Part 20 (1/2)
2. The same must be affirmed of the book called The Shepherd of HERMAS.
3. In CLEMENT of Rome, who speaks of the Lord Jesus having descended from Abraham according to the flesh, no mention is made of that daughter of Abraham of whom he was born.
4. IGNATIUS in a pa.s.sage already quoted (Ad Eph. vii. p. 13 and 16) speaks of Christ both in his divine and human nature as Son of G.o.d and man, and he mentions the name of Mary, but it is without any adjunct or observation whatever, ”both of Mary and of G.o.d.” In another place he speaks of her virgin state, and the fruit of her womb; and of her having borne our G.o.d Jesus the Christ; but he adds no {290} more; not even calling her ”The blessed,” or ”The Virgin.” In the interpolated Epistle to the Ephesians, the former pa.s.sage adds ”the Virgin” after ”Mary,” but nothing more.
5. In the Epistle of POLYCARP we find an admonition to virgins (Page 186), how they ought to walk with a spotless and chaste conscience, but there is no allusion to the Virgin Mary.
JUSTIN MARTYR. In this writer I do not find any pa.s.sage so much in point as the following, in which we discover no epithet expressive of honour, or dignity, or exaltation, though it refers to Mary in her capacity of the Virgin mother of our Lord:--”He therefore calls Himself the Son of Man, either from his birth of a virgin, who was of the race of David, and Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham, or because Abraham himself was the father of those persons enumerated, from whom Mary drew her origin.”
[Trypho, -- 100. p. 195.] And a little below he adds, ”For Eve being a virgin and incorrupt, having received the word from the serpent, brought forth transgression and death; but Mary the Virgin having received faith and joy (on the angel Gabriel announcing to her the glad tidings, that the Spirit of the Lord should come upon her, and the power of the Highest overshadow her) answered, Be it unto me according to thy word.
And of her was born He of whom we have shown that so many Scriptures have been spoken; He by whom G.o.d destroys the serpent, and angels and men resembling [the serpent]; but works a rescue from death for such as repent of evil and believe in Him.” One more pa.s.sage will suffice, ”And according to the command of G.o.d, Joseph, taking Him with Mary, went into Egypt.” [Trypho, -- 102. p. 196.] {291}
Among those ”Questions” to which we have referred under the head of Justin Martyr's works, but which are confessedly of a much less remote date, probably of the fifth century, an inquiry is made, How could Christ be free from blame, who so often set at nought his parent? The answer is, that He did not set her at nought; that He honoured her in deed, and would not have hurt her by his words;--but then the respondent adds, that Christ chiefly honoured Mary in that view of her maternal character, under which all who heard the word of G.o.d and kept it, were his brothers and sisters and mother; and that she surpa.s.sed all women in virtue. [Qu. 136. p. 500.]
IRENaeUS. To the confused pa.s.sage relied upon by Bellarmin, in which Irenaeus is supposed to represent Mary as the advocate of Eve, we have already fully referred (page 120 of this work). In that pa.s.sage there is no allusion to any honour paid, or to be paid to her, nor to any invocation of her. In every pa.s.sage to which my attention has been drawn, Irenaeus speaks of the mother of our Lord as Mary, or the Virgin, without any adjunct, or term of reverence.
CLEMENT of Alexandria speaks of the Virgin, and refers to an opinion relative to her virgin-state, but without one word of honour. [Stromat.
vii. 16. p. 889.]
TERTULLIAN[101]. The pa.s.sages in which this ancient writer refers to the mother of our Lord are very far from countenancing the religious wors.h.i.+p now paid to her by Roman Catholics: ”The brothers of the Lord had not believed on him, as it is contained in the Gospel published {292} before Marcion. His mother likewise is not shown to have adhered to him; whereas others, Marys and Marthas, were frequently in his company.” (See Tert. De carne Christi, c. 7. (p. 364. De Sacy, 29. 439.)) And he tells us that Christ was brought forth by a virgin, who was also about to be married once after the birth, that the two t.i.tles of sanct.i.ty might be united in Christ by a mother who was both a virgin and also once married[102].
[Footnote 101: Paris, 1675. De carne Christi, vii. p. 315. De Monogamia, vii. p. 529. N.B. Both these treatises were probably written after he became a Montanist.]
[Footnote 102: On the works once ascribed to Methodius, but now p.r.o.nounced to be spurious, see above, p. 131.]
ORIGEN thus speaks: ”Announcing to Zacharias the birth of John, and to Mary the advent of our Saviour among men.” [Comment on John, -- 24. vol.
iv. p. 82.] In his eighth homily on Leviticus, he refers to Mary as a pure Virgin. [Vol. ii. p. 228.] In the forged work of later times, the writer, speaking of our Saviour, says, ”He had on earth an immaculate and chaste mother, this much blessed Virgin Mary.” [Hom. iii. in Diversos.]
In CYPRIAN we do not find one word expressive of honour or reverence towards the Virgin Mary. Nor is her name mentioned in the letter of his correspondent Firmilian, Bishop of Cappadocia.
LACTANTIUS speaks of ”a holy virgin” [Vol. i. p. 299.] chosen for the work of Christ but not one other word of honour, or tending to adoration; though whilst dwelling on the incarnation of the Son of G.o.d, had he or his fellow-believers paid religious honour to her, he could scarcely have avoided all allusion to it.
EUSEBIUS speaks of the Virgin Mary, but is altogether silent as to any religious honour of any kind being due to her. In the Oration of the Emperor Constantine (as it is recorded by Eusebius), direct mention is made of the ”chaste virginity,” and of the maid who was mother {293} of G.o.d, and yet remained a virgin. But the object present to the author's mind was so exclusively G.o.d manifest in the flesh, that he does not throughout even mention the name of Mary, or allude to any honour paid or due to her. [Cantab. 1720. -- 11. p. 689. and -- 19. p. 703.]
ATHANASIUS, bent ever on establis.h.i.+ng the perfect divinity and humanity of Christ, thus speaks: ”The general scope of Holy Scripture is to make a twofold announcement concerning the Saviour, that He was always G.o.d, and is a Son; being the Word and the brightness and wisdom of the Father, and that He afterwards became man for us, taking flesh of the Virgin Mary, who bare G.o.d ([Greek: taes theotokou]).” [Athan. Orat. iii.
Cont. Arian. p. 579.]
The work which we have already examined, called The Apostolical Const.i.tutions, compiled probably about the commencement of the fourth century, cannot be read without leaving an impression clear and powerful on the mind, that no religious honour was paid to the Virgin Mary at the time when they were written; certainly not more than is now cheerfully paid to her memory by us of the Anglican Church. Take, for example, the prayer prescribed to be used on the appointment of a Deaconess; the inference from it must be, that others with whom the Lord's Spirit had dwelt, were at least held in equal honour with Mary: ”O Eternal G.o.d, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Maker of male and female, who didst fill with thy Spirit Miriam, and Hannah, and Holda, and didst not disdain that thy Son should be born of a woman,” &c. [Book viii. c. 20.]
Thus, {294} too, in another pa.s.sage, Mary is spoken of just as other women who had the gift of prophecy; and of her equally and in conjunction with the others it is said, that they were not elated by the gift, nor lifted themselves up against the men. ”But even have women prophesied; in ancient times Miriam, the sister of Aaron and Moses; after her Deborah; and afterwards Huldah and Judith; one under Josiah, the other under Darius; and the mother of the Lord also prophesied, and Elizabeth her kinswoman; and Anna; and in our day the daughters of Philip; yet they were not lifted up against the men, but observed their own measure. Therefore among you also should any man or woman have such a grace, let them be humble, that G.o.d may take pleasure in them.” [Book viii. c. 2.]
In the Apostolical Canons I find no reference to Mary; nor indeed any pa.s.sage bearing on our present inquiry, except the last clause of all, containing the benediction. In this pa.s.sage not only is the prayer for spiritual blessings addressed to G.o.d alone, but it is offered exclusively through the mediation of Christ alone, without alluding to intercessions of angels saints, or the Virgin: ”Now may G.o.d, the only unproduced Being, the Creator of all things, unite you all by peace in the Holy Ghost; make you perfect unto every good work, not to be turned aside, unblameable, not deserving reproof; and may He deem you worthy of eternal life with us, by the mediation of his beloved Son Jesus Christ our G.o.d and Saviour: with whom be glory to Him the Sovereign G.o.d and Father, in the Holy Ghost the Comforter, now and ever, world without end. Amen.” [Vol. i. p. 450.]
I have not intentionally omitted any ancient author {295} falling within the limits of our present inquiry, nor have I neglected any one pa.s.sage which I could find bearing testimony to any honour paid to the Virgin.
The result of my research is, that I have not discovered one solitary expression which implies that religious invocation and honour, such as is now offered to Mary by the Church of Rome, was addressed to her by the members of the primitive Catholic Church. {296}
CHAPTER III.--THE a.s.sUMPTION OF THE VIRGIN MARY.