In all the Ignatian epistles, except the Epistle to the Romans, we find polemical remarks and warnings against heretical tendencies which threatened the churches of Asia Minor.

It is not quite easy to obtain a clear picture of the heretics combatted by Ignatius. One point only is evident: their docetism. They considered Christ's life on earth, his birth, his human body, his death and resurrection as mere appearance.

In the last century the school of Tübingen held that Montanism is only a name invented by historians to describe certain currents of thought in the second century and later. But although the evidence for the movement is not so full as one might like, there is no more reason to doubt its historicity than most other contemporary movements or even persons. It is not easy to get rid of the later legal prescriptions of the Theodosian and Justinian Codes; while Aelius Publius Julius, bishop of Devultum in Thrace, expressed himself in no uncertain fashion: ‘As God in heaven liveth, I swear that the blessed Solus of Anchialus wished to cast out Priscilla's demon, and the hypocrites would not allow it.’ The Montanists were real enough to him.

L'anamnèse des liturgies eucharistiques pose deux problèmes: celui de son origine et celui de son développement. Le premier se rattache à la question plus générale de la structure de l'anaphore. Celle-ci, telle qu'elle nous apparaît dès la fin du IVe siècle, comporte six parties, abstraction faite des prières d'intercession qui représentent un développement secondaire. Ce sont: i. l'action de grâces; 2. le Sanctus; 3. le Post-Sanctus; 4. le récit de l'institution; 5. l'anamnèse; 6. l'épiclèse.

Two generations of lawyers and historians of the early Church have worked over the scanty evidence bearing on the legal and political relations between the first Christian communities and the Roman Empire. It is not the intention of the present writer to add to the enormous volume of work on the subject. The results of their battles have been ably summarised by A. N. Sherwin-White, and with his conclusions the legal problem may be allowed to rest until new evidence is forthcoming. The object of this paper is to look at the question from another point of view, and to ask who were the sufferers, and in particular, who were martyred in the period before the first general persecution under Decius. Were Polycarp, Justin, Blandina and the rest chance victims of private denunciation and the fury of the mob, or did they represent a tradition of belief in which martyrdom became the climax of earthly life? And what of those who obeyed the precept to flee during persecution? Was their action due to cowardice, or was it the belief that martyrdom was not the will of God? Can we see in the controversy over martyrdom which engaged so much of Tertullian's energies, one more phase in the strife between the orthodox and gnostic concepts of Christianity, on the outcome of which so much in the future of the Church depended? What, in fact, was the relationship between the Gnostics and the Roman authorities?

It had seemed that Ladeuze had firmly established the literary priority of the best Greek sources for the Life of Pachomius and his first successors as against the Coptic. Halkin's edition of the Vitae Graecae, while suggesting that the surviving ‘Vita Prima’ was not the earliest recension, had supported the same main conclusion—‘Cette première Vie de Pachôme fût certainement rédigé en grec. La discussion est présentement close.’

Strictly speaking, there is only one festival of encaenia in the ancient Church reported by our ancient or modern authorities on the subject, the feast of the dedication of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, instituted on 13 September 335 to mark the tricennalia of the emperor Constantine, and described for us by Eusebius in his Life of Constantine. The rebuilding of churches after the persecution under Diocletian, and a similar encaenia of the Church of Tyre are even more fully recorded in the tenth Book of the History. Both dedications were accompanied by a long panegyric of the emperor, delivered by Eusebius himself, extolling Constantine as a second Solomon, and were the occasion for similar festive addresses and theological discourses from other visiting ecclesiastical dignitaries: but, apart from the magnificence of the occasion, the public banquets, the vast concourse of delegates from every part of the Christian world (Eusebius seems to be as anxious as Luke in his account of Pentecost in Acts ii. to emphasise the ecumenical character of the occasion), there is nothing unexpected in any of the rites or ceremonies performed at the encaenia; in addition to the celebration of the Eucharist, they consisted for the most part of prayers for the general peace, for the Church of God and for the emperor, Scripture readings, singing of psalms, and the lavish distribution of alms.

‘D'une manière générate, on peut dire que les littératures chrétiennes de l'Orient sont largement tributaires de la littérature grecque.’ This statement of the late Paul Peeters concerning oriental hagiographical literature may equally well be applied to that of the Slavs. At the same time it does not in any way detract from the merits of original Slavonic hagiography to admit its debt to the Byzantine influences which it preserved and enriched. The principal channels by which these influences were transmitted were Slavonic translations of Greek works, mainly ecclesiastical, which were made from the late ninth century onwards. Among these translated works, which formed the nucleus of early Slavonic literature, were the most important Byzantine hagiographical compilations and ascetical treatises produced between the fifth and seventh centuries: the Apophthegmata Patrum; the Ἀνδρν γων ββλος (=The Book of Holy Men); the Lausiac History of Palladius; the Historia Monachorum; the Historia Religiosa of Theodoret of Cyrus; the Pratum Spirituale of John Moschus; and the Scala Paradisi of St. John Climacus. There is also evidence that the Paraenesis of Ephrem the Syrian was translated, and at least one treatise by, or attributed to, Evagrius, as well as the Latin Dialogues of Gregory the Great, this last from its Greek version.