AGNOSTICISM. 761 



their nation waited, had come ? Was not their chief, " James, 

 the brother of the Lord," reverenced alike by Sadducee, Pharisee, 

 and Nazarene ? At the famous conference which, according to 

 the Acts, took place at Jerusalem, does not James declare that 

 " myriads " of Jews, who, by that time had become Nazarenes, 

 were " all zealous for the law" ? Was not the name of " Chris- 

 tian " first used to denote the converts to the doctrine promul- 

 gated by Paul and Barnabas at Antioch ? Does the subsequent 

 history of Christianity leave any doubt that, from this time forth, 

 the " little rift within the lute," caused by the new teaching devel- 

 oped, if not inaugurated, at Antioch, grew wider and wider, until 

 the two types of doctrine irreconcilably diverged ? Did not the 

 primitive Nazarenism or Ebionism develop into the Nazarenism, 

 and Ebionism, and Elkasaitism of later ages, and finally die out 

 in obscurity and condemnation as damnable heresy; while the 

 younger doctrine throve and pushed out its shoots into that end- 

 less variety of sects, of which the three strongest survivors are 

 the Roman and Greek Churches and modern Protestantism ? 



Singular state of things! If I were to profess the doctrine 

 which was held by " James, the brother of the Lord," and by 

 every one of the " myriads " of his followers and co-religionists in 

 Jerusalem up to twenty or thirty years after the crucifixion 

 (and one knows not how much later at Pella), I should be con- 

 demned with unanimity as an ebionizing heretic by the Roman, 

 Greek, and Protestant Churches ! And, probably, this hearty and 

 unanimous condemnation of the creed held by those who were in 

 the closest personal relation with their Lord is almost the only 

 point upon which they would be cordially of one mind. On the 

 other hand — though I hardly dare imagine such a thing — I very 

 much fear that the " pillars " of the primitive Hierosolymitan 

 Church would have considered Dr. Wace an infidel. No one can 

 read the famous second chapter of Galatians and the book of 

 Revelation without seeing how narrow was even Paul's escape 

 from a similar fate. And, if ecclesiastical history is to be trusted, 

 the thirty -nine articles, be they right or wrong, diverge from the 

 primitive doctrine of the Nazarenes vastly more than even Paul- 

 ine Christianity did. 



But, further than this, I have great difficulty in assuring my- 

 self that even James, " the brother of the Lord," and his " myri- 

 ads " of Nazarenes, properly represented the doctrines of their 

 Master. For it is constantly asserted by our modern " pillars " 

 that one of the chief features of the work of Jesus was the instau- 

 ration of religion by the abolition of what our sticklers for 

 articles and liturgies, with unconscious humor, call the narrow 

 restrictions of the law. Yet, if James knew this, how could the 

 bitter controversy with Paul have arisen ; and why did one or 



