Image: Gnostic writings discovered at Nag Hammadi, Egypt in 1945.
This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes
and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The
Ecclesiastical History: book 4, chapter 7. Listen here.
Notes and Commentary:
In this chapter Eusebius outlines the various heretical
teachings that assailed the early Christian movement.
These attacks came when the churches were shining like “brilliant
lamps” throughout the whole world and as persecution waned.
He notes two heresies that arose from Menander (and Simon the
Sorcerer) which were liked a double-headed snake:
First, Saturninus of Antioch, who established a school in
Syria. According to Irenaeus his teaching was very much like that of Menander.
Second, Basilides of Alexandria, who established a school in
Egypt and promoted “secret doctrine.” He was refuted by Agrippa Castor who says
Basilides wrote 24 books, set up two persons as prophets (Bar Cabbas and Bar Coph),
taught that it was permissible to eat food offered to idols and to deny the
faith during persecution, and enjoined his followers, as Pythagoras did, to
keep silence for five years.
In addition to these two, he also draws on Irenaeus to
describe Carpocrates, whom he describes as the father of the Gnostic heresy.
These promoted “magical ceremonies,” “love charms,” and other supposed spiritual
experiences. They especially stressed mystical initiation rites. Many were piteously
deceived and enslaved in this.
Eusebius also notes how these false movements damaged the reputation
of orthodox Christians, whom he describes as being a distinct “race” (ethne). Christians were thus falsely
accused of incest and of eating “wicked food.” Of the latter Lake write in a
note: “The reference is to the story which was at that time told by the heathen
of the Christians and has since been told among Christians of the Jews that
they kill and eat small children.”
Eusebius contends, however, that these various attacks were
refuted as the truth vindicate itself and shone “ever more brightly.”
He seems to say that one of the reasons for the successful refutation
of heresy and false attacks was the consistency of the orthodox witness. The true
church “ever held to the same points in the same way.” This perhaps anticipates
the dictum of Vincent of Lérins in his Commonitorium (c. 434) that the true church is characterized by “what
has been believed everywhere, always, and by all [Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est.”].
Conclusion:
This chapter is important for showing the centrality of
apologetics in distinguishing orthodoxy from heresy, especially Gnosticism, in
the early Christian movement. Eusebius writes with confidence of the eventual
triumph of the orthodox position.
JTR
No comments:
Post a Comment