centuries of the christian era, and are chiefly interesting to the historian and antiquarian. And yet they are of importance as illustrating the condition of the primitive church.

1. Jews. By the Romans, Christians were at first regarded merely as a Jewish sect, like the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. As such they were accordingly denominated Jews, and despised as a superstitious and misanthropic sect. After they began to be distinguished from the Jews, they were described by Suetonius as a class of men of a new and mischievous superstition. Genus hominum superstitionis novae et maleficae.1

2. Nazarenes. Both Jews and gentiles unitedly denominated the Christians Nazarenes. The word is variously written Nazurenes, Nazarenes, Nazorenes, Nazerenes, and Nazirenes. The significa tions of the term seem to have been as various as its form, though it is uniformly applied in a bad sense.2 Acts 24: 5.

3. Galileans. The author of the name Galileans as a term of reproach was, according to Gregory Nazianzen,3 Julian the apostate. This he constantly employed, and made a law requiring that they should not be called by any other name. He died with these remarkable words on his lips: Ah! thou Galilean! thou hast conquered.4

4. Greeks. In direct opposition to Julian, christian converts were by the ancient Romans, styled Greeks; which with them was a proverbial phrase, expressive both of suspicion and contempt, as an impostor. Whenever they saw a Christian in the high way, they were wont to exclaim: Ah! a Greek impostor.5 Christ himself was regarded as an impostor, Matt. 27: 63.

5. Magicians. By heathen nations, the author of the christian religion was styled Magician, and his followers Magicians.6

Of other names which the malice of their persecutors invented or applied to them, the following is a brief summary.

Sibyllists. From their being charged with corrupting the Sibylline books. A favorite insinuation of Celsus.7

Sarmentitii. Derived from the faggots with which the fires were kindled around them at the stake.8

Semarii. From the stake to which they were bound.

Parabolani, nagáßolo. From their being exposed to ravenous beasts.9

Biadávatoi, self-murderers. Alluding to their fearlessness of death.

"Aεo, Atheists.10

NEOTεQOL,11 Novelli, new lights.

Etavpolárgai,12 worshippers of the cross, 2 Cor. 1: 18.

Plautinae prosapiae13 homines et Pistores, men of the race of Plautus, bakers. Plautus is said to have hired himself to a baker, to grind in his mill.

Asinarii,14 worshippers of an ass. Creduli, Simplices, Stulti, Lucifugae, Stupidi, Fatui, Imperiti, Abjecti, Hebetes, Idiotae, etc.

§ 3. DIVISION AND CLASSIFICATION OF CHRISTIANS.

As in the Old Testament, two great classes of persons are recognized and distinguished, the one from the other-the children of Israel and the gentiles and 2. So in the New Testament we observe a similar division, oi low and of sw, those that are within and those that are without. The former denotes Christians, not only as united together in the fellowship of the church, but as opposed to the latter class, which includes both Jews and gentiles. This classification, however, has no reference to a division of Christians among themselves, but simply to the distinction between such as are, and such as are not, believers in the Christian religion. A similar form of expression is used in various passages also to distinguish the true and the false disciples of Christ, Mark 4: 11. 13: 14. Luke 6: 13. 2 John 2: 19.

The equality of all Christians is clearly asserted in the Scriptures. They are brethren, and as such have equal rights, iσório. Comp. 2 Pet. 1: 1. They are one heritage, 2 Pet. 5: 3; and all members of the same head, Col. 1: 18. Nay, Christ himself asserts the equality of all his disciples, Luke 22: 25, 26. And yet a distinction is made between the master and his disciple-the teacher and the taught. The one are denominated the people, ô hàos; the flock, to ποιμνίον ; the body of believers, το πλῆθος τῶν πιστῶν; the church, ixxiŋoia; private persons, idiotai; and laymen, or men devoted to seculiar pursuits, Biorixo. The others are styled teachers, d δάσκαλοι; leaders, ἡγούμενοι; shepherds, ποιμένες; overseers, ἐπίσω ×оло; elders, лosσßtego; rulers, лоεσtτεs, etc. Subordinate to these were the deacons, diánovo; the widows, ziga, or deaconesses, διακονίσσαι; the allendants, ὑπηρέται, and the inferiors, νεώτε ça. So that even the New Testament indicates an ecclesiastical order, which at a later age became much more prominent.

βιωτικοί.

The sacred persons mentioned in the New Testament, and the regulations prescribed for the worship of God, were undoubtedly derived from the religion of the Jews. Indeed this fact has never been called in question. The only inquiry has been whether the organization of the christian church is to be derived chiefly from the forms of the temple service, or from those of the synagogue worship, both of which were in use through the period of the second temple, from the time of the Babylonish captivity to that of the christian era. This difference of opinion is evidently very ancient. Tertullian compares the office of bishop with that of the high priest. Cyprian and Jerome consider the Mosaic economy as the prototype of the christian church; while Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Augustine and others, refer its origin to the synagogue. The church of Rome manifestly has great interest in establishing the first hypothesis. And yet there are not wanting in that church those who maintain the contrary opinion. The majority of the learned, especially of the evangelical church, oppose the theory that the constitution of the church is to be traced for the most part to the temple service; but in every particular they labor to show that it is derived from the regulations of the Jewish synagogue.

The most ancient specific classification in the church, of which we have any knowledge, is found in Eusebius.4 "In every church there are three orders of men. One of the yovusvow, superiors, i. e. rulers, leaders or guides; and two of the vлoßeßnóton, subjects, i. e. the people, the body of the church. The latter class comprehends two divisions, the unbaptized, and the faithful. The unbaptized are usually denominated zarazovμevoi, catechumens, candidates for baptism." See § 5.

The above classification of Eusebius, in reality recognizes but two classes of men. Those that teach, and those that are taught. And this corresponds with the classification given by Jerome,5 though he specifies five classes-bishops, presbyters, deacons, believers, and catechumens. Here again, there really are but two divisions; those that teach, comprising the first three, and those that are taught, comprising the last two. The divisions of the church which occur in periods still later, are substantially the same. They universally recognize the distinction of the teacher, and the taught. These are most frequently denominated the laity and the clergy, with this difference, that in the latter class, the idea of ruler as well as teacher

is comprehended, a distinction, however, which is rather implied than expressed.

4. OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

This term, Exxλŋola, in the New Testament, and by the ancient fathers, primarily denoted an assembly of Christians, i. e. believers in the christian religion in distinction from all others. In this sense it included the officers and teachers, though these were more frequently denominated éxxinσiaσrizoì, ecclesiastics. But it has, from the earliest ages, been used in a more restricted sense to denote the great body of the church, the laity, in distinction from her officers and teachers. So it is used by Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Amalarius.

That it so seldom occurs in this signification, is to be ascribed merely to the circumstance that the term laity was the technical name of the body of the church in contradistinction from the clergy. The derivation of the word is unquestionably from the Greek Laos, people. In this sense it is not indeed used in the New Testament, but it occurs in the earliest christian writers, and was in familiar use in the third century.

Tertullian especially complains of heretics, that they confounded the officers of the church. One is made bishop to-day, another tomorrow. One is to-day a deacon, to-morrow a reader; to-day a presbyter, to-morrow a layman; for they confer the sacerdotal offices even upon the laity.2 Such was the anxiety of the ancient church to distinguish between the clergy and laity, and to guard them from assuming any of the official duties of the priesthood. Jerome indeed speaks of a lay priesthood, but by the term he only designates those who have received christian baptism, in allusion to the passage: He hath made us kings and priests unto God!

The laity were also divided into different classes, which were very distinctly known and cautiously observed previous to the general introduction of infant baptism. The prevalence of this ordinance changed, in a great measure, the ancient classification of the church, which again was subject to other modifications by the rise of the different classes of penitents, and of the energumens and the several orders of monastics.

[The views which the primitive Christians entertained of themselves as the priests of God are clearly exhibited in the following extracts from Bib. Repos. July 1840, pp. 97-99. "They viewed themselves as the priests of God, placed in a polluted world to sanctify it, to be purified temples in which the Holy Spirit might dwell, safe from the contact of surrounding corruption, to be purified channels in which the sweet influences of heaven, the rills from the river of life, which surrounds the throne of God, might freely flow to purify a world which lay in wickedness.

"We,' says Justin Martyr, (Dial. Tryph. 355,) are the true high priests of God, as God himself testifies, when he says that pleasant incense and a pure offering shall in every place among the heathen be offered to him. Mal. 1: 11. He receives offerings from none but his priests. Prayer and thanksgiving only, brought by the worthy, are genuine offerings well pleasing to God; and those, Christians alone are in a condition to give.' Says Irenaeus (iv. 20), All the righteous have the sacerdotal dignity.' Says Tertullian (de Orat. c. 28), ' We are the true worshippers and the true priests, who, praying in the Spirit, in the Spirit offer to God the prayer which is his due, and is well-pleasing to him. Such prayer, coming from a heart full of devotion, nourished by faith, kept pure by a blameless life, made glorious by love, and accompanied with good works, we must with psalms and hymns bring to the altar of God; and it is all which God requires of us.'

"There was then no such distinction between clergymen and laymen, that compliances which would be acknowledged improper in the one would yet be considered harmless in the other. They were all equally the priests of God, and as such they felt their responsi bilities, and as such they endeavored to keep themselves unspotted from the world, and always to maintain the grave and serious demeanor becoming in a priest of the Most High. Says Tertullian (Monog. 7), We are priests, called thereto by Christ. The supreme High Priest, the great Priest of the Heavenly Father, even Christ, when he clothed us with that which is his, for as many of you as are baptized have put on Christ, Gal. 3: 27, hath made us kings and priests to God and his Father.' Rev. 1: 6. We are deluded if we imagine that that is allowed to the layman which is not permitted to the priest. Are not we laymen also priests?' (Exhort. c. 7.)"