[Footnote 32: In the apologetic writings of Justin the courts of appeal invariably continue to be the Old Testament, the words of the Lord, and the communications of prophets; hence he has hardly insisted on any other in his anti-heretical work. On the other hand we cannot appeal to the observed fact that Tertullian also, in his apologetic writings, did not reveal his standpoint as a churchman and opponent of heresy; for, with one exception, he did not discuss heretics in these tractates at all. On the contrary Justin discussed their position even in his apologetic writings; but nowhere, for instance, wrote anything similar to Theophilus' remarks in "ad Autol.," II. 14. Justin was acquainted with and frequently alluded to fixed formulae and perhaps a baptismal symbol related to the Roman, if not essentially identical with it. (See Bornemann. Das Taufsymbol Justins in the Ztschr. f. K. G. Vol. III. p. 1 ff.), but we cannot prove that he utilised these formulae in the sense of Irenaeus and Tertullian. We find him using the expression [Greek: orthognomones] in Dial. 80. The resurrection of the flesh and the thousand years' kingdom (at Jerusalem) are there reckoned among the beliefs held by the [Greek: orthognomones kata panta Christianoi]. But it is very characteristic of the standpoint taken up by Justin that he places between the heretics inspired by demons and the orthodox a class of Christians to whom he gives the general testimony that they are [Greek: tes katharas kai eusebous gnomes], though they are not fully orthodox in so far as they reject one important doctrine. Such an estimate would have been impossible to Irenaeus and Tertullian. They have advanced to the principle that he who violates the law of faith in one point is guilty of breaking it all.] [Footnote 33: Hatch, "Organisation of the Church," p. 96.] [Footnote 34: We can only conjecture that some teachers in Asia Minor contemporary with Irenaeus, or even of older date, and especially Melito, proceeded in like manner, adhering to Polycarp's exclusive attitude. Dionysius of Corinth (Eusebius, H. E. IV. 23. 2, 4) may perhaps be also mentioned.] [Footnote 35: Irenaeus set forth his theory in a great work, adv. haeres., especially in the third book. Unfortunately his treatise, "[Greek: logos eis epideixin tou apostolikou kerygmatos]", probably the oldest treatise on the rule of faith, has not been preserved (Euseb., H. E. V. 26.)] [Footnote 36: Irenaeus indeed asserts in several passages that all Churches--those in Germany, Iberia, among the Celts, in the East, in Egypt, in Lybia and Italy; see I. 10. 2; III. 3. 1; III. 4. 1 sq.--possess the same apostolic _kerygma_; but "qui nimis probat nihil probat." The extravagance of the expressions shows that a dogmatic theory is here at work. Nevertheless this is based on the correct view that the Gnostic speculations are foreign to Christianity and of later date.]