A specimen shall be given first from the works of Justyn Martyr. That passage in his Dialogue with Trypho, which has already been in part adduced (see sect. 2.) was originally as follows: "I am not such a wretch, Trypho, as to say one thing and mean another. I have before confessed to thee, that I and many others are of this opinion: [viz. that Jerusalem shall be rebuilt, and the saints enjoy a happy life on earth with Christ:] so that we hold it to be thoroughly proved that it will come to pass. But I have also signified unto thee, on the other hand, that many-even those of that race of Christians who follow not godly and pure doctrine-do not acknowledge it. For I have demonstrated to thee, that these are indeed called Christians; but are atheists and impious heretics, because that in all things they teach what is blasphemous, and ungodly, and unsound, &c. If, therefore, you fall in with certain who are called Christians who confess not this [truth,] but dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in that they say there is no resurrection of the dead, but that, immediately they die, their souls are received up into heaven,* avoid them, and

*The condition of separate spirits, between the period of death and the resurrection, has so important a bearing upon the Millennarian doctrine, that I must be excused if I here notice it more at large. I have shown, in another work, (Abdiel's Essays, p. 93.) that the believer enjoys at death a conscious blessedness, which renders it better for him to depart and be with Christ, than to remain in the body; but it is equally clear from scripture and from the fathers, that the believer does not at death "ascend into the heavens," any more than did David; (Acts ii. 34.) or than Christ did between his death and resurrection; who went to paradise, and had not even after his resurrection yet ascended unto the Father. John xx. 17. It is very plain, from the testimony of Justyn, that in the primitive church they held those not to be Christians, who maintained that souls are received up into heaven immediately after death. Irenæus ranks them, in his work against Heresies, (lib. v.) as among the heretical; and the testimony of the church is uniform on this point, (if we except some questionable passages in Cyprian) down into Popish times: and it was indeed the general opinion of the Greek and Latin churches, down to the Council of Florence, held under Pope Eugenius IV. in 1439. A passage from bishop Taylor's 'Liberty of Prophesying,' (sect. viii.) will set this matter in a clear light. When shewing how doctrines of antiquity were sometimes contradicted in subsequent ages by councils, or by some ecclesiastic of power or popularity, he says, "That is a plain recession from antiquity, which was determined by the council of Florence-piorum animas purgatas, &c. mox in cælum recipi et intueri clare ipsum Deum trinum et unum sicuti est; (that the souls of the pious, being purified, are immediately at death received into heaven, and behold clearly the triune God just as he is:) for those who please to try may see it dogmatically resolved to the contrary by Justyn Martyr, Irenæus, Origen, Chrysostome, Theodoret, Arethas Cæsariensis, Euthymius, who may answer for the Greek church. And it is plain that it was the opinion of the Greek church, by that great difficulty the Romans had of bringing the Greeks to subscribe to the Florentine Council, where the Latins acted their master-piece of wit and stratagem,-the greatest that hath been till the famous and super-politic Council of Trent. And for the Latin church, Tertullian, Ambrose, Austin, Hilary, Prudentius, Lactantius, Victorinus, and Bernard, are known to be of opinion, that the souls of the saints are in abditis receptaculis et exterioribus atriis, where they expect the resurrection of their bodies and the glorification

esteem them not Christians. But I and whatsoever Christians are orthodox (opboxvæμoves) in all things, do know that there will be a resurrection of the flesh, and a thousand years in the city of Jerusalem, built, adorned, and enlarged, according as Ezekiel, Isaiah, and other prophets have promised." Now the above passage, had it been left untouched, must have remained so signal and obvious a testimony to the orthodox faith in his days, that the Romish church must at once have been convicted of having departed from the primitive belief in this matter. Accordingly, the passage in italics has been altered, and the first 'not' omitted. Thus it appears in the printed copies of Justyn, and thus it was in most of the manuscripts extant in the seventeenth century; but not in all. For Dr. N.

of their souls; and though they all believe them to be happy, yet that they enjoy not the beatific vision before the resurrection."

The stratagem employed by the Romanists, to which bishop Taylor alludes, is, I suppose, the fact recorded in the History of this Council by Creighton, who wrote in 1660, and in Geddes' Introductory Discourse to Vargas's Letters; who state, that the pope first inveigled the patriarch of Constantinople, and some of his clergy, to meet him at a Council at Ferrara, which he then adroitly adjourned to Florence; and when the Greek ecclesiastics pleaded inability to bear the charges, he actually defrayed all their expenses himself. The patriarch died at Florence, and the Greek church (according to Gaspar Pencerus) not only disowned the acts of the clergy present, but excommunicated them, and denied them Christian burial.

The early Reformers maintained the primitive faith on this point, plainly perceiving that the object of the Papists was to help forward the doctrine of purgatory and invocation of saints. Thus Tyndal, disputing with the Papists, says: "If the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be? and then, what cause is there of the resurrection?" p. 324, Works by Fox. And afterwards, in reply to More, who objects against Luther, that his doctrine on this point encouraged the sinner to continue in sin, seeing it so long postponed the ultimate judgment, Tyndal says: "Christ and his apostles taught no other, but warned to look for Christ's coming again every hour; which coming again, because ye believe it will never be, therefore have ye feigned that other merchandize."

Calvin also, in his Psychopannychia, replies thus to another objection against this doctrine: "I answer that Christ is our Head, whose kingdom and glory have not yet appeared. If the members were to go before the head, the order of things would be inverted and preposterous. But we shall follow our Prince then, when he shall come in the glory of his Father, and sit upon the throne of his majesty." p. 55.

It is greatly to be lamented that the Protestant church of a later period should have fallen into the errors of the Papists on this subject, (abating the distinct acknowledgment of purgatory; errors, the adoption of which has done more than any other thing perhaps, towards withdrawing from the Church the lively expectation of Christ's Advent.

I am indebted for what concerns the Council of Florence in the above statement, (excepting the extract from Bishop Taylor,) to an anonymous work entitled "An historical view of the Controversy concerning an intermediate state, &c. between death and the resurrection;" a work written with no great honesty in behalf of the extreme opinion that the soul is in a state of uneonsciousness and perishes at death: for the view which the fathers maintained on this particular point is carefully kept back. The reader who desires to see more of the testimony of the fathers may consult the learned work of Dr. Burnett, De statu Mortuorum et Resurgentium.

VOL. II.-5

Homes, in his work on the Resurrection, testifies to having seen some without it. Fortunately, however, the omission of the word, (though in that single sentence it alters the meaning, and makes some deniers of this truth followers nevertheless of "godly and pure doctrine,") has the effect of giving to the whole passage so forced, abrupt and obscure an aspect, that none can read it with attention without perceiving how contradictory it is. For how could any be followers, in the estimation of Justyn, of pure doctrine, and persons of sound judgment, who received not this, which he says, all who are orthodox received? And how can that next sentence: "for 1 have before demonstrated to thee, that these are indeed called Christians, but are really atheists," &c. apply (as it evidently does, if the not be omitted) to followers of that which is godly and pure?

There is apparently another suppression. Justyn alludes twice in this passage to his having before expressed his belief on this point, and also demonstrated the ungodliness of those who denied it: but the place in his writings where such a passage occurs, is not to be found. The author of "Eruvin," (p. 190-193.) supposes, and with great probability, that the deniers of the doctrine, whom he speaks of as having pointed out, are the heretics mentioned in a passage immediately previous: but there is no mention in that passage of the things concerning which Trypho puts the question, and to which Justyn replies:-"I told you before, that I and many others (as indeed you well know) believe that these things will take place; and I also stated," &c. The probability then is, that his sentiments were so plainly expressed in that instance, that they could not be made to speak a contrary opinion, merely by the eliding some convenient monosyllable; and therefore the passage has been got rid of entire. At any rate it must be viewed as a particular providence, that, owing to circumstances which we cannot now trace, the sentiments of Justyn should have been preserved to such an extent as they have been: an extent still sufficient clearly to demonstrate the voice of the church to have been millenarian in the earliest Christian times.t

*The extract just given from Justyn is as literally translated from the Greek as I can give it; two parenthetical sentences only being left out, that in no way affect the argument. The translator into Latin of the Parisian edition of Justyn's works, labours hard to give a sense which may comport with the omission of the word not; but it is in several instances not justified by the Greek. It is amusing also to observe, how puzzled the translator is, in his notes, to account for obscurities which appear in his translation; and how astonished he is at the harshness of Irenæus, for going further than Justyn apparently does in this matter, and condemning those as heretics who were not millenarians; whereas they actually both do the same thing.

+ It was apparently with a fraudulent intention that a book, entitled "Ques

1

It may appear surprising, that the work of Irenæus should have come down to us in the condition it has. Some of his writings, which are more directly on this subject, are lost altogether; and much of the original Greek is gone from that which we possess: but still there is in his book "on Heresies" matter as clear and tangible to the point, as any that may have been suppressed in Justyn. The fact, however, is, that this work actually was consigned to darkness, during the long period of papal supremacy, and was supposed to be lost, the same as his other works; but at the era of the Reformation, a copy of it was discovered by Erasmus, and given to the world. And herein the providence of God is again remarkable; for had a decided Protestant, or a Millenarian, have found and published it, somewhat of suspicion might have attached to the circumstance, so far as the passages which affect this question are concerned; but Erasmus continued in communion with the Romish church, and yet had that thirst for literature, and that looseness in his opinions in many points of popish doctrine and practice, that he could do things without a scruple, which a more rigid or more consistent Papist would not have resolved

upon.

A slur, however, is thrown upon Irenæus, in consequence of a passage in his book, said to be a tradition handed down by Papias, a passage which is made use of by the opposers of millenarian doctrine, at once to impugn the judgment both of Irenæus and Papias himself. It is as follows:

"The elders who saw John, the disciple of the Lord, have mentioned, that they themselves heard of him, after what manner the Lord was wont to teach concerning those times, [i. e. of the Millennium,] and to say: 'The day shall come when vines shall be produced each with ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand shoots, and on every shoot ten thousand sprigs, and on every sprig ten thousand bunches, and on every bunch ten thousand grapes, and every grape being

tions and Answers to the Orthodox," was during the dark ages incorporated with the works of Justyn, and imputed to him as its author. But critics of later times have so far done justice to him, that in most instances the work is now separated from the writings of Justyn; the circumstance that the author, whoever he was, advocates the Nestorian heresy, being too flagrant an anachronism to pass with any who are at liberty to think at all. It is but justice, however, to the anonymous author of this work, to observe, that there are marks in it which lead to a justifiable suspicion of its having been greatly corrupted. The form in which it is presented of questions and answers on independent subjects, afforded an easy opportunity, and therefore a great temptation, in those times, to interpolate any thing; and the circumstance that some of the objectionable passages are written in a feeble and irrational style, whilst others exhibit great penetration into the meaning of Scripture, shew that the opportunity has not been lost.

pressed shall yield twenty-five metretæ of wine. And when one shall have laid hold of a bunch, another shall cry out, I am a better bunch, take me; by me bless the Lord. In like manner also that a corn of wheat should yield ten thousand ears, and every ear should have ten thousand corns, and every corn ten pounds of fine clean flour; moreover also that the other kinds of fruit and seeds and herbs should in a like manner according to their nature do the same. And that all animals living on the fruits of the earth, should become peaceable, and one in harmony with another, being subject to men with all subjection. Moreover, Papias also, an ancient, who was an hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp, bears further testimony to these things, writing in his fourth book; for there are five books which he composed, and he (the Lord,) added saying, Now these things are worthy of belief unto the believing. And when Judas the traitor did not believe, and asked, How then are such things to be effected, the Lord answered, They shall see who shall come to those days.

On this passage it is first of all to be remarked, that the works both of Polycarp and Papias have been withdrawn from the light; so that it cannot be proved to be genuine, neither corrected, from their actual writings: nor have we the Greek, in this instance, of Irenæus. A recent author, in a learned and very able work on the parables,* surmises that in the original, the word translated decem millia was pupas; (vol. i. p. 296,) in which case the meaning is not of necessity to be understood definitely as ten thousand, but in that indefinite sense, in which we adopt it from the Greek and use it, when we say myriads.t This is a highly probable conjecture, and takes away from the passage that appearance of absurdity which has excited the profane scoff of Doctors Whitby and Middleton. When we

*See an Exposition of the Parables, and of other parts of the Gospels, by Edward Greswell, B. D., Fellow of C. C. C. Oxford.

+ Jude v. 14, would be more in the spirit of the original, if the word μupias were retained in the translation, and rendered, "Behold the Lord cometh with myriads of his saints." The original is literally "with his holy myriads," and at the least it should be rendered "with ten thousands of his saints," in the plural; as the definite term ten thousand, in the singular, conveys an idea quite foreign from the original.

The latter of these writers furnishes an instance that the art of interpolating and corrupting the text of an author, when the subject before us is concerned, has not been confined to papal times. In "Dr. Middleton's Inquiry, &c." page 26, he represents Justyn Martyr as saying: "that all the saints should be raised in the flesh, and reign with Christ in Jerusalem, enlarged and beautified in a wonderful manner for their reception, in the enjoyment of all sensual pleasures, for 1000 years before the general resurrection." On which Bishop Newton observes: "But in the original there is no such clause as that, in the enjoyment of all sensual pleasures; it is an addition and interpolation of the doctor's own, in order to depreciate the venerable father. And he could not possibly have made it by mistake; he must have done it designed