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.

THEOPHILUS Bishop of ANTIOCH.

THEY that imagine a 1.1, that this Theophilus whom we speak of is the same with him, to whom S. Luke dedicates the Acts of the Apostles, are grosly mistaken; for this Man was so far from being Contemporary with S. Luke and the Apostles, that he was not Ordained Bi∣shop * 1.2 of Antioch b 1.3, until the Year 170. after the Nativity of Jesus Christ, and he governed this Church Twelve or Thirteen Years, until the beginning of the Reign of Commodus c 1.4; that is to say, until the Years of our Lord 181, or 182. This Bishop was noe of the most vigorous Opposers of the Hereticks of his time; he wrote a considerable Book against Marcion, and a Treatise against the Heresie of Hermogenes. d 1.5, wherein he cited the Apocalypse. He likewise Composed other small Tracts, for the Instruction and Edification of the Faithfull: All these Works are entirely lost; but we have Three Books still written by him to Autolycus, a Learned Heathen of his Acquaintance, who had undertaken to vindicate his Religion against that of the Christians.

In the first of these Books he answers the Request, that had been made to him by that Heathen, to teach him how to know the true God, and after having declared that to attain to the knowledge of him, we must be purified in mind and heart, he proceeds to Treat of the Nature of God, and of those things which the Divines call his Attributes, as his Eternity, Immensity, Power, Invisibility; after∣ward he enlargeth on the Blessedness of the other Life, and on the Resurrection of the Body; he ob∣serves by the way, that Princes ought to be honoured as having received their Authority from God, and derives the Etymology of the word Christian from Unction. This first Book is properly a Dis∣course between him and Autolycus, in Answer to what this Heathen had said against the Religion of Jesus Christ. The second Book was written to convince him of the Falshood of his own Religion, and of the truth of the Christians. He begins with a Confutation of the Opinions that were main∣tained by the Pagans, concerning their Gods, and shews the Contradictions of the Philosophers, and Poets on this Subject; he explains at large the Creation of the World, and that which happened in the succeeding Ages; he Demonstrates that the History of Moses is the oldest, and truest History that ever was, and that the Poets have extracted many things from the Holy Scriptures, particularly their Re∣lations concerning the Torments of the Damned. In the third Book, after having proved that the Writings of the Heathens are full of an infinite number of Notions, contrary to right Reason and good Manners, he shews that the Doctrine and Lives of the Christians, are very far from those Crimes that are laid to their Charge. Lastly, at the end of his Work he adds an Historical Chronology, from the beginning of the World unto his Time, to prove that the History of Moses is the ancientest and the truest. It is apparent from this little Epitome, how well this Author was acquainted with profane History. These three Books are filled with a great Variety of curious Disquisitions concerning the Opinions of the Poets and Philosophers: Tho' there are but few things that relate immediately to the Doctrines of the Christian Religion; not that Theophilus was Ignorant of them, for it appears from several passages that he was very skilfull in these Matters, but in regard that he Composed this Book chiefly to convince a Pagan, he insists rather in proving our Religion, by Arguments from without, than by expounding its Doctrines. He is the first Author that hath applied the word Trinity e 1.6, to the Three Persons of the Godhead, but he calls the Third by the Name of Wisdom: He asserts two things concerning the Word, which seem to savour of the Arian Heresie; the first is, that the Word

may be in a Place, and the Second, that he was begotten in Time; but these Expressions, which are common to him, and many of the ancient Fathers, had a different Signification f 1.7 from that which was afterwards given them by the Arians.

Moreover these Books are full of Moral and Allegorical Expressions, the style is elegant, and the turn of the thoughts very agreeable, that whoever reads them, cannot doubt but that the Author was a very Eloquent Man. They are entituled in the Greek Manuscripts, The Books of Theophilus to Autolycus concerning the Faith of the Christians against the malicious Detracters of their Religion. They have been published in Greek and Latin, as also in Latin by Conradus Gesner, and Printed at Zurich in the Year 1546; afterward they were inserted in the Orthodoxographa, Printed at Basil in 1555. Fron∣to Ducaeus annexed them to the first Volume of the Supplement of the Bibliotheca Patrum set forth in 1624; and they were afterwards Printed at the end of the Works of S. Justin in the Edition of Mo∣rellus.

Besides these three Books, we have another Book in Latin attributed to Theophilus, consisting of Al∣legorical Commentaries on the four Gospels, which is in the Bibliotheca Patrum; There was a Com∣mentary on the Gospels under his name in S. Jerom's time, divers passages whereof are produced by him in his Annotations on S. Matthew; there were also Commentaries on the Proverbs of Solomon; but this Father observes in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers, that they did not come up to the ele∣gancy or to the style of the Writings of Theophilus.

Notes

• a 1.1

  They that imagine, &c.] This was the Opini∣on of Gulielmus Tyrius, who in S. Bernard's time wrote the History of the Crusade, See lib. 4. c. 9. It is a gross error, for according to this account Theo∣philus must have lived above 150 years.
• * 1.2

  Theophilus Bishop of Antioch.
• b 1.3

  Ordained Bishop of Antioch.] He was the sixth; The first (according to the testimony of Eusebius) was Evodius, the second S. Ignatius, the third Hero, the fourth Cornelius, the fifth Heros, and Theophilus the fixth; S. Jerome indeed declares in one place that he was the seventh, but he is mistaken; Euse∣bius in his Chronicle, and in his History, refers his Ordination to the eighth year of the Reign of the Emperor Marcus, that is the 170 after Christ, ac∣cording to the common computation.
• c 1.4

  Until the beginning of the Reign of Commo∣dus.] Eusebius affirms that Maximinus was his Suc∣cessor in the seventeenth year of Marcus Antoninus, but in the Chronology of the Emperors composed by Theophilus at the end of his third Book to Autolycus he reckons nineteen years and ten days of the Reign of Verus, that is to say, of the same Emperor Anto∣ninus, and it cannot be affirmed that 16 years ought to be put instead of 19, as it is in the Translation, for by computing the total Sum of the years of the Emperors which amount to 237 years and one day, it is apparent, that there must of necessity be 19. From whence it follows, that either he was mistaken in reckoning up a greater number of years of the Reign of this Emperor under whom he lived, than were re∣ally passed, which is not credible, or that he did not write these Books until after this time, under the be∣ginning of the Reign of Commodus; and then, he could not have had Maximinus for his Successor until the year 182 of the Vulgar Account, unless he was taken in his Life-time to be his Coadjutor. There is more probability that Eusebius was deceived a year or two. Nicephorus in his Chronography of the Patriarchs of Antioch allows 13 years to Theophilus, which agrees with our Opinion.
• d 1.5

  And a Treatise against the Heresie of Hermoge∣nes.] Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 St. Jerom, Sub Imperatore M. Antonino Vero librum contra Marci∣onem composuit, qui usque ••odie extat. And Euse∣bius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. S. Jerom, Et contra Haeresim Hermogenes li∣ber unus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. S. Je∣rom, Et alii breves, elegantesque tractatus ad aedi∣ficationem Ecclesiae pertinentes.
• e 1.6

  The word Trinity.] Lib. 2. p. 94. and 100.
• f 1.7

  But these Expressions which are common to him with many of the ancient Fathers had a different sig∣nification.] They meant nothing else by the first Ex∣pression, as hath been already observed, but that God made himself manifest unto Men by the Word, therefore when Theophilus affirms that the Word is in a place, and that the Father cannot be there, he in∣tended only to declare, that the Word appears unto Men in a place, as he heretofore appeared unto Adam in the Terrestrial Paradise, and that the Father doth not appear in that manner: This is the System of the ancient Christians: It would be more difficult to re∣solve the second Expression, were it not that they themselves have explained it, since they acknowledge that the Word is Eternal, and that he remained in God from all Eternity, as his Council, Wisdom, and Word. But they say that the same Word who was in God, in some manner went out from him when he undertook to Create the World, because he began to make use of this Word in Exterior Operations, and this is what they call the Procession, Prolation, and Co-generati∣on of the Word, which does not hinder but that the Word might be from all Eternity, and eternally be∣gotten of the Father after the same manner as we ap∣prehend it, but this is not that which they call Gene∣ration. These Expressions are not only used by Theo∣philus, but likewise by Athenagoras, Tatian, Tertul∣lian, the Author of the Book concerning the Trinity, amongst the Works of this Father, Lactantius, the Compiler of the Homilies attributed to Zeno Vero∣nensis, and afterwards by Rupertus in his Commenta∣ries on Genesis.