The Bride Fights Back

The Bible-believing Christians of the house-church at the Timothinian Baths (Santa Pudenziana) had been deprived of their spiritual leaders in the persecution. Their teacher Justin and the other faithful brethren had won the martyr's crown. But God had immediately provided them with a leader anointed with spiritual power greater even than the faith-warrior, Justin. That new leader was Irenaeus, the young pastor sent by Polycarp's disciples in Gaul on that fruitless mission of peace to the Bishop of the First Church of Rome. As he stood in Rome one day, perhaps wondering what God's purpose for him now was, he heard a great voice like a trumpet blasting out the message from Heaven, "Polycarp has been martyred!" He learnt later that this happened at the very hour of the hero's execution. It was as if Polycarp's mantle had fallen with the voice from Heaven on the shoulders of Irenaeus. He took up the battle against the spiritual serpents that were sapping the life of the nominal Christian Church of Rome. He preached and taught with the holy zeal of a prophet in the great metropolis. God confirmed His Word with mighty signs and wonders of the Holy Ghost. The sick were healed, the dead raised to life and demons expelled in the ministry of Irenaeus.

Irenaeus saw through the hypocrisy of the bishops of the First Church of Rome. When they talked to the Bible-believers they pretended to be one of them; but in their day-to-day dealings with the members of their flock, they tolerated and catered to every foul doctrine of the Devil, as long as it was popular with the public and the authorities of Rome. He determined to turn the spiritual heat up on the First Church bishops. He was in an excellent position to do this since he was a personal disciple of Polycarp, and Polycarp was a personal disciple of the Apostle John, the closest of all the disciples to the heart of Jesus. He was thus only one step removed from the fountainhead of Apostolic doctrine. No Gnostic heretic could claim in the presence of Irenaeus to be a recipient of "secret" traditions from the mouth of Jesus. If anyone knew the secret counsels of the Lord it was His beloved disciple John. And John had entrusted the truths he had received from Jesus to his faithful ministers, of whom Polycarp was one of the most worthy.

Irenaeus admitted that the First Church of Rome was the oldest church in the capital and that it could trace its origin from apostles in the primitive era of the New Testament Church. In this he concurred with the Gnostics. But, pointing to the bishops of Santa Pudenziana before Sixtus who were Bible-believing Catholics, Irenaeus proved that their doctrines were identical to his own and had nothing in common with Gnosticism. These bishops were accepted as true bishops by both sides, by the Bible-believing Catholics on the one hand and by the Gnostic heretics on the other (because the list of these bishops preceding Sixtus was used by the Gnostics to validate the apostolic succession of Sixtus himself and therefore of Sixtus' successors on the episcopal chair of the First Church). Irenaeus had only to refer doubtful souls to the Letter of Clement - Clement being the most notable of these early bishops of Santa Pudenziana - to prove that the true apostolic doctrine was nothing like what the Gnostics taught to have been the apostles' "secret tradition". Clement was, like Polycarp, a personal disciple of the apostles and was well acquainted with all their doctrines.

Irenaeus' arguments and proofs were set out in his opus magnum, the monumental Refutation and Subversion of Science Falsely So Called (commonly called Against Heresies). This work dealt a fatal blow to the many-headed beast of Gnosticism. He proved that the Gnostics were nothing more than pagans with a Christian label. He unmasked their absurd theories as poor imitations of the heathen philosophies and their rituals and liturgies as borrowings from the indigenous and oriental idolatries. He also provided for posterity a record of the simple, powerful, scriptural doctrine handed down by the Apostle John to his disciples. Many other works of Irenaeus, which would throw a flood of light on apostolic doctrine and practice, have strangely gone missing. The Byzantine scholar Photius, who still had access to some of them, explains their later disappearance when he refers to what they contained as unorthodox by the ecclesiastical canon of Photius' own degenerate times.

Those who had abandoned Bible-faith, Irenaeus did his best to reclaim. He wrote to Blastus, the elder who had fallen into Montanist heresy: he was now proclaiming that it was absolutely a divine requirement for all believers to celebrate the Passover, like the Jewish disciples of John, on the 14th of the month Nisan. Irenaeus exhorted him to abandon his schismatic legalism and return to the fold of God. He also wrote to Florinus, who had once been a pastor of the Bible-believing Catholics and had fellowshipped in his youth, like Irenaeus himself, with Polycarp, but was now a priest in the apostate First Church of Rome and an avid proponent of the Gnosticism of Valentinus. His loving entreaties were disregarded. Florinus wrote books developing even further the Valentinian system and tried to turn other brethren from the straight and narrow Way of the Cross. The bishop of the First Church, Eleutherus' successor, Victor, hypocritically turned a blind eye to Florinus' propaganda. Irenaeus then wrote to Victor, publically putting him on notice (as if he needed to know it) that Florinus was actively promoting Valentinian heresy.

Though Irenaeus' overtures were unsuccessful, it was a good time to approach Victor: the Gnostic teachers Valentinus and Marcion were losing favour in the First Church and Victor was currently toying with the new, more fashionable, heresy of Noetianism, influenced by its eloquent advocate, Praxeas. In fact, the First Church of Rome was in a crisis. Victor was its first Latin-speaking pastor and wanted to distance himself from the Greek-speaking theological "experts" in order to construct a purely Roman, Latin or Western theology. Previously the Roman Church had been under the sway of Greeks. The Gospel and the various heresies had arrived in Rome from the Greek-speaking East. Most of the renowned teachers were Greek-speakers. Christianity, therefore, took root first amongst the sizeable Greek-speaking population of the metropolis. Now, on one excuse or another, the earlier heretical favourites were banished from the First Church. Valentinianism, Marcionism and Montanism were abandoned. The Bishop of the First Church was in the process of evolving his very own Latin heresy. This incorporated elements of doctrine and practice culled from the multi-faith experience of the preceding century, but centred around the Noetian doctrine favoured by one group of Montanists (the Cataeschinetans).

In the earlier phase of this development Victor proceeded as a Montanist would (115). He became overly anxious about ceremonies, fasts and rituals. He suddenly denounced the rival Montanist group who followed Blastus in asserting the NECESSITY of celebrating Passover precisely on the 14th of the Jewish month Nisan. These he called "Quartodecimans", meaning "fourteeners" in Latin. Victor, on the contrary, as definitively asserted (as though by inspiration of the Paraclete) that Passover must be celebrated with the ritual of the First Church of Rome. This was the ritual which was so strikingly similar to that of Cybele, the "Mother of the Gods".

As Victor always had one eye on the Palace, he must have been aware of Commodus' interest in Mithraism and the cult of Cybele with which it was combined. In the religious sphere, the Empire was moving in the direction of a single solar cult. Rival religions were encouraged to lay down their arms and accept the "One God" (the Sun, Sol, Helios, Mithras, Apollo, Baal, Jupiter, Zeus etc., under whatever name he was called), this god, the King of Heaven, being embodied in the Emperor, who was King on Earth. Political stability - dear to the heart of emperors and despots - was the hoped-for result. The feminine element was represented in the Imperial "one-world" religion by the universal "Mother-goddess" (Cybele, Isis, Astarte, Juno etc.), and her divine child was the Platonic Logos, the creative World-Soul. It was a divine Triad or Trinity, superceding the old Triad worshipped on the Capitol Hill at Rome, namely Jupiter, the father-god, his wife Juno and Jupiter's spontaneously-generated child Minerva, the last representing a Logos-like creative wisdom, but feminine in gender. Many superficial connections could be forged between the Imperial Solar cult and Christianity and this fact will not have escaped Victor. Ahead lay an enticing vision: the possibility of becoming unofficial "Pontifex" (priest) to the Emperor in his "one-world" religion.

Encouraged by such thoughts, Victor became more and more dogmatic about the rituals of the First Church. As the accusations and counter-accusations flew, it was clear the whole Church would suffer as it had recently done under Eleutherus. This time Irenaeus did more than act as go-between. He intervened directly. He wrote to Victor in Christian love, as tender as a mother with an erring child. Why should there be strife over rituals, days and fasts? What did these matter in comparison to the great truths of the Gospel? Faith, Hope and Love only were essential. Victor was now imposing rules on details of ritual which his predecessors on the episcopal throne of the First Church had left up to the individual conscience. The earlier bishops of his group had claimed to believe in "multi-faith" tolerance. They had welcomed all faiths, and that had been their justification for embracing within their fellowship (though contrary to the Scriptures) even infamous Gnostic heretics, as well as for accepting the ministry of Polycarp, for example, who kept the Passover differently from them in the original Jewish manner of John the Apostle. Victor had changed all this. He pronounced that the Easter fast must absolutely be maintained up to the Sunday on which the Resurrection of Jesus was celebrated. "Judaizers" who ate a memorial passover meal on the 14th of Nisan, whatever day of the week that was, and who broke the First Church's pre-Sunday fast, were stigmatized as "Quartodeciman" heretics. That was a falsehood. "Quartodecimans", properly speaking, were sectarians like Blastus who said the Passover MUST be celebrated on the 14th Nisan. Irenaeus opposed their legalism; nevertheless, he upheld the right of all believers to celebrate the Last Supper on the evening of the 14th Nisan, as the Apostles had done, so long as that was not made a LAW. Irenaeus believed the point was one that should be left to the individual's conscience. He personally celebrated a memorial of the Lord's resurrection on Sunday of the Passover week and he believed that was the way it should be done in order to follow more perfectly the example of the Apostles. But he was far from condemning those who thought differently from himself. Church ritual had been changed by Victor into some kind of magical rite. Victor was prepared to disfellowship believers if they did not fast up to Easter Sunday. That was ridiculous and a disgrace to Christianity. The fast leading up to Easter Sunday had become in Victor's system a paganizing self-purification rite, like the mortifications and fasts imposed in the cult of the Great Mother Goddess which (it should be noted) held a spring-festival at that very same time of year.

Victor took no heed to Irenaeus. He sent emissaries all over the Christian world, proclaiming the dangers of Judaizing "Quartodecimanism". Because there was truly a heretical Quartodecimanism preached by Blastus, many Bible-believing Catholics responded to the call. They convened councils to debate the question. However, the results did not at all match Victor's swelling expectations. They decreed that to comply with the Apostolic custom, or, otherwise, to "walk by the same rule" as the Apostles, churches in their jurisdiction must celebrate the resurrection on Sunday and any passover fast must be broken on that day alone ... and that was all. The Christian character of the festival period was thereby ensured - it was not a Jewish Passover, commemorating the suffering of Christ without reference to the triumph of the resurrection, it was a joyful celebration of Christ's victory over sin and death. Those who celebrated the Lord's Supper, like the Apostle John, on the evening of the 14th Nisan at the time of the Jewish Passover were, of course, in no way condemned by these councils. That was the Passover memorial meal, the precursor to the memorial of the resurrection. Also, any fasting BEFORE the evening of the 14th was NOT a "passover" fast as the Passover only began on that evening. If the followers of John fasted any time before the evening of the 14th and then broke their fast by eating the Lord's Supper, as Christ Himself had done, on that evening, they were not breaking any "passover" fast before resurrection Sunday and thus they complied with the ruling of these councils. Some, as we learn from Anatolius of Laodicea, followed through in the Passover week the pattern set by Christ Himself in the days of his flesh, beginning the Passover celebration on the evening of the 14th Nisan, then extending the beginning of the celebration through the intervening days till the joyful Sunday of the resurrection (which could fall as late as the 20th Nisan on the Jewish lunar calendar), to commemorate the occasion when Christ Himself had eaten that original resurrection Sunday with his disciples (116). However those who fasted over the 14th of Nisan and only celebrated the Lord's Supper on Sunday of Passover week (like Victor) were likewise not condemned. The councils, in other words, confirmed the apostlocity of the advice and practice of Irenaeus.

Victor was furious. He had made his Montanizing stand, which demanded compliance with the Roman rite, now he had to back it up. His ritual was nothing less than the commandment of the Paraclete. Those who rejected it were rejecting the leadership of God. He summarily EXCOMMUNICATED every church throughout the world which celebrated the Lord's Supper on the evening of the 14th Nisan. The churches of the East were amazed at Victor's blustering intolerance and dogmatic arrogance. Of course, they took no notice whatsoever of his excommunication. However, this ecclesiastical decree did not lapse, it was simply held in reserve by subsequent bishops of the First Church to be hauled out later when the power of the emperor could be teamed up with the ecclesiastical authority of the Church of Rome in order to enforce it on the eastern churches. A hundred years were to pass yet before that opportunity presented itself. The single-minded patience of the First Church in achieving its own devious ends was (and is) quite remarkable.

While these events were transpiring, Irenaeus was back in Gaul continuing his spiritual warfare against the Gnostic heresies. Even on the barbarian mission-field of Gaul the heretics had made some inroads. A particularly virulent pest from the First Church called Marcus had made disciples in the Rhone valley and it now fell to Irenaeus to deal with the spiritual wrecks he left behind him. Marcus' particular penchant was for deludable, wealthy, and beautiful, young women. With his mystic chants and promises of spiritual marriage, many had been convinced they were to enter, in union with Marcus, the ultimate Gnostic nirvana. When the fantasy dissolved, they ran back in tears to Pastor Irenaeus. Marcus' methods and results are a paradigm of the whole Gnostic movement.

Still, in spite of this and similar obstructions to the work, Irenaeus had great success evangelizing the idolatrous barbarians of Gaul. By Irenaeus' own account the churches of Gaul were aflame with the revival fire of the Holy Spirit. He had winessed himself many miraculuous demonstrations of the Holy Spirit in the churches where he exercised his ministry: "Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform miracles, so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe in Christ, and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, scattered throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and which she exerts day by day for the benefit of the Gentiles, neither practicing deception upon any, nor taking any reward from them on account of such miraculous interpositions. For as she has received freely from God, freely also does she minister to others. Nor does she perform anything by means of angelic invocations, or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, she has been accustomed to work miracles for the advantage of mankind, and not to lead them into error."

Irenaeus pointed out that the same supernatural working of the Spirit of God was not found amongst heretics: "Moreover, those also will be thus confuted who belong to [the Gnostic teachers] Simon and Carpocrates, and if there be any others who are said to perform miracles - who do not perform what they do either through the power of God, or in connection with the truth, nor for the well-being of men, but for the sake of destroying and misleading mankind, by means of magical deceptions, and with universal deceit, thus entailing greater harm than good on those who believe them, with respect to the point on which they lead them astray. For they can neither confer sight on the blind, nor hearing on the deaf, nor chase away all sorts of demons - none, indeed, except those that are sent into others by themselves, if they can even do so much as this. Nor can they cure the weak, or the lame, or the paralytic, or those who are distressed in any other part of the body, as has often been done in regard to bodily infirmity. Nor can they furnish effective remedies for those external accidents which may occur. And so far are they from being able to raise the dead, as the Lord raised them, and the apostles did by means of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account of some necessity - the entire Church in that particular locality entreating the boon with much fasting and prayer, the spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has been bestowed in answer to the prayers of the saints - that they do not even believe this can be possibly be done, and hold that the resurrection from the dead is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they proclaim."

The Strange History of Callistus

Meanwhile back in Rome, the stage was being set for the final phase of the First Church's career into episcopal apostasy. This phase began in apparent innocence when Victor received a "charitable" request from his protegee in the palace, Marcia, the concubine of Emperor Commodus (117). This request related to members of the First Church who had been convicted of various criminal offences by the good Emperor Aurelius and condemned to penal servitude on the island of Sardinia. The First Church called these convicts "martyrs". The story is told by one of Irenaeus' noted Roman disciples, Hippolytus, in a heavy tone of irony and sarcasm. "After a time, there being in that place [the mines of Sardinia] other 'martyrs', Marcia, a concubine of Commodus, who was a 'God-loving female', and desirous of performing some 'good work', invited into her presence the 'blessed' Victor, who was at that time a 'bishop of the Church', and inquired of him what 'martyrs' were in Sardinia. And he delivered to her the names of all, but did not give the name of Callistus, knowing the villainous acts he had ventured upon. [Callistus was the fugitive slave of a true Christian called Carpophorus (who was counted amongst the "brethren" of Hippolytus' fellowship, and was therefore not a member of Victor's church), and had been successfully prosecuted before the Roman magistrate for fraud and other corrupt practices. The full details of Callistus' crimes are related hereafter.] Marcia, obtaining her request from Commodus, hands the letter of emancipation to Hyacinthus, a certain eunuch, a presbyter [presumably an elder in the First Church]. And he, on receiving it, sailed away into Sardinia, and having delivered the letter to the person who at that time was governor of the territory, he succeeded in having the 'martyrs' released, with the exception of Callistus. But Callistus himself, dropping on his knees, and weeping, entreated that he likewise might obtain a release. Hyacinthus, therefore, overcome by the captive's importunity, requests the governor to grant a release, alleging that permission had been given to himself from Marcia, and that he would make arrangements that there should be no risk in this to him. Now the governor was persuaded, and liberated Callistus also. And when the latter arrived at Rome, Victor was very much grieved at what had taken place; but since he was a 'compassionate' man, he took no action in the matter. Guarding, however, against the reproach uttered by many, - for the attempts made by this Callistus were not distant occurrences, - and because Carpophorus [the slave's Christian master] also still continued adverse, Victor sends Callistus to take up his abode in Antium, having settled on him a certain monthly allowance for food. And after Victor's death, Zephyrinus [the next bishop of the First Church after Victor], having had Callistus as a fellow-worker in the management of his clergy, paid him respect to his own damage; and transferring this person from Antium, appointed him over the cemetery."

The characters in this story of "humanitarian" compassion are quite a collection. At the head of the list is the arrogant, blustering and vicious bishop Victor of the First Church. In close collusion with him is the palace harlot Marcia, who later attempted to poison her own lover Commodus and when this failed brought in an athlete to strangle him in his bath, and her attendant, the eunuch Hyacinthus, who seems to have had no problem combining a position of spiritual leadership as a Christian "elder" with the intrigue and corruption of the imperial palace. Then there is Marcia's admittedly deserving victim, the mad Emperor Commodus. Following Victor on the episcopal throne is Zephyrinus, whom Hippolytus describes as "an ignorant and illiterate individual" and as one not only "unskilled in ecclesiastical definitions" but also "accessible to bribes, and covetous". At the centre of the whole story is the snivelling, cowardly, and utterly third-rate fraudster, Callistus. What should surprise one (but fails to in this particular company) is that the criminal Callistus was to become in remarkably short shrift the successor of Victor and Zephyrinus as bishop of the First Church!

Callistus' rise to eminence began with Victor's act of "compassion" in granting him free board in Antium. But to put this act in proper perspective, and thoroughly appreciate the quality of the character thus thrust into the ecclesiastical limelight, the details of Callistus' past must first be taken into consideration. Hippolytus tells the whole the story from its commencement several years earlier in the house of the hapless Christian businessman Carpophorus:

"It would seem to us desirable to explain the life of this heretic, inasmuch as he was born about the same time with ourselves, in order that, by the exposure of the habits of a person of this description, the heresy attempted to be established by him may be easily known, and may perchance be regarded as silly, by those endued with intelligence. This Callistus became a 'martyr' at the period when Fuscianus was prefect of Rome, and the mode of his 'martyrdom' was as follows.

"Callistus happened to be a domestic of one Carpophorus, a man of the faith belonging to the household of Caesar. [Several thousands of the inhabitants of Rome were employed, like Carpophorus, in the extended imperial household in one capacity or another, and some, from the earliest days of the Christian presence in Rome, were devoted Christians.] To this Callistus, as being of the faith, Carpophorus committed no inconsiderable amount of money, and directed him to bring in profitable returns from the banking business. And he, receiving the money, tried the experiment of a bank in what is called the Piscina Publica [The Public Fishpond at the Porta Capena, an area where there was a Jewish colony and where the house-church of Aquila and Priscilla was located in the first century AD]. And in process of time were entrusted to him not a few deposits by widows and brethren, under the ostensive cause of lodging their money with Carpophorus. Callistus, however, made away with all the moneys committed to him, and became involved in pecuniary difficulties.

"And after having practised such conduct as this, there was not wanting one [apparently Hippolytus himself] to tell Carpophorus, and the latter stated that he would require an account from him. Callistus, perceiving these things, and suspecting danger from his master, escaped away by stealth, directing his flight towards the sea. And finding a vessel in Portus ready for a voyage, he went on board, intending to sail wherever she happened to be bound for. But not even in this way could he avoid detection, for there was not wanting one [presumably Hippolytus] who conveyed to Carpophorus intelligence of what had taken place. But Carpophorus, in accordance with the information he had received, at once repaired to the harbor Portus, and made an effort to hurry into the vessel after Callistus. The boat, however, was anchored in the middle of the harbor; and as the ferryman was slow in his movements, Callistus, who was in the ship, had time to descry his master at a distance. And knowing that himself would be inevitably captured, he became reckless of life; and, considering his affairs to be in a desperate condition, he proceeded to cast himself into the sea. But the sailors leaped into boats and drew him out, unwilling to come, while those on shore were raising a loud cry.

"And thus Callistus was handed over to his master, and brought to Rome, and his master lodged him in the Pistrinum [the mill where slaves were punished with hard-labour at the millstone]. But as time wore on, as happens to take place in such cases, brethren repaired to Carpophorus, and entreated him that he would release the fugitive serf from punishment, on the plea of their alleging that Callistus acknowledged himself to have money lying to his credit with certain persons. But Carpophorus, as a devout man, said he was indifferent regarding his own property, but that he felt a concern for the deposits; for many shed tears as they remarked to him, that they had committed what they had entrusted to Callistus, under the ostensive cause of lodging the money with himself. And Carpophorus yielded to their persuasions, and gave directions for the liberation of Callistus.

"The latter, however, having nothing to pay, and not being able again to abscond, from the fact of his being watched, planned an artifice by which he hoped to meet death. Now, pretending that he was repairing as it were to his creditors, he hurried on their Sabbath-day to the synagogue of the Jews, who were congregated, and took his stand, and created a disturbance among them. They, however, being disturbed by him, offered him insult, and inflicted blows upon him, and dragged him before Fuscianus, who was prefect of the city. And on being asked the cause of such treatment, they replied in the following terms: 'Romans have conceded to us the privilege of publicly reading those laws of ours that have been handed down from our fathers. This person, however, by coming into our place of worship, prevented us so doing, by creating a disturbance among us, alleging that he is a Christian.' And Fuscianus happens at the time to be on the judgment-seat; and on intimating his indignation against Callistus, on account of the statements made by the Jews, there was not wanting one [presumably Hippolytus] to go and acquaint Carpophorus concerning these transactions. And he, hastening to the judgment-seat of the prefect, exclaimed, 'I implore of you, my Lord Fuscianus, believe not thou this fellow; for he is not a Christian, but seeks occasion of death, having made away with a quantity of my money, as I shall prove.' The Jews, however, supposing that this was a stratagem, as if Carpophorus were seeking under this pretext to liberate Callistus, with the greater enmity clamored against him in presence of the prefect. Fuscianus, however, was swayed by these Jews, and having scourged Callistus, he gave him to be sent to a mine in Sardinia."

Sadly, as with Dracula's bat, it seemed impossible to keep Callistus down. With help from the First Church it was not long before the criminal pseudo-Christian was back on the mainland and back in Church business, under the understandably very watchful eye of Victor, and subsequently under the less discerning patronage of Victor's successor, Zephyrinus. It is hard to believe that Victor's volte-face in his dealings with Callistus - first refusing to put in so much as a good word for him because of his record, then going to the other extreme of offering him free board and a Church appointment - had nothing to do with Callistus' original involvement with the rival Christian fellowship in Rome. When presented, against his will, with the liberated convict, Victor may well have decided to turn this embarassing situation to his advantage. By granting him asylum the bishop of the First Church put Callistus under obligation to himself at a time when he craved protection from the creditors he had dealt with as a member of Carpophorus' church. Accordingly, in gratitude to Victor and aversion to his former fellowship and the brethren in Carpophorus' circle, Callistus threw himself wholeheartedly into Victor's rival programmes. And when Callistus himself was promoted to the bishopric of the First Church he followed through to execution what had only been formulations in the mind of Victor.

Now, as well as the Spring Festival Passover, Victor was particularly interested in the latest Gnostic theology, which had been introduced into the First Church by the teacher Praxeas, but was the original invention of Noetus of Smyrna in Turkey and had been advocated in Rome by more than one theological "expert". Callistus took this project up with gusto. Under Victor's successor, Zephyrinus, we find Callistus going to extraordinary lengths to promote the theology of Noetus, as taught by its then current expositor, Cleomenes. Again Hippolytus takes up the story:

"There has appeared one, Noetus by name, and by birth a native of Smyrna. This person introduced a heresy from the tenets of Heraclitus [a heathen philosopher]. Now a certain man called Epigonus becomes his minister and pupil, and this person during his sojourn at Rome disseminated his godless opinion. But Cleomenes, who had become his disciple, an alien both in way of life and habits from the Church, was wont to corroborate the Noetian doctrine. At that time, Zephyrinus imagines that he administers the affairs of the Church - an uninformed and shamefully corrupt man. And he, being persuaded by proffered gain, was accustomed to connive at those who were present for the purpose of becoming disciples of Cleomenes. But Zephyrinus himself, being in process of time enticed away, hurried headlong into the same opinions; and he had Callistus as his adviser, and a fellow-champion of these wicked tenets. But the life of this Callistus, and the heresy invented by him, I shall after a little explain.

"The school of these heretics during the succession of such bishops, continued to acquire strength and augmentation, from the fact that Zephyrinus and Callistus helped them to prevail. Never at any time, however, have we been guilty of collusion with them; but we have frequently offered them opposition, and have refuted them, and have forced them reluctantly to acknowledge the truth. And they, abashed and constrained by the truth, have confessed their errors for a short period, but after a little, wallow once again in the same mire. Callistus attempted to confirm this heresy, - a man cunning in wickedness, and subtle where deceit was concerned, and who was impelled by restless ambition to mount the episcopal throne.

"Now this man molded to his purpose Zephyrinus, an ignorant and illiterate individual, and one unskilled in ecclesiastical definitions. And inasmuch as Zephyrinus was accessible to bribes, and covetous, Callistus, by luring him through presents, and by illicit demands, was enabled to seduce him into whatever course of action he pleased. And so it was that Callistus succeeded in inducing Zephyrinus to create continually disturbances among the brethren, while he himself took care subsequently, by knavish words, to attach both factions in goodwill to himself. And, at one time, to those who entertained true opinions, he would in private allege that they held similar doctrines with himself, and thus make them his dupes; while at another time he would act similarly towards those who embraced the tenets of Sabellius [another heretical teacher with similar views as Noetus on the godhead]. But Callistus perverted Sabellius himself, and this, too, though he had the ability of rectifying this heretic's error. For at any time during our admonition Sabellius did not evince obduracy; but as long as he continued alone with Callistus, he was wrought upon to relapse into the system of Cleomenes by this very Callistus, who alleges that he entertains similar opinions to Cleomenes. Sabellius, however, did not then perceive the knavery of Callistus; but he afterwards came to be aware of it, as I shall narrate presently.

"Now Callistus brought forward Zephyrinus himself, and induced him publicly to avow the following sentiments: 'I know that there is one God, Jesus Christ; nor except Him do I know any other that is begotten and amenable to suffering.' And on another occasion, when he would make the following statement: 'The Father did not die, but the Son.' Zephyrinus would in this way continue to keep up ceaseless disturbance among the people. And we, becoming aware of his sentiments, did not give place to him, but reproved and withstood him for the truth's sake. And he hurried headlong into folly, from the fact that all consented to his hypocrisy - we, however, did not do so - and called us worshippers of two gods [a mocking misrepresentation of the Bible-believers' Scriptural doctrine that the Father and the Son were two distinct character-roles], disgorging, independent of compulsion, the venom lurking within him .... And Callistus, who was in the habit of always associating with Zephyrinus, and, as I have previously stated, of paying him hypocritical service, disclosed, by force contrast, Zephyrinus to be a person able neither to form a judgment of things said, nor discerning the design of Callistus, who was accustomed to converse with Zephyrinus on topics which yielded satisfaction to the latter.

"Thus, after the death of Zephyrinus, supposing that he had obtained the position [as bishop of the First Church] after which he so eagerly pursued, he excommunicated Sabellius, as not entertaining orthodox opinions. He acted thus from apprehension of me, and imagining that he could in this manner obliterate the charge against him among the churches, as if he did not entertain strange opinions. He was then an impostor and knave, and in process of time hurried away many with him. And having even venom imbedded in his heart, and forming no correct opinion on any subject, and yet withal being ashamed to speak the truth, this Callistus, not only on account of his publicly saying in the way of reproach to us, 'Ye are Ditheists [worshippers of two gods, viz. the Father and the Son],' but also on account of his being frequently accused by Sabellius, as one that had transgressed his first faith, devised some such heresy as the following. Callistus alleges that the Logos Himself is Son, and that Himself is Father; and that though denominated by a different title, yet that in reality He is one indivisible spirit. And he maintains that the Father is not one character-role [Greek prosopon, lit. 'face', 'mask', 'role'] and the Son another, but that they are one and the same; and that all things are full of the Divine Spirit, both those above and those below. And he affirms that the Spirit, which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same. And he adds, that this is what has been declared by the Savior: 'Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?' For that which is seen, which is man, he considers to be the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son, to be the Father. 'For,' says Callistus, 'I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one. For the Father, who subsisted in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so that Father and Son must be styled one God, and that this character-role being one, cannot be two.'

"And in this way Callistus contends that the Father suffered along with the Son; for he does not wish to assert that the Father suffered, and is one character-role, being careful to avoid blasphemy against the Father. How careful he is! senseless and knavish fellow, who improvises blasphemies in every direction, only that he may not seem to speak in violation of the truth, and is not abashed at being at one time betrayed into the tenet of Sabellius [that there is only one character-role], whereas at another into the doctrine of Theodotus [that Jesus was merely human and became God secondarily by the indwelling of the Spirit of God].

"The impostor Callistus, having ventured on such opinions, established a school of theology in antagonism to the Church, adopting the foregoing system of instruction. And he first invented the device of conniving with men in regard of their indulgence in sensual pleasures, saying that all had their sins forgiven by himself. For he who is in the habit of attending the congregation of any one else, and is called a Christian, should he commit any transgression; the sin, they say, is not reckoned unto him, provided only he hurries off and attaches himself to the school of Callistus.

"And many persons were gratified with his regulation, as being stricken in conscience, and at the same time having been rejected by numerous sects; while also some of them, in accordance with our condemnatory sentence, had been by us forcibly ejected from the Church. Now such disciples as these passed over to these followers of Callistus, and served to crowd his school. This one propounded the opinion, that, if a bishop was guilty of any sin, if even a sin unto death, he ought not to be deposed. About the time of this man, bishops, priests, and deacons, who had been twice married, and thrice married, began to be allowed to retain their place among the clergy. If also, however, any one who is in holy orders should become married, Callistus permitted such a one to continue in holy orders as if he had not sinned. And in justification, he alleges that what has been spoken by the Apostle has been declared in reference to this person: 'Who art thou that judgest another man's servant?' But he asserted that likewise the parable of the tares is uttered in reference to this one: 'Let the tares grow along with the wheat;' or, in other words, let those who in the Church are guilty of sin remain in it. But also he affirmed that the ark of Noe was made for a symbol of the Church, in which were both dogs, and wolves, and ravens, and all things clean and unclean; and so he alleges that the case should stand in like manner with the Church. And as many parts of Scripture bearing on this view of the subject as he could collect, he so interpreted.

"And the hearers of Callistus being delighted with his tenets, continue with him, thus mocking both themselves as well as many others, and crowds of these dupes stream together into his school. Wherefore also his pupils are multiplied, and they plume themselves upon the crowds attending the school for the sake of pleasures which Christ did not permit. But in contempt of Him, they place restraint on the commission of no sin, alleging that they pardon those who acquiesce in Callistus' opinions. For even also he permitted females, if they were unwedded, and burned with passion at an age at all events unbecoming, or if they were not disposed to overturn their own dignity through a legal marriage, that they might have whomsoever they would choose as a bedfellow, whether a slave or free, and that a woman, though not legally married, might consider such a companion as a husband. Whence women, reputed believers, began to resort to drugs for producing sterility, and to gird themselves round, so to expel what was being conceived on account of their not wishing to have a child either by a slave or by any paltry fellow, for the sake of their family and excessive wealth. Behold, into how great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by inculcating adultery and murder at the same time! And withal, after such audacious acts, they, lost to all shame, attempt to call themselves a Catholic Church! And some, under the supposition that they will attain prosperity, concur with them. During the episcopate of this one, second baptism was for the first time presumptuously attempted by them.

"These, then, are the practices and opinions which that most astonishing Callistus established, whose school continues, preserving its customs and tradition, not discerning with whom they ought to communicate, but indiscriminately offering communion to all. And from him they have derived the denomination of their men; so that, on account of Callistus being a foremost champion of such practices, they should be called Callistians."

Here is the birth of the Roman Catholic system, described in vivid detail by a reliable contemporary bishop and eyewitness of the process. After a gestation of a century and a half, the beast had finally emerged into the full light of day. It called itself then, and still calls itself, the "Catholic Church", aping the nomenclature of the Bible-believing majority, but it was never anything but the "Callistian heresy".

_______________________________

115. THE PASSOVER CONTROVERSY. Eusebius, Hist. Ecc. V. xxiii-xxv: "CHAPTER 23. THE QUESTION THEN AGITATED CONCERNING THE PASSOVER. A QUESTION of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Savior's passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Savior. Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account, and all, with one consent, through mutual correspondence drew up an ecclesiastical decree, that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on no other but the Lord's day, and that we should observe the close of the paschal fast on this day only. There is still extant a writing of those who were then assembled in Palestine, over whom Theophilus, bishop of Caesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, presided. And there is also another writing extant of those who were assembled at Rome to consider the same question, which bears the name of Bishop Victor; also of the bishops in Pontus over whom Palmas, as the oldest, presided; and of the parishes in Gaul of which Irenaeus was bishop, and of those in Osrhoene and the cities there; and a personal letter of Bacchylus, bishop of the church at Corinth, and of a great many others, who uttered the same opinion and judgment, and cast the same vote. And that which has been given above was their unanimous decision.
CHAPTER 24. THE DISAGREEMENT IN ASIA. BUT the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them. He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him: "We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord's coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. He fell asleep at Ephesus. And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas, bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna. Why need I mention the bishop and martyr Sagaris who fell asleep in Laodicea, or the blessed Papirius, or Melito, the Eunuch who lived altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead? All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ' We ought to obey God rather than man.'" He then writes of all the bishops who were present with him and thought as he did. His words are as follows: "I could mention the bishops who were present, whom I summoned at your desire; whose names, should I write them, would constitute a great multitude. And they, beholding my littleness, gave their consent to the letter, knowing that I did not bear my gray hairs in vain, but had always governed my life by the Lord Jesus." Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the residential districts [of the churches] of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate. But this did not please all the bishops. And they besought him to consider the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. Words of theirs are extant, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them was Irenaeus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, recommended that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be observed only on the Lord's day. He fittingly admonishes Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the tradition of an ancient custom and after many other words he proceeds as follows: "For the controversy is not only concerning the day, but also concerning the very manner of the fast. For some think that they should fast one day, others two, yet others more; some, moreover, count their day as consisting of forty hours day and night. And this variety in its observance has not originated in our time; but long before in that of our ancestors, who, it seems, did not retain in a strictly accurate fashion the simple customwhich allowed for personal preference, and thus passed it on to their posterity. Yet all of these lived none the less in peace, and we also live in peace with one another; and the disagreement in regard to the fast confirms the agreement in the faith." He adds to this the following account, which I may properly insert: "Among these [the ones who held to established customs, like the First Church of Rome Passover ritual, which were not strictly in accord with Apostolic practice, ibid.13 ] were the presbyters before Soter, who presided over the church [the First Church of Rome] which thou [Victor] now rulest. We mean [working back in time] Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus, and Telesphorus, and Xystus [Sixtus]. They neither observed it [the Jewish Passover celebration] themselves, nor did they permit those after them to do so. And yet though not observing it, they were none the less at peace with those who came to them from the residential districts [of other churches] in which it was observed; although this observance was more opposed to those who did not observe it. But none were ever cast out on account of this form [the Jewish Passover]; but the presbyters before thee who did not observe it, sent the Eucharist to people from the residential districts [of other churches] who themselves observed it, and furthermore, at the time when the blessed Polycarp visited Rome in the time of Anicetus, and having little things against eachother on other points, they [viz. the presbyters of the First Church who did not keep the Jewish Passover, and those from other church districts who did] quickly made peace amongst themselves, not caring to quarrel over this matter. For neither was Anicetus able to persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord [i.e. the Jewish Passover celebration], and the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, as he [Anicetus] said that he ought to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him. And in this state of affairs, they held communion amongst themselves. Also Anicetus conceded the Eucharist in the church to Polycarp, evidently out of a feeling of shame. And they settled the matter between them in peace, both those who observed [the Jewish Passover], and those who did not, maintaining the peace of the whole church." Thus Irenaeus, who truly was well named, became a peacemaker in this matter, exhorting and negotiating in this way in behalf of the peace of the churches. And he conferred by letter about this mooted question, not only with Victor, but also with most of the other rulers of the churches.
CHAPTER 25. HOW ALL CAME TO AN AGREEMENT RESPECTING THE PASSOVER. THOSE in Palestine whom we have recently mentioned, Narcissus and Theophilus, and with them Cassius, bishop of the church of Tyre, and Clarus of the church of Ptolemais, and those who met with them, having stated many things respecting the tradition concerning the passover which had come to them in succession from the apostles, at the close of their writing add these words: "Endeavor to send copies of our letter to every church, that we may not furnish occasion to those who easily deceive their souls. We show you indeed that also in Alexandria they keep it on the same day that we do. For letters are carried from us to them and from them to us, so that in the same manner and at the same time we keep the sacred day."
THE PASCHAL CANON OF ANATOLIUS OF ALEXANDRIA, Chapter 10: "But nothing was difficult to them with whom it was lawful to celebrate the Passover on any day when the fourteenth of the moon happened after the equinox. Following their example up to the present time all the bishops of Asia - as themselves also receiving the rule from an unimpeachable authority, to wit, the evangelist John, who leant on the Lord's breast, and drank in instructions spiritual without doubt - were in the way of celebrating the Paschal feast, without question, every year, whenever the fourteenth day of the moon had come, and the lamb was sacrificed by the Jews after the equinox was past; not acquiescing, so far as regards this matter, with the authority of some, namely, the successors of Peter and Paul, who have taught all the churches in which they sowed the spiritual seeds of the Gospel, that the solemn festival of the resurrection of the Lord can be celebrated only on the Lord's day. Whence, also, a certain contention broke out between the successors of these, namely, Victor, at that time bishop of the city of Rome, and Polycrates, who then appeared to hold the primacy among the bishops of Asia. And this contention was adjusted most rightfully by Irenaeus, at that time president of a part of Gaul, so that both parties kept by their own order, and did not decline from the original custom of antiquity. The one party, indeed, kept the Paschal day on the fourteenth day of the first month, according to the Gospel, as they thought, adding nothing of an extraneous kind, but keeping through all things the rule of faith. And the other party, passing the day of the Lord's Passion as one replete with sadness and grief, hold that it should not be lawful to celebrate the Lord's mystery of the Passover at any other time but on the Lord's day, on which the resurrection of the Lord from death took place, and on which rose also for us the cause of everlasting joy. For it is one thing to act in accordance with the precept given by the apostle, yea, by the Lord Himself, and be sad with the sad, and suffer with him that suffers by the cross, His own word being: 'My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death;' and it is another thing to rejoice with the victor as he triumphs over an ancient enemy, and exults with the highest triumph over a conquered adversary, as He Himself also says: 'Rejoice with Me; for I have found the sheep which I had lost.'"

116. Luke 24. 36-43: " 36 ¶ And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 43 And he took it, and did eat before them."

117. On Marcia, we have a first-class, contemporary witness, Dion Cassius (a contemporary of Commodus) LXXIII. iv. 6: "There was a certain Marcia, the mistress of Quadratus (one of the men slain at this time), and Eclectus, his cubicularius; the latter became the cubicularius [valet] of Commodus also, and the former, first the emperor's mistress and later the wife of Eclectus, and she saw them also perish by violence. The tradition is that she greatly favoured the Christians and rendered them many kindnesses, inasmuch as she could do anything with Commodus."
Dion Cassius LXXIII. xiii. 5: "Marcia, the notorious wife of Quadratus"
Dion Cassius LXXIII. xxii. 1-3: "And he actually did die, or rather was slain, before long. For Laetus and Eclectus, displeased at the things he was doing, and also inspired by fear, in view of the threats he made against them because they tried to prevent him from acting in this way, formed a plot against him. It seems that Commodus wished to slay both the consuls, Erucius Clarus and Sosius Flaco, and on New Year's Day to issue forth both as consul and secutor from the quarters of the gladiators; in fact, he had the first cell there, as if he were one of them. Let no one doubt this statement. Indeed, he actually cut off the head of the Colossus, and substituted for it a likeness of his own head; then, having given it a club and placed a bronze lion at its feet, so as to cause it to look like Hercules, he inscribed on it, in addition to the list of his titles which I have already indicated, these words: "Champion of secutores; only left-handed fighter to conquer twelve times (as I recall the number) one thousand men. (ibid. 4-6) For these reasons Laetus and Eclectus attacked him, after making Marcia their confidant. At any rate, on the last day of the year, at night, when people were busy with the holiday, they caused Marcia to administer poison to him in some beef. But the immoderate use of wine and baths, which was habitual with him, kept him from succumbing at once, and instead he vomited up some of it; and thus suspecting the truth, he indulged in some threats. Then they sent Narcissus, an athlete, against him, and caused this man to strangle him while he was taking a bath. Such was the end of Commodus, after he had ruled twelve years, nine months, and fourteen days. He had lived thirty-one years and four months; and with him the line of the genuine Aurelii ceased to rule."
Dion Cassius LXXIV. xvi: "He [Julianus] accordingly put to death both Laetus and Marcia, so that all who conspired against Commodus perished; for later Severus gave Narcissus to the wild beasts, causing it to be expressly proclaimed that he was the man who had strangled Commodus."
There are also a few references in the Historiae Augustae, Commodus, VIII. 6: Fuit praeterea ea dementia, ut urbem Romanam coloniam Commodianam vocari voluerit; qui furor dicitur ei inter delenimenta Marciae iniectus. "His madness was so great that he actually purposed to change the name of the City of Rome to "The Colony of Commodus", this mania having been, it is said, infused into him by the blandishments of Marcia." XI. 9: Amazonius autem vocatus est ex amore concubinae suae Marciae, quam pictam in Amazone diligebat, propter quam et ipse Amazonico habitu in harenam Romanam procedere voluit. "Now he [Commodus] was called "The Amazonian" from love of his concubine, Marcia, whom he liked to be painted as an Amazon, on account of whom also he himself wished to enter into the Roman arena in the dress of an Amazon." XVII. 1-2: 1 His incitati, licet nimis sero, Quintus Aemilius Laetus praef. et Marcia concubina eius inierunt coniurationem ad occidendum eum. 2 Primumque ei venenum dederunt; quod cum minus operaretur, per athletam, cum quo exerceri solebat, eum strangularunt. "Stirred up by these things, and, one might justly add, not much beyond due time, Quintus Aemilius Laetus the Prefect and the concubine Marcia entered into a conspiracy to murder him. And they first plied him with poison, but when this failed to have the required effect, they strangled him by the hands of an athlete with whom he used to train."