calls him an ancient and apostolical man.' St. Jerom, in his Catalogue, writes of him to this purpose: 'Hege'sippus, who was near the times of the apostles, composed a 'history of the affairs of the church from the passion of our Lord to his own time. And collecting together a great ' variety of matters for the benefit of his readers, he wrote 'five books in a plain and simple manner, imitating' therein the style of those whose life he followed [or, as perhaps some may choose to have it rendered, 66 whose 'life he wrote"]. He says, he came to Rome in the time ' of Anicetus, the tenth bishop after Peter, and continued 'there to the time of Eleutherus, bishop of the same city, 'who formerly had been deacon of Anicetus.' These five books are all lost, except some fragments preserved by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, and one more in Photius from Stephen Gobar; of which I shall presently give an account, so far as they relate to our present subject: and in the margin I shall put the characterTM of this writer, as given by some moderns, though it be not very much to his advantage. I. The first fragment" is his relation of the death of James the Just at Jerusalem. In this narration, the style of the scriptures of the New Testament often appears. When the Jews (scribes and pharisees) and others came to James to desire him to tell the people his opinion of Jesus, they say to him: For° we and all the people bear witness to 'you, that you are just, and accept no man's person,' Matt. xxii. 16; Luke xx. 21. Afterwards, James says to them: "Why do you ask me concerning Jesus the Son of man? He sits in heaven, on the right hand of the Great Power, and will come in the clouds of heaven," Matt. xxvi. 64. Whereby many were fully persuaded, and glorified God for that testimony of James, saying, "Hosanna to the Son * Cap. 22. 1 Ut quorum vitam sectabatur, dicendi quoque exprimeret characterem. m Suspectum tamen merito Hegesippi est testimonium, quia ex reliquis ejus apud Eusebium fragmentis abunde constat, eum non accuratum, sed credulum ac fabulosum fuisse scriptorem. Ingenuum hic est judicium Dupinii, qui recensitis fragmentis Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ Hegesippi addit: Autant que nous pouvons juger par ce qui nous reste, il étoit peu exact, et plus rempli d' histoires feintes et fabuleuses, que ⚫ narrations solides et véritables.' Idem judicium est Basnagii, et aliorum. Lampe, Prolegom. in Joann. 1. i. c. 4. n. x. Eus. H. E. 1. 2. c. 23. Ημεις γαρ μαρτυρεμεν σοι και πας ὁ λαός, ότι δικαιος ει, και ότι προσωπον & λαμβανεις. p. 64. C. • Τι με επερωτατε περι Ιησε τω υἱε τε άνθρωπε; Και αυτός καθηται εν τῳ Βρανῳ εκ δεξιών της μεγάλης δυναμεως, και μελλει ερχεσθαι επι των νεφελών του ουρανού και πολλων πληροφορηθέντων και δοξάζοντων επι τη μαρτυρία του Ιακωβο, και λεγόντων, Ωσαννα τῳ υἱῳ Δαβιδ. p. 64. D of David," Matt. xxi. 9, 15. When they had thrown him down from the battlement of the temple, he not being quite dead, they began to cast stones at him. But he kneeling down said: "I beseech thee, O Lord God the Father, forgive them for they know not what they do," Acts vii. 60; Luke xxiii. 34. This man was a faithful witness both to the Jews and Greeks, that Jesus was the Christ,' Acts xx. 21. II. The next fragment of this writer contains an account of Domitian's inquiry after the posterity of David. At that time,' says he, there were yet remaining of the kindred of Christ the grandsons of Jude, who was called his brother according to the flesh. These some accused, as being of the race of David; and Evocatus brought them before Domitianus Cæsar. Fort he too was afraid of the coming of Christ, as well as Herod,' Matt. ii. This passage deserves to be remarked. It contains a reference to the history in the second chapter of St. Matthew; and shows plainly, that this part of St. Matthew's gospel was owned by this Hebrew christian. But Epiphanius" informs us, that the gospel of the Ebionites begins thus: 'It came to pass in the days of Herod the king of Judea, that John came baptizing with the baptism of repentance in the river Jordan;' which is the beginning of the third chapter of St. Matthew, a little altered. And he there says expressly, that their gospel called according to St. Matthew, is defective and corrupted.' It is plain however from this passage, that Hegesippus received the history in the second chapter of St. Matthew: so that he used our Greek gospel. Or, if he used only the Hebrew edition of St. Matthew's gospel, this history must have been in it in his time. These grandsons of Jude were interrogated by Domitian concerning their own substance; which they informed him of, and gave him proofs they were poor labouring men. Being asked,' says Hegesippus,' of Christ and his king • Αλλα τραφεις έθηκε τα γονατα, λεγων παρακαλω, Κύριε Θεε Πατερ, αφες αυτοις ου γαρ οίδασι τι ποιουσιν. p. 65. Β. Μαρτυς ουτος αληθης Ιεδαίοις τε και ̔Ελλησι γεγενηται, ότι Ιησες ὁ Χρισος εσιν. p. 65. C. Eus. H. E. 1. 3. c. 19, 20. t W Εφοβείτο γαρ την παρεσίαν του Χρισε, ώς και Ηρωδης. p. 89. C. Ερωτηθέντας δε πει το Χρισε και της βασιλειας αυτό, όποια τις ειη, και πότε και ποι φαινησομενη ; λόγον δεναι, ὡς 8 κοσμική μεν εδ' επίγειος, επεράνιος δε και αγγελικη τυγχάνει, επι συντελείᾳ τε αιώνος γενησομένη, όπηνικα ελθων εν δόξη κρινει ζωντας, και νεκρές, και αποδώσει έκασῳ κατα τα επιτηδεύματα αυτε. p. 90. Α. Β. dom, of what kind it was, and when and where it should appear ? Luke xix. 11; they answered that it was not worldly nor terrene, but heavenly and angelical, and would be in the end of the world; when he coming in glory should judge the quick and the dead, and render to every man according to his works,' 2 Tim. iv. 1. I do not pretend absolutely to determine a reference to any particular texts in these last words: but I have thought it very proper to place them here, together with what precedes, as representing the doctrine of the New Testament very much in the style of it. I omit the next fragment of this author in Eusebius, giving the history of the martyrdom of Simeon bishop of Jerusalem, it containing nothing suitable to our present design. 6 III. But afterwards, in another chapter, Eusebius observes several things which were in the five books of this writer: That in his journey to Rome he visited many bishops, in particular Primus bishop of Corinth, where he staid many days: and where,' says he, we received mu'tual refreshment from the true faith. From thence he 'went to Rome, and staid there to the time of Eleutherus.' He adds: And in every succession, and in every city, the same doctrine is taught, which the law, and the prophets, and the Lord preacheth.' Here it seems, that by the Lord' he must mean the scriptures of the New Testament; which he looks upon as containing the very doctrine taught and preached by Jesus Christ. However, he afterwards speaks of heresies; but the true church was free from these. IV. He also takes some things,' says Eusebius, 'out of the gospel according to the Hebrews, and out of the Syriac, and in particular out of the Hebrew tongue; manifesting hereby, that he is one of the faithful from ' among the Hebrews.' The former part of this sentence is rendered agreeably to the translation of Valesius, which I suppose is generally taken very contentedly; though, on the other hand, some have been mightily puzzled about the true meaning. I think Valesius's version is agreeable enough to the Greek × L. iii. cap. 32. y L. iv. cap. 22. * Εν έκατη δε διαδοχή και εν έκασῃ πολει οὕτως εχει, ὡς ὁ νομος κηρύττει, και οἱ προφηται, και ὁ Κύριος. p. 142. C. * Εκ τε τω καθ' Εβραιος ευαγγελις, και το Συριακό, και ιδίως εκ της Εβραϊδος διαλεκτο τινα τίθησιν, εμφαίνων εξ Εβραίων αυτόν πεπιτευκεναι. P. 143. B. in Eusebius. But one would be apt to suspect our present copies are here hardly right. I cannot pretend to correct them but I imagine that St. Jerom has given us, though undesignedly, the true sense of what Eusebius wrote, when he says: in the gospel according to the Hebrews, which is written indeed in the Syriac and Chaldaic tongue, [or Syro-Chaldaic tongue,] but in Hebrew cha'racters is this history;' which he there relates. Let this passage of Eusebius be allowed to be ever so obscure, I think it affords proof, that there was an Hebrew gospel in the time of Hegesippus, and that he made use of it; but how far, we cannot say. Here is nothing to help us to determine the question, whether this gospel according to the Hebrews, written in the Syriac language, but in Hebrew letters, was a translation, or an original. V. The last passage concerning our author to be taken from Eusebius is this: And discoursing of the books 'called apocryphal, he relates, that some of them were forged by some heretics in his time.' Whether he speaks of apocryphal books of the Old Testament, or the New, may be doubtful; because the last preceding observation of Eusebius is, that this writer, as well as Irenæus, and some other ancients, call the Proverbs of Solomon by the name of Wisdom. But the connection in Eusebius does not, I think, afford any certain proof that he means the apocryphal books of the Old Testament. However this we may learn hence, that the first christians were not only upon their guard against heretics, but also against their forgeries. d VI. Beside these, there is a remarkable fraginent of Hegesippus preserved by Photius in his extracts out of Stephen Gobar, a tritheistical writer of the sixth century. Gobar there says: The eye hath not seen, nor ear 'heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for the righteous: though Hegesippus, an ancient and apostolical man, iu 6 In evangelio juxta Hebræos, quod Chaldaïco quidem Syroque sermone, sed Hebraicis literis scriptum est;--adv. Pelagian. lib. iii. init. Op. T. iv. Part 2. p. 533. ed. Bened. • Και περι των λεγομένων δε αποκρυφων διαλαμβανων, επι των αυτό χρόνων προς τινων αἱρετικών αναπεπλασθαι τινα τετων ίπορει. p. 143. Β. d Cod. 232. p. 893. • Ηγησιππος μεν του, αρχαιος τε ανηρ και αποτολικός, εν τῳ πεμπτῳ των απομνημάτων, εκ οιδ' ό, τι και παθων, ματην μεν ειρησθαι ταυτα λεγει, και καταψεύδεσθαι της ταυτα φαμενες των τε θείων γραφων, και το Κύριε λέγοντος, Μακάριοι οἱ οφθαλμοι ύμων οἱ βλέποντες, και τα ωτα ύμων τα ακέοντα, και εξης. Apud Matth. Ύμων δε μακαριοι οἱ οφθαλμοι, ότι βλέπεσι και τα ώτα ύμων, ότι ακέει. 'the fifth book of his Commentaries, [or Memoirs,] I know 'not for what reason, says, this is said without ground, and that they who say so contradict the divine scriptures, and the Lord, who says: "Blessed are your eyes which see, and your ears which hear:" and what follows.' Here is a good quotation of St. Matthew's gospel, ch. xiii. 16. The other words are in 1 Cor. ii. 9; Isa. Ixiv. 4. It is likely Hegesippus did not blame these words themselves, but only some interpretation of them by persons who pretended that Jesus Christ was a mere phantom, and that the senses were not good judges of his actions. VII. We have then seen in Hegesippus divers things expressed in the style of the gospels, and Acts, and some other parts of the New Testament. He refers to the history in the second chapter of St. Matthew, and recites another text of that gospel, as spoken by the Lord. He speaks of the doctrine taught by the law, the prophets, and the Lord; by which last expression he must mean some writing or writings containing the doctrine of Christ. Moreover, he used the gospel according to the Hebrews, and says, there had been books forged by heretics; but they were such only as were called apocryphal, and were not received by the Catholics as of authority. CHAP. XV. MELITO. THIS writer will afford little relating to our present design. However, for the sake of that little, and his otherwise great merit, and many labours, it is very fit we should here settle his time, and give some account of him. Melito is placed by Cave at the year 170. He was bishop of Sardis in Lydia. Some moderns have supposed him to be the angel of the church of Sardis, to whom the epistle is directed, Rev. iii. 1-6; but this is without ground from antiquity: and, as Tillemont observes, it would oblige us to suppose he was bishop above seventy years; which is not easy to believe, none of the ancients Vid. Grabe, Spic. T. 2. p. 256. a Hist. Lit. |