THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH IN THE SECOND CENTURY.

 

I. The Apostolic Fathers

 

The Apostolic Fathers are to be regarded not as great writers, but as great historic characters. They preserved the treasure of evangelical doctrine, without themselves fully knowing all it contained. They esteemed it nevertheless more highly than their own life, which they were ever ready to lay down at the call of duty. The Christians of this epoch were martyrs in the holiest of causes, and set a sacred seal on the claims of God by their faithfulness to the truth, and on the rights of man by their resistance to all religious tyranny. The apostolic Fathers accept the great principles laid down in the previous period by St. Paul and St. John. They never appeal to the ceremonial law in opposition to the law of Christian liberty. But since Judaeo-Christianity was not so much a simple fact, as the embodiment of a principle and natural tendency of the human heart, we must not be surprised to meet with it again under new forms in the orthodox Church, at the commencement of the second century. The divergencies of view among these early Fathers do not reach positive opposition. There is no collision of hostile parties; no stormy discussion is raised, but there are, nevertheless, very distinct shades of doctrine variously colouring the faith in Christ, which is held in common by all. On the one hand, we have Pauline doctrine represented by Clement of Rome, Ignatius and Polycarp. The teaching of Polycarp bears also the distinct impress of the spirit of St. John, whose immediate disciple he was. On the other hand, the idealistic symbolism of the Epistle to the Hebrews, is carried to the verge of Gnosticism by the author of the Epistle known as that of Barnabas. Lastly, Papias and the writer oi the allegory of the Pastor, revive, if not the views, at least the principles, of Judaeo-Christianity.

We have but little reliable information about three of the apostolic Fathers : Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp. They are better known to us through their writings than through the often contradictory testimony of history. Clement of Rome has been confounded, by an error easily to be understood, with the Clement of Philippi whom St. Paul calls his fellow-labourer. The ancient Church, knowing that Clement had been an immediate disciple of the apostles, and finding the same name in one of Paul's Epistles, did not hesitate to associate him with the missionary travels of the great apostle. He is not, however, once named in the Acts. Indeed we learn from the Epistle to the Philippians, that Clement of Philippi was still in his native city, till within a very short period before the persecution under Nero. Now, it is quite certain that Clement of Rome was in that city at the time of the martyrdom of the two apostles. No reliance can be placed on the fables of the "Clementines", according to which Clement, who is elsewhere confounded with the consul of the senatorial family of the same name persecuted under Domitian, became the fanatic follower of St. Peter, and opponent of St. Paul.

If we adhere strictly to the evidence of history, we shall recognise in Clement a member of the Church of Rome, a pagan by birth, who was converted by the preaching of Paul, or by that of one of his fellow-labourers. According to Irenaeus, he was personally acquainted with the apostles, and through his association with them, became the living echo of their preaching. Clement of Alexandria goes so far as to call him an apostle; Origen speaks of him only as a disciple of the apostles. Regarded by Peter and John as one of the Christians of Rome, most eminent for piety and capacity, he was raised by them to the bishopric, not, be it remembered, to that which was regarded as the episcopal dignity in the third and fourth centuries, but to the bishopric in its primitive form, which was identical with the office of elder. Clement shared the government of the Church with Linus and Anacletus, who were bishops or elders with him. After the death of his colleagues, he remained the sole elder of the apostolic epoch, and as such exercised a moral power of peculiar weight. We know nothing with certainty about his death. But he has himself made us acquainted with the most important event of his life: his official intervention in the troubles which were anew agitating the Church of Corinth. His letter brings before us the principal features of his moral physiognomy. He wrote towards the end of the first, or beginning of the second century.

We are acquainted with the occasion and aim of this letter. He designed to restore harmony in one of the most glorious Churches of the apostolic age, (in that Church of Corinth whose dissensions Paul himself had once pacified, and which seems, from the description given of it in the commencement of the Epistle, to have passed long years of calm and prosperity. The writer first proceeds to describe the evil he desires to cure), that jealous and seditious spirit which, nurtured among the Corinthians by their proud self-complacency, has deprived them both of righteousness and peace. Clement earnestly calls upon the schis- matics to repent, and to seek once more the blessings of the meek and lowly. He enforces his exhortations by many examples drawn from sacred history, insisting especially on the gentleness of Christ. In the second part of his letter, the pious elder of the Church of Rome enters on an appeal based on more directly evangelical grounds. He reminds the Corinthians of the value and greatness of the Divine grace, of which they have been made the subjects. This grace they have already largely received, but there is a yet more plenteous manifestation oi it reserved for them, in that glorious resurrection which the whole world joins to proclaim. Clement invites the Christians to believe steadfastly in the love of God, and to respond t it by a holy life. In the second part of his letter he also enters upon the ecclesiastical question, properly so called, and urges the Church of Corinth to maintain within itself a well-regulated organisation, and to preserve it with the same vigilance and care, as the ancient people of God bestowed on the Levitical appointments, The epistle concludes with a eulogium on charity, and with fresh exhortations to humility and concord.

Such is in substance the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. It is not remarkable for brilliance of style or power of thought. It is loosely put together, and the thread of the argument is often lost in the profusion of illustration. We feel in reading it, that the writer is not a man of powerful mind, nor has he that passionate energy which characterises his race. Absorbed in the idea of the necessity of harmony, which is in his eyes the universal law of the world, he finds eloquent words in which to set forth its manifestations in the great scenes of nature.

"The heavens are under the control of God, and submit themselves to Him day and night in peace; they follow their appointed course without interruption or mutual disturbance. The sun and moon and the chorus of the stars obey His command, and move on harmoniously and undeviatingly in the course He has marked out for them."

Clement thus passes in review the various spheres of creation, and completes the sublime picture with these words: "The mighty Creator, Lord of all creatures, has ordained that all things should be wrought in peace and harmony, diffusing His benefits upon all, and most of all, loading those with His goodness who have fled for refuge to lay hold of His mercy in our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and majesty for ever and ever."

Clement's piety is not of the sombre and melancholy cast, which, under pretext of doing honour to grace, despises nature. He admires natural beauty ; he sees in it a divine element, and loves to meditate upon it. He challenges its testimony in support of the resurrection. "Let us observe," he says, "the resurrection which is daily wrought before our eyes. Day and night testify to it. The night passes away, the day rises again. Day flees, and night returns. Let us consider the fruits of the earth, and the seed, how it grows. The sower goes forth to sow his seed in the earth, and the seed laid in the soil, bare and barren grain, there dies. From this death Divine Providence brings forth the germs of new life ; they multiply and bear fruit." That which strikes us in Clement is his serenity. We feel that he himself enjoys that deep and abiding peace, which he urges the Corinthians to seek. It is impressed on every page he writes, while his thoughts flow on like a broad and quiet stream, never swelling into a full impetuous tide. The commandments of God are, to use his own expression, inscribed in the breadth and depth of his heart. Hence the fulness of expression which he gives to them. We feel that this man has a great love for Jesus Christ, and calm as is his nature, he finds words full of loftiness and fire when this is his theme. "Behold," he says, "the way of our salvation, Christ Jesus, the high priest of our sacri- fice, the comforter and strength of our weakness. Through Him we rise to sit in heavenly places. He unveils to us His face, glorious in holiness ; "by Him the eyes of our heart are opened, our barren and darkened understanding expands beneath His shining into marvellous light. God has been pleased to reveal to us in Him the excellent glory of His majesty, He being so much higher than the angels, as He hath by inheritance a more excellent name than they."

If in Clement we note the principal traits of the Roman character, we find in Ignatius altogether a Greek of Asia Minor. His soul burns like the sun in his native sky. The circumstances of his later life alone are known to us. It is ascertained that he was Bishop of Antioch, and like Clement, an immediate disciple of the apostles. Although he had in all probability seen and known St. John, and had not had any personal acquaintance with St. Paul, he is nevertheless clearly a disciple of Paul's school. The teaching of Paul has taken strong hold of his mind, and in his character he recalls to us the great apostle. Ignatius has too often been regarded as the most powerful champion of the episcopal system, and as imbued with all the prejudices of the clerical hierarchy. Thanks to recent discoveries, these assertions can now be truly weighed, and are found wanting. In fact, according to a Syriac manuscript, which has thrown much light upon this question, three only of the seven letters attributed to Ignatius are genuine. It is even possible for us to distinguish the original text from the spurious addition. This expurgation has restored the letters of Ignatius to their true character. If they still show a leaning towards episcopacy, it is in the measure in which such a manifestation was possible, at the commencement of the second century; and instead of a tissue of legends, we have precise details as to the martyrdom of the courageous bishop.

Pliny's letter to Trajan has shown us the great progress made by Christianity in Asia Minor. This progress had alarmed the magistrates, and called forth severe measures of repression ; the number of the accusations advanced, doubtless gave rise to the letters of the proconsul of Bithynia. The same causes and effects must have been at work in the adjoining provinces. The Christians were condemned for high treason, and the decree of Trajan, dealing with secret societies, was applied to them. The most illustrious victim of these preliminary persecutions, which preceded the edict of a.C. 110,, following on the letter of Pliny, was the Bishop of Antioch. He would be doubtless one of the first to fall, since it is certain he was one of the most active propagators of the new faith, and that if the temples of the gods were deserted, it was in great part through his influence. Antioch had been at the commencement of the second century a centre of active mission work, a focus of light for all Asia Minor. Ignatius, accused of the crime of high treason, was condemned to death; his sentence ran that he should be carried to Rome, there to fight with wild beasts. This torture had a double advantage ; it ensured the terrible punishment of the offender, and it afforded to the Roman people, one of those sanguinary spectacles which it so dearly loved. For a long time all restrictions on this barbarous usage had been removed. The proconsul Aquilius, in the war of Mithridates, had sent to Rome as many as a thousand captives. There had been no lack of victims under Nero and his successors, who had been, indeed, lavish purveyors for the circus. The number had diminished under Trajan. Thus, when the occasion presented itself with some show of justice, to give the Roman populace a spectacle all the more choice for being now more rare, it was eagerly turned to account. Ignatius was to appear as a criminal of the worst class. He was sent to Rome, laden with chains, and led by ten soldiers, whom he likens to so many leopards. If his journey bears no resemblance to the triumphal march described in his apocryphal letters, there is no difficulty in supposing that he might be able from time to time to hold communication with his brethren. The conduct of the Churches towards him is a touching proof of the love which then bound all Christians together. They do not, indeed, send to him numerous embassies, but only some delegates as their representatives. The Church of Ephesus sends one of her bishops. Ignatius makes use of the liberty granted him, to address last words of exhortation to his companions in labour.

In chains, and under sentence of certain death, his martyrdom may be said to have already begun. Every word he utters under such circumstances, is full of weight and authority. What an impression must have been produced on the Church by the warnings of one who could thus write : "And now, in my chains, I learn that I have nothing more to desire. I have already begun to fight with wild beasts ; from Syria to Rome, across sea and land, I was chained to ten leopards, whom kindness only rendered more cruel. Their outrages make me only the more the disciple of Him who was crucified ; but it is not this which justifies me." Words thus written are the sad and sacred testimony of martyrdom. His three epistles, in their genuine form, are the farewells of a Christian hero. They have that terse conciseness which belongs to the language of action. It is clear they were written in haste, by a man who desired to put all his Christianity into the few words hurriedly penned, in moments when the vigilance of his fierce gaolers was relaxed. A strange fire flashes from those broken words as from fretted flints.

The first letter of Ignatius, written to Polycarp, the young Bishop of Smyrna, and the second, addressed to the Ephesians, in the person of their Bishop Onesimus, show that the martyr was the worthy follower of St. Paul and St. John, the faithful disciple of the Good Shepherd who gives His life for the sheep. Ignatius is in truth, great as a pastor, because of the great love he bears to the Churches, and his great devotion to them. If he had used some influence in building up episcopal power, he had, at least, a heroic conception of the duties of a bishop. The counsels which he gave to Polycarp on the exercise of his office, are those of a veteran transmitting to younger hands the torn banner which he himself has valiantly defended. All the images employed by him point to the militant state of the martyr Church. "Watch," he wrote to Polycarp, "like a good soldier of God; the prize is an incorruptible crown of life. Stand fast in the truth ; be like iron under the anvil. It is the part of a good soldier to w in, even though wounded. We must be ready to bear all for God, that He Himself may bear us up. Let thy zeal grow great. Learn to discern the times. Consider Him with whom is no time, the invisible, inaccessible God, who for us took on Him a visible form, who, knowing no sorrow, bowed beneath the burden of our woe, and suffered all for us". "Labour, fight, run, suffer together," he adds, addressing the Christians of Smyrna; "seek to please Him who has chosen you to be His soldiers and servants; He will pay you your wages. Let not one of you turn deserter." The pastor is not merely a soldier, in the view of Ignatius ; he is also the watchful guardian of the flock, which he is to encompass ever with his prayers. "Watch," says he again, "with a spirit that never slumbers. Bear thou the burdens of all like a strong man. When the agony is great, great is the gain. If thou lovest only the faithiul disciples, thou art not merciful. Be long-suffering towards the most unworthy of the flock." Thus does Ignatius blend gentleness with power. He magnifies the office of a bishop, only because he forms so high a conception of the greatness of the bishop's responsibility, and demands of him nothing less than that he bear the burdens and sorrows of his whole Church, after the example of Christ Himself. That example he sets before Christians, that they may embrace in their large compassions the whole human race, and especially their most bitter enemies. "Pray," he says, "for all men (since there is hope of repentance for them also), that they may give themselves to God. Strive to enlighten them by your life. Be gentle and pitiful when they are insolent and cruel. Give them prayers for their blasphemies ; let your steadfastness in the faith reprove their errors ; show kindness for their hardness, never suffering yourselves to hate as they hate. Be followers of the Lord in all meekness. Who was ever more despitefully used than He, and shamefully entreated and spitted on?". Let us not forget that he who thus wrote was himself already on the way to the circus at Rome.

We can imagine how the love of God and of Christ glowed in this ardent soul. He wrote to Polycarp : "The time has come to desire earnestly the possession of God, as the pilot desires the favourable wind, and the storm-driven sailor the quiet haven". "And now," he says to the Romans, "there is not in all my heart one spark of desire for aught of earthly good". We find, indeed, in Ignatius, that which may be called the passion for the unseen. In an image full of grandeur, he likens death to a glorious sunset, preceding the radiant dawn of a divine day. Faith opens to him far-reaching vistas of eternal bliss. Ignatius speaks of the cross with a mystical fervour. It is by the cross, Christ raises and builds up the living stones into the spiritual temple, till the topmost stone is brought forth with shoutings to the glory of God. "My soul," he exclaims, "bows down adoring before the cross; that scandal of the unbelieving is salvation and eternal life to us". He sees in the star followed by the Magi, the inauguration of that kingdom of Christ, the mystery of which cannot be fathomed by the Tempter, who, when he has spent all his efforts, has but prepared the way for the great triumph over death.

Ignatius has often been reproached for his epistle to the Romans, written on hearing that the Christians of Rome were making some efforts to obtain grace from the emperor. This letter exhibits a fanatic desire for martyrdom, and is certainly wanting in that admirable equilibrium of feeling, so striking in the epistle addressed by St. Paul to the Philippians under similar circumstances. The desire for death is not kept in subjection with Ignatius, as with the apostle, by the clear view of the services he could still render to the Church, by continuing in the flesh. His mind fixes upon one thing : the deliverance from the fetters of earthly life, the triumph with Christ, the full possession of God. "I am afraid," he writes to the Christians of Rome, when approaching their city, "I am afraid of your love. I fear lest it may do me wrong. I shall never again have such an opportunity of entering into the full possession of God. Let me become the prey of the wild beasts, that God may become wholly mine. I am God's wheat; the teeth of the fierce beasts will but bruise me, that I may be changed, into the fine bread of my God. Rather, then, do ye encourage the beasts, that they may become my tomb, and leave nought of my body to oppress me in my last sleep. I shall be a true disciple of Jesus Christ when the world sees my body no more". These words are evidently the passionate expression of overwrought feeling. Ignatius would have been more truly like his Master, had he less ardently panted after martyrdom, and waited with patience till he also could say, "The hour is come"; as it assuredly did come in that age to every faithful witness of the truth. If, however, his impatience to die was excessive, that very excess was not without a salutary effect, at a time when the alternative of apostasy or death was about to be offered to thousands of Christians. They would remember with what joy Ignatius had entered the arena, the dust of which was to lick up the blood of so many martyrs ; and above the roaring of the lions and the imprecations of the crowd, they would hear the joyous tones of his triumphal hymn, "Welcome, nails and cross ; welcome broken bones, violence of fierce beasts, wounded limbs and bruised body ; welcome all diabolic torture, if I may but obtain Jesus Christ".

It is only just to remark further, that Ignatius had no idea of procuring to himself any merit towards God by his suffering. His humility was as great as his courage. After writing to the Ephesians, that it is better to be a Christian even in silence, than to speak without being so, in other words, that seeming is nothing, reality everything; he says to the Romans, "Ask for me that I may have strength without and within, so that I may not merely speak but feel, that I may not be a Christian in word only but in deed and in truth. If I am found thus, I may be pronounced faithful, for then I shall not only appear so in the eyes of the world. Nothing that seems good to the world is truly good. Christianity not only commends its doctrine when it is hated of the world, but only then reaches its true grandeur"." Again, "Being now close to Rome," he wrote, "I think of many things in God ; but I keep myself in subjection, lest I should yield to pride. It is a moment in which to tremble, lest I should be exalted above measure. Those who call me martyr, scourge me. I rejoice in the suffering, but I know not if I am worthy of it". That which Ignatius so eagerly sought in death, was the full possession of Jesus Christ. "I crave for no mortal food ; I desire no earthly pleasure. I want the bread of God, which is the body of Christ ; I want to drink His blood, which is immortal love." These words reveal the whole soul of Ignatius, the deep piety, the fervent love to Christ, and the tone of exalted and mystical feeling, which is ordinary to him. It is easy to understand how such a man might become an object of ridicule in the eyes of the cynical and sceptical philosophers of an age of declining piety. After enduring torture in humility and obscurity, Ignatius was made the victim of the biting raillery of Lucian, who, as we shall presently show, was undoubtedly aiming at him in his "Peregrinus," little deeming, when he did so, that he was furnishing valuable evidence to those who in after days would seek to establish the authenticity of the martyr's letters.

The "Acts of Ignatius" narrate in detail the circumstances preceding his torture, the impatience of the soldiers who hurried on his march, in order to arrive in Rome before the end of the public games ; the eagerness of the Christians to meet him, and finally, his last words, obviously borrowed from his letters. This whole story, however, is of no historical value. Like St. Peter and St. Paul, Ignatius came to his end obscurely. Nothing is more remote from the melo- dramatic than the death of the saints.

He left behind him, in Asia Minor, a young man, raised, perhaps by John himself,t to the office of elder in the Church of Smyrna, and destined to exercise a great influence over the Christians in those countries. This young man was Polycarp. Ignatius had already noted in him remarkable steadfastness in the faith. He was planted upon the rock of apostolic teaching. The Church which he governed was one of the most flourishing in Asia Minor, and is exhibited to us in the Revelation as displaying courageous fidelity under persecution. Polycarp had been the immediate disciple of St. John, and ever cherished his sacred memory. It was the constant theme of his conversation and preaching. Irenaeus, who was the disciple of Polycarp, writes : "I could point out the spot where the blessed Polycarp sat to teach. I could describe his gait, his countenance, all his habits, even the clothes he was accustomed to wear. I could repeat the discourses which he delivered to the people, and recall all that he said of his intimacy with St. John, and the narratives he used to relate about those who had seen the Lord upon earth. His memory was constantly dwelling on that which they had told him of the words, the miracles, the doctrine of Christ." This valuable testimony shows how eminently qualified was Polycarp, for effecting the transition from the apostolic to the following age. He delighted to be the docile, almost passive echo of the apostles. It is not surprising, therefore, that he should not have displayed much originality, though commanding such universal respect. He was the living tradition of the Church. His letter to the Philippians is quite in harmony with the idea Irenaeus gives us of him. He appeals perpetually to the memory of the apostles, and as he is addressing a Church founded by St. Paul, he invokes especially the name of the apostle of the Gentiles. "It is not in arrogance," he says, "I write to you these things, but because you have constrained me. In truth, I am not more able than any other, to reproduce the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who, when he was with you, taught you the truth with all firmness and faithfulness, and who, being absent, wrote to you epistles, by which, if you rightly give heed to them, you will be built up in the faith." His epistle, written shortly after the death of Ignatius, gives evidence that he had already attained a remarkable maturity in the Christian life. It is especially valuable for the information it contains as to the internal condition of the Churches. Polycarp sets himself to redress some abuses which had crept in at Philippi ; he especially deprecates the love of money, which had become the cause of grave disorders. Like his master, he burns with indignation against heresy, and upbraids it in words which call to mind the epistles of John. He says: "He who wrests, according to his own evil heart, the words of the Lord Jesus, saying that there is no resurrection or judgment, is the firstborn of Satan. I pray you all to give heed to the word of righteousness, and to exercise yourselves in all patience, as has been done, not only by those whom you have seen (Ignatius, Sozimus, and Rufus), but by many others who have gone forth from you, as well as by Paul and the other apostles". Polycarp is ever a faithful follower of tradition ; his gaze turns by preference backwards. A very ancient biography, annexed to an old Latin manuscript of his epistle, speaks of him as the first bishop of Asia. This aspiring epithet gives proof of his great influence. The latter part of his life belongs not to the transition era, but to the history of the second century. We shall have occasion to recur to it presently. It is enough for us now to remark that he repaired to Rome to confer with Anicetus on the question of Easter, and that he there met Marcion, whom he treated very roughly. He was put to death under Marcus Aurelius. The "Acts of his Martyrdom" is a valuable document for the history of the persecutions under the Antonines. If Polycarp showed less impatience for death than Ignatius, he was no less courageous when the hour of suffering came. He had fled into the country to escape his pursuers, and was betrayed, under stress of torture, by a young man, who knew of his hiding-place. Aged as he was, his spirit never for a moment faltered. None can forget his reply to the proconsul, who urged him to blaspheme Christ and save his life. "Eighty and six years have I served Him," Polycarp answered, "and He has done me no wrong. How then shall I curse my King and my Saviour?". The following prayer, of which there is no reason to doubt the genuineness, is said to be his: "Almighty God, the Father of Thy well-beloved Son Jesus Christ, by whom we have learned to know Thee, I bless Thee that Thou hast counted me worthy, in this day and in this hour, to take a place among Thy martyrs, and to drink of the cup of Thy Christ, for the resurrection unto eternal life of my soul and body. May I be accepted of Thee as a sacrifice well-pleasing in Thy sight. I laud, I bless, I magnify Thee for all that which has befallen me."

Two other apostolic Fathers form part of this group of the representatives of Paul's teaching : Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, and Aristides the philosopher, the two first apologists of Christianity. They belong to the transition period, for Quadratus says, in the fragment of his "Apology" which has come down to us, that there were still in his day some miraculous cures wrought by Jesus Christ. All we know of these two writers is, that both pleaded the cause of Christianity with the Emperor Adrian. Aristides evidently belonged to a school far removed from Judaism, since he appeals without hesitation to the testimony of the Greek philosophers. St. Jerome regards the "Apology" of Quadratus as a very useful book, full of reason and of faith.

 

II. The Fathers of the Church under the Antonines.

If we except Polycarp, who belongs rather to the age of the apostolic Fathers, we have only two names to quote during this period. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus leave far behind all the other teachers or bishops of the age of the Antonines. The most important episcopal sees are occupied by men of fervent piety and firm courage, but of only average, and sometimes narrow, intellect. The Church of Rome had in succession, at its head, Sixtus, who was arrested in the catacombs; Telesphorus, whose martyrdom produced a deep sensation; and Anicetus, distinguished for his large and liberal views, though differing from Polycarp on some secondary points. Anicetus never ceased to show a respectful deference to him, and during Polycarp's sojourn in Rome, asked him to preside, instead of himself, at a consecration of elders. To Anicetus succeeded, first, Soter, whose active charity is known to us through Dionysius of Corinth ; then Eleuther and Victor, the latter of whom made himself prominent by his despotic pretensions in the question of Easter, and called forth, at the beginning of the succeeding period, a lively and legitimate opposition on the part of the bishops of Asia Minor and Gaul.

During the bishopric of Anicetus there arrived in Rome a Christian from Palestine, already known for his piety, who had undertaken a long journey to inquire into the state of the Churches. He was named Hegesippus. The cast of his mind was thoroughly Jewish; he was an entire stranger to the speculative genius of Greece, and paid more attention to facts than to ideas. He found himself, therefore, much at home in the Church of Rome, which in many respects corresponded to the Judaic type. Hegesippus had met, on board the vessel in which he made his voyage, Primus, Bishop of Corinth, and had had much conversation with him. At his invitation, he had spent some time in the Church of Corinth, and had rejoiced to find the Christians there walking in all things according to apostolic tradition. To him, tradition was a thing of primary importance ; he even attached some value to the oral tradition of the Jews. He ignored the truth that in Christianity, even more than in Judaism, conformity to the letter by no means necessarily implies conformity to the spirit. Injustice, however, has been done to Hegesippus, when he has been regarded as a Judaising-Christian. The high esteem in which he was held in Greece and Rome, the explicit adherence he gives to the doctrine which predominated in the West, negative any such idea. Hegesippus had undoubtedly a mind of Jewish order. James, of whom he has drawn a striking portrait, was his ideal, rather than St. Paul ; but he does not diverge on a single point from the orthodoxy of his time ; he is, indeed, only too much in accord with the Western Church in the extravagant love of tradition. His first concern at Rome was to draw up an exact list of the bishops who had succeeded each other in the government of that Church. His memoirs appear to have been rather a polemical treatise against the heretics than a history, properly so called, of the first ages of the Church. His leaning to tradition leads him to give the foremost place in his dissertations to the exposition of facts.

A short time after Hegesippus' journey to Corinth, the Church of that city was governed by a bishop who exerted a very wide influence. Dionysius had as much eloquence as learning; by his activity in correspondence he took the oversight of a large diocese, sending his counsels throughout Greece, Asia Minor, and Italy. "Not content," says Eusebius, "with the labours of his diocese, he generously extended his benefits to the other Churches". Dionysius was a true member of the Church universal, a representative of real Catholicity. Such largeness of heart and breadth of charity were becoming more and more rare, while hierarchical lines of division were fast multiplying. Dionysius of Corinth was not a man of great intellect ; his letters indicate a certain amount of credulity. For example, he accepts without examination an absurd legend current in Corinth, according to which that Church owed its foundation to the united efforts of Peter and Paul. He exhibits no great learning nor force of argument, but all the fragments of his writings which remain, are full of benevolence ; they breathe the spirit of primitive times, the spirit of living Christian unity. This atones for many errors. Dionysius of Corinth pleads that a helping hand be held out to Christians who have fallen and are repentant ; he wisely counsels Pinytus, Bishop of the Church of Pontus, who seems to have been an ardent follower after imaginary perfection, not to push the practice of asceticism to extremes, because of the weakness of the flesh.

At the same time, Athenagoras the apologist was living in Athens. In Asia Minor we find several influential bishops, almost all engaged in the conflict with heresy, and in the determination of the date of the Easter festival. First among these is Apollinaris, Bishop of Hieropolis, who is already known to us by his Apology, and who endeavours to crush the nascent heresy of Montanus. He wrote two books against the Jews, and a treatise on the Easter festival. He was a man of strong and cultivated mind, and pleaded the cause of the Church with wisdom and dignity. Theodoret said of him subsequently, that he was versed in all sacred and profane literature. Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, displayed a zeal equal to that of Apollinaris, in the polemics against heresy, and in the defence of Christianity. His book "To Antolicus" is a philosophical apology for the new religion, too deeply tinged with Platonism. He wrote a treatise against Marcion. He is also known by his commentaries upon Scripture. Serapion, who presided after him over the Church of Antioch, was distinguished in the controversy against Montanism. We may mention also Philip, Bishop of Crete, who, as well as Modestus, engaged in controversy with Marcion; Rhodo, at first a disciple of Tatian, afterwards an opponent of Gnosticism; Musanus, known for his refutation of the heresy of the Encratites; Apollonius, whose writings against the Montanists were afterwards refuted by Tertullian. The most eminent bishop of Asia Minor at this period was Melito of Sardis, apologist and theologian. St. Jerome extols his eloquence. He took part in all the controversies, and treated of all the great questions of his day. He defended Christianity against the calumnies of the people and the sophistries of the philosophers; in opposition to Marcion, he established the dogma of the Incarnation, and maintained the oriental practice in the celebration of Easter. To judge by the title of one of his works, "The Key," he appears to have lent the force of his example to the symbolical exegesis, for which Christian antiquity had so decided a taste. But his especial study was prophecy. Not satisfied with making known the life of the great prophets, he also wrote a commentary on the Revelation; full of ardent anticipation of the return of Jesus Christ. Melito carried a generous enthusiasm into all he said and did. Thus, he did not hesitate to undertake a long journey in Palestine to acquire information as to the canonicity of the Old Testament. He was an extreme ascetic, and Polycarp called him the Eunuch Melito, alluding no doubt to those who, the Gospel says, have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of God's sake. "He did all," says Polycarp again, "under the guidance of the Divine Spirit, and the Church recognised in him a true prophet". We can well understand the lively admiration felt by the Church for a bishop who had defended it against both paganism and heresy, and who, without deviating from the straight road of orthodoxy, yet gratified the favourite tendencies of the Church, by the ascetic severity of his life, the subtlety of his symbolism, and the oriental tone of his prophetic teachings.

The Church of Asia had also at this period a bishop of great eminence. This was Polycrates of Ephesus, who wrote at the close of the second century a powerful letter to Victor, in which he conveys the positive decision arrived at by the bishops of Asia Minor, assembled at Caesarea, to adhere to the oriental practice in the observance of Easter.

We have already spoken of Justin Martyr as the firm and eloquent advocate of Christianity with the emperors. Let us now endeavour to sketch the features of his moral character as manifested in his life.

Justin was born, in the year 103, at Nicopolis, of a pagan family, which had probably emigrated from Greece into Samaria, at the commencement of the second century. He was thus placed from his cradle midway between Judaism and Paganism, both of which he was in turn victoriously to combat. He seems to have possessed some private fortune, which enabled him to undertake numerous journeys. He was completely the man of his age, familiar with all its troubles and sufferings, though escaping its corruption. He represented its best aspirations, free from the impure admixture which elsewhere stifled or alloyed them. The dreary void left in the world by the dethroned gods, whose place was still unfilled; the restless disquiet of heart, the craving after truth, while truth seemed to flee before the seeker like the mirage of the desert sand, all thsse characteristic traits of the crisis of the age were found in this young oriental Greek, whose earnest, impassioned soul proudly rejected the base allurements of a brilliant and corrupt state of society, the luxury of which was equalled by its licentiousness. He was as much a stranger to vulgar ambition as to sensual gratifications. No frequenter of the Forum, of camps or of palaces, he had early assumed the mantle of the philosopher, and set before him as his aim, the acquisition of truth. This he was resolved to seek till he should find, and if need be to travel over the whole world in his search. In this age of universal eclecticism, all the old schools had their representatives, and it was possible in a few years to pursue the whole course marked out by centuries of human thought. Justin pursued unwearyingly this toilsome pilgrimage, which, apart from the Gospel, led to neither resting-place nor goal. He has described with eloquent simplicity this troubled period of his life, in which each new effort ended only in deeper disappointment. His first halting-place was the Stoical school, which by its austerity was wont to attract to itself lofty and noble spirits; but had he become a full disciple of this school, he must have renounced the great problems of philosophy, which were forbidden to its alumni as a puerile amusement. Beneath this proud pretension there lurked, in truth, an unworthy surrender of the powers of thought. The young Greek, whose soul was burning to comprehend the deep things of metaphysics, soon turned away from these masters, who hid their impotence under a veil of scorn, and turned to the Peripatetics. In the teacher to whom he thus addressed himself, however, he found one who sought lucre rather than true learning, and professed philosophy for the sake of the honorarium it brought. Nothing could be more irritating than such a discovery to a mind like Justin's, seeking the pure ideal, and he broke away at once from the Peripatetics. At this period the ancient Pythagorean school was in great repute, owing to its oriental mysticism, which harmonised with the then predominant current of thought. Justin came up to this door and knocked; but while Plato had been content with inscribing over the portal of his school, "None but a geometrician may enter here," the Pythagorean demanded, as the condition of entrance, not only a perfect acquaintance with geometry, but also with music and astronomy. Justin Martyr was not a man of simply curious mind, he had a soul hungering and thirsting after light and truth. Such an initiation as was thus demanded, would have required a lifetime of labour ; and a knowledge of the stars and of musical measures seemed to him of secondary importance, compared with that which he longed to know. To gain it would be to spend life in the porch of the Temple, without ever entering the holy place. In following next the steps of the Platonist school, Justin thought that he had at length crossed the sacred threshold. He was entranced with the contemplation of the ideal world presented to him; he seemed to have found wings with which to soar above himself. But this ideal world was a cold region of pure intellect, whose pallid gleam, struggling with shadows, could not warm the heart or change the life. Once again Justin turned away baffled. He had already some vague notions of the truth of Christianity. He tells us in his second "Apology" of the deep impression produced upon him by the sight of the martyrs. He says: "At the time when I was delighting in the doctrines of Plato, and even while I was listening to the calumnies cast upon the Christians, I said to myself, as I saw them so dauntless in death and in the midst of perils which the world esteems so terrible, that it was impossible they should be men living in lust and crime". This heart-stirring spectacle had prepared him to receive the call of God.

Seeking solitude, that he might meditate with a mind more disengaged from outward things, he was walking one day by the side of a lake in his own country, when he met an aged man, whose countenance was full of gravity and sweetness. He looked like a philosopher, but one who had found peace in his philosophy. They entered naturally into conversation. The old man could read in Justin's face the feeling with which his heart was filled, the unslaked thirst after truth. He skilfully touched the vulnerable point, by showing the young man that his philosophy had no influence on his moral life, and still left him a prey to the most agonising uncertainty on the gravest problems.

''Where, then," exclaimed Justin, "is the truth to be found, if not among the philosophers?"

"Long before the philosophers," the old man replied, "there lived in the olden times happy and righteous men, the friends of God; they spoke by His Spirit; they were called prophets; they told to men that which they had heard and learned from the Holy Spirit; they worshipped God, the Creator and Father of all creatures; they adored His Son Jesus Christ. Ask thou that the gates of light may be opened to thee now".

This had been Justin's one desire from his youth up; the old man had shown him in what direction to look for the opening ol those gates of light. Having listened to the philosophers, he now turns to the prophets and to Him who is as far above the greatest of the prophets, as the heaven is above the earth, the Eternal Word, of whom he will be henceforward the full and faithiul witness.

The conversion of Justin was the consummation 0f a long inward struggle. He did not feel himself bound as a Christian, to overturn the ladder by which he had painfully climbed to the footstool of the truth. He always regarded Platonism as a preparation of the heathen world for Christianity, and he read the history of humanity in the light of his own personal experience. He knew that before he became acquainted with the true, living Christ, through the medium of revelation, he had been led to yearn after Him by his studies in philosophy, and yet more by the deepest needs of his own heart and mind. The Word did not come like a stranger to him ; a dim prophetic dawn had filled his soul, before the sun shone forth upon him in its strength and the fulness of the noontide light did not make him despise the early glimmerings of the day. Persuaded that the same aspirations might lead to the same results in others, he was ever anxious to appeal to these secret yearnings, to this latent fragmentary form of Christianity, which needed only the completion which the Gospel brought, in order to lead his contemporaries to the foot of the Cross. Justin, as a Christian, did not therefore cease to respect philosophy, and in order to make it patent to all that in becoming a disciple of Jesus Christ, he had not abandoned the quest and love of wisdom, but on the contrary had had revealed to him the highest wisdom, he still wore the mantle of the philosopher. He did so from no desire to escape the honourable reproach of the disciples of J,esus Christ. "I have cast aside," he says, "all the vain desires of men, I glory now only in being a Christian, and there is nothing I so much desire as to appear as a Christian in the face of the world". Henceforward, the entire life of Justin will be one ardent apostolate ; a lay apostolate indeed, resting on no other authority than that conferred by his own zeal and fervent convictions, but none the less real. His long and earnest pursuit of truth made him esteem it at its true value; he had experienced all the mental struggles of his contemporaries, and thus knowing at once the sickness and the remedy, he was admirably prepared to be an effective missionary,one of those true comforters, who have learned by their own experience of suffering how to solace others. He never lost for a single day the sense of the deep responsibility resting on the witness of the truth. He felt this equally in regard to Jews, pagans, and heretics. While acknowledging that nothing was more difficult to overcome than the obstinacy of the adherents of the synagogue, he thus addressed them: "I know that, as the Word of God has said, this great wisdom is hidden from your eyes. It is in compassion for you that I feel constrained, cost me what it may, to plead with you to believe these Divine paradoxes, that I may at least be found guiltless in the day of judgment". "The fear of the judgment of God," he says again, "makes me not cease to confer with the men of your nation, to see if I may not find some one among you, who may be saved by the grace of the Lord of hosts". "I must tell you, without flattery or disguise, all that I think. Has not the Lord said, 'The sower went forth to sow'? I must needs speak in the hope that some word may fall like seed into good ground; for the Lord, when He comes again in power and great glory, will call every one to account for that which he has received". Justin declared again and again in his "Apology" that he should hold himself guilty of the ignorance of the pagans, if he did not do all in his power to dispel it. He felt an equal responsibility with regard to the heretics. "Hence it is", he says, "that we seek every opportunity to confer with you". He epitomises all that he feels on this subject in this noble utterance : "Every man who can bear witness to the truth, and does it not, will be judged of God".

Faithful to his convictions, Justin never for a day relaxed his efforts to spread the faith. We have seen with how much dignity in his two Apologies he defends the Church before the emperors. Not content with this public and striking testimony, he has repeated conferences with the Jews and pagans wherever he meets them, and as the time for pronouncing summary anathemas has not yet come, he employs the same means with the heretics. In these discussions he exhibits great patience and firmness; it is evident that he is always actuated by the purest motives. He appears to have travelled much. We find him at Ephesus, where his famous interview with the Jew Trypho took place, the memory of which he has preserved to us in writing. Again we see him at Rome, opposing a false philosopher named Crescens, connected with the sect of the Cynics. Such courageous fidelity deserved to be owned and recompensed; this apostolic man was to wear the crown of an apostle. Already, in his second Apology, Justin Martyr expresses his foreboding of his approaching end. "I expect," he says, "to be taken in the toils of these false philosophers, and to suffer a death of ignominy, perhaps at the instigation of Crescens, who better deserves to be called the friend of fame and of luxury, than the friend of wisdom. He publicly charges the Christians with atheism and impiety, and that without any evidence, and merely to gratify the prejudices of the people". Justin tells us that he had in public closed Crescens' mouth. The latter, in his anger, sought to avenge himself as a man of such a disposition and of such a school would naturally do; and it was probably on his denunciation that Justin was thrown into prison. He appeared with some fellow Christians before the tribunal of the prefect of the city. Strangely enough, this magistrate was a philosopher of the Stoics, Rusticus, one of the instructors of Marcus Aurelius. The two doctrines were brought face to face, the one seated on the judgment-seat, the other at the bar. The unworthy spirit manifested by the pagan philosophers under such circumstances, is peculiarly marked in the case of Justin. He was, as he had always been, dignified and firm, without bravado. He plainly confessed the great philosophy of Christ, in which, after such long and weary seeking, he had found rest at last. When asked to define this philosophy, he expressed, in a few forcible words, his faith in the God of heaven and earth, and in His Son, "the Master of truth," adding humbly, "that he was too unworthy to say anything worthy of Him". The prefect, interspersing his interrogatory with jocose raillery, asked Justin if he supposed he would ascend into heaven when his head was cut off. "I know it," he said; "yes, beyond all power to doubt, I know it". When he was urged to offer sacrifice, he replied, "Our great desire is to suffer for Christ; for that will give us confidence before His awful judgment-seat, at the bar of which the whole world will have to stand". The sentence was pronounced and executed the same day. Thus died Justin, rightly surnamed by the ancient Church, "Justin the Martyr;" for the truth never had a witness more disinterested, more courageous, more worthy of the hatred of a godless age and of the approval of Heaven. The largeness of his heart and mind equalled the fervour of his zeal, and both were based on his Christian charity. Justin derived all his eloquence from his heart ; his natural genius was not of rare order, but the experiences of his early life, illumined by revelation, became the source of much fruitful suggestion for himself, and gave to the Church a heritage of thought, which, ripened and developed at Alexandria, was to become the basis of the great apology of Christianity. If we except the beautiful doctrine of the Word germinally present in every man, there was little originality in Justin's theological ideas. In exegesis he is subtle, and sometimes puerile; in argument he flags, but where his heart speaks, he stands forth in all his moral greatness, and his earnest, generous words, are ever quick and telling. Had he remained a pagan he would have lived unnoted in erudite mediocrity. Christianity fired and fertilised his genius, and it is the glowing soul which we chiefly love to trace in all his writings.

While Justin Martyr represented the speculative tendencies of the Eastern Church in their period of formation, Irenaeus occupies an intermediate position between the East and West, and in a manner unites the two. Born in Asia Minor in the year 140, he passed the greater part of his life in Central Gaul. He writes in Greek, and thinks often like a Roman. Essentially moderate in his mode of thought, he tones down, so as to conciliate them, tendencies which seemed directly opposed. An earnest apostle of ecclesiastical unity, he laboured effectually to realise his idea, by drawing together lines which had hitherto seemed divergent, and fusing as it were into one comprehensive system of doctrine, all the main elements of the Christian thought of his day. Hence the large influence which he exercised during his life, and which only went on increasing after his death. Irenaeus was equally removed from the speculative boldness of many of the Fathers of the following age, and from the narrow and passionate realism of Tertullian. He was peculiarly distinguished by the harmony and equilibrium of his spirit. Such as he was as a theologian he was also as a bishop, and he showed as much moderation and wisdom in the direction of souls as in the discussion of doctrines. His calm and gentle piety is reflected in his writings. All these qualities, illuminated and idealised in the memory of the Church by a glorious death, assured to Irenaeus an influence exceptionally broad and lasting. He was unanimously considered to be the greatest bishop of the second century, and the representative of the catholicity of the day. He contributed to strengthen the hierarchical system by his love of order and of tradition, but the best service he rendered it was in constraining it to moderate its premature pretensions.

Irenaeus passed his youth in Asia Minor, at a time when the memory of the apostolic age was still vivid. His master was Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, and their intercourse, as he himself tells us in a passage we have already quoted, left a deep impression upon Irenaeus. He was never weary of listening to the words of the beloved disciple, as they were recalled by the pious Bishop of Smyrna. We find also, from various allusions in his book, "Contra Haeres.," that he was brought into contact with several men of the generation which had seen and listened to the apostles. Thus, treading a soil watered and fertilised by the tears and travail of the first witnesses of the truth, living in the midst of the Churches founded by them, close to the very cradle of Christianity, listening to the narratives of Polycarp with the glowing imagination of youth and the tender emotion of a loving heart, the glorious past became to the young Irenaeus a living reality, which he beheld through the medium of his own impressions. A man thus filled with a great enthusiasm could not be a critic; he became the eager recipient of all tradition. Thus, while he merits the highest confidence as a disciple of Polycarp, it must be admitted that on minor points, he is sometimes the echo of a tradition already more or less legendary. But the most important result of these days, passed under such happy auspices in Smyrna, was an exaggerated estimate formed in the mind of Irenaeus, of oral tradition, to which he was disposed to attach sovereign authority in the Church. He raised to the height of a universal rule the favoured experiences of his own youth, forgetting that Christians would not always be able to sit at the feet of a disciple of John, and that as the distance widened between the stream of tradition and its source, its waters would become less and less pure. It is evident from the writings of Irenaeus that he did not confine himself to gathering up the memories of the Church, but that he also studied carefully the old pagan literature. For such studies he was very favourably placed, for the higher culture of Greece had, next to Alexandria, no more brilliant school than in the cities of Asia Minor. Subsequently Irenaeus turned his vast knowledge to account in his controversy with Gnosticism, the obscure beginnings of which in his own country he was able to trace. He was still young when he came into Gaul. In order to account for this journey, it is not necessary to suppose, as Gregory of Tours has done, an official commission given by Polycarp to Irenaeus. The bond between the various Churches was very close, and especially so between Gaul and Asia Minor, through the relations of commerce. Irenaeus, immediately on his arrival at Lyons; was made one of the elders of the Church of that city, and became, in fact, through the confidence placed in him by the old Bishop Pothinus, its director and head. The times were searching : persecution was raging with extraordinary fury, and the East had not only sent into Gaul some strong Christians like Irenaeus, it had also sent heretics, who were the more dangerous that they were scarcely suspected, and might catch the Gauls unawares in the simplicity of their faith. Irenaeus, under these circumstances, exerted a most happy influence. We have a striking proof of the confidence which he inspired, in the letter of which the Church of Lyons made him the bearer to Rome. They wrote to the Bishop of that city : "We have prayed our brother and colleague Irenaeus to bear to thee these letters. We commend him to thee as a devoted servant of the testament of Christ."

The journey undertaken by Irenaeus had a twofold object. He was first to appeal to the sympathy of the Christians on behalf of the much-suffering martyrs of Lyons, and next to convey and uphold their opinion on one of the questions then most deeply agitating the Church. This was the heresy of Montanus, who had gained many adherents at Lyons as in Italy. The Montanists had not as yet broken with the orthodox Church, and meanwhile they were calling forth hot discussions among the Christians. It seems that at Rome the Church was fluctuating between fatal compliance and futile severity. The Christians of Lyons desired to make known their decided opinion to the Bishop, who, according to Tertullian, had fallen to some extent under the influence of Montanism. Their counsel seems to have been both wise and moderate, and no more fit messenger could have been found to convey it than Irenaeus, the apostle of conciliation, who had, so to speak, beheld the very birth of Montanism. We do not know precisely what was the result of his mission. It is certain, however, that he fulfilled it with much zeal. The Church of Rome was a very important one in the view of Irenaeus, not as the centre of a hierarchy which had in truth no existence, but as an apostolic Church and the focus of primitive tradition in the West. It was of the first moment to Irenaeus, viewing tradition as he did, that there should be no extinction or obscuration of a light, designed to enlighten a multitude of Churches, which could not have recourse to the other centres of apostolic teaching, since these were all in the East. His sojourn at Rome was not without influence on his own mental development. His circle of ideas and of experience widened; he became better acquainted with various heresies, which he met with in the metropolis of the empire. Probably also his love of tradition strengthened, as it fed on all the memorials, more or less authentic, treasured up of the great apostles who had preached in Rome.

When he returned to Lyons, the aged Bishop Pothinus was dead, and the Church itself was decimated by persecution. A firm hand was needed to steer the vessel through the terrible storm still muttering thunder. Irenaeus had already been designated for the bishopric, and he accepted it with joy in the day of danger. To do so, was to prepare himself for martyrdom. After the fearful persecution under Marcus Aurelius, some respite was granted to the Church, and it reaped the glorious fruits of the bloody seed-sowing of the previous years. A crowd of neophytes thronged to its gates. According to Gregory of Tours, Irenaeus carried the Gospel to the greater part of the inhabitants of Lyons. These days of tranquillity were not all gain to the truth. Heresy, too, was busy in the work of perversion. The facility of communication between Gaul and Asia Minor, had led to Lyons some of those false teachers who were the crafty ministers of error, and who crept unawares into the Church. Irenaeus has given us a striking picture of them. He shows us the heretics insinuating themselves into families, and, under a mask of orthodoxy, using all means to subvert the faith, gaining an influence over the susceptible minds of some, and flattering the pride of all. Similar attempts at perversion were made at this time through the entire Church. The pious bishop sought to oppose error by unmasking it, and in the year 180 he wrote his book "Against Heresies", to which we shall have to make constant reference, when we come to our exposition of orthodox doctrine in the second century.For the present; we shall only give an outline of its general character. Written in a bold and simple style, this book faithfully reflects the soul of Irenaeus. It exhibits neither the philosophic boldness of Alexandria, nor the fierce fervour of Carthage. The author invariably pursues that middle track, which it was his nature to prefer. Tradition fills a large place in this work, and is appealed to as the paramount rule of faith. This book contributed more than any other theological work of the times, to establish the ecclesiastical authority, not upon a monarchical basis such as it subsequently received, but upon the principles of a sort of episcopal aristocracy. Irenaeus displays throughout his unfailing moderation; he discusses rather than condemns; he does not thunder anathemas on every page, as is too commonly done by the champions of orthodoxy. We feel that while he holds error in hearty detestation, he is full of compassion for the heretics. He expresses this pity very nobly in the following passage : "If we publish their errors, they themselves confirm them, teach them, and boast of them. We, for our part, entreat them not to remain longer in the ditch they have made for themselves with their own hands, and to forsake those shades of darkness, so that, coming into the Church of God, they may be born to the true life; that Jesus Christ may be formed in them, and that they may know the Creator and Governor of the universe, the only true God and Lord over all. This is our desire for them, and we love them better than they love themselves. The love we bear to them is sincere, and it will be well for them if they respond to it, for it is like a bitter medicine designed to cleanse and heal. Therefore, while multiplying our efforts for their conversion, we never cease to hold out to them friendly hands."

The plan of the great work of Irenaeus, which is divided into five books, is very simple. The author himself indicates, in the preface to his third book, the plan of the first three. He commences by describing the proceedings of the heretics, then he gives a complete exposition of their doctrines and of their life. The second book is a detailed refutation of their errors ; the third resumes the refutation from a Scriptural point of view, by quotations of the sacred text. The two last books refer especially to the words 0f Christ and of the Apostles. Happy age in which, instead of seeking to repress heresy by proscription and violence, the Church combated it with the lawful weapons of earnest and thoughtful discussion! The letter to the heretic Florinus, preserved to us by Eusebius, and containing the precious fragment about Polycarp, is written from the same stand-point as the book against heresy.

If the great Bishop of Lyons showed himself a zealous defender of the episcopate and of tradition, he did not in any way recognise the primacy of one bishop over the rest, nor anything like the false and mechanical unity constituted by decrees proceeding from Rome. In the controversy raised about the celebration of Easter, he maintained, in opposition to Bishop Victor, the rights of Christian freedom. While approving the practice of the West, he strongly opposed the sentence of excommunication pronounced by the Bishop of Rome upon the bishops of Asia Minor; and he gained for his opinion the weight of a synodal decision, passed at Lyons in an assembly of the bishops of Gaul. It seems that this step taken by Irenaeus had all the success desired, for in the next century Firmilianus affirmed that peace had been preserved in the Church until the episcopate of Stephen. This assertion proves that the troubles in the time of Victor had been speedily quieted.

According to Gregory of Tours, Irenaeus suffered martyrdom under Severus, in the year 197. He left a memory respected by all, and his influence went on augmenting after his death, in many respects for the good of the Church, but also to the detriment of her liberty; for he had laid down principles, which in their ultimate consequences would tend to establish that very hierarchy, the early pretensions of which he had so earnestly sought to keep in subjection.