Part 6 (1/2)
[Footnote 35: And surely if Justin had intended to represent the holy angels as objects of religious wors.h.i.+p, he would not so violently have thrust the mention of them among the Persons of the ever-blessed Trinity, a.s.signing to them a place between the second and third Persons of the eternal hypostatic union.] {109}
To evade this charge of impiety, some writers (among others, M. Maran, the Benedictine editor of Justin,) have attempted to draw a distinction between the two verbs in this pa.s.sage, alleging that the lower degree of reverence expressed by the latter applies to the angels; whilst the former verb, implying the higher degree of wors.h.i.+p, alone relates to the G.o.dhead. But this distinction rests on a false a.s.sumption; the two words being used equally to convey the idea, of the highest religious wors.h.i.+p[36].
[Footnote 36: For example, the first word ([Greek: sebometha]), ”we reverence,” is used to mean the whole of religious wors.h.i.+p, as well with regard to the true G.o.d, as with reference to Diana [Acts xviii. 7. 13; xix. 27.]; whilst the second word ([Greek: proskunoumen]), ”we wors.h.i.+p,” is constantly employed in the same sense of divine wors.h.i.+p, throughout the Septuagint [Exod. x.x.xiv.
14. Ps. xciv. (xcv.) 6. I Sam. (1 Kings) xv. 25. 2 Kings (4 Kings) xvii. 36. Heb. i. 6.], (with which Justin was most familiar,) and is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews to signify the wors.h.i.+p due from the angels themselves to G.o.d, ”Let all the angels of G.o.d wors.h.i.+p him.” The very same word is also soon after employed by Justin himself (sect. xvi. p. 53) to mean the whole entire wors.h.i.+p of the Most High G.o.d: ”That we ought to wors.h.i.+p ([Greek: prosk.u.mein]) G.o.d alone, Christ thus proves,”
&c. Moreover, the word which Justin uses at the close of the sentence, ”honouring them” ([Greek: timontes]), is the identical word four times employed by St. John [John v. 23.], in the same verse, to record our Saviour's saying, ”That all men might honour the Son, even as they honour the Father; he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, who hath sent him.”]
But in determining the true meaning of an obscure pa.s.sage, grammatically susceptible of different acceptations, the author himself is often his own best interpreter. If he has expressed in another place the same leading sentiment, yet without the same obscurity, and free from all doubt, the light borrowed from that pa.s.sage {110} will frequently fix the sense of the ambiguous expression, and establish the author's consistency. On this acknowledged principle of criticism, I would call your attention to a pa.s.sage in the very same treatise of Justin, a few pages further on, in which he again defends the Christians against the same charge of being atheists, and on the self-same ground, ”that they wors.h.i.+p the Father who is maker of all; secondly, the Son proceeding from Him; and thirdly, the Holy Spirit.” In both cases he refers to the same attributes of the Son as the teacher of Christian truth, and of the Holy Ghost, as the Prophetic Spirit. His language throughout the two pa.s.sages is remarkably similar, and in the expressions on the true meaning of which we have already dwelt, it is most strikingly identical; but by omitting all allusion to the angels after the Son, his own words proving that the introduction of them could have no place there, (for he specifies that the third in order was the Holy Spirit,) Justin has left us a comment on the pa.s.sage under consideration conclusive as to the object of religious wors.h.i.+p in his creed. The whole pa.s.sage is well worth the attention of the reader. The following extracts are the only parts necessary for our present purpose:--
”Who of sound mind will not confess that we are not Atheists, reverencing as we do the Maker of the Universe.... and Him, who taught us these things, and who was born for this purpose, Jesus Christ, crucified under Pontius Pilate.... instructed, as we are, that He is the Son of the True G.o.d, and holding Him in the second place; and the Prophetic Spirit in the third order, we with reason honour.” [Sect.
xiii. p. 50.] {111}
The impiety apparently inseparable from Bellarmin's interpretation has induced many, even among Roman Catholic writers, to discard that acceptation altogether, and to subst.i.tute others, which, though involving no grammatical inaccuracy, are still not free from difficulty.[37] After weighing the pa.s.sage with all the means in my power, and after testing the various interpretations offered by writers, whether of the Church of Rome or not, by the sentiments of Justin himself, and others of the same early age, I am fully persuaded that the following is the only true rendering of Justin's words:
”Honouring in reason and truth, we reverence and wors.h.i.+p HIM, the Father of Righteousness, and the Son (who proceeded from Him, and instructed in these things both ourselves and the host of the other good angels following Him and being made like unto Him), and the Prophetic Spirit.”
[Footnote 37: Le Nourry (Apparatus ad Bibliothecam Maximam Veterum Patrum. Paris, 1697. vol. ii. p. 305), himself a Benedictine, rejects Bellarmin's and his brother Benedictine Maran's interpretation, and conceives Justin to mean, that the Son of G.o.d not only taught us those truths to which he was referring, with regard to the being and attributes of G.o.d, but also taught us that there were hosts of spiritual beings, called Angels; good beings, opposed to the demons of paganism. Bishop Kaye, in his excellent work on Justin Martyr, which the reader will do well to consult (p. 53), tells us he was sometimes inclined to think that Justin referred to the host of good angels who should surround the Son of G.o.d when he should come to judge the world. The view adopted by myself here was recommended by Grabe and by Langus, called The Interpreter of Justin; whilst Petavius, a Jesuit, though he does not adopt it, yet acknowledges that the Greek admits of our interpretation. Any one who would pursue the subject further may with advantage consult the preface to the Benedictine edition referred to in this work. Lumper Hist. Part ii. p. 225. Augustae Vindelicorum, 1784. Petavius, Theologicorum Dogmatum tom. vi. p. 298. lib. xv.
c. v. s. 5. Antwerp, 1700.
The whole pa.s.sage is thus rendered by Langus (as read in Lumper), ”Verum hunc ipsum, et qui ab eo venit, atque ista nos et aliorum obsequentium exaequatorumque ad ejus voluntatem bonorum Angelorum exercitura docuit, Filium, et Spiritum ejus prophetic.u.m, colimus et adoramus.”]
This interpretation is strongly confirmed by the professed sentiments both of Justin and of his contemporaries, {112} with regard to the Son of G.o.d and the holy angels.
It was a principle generally received among the early Christians, that whatever the Almighty did, either by creation or by the communication of his will, on earth or in heaven, was done by the Eternal Word. It was G.o.d the Son, the Logos, who created the angels[38], as well as ourselves; it was He who spoke to Moses, to Abraham, and to Lot; and it was He who conveyed the Supreme will, and the knowledge of the only true G.o.d, to the inhabitants of the world of spirits. Agreeably to this principle, in the pa.s.sage under consideration, Justin affirms (not that Christians revered and wors.h.i.+pped the angels, but), that G.o.d the Son, whom Christians wors.h.i.+pped as the eternal Prophet, Angel, and Apostle, of the Most High, instructed not only us men on earth, but also the host of heavenly angels[39], in these eternal verities, {113} which embrace G.o.d's nature and the duty of his creatures. [Trypho, -- 141. p. 231.]
[Footnote 38: Thus Tatian (p. 249 in the same edition of Justin), ”Before men were prepared, the Word was the Maker of angels.”]
[Footnote 39: ”The OTHER good angels.” Justin (Apol. i. sect.
lxiii. p. 81.) reminds us that Christ, the first-begotten of the Father, Himself G.o.d, was also an Angel (or Messenger), and an Apostle; and here Christ, as the Angel of the Covenant and the chief Apostle, is represented as instructing THE OTHER ANGELS in the truths of the economy of grace, just as he instructed his Apostles on earth,--”As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.”]
It is evident that Justin himself considered the host of angels to be equally with ourselves in a state of probation, requiring divine instruction, and partaking of it. It is also evident that many of his contemporaries entertained the same views; among others, Irenaeus and Origen. [Irenaeus, book ii. c. 30. p. 163. Origen, Hom. x.x.xii. in Joann.
-- 10. vol. iv. p. 430.] I will not swell this dissertation by quoting the pa.s.sages at length; though the pa.s.sages referred to in the margin will well repay any one's careful examination. But I cannot refrain from extracting the words in which each of those writers confirms the view here taken of Justin's sentiments.
Irenaeus, for example, says distinctly, ”The Son ever, anciently and from the beginning co-existing with the Father, always reveals the Father both to angels and archangels, and powers, and excellencies, and to all to whom G.o.d wishes to make a revelation[40].” And not less distinctly does Origen a.s.sert the same thing,--”Our Saviour therefore teaches, and the Holy Spirit, {114} who spake in the prophets, teaches not only men, but also angels and invisible excellencies.”
[Footnote 40: So far did some of the early Christians include the hosts of angels within the covenant of the Gospel, that Ignatius (Epist. ad Smyrn. -- 6. p. 36.) does not hesitate to p.r.o.nounce that the angels incur the Divine judgment, if they do not receive the doctrine of the atonement: ”Let no one be deceived. The things in heaven, and the glory of angels, and the powers visible and invisible, if they do not believe on the blood of Christ--for them is judgment.” They seem to have founded their opinion on the declaration of St. Paul (Eph. iii.
10): ”That now to the princ.i.p.alities and powers in heavenly places might be made known through the Church the manifold wisdom of G.o.d.”]
I will only add one more ancient authority, in confirmation of the view here taken of Justin's words. The pa.s.sage is from Athenagoras[41] and seems to be the exact counterpart of Justin's paragraph.
[Footnote 41: Athenagoras presented his defence, in which these words occur, to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, and his son Commodus, in the year 177.]
”Who would not wonder on hearing us called Atheists? we who call the Father G.o.d, and the Son G.o.d, and the Holy Ghost, showing both their power in the unity, and their distinction in order. Nor does our theology rest here; but we say, moreover, that there is a mult.i.tude of angels and ministers whom G.o.d, the Maker and Creator of the world, BY THE WORD PROCEEDING FROM HIM, distributed and appointed, both about the elements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things therein, and the good order thereof.” [Sect. 10. p. 287. edit. Just. Mart.]
I have already stated my inability to discover a single word in Justin Martyr which could be brought to sanction the invocation of saints; but his testimony is far from being merely negative. He admonishes us strongly against our looking to any other being for help or a.s.sistance, than to G.o.d only. Even when speaking of those who confide in their own strength, and fortune, and other sources of good, he says, in perfect unison with the pervading principles and a.s.sociations of his whole mind, as far as we can read them in his works, without any modification or any exception in favour of saint or angel: ”In that Christ {115} said, 'Thou art my G.o.d, go not far from me,' He at the same time taught, that all persons ought to hope in G.o.d, who made all things, and seek for safety and health from Him alone” [Trypho, -- 102, p. 197.]
SECTION II.--IRENaeUS.