A Reply to Dr. Lightfoots Essays | Page 8

of certain 'Traditions of Matthias,' which claimed to be grounded on
'private intercourse with the Saviour.' [16:3] It appears, moreover, that
he himself published a gospel--a 'Life of Christ,' as it would perhaps be
called in our days, or 'The Philosophy of Christianity'--but he admitted
the historic truth of all the facts contained in the canonical gospels, and
used them as Scripture. For, in spite of his peculiar opinions, the
testimony of Basilides to our 'acknowledged' books is comprehensive
and clear. In the few pages of his writings which remain, there are
certain references to the Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. John,
&c." And in a note Dr. Westcott adds, "The following examples will be
sufficient to show his mode of quotation, &c." [17:1]
Not a word of qualification or doubt is added to these extraordinary
statements, for a full criticism of which I must beg the reader to be
good enough to refer to Supernatural Religion, ii. pp. 41-54. Setting
aside here the important question as to what the "gospel" of
Basilides--to which Dr. Westcott gives the fanciful names of a "Life of
Christ," or "Philosophy of Christianity," without a shadow of
evidence--really was, it could scarcely be divined, for instance, that the
statement that Basilides "admitted the historic truth of all the facts
contained in the canonical gospels" rests solely upon a sentence in the
work attributed to Hippolytus, to the effect that, after his generation, all
things regarding the Saviour--according to the followers of
Basilides--occurred in the same way as they are written in the Gospels.
Again, it could scarcely be supposed by an ordinary reader that the
assertion that Basilides used the "canonical gospels"--there certainly
were no "canonical" gospels in his day--"as Scripture," that his

testimony to our 'acknowledged' books is comprehensive and clear, and
that "in the few pages of his writings which remain there are certain
references" to those gospels, which show "his method of quotation," is
not based upon any direct extracts from his writings, but solely upon
passages in an epitome by Hippolytus of the views of the school of
Basilides, not ascribed directly to Basilides himself, but introduced by a
mere indefinite [Greek: phêsi]. [17:2] Why, I might enquire in the vein
of Dr. Lightfoot, is not a syllable said of all this, or of the fact, which
completes the separation of these passages from Basilides, that the
Gnosticism described by Hippolytus is not that of Basilides, but clearly
of a later type; and that writers of that period, and notably Hippolytus
himself, were in the habit of putting, as it might seem, by the use of an
indefinite "he says," sentiments into the mouth of the founder of a sect
which were only expressed by his later followers? As Dr. Lightfoot
evidently highly values the testimony of Luthardt, I will quote the
words of that staunch apologist to show that, in this, I do not merely
represent the views of a heterodox school. In discussing the supposed
quotations from the fourth Gospel, which Dr. Westcott represents as
"certain references" to it by Basilides himself, Luthardt says: "But to
this is opposed the consideration that, as we know from Irenaeus, &c.,
the original system of Basilides had a dualistic character, whilst that of
the 'Philosophumena' is pantheistic. We must recognise that Hippolytus,
in the 'Philosophumena,' not unfrequently makes the founder of a sect
responsible for that which in the first place concerns his disciples, so
that from these quotations only the use of the Johannine Gospel in the
school of Basilides is undoubtedly proved, but not on the part of the
founder himself." [18:1]
It is difficult to recognise in this fancy portrait the Basilides regarding
whom a large body of eminent critics conclude that he did not know
our Gospels at all, but made use of an uncanonical work, supplemented
by traditions from Glaucias and Matthias; but, as if the heretic had not
been sufficiently restored to the odour of sanctity, the additional touch
is given in the passage more immediately before us. Dr. Westcott
conveys the information contained in the single sentence of Clement of
Alexandria, [Greek: kathaper ho Basileidês kan Glaukian epigraphêtai
didaskalon, hôs auchousin autoi, ton Petrou hermênea], [19:1] in the
following words; and I quote the statement exactly as it has stood in my

text from the very first, in order to show the inverted commas upon
which Dr. Lightfoot lays so much stress as having been removed. In
mentioning this fact Canon Westcott says: "At the same time he
appealed to the authority of Glaucias, who, as well as St. Mark, was 'an
interpreter of St. Peter.' [19:2] Now we have here, again, an
illustration," &c.; and then follows the passage quoted by Dr. Lightfoot.
The positive form given to the words of Clement,