Antiquitates apoitolicæ, or, The history of the lives, acts and martyrdoms of the holy apostles of our Saviour and the two evangelists SS. Mark and Lvke to which is added an introductory discourse concerning the three great dispensations of the church, patriarchal, Mosiacal and evangelical : being a continuation of Antiquitates christianæ or the life and death of the holy Jesus / by William Cave ...

THE LIFE OF S. MARK the Evangelist.

[illustration]

The Evangelist S^t. Mark.

He having been the Coadiutor of S^t. Paul & S^t. Peter severally, at Alexandria planted & governd a Church and there by the violence of the Pagan multitude suffered Martyrdom. AD. 64. Baron & Centur

[illustration]

S^t. Mark's Martyrdom.

Hebr. 11.35.

Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection.

Of whom the world was not worthy.

His Kindred, and distinction from others of the same Name. Whether one of the Seventy. His Conversion. His attendance upon Peter, and Preaching the Gospel in Italy, and at Rome. His planting Christianity at Alexandria, and great success there. An account of the Therapeutae (mentioned by Philo) and their excellent manners, rules, and way of Life. These proved not to have been Christians by several arguments. The Original of the mistake whence. S. Mark's Preaching in the Parts of Africk. His return to Alex∣andria, and diligence in his Ministry. The manner of his Martyrdom. The time of it enquired into. The description of his Person. His Gospel, when and where written, and why said to be Peter's. His great impartiality in his Relations. In what Language written. The Original whether extant at this Day.

1. SAINT Mark, though carrying something of Roman in his Name, probably assumed by him upon some great change, or accident of his Life, or which was not unusual among the Jews, when going into the European Provinces of the Roman Empire, taken up at his going for Italy and Rome, was doubtless born of Jewish Parents, ori∣ginally descended of the Tribe of * 1.1 Levi, and the Line of the Priesthood, and (if ‖ 1.2 Nicephorus say true) Sister's Son to Peter, though by others against all reason confounded with John sirnamed Mark the Son of Mary, and Mark Sisters Son to Barnabas. By the Ancients he is generally thought to have been one of the Seventy Disciples, and * 1.3 Epiphanius expresly tell us, that he was one of those who taking exception at our Lord's discourse of eating his Flesh and drinking his Bloud, went back and walked no more with him, but was seasonably reduced and reclaimed by Peter. But no foundation appears either for the one or for the other; nay, ‖ 1.4 Papias Bishop of Hiera∣polis, who lived near those times, positively affirms that he was no hearer nor follower of our Saviour. He was converted by some of the Apostles, and probably by S. Peter, who is said to have been his undertaker at his Baptism (if I understand Isidore * 1.5 aright) for no other reason I suppose, than because he calls him his Son. Indeed he was his constant attendant in his Travels, supplying the place of an Amanuensis and Interpreter; for though the Apostles were Divinely inspired, and among other miracu∣lous powers had the gift of Languages conferred upon them, yet was the interpretation of Tongues a gift more peculiar to some than others. This might probably be S. Mark's Talent, in expounding S. Peter's Dis∣courses, whether by word or writing, to those who understood not the Language wherein they were delivered. He accompanied him in his Apostolical progress, Preached the Gospel in ‖ 1.6 Italy, and at Rome, where at the request of the Christians of those Parts he composed and wrote his Gospel.

2. BY Peter he was sent into Egypt to plant Christianity in those Parts, fixing his main residence at Alexandria, and the places thereabouts: where so great (says * 1.7 Eusebius) was the success of his Ministry, that he converted Multitudes both of Men and Women, not only to the embracing of the Christian Religion, but to a more than ordinarily strict profession of it, in∣somuch that Philo wrote a Book of their peculiar Rites and way of Life, the only reason why ‖ 1.8 S. Hierom reckons him among the Writers of the Church. Indeed Philo the Jew wrote a Book 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, extant at this day, wherein he speaks of a sort of Persons called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who in many parts of the World, but especially in a pleasant place near the Meraeotick Lake in Egypt had formed themselves into Religious Societies, and gives a large account of their Rites and Customs, their strict, philosophical, and contemplative course of life. He tells * 1.9 us of them, that when they first enter upon this way, they renounce all secular interests and employments, and leaving their Estates to their Relations, retire into Groves and Gardens, and Places devoted to solitude and contemplation; that they had their Houses or Colleges, not contiguous, that so being free from noise and tumult, they might the better minister to the designs of a contemplative life; nor yet removed at too great a distance, that they might maintain mutual so∣ciety, and be conveniently capable of helping and assisting one another. In each of these Houses there was an Oratory, call'd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

wherein they discharged the more secret and solemn Rites of their Reli∣gion; divided in the middle with a Partition-wall three or four Cubits high, the one apartment being for the Men, and the other for the Wo∣men: Here they publickly met every Seventh day, where being set ac∣cording to their seniority, and having composed themselves with great de∣cency and reverence, the most aged Person among them, and best skilled in the Dogmata and Principles of their Institution came forth into the midst, gravely and soberly discoursing what might make the deepest impression upon their minds; the rest attending with a profound silence, and only testifying their assent with the motion of their Eyes or Head. Their dis∣courses were usually mystical and allegorical, seeking hidden sences under plain words, and of such an allegorical Philosophy consisted the Books of their Religion, left them by their Ancestors: The Law they compared to an Animal, the Letter of it resembling the Body, while the Soul of it lay in those abstruse and recondite notions, which the external veil and surface of the words concealed from vulgar understandings. He tells us also, that they took very little care of the Body, perfecting their minds by Precepts of Wisdom and Religion; the day they intirely spent in Pious and Divine Meditations, in reading and expounding the Law and the Prophets, and the Holy Volumes of the ancient Founders of their Sect, and in singing Hymns to the honour of their Maker; absolutely temperate and abstemi∣ous, neither eating nor drinking till Night, the only time they thought fit to refresh and regard the Body, some of them out of an insatiable desire of growing in knowledge and vertue, fasting many days together. What Diet they had was very plain and simple, sufficient only to provide against hunger and thirst, a little Bread, Salt and Water being their constant bill of fare: their clothes were as mean as their food, designed only as a present security against cold and nakedness. And this not only the case of men, but of pious and devout Women that lived (though separately) among them; that they religiously observed every Seventh Day, and especially the preparatory Week to the great solemnity, which they kept with all expressions of a more severe abstinence and devotion. This and much more he has in that Tract concerning them.

3. THESE excellent Persons Eusebius peremptorily affirms to have been Christians, converted and brought under these admirable Rules and In∣stitutions of Life by S. Mark at his coming hither, accommodating all passa∣ges to the Manners and Discipline of Christians: followed herein by * 1.10 Epi∣phanius, ‖ 1.11 Hierom, and others of old, as by a 1.12 Baronius, and some others of later time: and this so far taken for granted, that b 1.13 many have hence fetch∣ed the rise of Monasteries and Religious Orders among Christians. But who∣ever seriously and impartially considers Philo's account, will plainly find that he intends it of Jews and Professors of the Mosaick Religion, though whether Essenes, or of some other particular Sect among them, I stand not to determine. That they were not Christians, is evident, besides that Philo gives not the least intimation of it, partly because it is improbable that Philo being a Jew should give so great a character and commendation of Christians, so hateful to the Jews at that time in all places of the World; partly, in that Philo speaks of them as an Institution of some considerable standing, whereas Christians had but lately appeared in the World, and were later come into Egypt; part∣ly, because many parts of Philo's account does no way suit with the state and manners of Christians at that time; as that they withdrew themselves from publick converse, and all affairs of civil life, which Christians never

did, but when forced by violent Persecutions, for ordinarily, as Justin Mar∣tyr and Tertullian tell us, they promiscuously dwelt in Towns and Cities, plowed their Lands, and followed their Trades, ate and drank, and were clothed and habited like other men. So when he says, that besides the Books of Moses and the Prophets, they had the Writings of the Ancient Authors of their Sect and Institution; this cannot be meant of Christians: for though Eusebius would understand it of the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, yet, besides that there were few of them published when Philo wrote this discourse, they were however of too late an Edition to come under the cha∣racter of ancient Authors. Not to say that some of their Rites and Customs were such, as the Christians of those days were mere strangers to, not taken up by the Christian Church till many Years, and some of them not till some Ages after. Nay some of them never used by any of the Primitive Christi∣ans;* 1.14 such were their religious dances, which they had at their Festival So∣lemnities, especially that great one which they held at the end of every Seven Weeks; when their entertainment being ended, they all rose up, the Men in one Company, and the Women in another, dancing with va∣rious measures and motions, each Company singing Divine Hymns and Songs, and having a Precentor going before them, now one singing, and anon another, till in the conclusion they joyned in one common Chorus, in imitation of the triumphant Song sung by Moses and the Israelites after their deliverance at the Red Sea. To all which let me add, what a Learn∣ed * 1.15 Man has observed, that the Essenes (if Philo means them) were great Physicians (thence probably called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Healers, though ‖ 1.16 Philo, who is apt to turn all things into Allegory, refers it only to their curing, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Souls of Men infected and over-run with difficult and disperate distempers, created by pleasures and extravagant appetites, and a long train of other lusts and passi∣ons) * 1.17 Josephus reporting of them, that they accurately study the Wri∣tings of the Ancients, excerping thence whatever is conducive either to Soul or Body; and that for the curing of Diseases, they diligently enqui∣red into the Vertues of Roots and Stones, that were most proper to drive away Distempers. An Account no ways agreeing with the Christians of those times, who miraculously cured Diseases without the Arts of Phy∣sick, or any other Preparations, than calling the Name of Christ over the afflicted Person. Doubtless that which led Eusebius into the mistake, was the conformity that he observed between the Christian 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in and before his time, who entred upon a more strict and severe course of life, and these Therapeutae described by Philo, an ordinary fancy being able to draw a fair parallel between them, and so it was but removing them some Ages higher, and imagining them to have been converted and founded by S. Mark, and the work was done. Indeed it is not to be doubted, but that Persons educated under these excellent rules and methods of life, were more than ordinarily prepared for the reception of Christianity (between which and their Principles and Rules of Life, there was so great an affinity and agreement) which must needs render our Evangelists success great in those Parts, and open the way for men to come flocking over to the Faith.

4. S. MARK did not confine his Preaching to Alexandria, and the Oriental Parts of Egypt, but removed * 1.18 Westward to the parts of Libya,

going through the Countries of Marmarica, Pentapolis, and others there∣abouts, where though the People were both barbarous in their manners, and idolatrous in their worship, yet by his Preaching and Miracles he made way for the entertainment of the Gospel, and left them not, till he had not only gained them to, but confirmed them in the profession of it.* 1.19 Return∣ing to Alexandria he preached freely, and ordered and disposed the affairs of the Church, and wisely provided for succession by constituting Gover∣nours and Pastors of it. But the restless enemy of the Souls of Men would not long suffer him to be quiet: It was the time of Easter, at what time the great Solemnities of Serapis hapned to be celebrated, when the minds of the People being excited to a passionate vindication of the honour of their Idol, broke in upon S. Mark, then engaged in the solemn celebration of Divine worship, and binding his Feet with Cords, dragged him through the streets and the most craggy places to the Bucelus,* 1.20 a Precipice near the Sea, and for that Night thrust him into Prison, where his Soul was by a Divine Vision erected and encouraged under the ruines of his shattered Bo∣dy. Early the next Morning the Tragedy began again, dragging him about in the same manner, till his Flesh being raked off, and his Bloud run out, his spirits failed, and he expired. But their malice died not with him, Metaphrastes adds that they burnt his Body, whose Bones and Ashes the Christians there decently entombed near the place where he was wont to Preach. His Body, at least the remains of it were afterwards with great pomp removed from Alexandria to Venice, where they are religiously ho∣noured, and he adopted as the Tutelar Saint and Patron of that State, and one of the richest and stateliest Churches erected to his Memory, that the World can boast of at this Day. He suffered in the Month Pharmuthi, on the XXV of April, though the certain Year of his Martyrdom is not pre∣cisely determined by the Ancients. * 1.21 Kirstenius out of the Arabick Me∣moires of his Life says, it was in the Fourteenth of the last Year of Claudius; ‖ 1.22 S. Hierom places it in the Eighth of Nero. But extravagantly wide is * 1.23 Dorotheus his computation, who makes him to suffer in the time of Tra∣jan, with as much truth as ‖ 1.24 Nicephorus on the other hand affirms him to have come into Egyyt in the Reign of Tiberius. If in so great variety of Opinions I may interpose my conjecture, I should reckon him to have suf∣fered about the end of Nero's Reign: For supposing him to have come with S. Peter to Rome about the Fifth or Sixth Year of Nero, he might thence be dispatched to Alexandria, and spend the residue of his Life and of that Em∣peror's Reign in planting Christianity in those parts of the World. Sure I am that * 1.25 Irenaeus reports S. Mark to have out-lived Peter and Paul, and that after their decease he composed his Gospel out of those things which he had heard Peter preach. But whatever becomes of that, it is evident that Irenaeus supposed (whose supposition certainly was not founded upon meer fancy and conjecture) that S. Mark for some considerable time survived the Martyrdom of those two great Apostles. A passage that so troubled Chri∣stophorson (one of those who in these later Ages first translated Eusebius into Latin) because crossing the accounts of their Writers in this matter, that he chose rather to expunge the word, decease, and substitute another of a quite different sence, expresly contrary to the faith of all ancient Copies, and to the most ancient Version of Irenaeus it self. But to return. S. Mark as to his ‖ 1.26 Person was of a middle size and stature, his Nose long, his Eye-brows turning back, his Eyes graceful and amiable, his Head bald, his Beard prolix and gray, his Gate quick, the constitution of his Body strong and healthful.

5. HIS Gospel, the only Book he left behind him, was, as before we observed, written at the intreaty of the Converts at * 1.27 Rome, who not content to have heard Peter preach, pressed S. Mark his Disciple, that he would commit to Writing an Historical account of what he had delivered to them: which he performed with no less faithfulness than brevity, all which S. Peter perused, ratified with his Authority, and commanded to be publickly read in their Religious Assemblies. And though, as we noted but now, Irenaeus seems to intimate that it was written after Peter's death: yet all that can be inferred hence will be, what in it self is a matter of no great moment and importance, that the Ancients were not agreed in assigning the exact time when the several Gospels were published to the World.* 1.28 It was frequently stiled S. Peter's Gospel, not so much because dictated by him to S. Mark, as because he principally composed it out of that account which S. Pe∣ter usually delivered in his Discourses to the People. Which probably is the reason of what * 1.29 Chrysostom observes, that in his stile and man∣ner of expression he delights to imitate S. Peter, representing much in a few words. Though he commonly reduces the story of our Savi∣our's Acts into a narrower compass than S. Matthew, yet want there not passages, which he relates more largely than he. The last Chap∣ter of his Gospel, at least part of it, was (as ‖ 1.30 Hierom informs us) wanting in all ancient Greek Copies, rejected upon pretence of some dis∣agreement with the other Gospels, though, as he there shews, they are fairly consistent with each other. His great impartiality in his Re∣lations appears from hence,* 1.31 that he is so far from concealing the shameful lapse and denial of Peter, his dear Tutor and Master, that he sets it down with some particular circumstan∣ces and aggravations, which the other Evan∣gelists take no notice of. Some dispute has been made in what Language it was written, whether in Greek or La∣tin; That which seems to give most countenance to the Latin Origi∣nal, is the note that we find at the end of the Syriack Version of this Gospel, where it is said that Mark preached and declared his Holy Go∣spel at Rome 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; in the Roman, or the Latin Tongue. An evi∣dence that with me would almost carry the force of a demonstration, were I assured that this note is of equal value and authority with that Ancient Version, generally supposed to come very few Centuries short of the Apostolick Age. But we know how usual it is for such additi∣ons to be made by some later hand. And what credit is to be given to the subscriptions at the end of S. Paul's Epistles, we have shewed else∣where. Besides, that it is not here said that he wrote, but that he Preached his Gospel at Rome in that Language. The Advocates of the Romish Church plead, that it's very congruous and suitable, that it should at first be consigned to Writing in that Language, being principally design∣ed for the use of the Christians at Rome. An objection that will easily va∣nish, when we consider, that as the Convert Jews there understood very little Latin, so there were very few Romans that understood not Greek, it being (as appears from the Writers of that Age) the gentile and fashionable Language of those Times. Nor can any good reason be assigned, why it should be more inconvenient for S. Mark to write his Gospel in Greek for the

use of the Romans, than that S. Paul should in the same Language write his Epistle to that Church. The Original Greek Copy, written with S. Mark's own hand, is said to be extant at Venice at this Day.* 1.32 Written (they tell us) by him at Aquileia, and thence after many Hundreds of Years translated to Venice, where it is still preserved, though the Letters so worn out with length of time, that they are not capable of being read. A story which as I cannot absolutely disprove, so am I not very forward to believe, and that for more reasons than I think worth while to insist on in this place.

The End of S. Mark's Life.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Hieron. praef. in Marc. Tom. 9. p. 87.
• ‖ 1.2

  H. Eccl. l. 2. c. 43. p. 209.
• * 1.3

  Haeres. LI. p. 186.
• ‖ 1.4

  Apud. Euseb. l. 3. c. 39. p. 113.
• * 1.5

  Petri discipu∣lus, & in bap∣tismate filius. Isid. de vit. & ob. SS. c. 84. p. 542.
• ‖ 1.6

  Naz. Orat. 25. p. 438.
• * 1.7

  H. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 16. p. 53.
• ‖ 1.8

  De Script. Eccl. in Phi∣lone.
• * 1.9

  Phil. lib. de vita contem∣plat. p. 891, 892. & seqq.
• * 1.10

  Haeres. XXIX p. 57.
• ‖ 1.11

  De Script. in Philome.
• a 1.12

  Ad Ann. 64. n. 11.
• b 1.13

  Sozom H. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 12. p. 419. Cassian de In∣stit Monach. lib. 2. c. 5. p. 12.
• * 1.14

  Phil. ibid. p. 901, 902.
• * 1.15

  N. Full. Mis∣cell. Sacr. lib. 1. cap. 3.
• ‖ 1.16

  Lib. supr. ci∣tat. p. 889.
• * 1.17

  De Bell. Ju∣daic. lib. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. p. 786.
• * 1.18

  S. Metaphr. Martyr. S. Marc. apud Sur. ad diem 25. Apr. Procop. Diac. Laudat. S. Marc. ib. n. 8. Niceph. H. Eccl. l. 2. c. 43. p. 209.
• * 1.19

  Id ibid.
• * 1.20

  Vid. vit. ejus MS. Arabice script. ap. Kir∣sten. p. 37.
• * 1.21

  Vbi supra.
• ‖ 1.22

  De Script. Eccles. in Marc.
• * 1.23

  Synops. de vit. & mort. App. in Bibl. Pp. Tom. 3 p. 148. col. 2.
• ‖ 1.24

  Lib. 2. c. 43. p. 209.
• * 1.25

  Adv. Haeres. lib. 3. c 1. pag. 229. citat. eti∣am ap. Euseb. lib. 5. c. 8. p. 172.
• ‖ 1.26

  Metaphr. ibid. n. 10. Niceph. ib. p. 210.
• * 1.27

  Clem. Al. Hy∣potyp. lib. 6. ap. Euseb. l. 2. c. 15 p. 53. Papias ib. l. 3. c. 39. p. 113
• * 1.28

  Vid. Pap. loc. supr. citat.
• * 1.29

  Homil. 3. in Matth. p. 30.
• ‖ 1.30

  Ad Hedib. Quaest. 3 p. 143 T. 3.
• * 1.31

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrys. Homil. 86. in Matth. p. 719.
• * 1.32

  Corn. à Lap. praefat. in Marc. p. 562.