CLOSING LIGHTS OF THE FOURTH CENTURY.

AMBROSE, AUGUSTINE AND CHRYSOSTOM.

BY THE EDITOR.

As we advance towards the close of the fourth century, the darkness of the moral firmament becomes more appalling. "The mother of harlots" becomes more gaudy in her dress, more pompous in her mien, and is rapidly approaching the zenith of her power, while the light of truth and primitive piety is scarcely perceptible, amid the fogs and damps of superstition, oppression and infidelity. The closing, but feeble lights of the century, were those named above, and a few less prominent individuals. AMBROSE was born about A. D. 333, being the son of a prætorian prefect of the same name. His father was governor-general of Gaul, Britain and Spain. He was thoroughly educated, and became an advocate, counsellor to Probus, the successor of his father. Finally, he was appointed governor of Liguria and Emylia, residing at Milan. A. D. 374, Auxentius, bishop of that place, died, and Ambrose, having entered the church to quell the riot caused by the Arians and Orthodox, in attempting to elect a bishop, was proclaimed bishop by the mob, from the fact that a little child happened to say, "Ambrose, bishop." He was a worldly man, and entirely unfitted for such a place, yet he was compelled to accept of the office. He renounced his civil honors, gave up his property, was baptized, and entered with much zeal into the duties of his office. In 377, he fled to Illyricum, and thence to Rome, on account of an irruption of Barbarians. He contended sharply with the Arians, and was considered as an orthodox Father. He was a good general scholar, and some suppose he was a devoted Christian. He wrote several works upon the Scriptures; but they do not seem to have been of great importance, though he is considered as one of the leading Fathers. Dr. Woods, in his work on Infant Baptism*, after presenting a passage from the writings of this Father, asserts that Ambrose "plainly signifies that infants were baptized in the time of the apostles, as well as in his own time." But we think the Dr. is mistaken. The clause which he thinks proves his point, is the following, as he translates it: "by which those who are baptized in infancy, are reformed from a wicked state to the primitive state of their nature." The word "parvuli,”

* Page 127, 2nd Edition. † Perquae in primordia naturæ suæ, qui baptizate fuerint parvuli, a malitia reformantur.

used by Ambrose, is not properly translated by Woods, "in infancy." The Latin term for infants is infantes. Parvuli means little children, the young. It includes in its signification, as we have before shown persons capable of receiving instruction, and there is no evidence in the passage that reference is made to infants. We perceive no more force in the other instances presented by Woods. Ambrose, like other divines of that age, undoubtedly maintained that believers only are the proper subjects of baptism, and that immersion is the proper mode. But he probably believed baptism to be a saving ordinance, and that infants and others, who were dangerously ill, might receive the ordinance by pouring or sprinkling, if they were not able to be immersed.

AURELIUS AUGUSTINUS, was a native of Tagaste in Numidia. He was born A. D. 354, was well educated, and taught rhetoric at Carthage, Rome and Milan. He was finally attracted by the eloquence of Ambrose, and became, it is believed, a truly pious man. He was baptized when thirty-three years of age, went to Africa, and lived as a recluse three years. A. D. 391, he proceeded to a town in Algiers, where he was appointed a presbyter, and preached with much acceptance. After a time he became distinguished, and was ordained as the colleague of Valerius, his bishop. In that capacity he labored five years, and accomplished much good, and died A. D. 430, aged seventy-six years. He was a man of extensive learning and fine talents.

He was an able polemical writer, and some of his works are of great value. The Benedictine edition of them, is published in eleven volumes. His eagerness to defend what he believed to be the truth, sometimes led him into extremes; but he will always be considered as one of the ablest defenders of Christianity among the Fathers. Still he advocated infant baptism, and maintained that it was derived from the Apostles. Dr. Neander says of Origen: "His words in that age cannot have much weight, for whatever was regarded as important, was allowed to be from the Apostles. Besides, many walls of partition intervened between this age and that of the Apostles, to intercept the view." Augustine lived nearly two hundred years after Origen, and if Neander's testimony is correct in reference to Origen, how much more so, in respect to Au-, gustine. The latter, as we have intimated, carried his controversial arguments to an extreme, and did, doubtless, in respect to infant baptism. But why did he believe infant baptism to be derived from the apostles? Because, he says, "whatever has prevailed in the church at all times, and in all places, and yet was not established by councils,

* See Bap Memorial, Vol. IX p. 54.

must be regarded as apostolical." How could he say this, when he must have known that the learned Tertullian violently opposed the rite, and considered it as an innovation? In our opinion, this circumstance entirely destroys the validity of Augustine's testimony. In his zeal to oppose his antagonists, he is carried beyond the limits of truth, in advo cating an unscriptural ceremony. Dr. Woods is welcome to such a wit ness, and he seems much pleased with his testimony.

JOHN CHRYSOSTOм, was born A. D. 354, at Antioch, in Syria. His father, whose name was Secundus, was a military character. Chrysostom was well educated, and is said to have become really pious when quite young. At the age of twenty he entered upon a monastic life, retired to the mountains, and spent three years with a hermit, and two more in a solitary cave. In 381 he returned to Antioch, and was appointed deacon. In 386 he was ordained a presbyter, and began to preach. He became Patriarch of Constantinople, A. D. 398. The faithfulness of his preaching, and the austerities of his life, raised enemies against him in that corrupt age, and in 403 he was condemned, deposed, and banished. But his friends caused him to be recalled. The next year be was removed to Cucusus in Armenia, where he suffered much. Thence he was removed to Pityus in Colchis: but expired on the road thither, aged fifty-two. He was bitterly persecuted, but endured his sufferings with religious fortitude, and is now, doubtless, reaping the rich reward of his fidelity in a better world.

Chrysostom is thought to have had no equal among the Fathers in eloquence. He had a powerful intellect, and a vivid imagination. He exhibited a peculiar richness of illustration, and an elevated style. He was a voluminous writer, his works consisting of three hundred and fifty sermons and orations, six hundred and twenty homilies on different books of the sacred scriptures, two hundred and fifty letters, several tracts, and a treatise on the Priesthood.

His testimony on baptism is of importance, though he is thought by some to favor pædobaptism. Like others of whom we have spoken, he believed baptism to be a saving ordinance, and that infants should receive it in case of dangerous illness, and probably by affusion or sprinkling, if they were unable to be immersed, though he never mentions sprinkling in any part of his writings. Expressions occasionally appear in his works, which, at first sight, would seem to favor the practice of infant baptism. Dr. Woods lays hold of one or two such expressions with great eagerness, and converts the venerable Father at once into an advocate of an unscriptural rite. The Doctor presents a quotation from Chrysostom's writings, by Augustine, in which the former says. "Some think that the heavenly grace (of baptism) consists only in

forgiveness of sins; but I have reckoned up ten advantages of it. For this cause we baptize infants also, though they are not defiled with sin.” Chrysostom, it is true, recognises infant baptism; but he may refer only to those who are ill, and are baptized to save their souls. The very manner of expression, "infants also," seems to indicate that it was something superadded to. the usual custom-something out of the common course for infants to be baptized. But that Chrysostom referred to clinical baptism is strongly confirmed by other expressions of the same Father. He always speaks of baptism as "a plunging into the water and rising out of it." "The whole man is entirely concealed by the immersion." Again he explains baptism as being an immersion, and then an emersion. * In his Homily on John, he says: "When our heads enter the water as a tomb, the old man is buried, and plunging down, is all at once entirely concealed." In Chrysostom's Comments on Mark 10: 39, he speaks of Christ as indicating his descent into death,

as a baptism," as when one "in the use of water is baptized and rises again.". In his seventeenth Homily, he says: "Our Lord delivered to his disciples one baptism by three immersions." Dr. Woods refers to another passage, in which he supposes Chrysostom to maintain that baptism is substituted for circumcision. But Chrysostom evidently makes a comparison simply between the circumcision of the Jews, and the circumcision of the heart, or that "without hands," as he expresses it, which he believed was received in the act of baptism. This is very different from maintaining that baptism is substituted for circumcision. Paul makes a similar comparison: "In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." ‡ There is no allusion by Paul to baptism, and Chrysostom alludes to it because he believed it to be a saving ordinance, and that the circumcision of which Paul speaks, is received in the act of baptism.

In view of these passages from that learned Father we cannot give him up to the Pædobaptists entirely. He certainly maintained that immersion was the only proper mode of baptism, except in cases of dangerous illness. Infant affusion and sprinkling were practised to some extent in his day, and perhaps some were sprinkled who were not dangerously sick, fearing that they might suddenly die, and thus lose their souls. Doubtless Chrysostom was influenced to some extent by the practice: but his language which we have quoted forbids the idea that he was an advocate of it.

* το βαπτιζεσθαι και καταδυεσθαι ειτα ανάδευειν. Hom. 12, on I Cor. † και καταδυς κατω κρυπτεται όλος καθαπαξ. Hom. 25.

+ Col. 2 11.

THE FRIENDSHIP OF CHRIST.

"There is a Friend, that sticketh closer than a brother." Prov. 18: 24.

SUCH a friend is Christ to every true Christian, however weak in faith or young in grace : "Such a friend is Christ to me."

He

How wonderful His condescension in forming this friendship? is the "brightness of his Father's glory;" I, a worm of the earth-weak -wicked-rebellious; yet he laid aside his glory, assumed our naturecame into our world-lived-labored--suffered-and died upon the cross to befriend me. "Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that • ye through his poverty might be rich."-2 Cor. 8: 9. Wonderful love! disinterested compassion! unparalleled friendship! Did ever any other friend or brother stick so close as this? But why did he love me? When I look at my poor, sinful, depraved heart, I can see nothing there to love. If there is any thing good in my heart, it is His own gift. The cause of this friendship can only be found in the infinite love of His own heart.

Am I lost? He saves me by His death. Am I guilty and condemned? He pardons and justifies me through his blood. Is my case perplexed and difficult before God? Christ becomes my counsellor, intercessor and surety. Am I poor, and blind, and extremely needy? He makes me rich, opens my eyes, and supplies all of my numerous wants. Precious thought! Love how amazing, wonderful! why should it be exercised towards me?

"Oh! for such love let rocks and hills

Their lasting silence break

And all harmonious human tongues

The Saviour's praises speak."

Am I clothed in rags? Isa. 64: 6. Christ is not ashamed of me; but clothes me with the robe of His own righteousness. What a costly, glorious dress! "Angels might envy a dress like mine." Am I poor? Christ enriches me; makes me an heir of God, and a joint heir with himself; gives me a portion for the way; and an eternal inheritance at the end. Am I in slavery-" sold unto sin," to the world, the flesh, and the devil? Christ, by the virtue of his blood, and the power of His spirit, breaks off my chains, and bids me go free in all the dignity of a free