A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

S. POLYCARP.

ST. Polycarp a 1.1 the Disciple of S. John the Evangelist b 1.2, and by him ordained Bishop of Smyr∣na, was after the decease of this Apostle, esteemed as the Head of the Churches of Asia; c 1.3 when * 1.4 he went to Rome, under the Pontificate of Anicetus about the Year 160 d 1.5 he converted several Marcionites, and obliged them to return to the Bosom of the Church. He had several Conse∣reno••s with Pope Anicetus, probably about several particular Customs of the Church of Rome; They debated the question of the day when they should keep Easter, which was afterwards disputed under the Pontificate of Pope Victor, but each of them having judged it to be most convenient to observe his own custom, they a•…•…cably communicated one with another; and Anicetus to do the greater honour to S. Polycarp caused him to officiate in his own Church e 1.6, and in his own place.

This Holy Bishop always abhorred Hereticks; and he used to tell a Story, That S. John having seen Cerinthus entring into a Bath, speedily fled from thence without bathing himself therein, fearing lest the building should fall because Cerinthus the Enemy of the Truth was there; and he himself having once accidentally met with M••rcion, who desired that he would vouchsafe to take notice of him, he re∣plied, I know that thou art the ••ldest Son of the Devil. He had a very particular respect for the Memory of S. John; he took much delight in telling over the Discourses that he formerly had with him, and with others that had seen Jesus Christ in the flesh; he related every thing whereof he had been informed by them concerning his Doctrine and Miracles, and if he had heard any one maintaining any Principles contrary to the Apostolical Faith, he was wont to cry out, O God to what times hast thou reserved me! and would immediately depart from the place where he was. All this is recorded by S. Irenaeus, and cited by Eusebius in the 14th Chapter of the fourth Book of his History, and in Book 5. Chap. 20.

The illustrious Martyrdom of this Saint, which happened in the year 167. after the Nativity of Jesus Christ on the 23d day of February, is described after a most elegant manner in the Excel∣lent Epistle of the Church of Smyrna to those of Pontus, produced in part by Eusebius, in the Fifteenth Chapter of the fourth Book of his History, and published entirely first by Archbishop Ush••r, and afterward by Valesius. They there give an account that S. Polycarp did not volun∣tarily surrender himself to his Executioners, but that he waited after the example of our Saviour, untill he was deliverd into their hands; that many Christians suffered before him with admirable constancy, all the Torments imaginable; that there was only one Quintus, who had persuaded the others to present themselves before the Tribunal of the Judge, that was overcome in the great Tryal, which shews (as it is observed in the same Epistle) that although we cannot but admire the constan∣cy of those that have generously suffered, after they had presented themselves, yet their Conduct ought not to

be approved, since it is condemned in the Gospel. That S. Polycarp being informed of what had happen∣ed, determined to remain in the City; but being constrained to retire into a little House in the Country, he there continually prayed to God night and day for all the Churches, and for all Men; that three days before he was apprehended, being fervent in Prayer, he saw a Vision, wherein he perceived that his Bedstead was all on fire, which caused him immediately to foretell that he should ere long be burnt alive; that although he was removed from the place of his abode, yet he was seized by the Soldiers of the Provost-Marshal, led into the City and brought before the Pro-Consul, who endeavoured to per∣suade him to swear by the Genius of Caesar, and to curse Jesus Christ, whereupon Polycarp being en∣couraged by a Voice from Heaven, openly declares that he was a Christian; That the Pro-Consul ha∣ving caused his profession to be proclaimed with a loud Voice, all the People who were in the Amphi∣theatre, cryed out, that he should be burnt alive: That being tied to a Stake, he prayed to God, and concluded with Blessing the most Holy Trinity; that when the Fire was kindled it made a kind of a Circle round about the Body of this holy Martyr, who remained in the midst thereof without recei∣ving the least hurt; And lastly, that the Pagans perceiving that the Fire could not burn or consume him, sent an Officer to run him through with a Sword; and would not suffer the Christians to car∣ry off his Body, which continued whole and intire, lest (as these deluded Heathens affirm'd) they should adore it in stead of Jesus * 1.7 Christ. Fools, as they were, (these are the words of the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna) they did not know that the Christians worship none but Jesus Christ because he is the Son of God, and only honour the Martyrs who are his Disciples and Followers, because of the Love which they testifie to have for their King and Master. The Centurian having caused the Body of this Martyr to be burnt, the Christians car∣ried away his Bones being more valuable than the most precious Stones, and more pure than Gold, which they buried in a place where they as∣sembled together, to celebrate with joy and chearfulness the day of his Martyrdom, thus honouring the memory of those that have fought glo∣riously for the defence of their Religion, and to confirm and instruct others by such Examples. These were the Notions of the Primitive Church concerning the Respect due to Martyrs and their Relicks, explained after a clear and exact manner, which are as far remo∣ved from the aspersions that are cast on them by the Protestants of our time, as from the superstition of some Roman Catholicks.

S. Irenaeus assures us in his Letter to Florinus, that S. Polycarp wrote several Epistles to the Neighbouring Churches to confirm them in the Christian Faith, and others to some of his Brethren to encourage and exhort them to persevere in the Truth. We have at present but one single Epistle written by him to the Philippians, and particularly cited by S. Irenaeus, Eusebius, S. Jerom and Photius, f 1.8 who have all commended and approved it as really belonging to this Primitive Bishop. And it cannot be doubted that it is the same with that which was ex∣tant in the time of these ancient Writers; wherefore I shall make no difficulty to affirm, that it would be great rashness to reject it, as M. Blondel and M. Daillé have done; for by whom have these modern Authors been informed that this Letter was not composed by S. Polycarp? What reasons can they al∣ledge? Do they know S. Polycarps's style better than S. Irenaeus his Disciple? Have they a greater in∣sight into this matter than Eusebius, S. Jerom, or Photius? Besides, if the Arguments produced by them had any weight, one might set them in the balance with the authority of these ancient Writers, but they are so weak that they scarcely deserve to be mentioned. This Epistle (says M. Daillé) is disallow∣ed by Nicephorus in his Stichometria: This is indeed an authority of great moment fit to be set against the testimony of Eusebius, S. Jerom and Photius! It is not certainly known by whom this Stichometria was composed, and although we should allow that it was written by Nicephorus, yet he is a late Author, and of very little authority in comparison of those that we have now cited. After all, he doth not reject the Epistle of S. Polycarp, but only a certain Work that was attributed to him, and the Book of the Doctrine of S. Polycarp (as we have elsewhere observed) ought to be thereby understood, after the same manner as the Book of the Doctrine of S. Ignatius, and the Book of the Doctrine of S. Clement. Otherwise we must likewise disallow the Epistle of S. Clement to the Corinthians, whose name is found among the Apocryphal Writings immediately before that of S. Polycarp. It is certain also, that there was extant a Book, entituled, The Doctrine of S. Polycarp, as well as one called, The Doctrine of S. Clement, since it is cited by Maximus, Bede, Ado, Usuardus, Metaphrastes, Pachy•…•…eres, Honorius, and Nicephorus Calistus.

M. Daillé perceiving th•• weakness of his objection against the Epistle of S. Polycarp, is obliged to assert, that tho the first part is genuine, yet the second wherein he mentions those of S. Ignatius, i•• supposititious▪ And to prove this he shews, that the Epistle was concluded with the Invocation of Jesus Christ, and that which follows ought to be esteemed as an addition made afterwards, being of no authority. But M. Daillé cannot maintain this Hypothesis without rejecting the Testimony of Eu∣sebius and Photius, who cite this second part, and more especially that which relates to the Letters of S. Ignatius; neither doth it signifie any thing to urge that the Epistle was concluded before, because, it is evident, that the Invocation of Jesus Christ is frequently inserted in the middle of an Epistle, which is nevertheless continued after this sort of conclusion; this is very often to be found in S. Paul's Epistles, particularly in the Fifteenth Chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. The only objection alledg∣ed by M. Daillé that hath any manner of probability is this; It is manifest (says he) that the Author who wrote that part wherein S. Ignatius is mentioned, supposeth him to be yet living, since he re∣quires the Philippians to inform him concerning the transactions of S. Ignatius, and of those that were with him; De ipso Ignatio & de iis qui cum eo sunt g 1.9 quod certius agnoveritis significate. But if we observe these words, it will appear, that they might as well be written after the death of S. Ignatius, as when he was alive, and that S. Polycarp only desired an account of the particular Circumstances of the Life and Martyrdom of that eminent Bishop, which were not unknown to the Christians of Philippi, through which City he had passed in his Journey to Rome.

This Epistle being full of admirable Counsels, Precepts, and Exhortations taken from the Holy Scriptures is written with a great deal of elegancy and simplicity, as Photius has observed already. It was Printed in Latin together with the Epistles of S. Clement and S. Ignatius in the years 1498, 1502, 1520, 1536, and 1550, at Basil in 1579, at Colen in 1530, at Paris in 1569 with the Works of S. Ire∣neus, at Ingolstadt in 1546, at Paris in 1562, and at several other times, it is likewise inserted in the Bibliotheca Patrum set forth by La Bigne. Besides it was Printed at Colen in 1557 of the Translation of Perionius, with the Works of Dionysius the Areopagite, and in 1585, with them and the Epistles of S. Ignatius. Halloixius first published part thereof in Greek from a Manuscript which Sirmondus had transcribed from a Copy written by Turrianus. Usher hath Printed it in Greek and Latin after∣wards with the Epistles of S. Ignatius in the year 1644. Cotelerius put it into his Collection of the ancient Records of the Fathers. Moderus hath likewise procured it to be reprinted at Helmstadt, and lastly it was Printed in Holland in 1687, with a Dissertation concerning the Life and Writings of S. Polycarp, in a Collection of Treatises, entituled, Varia Sacra, set forth by M. Le Moine.

There are several other Works attributed to this ancient Bishop, as an Epistle to S. Dionysius the Areopagite, quoted by Suides, and a Treatise concerning the Union of S. John, which is pretended to be kept in the Abby of Fleury; some Passages or Notes on the Gospels are likewise produced for his, which are taken from the Catena of Feuardentius under the name of Victor Capuensis. But it is very probable that these Tracts are fictitious. S. Jerome in his 28th Epistle to Baeticus declares, that it was commonly reported in his time, that the Authentick Works of Josephus, Polycarp, and Papias, were brought to him, but that it was a false rumour.

Notes

• a 1.1

  S. Polycarp] Halloixiu•• says that S. Polycarp was origi∣nally of Smyrna; that he was born in the East, and that he was a Slave in his youth, that he was bought by a certain Lady named Calisti••ne, who gave him his Li∣berty, and caused him to be instructed in the Christi∣an Religion; that she afterwards made him her Stew∣ard, and at last her Heir. He enlarged on the liberal donations of this Lady; he affirms that B••c••l•••• Bishop of Smyrn•• was at first Tutor to S. Polycarp, and after∣wards S. Jo••••; he write•• much in the commendation of this Fictitious Buc••l••••, and declares, that he ordain∣ed S. Polycarp who is the Angel of Smyrn••. These Tales and many others are extracted from the false Acts of the Life of St. Polycarp forged under the name of Pionius from the M••nologium Graec••r••m by the mo∣dern Greeks.
• b 1.2

  The Disciple of S. John the Evangelist.] S. Ir•…•…∣us tells us, lib. 3. cap. 3. that he was constituted Bi∣shop of Smyrna by the Apostles; and this could be done by no other than S. Jo••••.
• c 1.3

  The head of the Churches of Asia.] S. Jer••me says that he was Pri•…•…ps 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Asia, that is to say, that he was the most considerable Bishop, and (as I may say) succeeded in the Authority of S. John.
• * 1.4

  S. Poly∣carp.
• d 1.5

  About the year 160.] He died in the seventh year of the Emperor Marcus A••relius in the year 167. he had then served Jesus Christ 86 years, as he declares him∣self in the Acts of his Martyrdom; Thus he might have begun to serve God in the year 81 after the Na∣tivity of our Saviour, and then he might be Ten years old. He conversed with all the Apostles, if we may believe the Testimony of S. Irenaeus. S. John died in the year of our Lord 101, and in the second of Traj••n; he was banished in the fourteenth of Domitian, A•…•… D•…•…. 95, and returned into Asia after the death of this Emperor. These Observations may serve to fix the Chronology of the Life of S. Polycarp. He was born about the year of our Lord 70, he began to consecrate himself to the service of God in the year 81. At that time he conversed with the Apostles, and became the Disciple of S. John; after the return of this Apostle he was ordained Bishop of Smyrna, however it is not pre∣cisely known in what year, but this must of necessity have happened before the year 101, since S. John died that year: He undertook his Journy to Rome in th•• beginning of the Pontificate of Anicet••••, who presided in that See from the year 158 to the year 169.
• e 1.6

  In his own Church.) All these Circumstances are related by S. Ire••••us. There are some who affirm, that the Expression of S. Irenaeus signifies only, that Anicetus administred the Holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper to S. Polycarp, but he would not thereby have done him much honour, it may be better understood according to our Explication.
• * 1.7

  [There is nothing in this Declara∣tion of the Church of Smyrna which the Protestants ever disallowed: They are far from thinking that those are not worthy of extraodinary Honours here below, who are so peculiarly graced by God himself. But yet if they ••re je••∣lous of the Honour which is onely due to Jesus Christ, and afrayd of doing any thing which may derogat•• from it, they think this to be a thing which needs no excuse; since we have a posi∣tive command for the one, whereas the other is wholly discretionary: And we can never E•••• in assigning the Bonds of that Respect which is due to Saints and Martyrs if we consider that their great Honour arises from their i••viola∣ble fidelity to our common Master; and that the chiefest reason why the Church at first commanded the annivers••∣ries of Saints and Martyrs to be ••bser∣ved with so much splendour▪ was to en∣courage the rest of the faithfull to imitate them as they imitated Jesus Christ.]
• f 1.8

  By S. Irenaeus, Eusebius, S. Jerom, and Photius.] S. Irenaeus in Lib. 3. contr. Haeres. says thus, There is ex∣tant an Epistle of Polycarp to the Christians of Philip∣pi, which is extremely accurate, and very proper to shew the Character of the Faith, and the Doctrine of the Truth, to those that take any care of their Salvation. Euse∣bius adds in lib. 4. cap. 14. that S. Polycarp in this E∣pistle makes use of some Testimonies taken from the First Epistle of S. Peter; These References are found in that which we now have under his Name. S. J••∣rom affirms, that this Epistle was read in the Assem∣bly of the Faithfull of Asia. See Photius, ••od. 126.
• g 1.9

  Qui cum eo sunt] It is expressed in the Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, they that had been with him, and who followed him when he passed through Philippi.