Besides these, there are many others of the ancient writers who have mentioned Thecla, or referred to her history; viz. Gregory Nazianzen 9, Chrysostom1, Severus Sulpitius, who all lived within the fourth centuryt. In the following ages the subject became more known; the incomparable Photius tells us", that Basil of Seleucia wrote, in verse, the acts and sufferings, and victories of the first martyr Thecla. I shall only add, that Euagrius Scholasticus, an ecclesiastical historian, who wrote about the year 590, relates, that "after the emperor “Zeno had abdicated his empire, and Basilisk had taken pos"session of it, he had a vision of the holy and excellent martyr "Thecla, who promised him the restoration of his empire; for “which, when it was brought about, he erected and dedicated "a most noble and sumptuous temple to this famous martyr "Thecla, at Seleucia, a city of Isauria, and bestowed upon it "very noble endowments, which," says the author, "are pre"served even till this day x."

(3.) These Acts, which I have above produced, require to be inserted here, because they went under the name of St. Paul, and pretended to be written by him. The fact is certain, from the place of Tertullian above cited, and from the current title the book has had in all ages; and there can be no history in which St. Paul was so much concerned, and acted so considerable a part, and pretending to be written by himself, but must very properly fall under consideration in this volume.

(4.) Several of the peculiar tenets of popery are by the advocates of that party confirmed out of this book, as being authentic, genuine, and apostolic. So, for instance, the story, chap. 20. of Falconilla (Trifina's daughter) coming after her death from the other world, and desiring her to ask Thecla to pray for her, that she might be translated from her state of misery to a state of happiness; which request Trifina made to Thecla, and Thecla accordingly prayed for her. This passage is brought by Damascenusy, to support the doctrine of pray

a Orat. 3. n. 63. et 18. n. 17. r Homil. 25. in Act. Apost.

s De vita Martini inter Orthodoxographa, vol. 1. p. 544, &c.

t Add to these cited, Ambrose Epist. 7. et 82; Gregory Nyssene in vita Macrinæ; Zeno Veronensis Serm. de

Tim. who all lived within the fourth century.

u Cod. 168.

* Hist. Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 8.

In Serm. de Mortuis adjuvandis apud Sixt. Senens. Bib. Sanct. 1. 6. annot. 47.

ing for the dead, and helping the miserable in the other worldby our prayers and alms. Again, the popish doctrine of celibacy is frequently contended for, and confirmed out of this book; as, perhaps, the first prevalence and progress of that doctrine owed its original to it 2.

(5.) Add to all this, that not only cardinal Baronius a, Locrinusb, and others; but the learned editor of these Acts in England, Dr. Grabe, also looks upon this history as true and genuine, wrote in the apostolic age, and containing nothing in it which is superstitious or disagreeable to that time; which, if true, will certainly make it as justly considerable, as any other apocryphal book whatsoever.

CHAP. XXXV.

Previous remarks upon these Acts: they were in part the forgery of an Asiatic presbyter: they are now interpolated: they are apocryphal and spurious; were confessed to be such by their author; were never read nor cited as scripture : they contain many falsehoods; as, that Paul was against marriage; that he told a wilful lie; that he allowed women to preach. Robert Barclay noted.

HAVING in the former chapter largely given the reasons of my inserting these Acts of Paul and Thecla, I proceed now to lay before the reader whatever I have observed relating to them, with a particular proof that they are apocryphal. I observe then,

(1.) That some part of these Acts was certainly written by the presbyter of Asia, whom Tertullian mentions in the apostolic age. (See the place, chap. preced. No. I.) The truth of this is sufficiently evinced by this single consideration, viz. That the peculiar doctrines, which Tertullian saith were delivered and contended for out of this book forged by the Asiatic presbyter, are to be found in the Acts above published. The doctrines I mean are those, that women may lawfully teach or preach in the church, and that women may lawfully b Præfat. in Act. Apost. c. 5. apud

z Vid. Chemnit. Exam. Concil. Trident. par. 3. p. 89, 90.

a Annal. tom. 1. ann. 47. §. 2. apud Rivet. Crit. Sac. lib. I. c. 5.

eund. eod. loco.

baptize. These are the two things for which this book was cited, and pleaded by those against whom Tertullian disputes; and these things are very visible in the Acts which we have now under consideration. For,

1. We read of Thecla's teaching, or preaching, several times: e. g. ch. 24. she preached the word of the Lord, and was the instrument of converting many young women to Christianity in the house of Trifina at Antioch; and ch. 25. when she had found Paul at Myra, and told him of her intended journey to Iconium, he gives her a commission, or command, to preach the Gospel: Go, says he, and teach the word of the Lord. And accordingly, ch. 27. we find her at Seleucia, enlightening many in the knowledge of Christ. And once more, ch. 28. we read of several gentlewomen converted by her preaching in the cave. From all this it was easy and natural to conclude the lawfulness of women's teaching, or preaching.

2. Nor was it with less reason, that they did also support their practice of baptizing from the example of Thecla: for, ch. 22. it is said, that she threw herself into the water, and said, In thy name, O my Lord Jesus Christ, I am this last day baptized. And upon her arrival to Paul, ch. 25. she acquaints him, that he who had assisted him in preaching, had also assisted her in baptizing. From hence (to omit many other arguments which it were easy to produce) it is evident, that some part of these Acts of Paul and Thecla were written by the presbyter of Asia.

(2.) The present Acts of Paul and Thecla are very different from the ancient book written by the presbyter of Asia. It happened to them, as to many other of the apocryphal pieces of the New Testament; the too fruitful imagination and kind hand of some well-designing Christian to have embellished the original performance by the addition of many fictitious circumstances; and just as the first author declared he was influenced to his forgery out of the prodigious respect he had for St. Paul, and with design to advance his reputation, so with the same kind design others have taken the liberty of interpolating, and inserting whatsoever they apprehended conducive to it. This cannot but be most clearly evident to any one, who with a just impartiality reflects upon the matter; for nothing can possibly

be more unlike a writing of the first century, or apostolic age, than a considerably large part of this book is: the idle and romantic fables, the silly miracles, the incredible stories, (of which I shall produce instances below,) the ridiculous and late customs which are referred to, such as signing with the sign of the cross, &c. are so many demonstrative evidences of interpolations in this work long after the apostle's time, and make the composure appear much more like the legends of the monks, and the products of the miraculous ages before the reformation, than a real and genuine history of a plain fact done and written in the apostle's time. Nothing therefore can be a more surprising evidence of prejudice, than that a person of Dr. Grabe's learning d should so confidently tell us, "That it is a "confirmation the Acts of Paul and Thecla were wrote by the "presbyter of Asia, that there is scarce any thing superstitious "in them, or that savours of any opinions later than the apo"stles' age, and that there is nothing in them which might not "have been wrote in that first century by an honest presbyter, "not well versed in Christianity."

(3.) The Acts of Paul and Thecla are apocryphal. No one that I know has yet ventured to assert them canonical; but the asserting of them to be genuine, true, and containing real fact which happened in the apostles' time, and in which St. Paul bore so considerable a part; the asserting them to contain sermons and discourses, which were really the sermons and discourses of the inspired apostle; in a word, the asserting them to relate many real miracles wrought at that time, and the book itself written about that time, which is done by Baronius, Lorinus, and Dr. Grabe, seems to be little less than asserting them to be of authority very near equal to the books which are of the Canon. I shall therefore, for the most part, under this head endeavour after such proof, as will not only shew these Acts to be apocryphal, but the whole history to be spurious and false, a mere fable and legend.

Arg. I. The Acts of Paul and Thecla appear to be apocryphal and spurious, from the confession and acknowledgment of

d Vix quidquam in iis reperiatur superstitiosum, aut proprias sequioris ævi hypotheses redolens, nihilque sit, quod

non prima ista ætate scribi potuerit, &c. Spicileg. Patr. tom. I. p. 93.

the Asiatic presbyter who was the first author of them. When he had first published his book, such was the care of those primitive Christians not to be imposed upon by any spurious pieces under the apostles' names, that they immediately endeavoured to detect the fraud; in which they met with the desired success, and obliged him to a confession of the whole matter, and upon that deprived him of his office in the church. All he pleaded for himself was, that he made the book out of his great respect for St. Paul; by which he could mean no other, than that he designed, by relating the miracles attending St. Paul's preaching, to make him of a more advanced reputation. All this is in the place of Tertullian cited at large chap. preced. No. 1. to which I shall only add out of Jerome, (see the same place, No. 2.) that he was convicted of the forgery by St. John. Nothing can be more fairly deduced from any words, than it is from hence, that the book of this presbyter's writing, and the history contained in it, was the fiction of his own brain; and a composure or relation, not of any real facts, but a mere fable, or collection of imaginary stories to serve a purpose. This will undeniably prove it apocryphal and spurious; and one would have imagined, there had been scarce any way possible to have avoided the force of such evidence. But it is strange to observe with what subtle artifice and pains, learned men will endeavour to elude the force of every thing which is said against a favourite opinion. Dr. Grabe e has therefore found a means to come off here, and would persuade us, that the words of Tertullian imply no more, than that the book was falsely ascribed to St. Paul, as the author, and not that the story was a fiction. But can any thing be more evidently calculated to sevre a purpose? The whole of Tertullian's argument, as well as the plain texture of the words, imply it was a fiction; for if the whole that was proved upon the presbyter was, that he wrote the book; and it was not also proved, that he wrote that which was false; (i. e. if we suppose with Dr. Grabe, the history genuine, and only the title or name

e At vero istud adhuc in quæstione manet, utrum historia Thecla in isto libro narrata, mera fuerit fabula, a presbytero isto confecta, cum talis virgo et martyr sanctissima nunquam exstiterit, istave egerit et passa sit pro

fide Christiana, quam a Paulo didicisse fertur. Sane Tertulliani verba hoc non evincunt ; sed solum libellum presbyteri istius Asiatici perperam apostolo adscriptum, &c. Spicileg. tom. 1. p. 88.