WHO WAS ST. GEORGE?

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3676, 26 April 1883, Page 3

WHO WAS ST. GEORGE?

[To the Editor of the Daily Telegrami.] Sic,—Your correspondent A. D. Mulvihill says that I undertook to disprove his assertion that '' thehistorian Gibbon, in matters relating to the church, allowed himself to be misled by historians as false as himself." I I can find nothing in my letter to lead him to suppose that I did anything of the kind, and I can assure him I had no such intention. He made the assertion, and it behoves him to prove it. To actually verify what Gibbon has written respecting the rise aud progress of Christianity in the only way in which it could be done, i.e., by a personal and critical examination of the AA-ritings of the ancient philosophers, historians, and of the early fathers of the church, interspersed as their Avritmgs are Avith pious interpolations, as avcll as of the critical and historical works in all the modern languages of Europe, Avould require a man of genius and learning, with an ample fortune, and a big life before him, all of which he must be prepared to sacrifice on the altar of his curiosity. But such a work is not at all necessary, for, as I said before, Gibbon makes no material statement Avithout giving his authorities, aud if Pliny, Tacitus Dion Cassius, Tcrtullnin, Athanasius, Justin Martyr, Suetonius, Euscbius, Gregory - Nazicnzen, Zosimus, Julian, Ammianus, Cyprian, Sec, kc, are false historians, avlio arc the true ones ? These names I have taken at random from his notes, and one or more of them is to be found on CA-ery page of the Avork. It is simply idle to go on asserting that he is false, and that he has been misled without bringing anything forward to support the statement. As an instance of the critical acumen Avhich he exercised in selecting the materials of his Avork, I will, Avith your permission, give one or two familiar instances :— It was Gibbon avlio first pointed out that the famous passage of Scripture, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, ifce.," lias a peculiar significance Avhen Avritten in French, in Avhich language it runs thus, " Tu. es Vierre et s/ir cet/e pierrcP It is simply unintelligible in English, and is said to be more or less so in every other language. Did Christ speak French to his disciples? Your readers may draw their own conclusion. Again, ho pointed out that the passage, "There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three aro one," is spurious, and when Bishop Travis Avrote an elaborate defence of the passage he avus triumphantly refuted by Porson in his celebrated "Letters to Travis." I need hardly say that this celebrated passage has been quietly omitted from the revised edition of the New Testament. He also draAVS attention to tho fact that the Alogians disputed the genuineness of tho Apocalypse (which your readers aro aware is addressed to the Church of Tliyatira), on tho ground that this church was not yet founded, and that Epiphanius, avlio admits the fact, extricates himself from the difficulty by ingeniously supposing that St. John wrote in the spirit of prophecy. A perusal of the work will slioav _ that he was equally discriminating iv dealing with other Avritiugs, and was by no means so easily imposed upon, as your correspondent seems to imagine. And uoav in the matter of St. George. Hayden's Dictionary of Dat- cannot be regarded as an ultimate authority in matters of this kind; he must give his authority as Gibbon docs. Gibbon's is Pope Gelasius ; I will giA-e note in full— "Poj.ii- Gelasius (\.i>. 10-t), the first Catholic who .'icknoAvlodges St. George, places him among the martyrs—' </"i deo mar/is quaui homiuihus noli ■sunt.'' He rejects his Acts, as tho composition of heretics. Some, perhaps not the oldest of the spurious Acts, are still extant, and through a cloud of fiction Aye may yet distinguish St. George of Cappadocia, sustained before Queen Alexandria, against the mayician Alhauashrs " Now, if Gelasius did not refer to George of Cappadocia, whore was the necessity of repudiating his reputed Acts ? and hoAV was it that he Avas not proclaimed a martyr until 200 years after his death, for your correspondent says he suffered death a.d. 290. When the glaring and astounding interpolations made by the advocates of Christianity, both in the Scriptures and iv the writings of laymen are exposed, it is not surprising that in works written expressly for theological students by their superiors we find the names of saints and martyrs that it is difficult to find elsewhere. It is distinctly stated on the authority of Euscbius and Rufiims that Adauctus avus the only person of rank and distinction Avho suffered martyrdom under Diocletian. Tho noble acts" of self-sacrifice and devoted death ascribed by Mr MulA-ihill to George are related exactly as he describes ; but, instead of George, the name is Marcellus, and instead of being a lofty Tribune ho is a humble Centurion. The date too corresponds, for though Gibbon does not give the exact date of his death, it is obviously sonic A-ears prior to the publication of the edict .against Christians in 303. If I speak strongly on these matters I must beg your correspondent not to suppose that I am speadiug at him personally ; such is far from niv wishes, but it is no use glossing over and softening doAVii hard facts in consideration of sentiment. But if lie is foud of sentiment I will give him a line from a favorite poet — " I ne'er mistook thee for a personal foe, Our difference is political." —I am, kc, QUINTILLVNUS. April 2b, 1883.