in the background or ]>ractically explained away. There are few who would care to assert the doctrine in so uneomproniising a form as that which Kobert Browning, in "Jolianncs Agricola in Meditation", with undoubted accuracy, iuscribes to the Lutheran originator of the heresy: —
I have God's warrant, could I blend
All hideous sins, lus in a cup, To drink the niinsled venoms up;
Secure my nature would convert The drauglit to blossomiufc gladness fast:
While sweet dews turn to the gourd's hurt, And bloat, and while they bloat it, blast,
As from the first its lot was cast.
For this rea.san it is not always an easy matter to determine with any degree of precision how far cer- tain forms and offslioots of Calvinism, Socinianism, or even Lutheranism, may not be .susceptible of Antinomian interpretations; wliile at the same time it must be remembered that many sects and indi- viduals holding opinions dubiously, or even indu- bitably, of an .\ntinomian nature, would indignantly repudiate any direct charge of teaching that evd works and immoral actions are no sins in tlie ca.se of justified Christians. The shatles and gradations of heresy here merge insensibly tlie one into the other. To say that a man cannot sin because he is justified is very much the same tiling as to state that no action, whetlier sinful in itself or not, can be imputed to the justified Christian as a sin. Nor is the doctrine that gooii works do not help in pro- moting the sanctification of an individual far re- moved from the teaching that evil deeds do not interfere with it. There is a certain logical nexus between these three forms of the Protestant doc- trine of justification that would .seem to have its natural outcome in the assertion of .\ntinoniianisni. The only doctrine that is conclusively and officially opposed to this heresy, as well as to those forms of the doctrine of justification by faith alone that are so closely connected with it, both doctrinally and historically, is to be found in the Catholic dogma of Faith, Justification, and Sanctification.
DecreUi Dngmatica Concilii Trideritini: Sess. VI; Bellar- HlNi-:, De Jutlificfitione: Jutlicium de Libra Concordantice Lutheranorum; Ai.zoo. Church History, III: Ligcori, The His- tory of Iltrenea (tr. MuLl.ocil); Formula Concordia; Elwkrt, De Antinomid J. Attricotw htebii; Hagendach, A Tert Book of thf- History of Doctrinefi; Bell. The Wanderinga of the Human Intellect; Hull, Opera; Hall, Remains; Sanders. Sermons; Rutherford. A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist openina the secrets of Familisme and Antinomianisme in the Anti-cnrtstian Doctrine of J. Sattmarsh; Gatakkr, An Anti- dole af/ninst Error Conrerniny Justification; Antinomianism Discovered and Unmasked; I^axter, The Scripture Gospel defemied . , . In ttco books . . . The second upon the aiulden reviving of Antinomianism; Fletcher. Four Checks to Anlinomianiam; Cottle, .In Account of Plymouth Anli- nomiana; Teulon, History and Teacliing of the Plymouth Brethren; Nelson, A Review and Analyaia of Bishop Bulla Erpotition . . . of JuatifUation.
Antioch ('An-ioxf'a, Antiochia) , TmeChitijch of. — I. Origin- a.nd Histoky of thk City. — Of the vast empire conquered by .Mexander the Great many states were formed, one of which comprised Syri.a and other countries to the east and west of it. This realm fell to the lot of one of the conqueror's gen- erals, Scleucus Nicator, or Seleucus I, founder of the dynasty of the Seleucida?. About the year 300 n. c. he founded a city on the banks of the lower Orontes, some twenty miles from the Syrian coast, and a short distance below .^ntieonia, the capital of his defeated rival Antigonus. The city which was named An- tioch, from Antiochus the father of Seleucus, was meant to be the capital of the new realm. It was situated on the northern slope of .Mount Silpius, on an agreeable and well-chosen site, and stretched as far as the Oronte.s, which there flows from east to west. It grew soon to large proportions; new
quarters or suburbs were added to it, so that ulti- mately it consisted of four towns enclosed by as many distinct walls and by a common rampart, which with the citadel reached to the summit of .Mount Silpius. When Syria was made a Roman province by Pompey (64 B. c), Antioch continued to be the metropolis of the East. It also Ixicaine the residence of the legates, or governors, of Syria. In fact, Antioch, after Rome and Alexandria, was the largest city of the empire, with a [Jopulation of over half a million. Whenever the emperors came to the East they honoured it with their presence. The Seleucida^ as well as the Roman rulers vied with one another in adorning and enriching the city with statues, theatres, temples, aqueducts, public baths, gardens, fountains, and cascades; a broad avenue with four rows of columas, forming covered porticoes on each side, traversed the city from east to west, to the length of several miles. Its most attractive pleasure resort Wiis the beautiful grove of laurels and cypres.ses called Daphne, some four or five miles to the west of the city. It was renowned for its park- like appearance, for its magnificent temple of .\i)ollo, and ior the pompous religious festival held in the month of Augu.st. From it Antioch was .sometimcjs surnamed Epidaphnes. The population included a great variety of races. There were Macedonians and Greeks, native Syrians and Phoenicians, Jews and Romans, besides a contingent from further Asia; many Hocked there because Seleucus had given to all the right of citizenship. Nevertheless, it re- mained always predominantly a Greek city. The inhabitants did not enjoy a great reputation for learning or virtue; they were excessively devoted to pleasure, and universally known for their witticisms and sarcjism. Not a few of their peculiar traits have reached us through the sermons of St. John (.'hrj-s- ostom, the letters of Libanius, the "Mi.sopogon" of Julian, and other litcrarj' sources. Their loyalty to imperial authority could not always Ix; dependc<l upon. In spite of these defects there was at all times in .\ntioch a certain number of men, especially in the Jewish colony, who were given to serious thoughts, even to thoughts of religion. After the fifth century .\ntioch lost much of its size and im- portance. It was visited by frequent eartlKjuakes, by not less than ten from the second centuiy B. c. to the end of the sixth century of the Christian era. Twice it was captured and sacked by the Per- sians, in .\. n. 260 and .5-10. On the latter occasion it was almost completely destroyed, but was rebuilt by the Emperor Justinian I (.527-56.5) on a much smaller scale, and called Theopolis. It is .said that no small portion of his walls remained until 182.5. a specimen of the military architecture of the sixth century. In 6.38 it was taken by the .Mohammedans, was restored to the Byzantine ICmpire in 969, and reconcpiered by the Seljuks in 1081. From 1098 until 1268 it was in the hands of the Crusaders and their descendants; the Sultan Bibars of Egj'pt took it in 1268; and in 1517 it came with Syria under the Turkish ICmpire. The former populous metropolis of the East is now the small town of Antakia witli about 20,000 inhabitants (see Aleppo).
II. Chkistianity of Antioch. — Since the city of Antioch was a great centre of government and civili- zation, the Christian religion spread thither almost from the beginning. Nicohvs, one of the seven deacons in Jerusalem, was from Antioch (Acts, vi, 5). The seed of Christ's teaching was carried to Antioch by some disciples from Cj'prus and Cyrene, who fled from Jerusalem during the persecution that followed upon the martyrdom of St. Stephen (Acts, xi, 19, 20). They preached the teachings of Jesus, not only to the Jewish colony but al.so to the (ireeks or Gen- tiles, and soon large nuinl>ers were converted. The mother-church of Jerusalem having heard of the