of a far-fetch't Eloquence ought to be despised but Clearness cannot be reckon'd among those Ornaments It must needs be confest that there are but few Fathers whose Writings are not lyable to the same Observation with those of Clemens Most of 'em whilst they excuse themselves for not being Eloquent do whatever they can to appear so after their way as may be seen by a thousand high stroaks and strained Metaphorical Expressions which their Writings are full of and we see but few who thought that the greatest care a Writer should take consists in exciting in the Minds of his Reader clear Idea's of what he says by using Words without any Equivocation There is extant besides an Homily of Clemens entitled What Rich Man is Saved It was printed in Greek and Latin by Combefis at Paris 1672 and at Oxford 1683 With several other Greek and Latin Fragments Those who took care of the German Edition at Colen 1688. of Clemens's Works should have printed it with the rest of his Works it would have made their Edition more considerable which otherwise is not much more valuable as those that use it will find They have only followed the Paris Edition 1641 without adding any thing to it except New Faults There is at the End of the Volume An Abridgment of the Doctrine of Theodotus and of the Doctrine called Eastern in Valentinus's time The greatest part of it is only an Interpretation of some Places of the Holy Scripture which some think to have been taken out of the Eighth Book of Clemens Alexandrinus's Hypotyposes as I have already observed * Lib. 6. cap. 14. Eusebius tells us that he had interpreted the Holy Scripture after a compendious manner in that Work without omitting says he the Disputed Writings as St. Jude 's and the other Catholick Epistles St. Barnabas 's Epistle St. Peter 's Apocalypsis and the Epistle to the Hebrews which he assures to he St. Paul 's c. †God CIX Photius who had seen that Work says also that the Design of it was to Explain the Holy Scripture but he accuses the Author of maintaining That Matter is Eternal That the different Forms which it receives are imparted to it by virtue of I know not what Decrees That the Son is in the number of Things Created That there hath been Many Worlds before Adam That Eve was formed out of him after another manner than what the Scripture relates That the Angels having been conversant with some Women had Children by them That the Reason was not made Flesh tho' it seem'd so to Men That there are Two Reasons of the Father the least whereof appeared to Men and was made Flesh If we had those Books still we might perhaps more clearly know that they are only some Platonick Doctrines some of which Photius did not well understand because of the Equivocation of the Terms and the other were not in Clemens's time lookt upon as Impieties as they have been since Systems of Divinity were compiled among Christians In the first Ages when no Systems were entertained in the Schools and explained to the Youth as they are now every one Philosophized as well as he could upon Matters of Speculation and explained Speculative Doctrines according to the Philosophy he had learned Except some Opinions which either because they had made a great Noise or for some other Reasons were condemned by the Bishops they were very free in their Thoughts If any one doubted of it he might convince himself of the Truth thereof by the strange Opinions which have been entertained by some of the Fathers who were rank't among the Orthodox and for which they were not censured in their time One may see many Examples of it in the Fourth Chapter of Dallaeus's Book de Vsu Patrum which notwithstanding the Panegyrists of Antiquity will always be accounted a Good Book by those that know Antiquity Such was for Example St. Hilary's Opinion who believed that Christ felt no Pain when he was scourged But Photius suspects that the Hereticks corrupted the Works of Clemens and Ruffinus had the same Thoughts as it appears by his Apology for Origen which is in the IV. Tome of St. Jerom's Works Yet if there was no more in them than what Photius cites there would be no reason to believe that they were much corrupted though it cannot be absolutely denied The reason of it is that whatever that learned Patriarch may say those very Opinions if well understood are to be found in the other Works of Clemens and are agreeable to the Principles which he follows every where 1. He approves * Strom. l. 5. p. 599. clearly enough the Opinion of Heraclitus who believed that the Matter of the World is Eternal and he shews that he esteems him for having distinguisht the Matter of the World from its Form the first whereof is immutable and the second subject to change 2. As to the Reasons why Matter receives certain Forms Photius knew no more of it than Clemens 3. If Clemens had said that the Supreme Reason was Created 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one ought to observe that †See the Life of Eusebius to Create Produce Beget signifie the fame thing in Plato and that it doth not follow from thence that he believed the Reason was Begotten or Produced out of Nothing 4. It was Plato's Opinion That the Form of the World doth altogether change in a certain number of Years and that many such Changes happen'd before the Revolution in which we are began One may read his Politicus concerning this wherein he maintains that the Revolution of all the Stars must cause an Universal Change in the World Thus in his Opinion what was said That Men had their Original from the Earth happened in the Beginning of a Revolution * Pag. 175. 'T is what as he goes on our Predecessors said who lived at the End of the foregoing Change and were near the following as well as those who were born in the Beginning of this The Stoicks believed also the same thing as †Strom. l. 5. p. 549. Clemens reports who doth not seem to dislike their Opinion and fails not to confirm it by the Authority of Plato 5. The same Philosopher thought that the First Men were Androgynes and had Four Feet Two Heads and so with the other Members but that God divided them afterwards into Two as may be seen in his Feast Some Rabbins have said something like it and grounded their Opinion upon this That 't is said That God ‖ Vid. Breschith Rabba in sect VIII Created Man Male and Female This seems to be only an ingenious Fancy not an Opinion which those Authors did seriously entertain It may be that Clemens took some delight in making some Reflections upon Plato's Opinion with so much the greater freedom because perhaps he believed as his Disciple Origen that there was abundance of Allegories in the Beginning of Genesis 6. As for the
know that it is apparent they contain'd not the subject of the Three Principles like an infinite of others which they have known how to express in an even clear and elegant manner The Second thing we should observe is That in so difficult a Matter we must content our selves with what they say positively without attempting to draw far-fetch'd Consequences from their Principles which we cannot understand but by halves otherwise we are in danger of attributing to them such Notions as they never had Neither must we endeavour to reconcile in so abstracted a Subject the Contradictions which seem to appear in their Doctrine nor conclude that they could not mean things in such a manner because then they must contradict themselves It was the Custom of these Philosophers to affect certain apparent Contradictions in using the same Terms in divers Sences Besides its obvious enough to imagine that they may have sometimes contradicted themselves on a Subject whereof they had no distinct Idea These two Remarks were necessary to prevent the Questions which might be offer'd on these Matters and to shew that in writing the History of these Doctrines one should keep wholly to Facts and the Terms of the Authors we treat of A Second Opinion of the Platonists which has made a great noise in the World is that of the Prae-existence of Souls in places above the Moon * See Plato's Timoens of the Faults which they may have there committed of their banishments from these happy Abodes to come to inhabit in differently disposed Bodies according to the different Merits of these Souls in fine of their return into places whence they drew their Original We shall not trouble our selves to explain this Doctrine because it belongs not to the Relation in hand having only made mention of it for a particular Reason which will appear in its place The Kings of Egypt and Syria having carried the Sciences of the Greeks into Asia the Jews who were in great numbers in these two Kingdoms and who were obliged to converse with them learn'd of them their Opinions and made no difficulty of embracing those which did not appear to 'em contrary to their Religion Their Books containing nothing inconsistent with sundry of the Platonick Doctrines they believed therefore that these Doctrines might be true and receiv'd them so much the more easily in that they thought they might hereby defend their Religion against the Pagans and make them relish it the better Plato every where affirm'd the Unity of the Supreme Being yet without denying that there are other Beings which may be called Gods to wit the Angels which is agreeable to the Expressions of the Old Testament And this is apparently one of the things which made the Jews better relish the Opinions of this Philosopher But we should give some particular Proofs of this The Author of the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon was plainly of the Opinion of the Prae-existence of Souls as it appears from these words of chap. 8. ver 19 20. For I was a witty Child and had a good Spirit Yea rather being good I came into a Body undefiled The same Author has used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reason in some places where Plato would have used it were he to have said the same thing Thus in chap. 18. ver 15 16. in speaking of the Deliverer of the Israelites he says Thy Almighty Reason descended from Heaven out of thy Royal Throne as a fierce Man of War into the midst of a Land of Destruction and brought thine unfeigned Commandment as a sharp Sword and standing up fill'd all things with Death and it touched the Heaven but it stood upon the Earth In chap. 9. ver 1. he says That God has made all things by his Reason It cannot be alledg'd that he has been the only one of the Jews that has spoke in this manner seeing that Philo who liv'd a little while after Our Saviour is full of the like Expressions as several of the Learned have observed It s known that this Author has so well imitated Plato that he has been call'd the Jewish Plato He believ'd that there was One only Supreme God as all the rest of the Jews do whom he calls TO ON the Being through Excellency But he further acknowledg'd a Divine Nature which he calls ΛΟΓΟΣ the Reason as well as Plato And another whom he calls likewise the Soul of the World His Writings are so full of these manner of speaking that there is no nead of offering * Vid. Defens Fid. Nicen. §. 1. c. 1. §. 16 17. Instances The Jews were of these Opinions when Our Saviour and his Apostles came into the World And this is perhaps the Reason why we find accordingly as it has been observed by several learned Men several Platonick Phrases in the New Testament especially in the Gospel of St. John It 's well known that Amelius the Platonick Philosopher having read the beginning of this Gospel remarked that this Apostle spake like Plato In effect this Philosopher might have said according to his Principles The Reason was in the beginning with God She it is who hath made all things who is Life and the Light of Men c. We find several Passages in Philo like to this This Jewish Philosopher calls Reason the Priest the Mediator between God and Men the Eldest Son of God c. Wherein it is observable that he mixes his Jewish Notions with the manners of Speaking of Plato He has likewise used in one place the term Paraclete * De Vit. Mos p. 521. Edit Gen. Graeco-Lat Intercessor in speaking of the Reason It was necessary said he that the High-Priest who is to offer Sacrifices to the Father of the World should have for Intercessor him of his Sons whose Vertue is the most perfect for to obtain the Pardon of Sins and abundant Graces He had said * Quod Det. Pot. Insid p. 137. that Moses denoted by the Manna and by the Rock of the Desart the same Reason The Prophet says he calls elsewhere this Rock Manna a name which signifies the same thing to wit the Divine Reason the most Ancient of Beings Our Saviour Christ calls himself Paraclete in St. John chap. 14.16 when he promises his Apostles to send them another Paraclete He says likewise that he is the True Bread in opposition to the Manna which could be no more than a Shadow of it And St. Paul says that the Stone of the Desart was Christ 1 Cor. 10.4 These ways of speaking which are found in St. John to be the True Bread the True Vine and which denote that he to whom they are applied is able to produce in Mens Spirits as much Efficacy in another kind of things as the Bread and Wine produce in the Body These ways of speaking I say were particular to the Platonists as has been observed elsewhere We might give several other Examples of Platonick Phrases to be met with in
they sent a Man to kill him who moved with repentance confest to him at the feet of his Bed that they had incited him to commit that Crime the Pardon of which he presently obtained As for the Revenues of the Church Gregory says that having not been able to find any Account of them neither among the Papers of those who had been Bishops of Constantinople before him nor among those to whom the care of gathering them was committed he would not meddle with them and took nothing out of them to avoid giving an account of them Theodosius called at that time a Council at Constantinople either to condemn several Heresies or to settle Gregory Canonically in the Episcopal See of that City But before I relate what past with respect to Gregory it will not be amiss to say something of the Orations he made whilst he was at Constantinople and which are extant Basil Bishop of Caesarea * Vid. Pagi ad An. 378. n. 1. being dead on the First Day of the Year 380 Gregory made an †Orat. 20. Oration in his Praise some time after having not been able to pay that last Duty to his Friend as soon as he could have wished He praises Basil's Ancestors who were Persons of Quality and besides Christians for a long time He says that ‖ Pag. 319. during Maximin's Persecution some of Basil's Ancestors having retired into a Forest of Pontus without any Provision and without Arms to go a Hunting they prayed to God that he would send them some of the Fowls or a little of the Venison which they saw in that Wood and God presently sent 'em a great number of the fattest Stags who seemed to be grieved because they had not called them sooner Gregory delights in that Subject according to the Custom of the Pagan Orators who did the same with respect to the Fables of Paganism The worst of all is that it makes one suspect the other Relations of Gregory 2. Afterwards he gives a short Account of Basil's Life and insists upon every Particular according to his custom with a great deal of Exaggeration many Figures and Moral Observations Speaking of the manner after which he himself had spent his Life he says that he wishes * Pag. 333. his Affairs may better prosper hereafter by the Intercessions of Basil 3. The manner of getting * Pag. ib. Church-Preferments in his time was not more Canonical than the Means which are now-a-days made use of for the same end if we believe Gregory Having said that in other Professions Men raised themselves only by degrees and according to their Capacity he assures That the Chief Dignity was got as much by Crimes as by Vertue and that Episcopal Sees were not for those who deserved them best but for the most Powerful c. No body takes the Name of a Physician or a Painter before he hath studied the Nature of Diseases well mixed his Colours and made several Pictures but a Bishop may be easily found not after he hath been carefully formed but upon the spot as the Fable feigneth That the Giants were no sooner sowed but they sprung out of the Earth We make †The Bishops were then called Saints as now-a-days Lords SAINTS in one day and we exhort to Wisdom those who have not learn'd to be Wise and who have brought nothing to perform well the Episcopal Duties but the Desire of being Bishops 4. Gregory ascribes to Basil ‖ Pag. 340 358. some Monastical Laws and written Prayers We have the former still without any great alteration but the Liturgy which bears his Name hath been very much alter'd since 5. He not only praises his Friend but also makes his Apology against those who accused him of Pride of which notwithstanding he himself accuses him in several places * Pag. 364. and suspected he did not believe the Divinity of the Holy Spirit because he had not stiled him God in his Book Gregory says that Basil did so for fear of exasperating the Hereticks who could not abide that that Title should be bestowed upon the Holy Spirit because the Scripture doth not ascribe it to him but that he had said something equivalent to it which was the same thing since Words do not save us but Things 6. Lastly Having described Basil's Funeral he goes on thus †Pag. 372. He is now in Heaven where he offers as I think Sacrifices for us and prayeth for the People for when he left us he did not altogether forsake us c. He advises me still and chides me in Night-Visions when I depart in something from my Duty At the end of his Oration he addresses himself to him and asks his Help in energick terms as if he heard him though he seemed to doubt whether he was in Heaven that is in the Place of greatest Bliss into which the Antients believed no body went except Martyrs but after the Resurrection as we have already seen by another Passage of Gregory There is some likelyhood that he composed at Constantinople most of the other Orations which are extant which I have not mention'd yet especially those which he made against the Arians wherein he hath been thought to have so well defended the Doctrine of the Council of Nice as well as in his other Writings that for that reason they have given him the Title of Theologue One may read especially his Thirty third Oration and the Four following upon that Subject In order to give an Idaea of those Five Orations I shall observe that the Design of the First is to shew that it doth not belong to All to dispute about Religion and that it ought not to be done before every body neither at all times nor with too great a heat He censures the Hereticks as if they had no regard to any of those things and preaches some common places which all Parties have always equally made use of He complains * Orat. 33. p 535. That they make Saints the very same day they go about it That they chuse Divines as if they had inspired them with Learning and That they make a great many Assemblies of Ignoramus's and Babblers Forasmuch as he knew that some Men can't forbear Disputing he tells 'em to satisfie their Desire that he will give them a large Field in which they may exercise themselves without danger * Ib. p. 536. Philosophize says he about the World or Worlds the Soul Rational Creatures less or more Excellent about the Resurrection the Judgments the Rewards the Sufferings of Christ 'T is not an useless thing to succeed in those Matters as there is no great danger in being mistaken about them Christians have been since of a very different Opinion and 't is certain that one may fall into dangerous Errors and that there hath been real Mistakes about those Articles In the †Orat. 34. Second Oration he comes to the Matter in hand and doth chiefly enlarge to prove
Angels that were in Love with Women Clemens * Pad l. 3. p. 222. Strom. l. 3. p. 450. l. 5. p. 550. says in more than one place that he thought the same thing and most of the Ancient Greek and Latin Fathers have explained so the Beginning of the Sixth Chapter of Genesis Photius cannot blame that Opinion without censuring at the same time all Antiquity but 't is his Custom to treat ill the most Ancient Authors when he finds in them some Opinions that were not received in his time or some Expressions which he doth not think energick enough to express such Thoughts as in his judgment the Antients should have had because 't would have been an Heresie not to think so in his time 7. The Incarnation being a Mystery which we do not comprehend and Clemens's Style not being for the most part very clear he might have exprest himself so as not to be well understood by Photius which is so much the more easie to believe because that Patriarch commonly explains the Thoughts of the Antients agreeably to the Opinions and Ways of Speaking of his time The Writings of the Antients are full of Equivocal Terms which they use in such a sence as they had no more in the following Ages Terms which signifying Spiritual and Obscure Things and very compounded Idea's must necessarily be difficult to understand because they took no care to Define them and make an exact Enumeration of the Idea's which they fixed to them Perhaps it did not so much as come into their Mind that this was very necessary to be well understood At least One may observe that when they endeavour to explain themselves about those Obscure Matters they use Terms as Obscure as the fore-going 8. One may observe an Example of it concerning the Two Reasons mention'd by Photius Those who will carefully read the Second Tome of Origen upon St. John may observe that he establishes a First or Supreme Reason which is Christ's Divinity and many Inferior Reasons which are made according to the Image of the Precedent It might be said in that sence that None but the Second Reasons became Flesh because none but they animate Humane Bodies for although the First was united to the Humane Nature of Christ it did not supply the Place of a Soul So that although Clemens had said what Photius pretends yet he could not be charged with Heresie upon that account But he did not say so as appears by the Passage which Photius himself quotes out of him The Son is called Reason as well as the Paternal Reason but 't is not that which was made Flesh Nor is it the Paternal Reason neither but a Divine Power which is as it were an Emanation of that same Reason which became Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is come into the Hearts of Men. By those Terms The Son we must not understand the Only Begotten Son of God but the Man as it clearly appears by what follows Clemens perhaps call'd him only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because he might have before clearly enough denoted whom he meant by that word Photius who did not well apprehend the Meaning of that Passage might easily mistake the Series of that Discourse As the Jesuite Schottus otherwise a Learned Man was altogether mistaken in the Latin Translation of those Words as one may presently observe by comparing it with mine Lastly We have a Latin Work * In Bibliot Pat. ascribed to Clemens and intituled Commentariola in Primam Canonicam S. Petri in Epistolam Judae Tres Epistolas S. Joannis Apostoli There is indeed several things in those Notes which do not differ from Clemens's Doctrine but we can't know whether they are an entire Translation of part of the Hypotypoles or only some Extracts corrected according to the Interpreter's mind 'T is well known that when the Latins translated some Greek Writings they were very apt to make such Alterations in them as they thought fit as Ruffinus hath been upbraided with it Nay there is no need to look so far for Examples of that ill Custom since we have one with relation to part of Clemens's Hypotyposes of which Cassiodorus speaks thus * Lib. 1. de Just Div. Script Clemens Alexandrinus explained in the Athenian Language the Canonical Epistles that is the First Epistle of St. Peter the First and Second of St. John and that of St. James wherein there is many subtle things but also some unwarily spoken which we have caused to be so translated into Latin as to take away what might give scandal that his Doctrine thus purified might be more safely read Vbi multa quidem subtiliter sed aliqua incautè loquutus est quae nos ita transferri fecimus in Latinum ut exclusis quibusdam offendiculis purificata doctrina ejus securior posset hauriri Clemens also composed Five Tracts which are lost 1. The Rule or Canon of the Church against those that followed the Opinions of the Jews 2. Concerning Easter 3. Concerning III Speaking 4. Some Disputes about Fasting 5. An Exhortation to Patience directed to the Neophytes Having thus made some Particular Remarks upon every one of his Works and some General Ones on that Occasion what remains is only to take notice of Three Things 1. He often cites Suppositious Writings as if they had been acknowledged by every Body as one may observe by that Place of St. Peter's Preaching which I have alledg'd and another of St. Paul which seems to have been taken out of the Book of his Travels upon which Eusebius and St. Jerome may be consulted Which may make one believe that the great Reading of that Learned Man gave him no refined Palate One need not be a great Master of this sort of Learning to perceive that what he cites out of them doth not suit the Style of the Apostles and is not agreeable to their Principles It cannot be doubted but that they believed that the God whom the Jews worshipped was the True God Maker of Heaven and Earth and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ who says so himself Nor can the Jews be charged with having served the Angels the Month and the Moon with any probability and the Reason which the Author of St. Peter's Preaching gives for it is so ridiculous that none but such as will be deceived can be deceived by it 'T is true that some * Huet in Orig. T. 2. p. 212. Learned Men have otherwise explained that Accusation which that Author lays upon them but one may easily see by what follows that he understood it in a more simple manner than they do However that Book being manifestly Supposititious †Ibid. T. 14. in Joan. Origen dealt much more prudently than his Master since being to refute Heracleon a Valentinian who drew some Consequences against the Old Testament from those pretended words of St. Peter he begins with saying That one should enquire whether that Book is truly St. Peter ' s
the same thing The First is more Excellent than the Second and the Second more Excellent than the Third 4thly The Terms which Plotinus uses are worth observing 1. He calls not only Essence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after Plato the Nature of the Being of the Reason and of the Soul of the World but he likewise uses the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matter and says that the Matter of the one is more perfect than that of the other Having pretended that Parmenides had said before Plato that there are Three Principles he expresses himself in these terms Parmenides holds likewise the Opinion of the Three Natures 2. It 's observable that the word Hypostasis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies two things with this Philosopher first the Existence of a thing considered abstractedly and in the second place the thing it self which exists as it 's taken in the Title of this Book of the Three Hypostases which are the Principles of all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Title of the Third Book of the same Enneade of Intelligent Beings 3. As he says That the Reason is the Father of the Soul he says likewise That the Reason begets and makes the Soul For we must observe that in this matter Plato and his Disciples use indifferently the words to Beget to Make to Produce c. and that Begotten and Made is the same thing here in their mouths We need only read Plato's Timoeus 4. Plotinus says That the Father and the Reason are one and the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they coexist and forsake not one another He says that the Supreme Being and whose Essence consists in Existing in a manner wholly particular has begotten by his Nature the Spirit and that he cannot be without him no more than a Luminous Body can be without Light The Spirit on his part whose Essence consists in having perpetually a lively conception of the Being cannot exist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without this They cannot be separated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one from the other because there is nothing between them as there is nothing between the Spirit and the Soul 5. He says That that which is begotten resembles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 its Cause just as the Light resembles the Sun 6. He says That the Spirit is the Image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Being as the Soul is the Image of the Spirit St. Cyril of Alexandria in his Eighth Book against Julian cites a Passage of Porphyry out of his Third Book of the Philosophical History whence it appears that the Platonists disputed among themselves whether there could be more than Three Hypostases in the Divinity Plato saith Porphyry has taught That the Divine Essence may extend it self even to Three Hypostases to wit the Supreme Divinity or the Good it self after it the Creator who is the Second and the Soul of the World which is the Third c. But there are Men who pretend that we must not reckon the very Good or Good it self among the things which he has produced and that being of a perfect Simplicity and incapable of Accidents he has Communion with nothing so that it is by the Spirit that we must begin to reckon the Trinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 However Porphyry's Master whom we have already cited seems * Ennead V. lib. 8. cap. 12. to say that there may be more than Three Hypostases in these remarkable words God has begotten an excellent Being and has brought forth all things in Him This Production has cost him no Pain for pleasing himself in what he begat and finding his Productions good he has retained them all in Himself tempering his Brightness and theirs Those which have there remain'd being more excellent there 's only his only Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jupiter who has appear'd without by whom as by the Supreme Son of the Divinity and as in an Image one may see what the Father is and the Brethren which have remain'd in the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Platonists likewise used in speaking of the Union which they conceiv'd to be between the different Orders of their Divinities the terms of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of different Essence and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Co-essential By the first they denote the different sorts of Beings and by the second what is of the same kind Here 's a Proof taken out of Jamblichus in his Book of the Mysteries of the Egyptians Sect. 1. ch 19. He speaks of the Manner after which the Superior Gods are united to the Inferior according to the Platonick Philosophy The Divinities says he of the Second Order turning themselves towards the First Intellectual Beings and the First giving to the Second the same Essence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the same Power this entertains their Union What we call Union in the things which are of different Kinds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Soul and the Body or which are divers Species 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Material things or which are otherwise divided this Union I say happens to 'em from Superior things and destroys it self at a certain time But the more we elevate our selves to Superior things and to the Identity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the First Beings and in regard of the Species and in regard of the Essence when we ascend from the Parts to the Whole the more we acknowledge the Union 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is Eternal and the more we see what is the Union properly so called and the Model whereon all the rest have been form'd and that it hath about it and in it self the Diversity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Multiplicity Porphyry had ask'd Whether a kind of Being is form'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mixt with our Soul and Divine Inspiration which made the Prophets able to foresee the Future * §. 3. c. 21. Jamblichus answer'd No and gives this Reason for it which is That when One thing is form'd of Two the Whole is of one and the same Species of the same Nature and Co-essential 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that this does not happen in the case proposed by Porphyry One may see hereby the Subtilty with which the Platonists handled these Matters and the Terms they used But we should take notice of two things in endeavouring to form to our selves an Idea of their Sentiments The first That we must not always suppose they had a clear and distinct Knowledge of what they would say themselves and that they saw all the Consequences of their Opinions So that it would be perhaps in vain to endeavour to draw out of their Writings a clear Idea of their Sentiment touching the Three Principles of all things because perhaps they themselves conceiv'd not clearly what they said at least their Style is so different on this occasion from that which is observable in the Passages of their Writings wherein they speak of things which they may
appear'd remote in upholding the Arguments which seem'd to him weak and in giving Praises to such who seem'd to speak well Eusebius of Caesarea long held out against the Use which they * Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. Theod. l. 1. c. 12. would make of the word Consubstantial He offer'd another Confession of Faith wherein it was omitted and wherein he call'd the Son barely God born of God Light of Light Life of Life Only Son First-born of all Creatures Begotten of his Father before all Worlds The Emperor approv'd this Confession of Faith and exhorted the Fathers of the Synod to follow it in adding thereto only the word Consubstantial Afterwards the Confession was read which had been drawn up with this Word the Terms of which have been already recited Anathema's were join'd thereto against those who should use on this Occasion other Terms than those of the Holy Scripture which must be understood with an Exception of those which the Council thought fit to Consecrate This Proposition was particularly condemn'd That the Son existed not before he was begotten Eusebius and others requested That the Terms of the Symbol and Anathema's might be explained 1. It was said That the word Begotten and not Made was used because this last word expresses the Production of Creatures to which the Son has no likeness being of a Substance far more excellent than they begotten by the Father in an incomprehensible manner 2. As for the word Consubstantial it is proper to the Son not in the sence wherein it is taken when we speak of Bodies or Mortal Animals the Son being Consubstantial with the Father neither by a Division of the Divine Substance of which he possesses a part nor by any change of this same Substance The meaning of which is only this That the Son has no Resemblance with the Creatures which he has made but that he is in all things like to his Father by whom he has been begotten or That he is not of another Hypostasis or Substance but of that of the Father 3. Those were condemn'd who said That the Son was not before he was born seeing that he existed before his Corporal Birth and even before his Divine Generation according to Constantine's Argument * These words of Eusebius's Letter are not to be found but in Theodorit Socrates having retrenched them For before said he that he was actually Begotten he was in Power in his Father in a manner Unbegotten the Father having been always Father as he is always King and Saviour and all things in Power being eternally in the same Condition It will perhaps seem that this is pure Arianism and that this is to deny the Eternity of the Son But we must observe that in the style of that time to Exist before the World and to be Eternal is the same thing seeing that to prove his Eternity this Passage is cited * Vid. Ep. Alexandri Ep. Al. supra laudatam In the Beginning was the Word And it sufficed to shew that he was Begotten before there was any Time So that we must not reject these words as Supposititions meerly for this reason And it is so ordinary to find hard Expressions in those who attempt to explain in any sort this incomprehensible Mystery that if one might hence judge of them one would be apt to declare them all Hereticks which is to say to anathemamize the greatest part of the Ancients Besides this †* De. Deret Nicaen Tom. 1. pag. 251. St. Athanasius who openly treats Eusebius as an Arian makes allusion to one part of this Passage and draws thence a Consequence which Eusebius without doubt would not have owned which is That the Arians believed that the Divinity of Jesus Christ did not exist before his Corporal Birth After these Explications Eusebius subscribed as he himself testifies in the Letter above recited ‖ Athanas ibid. although he had refused it the day before The long and formal Opposition which he had made against the word Consubstantial caused it to be suspected that there was want of Sincerity in this Subscription In fine Arius and his Party were anathematized and all their Books condemned and particularly a Poem which Arius had entituled Thalia Most of the Arian Bishops subscribed after Eusebius his Example to this Confession of Faith and the Anathema's after the Explication above-mentioned Yet there were some of 'em who refused at first to sign * Socr. l. 1. c. 1. the principal of which were Eusebius of Nicomedia Theognis of Nice Maris of Calcedon Theonas of Marmarica and Secondus of Ptolemais They were immediately Excommunicated by the Council and were to be sent afterwards as well as Arius into Exile by Constantine The Council wrote a Circular Letter †Ib. Socr. l. 1. c. 9. to the Churches of Egypt denoting to 'em in what sort they had carried themselves in the business of Arius and what had been ordered touching Melece the Schismatical Bishop and the Observation of Easter Constantine wrote also to the Church of Alexandria to assure it that after a full and mature Examination Arius had been condemned by the common Consent He greatly vaunted of the Moderation and Learning of the Bishops making no mention of their Quarrels according to the Custom observed in Publick Acts and such like Occasions where every thing is supprest which may give an ill Opinion of the Decrees of these kinds of Assemblies In another Letter directed to the Bishops and Churches he enjoins the Name of Porphyrus to be given to Arius and his Followers to be called Porphyrians This Porphyry was a famous Platonist who had written against the Christian Religion and whose Books Constantine had caus'd to be burnt Lucas Holstenius has written his Life which is to be found at the end of the Book Of the Abstinence of Animals Constantine design'd to declare hereby Arius an Enemy to the Christian Religion and not in any manner reproach him with being a Platonist touching the Trinity seeing Constantine did not disapprove as we have seen the Sentiments of Plato It 's true the Arians have been upbraided with their too great application to the reading of this Philosopher and other Heathen Authors Revera de Platonis Aristophanis says * Advers Lucif T. 2. p. 142. Ed. Gryph St. Jerom in episcopatum allegentur Quotus enim quisque est qui non apprime in his eruditus sit Accedit ad hoc quod Ariana hoeresis magis cum sapientia seculi facit argumentationum rivos de Aristotelis fontibus mutuatur Thus the Orthodox and Hereticks equally approved the Sentiments of Plato each of them apparently explaining them according to his Hypothesis Constantine further ordered in the same Letter to burn all Arius's Books to the end that not only his pernicious Doctrine be destroyed but that there remain no monument of it to Posterity He likewise declared That if any one concealed any of his Books and did not bring
those of Plato 7. That the History of the Hebrews is confirmed by the Testimony of several Heathen Historians 8thly That the Graecians took their Philosophy from the Barbarians especially from the Jews to whom Plato and the Platonicks owe what they said concerning their Three Principles and several other Doctrines which the Greeks admired 9thly That the Philosophers had an infinite number of different Opinions which may easily be confuted the one by the other as it appears by Eusebius his Essay towards it One may see by this whole Work that he was very well vers'd in Heathen Authors and had taken care in his Study to collect whatever might be of use to prove or confirm the Christian Religion by the Testimony of Philosophers It affords several Fragments of Authors who are lost as Sanchoniathon and several Platonicks out of whom he cites some long Passages 3. The Evangelical Demonstration which contain'd Twenty Books is now reduced to Ten. The Author explains in it the Old Jewish Religion and undertakes to prove by the Prophets the Truth of the Christian Religion But he grounds all his Arguments upon some Mystical or Allegorical Explications of some Places of the Old Testament without being able to prove against those who would have denied it that they ought to be understood so He lends if I may so say his Principles to the Prophets and then fixes to their Terms the Idea's he had of them by virtue of those Principles Thus Book 5. chap. 1. where he explains at large the famous Passage of Solomon concerning Wisdom God hath begotten me before the Mountains he finds in the word to Beget all the Subtilties which the Arians used after the Council of Nice to explain it according to their Mind without openly shocking the Orthodox 4. The Ten Books of the Ecclesiastical History came out after the preceding which are cited in them It begins with Christ and ends in the Year 324 before the Council of Nice met One may complain of Eusebius because he hath incerted several Fables in it as that of Agbarus c. and committed several Faults in Chronology of which I have already said something But one ought to forgive him those Faults because he is the first who hath composed any Work concerning the Christian History for he hath preserved a great number of Fragments of ancient Authors whom we have lost and related their Opinions faithfully enough Besides 't is he chiefly who can give us some light concerning the Canon of the Books of the New Testament He dedicated that Book to Paulinus Bishop of Tyre who hath been rank't among the Prelates who favoured Arius The neatest Greek Edition we have of this Work is that of Robert Stephen in 1544 and the best Translation is that of Valesius which was printed together with the Greek in Columns at Paris and Francfort Yet the Translation of that learned Man is not without Faults I am persuaded that the greatest part of them come from meer Inadvertency but it cannot be doubted that some arise from his understanding the Terms of the Antients according to the Modern Notions as when he renders the words of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria which I before mention'd Duas Personam Vnam esse c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One cannot alledge any place wherein the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what we call now-a-days Persona in Divinis but by supposing that the Antients ought to think as we do and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can signifie only Two Natures in Existence that is which do not differ in Kind as a Man and a Horse but only in Existence or Number as Two Men. This Lucas Holstenius observed in a Discourse which Valesius himself caused to be printed at the end of * Pag. 199 Theodoret Evagrius c. wherein he says that this Place must needs be corrupted either by some Hereticks or Transcribers because he knew not how to reconcile it with the Orthodox Opinions 5. Of the Martyrs of Palestine This Book is to be found next to the Eighth of the Ecclesiastical History 6. The Book against Hierocles was writ against a Judge of Nicomedia who * Vid. Lactant Instit l. 5. c. 2 3 4. in the time of Dioclesian's Persecution had composed two Books entitled Philalethes wherein he compared Jesus Christ to Apollonius Thyaneus Eusebius hath shewed the absurdity of that Comparison by a short Critick of the Eight Books of the Life of that Philosopher written by Philostratus This Hierocles must be distinguish'd from a Philosopher of the same Name who lived almost a hundred years after and wrote a fine Commentary upon the Golden Verses of Pythagoras 7. I have already spoken of Eusebius his Books against Marcellus and of the Ecclesiastical Theology I shall only add here two things The first is that R. M. which are seen in the Title signifie Richard Montagu Bishop of Chichester who first publish'd them The second is of greater moment viz. that Eusebius wrote 'em in anger and not only gives his Adversary no quarter but besides Disputes with him about things that are clear and which himself had proved elsewhere * L. 1. c. 4. Marcellus said That if we ought to tell the truth about Origen it must be acknowledged that he was but just come from the study of Philosophy when he applied himself to the reading of the Scripture and that before he understood it well he betook himself to write sooner than he ought to do because of his great Learning in the Pagan Sciences from whence it is that Philosophy made him wander and that he had writ some things which are not true For Example says Marcellus having his mind full of Plato's Doctrines and the Difference he teaches between the Principles he wrote his Book Of Principles and entitled it so That Title only was sufficient to make one clearly perceive that he took from Plato the first Words of his Work as as well as the Title for he begins thus Those who have believed and those who have been believed c. words taken out of Plato's Gorgias There is nothing truer than what Marcellus says here and all who have read something of Origen will grant it Yet Eusebius answers him in these extremely morose terms Supposing this were true there was no need of calumniating Origen for it since he immediately after adds that Grace and Truth are by Jesus Christ and that Jesus Christ is that Truth What is there in it that 's common to Plato I never heard that Plato wrote a Book of Principles and Origen hath not taught the same thing as Plato concerning those Principles Origen acknowledged only One Principle without Generation and Beginning and above all things who is the Father of an Only Son by whom all things were made One may plainly see that Eusebius made as if he understood not Marcellus or that Anger hinder'd him from understanding him The Bishop of Ancyra meant only this viz. that Origen had
alludes to his several Works Vers 35 c. which he designed or had already composed but perhaps were not yet made publick They all run upon some Subjects of Devotion and part of them are in Lyrick and part in Heroick Verses yet he was not born for Poetry and it doth not appear that he had much Learning He doth very often mistake the Quantity not only of Greek Words the Orthography of which he doth not seem to have well understood but also of Latin Words of which one may find some Lists in his Interpreters He also uses many words of the Latinity of his time and a Style which could only be liked then The noble Facility of the ancient Poets nor so much of Claudian who lived at the same time doth not appear in it and the bottom of his Style is low and prosaick enough though he doth whatever he can to raise it His Heat fails him at every moment One may perceive that Age had lessen'd the Heat of his Fancy and that he could not supply it by the Light of his Mind But if his Poetry doth not please by its Elegancy yet it may be useful because one may learn from it several Opinions and Customs of his time besides some Facts concerning the History of Martyrs as it will appear by the following Examination of some Places of our Poet. I. The Book entitled Hymns for Every Day contains Twelve of them composed as if they were to be sung or recited on several Occasions at Break of Day at one's Rising before and after Meals when they light the Candle when one goes to Bed on a Fast and after Fasting at all times at a Funeral on Christmas-Day and on the Epiphany The Preface which is before those Hymns seems to be rather a General Preface for all the Poems of Prudentius since as I have already observed he alludes therein to all his Works and says that he is resolved to leave for ever his worldly Employments that he might altogether apply himself to write Verses to the Praise of God against Heresies and the Pagan Religion to explain that of Christ and upon the Martyrs and Apostles Those are the Subjects upon which all the Poems of Prudentius run 1. One may observe that that Poet mentions several popular Opinions of the Christians in his time which they took from the Heathens as that which is to be found in the First Hymn Vers 38. wherein he assures us that they said That the Daemons whom the Darknesses of the Night rejoyces withdraw when the Day appears The Pagans believed that the Demi-Gods retired into some Desart Places and wandred in the Night and at Full-Noon as I have observed elsewhere to which the 72 73 and 74 Verses of Callimacus his Hymn entitled The Baths of Pallas may be joined wherein he says that that Goddess bathed herself at the same time that Mount Citheron enjoyed the Rest of Noon What the Latins said concerning their Lemures and Striges is well known 2. There is many Expressions in Prudentius which are very harsh and seem to say much more than he designed For Example * Ib. v. 58. speaking of St. Peter he says Flevit negator denique Ex ore prolapsum nefas Cum Mens maneret Innocens Animusque servaret fidem It seems that he meant no more than this viz. That though St. Peter had sworn that he knew not our Lord yet he kept in his mind the same Sentiments for him which he had before But his words taken in a rigorous sence seem to say that a Man may speak against his Conscience and yet have his Mind free from Guilt as in Euripides's Verse Juravi Lingua Mentam Injuratam gero Those who delight too much in a Figurative Style are liable to the like Expressions Thus St. Cyprian in his Book * Oxon. Ed. 127. de Lapsis speaking of those who were overcome by the violence of Torments says Infirmitas viscerum sensit nec animus sed corpus dolore defecit 'T is not the Mind but the Body that failed We shall see in the Sequel of this Discourse another remarkable Example by which it will appear that Prudentius says more than he means 3. In the Evelenth Hymn to be recited in the Morning †Vers 29. there is a slight Imitation of Horace wherein having said that in the Morning every body betakes himself to his Affairs Prudentius adds Miles Togatus navita Opifex arator institor Illum forensis gloria Hunc triste raptat classicum c. One may see the beginning of the First Satyr of Horace by which it will appear that by Togatus we are to understand a Juris Consult or a Lawyer F. Chamillard understands a Judge by it But what I have said and forensis gloria which follows shew that the Poet means a Person who frequented the Barr to get Glory by Pleading not to do Justice in it This agrees well enough with the Division of the Day which we find in Martial l. 4. Ep. 8. Prima salutantes atque altera distinet Hora Exercet raucos tertia Causidicos In the words of Cicero cited by F. Chamillard Cedant arma togae Toga doth not signifie the Judgments given in time of Peace and hath no relation with Junicature but denotes Eloquence as it appears by the rest of the Verse Concedat Laurea Linguae This is not the only place wherein Criticks will not agree with our Commentator 4. For Example Prudentius in the Third Hymn * Vers 2. to be recited Before Meals calls Christ Verbigena where F. Chamillard doth well observe that according to the Analogy of the Latin Tongue that word signifies Begotten or Born of the Word as Martigena signifies Born of Mars Yet he maintains that this is not Prudentius's meaning because it is contrary to the Faith which teaches us that Christ is the very Word of his Father not a Production of the Father's Word so that he explains Verbigena Begotten Word But as we would not have our Words to be always explained according to the Notions and Terms of the Antients 't is not just that we should make 'em speak as we do unless it be evident that they have really used the same Expressions in the same sence That Rule ought always to be observed but especially when the Question is about an Incomprehensible Subject as on this occasion for indeed whatever Expressions be used it doth not become more Intelligible Besides it appears from another place of Prudentius that by Verbigena he understood Begotten by Speaking Here are his words in * Vers 17. the Eleventh Hymn of the same Book Ex ore quamlibet Patris Sis ortus Verbo Editus Tamen paterno in pectore Sophia callebas priús Although Thou camest out of the Father's Mouth and wast begotten as the Word yet Thou wast before his Wisdom in his Breast Prudentius expresses in those words the Opinion of several Antients who liv'd before the Council
Christians did against the Opinion of Fate He says that if it be true there should be no Laws nor Punishments against Malefactors quos ferrea Fata Cogunt ad facinus inevitabile mergunt Quin velle adigunt pravum insinuantia votum Ne liceat miseris vetitum committere nolle That Unmoveable Fate doth unavoidably force to Sin That it disposes the Will to do Ill so that Men cannot forbear being willing to do what is forbidden 4. The Heathen Orator vaunted much the Institution and Chastity of the Vestales But Prudentius who did not suffer himself to be surprized by fine words when the Question was about Paganism replied * Ver. 1065. That it must be observed that the Vestales were chosen in their Childhood before they came to despise the lawful Bond of Marriage of their own motion and kindled with the love of Virginity and Religion They Consecrate says he their Chastity before the Altars against their Wills and those poor Wretches are deprived of a Pleasure which they take away from them but they have not despised it If they are Chaste as to the Body they are not so as to the Mind They enjoy no Rest in their Beds where an Invisible Wound makes them sigh after the Nuptial Torches The same Argument cannot be made use of against the Christian Nuns of that time who were permitted to Marry if they were not content with Celebacy But some things have happen'd since among a part of Christians by the means whereof we see now-a-days upon the Theater of Christianity its several Parties act the same Scene between themselves which was acted formerly by the Pagans and Christians VII Lastly There are Forty nine Quadrants to be found in the Works of Prudentius upon several Histories of the Old and New Testament which make up a little Book entitled Enchiridion whereby the Style is still less Poetical than that of the other Works of our Poet. THE HISTORY OF PELAGIANISM IN the Fourth Century a vast number of People went to visit the Holy Places in Pulestine which made the Books of Origen to be known in the West where they were unknown before Rufinus amongst others a Priest of Aquileia having lived thirty Years in the East and studied under Evagrius an Origenist not only embraced the Opinions of Origen but being returned into Italy spread them every where by translating several of his Works Pelagius and Celestius learned of him at Rome that Doctrine of which I shall speak hereafter They were both Monks and of Great Britain Celestius was a Scotch-man and Pelagius an English-man The latter's Name was Morgan in the Language of his Countrey that is Born of the Sea or in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Name which he took out of his Native Countrey If we believe * In Proem Dial. cont Pelag. St. Jeram Pelagius was an ignorant Fellow who knew not how to express himself who deserved more to be pitied than envied and Celestius a Solecism-maker But St. Augustine speaks well of their Parts in several Places and indeed it appears by their Fragments which remain in his Works that they did not express themselves so ill as St. Jerom says We have still two Pieces of Pelagius among the Supposititious Writings of this latter whereof one is a Letter to Demetriades and the other is entitled Symboli Explanatio ad Damasum whereas it should be called Professio Fidei ad Innocentium for Pelagius sent it to Innocent This last Piece is also to be found in Baronius and in the First Volume of the Councils of Cologne in 1606. Pelagius made a long stay at Rome where he got a great Reputation by his Works and Conduct Hence it is that Augustin Bishop of Hippo praised him and wrote a very obliging Letter to him before he fell a Disputing with him He calls him in his Book De Peccatorum Meritis †Cap. 1 3. Vir ut audio sanctus nec parvo profectu Christianus bonus ac praedicandus Vir As I hear says he he is a Holy Man and very much improved in Piety a Good Man and worthy of Praise Petavius in his Book * Dogm Theol. T. 3. p. 586. De Pelagianorum Semi-Pelagianorum Dogmatum Historia observes that St. Augustin wrote the Book in which he speaks so advantageously of Pelagius after the Condemnation of Celestius in the Council of Carthage in 412. From whence he concludes that St. Chrysostom doth not mention the same Pelagius in his Fourth Letter wherein he laments the Fall of a Monk of the same Name 'T is not more likely that Pelagius the Hermit to whom St. Isidorus of Damietto wrote †Lib. 1. Ep. 314. sharp Censures was the same whose History I write and whose Life was always unblameable as it appears by St. Augustin's Testimony Rome having been taken by the Goths in the Year 410 ‖ Vid. Vsser Brit. Eccl. Antiq. c. 9. p. 16. Pelagius who was there left it and sailed into Africa but he did not stay there having presently set out for the East In the mean time Celestius his Disciple stay'd at Carthage and aspired to be Priest of that Church but because he made no scruple to maintain the Opinions of his Master he was accused by Paulinus a Deacon of the same Church in a Council wherein Aurelius Bishop of Carthage presided in the before-mentioned Year Celestius was Condemned and Excommunicated as having maintained these Seven Propositions 1. That Adam was created a Mortal Man and would have died whether he had sinned or not 2. That Adam's Sin had prejudiced none but himself not all Mankind 3. That the Law brought Men to the Heavenly Kingdom as well as the Gospel 4. That before the Coming of Jesus Christ Men were without Sin 5. That New-born Children are in the same Condition in which Adam was before his Fall 6. That all Men do not die through the Death and Prevarication of Adam as all Men do not rise through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ 7. That Man is without Sin and may easily obey God's Commands if He pleases Celestius answered all those Heads but we have only some Fragments of his Answers in St. Augustine's Book that is to say we have no other Witnesses of his Doctrine but his Adversaries who took no great care to propose their Accusations clearly and to apprehend well of the Opinions of those whom they accused as it appears by the Obscurity of the before mention'd Heads * Aug. de Pecc Orig. c. 3. Celestius said among other things that as for what concerns the Propagation of Sin He had heard many Catholick Priests and especially Rufinus deny it He presented a Request to the Council wherein he consest that Children were Redeemed by Baptism But he was Condemned notwithstanding and being obliged to leave Africa he went into Sicily where he wrote some Books in his Vindication From thence some short Questions were sent to St. Augustine which Celestius
prevented by Death We have Two Books of his with the Two Books of Julian which he confutes printed at Paris by the care of Claudius Menard in the Year 1616. Julian exprest his Mind boldly in those Books and seems by his giving the Adversaries of Pelagius ill Words to have been willing to take his revenge of the severe Edicts which they had obtained against him But his Conduct proved prejudicial to him seeing Celestinus Bishop of Rome caused him to be banished out of Italy together with Florus Orentius Fabius and all the Bishops of the same Party It appears notwithstanding that Pelagianism spread it self maugre its Opposers seeing the Emperor Valentinian publish'd an Edict at Aquileia in the Year 425 to drive it from the Gauls by which he order'd Patroclus Bishop of Arles to go and see several Bishops who followed the Opinions of Pelagius and to let 'em know that if they did not retract their Errors within Twenty Days allowed them to deliberate about it they should be banisht from the Gauls and deprived of their Bishopricks Joaunes Cassianus a Scythian by Origin whom some will have to be an Athenian others a Roman and others to be born in the Gauls who had been Deacon of St. Chrysostome and Ordained a Priest by Innocent I. having retired to Marseilles betook himself to write some Books then by which softening a little the Opinions of Pelagius whom he otherwise condemn'd as a Heretick he gave birth to those Opinions which went since under the Name of Semi-Pelagianism His Opinions may be seen in his Collationes or Conferences which St. Prosper confuted and which he maintained to contain meer Pelagianism * Petav. lib. Laud. c. 7. Here 's in a few words what his Opinions may be reduced to 1. The Semi-Pelagians confest that Men are born corrupted and cannot free themselves from that Corruption but by the help of Grace which is notwithstanding prevented by some Motion of the Will as by a good Desire whence it is that they said Meum est velle credere Dei autem gratiae est adjuvare To be willing to believe depends on me but 't is the part of God's Grace to help me God in their Opinion expects those First Motions from us and then gives us his Grace 2. That God invites All Men by his Grace but that it depends upon Mens freedom to embrace or reject it 3. That God caused the Gospel to be preached to the Nations which he foresaw should embrace it and would not have it to be preached to the Nations which he foresaw should reject it 4. That although he would have all Men to be saved yet he had only elected to Salvation those whom he foresaw should persevere in Faith and Good Works 5. That there was no particular Grace absolutely necessary to Salvation which God gave only to a certain number of Men and that Men could lose all the Graces they had received 6. That among little Children who died in that Age God permitted that those only should be Baptized who according to God's Fore-knowledge would have been Pious Men if they had liv'd and on the contrary that those who were to be Wicked if they had come to a more advanced Age were excluded from Baptism by Providence 7. The Semi-Pelagians were also accused of making Grace altogether External so that in their Opinion it consisted only in the Preaching of the Gospel But some of them maintained that there was also an Inward Grace which Pelagius himself did not altogether reject Some others confest besides that there is a Preventing Grace Thus it seems that the Difference between their Opinions and those of Pelagius consisted in their owning that Men are born in some sort corrupted and in their insisting more upon the Necessity of Grace at least in Words Although the Difference is not very great yet they Anathematized Pelagius Which perhaps they did supposing that Pelagius maintained all the Opinions condemned by the Councils of Africa St. Augustine accuses them of making the whole Grace of God to consist in Instruction which concerns only the Understanding whereas he makes it to consist in a Particular and Inward Working of the Holy Ghost which unavoidably determines us to Good and that Determination is not the Effect of the Light we have The other Opinions of that Father either contrary to the Doctrine of Pelagius or that of the Semi-Pelagians are well known One may learn them especially in his Books concerning Predestination and Perseverance which he wrote at the Desire of St. Prosper against the Semi-Pelagians and in the Works of this latter To return to the History 't is said that in the Year 429 one Agricola Son of Severianus a Pelagian Bishop brought Pelagianism into England but St. German Bishop of Auxerre was sent thither by Pope Celestinus or the Bishops of the Gauls and soon extirpated it Many Miracles are ascribed to him in that Journey and whilst he staid in England which may be read in Bishop Vsher But if what * Hist Scot. lib. 8. Hector Boetius a Scotch Historian who liv'd in the beginning of the last Century says be true he used a Method which is not less efficacious for the extirpating of Heresie 't is this the Pelagians who would not retract their Errors were burnt by the care of the Magistrates But whilst St. German was purifying England the Seeds of Pelagianism which Cassianus had spread among the Monks of Marseilles and in Gallia Narbonensis made it grow in France St. Prosper and Hilary wrote to St. Augustine about it and let him know that many Clergy-men in the Gauls look'd upon his Opinions as dangerous Novelties St. Augustine answered their Objections in the Books which I have just now mentioned But the Toleration which Hilary Bishop of Arles and Maximus Bishop of Riez granted the Semi-Pelagians hindred every body from molesting them though they shewed a great Aversion to the Doctrine of St. Augustine Julian and the other Bishops who were banish'd as I have said from Italy went to Constantinople where they importun'd the Emperor to be re-establish'd but because they were accused of Heresie he would grant 'em nothing without knowing the Reasons for which they were expell'd Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople wrote to Celestinus about it who returned him a very sharp Answer and as if it had not been lawful to enquire for the Reasons of their Condemnation upbraiding him at the same time with his private Opinions His Letter is dated the 12th of August in the Year 430. St. Augustine died about that time whose Encomium's may be found in Bishop Vsher who approves the Praises bestowed upon him by Fulgentius in his Second Book Of the Truth of Predestination wherein he calls him an Inspired Man A little while after his Death the Letters of Theodosius who ' call'd him to the Council of Ephesus came to Africa from whence some Bishops were sent to it That Council made up of Two hundred and ten Bishops