ed by them, and by all the arts of flattery and persuasion, of wantonness and immodesty had been set upon to join himself to them; and certainly it is not imaginable that a person so venerable for learning and piety as Epiphanius was, should impose upon us by forging so gross and notorious a falsehood. Besides, whoever reads Irenæus, in whose time these heresies were most rife and predominant, and considers the account that he gives of them, which he mainly received from persons of their own party after they were returned back to the Church, will see little reason either to think any wickedness too great for them to boggle at, or to doubt of the truth of what he reports concerning them." Part 3, ch. 1.

And Dr. Cave, speaking of the origin of the charge of promiscuous mixtures, says :--

"Origen fathers it upon the Jews, as if they had falsely and spitefully invented it to disgrace Christianity, and he tells us that in some measure it succeeded accordingly, keeping many at a distance from the Christian religion; and that even in his time there were some who for this very reason would have no discourse or commerce with a Christian. But though both Jews and Gentiles had malice and spite enough against the Christians, yet I can hardly think that it was a purely invented falsehood, but that it had some ground of pretence, though ill applied; and so we shall find it had; for which we are to know that in the most early times of Christianity, there were several sorts of heretics (who though they had their particular names, yet all called themselves Christians), the followers of Simon Magus, Memander, Marcion, Marcus, Basilides, &c. who all met under the general name of Gnosticks, and were under the pretence of religion guilty of the most prodigious villanies, and particularly these we are speaking of: Irenæus reports of them that they gave themselves up to all filthiness and beastiality, not only privately corrupting the women whom they had inveagled into their sect (as some

of them returning after to the Church confessed with shame and sorrow), but openly and with bare-face marrying women whom they had seduced from their husbands; committing the most execrable wickedness.

"Of the Carpocratians, another gang of these brutish heretics, Clemens Alexandrinus relates the same both as to their doctrines and practices, reporting the matter almost in the very same circumstances, wherein it is charged upon the Christians in Men. Fœlix, viz. that both men and women used to meet at supper (which was called their love-feast) when after they had loaded themselves with a plentiful meal, to prevent all shame, if they had any remaining, they put out the lights, and then promiscuously mixed in filthiness with one another, or else each sorting as they pleased. And of the Gnosticks Epephanius tells us, that they had their wives in common.

"Now this being the case with these abominable wretches, who yet had the face to call themselves Christians, it is no wonder if Jews and Gentiles, who were greedy of any occasion to bespatter and reproach Christians, and rather than to find an accusation would make one, charge it upon all Christians, either not knowing it to be otherwise, or if they did, not willing to distinguish between true and false: And that this was the true and only rise and ground of the charge, besides some intimations of it in Justin Martyr, we have it expressly asserted by Eusebius, as that which gave being to that impious opinion which spread so fast among the Heathens, of the Christians being guilty of promiscuous mixtures." Primitive Christianity, Part 2, ch. V.

It appears then from the foregoing extracts, that the primitive Christians were really guilty of the crimes imputed to them. It is of no consequence for the Fathers to say, that they were particular sects of Christians that were guilty of these crimes, and not the sect to which they belonged. In the first place, so far as they were Christians, believing in Jesus Christ, and receiving all,

or portions of the New Testament, so far is the testimony of Tacitus confirmed and established, that the Christians were held in abhorrence for their crimes. And in the

second place, seeing that the Fathers conceived it an act of virtue to deceive and lie, there is every likelihood that they would practice this virtue in order to clear themselves of the guilt of the abominable crimes in question. One can hardly believe that any sort of beings would be guilty of some of the crimes enumerated; especially that of taking an infant, the produce of their promiscuous mixtures, beating it in a mortar, seasoning it with pepper and honey, and then devouring it like dogs. And yet that the first Christians were guilty of such crimes the Fathers themselves acknowledge, as we have seen from the preceding quotations; only, say they, they were Christians of particular sects, and not of the orthodox party. Every body knows that orthodoxy and heresy have no relation to truth; they merely relate to power. The orthodox are those in power, while the heretics are those out of power and it has often happened, in the history of the Church, that the orthodox have become heretics, and heretics have become orthodox. Even then admitting, which I by no means will do, that the orthodox party at that time were guilty of none of the crimes imputed to them, still the heretics, who were guilty of the crimes, were just as true Christians as those of the orthodox party, for the truth in such cases is not decided by evidence, but by power. Besides what is a Christian but he who receives the New Testament as his rule of faith? and that these heretics, who committed these beastly crimes, did receive the New Testament as their rule of faith, I shall now show from the testimony of Christian writers themselves. The passages which I shall quote for this purpose are from the work of Dr. Lardner, as quoted by Paley in his Evidences of Christianity, Part I. sec. VII. as follows:

"Basilides lived near the age of the Apostles, about the year 120, or, perhaps sooner. He rejected the Jew

ish institution, not as spurious, but as proceeding from a being inferior to the true God; and in other respects advanced a scheme of theology widely different from the general doctrine of the Christian church, and which, as it gained over some disciples, was warmly opposed by Christian writers of the second and third century. In these writings, there is positive evidence that Besilides received the Gospel of Matthew; and there is no sufficient proof that he rejected any of the other three: on the contrary, it appears that he wrote a commentary upon the Gospel, so copious as to be divided into 24 books.

“The Valentinians appeared about the same time. Their heresy consisted in certain notions concerning angelic natures, which can hardly be rendered intelligible to a modern reader. They seem, however, to have acquired as much importance as any of the seperatists of that early age. Of this sect, Irenæus, who wrote in the year 172, expressly records that they endeavoured to fetch arguments for their opinions from the evangelic and apostolic writings. Heracleon, one of the most celebrated of the sect, and who lived probably so early as the year 125, wrote commentaries upon Luke and John. Some observations also of his upon Matthew are preserved by Origen. Nor is there any reason to doubt that he received the whole New Testament.

"The Carpocratians were also an early heresy, little, if at all, later than the two preceding. Some of their opinions resembled what we at this day mean by Socinianism. With respect to the Scriptures, they are specifically charged, by Irenæus and by Epiphanius, with endeavouring to pervert a passage in Matthew, which amounts to a positive proof that they received that Gospel. Negatively, they are not accused, by their adversaries, of rejecting any part of the New Testament.

"The Sethians, in the year 150; the Montanists, in the year 156; the Marcosians, in the year 160; Hermogenes, in the year 180; Praxias, in the year 196;

Artemon, in the year 200; Theodotus, in the year 200; all included under the denomination of heretics, and all engaged in controversies with Catholic Christians, received the Scriptures of the New Testament.

"Tatian, who lived in the year 172, went into many extravagant opinions, was the founder of a sect called Encratites, and was deeply involved in disputes with the Christians of that age; yet Tatian so received the four Gospels, as to compose a harmony from them.

"From a writer, quoted by Eusebius, of about the year 300, it is apparent that they who at that time contended for the mere humanity of Christ, argued from the Scriptures; for they are accused by this writer, of making alterations in their copies, in order to favour their opinions.

And after enumerating a number of other heretics, who came after these, all receiving alike the New Testament as their rule of faith, Paley says:

"We have here, therefore, a proof, that parties, who were the most opposite and irreconcileable to one another acknowledged the authority of Scripture with equal deference."

Thus have I proved, my Lord, from the evidence of your own party, that those heretics who murdered the infants begotten in their promiscuous mixtures, and devoured them like dogs, acknowledged the authority of Scripture with equal deference with the orthodox party, and therefore equally entitled to the name of Christian. What an example is this of the beneficial effects of the Gospel; of its softening, humanizing, and refining influence! Let it be borne in mind, however, that I do not admit that the orthodox party were free from the crimes imputed to them, and that they were committed solely by heretics: the Fathers were men who considered it at act of virtue to deceive and lie, and therefore their disclaimer amounts to nothing.