The life and work of St. Paul

744 APPENDIX.
De Wette, to mean that Timothy is not to embroil himself in idle and fruitless con-
troversies. But even, supposing that "antilogies" are meant, what shadow of proof is
there that nothing of the kind existed among the "vain babblings" of Essenian specula-
" " 1
tion? Hegesippus, says Baur, "considering his Ebionite views, can scarcely have
drawn from an Epistle supposed to be by Paul." It is difficult to believe that this
remark is 2
perfectly serious; but if it be, I would ask, Is it not indefinitely more
improbable that the falsarius 3 would instantly condemn his own work as spurious by
interpolating marked passages from Clemens, Polycarp, and Hegesippus, which hia
instructed readers would be sure to recognise, and which would then bo absolute!}' fatal
to the success of his design ?
II. Let us, then, pass to the internal evidence. It is argued that these three
Epistles cannot have been written by St. Paiil (1) Because " they stand far below the
originality, the wealth of thought, and the whole spiritual substance and value of
the authentic 4
Epistles;" (2) Because they abound in un-Pauliue words and phrases;
(3) Because their theology differs from that of the Apostle ; (4) Because they deal with
conditions of ecclesiastical organisation which had no existence till long after the ago of
the Apostles ; (5) Because they betray allusions to later developments
heresy : and these objections we will briefly consider.
of Gnostic
(1) Now as to the style of these Epistles, we admit at once that it is inferior to that
of St. Paul's greatest productions. For eloquence, compression, depth, passion, and
logical power, they cannot for one moment be compared to the letters to the Corinthians,
Homans, Galatians, or Ephesians. St. Paul
"
is not here at his best or greatest. His
restless 5 "
energies," says Alford, are still at work; but those energies have changed their
complexion ; they have passed from the dialectic character of his earlier Epistles,
from the wonderful capacity of intricate combined rationalism of his subsequent Epistles,
to the urging, and repeating, and dilating upon truths which have been the food of
his life ; there is a resting on former conclusions, a constant citation of the temporis acti,
which lets us into a most interesting phase of the character of the great Apostle. Wo
see here rather the succession of brilliant sparks than the steady flame ; burning words
indeed and deep pathos, but not the flower of his firmness as in his discipline of tho
Galatians ; not the noon of his bright, warm eloquence, as in the inimitable Psalm of
Love." 6
But in what way does this invalidate their authenticity ? Wo entirely dissent from
Baur's exaggerated depreciation of then* value ; if we admitted that they were as meagre
of contents, as colourless in treatment, as deficient in motive and connexion, as full of
monotony, repetition, and dependence, as he asserts what then? Must a writer be always
at his greatest ? Does not the smallest knowledge of literary history prove at once that
writers are liable to extraordinary variations of literary capacity ? Do not their shorter
and less important works offer in many cases a most singular contrast to their more
elaborate compositions ? Are all the works of Plato of equal value ? Do we find in the
Epinomis the grandeur and profundity which mark the Phaedo and the Tkeaetetus f Is
the Leges as rich in stylo as the Phaedrus ? Is there no difference in manner between the
Annals of Tacitus and the dialogue De Oratoribusf Was it the same hand which wrote
Paul. ii. 101.
* Davidson freely admits that "there Is no great difficulty In supposing that he read the
Pastoral Epistles written in Paul's name, and remembered some of their expressions " (Introd.
ii. 181).
3
Admitting that " pseudonymity and literary deception " were regarded in antiquity as very
different things, I would willingly avoid the word "forger " if there were auy other convenient word
which could be substituted for it. I quite concede to Do Wette, Schloiermacher, Baur, &c., that
the word connotes much more than it ought to do, as applied to a writer of the first two centuries,
and that " the forging of such Epistles must not be judged according to the modern standard of
literary honesty, but according to the spirit of antiquity, which attached no such definite value as
we do to literary property, and regarded the thing much more than the person " .(Baur, Paul.
U. *
110).
Baur, Paul. ii. 100. * Greek Ttst. iii. 83. 6 1 Cor. xiil