HIERARCHY
340
HIERARCHY
nology, no clear distinction can be discovered in his
writings between bisliops and presbyters, (c) It is
certain tliat the presbyters are identical with the
irpoTiyoviicvoi antl tlie pastors, (d) They are primarily
pastors of souls, whose duty it is to preserve the proper
spirit in the community, (e) Hennas .says nothing
about bishops of the Roman community; they are
spoken of in company with the Apostles, teachers, antl
deacons as stones that go to build up the etlifice of the
Ecclesia; in a subordinate measure their office is to be
one of devotion to works of charity and the cares of
the poor. Since in Hermas's time the name inluKo-Ko^
was extensively used for the monarchical bishop, Her-
mas seems to have had one in mind. The Clement
spoken of by him in Vis., ii, 4, 3 is evidently such an
episkopos in Rome; Hermas gives him no official title;
his duty it is to sentl to the other Churches the book
given to Hermas by the ecclesia. The teachers (oiSdo--
KoXoi, Vis., iii, 5, 1; Sim., i.x, \r>, 4; IB, 5; 25, 2; Man.,
iv, 3, 1, SiSdcrraXoi Tronriplas Sim., ix, 19,2) are preach-
ers of the Word of Clod, (f) A certain strife for prece-
dence between the rulers of the community and promi-
nent Christians, which Hermas seems to refer to, is of
course no proof of a contest about the ecclesiastical
constitution itself. It is probable that not only the
holders of office were entitled to the first places of
honour in the common assemblies but the teachers as
well, who thus were numbered among the irpwroKaSeSpT-
Tai. The assertion is constantly made, bvit cannot be
proved, that Hermas included them among those en-
dowed with mystical or miraculous " spiritual " gifts.
(S) Justin Martyr. — In his first "Apology" Justin
Martyr represents the presiding officer (Trpofa-rus) at
the Divine service as a liturgical agent, by whose
prayer in the Eucharistic celebration, the bread and
wine are changed into the Boily and Blood of Christ
(Ixv, 3-5; Ixvii, 5). After a lector has read, the same
presiding officer addresses words of counsel and en-
couragement to the assembled brethren (Ixvii, 4). He
also receives the voluntary offerings of those present,
and distributes them to the widows and orphans, to
the sick, the prisoners, and strangers, in short to all
who need help (Ixvii, 6 and 7). We find therefore in
Rome about the year 150 a monarchical presiding offi-
cer who acts as liturgical celebrant, teacher, and de-
clarer of the Word of God and as administrator of the
sacred funds: an interesting testimony. Justin does
not speak of presbyters, but mentions deacons; they
distribute the E^ucharist to those present and bring it
to the homes of those who are absent (Ixv, 5; Ixvii, 5).
(9) Hegesippus. — In his " Memorabilia " (the book was probably called v-Kop.vfiiiaTa) , he describes the in- errant tradition of the Apostolic teaching. He re- gards the unbroken succession of bishops as the guar- antee of truth (cf. Euseb. " Hist. Eccl.", iv, 22, 1 sq.). On his journey to Rome he found the true doctrine in Corinth, and mentions Bishop Primus in this connex- ion. In Rome he " examined the .series of the bishops of that place " as far as Anicetus {(Troirjcrdpi-qv tt)v ScaSo- XV") the translation; " I made for myself a list of them in their succession" is hardly credible; Rufinus's con- jecture " ' mansi ', I abode there " (SiaTpi/Sijc ^iroiTjtrdjuT)!') IS arbitrary; theSvTiac reads literally: " I made there in the derivation of the bishops" (Nestle). I read: StaSoxv^ rfp^VfTjaiip.rji' or iiT0VTiff6.}xriv.
(10) Abercius. — It seems to me as good as proved that Abercius was Bishop of Ilierapolis (not Ilicropo- lis) in Phrygia (Salutaris) in the second half of the sec- ond century. The attempt of some scholars, notably Dieterichs (Die Cirabschrift des Aberkios, 1S96), to deny the Christian character of the epitaph appears to have found a final refutation in Fr. Cmnont [" L'in- scription d'.\bercius et son dernier ex(5gete" in the "Revue <le I'instr. publique en Belgique" (1897), 91; cf . also Ramsay, " Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia", II (Oxford, 1.S97), 722 sq. and 788 sq. and the excellent article of H. Leclercq in Dom Cabrol's " Dictionnaire
d'Arch(ologie chr<5tienne et de Liturgie", I, 1903,
66 sq.]. Here we can only mention his witness to the
primacy of the Roman Church (U-lSj.
(11) Gnosticism and Montanism. — The fantastic speculations of the Gnostics of the .second and third centuries, which apotheosizetl the Apostles as demi- gods and a-ons, supply, of course, no more material to the hi-storian than those other Gnostic teachings which minimized the authority of the first Apostles in order to raise to prominence the secret doctrine and the personality of the Gnostic teachers. The same is to be .said of the Gnostic metaphysical doctrine of the Church. The Epistle of the Gnostic Ptolema>us to Flora deserves special notice (Epiphanius, "Ilsres.", XXXIII,c. iii, ed. Oehlerll, I,401seq.). kX I he close of c. vii (ib., 413) Flora's attention is called to the Apostolic doctrine, "which we also have received through a line of succession" (fiv (k SiaSox^s *oI ^/xf TTapeiKrjfaix(v). The "also" is worthy of remark. I'tolema'us means that not merely the universal Church, l^ut they also had an Apostolic tradition. The progress of historical investigation disproves more and more the assumption of certain Protestant scholars that the Cinostics were the first to elaborate the theories of Tradition and Apostolic succession, and that afterward the Catholic Church gradually and unconsciously assimilated them. Catholic scholar- ship has recently established the following two points:
(a) The polemical writings of Irenanis and Tertullian offer clear proof that the ideas of Tradition and .Apos- tolic succession, with which these ecclesiastical writers repeatedly assail the (inostics, were inherited from ancient times, at any rate in their essential character.
(b) The most rigidly critical analysis of the tinostic system has demonstrated that their theories of Tra- dition and Apostolic succession .show unmistakable signs of ijeing the copy and replica of a system already existing.
Marcion and his Church should be mentioned in this connexion, although Marcionism cannot be directly classified as Cinosticism. The same remarks, however, apply to him. His Church is precisely lacking in those elements, which constitute the chief strength of the Catholic Church: unity of Faith, unity anil perma- nence of government. The legend of a well-established organization of the Marcionite comnumitics about the year 160, far surpassing in firmness that of the Roman Church, originated in a misimderstanding. The true statement is this: At the time of the first appearance of Marcion and his doctrines, speculative minds of many Christians were inclined, in conse- quence of Gnostic theorizing, to reject as a deceiver the God of the Old Testament and to accept instead a tiod the Father who was superior to Him, and un- known to Him as well. This Ciod enters into relation with the world through a series of intermediary beings. One of these ajons unites himself with the man Jesus and operates apparently as a mere human being. These assertions disgusted and repelled many minds, not merely because of the grotesque theory of inter- mediary existences, liut also because of the impossi- bility of reconciling the Christian Scriptures with this new doctrine and would-be .secret tiadition. The contradictions were jialpable and unavoidable; and the as.sertions altogether arbitrary and devoid of proof. For this reason Marcion abandoneil first his fanta.stic theory of ;eons, then his my.stical dream of ecstatic and prophetic inspirations, and finally his fraudulent fiction of a secret tradition. Thereupon he tried to solve the contradictions of his system by re- jecting the Old Testament, taking as a basis St. Paul, to the exclusion, however, of everything Jewish in the Epistles, retaining only the Gospel of St. Luke, and assuming a more convenient position. Jesus was merely the good God manifesting himself under an apparently human form. Everything centred around the doctrine of the Redemption; he rejected all
