the converted Manichæan renounced his errors. But what this can have to do with the question of the Paulician creed, it is not easy to see; for not one word is there to connect the two, and their identity is just the very thing concerning which the dispute is being carried on. Then we are told that "Euthymius Zigabenus," a writer of the twelfth century, "copies verbatim the early part of the first book of Photius, touching the Paulicians." Of his own knowledge, however, this writer says not one word. He therefore leaves the question exactly where Photius left it. At last we come to the two writers, and the only two writers, who, of their own knowledge, tell us anything of the Paulicians. These are, Photius, and Petrus Siculus. On these two we must rely; for neither Mr. Maitland nor Mr. Dowling, with all their research, have been able to bring us one word, from any later writer, which in the least enlarges the knowledge afforded us by these two writers. Of the two, Photius is the least worthy of regard. He was patriarch of Constantinople, and passed his life in a turmoil of intrigues. Placed therefore at a distance of a thousand miles from the Paulicians, and professing no other personal knowledge of them than that derived from certain stragglers who applied to him for admission into the Catholic communion; and himself described by Dupin as guilty of "tricks and artifices unworthy of an honest man,"it is plain that we must accept him merely as a prejudiced witness, and that only as to a certain amount of hearsay. He fills up his story, as Mr. Dowling admits, by copying from Cyril of Jerusalem, a history of the Manichees. That is to say, the poor Paulicians, whose earliest appearance dates from A.D. 653, are to be mingled up, in spite of all their protests, with a sect which sprang up about the year 270-whose tenets they entirely disclaimed, and whose writings they cast from them with abhorrence. The only remaining witness, is the single one, out of some twelve or fourteen in all, quoted by Mr. Dowling, who can advance any claim to a personal acquaintance with the subject on which he treats. Petrus Siculus did actually visit the Paulicians in their own country; resided there nine months; and naturally affords us much information which is both credible and important. To Peter of Sicily, then, we are quite ready to turn, as the best, and, in fact, the only witness who can be produced, who can tell us any thing of the character and tenets of the Paulicians, from his own knowledge. Let us ask of him, then, prejudiced as he was against these poor people, what we are to conclude of their 1, Purity of Faith; and 2, of their Purity of Life? Perhaps the answer will best be given by narrating, in his (Peter's) own words, the history of the rise and earliest periods of the Paulician faith. As a The opening circumstance has already been stated. About A.D, 653, "a certain deacon, returning from captivity, was hospitably entertained by one Constantine, a Manichæan residing at Mananalis, which place was inhabited by persons of that sect. To requite the kindness of his host, he presented him with two books which he had brought with him from Syria,-the Gospels, and the Epistles of St. Paul."1 Upon which, proceeds Peter, "the devil, it is probable, instigated him to touch no book from that time except the volumes of the gospels, and of the Apostles."2 natural consequence, he "constantly rejected the writings of the Manichæans" "exploding and casting away the blasphemies of Valentinus, the prodigious dogmas of the thirty divine æons, and the entire fable of Curbicius," &c. So that, says this same Peter, "the Manichæans of the present day" (as he persists in calling the Paulicians) "reject and detest with prompt minds, Scythianus, and Budda, and Manes, who were the chiefs of the whole sect; reckoning, however, this Constantine (called Sylvanus,) and others who arose after him, as apostles of Christ." 5 4 This Constantine, then, having taken the new name of Sylvanus, apparently the more distinctly to mark his new profession, and his purpose of following St. Paul, "lived twenty-seven years in that place, and impelled many of the inhabitants into error" (as Peter deemed his faith;) "when at last the Emperor despatched an officer named Simeon, with orders to stone Sylvanus, and to disperse his followers." This Simeon seized and led away to a chosen spot, Sylvanus and his disciples, and there commanded the latter to stone their master. But only a single traitor could be found, one Justus, to obey the mandate. The whole body, excepting Justus, "regarding Sylvanus as one sent to them by God, cast the stones behind their backs, which they were commanded to hurl at him." 6 But by the hand of Justus, the first Paulician fell. The next circumstance is a striking one, and cannot but compel our attention. This Imperial Commissioner, Simeon, who had been sent to extirpate the new sect, "examined and listened to these persons," says Peter, "too incautiously," and the result was, that he imbibed the pestilential heresy." Many such conversions are recorded. The blood of the martyrs has ever been the seed of the Church. Simeon, then, returns to Constantinople, 1 Petrus Siculus in Bib. Pat. vol. ix. p. 36. 3 Ibid. p. 36. 2 Ibid. p. 36. JAN. 1843. I and spends three years in a private station; till at last being (says Peter) "fully ensnared and possessed by the devil," or, in other words, being strengthened of God to choose the better part, he "leaves all; withdraws to Cibossa, calls together the Paulicians," and boldly casts in his lot with these despised and persecuted servants of God. Treading in the steps of the first founder of this infant Church, he too resigns his former name, and takes that of Titus. But Justus, who had formerly been the executioner of Sylvanus, and who yet appears to have been reconciled to his former brethren, becomes once more a cause of evil to them. A contention springing up between Simeon (or Titus) and Justus, the latter goes to the bishop of Colonia, and "exposed all things relating to himself and his companions." The bishop invokes the Imperial authority once more, and the emperor orders that all "should be collected together, and interrogated; and that those who continued pertinacious should be committed to the flames. A huge funeral pile being therefore heaped up on high, they were all set fire to, and burned to death." Yet the candlestick was not to be wholly removed. From this exterminating sentence one Paulus escaped, and fled as far as Epispalis; taking with him two sons, Genesius and Theodorus, whereof Genesius afterwards became a teacher of divine truth, under the name of Timotheus. But not long after this, another and an exceedingly eminent evangelist arose among them, named Sergius, who, assuming, like the rest, a name chosen from among St. Paul's companions, was called Tychicus. The circumstances of his conversion, as given, with all possible venom, by Petrus Siculus, are most instructive. That they should have been preserved and handed down by a bitter opponent, writing, too, perhaps a century after, is very remarkable. He, doubtless, derived them from a record then existing; for he says, they have moreover the epistles of their master Sergius, full of all pride and impiety."? "Sergius," says Peter, "when he was yet a youth, accidentally fell in with a certain woman." "She, a follower of the devil in craftiness and cunning, thus addressed him :" (our readers will smile when they read this address of "a follower of the devil.") "I understand, Sergius, that you excel in literature and erudi"tion; and that you are moreover a good man in all respects: "tell me, then, why do you not read the holy gospels? 1 Petrus Siculus in Bib. Pat. vol. ix. p. 37. 2 Ibid. p. 33 So that, in the view of Peter, it argued "Satanic craftiness and cunning," to urge upon a youth of good education and morals, the necessity of reading the sacred Scriptures! Precisely such has been the view of the Apostate Church from the beginning. And constantly has her priesthood been prompt to exclaim "Heresy!". "a Manichæan !" " an Infidel !" immediately any one insisted on appealing "to the Law and to the Testimony.' The reply of Sergius shews the state into which the visible Church of that period had fallen. "It is not permitted to us, of the laity," he answers, " to read them; but only to the priests." This "Manichæan woman," however, replies like one of our Christian heroines of Queen Mary's days. "It is not as you suppose,”—she says, evidently objecting to a supposition on his part, that there was a divine prohibition. "It is not as you suppose; "for there is no respect of persons with God. He willeth all men "to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. But "your priests, because they corrupt the word of God, and conceal "the mysteries which are contained in the gospels, do therefore "not read all things that are written, to you who hear; but read "some things and omit others; so that you may not be able to come to a knowledge of the truth." And then, adds Peter, "running with the same thread through the words of the gospels, and in a wonderful manner corrupting the sense of every expression, she rendered him in a short time a fit instrument of the devil."1 66 Now this Peter, be it observed, while he thus pours forth his indignation, does not attempt to deny the important facts which fix the character of the persons spoken of. He admits, by his recording these facts without protest, that this woman whom he calls a Manichæan, directed the attention of the person she addressed, not to Manichæan books, but to the pure word of God. And it is worthy of especial remark, that during all the period of their continuance, no corruption of the Scriptures (the constant practice of all heretics) is charged upon the Paulicians. Peter himself declares, that they have the sacred books, "in the same words in which they are amongst us." It is also similarly admitted, that while these alleged "heretics" inculcated the reading of God's word, the priests kept the laity, and had kept Sergius, in ignorance of it. This woman, then, lays open the gospel itself, in its own purity, to a youth of erudition and piety, and by such means, and such means alone, "renders him in a short time a fit instrument of the devil!" By this pregnant instance we may fully understand, both what 1 Petrus Siculus, p. 38. the religion of the priests, and of the dominant Church, in that day, was; and also what these priests meant when they so loudly called all persons heretics and Manichæans who insisted on the duty of reading the Scriptures. Sergius, however, being thus converted to God by the use of God's word, through the means of a simple Christian woman, became, as it is abundantly apparent from Peter's invectives, one of the earnest and laborious preachers of the gospel that the world has ever seen. Peter's own account of his labours runs as follows: "Sergius, therefore, the champion of the devil, being instructed by a mischievous woman, when he had drunk more deeply of the heresy, believing that all men who hold our christian faith in sincerity were on the way to destruction, rose up with satanic zeal, and became a new preacher of error." "Assuming the name of Tychicus, from the epistles of St. Paul," "he actively traversed all the states and regions in which the apostle had published the word of truth eight hundred years before; turning many away from the orthodox faith, and adding them to the devil. In a certain epistle he himself says, "I have run from east to west, from north to south, proclaiming the gospel of Christ, and labouring on my knees." "Thus persisting for the space of thirty-four years, he spread the defection which still prevails.' "At length," adds this worthy emissary of a persecuting emperor, with a spirit worthy of a Bonner or a Gardiner"at length, by the just judgment of God, being cut in two by an axe, as one who had cut in two the Church of God, he was sent to eternal fire." دو In the furious diatribe of Peter against Sergius, we both discern the vast influence of this evangelist's labours, and also see very distinct tokens of the causes which made him so hateful to the priesthood. "Sergius, that most mighty champion of the devil,-Sergius, who has changed many from sheep into wolves, and through them has scattered the folds of Christ,-Sergius, himself a fierce wolf in the skin of a sheep a deceitful pretender to virtue; who has by this disguise beguiled many,-Sergius, the enemy of the Cross of Christ; the mouth of impiety; uttering reproaches against the Mother of Christ, and the saints,"-" the antagonist of the Church, who has trodden under foot the Son of God," (the mass) "and counted the blood of the covenant an unholy thing," &c. &c. There can be little doubt that this eminent man was the brightest ornament of that community, and that the state of their Church was most flourishing during his life. Subsequently we find various |