was, or in the ruins; as if one had said, During the ruins. of London, there is in Cheapside a conduit. The current tradition is, that he wrote it upon his return to Ephesus, after that violent persecution of Christians in the 14th year of Domitian, Anno Dom. 94, remembered by all writers. In that persecution St. John was banished into the island Patmos, * for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ; where he had that vision or revelation which he has published, which Irenæus shews to have been in the latter end of Domitian's reign, in these words: "We will run the hazard of affirming any thing positively concerning the name of Antichrist [signified by the number 666]; for if it had been expedient to be published plainly at present, it would have been expressed by him himself that saw the vision, since it is not very long ago that it was seen; being but a little before our time, at the latter end of Domitian's reign." t Domitian dying anno 96, and Nerva, a mild prince, succeeding, the prisoners and banished men were released; and St. John returned to Ephesus, where, as Irenæus and Athanasius testify, he wrote his Gospel ; and St. Hierom mentions the occasion of it: "He, last of all the rest, wrote his Gospel, being entreated so to do by the bishops of Asia, against Cerinthus and other heretics, and especially the then new-sprung-up opinion of the Ebionites, who affirm That Christ had no being before Mary; for which reason he thought it needful to discourse concerning his divine nativity also;" and this is, as to the main, confirmed of Irenæus himself; for he says T "That he wrote it at Ephesus ;" and, that **"he aimed thereby to extirpate the error which had been sowed in the minds of men by Cerinthus." These things are reported by such men as had the opportunity of easily knowing the truth in such matters of fact. Now, for the age of these books of Clement and Her * Rev. i. 9. § In Sinopsi. + Lib. 5, c. 30. De Script. Eccl. v. Joan. ** Lib. 3, c. 11. Lib. 3, c. 1. mas, one need only enquire for the time of Clement's death; for Hermas wrote his while Clement was living, and bishop of the church at Rome, and * mentions him therein as such; and though the time of Clement's death be not so exactly to be discovered from the antients, but that they that have gone about to settle it have varied, and some from others 20 years, yet they that have placed it the latest, have placed it as soon as St. John's death is placed by those that have placed that the soonest, viz. anno 101; for in giving that date of St. John's death, I gave the earliest that is pitched upon. St. Chrysostom and the Chronicon Alexandr. make him live some years longer. The two that of late have made the most exact disquisition about the time of St. Clement, are Bishop Pearson and Mr. Dodwell. † Bishop Pearson having found, by undeniable proofs, that the times of Hyginus, Bishop of Rome, are set too low in the chronological tables by fifteen or twenty, or, as some writers place him, thirty years; and that he must have entered upon his office anno 122 at the latest, does proportionably set all the foregoing bishops higher; and so he has made St. Clement come into the bishopric immediately after the death of St. Peter and St. Paul, which he places anno 68, thirty-five years after our Saviour's passion, and to continue alive till the year 83; and he supposes Linus and Anencletus, who are commonly placed before St. Clement, to have been no otherwise bishops there than as they acted under the said apostles in their life-time. Mr. Dodwell judges that, after the said apostle's death, which he places anno 64, Linus was bishop, and after him Anencletus; but that they both died in a very short time, about a year; and that Clement succeeded anno 65, and continued to 81. By either of these ac * Lib. 1. vis. 2. + Pearsoni Opera Posthuma Chronolog. Dissert. 2. Dissertatio sing, de Success. Rom. Pont. c. 11, 12, &c. counts, Clement was dead a great while before St. John had wrote any of his books. But there is a passage in Irenæus (whose authority every one owns to be in this matter beyond compare) wherein the time of Clement's succession, and the distance thereof from the time of those apostles, is purposely insisted on; and that though it mention not the years, yet, as it supposes his entry on that office to be nigher St. Peter and St. Paul's time than some had placed it, so it will by no means suffer him to be placed so early as to succeed within a year or two after their death. It is (lib. 3, c. 3) where he is confuting that plea of the Valentinians (heretics that held that there is another God, superior to him that created the world) whereby they pretended to have this doctrine by tradition from the apostles, who would not write it, nor tell it to every body, but to some more perfect disciples, by whose hands it came to them. The words are these: "It is easy for any one that would be guided by truth, to know the tradition of the apostles, declared in all the world; and we are able to reckon up those that were placed bishops by the apostles in the several churches, and their successors to this time, who never taught nor knew any such thing as these men dream of. Now the apostles, if they had known of any deep mysteries which they would communicate to those that were perfect, privately and by themselves, would have taught them to those men sooner than any, to whom they committed the churches; for they desired that such should be very perfect in every thing, and wanting in nothing, whom they left as their successors, delivering to them their own place of government. Since, if these men did well, there would ensue great advantage; but if they miscarried, great mischief. "But it being a long business in such a book as this to reckon up the successions of all the churches; if we shew the tradition left by the apostles, and the faith taught the Christians derived by successions of bishops to our time, in that church which is one of the greatest and most ancient, and known to every body, founded and built by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul we shall shame all those who by self-conceit or vainglory, or by ignorance and mistaken opinion, hold things that they ought not; for every church, I mean the Christians of all places round about, have necessary occasions to come to this church, by reason that the government and power is there [meaning the seat of the empire] and so in this church the tradition of the apostles is always preserved, by means of those that from all places resort thither. "The blessed apostles then having founded and built this church, delivered over to Linus the office of the bishopric. This Linus, Paul mentions in his Epistles to Timothy.-2 Tim. iv. 21. "The next to him is Anencletus. "After him, in the third place from the apostle, Clement comes into the bishopric, who had both seen the blessed apostles and conferred with them, and had the preaching and tradition of the apostles as yet sounding in his ears; and that not he alone; for there were many then left alive who had been personally taught by the apostles. It was under this Clement that a great dissention happening among the brethren that were at Corinth, the church that was at Rome sent a most powerful epistle to the Corinthians, persuading them to peace, stirring up their faith anew, and declaring to them the tradition which they had lately received from the apostles, which teaches that there is but one God Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, Creator of man, &c.;and that the same God is declared by the churches to be the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (whoso will may see, ex ipsa Scriptura) by that Scripture [or writing] itself, and may understand the apostolical tradition of the church; for that epistle is older than they are that now teach these false doctrines, and invent another God above the Creator and Maker of the things that are seen." He proceeds to name the bishops from Clement to Eleutherus, who was then bishop, the 12th from the apostles; and to appeal to the church of Smyrna, which had had Polycarp; and to the church of Ephesus, which had had St. John so lately living among them; and that none of these had taught or pretended to know of any of those secret traditions that these men set up. Now, when it was for his purpose to shew how near Clement and this epistle of his were to the times of St. Peter and St. Paul, and he says no more, but that Clement had seen and heard them; and that several others were then alive beside him, that had done the like,-he plainly supposes that they had been dead a considerable time; for we never speak so of men that have been dead but a year or two. When we say "There are many yet alive that can remember such a man, and have conversed with him," a stander-by will conclude, we speak of one that has been dead a good while: it may be fifteen or twenty years; and yet even so, if we reckon with* Eusebius and other ancient accounts, that Clement held the seat but nine years, he will yet die before St. John, and before the time when, by all accounts, he wrote his Gospel. This also is considerable, That Clement, who quotes many places out of other books of the New Testament, seems never to have seen any of St. John's writings; therefore, though Bishop Pearson has convinced every body that Hyginus is to be placed as he has placed him; yet it seems improbable that Clement should have been bishop so soon as he places him. Rather some years are to be taken from the times of the bishops that were between those two. For the same reason, I think it very improbable that this Clement was the Clement mentioned (Phil. iv. 3) as St. Paul's fellow-labourer, when he was at Rome the first time, six years before his martyrdom; though Eusebius, St. Jerome, and Epiphanius do guess him to be the same; for would not Irenæus have mentioned * Chronic item Hist. lib. 3, c. 31. De Script. Eccl. v. Clemens. + H. E. lib. 3, c. 12. |