NICOLAITANS (NnccAafra1). This word oc curs twice in the N. T. (Rev. ii. 6, 15). In the former passage the conduct of the Nicolaitans, ra tpya NircoNsar'cliv, is condemned ; in the latter, the angel of the church in Pergamus is cen sured because certain members of his church held their doctrine, rip) T 6) V NucoNcaraw. Irenwus, the earliest Christian author who mentions them, says simply (Contra Hceres., i. 26), It very clearly appears, from the Apocalypse, that the Nicolaitans held fornication, and the eating of idol-sacrifices, to be things indifferent, and therefore permitted to Christians.' In short, Irenus evidently knew nothing of the Nicolaitans, except what he gathered from the text of the Apocalypse ; as, indeed, the concluding words of his short notice suggest : Quapropter dixit et de its sermo : Sed hoc habes quod odisti opera Nicolaitarum, quw et ego odi ;' unless it be his statement that Nicolas, one of the seven deacons (Acts vi.), was the founder of the sect. The practices of these heretics were the more reprehensible, as being not only opposed to the whole spirit and morality of the Gospel, but a violation of an express decree of the Apostles and Elders, issued in relation to this matter (Acts xv.) As time rolled on, however, the information regard ing Nicolas and his proceedings seems continually to have increased, till Epiphanius, at length, fur nishes us with a full-blown account of the manner in which the proselyte of Antioch founded the sect which was supposed to bear his name. Nicolas, such is the story of Epiphanius (Advers. ThEreS., 1. 25, p. 76, edit. Petay.), had a beautiful wife, and, following the counsels of perfection, he separated himself from her ; but not being able to persevere in his resolution, he returned to her again (as a dog to his vomit, (In dun, rbe Moo elhETO)) ; and not only so, but justified his conduct by licentious principles, which laid the foundation of the sect of the Nicolaitans.
Against this account (in which Tertullian, Hilary, Gregory of Nyssa, and several other fathers, sub stantially concur) we may object—(t) That the custom of men putting away their wives for the attainment of a supposed higher sanctity evidently belongs to a later period, when the monastic ideas produced these and similar practices. Such an occurrence was natural enough in the age of Cle ment of Alexandria and of Tertullian—that is, towards the conclusion of the second century ; but we cannot believe it could have happened in the Apostolic age. (2) It is not conceivable that his
taking back his wife, even if he had, on those grounds, separated himself from her, would then be regarded as an immorality, much less as an en ormous crime, especially considering what St. Paul had said on the subject (1 Cor. vii. 3-6). (3) Epi phanius, after stating that Nicolas lapsed into the greatest enormities, informs us that all the Gnostics derived their origin from him ; a statement which throws an air of ridicule over all he has told us on this subject, and proves how little his authority in the matter is worth.
Clement of Alexandria has preserved a different version of the story (Strom. iii. 4, p. 522, edit. Potter), which Eusebius copies from him (Hist. Eccles., iii. 29), and which is repeated by Augus tine and other ancient writers. The apostles,' they say, reprehended Nicolas for jealousy of his wife, who was beautiful ; whereupon Nicolas pro duced her, and said, Any one might marry her who pleased. In this affair the deacon let fall the expression, 871 7rapaxOcradat ri7 TapKi. Se; that we should abuse the flesh ;' which, though em ployed in a good sense by him, was perverted to a bad one by those who would gain to their licentiousness the sanction of a respectable name, and who from hence styled themselves Nicolaitans.' Who can believe that a sect should take its rise and its name from a casual expression by a man whose obvious sense and whose conduct were opposed to the peculiarities of the sect ? Neither can we think the conjecture of Grotius (Anna. in Apocalyps., ii. 6) at all probable : Mihi veterum testimonia conferenti, media placet sententia, quze lute est : Nicolaum accusatum NX07-mrias, quod, uxorem pulchram habens, usitata ilia inter Christianos utri usque sexfis pacis oscula non satis ferret, in contra rium cucurrisse, et exemplo Laconum ac Catonis uxoris sme usuram permisisse aliis, plane quasi in eo quod marito et uxore volentibus fieret non peccaretur, etc.' For it is hard to conceive that a custom which was universal could excite any jealousy ; and yet more so that a man imbued with the doctrines of the Apostles, as Nicolas was, should seek to turn aside their displeasure by imi tating the matrimonial enormities of Spartans or of Cato.