Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 2.djvu/209

Rh A P A P 195 taut. These rules contain a tolerably complete directory for the guidance of the clergy in their daily life and usual round of duties. It is somewhat remarkable that the life of the ordinary layman is for the most part left unnoticed; four Canons only deal with the laity, the rest of them speak of the clerical life and that alone. The authority of these Canons varies in the Eastern and in the Western Church. The Eastern Church, following the guidance of John of Damascus, has received as authoritative the whole eighty- five, and makes them of equal authority with the Epistles of St Paul, i.e., acknowledges that they possess plenary authority. The Western* Church has always hesitated to receive more than the first fifty, and has received them more on the recommendations of such distinguished popes as John II., Stephen III., and Urban II. , than because of their own intrinsic value; and it was only when they were incorporated in the decretals that they obtained a real authority. According to some authors, they are first quoted in the Acts of the Synod of Constantinople, in 394 A.D., and in those of the Synods of Ephesus and Chalcedon, in 431 and 451 A.D. Some have said that they are mentioned in the Decretum de libris recipiendis, issued by Pope Gelasius (492-496 A.D.), while others have pointed out that the name occurs in those MSS. only which have the decree of Hormisdas (514-523). Perhaps the soundest decision is, that the collection is not mentioned in history until about the end of the 5th century ; it is undoubted that it was in existence before the beginning of the 6th, for the Latin trans lation of the first fifty Canons dates from the year 500 A.D. A great deal of criticism has been expended upon this collection of ecclesiastical rules. It was once commonly received that the Apostolic Canons were the authoritative decisions upon church life and discipline enacted by the first council of Jerusalem, whose proceedings are recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. Since the 16th century juster views have prevailed. The Canons themselves contain statements which are almost identical with many passages in Holy Scripture, and with many of the decisions of the earlier synods and councils, more especially those I of Antioch, Nicaea, and Laodicea ; it is also evident that much that they include is but the description of the tradi tion and practice of the church then existing. The follow ing questions then arise : (1.) Are the passages which resemble what we find in Scripture taken therefrom, or from contemporary independent oral tradition 1 ? and, (2.) Have the rules, which are almost literally identical with the decisions of the earlier councils, suggested and formed the basis of these.decisions, or are they themselves suggested by the decisions of the councils 1 When we bear in mind the fact that the historical existence of the Holy Scriptures and of the councils is well assured, and that we have no trustworthy evidence of the existence of this collection until the end of the 5th century, the conclusion forces itself upon us that the Apostolic Canons must be based upon the Acts of the earlier councils, not these upon the Canons. Critics have differed about the precise date of the compila tion. The Magdeburg Centuriators think that it was some time in the 3d century ; while Dalleus is of opinion that it was not until the middle of the 5th century ; others place it between these dates. Perhaps the best conclusion we can come to is that the so-called Apostolic Canons are a compilation of practical rules for the guidance of the clergy made from holy Scripture, the decisions of the earlier councils, and existing ecclesiastical usage, by an unknown ecclesiastic belonging to the Syrian Church, who lived in the 4th or 5th century. _ See Dalleus, De Pseudcpigmphis Apostolorum ; Franciscus Tur- rianua, Pro Canonibus Apostolorum, who asserts their apostolic APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS are a collection of eight books of directions and prescriptions on ecclesiastical and theological matters, for which apostolic origin and authority have frequently been claimed. It is probable that the first six books form the earliest part of the whole, and it is certain that they were known and quoted as a separate treatise, under^the title TO. StSao-KaXta TOJV ATrooroAwv; the seventh book was also separately known, and in many parts bears a curious resemblance to the Epistle of St Barnabas ; the eighth is also an independent work, and is more legislative than the others. Historians have differed as to the first mention of the collection. Some, without much warrant, think that the work is mentioned by Euse- bius and Athanasius, under the title StSa^ or SiSa^at rwv ATroo-ToAcov ; while others, with more justice, think that it is not alluded to by any well-known writer until Epiphanius (d. 402), quotes it under the name Siara^is TUJI/ ATTO- o-ToXwv SiSao-KaAia. It was well known in the 6th and 7th centuries. The book as a whole has never been received as an authority in the church, and its influence has been greater in the East than in the West. The prin cipal defenders of its apostolic origin and authority have been such English Episcopalian writers as Stapleton, Whiston, and Pearson. See &quot;Whiston, Primitive Christianity Revived, 1711 ; Baur, Ueber der Ursprung des Episcopats in der Christlichen Kirche. (T. M. L.) APOSTOLIC FATHERS. The apostolic fathers is a name given to certain writers [in the earliest period of Christianity, who were believed to have been the disciples of the apostles, and to have had intercourse with them. Those generally included under the title are Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, and Hernias. Sometimes the name is extended to Papias of Hierapolis and the writer of the Epistle to Diognetus. A critical examination of the writings attributed to these men, and a critical sifting of the traditions which we have in relation to their history, bring out the circumstance that the name is unsuitable. Clemens Romanus, Barnabas, and Hermas were supposed to be persons mentioned in the New Testa ment; but criticism proves conclusively that this is a mistake in regard to Barnabas and Hermas, and possibly also in regard to Clemens. Polycarp, in all probability, and according to the best testimony, had intercourse with apostles, but it was in his early youth; and his Letter belongs to a period considerably later than that of the apostles. The Epistles of Ignatius, as well as the personal history of that martyr, are involved in great obscurity, and critics differ widely in regard to both. At the same time, the writings assigned by most critics to these men with some degree of certainty belong to a very early age of Christianity. They are among the earliest utterances of the Christian faith which have come down to us. All of them are of the nature of occasional productions, with perhaps the exception of the Pastor of Hermas. All of them breathe a spirit of deep piety. There is no attempt to formulate the truths of Christianity. There are very few references to the books of the New Testament, and very few quotations from them. All of them are written in Greek. Clemens Romamis. According to the statement of Irenaeus, Clemens was the third bishop of the Roman Church ; this seems to have been the tradition among the Greek writers. Tertullian, on the other hand, seems to have believed that he was the first bishop, and that he had been ordained by St Peter. Origen regarded him as the Clemens mentioned in the Epistle to the Philrppians, and Clemens Alexandrinus often calls him an apostle. Nothing is known of his death. Very late fictions represented him as a martyr. Eusebius gives as the date of his episcopate from 93 to 101 A.D. The only writing which can in any
 * Bickrell, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts. (T. M. L.)