reflecting his glory, has waned with the queen of heaven, and been almost shrouded behind the dense accumulating clouds of error and superstition. The gloomy portraiture of the book of Judges follows immediately upon the glorious records of Joshua. The noble seed became "the degenerate plant of a strange vine unto the Lord." The true Israel was concealed amidst the vicious idolatry of the Jews at large, and the frivolous traditions of their elders. The covenant made on their redemption out of Egypt, the promise that his Spirit should always remain with them, which Haggai so distinctly specifies, seemed to have been broken. "I, even I only, am left," said Elijah: "If ye can find a man, if there be any that executeth judgment, that seeketh the truth, I will pardon" Jerusalem, saith the Lord.* But he never made a full end" with them, nor cast off the people whom he foreknew," but still reserved to himself a faithful remnant, the objects of his special grace, amongst whom the stream of blessing still ran on, secretly but surely! + The case before us seems to me strikingly parallel : the cry of the psalmist must have been often repeated; "Help, Lord, for the godly man ceaseth; the faithful are minished from amongst the children of men." True believers lived and died, alike unknown by the world, and dishonoured by the worldly church. Their fame occupies but little space in the annals of men; their only record is on high. It is enough Felix, qui vivus, moriensque fefellit! We see the husk, not the kernel. This seems to be the only sufficient answer which has ever been given to * Jerem. v. 1. † 1 Kings xix. 18; Rom. xi. 1, 5; Ps. lxxxiii. 3. the jeering question of the Romanist :-"Where was your church before the days of Luther?" With reference to the interval between the fifth and fifteenth centuries, those days of darkness that might be felt, I conclude that you would readily admit the accuracy of my position. Later corruptions are at least notorious. My object is to prove their early origin, and their extensive prevalence in the page of ecclesiastical history to which you refer. The Therapeute of Egypt and of the adjacent regions, alluded to by Pliny, and more particularly described by Philo, seem to have been a branch of the Essenes, mere contemplative ascetics. But Eusebius,* who was a great admirer of Origen, and of what was already termed a philosophic life, was naturally willing to find an early precedent in the christian church, and so he thought, or at least roundly affirms that these men were the followers of Jesus, and that their rules were those of the professors in his day. Could we adduce a stronger and more decisive proof of the prevalence of corruption, almost obliterating the distinguishing features of real Christianity? Or who can detect anything of the mind of Emmanuel in the cold austerities, the fiery temper,† the filth, the pretended miracles of the ignorant and arrogant monks, and their useless lives? (A.) Asceticism ate away all the moral virtue, dignity, and godliness of the empire. We contemplate the picture with pain, under a deep sense of the miserable weakness of the human understanding and the extent of our corruption, * Hist. Eccles. 1. 2, c. 17. See also Præp. Evang. 1. 8, c. 11, 12 ; l. 9, c. 3. Josephus Hist. Bell. Jud. lib. 2, c. 8, p. 161. + Murderous intent! Socrates, 1. 6. c. 7; 1. 7. c. 14. (A.) See Appendix. but we cannot be surprised at the sneers of the philosopher.* "Fas est et ab hoste doceri." It is not improbable that the example of the Essenes, and the necessary hardships to which the fugitive Christians were exposed, when they fled from their homes to avoid persecution, and were compelled to wander in desolate places, may have paved the way to the monastic system.† But as Tertullian says, the devil had anticipated the church, and the rites of paganism and the tenets of Platonic philosophy were therefore, in some points, eagerly imitated. The body must be mortified by every true believer, but it was called "the prison of the soul," and the cry, "Touch not, taste not, handle not," was repeated notwithstanding apostolic warning, with too successful zeal. 66 The result is forcibly stated by the Bishop of Lincoln. Fasting, instead of being considered as a salutary discipline, or as a means to holiness, came to be regarded as holiness itself. The piety of men was estimated by the frequency and severity of their fasts. In proportion as they subjected themselves to greater privations and hardships, they acquired a higher reputation for sanctity. A species of rivalry was thus excited, and strange methods were invented of macerating and torturing their bodies, till at length, extravagance in practice led to error in doctrine; fasts and mortifications were regarded as meritorious in themselves, as procuring by their intrinsic efficacy, remission of sins and restoration to the favour of God."§ . Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ch. 37. † Sozomen, 1. 1, c. 12; with Cyprian, Ep. 56. Cum autem Dei sacramenta Satanas adfectat, provocatio est nostra, imo suffusio si pigri sumus, &c., de Exhort. Cast. c. 13. Account of Tertullian, &c., p. 424. The enthusiasm of Sozomen, in the fifth century, knew no bounds. The Ascetics were "the men who adorned the Church, and by their virtues upheld Christianity. Theirs was the philosophy which a bountiful God had given to man, as a most edifying system of unstudied wisdom, by which wickedness might be eradicated, or at least greatly restrained."* The admirable Julian of Edessa lived such an incorporeal (not spiritual) life, that he had become nothing but skin and bone.† The grazing monks depastured on the mountain herbage, and seem to have envied the punishment of the proud Nebuchadnezzar. Even the more judicious Socrates praises the apostolical lives of the leading monks, and Athanasius recorded the life of Anthony the Great, with admiring zeal. The influence of this memoir is attested by Augustine, who acknowledges his miracles, and loudly praises the ornaments of the desert and their savoury habits. Angels had carried the soul of the honoured Ammon to heaven-Anthony saw them and was thus enabled to attest the divine approbation of such excellence.** But again, Eusebius had no hesitation in ascribing the last dreadful persecutions to divine vengeance, provoked by the insatiable avarice, selfishness, and bitter contentions of the ambitious prelates. (B.) We find mention of a similar temper, even in the lying shepherd of Hermes." Men, otherwise faithful and excellent, had ¶ Mores sauveolentiæ tua et ubera eremi. Confess. 1. 8, c. 6. ** Athanasius ap. Socr. 1. 4. c. 23. a certain envious spirit of rivalry on the subject of their mutual dignity and precedence."* The accounts of the savage cruelties exercised upon the Christians during the persecution, are scarcely enlivened by a single circumstance which enables us to recognize brethren of Christ in the afflicted sufferers. Two indeed are commended for their (rare) knowledge of Scripture, and one more is honourably distinguished by the fervent and suitable characters of the supplications, which he had offered up during a short interval which he had requested for prayer. The zeal of the others seems to have been false, ignorant, and headstrong. The language of one was mere sedition! " Many rulers are evil; let there be one sovereign." The conduct of another was wantonly insulting to the judge; a threatening mien seems to have confirmed his angry words! A mother persuaded her daughters to drown themselves with her, calling this their only refuge from the brutal violence of the persecutors, instead of staying themselves really upon God, and laying hold of his strength, in prayer and meek submission to his will. Eusebins has not a word of censure in any of these cases. The suicides were celebrated by Chrysostom, as the acts of illustrious martyrs.‡ The professors at Alexandria appear to have retained all the turbulent violence of the mixed rabble of that most disorderly and tumultuous city.§ The forcible * Past. Sim. 8, c. 7. † Λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις τὸν δικαστὴν ἀισχύνῃ καὶ ἀτιμία περιβαλών. Euseb. de Mart. Palæst., c. 5. Euseb. Hist. 1. 8, c. 12. Chrysost. Hom. 51; but see Augustine de Civ Dei, l. 1, c. 17. § Xάipei Tôis σTÁσeow. Socrates, Hist. 1. 7, c. 13; Evagrius Schol. Hist. 1. 2, c. 8. |