The Non-Christian Cross Part 2

Moreover the denunciation in question was clearly due to the fear that such objects might degenerate amongst Christians, as they afterwards did, into little better than idols. And if the sign or figure of the cross did not mainly remind the early Christians of the death of Jesus, it must have mainly reminded them of something else.

CHAPTER III.

THE EVIDENCE OF THE OTHER FATHERS.

The works which have come down to us from the Fathers who lived before the days of Constantine make up over ten thousand pages of closely printed matter; and the first point which strikes those who examine that ma.s.s of literature with a view to seeing what the Christians of the first three centuries thought and wrote concerning the execution of Jesus and the symbol of the cross, is that the execution of Jesus was hardly so much as mentioned by them, and no such thing as a representation of the instrument of execution once referred to.

Another fact worthy of special note is that, whether the Fathers wrote in Greek and used the word _stauros_, or wrote in Latin and translated that word as _crux_, they often seem to have had in their mind's eye a tree; a tree which moreover was closely connected in meaning with the forbidden tree of the Garden of Eden, an allegorical figure of undoubtedly phallic signification which had its counterpart in the Tree of the Hesperides, from which the Sun-G.o.d Hercules after killing the Serpent was fabled to have picked the Golden Apples of Love, one of which became the symbol of Venus, the G.o.ddess of Love. Nor was this the only such counterpart, for almost every race seems in days of old to have had an allegorical Tree of Knowledge or Life whose fruit was Love; the ancients perceiving that it was love which produced life, and that but for the s.e.xual pa.s.sion and its indulgence mankind would cease to be.

Starting upon an examination of the early Christian writings in question, we read in the _Gospel of Nicodemus_ that when the Chief Priests interviewed certain men whom Jesus had raised from the dead, those men made upon their faces "the sign of the stauros."[12] The sign of the cross is presumably meant; and all that need be said is that if the men whom Jesus raised from the dead were acquainted with the sign of the cross, it would appear that it must have been as a pre-Christian sign.

Further on in the same Gospel, Satan is represented as being told that "All that thou hast gained through the Tree of Knowledge, all hast thou lost through the Tree of the Stauros."[13]

Elsewhere we read that "The King of Glory stretched out his right hand, and took hold of our forefather Adam, and raised him: then, turning also to the rest, he said, 'Come with me as many as have died through the Tree which he touched, for behold I again raise you all up through the Tree of the Stauros.'"[14] Some see in this peculiar p.r.o.nouncement a reference to the doctrine of re-incarnation.

In the _Acts and Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Andrew_ we are told that those who executed Andrew "lifted him up on the stauros," but "did not sever his joints, having received this order from the pro-consul, for he wished him to be in distress while hanging, and in the nighttime as he was suspended to be eaten by dogs." There is nothing to show that the stauros used was other than an ordinary stauros.

In the _Epistle of Barnabas_ are various references to the stauros; mixed up with various pa.s.sages from the Hebrew Scriptures, quoted--without any justification--as referring to the initiatory rite of baptism; a rite, be it noted, that was admittedly of Gentile rather than Israelitish origin, and not unconnected with the Sun-G.o.d wors.h.i.+p of the Persians and other Orientals of non-Hebrew race.

The references in question commence with the enquiry, "Let us further ask whether the Lord took any care to foreshadow the Water and the Stauros?"

Afterwards we have a quotation of _Psalm_ i. 3-6--which likens the good man to a tree planted by the side of a river and yielding his fruit in due season--and the p.r.o.nouncement, "Mark how he has described at once both the Water and the Stauros. For these words imply, Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the Stauros, have gone down into the Water."

This further reference to the non-Mosaic initiatory rite of baptism is followed by a quotation of _Ezekiel_ xlvii. 12, which speaks of a river by whose side grow trees those who cat the fruit of which grow for ever.

Further on is a declaration that when Moses stretched out his hands (in a direction not specified) that victory might rest with the forces he commanded, he stretched them out in the figure of a stauros, as a prophecy that Jesus "would be the author of life."

A reference is then made to the Brazen Serpent, and to the pole upon which it was placed; and it is stated that this lifeless imitation of a serpent was a type of Jesus.

In the _Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians_ we read that the stauros of the Christ is indeed a stumbling block to those who do not believe.

The evidence of Irenaeus, as that of one who was through his acquaintance with the aged Polycarp almost in touch as it were with the apostles, will on account of his importance as a witness be specially dealt with in the next chapter.

Justin Martyr, arguing that the figure of the cross is impressed upon the whole of nature, asks men to

"Consider all things in the world, whether without this form they could be administered or have any certainty.

For the sea is not traversed except that trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the s.h.i.+p; and the earth is not ploughed without it: diggers and mechanics do not their work except with tools which have this shape. And the human form differs from that of the irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect and having the hands extended and having on the face extending from the forehead what is called the nose, through which there is respiration for the living creature; and this shows no other form than that of the cross. And so it was said by the prophet _The breath before our face is the Lord Christ_. And the power of this form is shown by your own symbols on what are called standards and trophies; with which all your processions are made, using these as insignia of your power and government."[15]

Elsewhere Justin Martyr declares that the Christ

"Was symbolised both by the Tree of Life which was said to have been planted in Paradise, and by those events which should happen to all the just. Moses was sent with a _rod_ to effect the redemption of the people; and with this in his hands at the head of the people he divided the sea. By this he saw the water gus.h.i.+ng out of the rock; and when he cast a _tree_ into the waters of Marah, which were bitter, he made them sweet. Jacob by putting _rods_ into the water troughs caused the sheep of his uncle to conceive . . . . Aaron's _rod_ which blossomed declared him to be the High Priest. Isaiah prophesied that a rod would come forth from the root of Jesse, and this was the Christ."[16]

Further on in the same work, Justin Martyr, alluding to the statement in the Israelitish Law "Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree,"

states that

"It was not without design that the prophet Moses when Hur and Aaron upheld his hands, remained in this form until evening. For indeed the Lord remained upon the tree almost until evening."[17]

Tertullian writes concerning the Christ "With the last enemy Death did he fight, and through the trophy of the cross he triumphed"[18]; and elsewhere tells us that "Cursed is every one who hangeth on a tree" was a prediction of his death.[19]

There is also in existence a long essay by Tertullian which starts by discussing the efficacy of "the sign" as an antidote. The sign of the cross as traced upon the forehead in the non-Mosaic initiatory rite of baptism seems to be what is referred to; and no representation of an instrument of execution, or cross-shaped symbol of wood or any material, is once mentioned.[20]

In another of Tertullian's works we come across the pa.s.sage "In all the actions of daily life we trace upon the forehead the sign."[21]

His famous reference to the Sun-G.o.d Mithras reads as follows:--

"The devil in the mystic rites of his idols competes even with the essential portions of the sacraments of G.o.d. He, like G.o.d, baptizes some, that is, his own believing and faithful followers, and promises the putting away of sins by baptism; and if I remember rightly Mithras there signs his soldiers upon their foreheads, celebrates the oblation of bread, introduces a representation of the resurrection, and places the crown beyond the sword."[22]

Elsewhere Tertullian writes:--

"If any of you think we render superst.i.tious adoration to the cross, in that adoration he is sharer with us . .

You wors.h.i.+p _victories_, for in your trophies the cross is the heart of the trophy. The camp religion of the Romans is all through a wors.h.i.+p of the standards . . . I praise your zeal: you would not wors.h.i.+p crosses unclothed and unadorned."[23]

In another of Tertullian's works we read:--

"As for him who affirms that we are the priesthood of a cross, we shall claim him as a co-religionist . . .

Every piece of timber which is fixed in the ground in an erect position is part of a cross, and indeed the greater part of its ma.s.s. But an entire cross is attributed to us . . . . The truth however is that _your_ religion is _all_ cross . . . You are ashamed, I suppose, to wors.h.i.+p unadorned and simple crosses."[24]

In the _Instructions of Commodia.n.u.s_ we read "The first law was in the tree, and so, too, was the second."[25]

Cyprian contends that "By the sign of the cross, also, Amalek was conquered by Moses."[26]

Elsewhere Cyprian tells us that "In this sign of the cross is salvation for all people who are marked on their foreheads"; quoting as proof of this, from the Apocalypse, "They had his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads," and "Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have power over the Tree of Life."[27]

Methodius tells us that "He overcame, as has been said, the powers that enslaved us by the figure of the cross; and shadowed forth man, who had been oppressed by corruption as by a tyrant power, to be free with unfettered hands. For the cross, if you wish to define it, is the confirmation of victory."[28]

Pa.s.sing on to Origen, we find in one of his works the noteworthy pa.s.sage:--

"It is possible to avoid it if we do what the Apostle saith 'Mortify your members which are upon earth,' and if we always carry about in our bodies the death of Christ. For it is certain that where the death of Christ is carried about, sin cannot reign. For the power of the _stauros_ of Christ is so great that if it be set before a man's eyes and kept faithfully in his mind so that he look with steadfast eyes of the mind upon that same death of Christ, no concupiscence, no sensuality, no natural pa.s.sion, and no envious desire, is able to overcome him."[29]

Whether however this reference to the "_stauros_ of Christ" is or is not a reference to the figure of the cross, is doubtful.

Such is the evidence regarding the cross, whether considered as immaterial sign or material symbol, obtainable from the writings of the Christians who lived between the days of the Apostles and those of Constantine; other of course than the _Octavius_ of Minucius Felix, which was dealt with in the last chapter, and the writings of Irenaeus, which will be dealt with in the next.

Among the noteworthy features of the evidence in question prominently stands out the smallness of its volume.

This is but a negative point, however; and what should be carefully borne in mind is that the evidence as a whole leads to the conclusion that the Christians of the second and third centuries made use of the sign and venerated the figure of the cross without, as Dean Farrar admits, it "only or even mainly," reminding them of the death of Jesus; and therefore otherwise than as a representation of the instrument of execution upon which Jesus died.[30]

CHAPTER IV.

CURIOUS STATEMENTS OF IRENAEUS.

The special importance of the evidence of Irenaeus, is due to the fact that of all the Fathers whose undisputed works have come down to us he is the only one who can be considered to have been anything like in touch with the Apostles. As an acquaintance of the aged Polycarp, who is said to have been in his youth a pupil of the aged Evangelist and Apostle St. John and to have met yet other Apostles, Irenaeus had opportunities for ascertaining facts concerning the life and death of Jesus which the other Fathers upon whose works we rely did not possess.