part i

. of his masterpiece that the light seems to grow dim. Another of the Oxford converts to Rome, W.G. Ward, made vigorous contributions to natural theology.

VII. _Contents of Modern Apologetics._--Superficially regarded, philosophy ebbs and flows, whatever progress the debate may reveal to speculative insight. Old positions re-emerge from forgetfulness, and there is always a philosophy to back every "case." More visible dangers arise for the apologist in the region of science, historical or physical. There the progress of truth, within whatever limits, is manifest. _Essays and Reviews_ (1860) was a vehement announcement of scientific results--startling English conservatism awake for the first time. And in the scientific region the great apologetic classics, like Butler, are hopelessly out of date. The modern apologist must do ephemeral work--unless it should chance that he proves to be the skirmisher, pioneering for a modified dogmatic. He holds a watching brief. While he must beware of hasty speech, he has often to plead that new knowledge does not really threaten faith; or that it is not genuinely established knowledge at all; or else, that faith has mistaken its own grounds, and will gain strength by concentrating on its true field. The work is not always well done; but the Christian church needs it.

1. _Apologetics and Philosophy._--The main part of this subject is discussed under THEISM. Some notes may be added on special points, (a) Freewill is generally assumed on the Christian side (R.C. Church; Scottish philosophy; H. Lotze; J. Martineau; W.G. Ward. Not in a libertarian sense; Leibnitz. New and obscure issues raised by Kant). But there is no continuous tradition or steady trend of discussion. (b) Personal immortality is affirmed as philosophically certain by the Church of Rome and many Protestant writers. Others teach "conditional immortality." Others base the hope on belief in the resurrection of Christ, (c) Theodicy--the tradition of Leibnitz is preserved (on libertarian lines) by Martineau (_A Study of Religion_, 1883). See also F.R. Tennant's _Origin and Propagation of Sin_ (1902)--sin a "bye-product" of a generally good evolution. Others find in the gospel of redemption the true theodicy. (d) The problem of Christian apologetic has been simplified in the past by the prevalence of the Christian ethics and temper even among many non-Christians (e.g. J.S. Mill). But hereafter it may not prove possible for the apologist to assume as unchallenged the Christian moral outlook. Germans have suspected an anti-Christian strain in Goethe; all the world knows of it in E. von Hartmann or F. Nietzsche.

2. _Apologetics and Physical Science._--(a) Copernicanism has won its battles and the Church of Rome would fain have its error forgotten. The admission is now general that the Bible cannot be expected to use the language of scientific astronomy. Still, it is not certain that the shock of Copernicanism on supernatural Christianity is exhausted. (b) Geology has also won its battles, and few now try to harmonize it with Genesis. (c) Evolution came down from the clouds when C. Darwin and A.R. Wallace succeeded in displacing the naif conception of special creation by belief in the origin of species out of other species through a process of natural law. This gave immense vogue to wider and vaguer theories of evolutionary process, notably to H. Spencer's grandiose cosmic formula in terms of mechanism. Here the apologist has more to say. The special Darwinian hypothesis--natural "selection"--may or may not be true; it was at least a fruitful suggestion. If true, it need not be exhaustive. Again, evolution itself need not apply everywhere. We are offered a philosophical rather than a scientific speculation when E. Caird (_Evolution of Religion_, 1893) tries to vindicate Christianity as the highest working of nature--true just _because_ evolved from lower religions. The Christian apologist indeed may himself seek, following John Fiske, to philosophize evolution as a restatement of natural theology--"one God, one law, one element and one far-off divine event"--and as at least pointing _towards_ personal immortality. But if evolution is to be the whole truth regarding Christianity, we should have to surrender both _supernatural revelation_ and _divine redemption_. And these, it may be strongly urged, contain the magic of Christianity. Losing them it might sink into a lifeless theory.

As far as pure science goes, the inference from science in favour of materialism has visibly lost much of its plausibility, and Protestant apologists would probably be prepared to accept in advance all verified discoveries as belonging to a different region from that of faith. Roman Catholic apologetic prefers to negotiate in detail.

3. _Apologetics and History._--History brings us nearer the heart of the Christian position. (a) Old Testament criticism won startling victories towards the end of the 19th century. It blots out much supposed knowledge, but throws a vivid and interesting light on the reconstrued process of history. Most Protestants accept the general scheme of criticism; those who hang back make not a few concessions (e.g. J. Orr, _Problem of the O.T._, 1906). The Roman Catholic Church again prefers an attitude of reserve, (b) New Testament criticism raises even more delicate issues. Positively it may be affirmed that the recovered figure of the historical Jesus is the greatest asset in the possession of modern Christian theology and apologetics. The "Lives" of Christ, Roman Catholic and Protestant; "critical" (D.F. Strauss, A. Renan, &c., &c.) and "believing," imply this at least. Negatively, "unchallenged historical certainties" are becoming few in number, or are disappearing altogether, through the industry of modern minds. True, the Tubingen criticism of F.C. Baur and his school--important as the first scientific attempt to conceive New Testament conditions and literature as a whole--has been abandoned. (A. Ritschl's _Entstehung der alt-katholischen Kirche_, 2nd edition, 1857, was an especially telling reply.) The synoptic gospels are now treated with considerable respect. It is no longer suggested in responsible quarters that they are party documents sacrificing truth to "tendency." But not all quarters are responsible; and in the effort to grasp scientifically, i.e. accurately, the amazing facts of Christ and primitive Christianity, every imaginable hypothesis is canvassed. Even the Roman Catholic Church produced the Abbe Loisy (though he undertakes to play off church certainties against historical uncertainties). Hitherto at least the fourth gospel has been the touchstone. The authorship of the epistles is in many cases a matter of subordinate importance; at least for Protestants or for those surrendering Bible infallibility, which Rome can hardly do. (c) New Testament history, The apologist must maintain (1) that Jesus of Nazareth is a real historical figure--a point well-nigh overlooked by Strauss, and denied by some modern advocates of a mythical theory; (2) that Jesus is knowable (not one "of whom we really know very little"--B. Jowett) in his teaching, example, character, historical personality; and that he is full of moral splendour. On the other hand, faith has no special interest in claiming that we can compose a biographical study of the development of Jesus. Certainly no early writer thought of providing material for such use. It is a common opinion in Germany that our material is in fact too scanty or too self-contradictory. Yet the fascination of the subject will always revive the attempt. If it succeeds, there will be a new line of communication along which that great personality will tell on men's minds and hearts. If it fails--there are other channels; character can be known and trusted even when we are baffled by a thing necessarily so full of mystery as the development of a personality. Notably, the manifest _non-consciousness of personal guilt_ in Jesus suggests to us his sinlessness. (3) Apologists maintain that Jesus "claimed" Messiahship. There are speculative constructions of gospel history which eliminate that claim; and no doubt apologetics could--with more or less difficulty--restate its position in a changed form if the paradox of to-day became accepted as historical fact to-morrow. The central apologetic thesis is the _uniqueness_ of the "only-begotten"; it is here that "the supernatural" passes into the substance of Christian faith. But most probably the description of Jesus as thus unique will continue to be associated with the allegation--He told us so; he claimed Messiahship and "died for the claim." (See preface to 5th ed. of _Ecce Homo_.) Nor did so superhuman a claim crush him, or deprive his soul of its balance. He imparted to the title a grander significance out of the riches of his personality. (4) In the light of this the "argument from prophecy" is reconstructed. It ceases to lay much stress upon coincidences between Old Testament predictions or "types" and events in Christ's career. It becomes the assertion; historically, providentially, the expectation of a _unique religious figure_ arose--"the" Messiah; and Jesus gave himself to be thought of as that great figure. (5) It is also claimed as certain that Jesus had marvellous powers of healing. More reserve is being shown towards the other or "nature" miracles. These latter, it may be remarked, are more unambiguously supernatural. But, if Jesus really cured leprosy or really restored the dead to life, we have miracle plainly enough in the region of healing. (6) For Jesus' own resurrection several lines of evidence are alleged. (i.) All who believe that in any sense Christ rose again insist upon the impression which his personality made during life. It was _he_ whose resurrection seemed credible! Some practically stop here; the apologist proceeds. (ii.) There is the report of the empty grave; historically, not easily waved aside. (iii.) We have New Testament reports of appearances of the risen Jesus; subjective? the mere clothing of the impression made by his personality during life? or objective? "telegrams" from heaven (Th. Keim)--"Veridical Hallucinations"? or something even more, throwing a ray of light perhaps on the state and powers of the happy dead? (iv.) There is the immense influence of Jesus Christ in history, _associated with belief in him_ as the risen Son of God.

In view of the claims of Jesus, different possibilities arise, (i.) The evangelists impute to him a higher claim than he made. This may be called the rationalistic solution; with sympathy in Christ's ethical teaching, there is relief at minimizing his great claim. So, brilliantly, Wellhausen's Gospel commentaries and Introduction. (Mark fairly historical; other gospels' fuller account of Christ's teaching and claims unreliable.) (ii.) The claim was fraudulent (Reimarus; Renan, ed. 1; popular anti-Christian agitation). This is a counsel of despair. (iii.) He was an enthusiastic dreamer, expecting the world's end. This the apologist will recognize as the most plausible hostile alternative. He may feel bound to admit an element of illusion in Christ's vision' of the future; but he will contend that the apocalyptic form did not destroy the spiritual content of Christ's revelations--nay, that it was itself the vehicle of great truths. So he will argue as the essence of the matter that (iv.) he who has occupied Christ's place in history, and won such reverence from the purest souls, was what he claimed to be, and that his many-sidedness comes to focus and harmony when we recognize him as the Christ of God and the Saviour of the world.

To a less extent, similar problems and alternatives arise in regard to the church:--Catholicism a compromise between Jewish Christianity and Pauline or Gentile Christianity (F.C. Baur, &c.); Catholicism the Hellenizing of Christianity (A. Ritschl, A. Harnack); the Catholic church for good and evil the creation of St Paul (P. Wernle, H. Weinel); the church supernaturally guided (R.C. apologetic; in a modified degree High Church apologetic); essential--not necessarily exclusive--truth of Paulinism, essential error in first principles of Catholicism (Protestant apologetic).

LITERATURE.--Omitting the Christian fathers as remote from the present day, we recognize as works of genius Pascal's _Pensees_ and Butler's _Analogy_, to which we might add J.R. Seeley's _Ecce Homo_ (1865). The philosophical, Platonist, or Idealist line of Christian defence is represented among recent writers by J.R. Illingworth [Anglican], in _Personality, Human and Divine_ (1894), _Divine Immanence_ (1898), _Reason and Revelation_ (1902), who at times seems rather to presuppose the Thomist compromise, and A.M. Fairbairn [Congregationalist], in _Place of Christ in Modern Theology_ (1893), _Philosophy of the Christian Religion_ (1902). The appeal to ethical or Christian experience--"internal evidence"--is found especially in E.A. Abbott [Christianity supernatural and divine, but not miraculous], _Through Nature to Christ_ (1877), _The Kernel and the Husk_ (1886), _The Spirit on the Waters_ (1897), &c., or A.B. Bruce, _Chief End of Revelation_ (1881), _The Miraculous Element in the Gospels_ (1886), _Apologetics_ (1892), and other works; Bruce's posthumous article, "Jesus" in _Encyc. Bib._, was understood by some as exchanging Christian orthodoxy for bare theism, but probably its tone of aloofness is due to the attempt to keep well within the limits of what the author considered pure scientific history. Scholarly and apologetic discussion on the gospels and life of Jesus is further represented by the writings of W. Sanday or (earlier) of J.B. Lightfoot. Much American work of merit on the character of Christ is headed by W. E Channing, and by H. Bushnell (in _Nature and the Supernatural_). For defence of Christ's resurrection, reference may be made to H. Latham's _The Risen Lord_ and R. Mackintosh's _First Primer of Apologetics_. For modification in light of recent scholarship of argument from prophecy, to Riehm's _Messianic Prophecy_, Stanton's _Jewish and Christian Messiah_, and Woods's _Hope of Israel_. Roman Catholic apologetics--of necessity, Thomist--is well represented by Professor Schanz of Tubingen. The whole Ritschl movement is apologetic in spirit; best English account in A.E. Garvie's _Ritschlian Theology_ (1899). See also the chief church histories or histories of doctrine (Harnack; Loofs; Hagenbach; Shedd); A.S. Farrar's _Critical History of Free_ (i.e. anti-Christian) _Thought_ (Bampton Lectures, 1862); R.C. Trench's Introduction to _Notes on the Miracles_, and F.W. Macran's _English Apologetic Theology_ (1905). For the 18th century, G.V. Lechler's _Geschichte des englischen Deismus_ (1841); Mark Pattison in _Essays and Reviews_ (1860); Leslie Stephen's _English Thought in 18th Century_ (agnostic); John Hunt, _Religious Thought in England_ (3 vols., 1870-1873). (R. Ma.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] While these writings are of great historical value, they do not, of course, represent the Christian argument as conceived to-day. The Church of Rome prefers medieval or modern statements of its position; Protestantism can use only modern statements.

APOLOGUE (from the Gr. [Greek: apologos], a statement or account), a short fable or allegorical story, meant to serve as a pleasant vehicle for some moral doctrine or to convey some useful lesson. One of the best known is that of Jotham in the Book of Judges (ix. 7-15); others are "The City Rat and Field Rat," by Horace, "The Belly and its Members," by the patrician Menenius Agrippa in the second book of Livy, and perhaps most famous of all, those of Aesop. The term is applied more

## particularly to a story in which the actors or speakers are taken from

the brute creation or inanimate nature. An apologue is distinguished from a fable in that there is always some moral sense present, which there need not be in a fable. It is generally dramatic, and has been defined as "a satire in action." It differs from a parable in several respects. A parable is equally an ingenious tale intended to correct manners, but it can be _true_, while an apologue, with its introduction of animals and plants, to which it lends our ideas and language and emotions, is necessarily devoid of real truth, and even of all probability. The parable reaches heights to which the apologue cannot aspire, for the points in which brutes and inanimate nature present analogies to man are principally those of his lower nature, and the lessons taught by the apologue seldom therefore reach beyond prudential morality, whereas the parable aims at representing the relations between man and God. It finds its framework in the world of nature as it actually is, and not in any grotesque parody of it, and it exhibits real and not fanciful analogies. The apologue seizes on that which man has in common with creatures below him, and the parable on that which he has in common with God. Still, in spite of the difference of moral level, Martin Luther thought so highly of apologues as counsellors of virtue that he edited and revised Aesop and wrote a characteristic preface to the volume. The origin of the apologue is extremely ancient and comes from the East, which is the natural fatherland of everything connected with allegory, metaphor and imagination. Veiled truth was often necessary in the East, particularly with the slaves, who dared not reveal their minds too openly. It is noteworthy that the two fathers of apologue in the West were slaves, namely Aesop and Phaedrus. La Fontaine in France; Gay and Dodsley in England; Gellert, Lessing and Hagedorn in Germany; Tomas de Iriarte in Spain, and Krilov in Russia, are leading modern writers of apologues. Length is not an essential matter in the definition of an apologue. Those of La Fontaine are often very short, as, for example, "Le Coque et la Perle." On the other hand, in the romances of Reynard the Fox we have medieval apologues arranged in cycles, and attaining epical dimensions. An Italian fabulist, Corti, is said to have developed an apologue of "The Talking Animals" to the bulk of twenty-six cantos. La Motte, writing at a time when this species of literature was universally admired, attributes its popularity to the fact that it _menage et flatte l'amour-propre_ by inculcating virtue in an amusing manner without seeming to dictate or insist. This was the ordinary 18th-century view of the matter, but Rousseau contested the educational value of instruction given in this indirect form.

A work by P. Soulle, _La Fontaine et ses devanciers_ (1866), is a history of the apologue from the earliest times until its final triumph in France.

APOLOGY (from Gr. [Greek: apologia], defence), in its usual sense, an expression of regret for something which has been wrongfully said or done; a withdrawal or retraction of some charge or imputation which is false. In an action for libel, the fact that an apology has been promptly and fully made is a plea in mitigation of damages. The apology should have the same form of publicity as the original charge. If made publicly, the proper form is an advertisement in a newspaper; if made within the hearing of a few only, a letter of apology, which may be read to those who have heard what was said, should be sufficient. By the English Libel Act 1843, s. 2, it was enacted that in an action for libel contained in a newspaper it is a defence for the defendant to plead that the libel was inserted without actual malice and without gross negligence, and that before the commencement of the action and at the earliest opportunity afterwards he inserted in the newspaper a full apology for the libel, or, where the newspaper in which the libel appeared was published at intervals exceeding one week, he offered to publish the apology in any newspaper selected by the plaintiff. The apology must be full and must be printed in as conspicuous a place and manner as the libel was.

The word "apology" or "apologia" is also used in the sense of defence or vindication, the only meaning of the Greek [Greek: apologia], especially of the defence of a doctrine or system, or of religious or other beliefs, &c., e.g. Justin Martyr's _Apology_ or J.H. Newman's _Apologia pro vita sua_. (See APOLOGETICS.)

APONEUROSIS ([Greek: apo], away, and [Greek: neuron], a sinew), in anatomy, a membrane separating muscles from each other.

APOPHTHEGM (from the [Greek: apophthegma]), a short and pointed utterance. The usual spelling up to Johnson's day was _apothegm_, which Webster and Worcester still prefer; it indicates the pronunciation--i.e. "apothem"--better than the other, which, however, is more usual in England and follows the derivation. Such sententious remarks as "Knowledge is Power" are apophthegms. They become "proverbs" by age and acceptance. Plutarch made a famous collection in his _Apophthegmata Laconica_.

APOPHYGE (Gr. [Greek: apophugae], a flying off), in architecture, the lowest part of the shaft of an Ionic or Corinthian column, or the highest member of its base if the column be considered as a whole. The apophyge is the inverted cavetto or concave sweep, on the upper edge of which the diminishing shaft rests.

APOPHYLLITE, a mineral often classed with the zeolites, since it behaves like these when heated before the blowpipe and has the same mode of occurrence; it differs, however, from the zeolites proper in containing no aluminium. It is a hydrous potassium and calcium silicate, H7KCa4(SiO3)8 + 4-1/2(H2O). A small amount of fluorine is often present, and it is one of the few minerals in which ammonium has been detected. The temperature at which the water is expelled is higher than is usually the case with zeolites; none is given off below 200 deg., and only about half at 250 deg.; this is slowly reabsorbed again from moist air, and is therefore regarded as water of crystallization, the remainder being water of constitution. When heated before the blowpipe, the mineral exfoliates, owing to loss of water, and on this account was named apophyllite by R.J. Hauy in 1806, from the Greek [Greek: apo], from, and [Greek: phullon], a leaf.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.]

[Illustration: FIG. 2.]

Apophyllite always occurs as distinct crystals, which belong to the tetragonal system. The form is either a square prism terminated by the basal planes (fig. 2), or an acute pyramid (fig. 1). A prominent feature of the mineral is its perfect basal cleavage, on which the lustre is markedly pearly, presenting, in white crystals, somewhat the appearance of the eye of a fish after boiling, hence the old name fish-eye-stone or ichthyophthalmite for the mineral. On other surfaces the lustre is vitreous. The crystals are usually transparent and colourless, sometimes with a greenish or rose-red tint. Opaque white crystals of cubic habit have been called albine; xylochlore is an olive-green variety. The hardness is 4-1/2, and the specific gravity 2.35.

The optical characters of the mineral are of special interest, and have been much studied. The sign of the double refraction may be either positive or negative, and some crystals are divided into optically biaxial sectors. The variety known as leucocyclite shows, when examined in convergent polarized light, a peculiar interference figure, the rings being alternately white and violet-black and not coloured as in a normal figure seen in white light.

Apophyllite is a mineral of secondary origin, commonly occurring, in association with other zeolites, in amygdaloidal cavities in basalt and melaphyre. Magnificent groups of greenish and colourless tabular crystals, the crystals several inches across, were found, with flesh-red stilbite, in the Deccan traps of the Western Ghats, near Bombay, during the construction of the Great Indian Peninsular railway. Groups of crystals of a beautiful pink colour have been found in the silver veins of Andreasberg in the Harz and of Guanaxuato in Mexico. Crystals of recent formation have been detected in the Roman remains at the hot springs of Plombieres in France. (L. J. S.)

APOPHYSIS (Gr. [Greek: apophysis], offshoot), a bony protuberance, in human physiology; also a botanical term for the swelling of the spore-case in certain mosses.

APOPLEXY (Gr. [Greek: apoplaexia], from [Greek: apoplaessein], to strike down, to stun), the term employed by Galen to designate the "sudden loss of feeling and movement of the whole body, with the exception of respiration," to which, after the time of Harvey, was added "and with the exception of the circulation." Although the term is occasionally employed in medicine with other significations, yet in its general acceptation apoplexy may be defined as a sudden loss of consciousness, of sensibility, and of movement without any _essential_ modification of the respiratory and circulatory functions occasioned by some brain disease. It was discovered that the majority of the cases of apoplexy were due to cerebral haemorrhage, and what looked like cerebral haemorrhage, red softening; and the idea for a long time prevailed that apoplexy and cerebral haemorrhage could be employed as synonymous terms, and that an individual who, in popular parlance, "had an apoplectic stroke," had necessarily suffered from haemorrhage into his brain. A small haemorrhage may not, however, cause an apoplectic fit, nor is an apoplectic fit always caused by haemorrhage; it may be due to sudden blocking of a large vessel by a clot from a distant part (embolism), or by a sudden clotting of the blood in the vessel itself (thrombosis). Owing to the prevailing idea in former times that cerebral haemorrhage and apoplexy were synonymous terms, the word apoplexy was applied to haemorrhage into other organs than the brain; thus the terms pulmonary apoplexy, retinal apoplexy and splenic apoplexy were used.

The term "apoplexy" is now used in clinical medicine to denote that form of coma or deep state of unconsciousness which is due to sudden disturbance of the cerebral circulation occasioned by a local cause within the cranial cavity, as distinct from the loss of consciousness due to sudden failure of the heart's action (syncope) or the coma of narcotic or alcoholic poisoning, of _status epilepticus_, of uraemia or of head injury.

The sudden coma of sunstroke and heat-stroke might be included, although owing to the suddenness with which a person may be struck down, the term _heat apoplexy_ is frequently used, and, from an etymological point of view, quite justifiably. The older writers use the term _simple apoplexy_ for a sudden attack which could not be explained by any visible disease. Again, _congestive apoplexy_ was applied to those cases of coma where, at the autopsy, nothing was found to account for the coma and death except engorgement of the vessels of the brain and its membranes. In senile dementia and in general paralysis the brain is shrunken and the convolutions atrophied, the increased space in the ventricles and between the convolutions being filled up with the cerebro-spinal fluid. In these diseases apoplectic states may arise, terminating fatally; the excess of fluid found in such cases was formerly thought to be the cause of the symptoms, consequently the condition was called _serous apoplexy_. Such terms are no longer used, owing to the better knowledge of the pathology of brain disease.

Having thus narrowed down the application of the term "apoplexy," we are in a position to consider its chief features, and the mechanism by which it is produced. Apoplexy may be rapidly fatal, but it is very seldom _instantly_ fatal. The onset is usually sudden, and sometimes the individual may be struck down in an instant, senseless and motionless, "warranting those epithets, which the ancients applied to the victims of this disease, of _attoniti_ and _siderati_, as if they were thunder-stricken or planet-struck" (Sir Thomas Watson). The attack, however, may be less sudden and, not infrequently, attended by a convulsion; while occasionally, in the condition termed _ingravescent apoplexy_, the coma is gradual in its onset, occupying hours in its development. Although unexpected, various warning symptoms, sometimes slight, sometimes pronounced, occur in the majority of cases. Such are, fulness in the head, headache, giddiness, noises in the ears, mental confusion, slight lapses of consciousness, numbness or tingling in the limbs. A characteristic apoplectic attack presents the following phenomena: the individual falls down suddenly and lies without sense or motion, except that his pulse keeps beating and his breathing continues. He appears to be in a deep sleep, from which he cannot be roused; the breathing is laboured and stertorous, and is accompanied with puffing out of the cheeks; the pulse may be beating more strongly than natural, and the face is often flushed and turgid. The reflexes are abolished. Although apoplexy may occur without paralysis, and paralysis without apoplexy, the two, owning the same cause, very frequently co-exist, or happen in immediate sequence and connexion; consequently there is in most cases definite evidence of paralysis affecting usually one side of the body in addition to the coma. Thus the pupils are unequal; there may be asymmetry of the face, or the limbs may be more rigid or flaccid on one side than on the other. These signs of localized disease enable a distinction to be made from the coma of narcotic poisoning and alcoholic intoxication. It must be borne in mind that a person smelling strongly of liquor and found lying in the street in a comatose state may be suffering from apoplexy, and the error of sending a dying man to a police cell may be avoided by this knowledge.

If the fit is only moderately severe, the reflexes soon return, and the patient may in a few hours show indications of returning consciousness by making some movements or opening his eyes when spoken to, although later it may be found that he is unable to speak, or may be paralysed or mentally afflicted (see PARALYSIS). In severe cases the coma deepens and the patient dies, usually from interference with the breathing, or, less commonly, from arrest of the heart's action.

The mechanism by which apoplexy is produced has been a matter of much dispute; the condition was formerly ascribed to the pressure exerted by the clot on the rest of the brain, but there is no increase of intracranial pressure in an apoplectic fit occurring as a result of the sudden closure of a large vessel by embolism or thrombosis. Suddenness of the lesion appears to be, then, the essential element common to all cases of apoplexy from organic brain disease. It is the sudden shock to the delicate mechanism that produces the unconsciousness; but seeing that the coma is usually deeper and more prolonged in cerebral haemorrhage than when occasioned by vascular occlusion, and that an ingravescent apoplexy coma gradually develops and deepens as the amount of haemorrhage increases, we may presume that increase of intracranial pressure does play an important part in the degree and intensity of the coma caused by the rupture of a vessel. Apoplexy seldom occurs under forty years of age, but owing to the fact that disease of the cerebral vessels may exist at any age, from causes which are fully explained in the article NEUROPATHOLOGY, no period of life is exempt; consequently cases of true apoplexy are not wanting even in very young children. Recognizing that there are two causes of apoplexy in advanced life, viz. (1) sudden rupture of a diseased vessel usually associated with high arterial pressure, enlarged, powerfully acting heart and chronic renal disease, and (2) the sudden clotting of blood in a large diseased vessel favoured by a low arterial pressure due to a weak-acting heart, it is obvious that the character of the pulse forms a good guide to the diagnosis of the cause, the prevention and warding off of an attack, and the treatment of such should it occur.

Anything which tends directly or indirectly to increase arterial pressure within the cerebral blood-vessels may bring on an attack of cerebral haemorrhage; and although the identification of an apoplectic habit of body with a stout build, a short neck and florid complexion is now generally discredited, it being admitted that apoplexy occurs as frequently in thin and spare persons who present no such peculiarity of conformation, yet a plethoric habit of body, occasioned by immoderate eating or drinking associated with the gouty diathesis, leads to a general arterio-sclerosis and high arterial pressure. All conditions which can give rise to a local intracranial or a general bodily increase of the arterial pressure, i.e. severe exertion of body and mind, violent emotions, much stooping, overheated rooms, exposure to the sun, sudden shocks to the body, constipation and straining at stool, may, by suddenly increasing the strain on the wall of a diseased vessel, lead to its rupture.

The outlook of apoplexy is generally unfavourable in cases where the coma is profound; death may take place at different intervals after the onset. If the patient, after recovering from the initial coma, suffers with continual headache and lapses into a drowsy state, the result is likely to be serious; for such a condition probably indicates that an inflammatory change has taken place about the clot or in the area of softening.

_Treatment._--The patient should be placed in the recumbent position with the head and shoulders slightly raised. He should be moved as little as possible from the place where the attack occurred. The medical man who is summoned will probably give the following directions: an ice-bag to be applied to the head; a few grains of calomel or a drop of croton oil in butter to be placed on the tongue, or an enema of castor oil to be administered. He may find it necessary to draw off the water with a catheter. The practice of blood-letting, once so common in this disease, is seldom resorted to, although in some cases, where there is very high arterial tension and a general state of plethora, it might be beneficial. Depletives are not employed where there is evidence of failure of the heart's action; indeed the cautious administration of stimulants may be necessary, either subcutaneously or by the mouth (if there exist a power of swallowing), together with warm applications to the surface of the body; a water-bed may be required, and careful nursing, is essential to prevent complications, especially the formation of bedsores. (F. W. Mo.)

APOROSE (from Gr. [Greek: ha], without, and [Greek: poros], passage), a biological term meaning imperforate, or not porous: there is a group of corals called _Aporosa_.

APOSIOPESIS (the Greek for "becoming silent"), a rhetorical device by which the speaker or writer stops short and leaves something unexpressed, but yet obvious, to be supplied by the imagination. The classical example is the threat, "Quos ego----!" of Neptune (in Virgil, _Aen._ i. 135).

APOSTASY ([Greek: apostasis], in classical Greek a defection or revolt from a military commander), a term generally employed to describe a complete renunciation of the Christian faith, or even an exchange of one form of it for another, especially if the motive be unworthy. In the first centuries of the Christian era, apostasy was most commonly induced by persecution, and was indicated by some outward act, such as offering incense to a heathen deity or blaspheming the name of Christ.[1] In the Roman Catholic Church the word is also applied to the renunciation of monastic vows (_apostasis a monachatu_), and to the abandonment of the clerical profession for the life of the world (_apostasis a clericatu_). Such defection was formerly often punished severely.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] The readmission of such apostates to the church was a matter that occasioned serious controversy. The emperor Julian's "Apostasy" is discussed under JULIAN.

APOSTIL, or APOSTILLE (possibly connected with Lat. _appositum_, placed near), a marginal note made by a commentator.

APOSTLE ([Greek: apostolos], one sent forth on a mission, an envoy, as in Is. xviii. 2; Symmachus, [Greek: apostellein apostolous]; Aquila, [Greek: presbentas]), a technical term used in the New Testament and in Christian literature generally for a special envoy of Jesus Christ. How far it had any similar use in Judaism in Christ's day is uncertain; but in the 4th century A.D., at any rate, it denoted responsible envoys from the central Jewish authority, especially for the collection of religious funds. In its first and simplest Christian form, the idea is present already in Mark iii. 14 f., where from the general circle of his disciples Jesus "made twelve ('whom he also named apostles,' Luke vi. 13, but doubtful in Mark), that they should be with him, and that he might from time to time send them forth ([Greek: hina apostellae]) to preach and to have authority to cast out demons." Later on (vi. 6 ff.), in connexion with systematic preaching among the villages of Galilee, Jesus begins actually to "send forth" the twelve, two by two; and on their return from this mission (vi. 30) they are for the first time described as "apostles" or missionary envoys. Matthew (x. 1 ff.) blends the calling of the twelve with their actual sending forth, while Luke (vi. 13) makes Jesus himself call them "apostles" (for Luke's usage cf. xi. 49, "prophets and apostles," where Matthew, xxiii. 34, has "prophets and wise men and scribes"). But it is doubtful whether Jesus ever used the term for the Twelve, in relation to their temporary missions, any more than for the "seventy others" whom he "sent forth" later (Luke x. 1). Even the Fourth Gospel never so describes them. It simply has "a servant is not greater than his lord, neither an apostle (envoy) greater than he that sent him" (xiii. 16); and applies the idea of "mission" alike to Jesus (cf. Heb. iii. 1, "Jesus, the apostle ... of our profession") and to his disciples, generally, as represented by the Twelve (xvii. 18, with 3, 6 ff.). But while ideally all Christ's disciples were "sent" with the Father's Name in charge, there were different degrees in which this applied in practice; and so we find "apostle" used in several senses, once it emerges as a technical term.

1. In the Apostolic age itself, "apostle" often denotes simply an "envoy," commissioned by Jesus Christ to be a primary witness and preacher of the Messianic Kingdom. This wide sense was shown by Lightfoot (in his commentary on _Galatians_, 1865) to exist in the New Testament, e.g. in 1 Cor. xii. 28 f., Eph. iv. ii, Rom. xvi. 7; and his view has since been emphasized[1] by the discovery of the _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_ (see DIDACHE), with its itinerant order of "apostles," who, together with "prophets" (cf. Eph. ii. 20, iii. 5) and "teachers," constituted a _charismatic_ and seemingly unordained ministry of the Word, in some part of the Church (in Syria?) during the early sub-apostolic age. Paul is our earliest witness, as just cited; also in 1 Cor. xv. 5 ff., where he seems to quote the language of Palestinian tradition, in saying that Christ "appeared to Cephas; then to the Twelve; then ... to James; then to the apostles one and all ([Greek: tois apostolois pasin]); and last of all ... to me also." The appearance to "_all_ the Apostles" must refer to the final commission given by the risen Christ to certain assembled disciples (Acts i. 6 ff., cf. Luke xxiv. 33), including not only the Twelve and the Lord's brethren (i. 13 f.), but also some at least of the Seventy. Of this wider circle of witnesses, taken from among personal disciples during Jesus's earthly ministry, we get a further glimpse in the election of one from their number to fill Judas's place among the Twelve (i. 21 ff.), as the primary official witnesses of Messiah and his resurrection. Many of the 120 then present (Acts i. 15), and not only the two set forward for final choice, must have been personal disciples, who by the recent commission had been made "apostles." Among such we may perhaps name Judas Barsabbas and Silas (Acts xv. 22, cf. i. 23), if not also Barnabas (1 Cor. ix. 6) and Andronicus and Junia (Rom. xvi. 7).

So far, then, we gather that the original Palestinian type of apostleship meant simply (a) personal mission from the risen Christ (cf. I Cor. ix. i), following on (b) some preliminary intercourse with Jesus in his earthly ministry. It was pre-eminence in the latter qualification that gave the Twelve their special status among apostles (Acts i. 26, ii. 14, vi. 2; in Acts generally they are simply "the apostles"). Conversely, it was Paul's lack in this respect which lay at the root of his difficulties as an apostle.

It is possible, though not certain, that even those Judaizing missionaries at Corinth whom Paul styles "false-apostles" or, ironically, "the superlative apostles" (2 Cor. xi. 5, 13; xii. 11), rested part of their claim to superiority over Paul on (b), possibly even as having done service to Christ when on earth (2 Cor. xi. 18, 23). There is no sign in 2 Cor. that they laid claim to (a). If this be so, they were "Christ's apostles" only indirectly, "through men" (as some had alleged touching Paul, cf. Gal. i. 1), i.e. as sent forth on mission work by certain Jerusalem leaders with letters of introduction (2 Cor. iii. 1; E. von Dobschutz, _Problems der apost. Zeitalters_, p. 106).

2. _The Twelve._--When Jesus selected an inner circle of disciples for continuous training by personal intercourse, his choice of "twelve" had direct reference to the tribes of Israel (Matt. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30). This gave them a symbolic or representative character as a closed body (cf. Rev. xxi. 14), marking them off as the primary religious authority (cf. Acts ii. 42, "the apostles' teaching") among the "disciples" or "brethren," when these began to assume the form of a community or church. The relationship which other "apostles" had enjoyed with the Master had been uncertain; _they_ had been his recognized intimates, and that as a body. Naturally, then, they took the lead, collectively--in form at least, though really the initiative lay with one or two of their own number, Peter in particular. The process of practical differentiation from their fellow apostles was furthered by the concentration of the Twelve, or at least of its most marked representatives, in Jerusalem, for a considerable period (Acts viii. 1, cf. xii. 1 ff.; an early tradition specifies twelve years). Other apostles soon went forth on their mission to "the cities of Israel" (cf. Acts ix. 31), and so exercised but little influence on the central policy of the Church. Hence their shadowy existence in the New Testament, though the actual wording of Matt. x. 5-42, read in the light of the _Didachi_, may help us to conceive their work in its main features.

3. _"Pillar" Apostles._--But in fact differentiation between apostles existed among the Twelve also. There were "pillars," like Peter and John (and his brother James until his death), who really determined matters of grave moment, as in the conference with Paul in Gal. ii. 9--a conference which laid the basis of the latter's status as an apostle even in the eyes of Jewish Christians. Such pre-eminence was but the sequel of personal distinctions visible even in the preparatory days of discipleship, and it warns us against viewing the primitive facts touching apostles in the official light of later times.

Consciousness of such personal pre-eminence has left its marks on the lists of the Twelve in the New Testament. Thus (1) Peter, James, John, Andrew, always appear as the first four, though the order varies, Mark representing relative prominence during Christ's ministry, and Acts actual influence in the Apostolic Church (cf. Luke viii. 51, ix. 28). (2) The others also stand in groups of four, the first name in each being constant, while the order of the rest varies.

The same lesson emerges when we note that one such apostolic "pillar" stood outside the Twelve altogether, viz. James, the Lord's brother (Gal. ii. 9, cf. i. 19); and further, that "the Lord's brethren" seem to have ranked above "apostles" generally, being named between them and Peter in 1 Cor. ix. 5. That is, they too were apostles with the addition of a certain personal distinction.

4. _Paul, the "Apostle of the Gentiles."_--So far apostles are only of the Palestinian type, taken from among actual hearers of the Messiah and with a mission primarily to Jews--apostles "of the circumcision" (Gal. ii. 7-9). Now, however, emerges a new apostleship, that to the Gentiles; and with the change of mission goes also some change in the type of missionary or apostle. Of this type Paul was the first, and he remained its primary, and in some senses its only, example. Though he could claim, on occasion, to satisfy the old test of having seen the risen Lord (1 Cor. ix. 1, cf. xv. 8), he himself laid stress not on this, but on the revelation within his own soul of Jesus as God's Son, and of the Gospel latent therein (Gal. i. 16). This was his divine call as "apostle of the Gentiles" (Rom. xi. 13); here lay both his qualification and his credentials, once the fruits of the divine inworking were manifest in the success of his missionary work (Gal. ii. 8 f.; 1 Cor. xi. 1 f.; 2 Cor. in. 2 f., xii. 12). But this new criterion of apostleship was capable of wider application, one dispensing altogether with vision of the risen Lord--which could not even in Paul's case be proved so fully as in the case of the original apostles--but appealing to the "signs of an apostle" (1 Cor. ix. 2; 2 Cor. xii. 12), the tokens of spiritual gift visible in work done, and particularly in the planting of the Gospel in fresh fields (2 Cor. x. 14-18). It may be in this wide charismatic sense that Paul uses the term in 1 Cor. xii. 28 f., Eph. ii. 20, iii. 5, iv. 11, and especially in Rom. xvi. 7, "men of mark among the apostles" (cf. 2 Cor. xi. 13, "pseudo-apostles" masquerading as "apostles of Christ," and perhaps 1 Thess. ii, 6, of himself and Silas). That he used it in senses differing with the context is proved by 1 Cor. xv. 9, where he styles himself "the least of apostles," although in other connexions he claims the very highest rank, co-ordinate even with the Twelve as a body (Gal. ii. 7 ff.), in virtue of his distinctive Gospel.

This point of view was not widely shared even in circles appreciative of his actual work. To most he seemed but a fruitful worker within lines determined by "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" as a body (Rev. xxi. 14). So we read of "the plant (Church) which the twelve apostles of the Beloved shall plant" (_Ascension of Isaiah_, iv. 3); "those who preached the Gospel to us (especially Gentiles) ... unto whom He gave authority over the Gospel, being twelve for a witness to the tribes" (Barn. viii. 3, cf. v. 9); and the going forth of the Twelve, after twelve years, beyond Palestine "into the world," to give it a chance to hear (_Preaching of Peter_, in Clem. Alex. _Strom._ vi. 5.43; 6.48). Later on, however, his own claim told on the Church's mind, when his epistles were read in church as a collection styled simply "the Apostle."

As the primary medium of the Gentile Gospel (Gal. i. 16, cf. i. 8, ii. 2) Paul had no peers as an "apostle of the Gentiles" (Rom. xi. 13, cf. XV. 15-20, and see 1 Cor. xv. 8, "last of all to me"), unless it were Barnabas who shares with him the title "apostle" in Acts xiv. 4, 14--possibly with reference to the special "work" on which they had recently been "sent forth by the Spirit" (xiii. 2, 4). Yet such as shared the spiritual gift (_charisma_) of missionary power in sufficient degree, were in fact apostles of Christ in the Spirit (1 Cor. xii. 28, II). Such a secondary type of apostolate--answering to "apostolic missionaries" of later times (cf. the use of [Greek: hierapostolos] in this sense by the Orthodox Eastern Church to-day)--would help to account for the apostolic claims of the missionaries censured in Rev. ii. 2, as also for the "apostles" of the second generation implied in the Didache.

In the _sub-apostolic age_, however, the class of "missionaries" enjoying a _charisma_ such as was conceived to convey apostolic commission through the Spirit, soon became distinguished from "apostles" (cf. Hennas, _Sim._ ix. 15.4, "the apostles and teachers of the message of the Son of God," so 25.2; in 17.1 the apostles are reckoned as twelve), as the title became more and more confined by usage to the original apostles, particularly the Twelve as a body (e.g. _Ascension of Isaiah_ and the _Preaching of Peter_), or to them and Paul (e.g. in Clement and Ignatius), and as reverence for these latter grew in connexion with their story in the Gospels and in Acts.[2] Thus Eusebius describes as "evangelists" (cf. Philip the Evangelist in Acts xxi. 8, also Eph. iv. 11, 2 Tim. iv. 5) those who "occupied the first rank in the succession to the Apostles" in missionary work (_Hist. Eccl._ iii. 37, cf. v. 10). Yet the wider sense of "apostle" did not at once die out even in the third and fourth generations. It lingered on as applied to the Seventy[3]--by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement and Origen--and even to Clement of Rome, by Clem. Alex. (? as a "fellow-worker" of Paul, Phil. iv. 3); while the adjective "apostolic" was applied to men like Polycarp (in his contemporary _Acts of Martyrdom_) and the Phrygian, Alexander, martyred at Lyons in A.D. 177 (Eus. v. 1), who was "not without share of apostolic _charisma_."

The _authority_ attaching to apostles was essentially spiritual in character and in the conditions of its exercise. Anything like autocracy among his followers was alien to Jesus's own teaching (Matt, xxiii. 6-11). All Christians were "brethren," and the basis of pre-eminence among them was relative ability for service. But the personal relation of the original Palestinian apostles to Jesus himself as Master gave them a unique fitness as authorized witnesses, from which flowed naturally, by sheer spiritual influence, such special forms of authority as they came gradually to exercise in the early Church. "There is no trace in Scripture of a formal commission of authority for government from Christ Himself" (Hort, _Chr. Eccl._ p. 84) given to apostles, save as representing the brethren in their collective action. Even the "resolutions" ([Greek: dogmata]) of the Jerusalem conference were not set forth by the apostles present simply in their own name, nor as _ipso facto_ binding on the conscience of the Antiochene Church. They expressed "a claim to deference rather than a right to be obeyed" (Hort, _op. cit._ 81-85). Such was the kind of authority attaching to apostles, whether collectively or individually. It was not a fixed notion, but varied in quantity and quality with the growing maturity of converts. This is how Paul, from whom we gather most on the point, conceives the matter. The exercise of his spiritual authority is not absolute, lest he "lord it over their faith"; consent of conscience or of "faith" is ever requisite (2 Cor. i. 24; cf. Rom. xiv. 23). But the principle was elastic in application, and would take more patriarchal forms in Palestine than in the Greek world. The case was essentially the same as on the various mission-fields to-day, where the position of the "missionary" is at first one of great spiritual initiative and authority, limited only by his own sense of the fitness of things, in the light of local usages. So the notion of formal or constitutional authority attaching to the apostolate, in its various senses, is an anachronism for the apostolic age. The tendency, however, was for their authority to be conceived more and more on formal lines, and,

## particularly after their deaths, as absolute.

The authority attaching to apostles as writers, which led gradually to the formation of a New Testament Canon--"the Apostles" side by side with "the Books" of the Old Testament (so 2 Clement xiv., c. A.D. 120-140)--is a subject by itself (see BIBLE).

This change of conception helped to further the notion of a certain devolution of apostolic powers to successors constituted by act of ordination. The earliest idea of an _apostolical succession_ meant simply the re-emergence in others of the apostolic spirit of missionary enthusiasm. "The first rank in the succession of the apostles" consisted of men eminent as disciples of theirs, and so fitted to continue their labours (Euseb. iii. 37); and even under Commodus (A.D. 180-193) there were "evangelists of the word" possessed of "inspired zeal to emulate apostles" (v. 10). Such were perhaps the "apostles" of the _Didache_. Of the notion of apostolic succession in ministerial grace conferred by ordination, there is little or no trace before Irenaeus. The famous passage in Clement of Rome (xliv. 2) refers simply to the succession of one set of men to another in an office of apostolic institution. The grace that makes Polycarp "an apostolic and prophetic teacher" (_Mart. Polyc._ 16) is peculiar to him personally. But Irenaeus holds, apparently on _a priori_ grounds, that "elders" who stand in orderly succession to the apostolic founders of the true tradition in the churches, have, "along with the succession of oversight," also an "assured gift of (insight into) truth" by the Father's good pleasure ("cum episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundum placitum Patris acceperunt"), in contrast to heretics who wilfully stand outside this approved line of transmission (_adv. Haer._ iv. 26. 2). So far, indeed, the succession is not limited to the monarchical episcopate as distinct from the presbyteral order to which it belonged (cf. "presbyterii ordo, principalis consessio" in the same context, and see iii. 14. 2), though the bishops of apostolic churches, as capable of being traced individually (iii. 3. 1), are specially appealed to as witnesses (cf. iv. 33. 8, v. 19. 2)--as earlier by Hegesippus (Euseb. iv. 22). Nor is there mention of sacerdotal grace attaching to the succession in apostolic truth.[4] But once the idea of supernatural grace going along with office as such (of which we have already a trace in the Ignatian bishop, though without the notion of actual apostolic succession) arose in connexion with _successio ab apostolis_, the full development of the doctrine was but a matter of time.[5]

LITERATURE.--In England the modern treatment of the subject dates from J.B. Lightfoot's dissertation in his _Commentary on Galatians_, to which Dr F.J.A. Hort's _The Christian Ecclesia_ added elements of value; see also T.M. Lindsay, _The Church and the Ministry_, and articles in Hastings' _Dictionary of the Bible_ and the _Ency. Biblica_; A. Harnack, _Die Lehre der Apostel_, pp. 93 ff., and _Dogmengeschichte_ (3rd ed.), i. 153 ff.; E. Haupt, _Zum Verstandnis d. Apostolats in NT._ (Halle, 1896); and especially H. Monnier, _La Notion de l'apostolat, des origines a Irenee_ (Paris, 1903). The later legends and their sources are examined by T. Schermann, _Propheten- und Apostellegenden_ (Leipzig, 1907). (J. V. B.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] By analogy, that is; for the wider sense of "apostle" in the Apostolic age need not be identical with a sub-apostolic use of the term (see below, 4 _fin_.).

[2] The tendency is already visible in the Lucan writings. An anologous process is seen in the use of "disciple," applicable in the apostolic age to Christians at large, but in the course of the sub-apostolic age restricted to personal "disciples of the Lord" or to martyrs (Papias in Eus. iii. 39, cf. Ignatius, _Ad Eph._ i. 2).

[3] In the Edessene legend of Abgar, in Eus. i. 12, we read that "Judas, who is also Thomas, sent Thaddaeus as apostle--one of the Seventy," where simply an authoritative envoy of Jesus seems intended. For traces of the wider sense of "apostle" in Gnostic, Marcionite and Montanist circles, see Monnier (as below).

[4] The above is substantially the view taken by J.B. Lightfoot in his essay on "The Christian Ministry" (_Comm. on Philippians_, 6th ed., pp. 239, 252 f.), and by T.M. Lindsay, _The Church and the Ministry_ (1902), pp. 224-228, 278 ff. Even C. Gore, _The Church and the Ministry_ (1889), pp. 119 ff., while inferring a sacerdotal element in Irenaeus's conception of the episcopate, says: "But it is mainly as preserving the catholic traditions that Irenaeus regards the apostolic succession" (p. 120).

[5] See Lightfoot's essay for Cyprian's contribution, as also for that of the Clementines, which fix on the twofold position of James at Jerusalem, as apostle and bishop, as bearing on apostolic succession in the episcopate.

APOSTLE SPOONS, a set of spoons, usually of silver or silver gilt, with the handles terminating in figures of the apostles, each bearing their distinctive emblem. They were common baptismal gifts during the 15th and 16th centuries, but were dying out by 1666. Often single spoons were given, bearing the figure of the patron or name saint of the child. Sets of the twelve apostles are not common, and complete sets of thirteen, with the figure of our Lord on a larger spoon, are still rarer. The Goldsmiths' Company in London has one such set, all by the same maker and bearing the hall-mark of 1626, and a set of thirteen was sold at Christie's in 1904 for L4900.

See William Hone, _The Everyday Book_ and _Table Book_ (1831); and W.J. Cripps, _Old English Plate_ (9th ed., 1906).

APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS ([Greek: Diatagai] _or_ [Greek: Diataxeis ton agion apostolon dia Klaementos tou Rhomaion episkopou te kai politou. Katholikae didaskalia]), a collection of ecclesiastical regulations in eight books, the last of which concludes with the eighty-five _Canons of the Holy Apostles_. By their title the Constitutions profess to have been drawn up by the apostles, and to have been transmitted to the Church by Clement of Rome; sometimes the alleged authors are represented as speaking jointly, sometimes singly. From the first they have been very variously estimated; the _Canons_, as a rule, more highly than the rest of the work. For example, the Trullan Council of Constantinople (_quini-sextum_), A.D. 692, accepts the Canons as genuine by its second canon, but rejects the Constitutions on the ground that spurious matter had been introduced into them by heretics; and whilst the former were henceforward used freely in the East, only a few portions of the latter found their way into the Greek and oriental law-books. Again, Dionysius Exiguus (c. A.D. 500) translated fifty of the Canons into Latin,[1] although under the title _Canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum_, and thus they passed into other Western collections; whilst the Constitutions as a whole remained unknown in the West until they were published in 1563 by the Jesuit Turrianus. At first received with enthusiasm, their authenticity soon came to be impugned; and their true significance was largely lost sight of as it began to be realized that they were not what they claimed to be. Vain attempts were still made to rehabilitate them, and they were, in general, more highly estimated in England than elsewhere. The most extravagant estimate of all was that of Whiston, who calls them "the most sacred standard of Christianity, equal in authority to the Gospels themselves, and superior in authority to the epistles of single apostles, some parts of them being our Saviour's own original laws delivered to the apostles, and the other parts the public acts of the apostles" (Historical preface to _Primitive Christianity Revived_, pp. 85-86). Others, however, realized their composite character from the first, and by degrees some of the component documents became known. Bishop Pearson was able to say that "the eight books of the Apostolic Constitutions have been after Epiphanius's time compiled and patched together out of the _didascaliae_ or doctrines which went under the names of the holy apostles and their disciples or successors" (_Vind. Ign._ i. cap. 5); whilst a greater scholar still, Archbishop Usher, had already gone much further, and concluded, forestalling the results of modern critical methods, that their compiler was none other than the compiler of the spurious Ignatian epistles (_Epp. Polyc. et Ign._ p. lxiii. f., Oxon. 1644). The Apostolical Constitutions, then, are spurious, and they are one of a long series of documents of like character. But we have not really gauged their significance by saying that they are spurious. They are the last stage and climax of a gradual process of compilation and crystallization, so to speak, of unwritten church custom; and a short account of this process will show their real importance and value.

Origin and real nature.

These documents are the outcome of a tendency which is found in every society, religious or secular, at some point in its history. The society begins by living in accordance with its fundamental principles. By degrees these translate themselves into appropriate action. Difficulties are faced and solved as they arise; and when similar circumstances recur they will tend to be met in the same way. Thus there grows up by degrees a body of what may be called customary law. Plainly, there is no

## particular point of time at which this customary law can be said to have

begun. To all appearance it is there from the first in solution and gradually crystallizes out; and yet it is being continually modified as time goes on. Moreover, the time comes when the attempt is made, either by private individuals or by the society itself, to put this "customary law" into writing. Now when this is done, two tendencies will at once show themselves. (a) This "customary law" will at once become more definite: the very fact of putting it into writing will involve an effort after logical completeness. There will be a tendency on the part of the writer to fill up gaps; to state local customs as if they obtained universally; to introduce his personal equation, and to add to that which is the custom that which, in his opinion, _ought_ to be. (b) There will be a strong tendency to fortify that which has been written with great names, especially in days when there is no very clear notion of literary property. This is done, not always with any deliberate consciousness of fraud (although it must be clearly recognized that truth is not one of the "natural virtues," and that the sense of the obligations of truthfulness was far from strong), but rather to emphasize the importance of what was written, and the fact that it was no new invention of the writer's. In a non-literary age fame gathers about great names; and that which, _ex hypothesi_, has gone on since the beginning of things is naturally attributed to the founders of the society. Then come interpolations to make this ascription more probable, and the prefixing of a title, then or subsequently, which states it as a fact. This is precisely the way in which the Apostolical Constitutions and other kindred documents have come into being. They are attempts, made in various places and at different times, to put into writing the order and discipline and character of the Church; in part for private instruction and edification, but in part also with a view to actual use; frequently even with an actual reference to particular circumstances. In this lies their importance, to a degree which is only just being adequately realized. They contain evidence of the utmost value as to the order of the Church in early days; evidence, however, which needs to be sifted with the greatest care, since the personal preferences of the writer and the customs of the local church to which he belongs are continually mixed up with things which have a wider prevalence. It is only by careful investigation, by the method of comparisons, that these elements can be disentangled; but as the number of documents of this class known to us is continually increasing, their value increases even more than proportionately. And whilst their local and fugitive character must be fully recognized and allowed for, is it unjustifiable to set them aside or leave them out of account as heretical, and therefore negligible.

Other collections.

It will be sufficient here to mention shortly the chief collections of this kind which came into existence during the first four centuries; generally as the work of private individuals, and having, at any rate, no more than a local authority of some kind, (a) The earliest known to us is the _Didache_ or _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_, itself compiled from earlier materials, and dating from about 120 (see DIDACHE). (b) _The Apostolic Church Order_ (_apostolische Kirchenordnung_ of German writers); _Ecclesiastical Canons of the Holy Apostles_ of one MS.; _Sententiae Apostolorum_ of Pitra: of about 300, and emanating probably from Asia Minor. Its earlier part, cc. 1-14, depends upon the _Didache_, and the rest of it is a book of discipline in which Harnack has attempted to distinguish two older fragments of church law (_Texte u. Unters_. ii. 5). (c) The so-called _Canones Hippolyti_, probably Alexandrian or Roman, and of the first half of the 3rd century. It will be observed that these make no claim to apostolic authorship; but otherwise their origin is like that of the rest, unless indeed, as has been suggested, they represent the work of an actual Roman synod, (d) The so-called _Egyptian Church Order_, in Coptic from a Greek pre-Nicene original (c. 310). It is part of the Egyptian Heptateuch and contains neither communion nor ordination forms, (e) The _Ethiopic Church Order_, perhaps twenty years later than (d), and forming part of the _Ethiopic Statutes_. (f) The _Verona Latin Fragments_, discovered and published by Hauler, portions of a form akin to (e), which may be dated c. 340, though possibly earlier. It has a preface which refers to a treatise _Concerning Spiritual Gifts_ as having immediately preceded it. (g) The recently discovered _Testament of the Lord_, which is somewhat later in date (c. 350), and likewise depends upon the _Canones Hippolyti_. (h) The so-called _Canons of Basil_. This is an Arabic work perhaps based on a Coptic and ultimately on a Greek original, embodying with modifications large portions of the Canons of Hippolytus. (On the relations between the six last-named, see HIPPOLYTUS, CANONS of.)

Here also may be noticed the _Didascalia Apostolorum_, originally written in Greek, but known through a Syriac version and a fragmentary Latin one published by Hauler. It is of the middle of the 3rd century--in fact, a passage in the Latin translation seems to give us the date A.D. 254. It emanates from Palestine or Syria, and is independent of the documents already mentioned; and upon it the _Constitutions_ themselves very largely depend. It is a mixture of moral and ecclesiastical instruction. The _Sacramentary of Serapion_ (c. 350), _The Pilgrimage of Etheria_ (_Silvia_) (c. 385), and _The Catechetical Lectures of Cyril of Jerusalem_ (348) are also of value in this connexion. In the (so-called) _Constitutions through Hippolytus_ we have possibly a preliminary draft of the famous 8th book of the _Apostolical Constitutions_.[2]

Contents.

The Constitutions themselves fall into three main divisions. (i.) The first of these consists of books i.-vi., and throughout runs parallel to the _Didascalia_. Bickell, indeed, held that this latter was an abbreviated form of books i.-vi.; but it is now agreed on all hands that the Constitutions are based on the _Didascalia_ and not vice versa. (ii.) Then follows