24.06.2013 Views

The works of Nathaniel Lardner - The Christian Researcher - Home

The works of Nathaniel Lardner - The Christian Researcher - Home

The works of Nathaniel Lardner - The Christian Researcher - Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>The</strong> Manichees. SECT. I. 287<br />

tliat Hierax learned it <strong>of</strong> Origcn, or formed it out <strong>of</strong> liis own^<br />

head.<br />

In the letter <strong>of</strong> Arias to Alexandria, as we have it in<br />

^Epiphanius and ''Athanasius in Greek, and in '^Hilary in<br />

Latin, divers opinions concerning- the Son are represented ;<br />

that <strong>of</strong> Mani, Sabellius, and Hierax, all as different from<br />

each other.<br />

If Hierax had been a Manichee, it would be very strange<br />

that'^ great numbers <strong>of</strong> the Egyptian monks, or ascetics,<br />

should admire and follow him, as Epiphanius says they did.<br />

Finally, there is no notice taken <strong>of</strong> Hierax as a disciple <strong>of</strong><br />

Mani, in the Disputation <strong>of</strong> Archelaus, nor in St. Cyril <strong>of</strong><br />

Jerusalem, no niore than in Epiphanius.<br />

I conclude therefore there is no reason to think that<br />

Hierax, whose opinions make a distinct heresy in Epiphanius,<br />

was a Manichee. If Photius, or Peter <strong>of</strong> Sicily, knew any<br />

one <strong>of</strong> that name who was a Manichee, he must have been<br />

different from him mentioned by Epiphanius, and other<br />

ancient writers; and probably he was no very early or<br />

ancient follower <strong>of</strong> Mani : but I rather think that they knew<br />

not any such person, but have mistaken the character <strong>of</strong><br />

Hierax, <strong>of</strong> whom Epiphanius writes.<br />

Let it not be thought to no purpose that T have said so<br />

much to show that Hierax was not a Manichee. Beausobre<br />

in several parts <strong>of</strong> his work has divers arguments, built upon<br />

the supposition (hat Hierax was in the Manichsean scheme ;<br />

all which reasonings therefore now fall to the ground ; nor<br />

can we in any case judge <strong>of</strong> the Manichdean sentiments by<br />

' Beausobre is pleased to ?ay, (T. i. p. 431,) ' What we know <strong>of</strong> his senti<br />

' ments is, that he denied the resurrection <strong>of</strong> the body ; that he did not beheve,<br />

' that Jesus had a true human body ; and that he admitted three principles <strong>of</strong><br />

' all things, God, Matter, and Malice.' But these things are not in Epiphanius.<br />

Beausobre here builds upon a passage <strong>of</strong> a writer <strong>of</strong> the seventh or<br />

eighth century ; De Hieracitis locus insignis Joannis Carpathi episcopi, ex MS.<br />

opere de Anachoretis, productus a Cangio in Appendice ad Glossarium Grae-<br />

cum :<br />

—<br />

o'lTiveg Xtyaai, fir] avOpwTrivov ffw/ta aviC\i]

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!