heretics than they. Thus, the Ebionites had no philosophical notions re- specting the procession of the Word from the Father, which Ignatius appears to refute, when he says that “ the Word proceeds not from silence.” Again, his exhortation, in Sect. 7, that they should come “as unto one Jesus Christ, who proceedeth from one Father, and exists in One and is returned to One,” is a manifest allusion to the Cerinthian Gnostics, who held that Jesus and Christ were two persons; that Christ descended and entered into Jesus at his baptism, and before his passion returned into the pleroma: and that the Father of Jesus was the Demiurge, who made the world, but the Father of Christ was a higher power. The words in Sect. 8, “For this cause they were persecuted, being inspired by his grace fully to convince the unbelievers that there is One God, who hath manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son,” refer also to the errors of the Gnostics, who maintained that the world was created either by angels or by a being different and inferior to the supreme God, who revealed himself to mankind by Christ, his Son. Iren. Adv. Hares, iii. 11. Bp. Bull is therefore of opinion that Ignatius in the words, “not proceeding from silence,” intended to oppose some erroneous notions of the same heretics concerning the procession of the Son from the Father; as in Sect. 9, he clearly refers to another error of the Ju- daizing heretics, who denied the true passion of Christ. In Sect. 11, he warns the Magnesians “ not to fall into the snares of vain-glory,” another apparent allusion to the Gnostics, whose very name was assumed to intimate their superiority in knowledge to other Christians.
He then shows, by the testimony of Epiphanius, Philastrius, and Augustine, that the observance of the peculiar rites of Judaism, from prudential motives, was at that period one of the professed tenets of the Cerinthians, although Cerintnus himself did not submit to the rite of circumcision, as he taught others to do. It is thought that St John alludes to the Cerinthians, when he speaks to the Philadelphians, respecting them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie. Rev. iii. 9; see also Rev. ii. 9. And it is remarkable that Ignatius, writing to the same Philadelphians, Sect. 6, says, “ If any one preach the Jewish religion to you, hear him not. For it is better to learn the Christian faith from one who is circum- cised, than the Jewish from one who is uncircumcised.”
NOTE ON IGNATIUS* EPISTLE.
Bp. Bull then proves, by the testimony of Irenjeus, Adv. Bares. iii. 11, that the Nicolaitans, Corinthians, and other early heretics held tenets of the same absurd hind as those afterward professed by the Valentinians, respecting various orders of jEons, between the supreme God and the Creator of the world; and shows that it is highly proba- ble that the very procession of the Word from Sige t or “Silence,” was one of their notions. Gregory Nazianzen, indeed, Oral. 23, enumerates the Cerinthians among those Gnostics who reckoned Bythus and Sige in the number of their ASons.
Upon the whole we may be justified in concluding: 1. That if the words oIk inb 2 c y~is xpoiXdujv” be an allusion to the opinions of Valentinus, such an allusion cannot be shown to be chronologically impossible; nor would it prove that the Epistle in which it occurs is either interpolated or fictitious.
2. That there is the highest probability that the words refer to the erroneous notions, either of the Corinthian heretics, or of other Gnostics before Valentinus.
3. That this is a plain testimony of a writer of the Apostolic age to the absolute eternity of Jesus Christ, the Word of God.
Digitized C