[866] It was a primitive and probably correct opinion that all the apostles were married except Paul and John—Omnes apostoli, exceptis Johanne et Paulo, uxores habuerunt.—Ambros., ad Hilar.; Clem. Alex., Strom., iii; Euseb., H. E., iii, 30; Orig., Com. in Rom.
[867] It was probably derived by them from the Essenes and other ascetic communities of the East.
[868] Orig. Eccles., iv, 4.
[869] 1 Tim. ii, 2, 12; Titus i, 6. So the Greek Church still understands him, requiring the marriage of its clergy. Tertullian, Cyprian, Gregory of Nyssa, Hilary of Poitiers, Spyridon, Synesius, and many other distinguished ecclesiastics of early times, are recorded to have been married.
[870] Socrat., i, 11; Sozom., i, 23. “Marriage is the true chastity,” exclaimed the aged bishop Paphnutius.
[871] Sacerdotal Celibacy, p. 162. The satirical songs, tales, and scandalous anecdotes concerning the celibate clergy, and the denunciations of their vice by successive councils, attest the social depravity caused by this system. The ascetic depreciation of woman led also inevitably to her moral degradation. She was described by some of the monkish writers, who thus slandered the memory of their own mothers, as a noxious animal, the very essence of evil and gate of hell, whose beauty was a lure of the devil and perpetual temptation to sin, and her very presence a contamination. The tenderest family ties were severed at the fancied call of duty. In Roman Catholic countries woman is still immured with almost oriental jealousy, and is denied the intellectual emancipation her sex elsewhere enjoys. She may not enter the most sacred places of Rome, nor visit the pope, except in mourning. There is no music for the female voice in the service of the papal chapel.
[872] Inscrip. Antiq., p. 1173.
[873] See ante, p. 428. The following is from Salonæ: FL · IVLIVS DIACONVS ET AVRELIA MERIA CONIVX EIVS HOC SARCOFAGVM (sic) SIBI VIVI POSVERVNT—“Flavius Julius, a deacon, and Aurelia Meria, his wife, while living, erected this sarcophagus for themselves.” See, also, the epitaph of Tettius Felicissimus, p. 474.
[874] The following is from the island of Salamis: Οἶκος αἰώνιος Ἀγάθωνος ἀναγνώστου καὶ Εὐφημίας.... “The everlasting dwelling of Agatho, a reader, and Euphemia...." She was probably his wife.
[875] Thus, St. Paul calls Phœbe a διάκονος, translated “servant,” of the church at Cenchria.—Rom., xvi, 1. The Christian ancillæ quæ ministræ dicebantur, whom Pliny tortured, were probably of this class.
[876] 1 Tim. v, 9.
[877] Concil. Chalcedon, c. 14.
[878] Tertul., de Veland. Virgin., c, 9. Olympias, a Christian matron of Constantinople, of noble rank, widowed at eighteen, became a deaconess, and devoted her immense fortune to charity. She was long the devoted patroness of the persecuted Chrysostom.
[879] Cypr., Ep., 62.
[880] The Fathers are enthusiastic in the praise of perpetual virginity. “It has the higher dignity, as vessels of gold and silver compared to earthenware,” says Jerome.—Adv. Jovin. “The thirty-fold increase of Scripture,” he asserts, “refers to marriage, the sixty-fold to widowhood, but the hundred-fold to virginity.”—Ad Ageruchiam. “Marriage replenishes earth,” he adds; “but virginity, heaven”—Nuptiæ terram replent, virginitas paradisum. “These sacred virgins are the necklace of the church,” says Prudentius, “and with these gems she is adorned”—Hoc est monile ecclesiæ! His illa gemmis comitur!—Peristeph., H., 3. They became in a mystical sense the spouses of Christ, and Jerome blasphemously addresses the mother of Eustochium as the mother-in-law of God—Socrus Dei esse cœpisti—Ad Eustoch. Both Jerome and Chrysostom, however, acknowledged, and unsparingly lashed, the evils to which the celibate system in their time had led. “She is the true virgin,” says the latter, “who careth for the things that belong to the Lord.”
[881] In one example, of date A. D. 525, we find the phrase NONNAE ANCILLAE DEI, in which we see, perhaps, the origin of our word nun. Jerome had previously applied the word nonnæ to either widows or virgins professing chastity.—Ad Eustoch., c. 6.
[882] See article on “The Rise of Monachism,” by the present writer, in London Quarterly Review, October, 1873.
[883] This was not of uniform duration. The Council of Elvira, (c. 24,) indeed, prescribed two years, but the length of the period varied in different places.
[884] “Tanto ardentius concupiscantur, quanto honorabilius occultantur,” says Augustine, of this very practice.—In Johan., 96.
[885] The following resumé of the principal patristic evidence on the practice of infant baptism is corroborated by the testimony of the Catacombs. We omit the passages from Clement and Hermes Pastor, which imply its prevalence in the first century, as being rather vague. Justin Martyr, about A. D. 148, speaks of persons sixty and seventy years old who had been made disciples of Christ (ἐμαθητεύθησαν, the very word employed in Matt. xxviii, 19,) in their infancy, (Apol., 2,) and compares the rite of baptism to that of circumcision.—Dial. c. Tryph. Irenæus expressly speaks of “infants, little ones, children, youth, and the aged, as regenerated unto God,” which phrase he elsewhere applies to baptism—Infantes et parvulos, et pueros, et juvenes, et seniores.—Lib. ii, c. 39. Tertullian, indeed, in the third century, recommends the delay of baptism, especially in the case of infants—Cunctatio baptismi utilior est, præcipue tamen circa parvulos—an indication of the Montanist heresy, into which he fell, which regarded post-baptismal sins as inexpiable.—De Baptis., c. 18. The practice, however, continued, and Origen expressly asserts that little children were baptized for the remission of sins (Parvuli baptizantur in remissionem peccatorum—Hom., 14, in Luc.,) which custom, he says, the church handed down from the apostles—Ecclesia ab apostolis traditionem suscepit.—Id., in Rom., v. 6. When the question arose, in the third century, not whether baptism should be administered to infants, but whether it should be administered before the eighth day, Cyprian and a council of sixty-six African bishops unanimously decreed that the rite should be denied to none, even in earliest infancy—Universi potius judicavimus, nulli hominum nato misericordiam Dei et gratiam denegandam.—Cypr. Ep. 59, ad Fidum. “And this,” says Augustine, “is no new doctrine, but of apostolic authority”—Nec omnino credenda, nisi apostolica esse traditio.—De Genesi ad Literam., x. The later Fathers abound in similar testimonies. The infant children of heathen converts were baptized immediately, and the older ones when instructed.—Cod. Justin., i, 11, Leg. 10. Orphans, foundlings, and even the children of heathens, received this sacred rite. At an early period the eucharist was administered to infants, which was of necessity preceded by baptism.
[886] Hence, when a person died unbaptized, a living substitute sometimes received the rite in his stead. Fulgentius indeed asserts, that unbaptized children, even if they die “in uteris matrum,” are punished with everlasting punishment in eternal fire—ignis æterni sempiterno supplicio puniendos.—De Fide ad Petr., 27. But he alone of the Fathers expresses this abominable opinion. Augustine and Ambrose, though insisting on the importance of baptism, admit that the faith and repentance—fidem conversionemque cordis—of those who die while piously preparing therefor may suffice in its stead.—Aug., de Bap., iv, 22.
[887] In bold and unwarrantable metaphor some of the Fathers speak of the waters of baptism as changed in mystical transubstantiation into the very cleansing blood of Christ.
The prevalence of the Montanist heresy, which regarded as inexpiable all sins committed after baptism, led many to postpone its reception, although this practice was strongly censured by the church. Thus, Constantine remained a catechumen till his sixty-fifth year, and received baptism—”ἐμυήθη," says Sozomen, (ii, 34,) literally, “was initiated,”—just before his death. An inscription at St. John’s Lateran asserts his baptism by Sylvester many years previously: CONSTANTINVS PER CRVCEM VICTOR A S. SILVESTRO BAPTIZATVS CRVCIS GLORIAM PROPAGAVIT: but Dr. Döllinger has shown the entirely mythical character of the legend.—Fables respecting the Popes, etc., by Jn. G. Ign. von Döllinger. 1872.
[888] See the epitaph of an unbaptized catechumen already given.
[889] In a Christian epitaph from Aquileia, of date A. D. 734, we find the scriptural formula—ex aqua et Spu renatus—“born again of water and the Spirit.”—Muratori, Nov. Thesaur., p. 1849.
[890] See McCaul, Christian Epitaphs, p. 64.
[891] De Bapt. Christ.
[892] Cyprian argues for the validity of baptism by sprinkling, when immersion is inconvenient, as in the case of the sick, prisoners, etc., as follows: “In baptism the spots of sin are otherwise washed away than is the filth of the body in a secular and carnal washing, in which is need of a bath, soap, and the like. The heart of the believer is otherwise washed; the mind of man is cleansed by the merit of faith”—Neque enim sic in sacramento salutari delictorum contagia, ut in lavacro carnali et seculari sordes cutis et corporis abluuntur, etc.—Ep. ad Magnum.
Thus, we read that St. Lawrence baptized with only a pitcher of water—urceum afferens cum aqua—and by pouring water on the head of the subject—fundit aquam super caput.—Acta Laurentii. Tertullian also speaks of the “aspersion of water” in baptism—asperginem aquae.—De Pœnitent., 6.
[893] The so-called benitiers, or holy water vessels of the Catacombs, were, it is likely, in some cases at least, baptismal vases. The Romish “holy water” is probably copied from the aqua lustralis of the pagans, which stood at the door of the temples, and into which the worshipper on entering and leaving dipped his fingers. In striking analogy to Romish usage, the pagan priest sprinkled the multitude with the holy dew by means of an aspergillum, or light brush—
Idem ter socios pura circumtulit unda
Spargens rore levi.
[894] The nimbus and other characteristics indicate the comparatively late date of this picture. De Rossi thinks it not earlier than the seventh or eighth century. The ravages of time since the above was copied by Bosio have defaced part of the angel figure. In a similar group in a Latin MS., of the ninth century, the river Jordan flows from two vessels held by two boys. In another group at Monza, of the seventh century, the baptismal water pours from a vase held in the beak of the divine dove upon the head of Christ.
[895] The figures are a light umber, the falling water a pale blue.
[896] The neophytes laid aside their white baptismal robes, or albs, on the Sunday after Easter, hence called Dominica in albis. In the following inscription Pascasius, a neophyte of six years, is said to have received baptism on Easter eve, and to have laid aside his albs one week thereafter in the tomb: PERCEPIT XI KAL. MAIAS ET ALBAS SVAS OCTABAS (sic) PASCAE (sic) AD SEPVLCHRVM DEPOSVIT. (A. D. 463.)
Dr. McCaul notes a striking analogy to Christian forms of expression in an epitaph describing pagan initiation: ARCANIS PERFVSIONIBVS IN AETERNVM RENATVS—“Born eternally by secret sprinklings.” The sprinkling was that of the blood of a bull or ram, dripping on the bodies of the recipients of the lustration through perforations in a platform beneath which they stood.—Christian Epitaphs, p. 57.
[897] Although these in after times became vast buildings, with ample provision for baptismal immersion, in the earlier ages they were quite small; and, according to Smith’s Classical Dictionary, the baptisterium was “not a bath sufficiently large to immerse the whole body, but a vessel or labrum containing cold water for pouring on the head.”—Art., Baths. Eusebius speaks of baptisteries without the church “for those who require yet the purification and the sprinklings (περιῤῥαντήριον) of water and the Holy Spirit.”—E. H., x, 4.
[898] I am indebted for these references to the Rev. Prof. Bennett, D.D., of Syracuse University, late of Berlin, Prussia.
[899] Ciampini, Tab. ii, Figs. 3, 4.
[900] In later times the devout Bernard of Clairvaux thus eulogizes the eucharist: “It is,” he exclaims, “the medicine of the sick, the way of the wandering; it comforts the feeble and delights the strong; it cures disease and preserves health; it makes man more submissive to correction, stronger to labour, more ardent to love, wiser in foresight, prompter in obedience, more devout in thanksgiving. It absolves from sin, destroys the power of Satan, gives strength for martyrdom, and, in fine, brings every good.”—Costeri. Institut. Chr., lib. i, c. 6. It was also described as “the bread of angels, spiritual food, the life of the soul, the perpetual health of the mind, the antidote of sin, and pledge of future glory.”
[901] Alicubi quotidie alicubi certis intervallis dierum.—Aug., Tr., 26, in Johan. It was, in a special sense, the “daily bread of the soul.”
[902] “Christ who suffered is the fish which was broiled,” says St. Augustine—Piscis assus, Christus passus.
[904] Nihil illo ditius, qui corpus Domini canistro vimineo, sanguinem portat in vitro.—Ep. 4, ad Rustic. The communion was thus conveyed to those who through sickness were absent from its public celebration.
[905] Cur nullas aras habent?—Minuc., Octav. Non altaria fabricemus, non aras.—Arnob., Contr. Gentes. The Christian altars were called indifferently, Altare, ara Dei, mensa Domini.
[906] In the Lateran basilica, which is claimed as the head and mother of all the churches of Rome—caput et mater omnium ecclesiarum—is an altar which tradition asserts St. Peter made with his own hands, and employed for the administration of the Holy Sacrament. The legend attests at least an ancient opinion as to primitive usage. Originally only one altar was permissible in a church, but under Romish influence the number increased to as many as twenty-five, as at St. Peter’s.
[907] In three or four instances bronze rings are attached to the slab, as if to allow its removal for a second interment, or perhaps to give a view of the relics of the saint.
[908] Tertullian carefully guards against the literal interpretation of the words of Christ, “This is my body,” by the addition, “that is, a figure of my body”—figura corporis mei.—Adv. Marc., iv, 40. Augustine and others of the Fathers also discriminate between Christ’s spiritual and corporeal presence.
[909] They were called eulogia, that is, blessing or benediction. In the Jewish cemetery is a representation of sacred loaves, probably passover cakes, marked ΕΥΛΟΓΙΑ. The Christian representation of a cup doubtless frequently refers to the “cup of blessing”—Τὸ ποτήριον τῆς εὐλογίας—mentioned by St. Paul.—1 Cor. x, 16.
[910] There is not in the whole range of early Christian epigraphy the slightest indication of the Romish doctrine of Transubstantiation; which, indeed, as Dr. Maitland remarks, “was not distinctly broached till the ninth century.” Some of the earlier poets, however, and the more rhetorical of the Fathers, allude to a mystical presence of Christ in the eucharist, bordering on the modern Romish conception.
The council of Elvira forbade the acceptance of any gift for the administration of the sacraments. How different from Rome’s mercenary tariff for the celebration of masses for the dead!
[911] Ταῖς ἀγάπαις.—Jude, 12.
[912] Acts ii, 46; vi, 2.
[913] 1 Cor. xi, 16-34.
[914] Ita saturantur, ut qui meminerunt etiam per noctem adorandum sibi esse; ita fabulantur, ut qui sciunt Dominum audire.—Apol., 39.
[915] Jus. Mar., Apol., ii; Socrat., Eccl. Hist., v, 22; Orig., in Ep. ad Rom., xvi, 16.
[916] Cibum promiscuum et innoxium.—Ep., lib. x, ad Traj.
[917] ἱεροὶ λόγοι.—Peregrinus.
[918] Pædag., ii.
[919] Qui de ultima fæce collectis imperitioribus et mulieribus credulis sexus sui facilitate labentibus, plebem profanæ conjurationis instituunt: quæ nocturnis congregationibus et jejuniis solennibus et inhumanis cibis non sacro quodam sed piaculo fœderantur, latebrosa et lucifugax natio ... deos despuunt, rident sacra.—Minuc. Felix, Octav. Odio humani generis convicti sunt.—Tac., Ann., xv. 44.
[920] Malifica superstitio.—Suet., Neron., 16. Comp. Hor., Sat., i, 8.
[921] Quotidie obsidemur, quotidie prodimur, in ipsis plurimum cœtibus congregationibus nostris opprimimur. Quis unquam taliter vagienti infanti supervenit?—Apol., c. 7; comp. ad Nat., i, 10-15.
[922] Casto sermone, corpore castiore.—Minuc., Octav.; comp. Orig. Cont. Cels., vi., Jus. Mar., Apol., i, 2.
[923] Agapæ natalitiæ, agapæ connubiales, and agapæ funerales. The pagans, not unnaturally, regarded the latter, like their own funeral banquets, as designed to appease the manes of the dead. They would doubtless think the same of the modern mortuary masses.
[924] Non simili sacrilegio, quamvis simili luxu celebrarentur.—Aug., Ep., 29.
[925] Qui se in memoriis martyrum inebriant.—Aug., Cont. Faust., xx, 21. Voracitates ebrietatesque suas deputant religioni.—De Morib. Eccl., i, 34.
[926] Enarr., in Psa. lix.
[927] Placuit prohiberi, ne fœminæ in cœmeteriis pervigilent, eo quod sæpè sub obtentu religionis latenter scelera committunt.
[928] Among other traces of primitive Christianity among the latter are their married clergy and abhorrence of images. “We are Christians, not idolaters,” they said to the Jesuit missionaries, who presented for their homage images of the Virgin Mary.
[929] The name of Pius is substituted for Deus in one well-known Latin hymn. Another pentecostal hymn to the Holy Spirit is addressed directly to the present pontiff. The growth of this dogma of infallibility, the distinguished French ecclesiastic, Père Gratry, asserts, “was utterly gangrened with imposture.” The stultification of the human intellect was never more strikingly exemplified than in the dictum of Bellarmine: Vera sunt vera et falsa sunt falsa; sed si ecclesia dixit vera esse falsa et falsa esse vera, falsa sunt vera et vera sunt falsa.
[930] Adv. Praxean.