« السابقةمتابعة »
not, however, come down to us; we only possess a series of extracts* made from it by Nicephorus Callisti in the fourteenth century, and a few other fragments. Yet these, brief and imperfect as they are, form our most satisfactory guide for the history of the eastern church from the death of Theodosius II. to that of Anastasius.
Theodore, the reader, was moreover the earliest writer who attempted to reduce the works of the three historians, Socrates, Sozomen, and 'Theodoret, into one continuous narrative. He constructed a tripartite history of the fourth century, with a view probably of providing a convenient introduction to his own work.+ But his labours seem to have been interrupted. We find two books only of this arrangement mentioned by ancient writers; and the manuscript of the work, which was in the possession of Leo Allatius, brought down the history merely to the death of Constantius (361.)
ZACHARIAS RHETOR was Bishop of Melitene,f in the lesser Armenia, in the reign of Justinian. His Ecclesiastical History was only known to have existed from its being referred to by Evagrius, till, in the former part of the last century, several considerable fragments of a Syriac translation & of it were published in the Bibliotheca Orientalis of Assemani. His work appears to have extended from the reign of Constantine to the middle of that of Justinian I. The earlier portions would seem to have been merely abridgments of Socrates and Theodoret; and the original part must have come down as low as I have stated, as it mentioned the taking of Rome, by Totila, in 546. It is evident, from the testimony of Evagrius, and the sentiments expressed in the fragments of the work, that the author was a zealous Monophysite.
But of all the Greek historians of the church who wrote in the sixth century, the only one whose work has come down to us entire is
* Εκλογοι εκ της εκκλησιαστικής ιστορίας Θεοδώρου αναγνώστου από φωνής Νικηφόρου Καλλίστου To Eavtonoúlov. Valesius, however, believed that Nicephorus himself possessed no other part of the work of Theodore than these extracts.-Præfat, ad vol. iii. Eccles. Hist. Scriptorum.
† Primum opus nihil aliud erat quam Historia Tripartita, duobus libris comprehensa, quam ex Socrate, Sozomeno, ac Theodorito unum in corpus collegerat, å vicesimo anno Imperatoris Constantini usque ad principatum Juliani. Hujus Tripartitæ Historiæ notitiam Leoni Allatio debe. mus, qui primus hoc monumentum ex tenebris eruerat, et publica luce donaturum se esse promiserat. Ejusdem Historiæ manuscriptum exemplar Venetiis in Bibliotheca sancti Marci extare, jam pridem monuit Possevinus : quod etiam ab se visum illic esse mihi testatus est Emericus Bigotius. Valesius in præfat., vol. iii. | Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, ii. 1451.
Assemani appears to think that the work was originally written in Syriac. But, in the absence of positive evidence, I am disposed to regard the fact of its being so often referred to by Evagrius, who, as far as I am aware, never quotes a Syriac writer, as proving that it was written in Greek.
| Zacharias Meletinæ in Armenia minore Episcopus, claruit sub Justiniano Imper. circa annum Christi 540. Rhetorem vocat Evagrius in Hist. Eccles., lib. 2, cap. 2, 8, 10, et lib. 3, cap. 5, 6, 7, et 18. Malelam,
hoc est, oratorem, seu Rhetorem, et Meletinensem Episcopum diserté appellat Barsalibæus, cujus verba retuli supra pag. 53. Scripsit Historiam Ecclesiasticarn à Constantini Magni Imperio usque ad annum Justiniani vigesimum, quæ anonyma exstat in Cod. Syr. Vat. 24. Sed Auctoris nomen tum ex collatione locorum, quæ ab Evagrio ex Zacharia citantur, tum ex Barsalibæo, qui ejus nomen diserte prodidit, restituimus. Tres vero Partes continet. Prima est epitome Socratis : Altera Theodoreti : Tertia opus ipsius Zachariæ a Theodosio Ju. niore usque ad Justinianum.. ....... Tertia Pars, unde Zacharias initium historiæ suæ ducit, incipit à fol. 79. mutila est autem, et ab amanuensi videtur in compendium redactæ, vel potiùs capita quædam ex historia Zachariæ, quæ in octo libris dividebatur, ut infra patebit , decerpta. Assemani Bibliotheca Orientalis. tom. ii. cap. 7, pp. 54, 55.
S 'Eμπαθώς την όλην πραγματείαν συγγράψας. Evagr. lib. iii. c. 7, p. 341.
Evagrius Scholasticus. EVAGRIUS was a Syrian, & native of Epi, phania,* who practised as an advocate at Antioch, where, by the interest of Gregory, the accomplished patriarch, (570—594,) to whom he had rendered valuable professional assistance, he attained high civil dignities. His Ecclesiastical History, which extends, in six books, from the council of Ephesus (431) to the twelfth year of the Emperor Maurice (594), possesses considerable merit. His style, as Photiust remarks, though somewhat diffuse, is not unpleasing ; his opinions are sound and orthodox; and the whole work bears frequent marks of the diligence and care with which the author collected his materials. Though certainly very inferior in the art of historical composition to his eminent contemporaries, Procopius, Agathias, and Theophylact, Evagrius is justly regarded as having rendered a valuable contribution to the history of the church.
Though the east still took the lead in the production of original works op historical subjects, the west, unfavourably as it was situated for literary pursuits, did not totally neglect the cultivation of church history, An important work is due to the period which we have been engaged in reviewing; I mean the celebrated TRIPARTITE History, or Latin arrangement of the works of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret. Marcus Aurelius CASSIODORUS was descended from a senatorian family, and, as the minister of the great Theodoric, enjoyed the highest honours in the gothic kingdom of Italy. After retiring from the world, he devoted his talents to the spiritual and mental improvement of the inmates of a monastery which he founded in Calabria. With a view to the edification of his monks, he employed Epiphanius Scholasticus, an Italian, eminent for his acquaintance with the Greek language, to translate the continuators of Eusebius into Latin. And he afterwards himself digested the three narratives into one connected history. Small as is the value of this arrangement to those who possess, and have the power of reading, the works from which it is
* Fabr. Bibl. Græc. vi. 126.
+ Έστι δε την φρίσιν ουκ αχαρις, ει και πως περιττεύεσθαι ενίοτε δοκεί. έν τη δε των δογμάτων opłótnto uspijns Tūv a XAww mūâlov Lo Topikõv. Bibl. Cod. xxix. p. 7. Valesius gives the following candid and judicious estimate of the literary merits and defects of Evagrius :-"Laudanda est in primis Evagrii diligentia, qui cum historiam ecclesiasticam scribere aggressus esset, quæ. cumque ad id argumentum spectabant, ex optimis Scriptoribus collegit, puta ex Prisco, Joanne, Zacharia, Eustathio, et Procopio Rhetoribus. Stilus quoque ejus non improbandus est. Habet enim elegantiam et venustatem, ut testatur etiam Photius. Sed quod præcipue in Evagrio lau. dandum est, ex Græcis Ecclesiasticæ historiæ Scriptoribus, solus hic rectæ fidei doctrinam inte. gram atque illibatam servavit, ut post Photium observavit Baronius in Annalibus. lllud tamen in eo reprehensionem meretur, quod non tantam diligentiam adhibuit in conquirendis antiquitatis Ecclesiasticæ monumentis, quantam in legendis profanis Scriptoribus."- Præfat. ad vol. iii.
* The title of the Tripartite History is as follows:--"Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ, quam Tripartitam vocant, ex tribus Græcis auctoribus Sozomeno, Socrate, et Theodoreto, ab Epiphanio Scholastico versis, per Cassiodorum Senatorem in Epitomen redactæ libri xii.” The nature of the work is thus fully explained in the preface of Cassiodorus :-Hæc historia Ecclesiastica, quæ cunctis Christianis valde necessaria comprobatur, à tribus Græcis auctoribus mirabiliter constat esse conscripta ; uno scilicet Theodoreto, venerabili Episcopo, et duobus disertissimis viris, Sozomeno, et Socrate ; quos nos per Epiphanium Scholasticum Latino condentes eloquio, necessarium duxi. mus eorum dicta deflorata in unius stili tractum, Domino juvante, perducere, et de tribus auctoribus unam facere dictionem. Sciendum plane, quòd prædicti scriptores a temporibus divæ memoriæ Principis Constantini usque ad augustæ recordationis Theodosii judioris, quæ sunt gesta, digesserint. Nos autem eorum relectis operibus, et unumquemque cautâ mente tractantes, cognovimus, non æqualiter omnes de unaquaque re luculenter ac subtiliter explanasse: sed modo hunc, modo alterum aliam partem melius expediisse. Et ideo judicavimus de singulis doctoribus deflorata colligere, et cum auctoris sui nomine in ordinem collocari."--Cassiodori Opera, tom. i. p. 203. Edit. Benedict. Rotomagi, 1679.
compiled, it is of great importance in a historical view of the condition and progress of ecclesiastical history, as having, with the translation of Eusebius, which had been made by Ruffinus, supplied the west, for nearly a thousand years, with all it knew of the ancient history of the church.
LIBERATUS Diaconus, who was archdeacon of Carthage in the middle of the sixth century, and distinguished himself by his activity in defence of the Three Chapters, wrote an “ Abridged History"* of the troubles which had been occasioned by the errors of the Nestorians and Eutychians, to the year 553. His workt is for the most part compiled from original documents, and though written in a rude style, and with little regard to the rules of historical composition, is valuable for the information it affords on the controversy respecting the Incarnation.
During the whole of this period, a number of contemporary annalists were engaged in recording the fortunes of the church and state. We still possess the Latin chronicles of Idatius, Prosper Aquitanus, Marcellinus Comes, Marius Aventicensis, Victor Tunupensis, and Joannes Biclariensis ; & all of whom afford valuable materials of church history, though they cannot be ranked among the ecclesiastical historians.
J. G. D.
THOUGHTS ON THE POPULAR EVIDENCES OF A CALL TO THE
CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. There are certain passages of the New Testament which, in the present day, are very awkward, and, to a thinking man, very perplexing. Christ says, for instance, that “ It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment" than for those who will not receive his ministers, nor hear their words. And in the epistle to the Hebrews it is said, “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account.” The words are simple and plain, but the application is difficult. There are episcopalians, presbyterians, independents, Wesleyans, baptists, besides an innumerable company of seceders belonging to no denomination, and their ministers all say that they are mi
* “ Breviarium Causæ Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum collectum a sancto Liberato archi. diacono ecclesiæ Carthaginensis regionis sextæ.” The Breviarium of Liberatus is printed in almost all the editions of the councils; and it was published in a separate form by Garnier. Paris, 1675.
+ The proæmium at once describes the nature of the work, and affords a specimen of the Latinity. “Peregrinationis necessitatibus defatigatus, et aliquatenus feriatus animo a curis temporalibus, duarum, hoc est, Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum, ex ecclesiastica historia nuper de Græco in Latinum translata, et ex gestis synodalibus, vel sanctorum patrum epistolis hoc breviarium collegi, nectens temporum curricula illa quæ in Græco Alexandriæ scripta accepi, vel gravissimorum hominum didici narratione fideli. Quod faciens pro mea eruditione et responsione contra falsiloquos utrarumque partium sectatores, qui consucto studio aliter loquun. tur de suis auctoribus, quam veritas habet, libenter offero catholicis fratribus ignorantibus acta ipsarum hæresum, et legere volentibus." Concil., tom. v. col. 740. Edit. Labbe.
Prosper, Victor, an anonymous continuator, and the Abbot of Biclaro, form a series, ending with the year 590. They are printed in the first volume of Basnage's edition of the “Antique Lectiones” of Canisius, pp. 261-311. Idatius and Marcellinus Comes are to be found most complete in Sirmond's Works, vol. ii. col. 227–296. Edit. Venet. 17:28. Marius Aventicensis is in the first vol. of the collection of Du Chesne.
nisters of Christ, and all are watching for my soul;' now, which am I to receive, and whom am I to obey ? I cannot obey all, for no man can
even two masters; and, moreover, these persons are by no means agreed in that complex idea which they call the gospel. Some say that the Calvinistic system is the gospel; others affirm that the Arminian scheme is the gospel; and, as to practice, one says that I am bound to have my children baptized; another declares as peremptorily that they are not to be baptized; so that it is impossible to obey the words of one without disobeying the other, and if this other should happen to be a true minister of Christ, I expose myself to a punishment less tolerable than that inflicted on the guilty cities of the plain. I ask, then, how I am to know a true minister of the gospel, whom I am bound to receive, and whom I can obey without risking my eternal happiness? To this question there are many answers current at present, which, because of the importance of the subject, are worthy of consideration.
The first answer is—He that has an internal call, that is, he who feels within him a strong and vehement desire to proclaim the message of salvation, is a true minister of Christ. But this answer is inadequate ; first, because perhaps all the above-mentioned conflicting parties will profess that they have this call, and we are, therefore, left just where we were before; and, secondly, because in the Bible there is no mention of any such thing. It may be thought, perhaps, that this assertion goes too far, and even that it contradicts the principles and practice of the Anglican church, which asks at ordination, “Do you trust that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this office and ministration, to serve God for the promoting of his glory, and the edifying of his people ?” But this is far from being the case. Our church does not authorize the ordination of any man because he can answer this question in the affirmative, but it proposes the question because, by having a title to orders, the candidate has previously had an external call; without this external and providential evidence, his internal call will be of no use; no bishop will on that account receive him even as a candidate for orders. The external call is the prerequisite, without which the question about an internal call will never be proposed. Our church therefore knows nothing of an internal call, which, without external evidence, can prove any man to be a minister of Christ. It does not even permit him to become a candidate for the holy office, on his own representation or wish, but, in the title for orders, requires an external call. We do not therefore deviate from the principles of the church when we say, that the Bible contains no warrant for this plea of an internal call as the test of a true ministry; neither the church nor the Bible knows anything of the kind. There is no instance, either in the Old or the New Testament, of any one minister of God resting his claims to this high office upon any such foundation. The only persons mentioned in the Bible as impelled solely by an internal call are the false prophets. “I have not sent these prophets, yet they run: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.” (Jer. xxiii. 21.) “ Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, that prophesy, and say unto them that prophesy out of their own hearts, Hear ye the word of the Lord: Thus saith the Lord God, Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing." (Ezek. xii. 2, 3.) But they will scarcely be taken as safe guides in this matter, and yet there is no other example of an internal call to be found in the whole word of God. It is nowhere said that the true prophets had an internal call, or that the apostles of Christ were urged by an internal desire to assume their office. Peter and his companions were engaged in their lawful calling, Matthew was seated at the receipt of custom, when they received Christ's external call to follow him. Some of the most remarkable, and most highly gifted, were called almost against their will. Moses needed more than one command to go forth as the servant of God; and St. Paul was in the midst of a mad career of persecution when he was called to the ministry. If the proof of an internal call be necessary to a true minister of Christ, we must at once exclude Moses and the prophets, Paul and his fellow-apostles. This pretence of an internal call however, although antiscriptural, is not new. When Luther began the reformation in Germany, he had to contend with many who urged it; and it is worth while to consider how he met it. In commenting on the call of Moses, he says
“ Hold fast what I have said concerning the call of Moses; for no man should push himself into a public office without God's call. And bear this in mind particularly, because of those modern vain spirits who push and insinuate themselves, where God has neither called nor sent them-choose to be preachers, and to teach the people, without either summons or call, (Jer. xxiii. 21.) Moses had long before wished, in his spirit, the deliverance of his brethren from the bondage of Egypt, and had spirit and courage enough, when he slew the Egyptian; as if he would say, I think, I ought to help you. Neither did God punish this act; on the contrary, Stephen praises it, in the Acts of the Apostles, (vii. 25.) And yet he would not attempt to lead them out of Egypt until God had first called and sent him to the children of Israel. For it is not enough to boast of the Spirit, neither will God have us believe those who make pretensions, and say, ' Believe my spirit;' item, nor those who say, “ The Spirit moves me; the Spirit commands me. Otherwise we should all stand on an equal footing, and no one would listen to another. He that would begin anything new, let him not come with the boast that the Spirit has put it into his heart. But if he does, let him be rejected at once. For this is what one should earnestly do and say: 'If the Holy Spirit will employ me in any office, (he it what it may,) and if God's will be that I should begin it, and I entertain the wish in my own mind, he will give the office in such a way, that signs follow, and that heavenly signs confirm the mission.' For this is certain, that the Spirit will not puff up or tempt the heart of any one, where he does not confirm the matter by miracles: external evidence is absolutely necessary."*
Such was Luther's opinion of those who have nothing better to offer in defence of their claims than a vehement internal desire. His opinion is not given as an authority, but to shew that it was no part of Luther's protestantism to acknowledge the claims of every man who pretended to be a minister of Christ. He required evidence, and so will every man who has got the least particle of common sense; and if, besides, he has got any respect for the Bible, he will not receive the assertion of an internal call as sufficient evidence, for neither in the
* Luther's Werke in einer das Bedürfniss der Zeit berücksichtigend, Auswahl, vol. ii., p. 273.