the least injury to the Divinity of Christ, or to his consubstantiality, but himself believed it, as sincerely and fully as any man else could. This affair is recorded by Athanasius f, from whom I have collected what I have said: and it is a standing monument of the high regard paid to the doctrine of our Lord's Divinitys, as a most important and fundamental article of Christianity in those days, sixty years and more before the Council of Nice. A. D. 319. ALEXANDER of Alexandria. I shall close this account with the sentiments of Alexander and his clergy, among which were near a hundred more bishops of the province, upon the present question, at the first breaking out of the Arian heresy. In their synodical letter, after sentence of excommunication passed upon Arius and his adherents, they represent the Arians, or Eusebians, as fallen into an apostasy, and as forerunners of antichristh: they compare them with Hymenæus and Philetus, and the traitor Judas; and they stigmatize them as enemies to God, and subverters of souls. Such was their sense of the high importance of the doctrine of Christ's Divinity, which Arius had impugned. About two years after, the same Alexander, in his circular letter to the other Alexander of Byzantium, after declaring his faith in Christ, as truly and essentially God, of that and other articles of his Creed, he says: "These we teach, "and these we declare these are the apostolical doc"trines of the Church, for which we should be content "to die, making small account of them who would com"pel us to deny them: for though they should even "torture us to comply, yet would we not cast off our hope in those [doctrines:] for the opposing of which 66 f Athanas. de Sententia Dionys. p. 252. de Synod. 757, 758. * See the whole thing more particularly drawn out, and vindicated from exceptions, in Bull. Def. F. N. sect. ii. c. 11. Thirlby's Answers to Whiston's Suspicions, p. 31, &c. Berriman, Hist. Account, p. 127, &c. Η "Ανδρες παράνομοι καὶ χρισομάχοι διδάσκοντες ἀποτασίαν, ἣν εἰκότως ἄν τις πρόδρομον τῷ ἀντιχρίσει ὑπονοήσειεν καὶ καλέσειεν. Αp. Athanas. p. 397. et ap. 50crat. lib. i. c. 6. "Arius and Achillas, with their accomplices, being ene"mies to the truth, are ejected out of the Church, as "deserters of our holy faith, [godly doctrine ;] pursuant "to St. Paul's rule: If any one preach any other Gospel "unto you than what you have received, let him be ac"cursed, though he should pretend to be an angel from "heaven." Such were the sentiments of this good and great man, relating to the importance of the doctrine he taught; the same which was afterward confirmed by the general Council of Nice, summoned from out of all Christendom to decide so momentous a question. The sum of what I have advanced in this chapter is, that by three several topics it is proved to be certain fact, that the doctrine of our Lord's Divinity, and so of the whole Trinity, was looked upon by the ancient churches of Christ as one of the prime verities, one of the essentials of Christianity. This, I say, is proved from Creeds, and from censures upon heresies, (public acts of the Church,) and from particular testimonies of Fathers, declaring their own private sentiments of the weight and importance of the doctrines we have been considering. Now I proceed to inquire of what use and value this view of the ancients may be to us. CHAP. VII. Showing the Use and Value of Ecclesiastical Antiquity with Respect to Controversies of Faith. I INTEND not here to consider the use of the Fathers in its largest extent, but only so far as concerns articles of faith. I shall endeavour to set this matter in as clear a light as I can, for the impartial and discerning reader to judge of, avoiding all extremes. A certain writer, whom I should not perhaps have taken the least notice of, had · Ταῦτα διδάσκομεν, ταῦτα κηρύττομεν· ταῦτα τῆς ἐκκλησίας τὰ ̓Αποςολικὰ δόγματα, ὑπὲρ ὧν καὶ ἀποθνήσκομεν, τῶν ἐξόμνυσθαι αὐτὰ βιαζομένων ἧττον πεφρον τικότες, εἰ καὶ διὰ βασάνων ἀναγκάζεσι, τὴν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐλπίδα μὴ ἀποτρεφόμενοι. ὧν ¡vavríos x. 7. λ. Apud Theodorit. E. H. lib. i. c. 4. it not thus fallen in my way, has been pleased to tell the world, that " Dr. Waterland and some others, who have "appeared on the same side of the question, have only "considered the Scripture in that light which a sober "Turk or an Indian might discover in it. But Scripture "has a much greater force in the hands of St. Athana"sius and of St. Basil, (who viewed it in its true, that "is, in its original and traditionary sense, and under the lights of faith,) than it has in Dr. Waterland's; who "ascends no higher than the bare letter, and that sense "of which all men, who are sincere, may equally judge, "whether they believe it or not. But when St. Athana"sius and St. Basil argue from Scripture, they have a "regard to faith, and those ideas which Catholics have always had concerning the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The report which this gentleman has here made may be true in part: and, so far, what he intended as an article of blame may appear much otherwise to more equal judges. I doubt not to say, that the Scripture is plain enough in this cause, for any honest Turk or Indian to judge of, who is but able to discern the difference between wresting a text, and giving it an easy and natural interpretation. Nor do I see why a man may not be as certain of the construction of Scripture in this article, from the words themselves, comparing Scriptures with Scriptures, as he may be of the sense of Homer or Aristotle, of Cicero or Cæsar, in plain and clear passages. Nevertheless, if over and above this, any further light or strength may a.se from comparing Scripture and antiquity together, it is an additional advantage to our cause, such as we are thankful for, and constantly make use of. All kinds of evidences are useful; and there is so much weakness generally in mankind, that we have no reason to throw aside any assistances given us for relief or remedy. Anti k An Answer to Dr. Clarke and Mr. Whiston, concerning the Divinity of the Son and Holy Spirit, with a summary Account of the chief Writers of the three first Ages. By H. E. Printed by Roberts, 1729. See pref. p. 4, 5. quity therefore, superadded to Scripture, is what we sincerely value, and pay a great regard to; perhaps much greater than that gentleman himself really does: for if I be not very much mistaken in the drift and tendency of his censure, it is such as plainly discovers (notwithstanding his artful disguises) a much more affectionate concern for a modern corrupt Church, than for the pure and ancient faith. St. Athanasius and St. Basil pleaded the same cause, and exactly in the same way, as we of the Church of England do. They appealed to Scripture first, speaking for itself, and proving its own sense to the common reason of mankind, according to the just rules of grammar and criticism: after that, they referred also to the well known faith of all the ancient churches, as superabundantly confirming the same rational aud natural construction. Athanasius and Basil were wise and honest men, and would never have admitted what this writer meanly insinuates', (while he pretends to be an advocate on the same side,) that Arianism would not be heresy upon the foot of Scripture, singly considered. Such unworthy suggestions are as contrary to the general sense of antiquity, as they are to truth and godliness, and tend only to betray the best of causes, for the sake of serving and supporting one of the worst. Athanasius's sentiments may appear from one single passage, which is all I need refer to at length in proof of a thing so well known. He observes, that the Arians, finding nothing in Scripture to countenance their heresy, were forced to have recourse to confident presumptions and collusive sophistry; and when they had done with those, their next attempt was, to abuse the Fathers alsom, who favoured them as little as the Scripture did. Athanasius appealed to Scripture in the first place, and laid the main stress there: which indeed is his constant 1 An Answer to Dr. Clarke and Mr. Whiston, &c. pref. p. 6, 7. το Τῶν δ' Αρειομανιτῶν τὴν ἀλογίαν καὶ νῦν ἐπέγνων. ὐδὲν γὰρ οὔτ ̓ εὔλογον, οὔτε πρὸς ἀπόδειξιν ἐκ τῆς θείας γραφῆς ῥητὸν ἐχέσης τῆς αἱρέσεως αὐτῶν, ἀεὶ μὲν προφά σεις ἀναισχύντους ἐπορίζοντο καὶ σοφίσματα πιθανά· νῦν δὲ κ διαβάλλειν τὰς πατέρας TETOλμnnas. Athanas. de Sent. Dionys. p. 243. way in his dispute with the Arians. No man speaks more highly of the perfection and sufficiency of Scripture than he does namely, that it affords the fullest and strongest evidences for establishing the faith against the Arians; and that it is in itself sufficient for every thing. The like might be shown of Basil, were it needful. Therefore let not that gentleman hope to find shelter for his insidious conduct under those great and venerable names. He proceeds to observe, that "Catholics (Roman Ca"tholics I suppose he means) are so accustomed to join faith and reading the holy Scripture together, that they "account this to be the natural signification of the words P." Which is artfully insinuating, that the sense which Trinitarians affix to Scripture is not natural, but made to appear so, through the prejudice of education, or through the lights of an infallible chair. And so he pleads, under cover, for imposing a sense upon Scripture, instead of taking one from the natural force of the words. This never was the advice of the ancients 9, neither ought it to be the practice of moderns. We insist upon it, that our interpretation of Scripture is just and natural, and that one great use of antiquity is, to guard that natural construction against unnatural distortions. To do violence to Scripture, in order to bring it to speak what we have a mind to, or what we have preconceived, is making Scripture insignificant, and setting up a new rule of faith: and indeed this gentleman, afterwards, gives very broad intimations, that Scripture is not the whole rule of faith. So now the secret is out and I suppose, by this time, it is manifest what cause he is serving; and that he has something else more at heart than the doctrine of the ■ Vid. Athanas. p. 274, 720, 237. edit. Bened. • Athanas. p. 1. P Answer to Dr. Clarke, &c. p. 7. • Optimus enim lector est, qui dictorum intelligentiam exspectet ex dictis potius quam imponat, et retulerit magis quam attulerit; neque cogat id videri dictis contineri, quod ante lectionem præsumserit intelligendum. Hilar. de Trin. lib. i. col. 777. Answer to Dr. Clarke, pref. p. 17. book 22, 23. |