In contending that the subsequent relapse of the professors of Christianity into the system of Private Property ought not to afford any presumption of mistake with regard to this subject on the part of its first teachers, I do not at all mean to admit that this apostolic institution of a Community of Goods and the renunciation of riches was early or suddenly lost sight of in the church; the history of its continuance and gradual perversion and decay, is probably to be

deacons spoken of in the Acts are not to be understood of such as ministered in Divine service or the sacred mysteries" (as they were called), "but only of such as served tables or attended the poor." Attempts have been made, with great earnestness, to confute this assertion of the council, and to show, from some of the Fathers, that deacons were the third Sacred Order, and had sublimer duties in the ministry and mysteries of the altar: but the contempt into which the duties for which they had really been appointed had fallen, only shows how much the apostolic institution of a Community had been lost sight of. Jerome styles them somewhat contemptuously "ministers of widows and tables." The original functions of deacons being despised or forgotten, many new and fanciful duties were assigned to them as the church became corrupt: but it could make nothing of the office of deaconess; this was therefore abolished in the Latin Church about the sixth century, though in the Greek Church it lasted till the twelfth: it was, however, unquestionably an office of the primitive church, mentioned by the earliest Christian writers, as well as by Pliny, who speaks of them (ministræ) in his celebrated Letter about the Christians. St. Paul gives this appellation to Phoebe, Rom. xvi. 1.-See Bingham, Orig. Eccles.

traced in the history of those religious orders and communities whose members alone were considered as living in complete conformity with Christian principles, and which were established upon the plan of having all things in common.*

One error into which some of the early Christians fell, was the supposing that, in order to comply with the renunciation of riches, which their religion required, it was necessary to renounce the enjoyments and conveniences of social life, which it was no doubt the design of the apostolic ordinance not to withhold, but to diffuse among all. Instead of "being together and having all things common," these ascetics lived

* In the middle of the fourth century, St. Anthony permitted a numerous body of men to live in a community with him, and lead under his direction a life of piety and manual labour.-Butler's "Memoirs respecting the English Catholics." Anthony had given up a large estate on his conversion in obedience to the precept of Christ, "Go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor."

St. Jerome ("On the Christian Ecclesiastical Writers," verb. Philo) says of Philo: “He hath praised the Christians, reporting them to be not only there (in Alexandria) but in many countries, and calling their dwelling-places monasteries. Whereby it is apparent that the church of believers in Christ at the first was such as monks endeavour to be now, that nothing in property is any man's own, none is rich among them, none poor, their patrimony is distributed to the needy," &c.

alone and had nothing.* The prevalence of persecution may, however, have concurred with this misapprehension in causing the adoption of the eremitical life. But it is in the history of conventual or cœnobitic life that we must seek for the relics of the Christian system with regard to possessions. The author of the "Histoires des Ordres Monastiques" informs us, that many of the councils and a great number of writers have agreed in referring monastic institutions† to the apostles, and to the above-mentioned primitive practice of the Church of Jerusalem.

The history of the Essenes may throw considerable light upon our subject. In the learned work just mentioned, we find some account of an interesting controversy which took place at the beginning of the last century relative to this sect, in which the illustrious Benedictine Dom Bernard de Montfaucon, in some observations appended to his translation of Philo " De Vitâ Contemplativa,” maintained, in accordance with Eusebius and Jerome and the greater number of Catholic

* Jesus Christ was no ascetic, and was reproached on that account by the Pharisees.

"Cassien aïant prétendu que les Coenobites sont plus ancien que les Anachorètes, qu'ils ont commencé avant St. Paul Ermite et St. Antoine; et mesme qu'ils ont toûjours esté dans l'Eglise depuis les Apostres, M. de Tillemont veut qu'il justifie cette prétention."-Tom. I., Diss. Prêlim., p. 19.

L

writers, that the Essenes were Christians, but dissented from the opinion that to them the origin of monastic institutions was to be attributed, as they had wives, and did not observe the rules of any order. His anonymous opponent denied that they were Christians, as being highly commended by Philo, whom he considers as a Jew, and as all that could be learnt respecting them savoured of Judaism, and was opposed to Christianity (meaning, no doubt, Catholic or orthodox Christianity); but at the same time maintained, that if they were Christians, they must be allowed to have been monks, living according to a rule of their own, much more ancient than any now known. truth, however, probably escaped both these disputants, who, in the unadulterated doctrine and practice of these early believers, could not recognise either primitive Cœnobitism or genuine Christianity.

The

A question much connected with this inquiry, viz., whether Philo was not himself a Christian, has lately, upon other grounds, occupied the learned pen of Dr. John Jones, who quotes from the works of that writer the following accounts of the Essenes :

"These are called Esseans, a name (though not in my opinion formed by strict analogy) corresponding in Greek to the term holy. For they have attained the

highest holiness in the worship of God; and that not by sacrificing animals, but by cultivating purity of heart: they live principally in villages, and avoid the towns; being sensible that, as disease is generated by corruption, so an indelible impression is produced in the soul by the contagion of society. Some of these men cultivate the ground; others pursue the arts of peace, and such employments as are beneficial to themselves without injury to their neighbours; they seek neither to hoard silver nor gold, nor to inherit ample estates in order to gratify prodigality and avarice, but are content with the mere necessaries of life: they are the only people who, though destitute of money, and possessions, and that more from choice than the untowardness of fortune,-felicitate themselves as rich; deeming riches to consist not in amplitude of possession, but, as is really the case, in frugality and contentment. Among them no one can be found who manufactures darts, arrows, swords, corselets, shields, or any other weapon used in war; nor even such instruments as are easily perverted to evil purposes in times of peace. They decline trade, commerce, and navigation altogether, as incentives to covetousness and usury; nor have they any slaves among them, but all are free, and all in their turn administer to others. They condemn the owners of slaves as tyrants, who violate the principles of justice and equality, and impiously transgress the dictates of nature, which, like a common parent, has begotten and educated all men alike, and made them brethren not in name only but in sincerity and truth; but avarice, conspiring against nature, burst her bonds, having produced alienation for affinity, and hatred in the room of friendship.