flagitious Men in the World I am of opinion we ought to answer that 't is not to be wondred at if a counterfeit Apostle belies the true ones This Crimination of the true Apostles is in the 5 th Chapter of the alledged Epistle The more learned and impartial Criticks freely observe concerning this Epistle that 't is full of strained and dull Allegories extravagant and incongruous Explications of Scripture and abundance of silly and notorious Fables concerning Animals And what all judicious Men think of the Epistle is that it is indeed very antient being quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen but that it was forged about the beginning of the 2 d Century or the 2 d Century being well advanced when also the Gospels of St. Thomas St. Peter St. Matthias the Acts of St. Andrew St. John and other Apostles were devised and published as Eusebiue witnesses H. E. l. 3. c. 25. But lest this Epistle should be thought to be of somewhat the more Credit because 't is barely quoted by Clemens and Origen the Reader may take notice that Clemens cites also other counterfeit Works of the Apostles as particularly the Revelation of St. Peter as has been noted by Eusebius H. E. l. 6. c. 14. And nothing is more common with Origen than to quote such supposititious Writings as for Instance the Book of Enoch the Revelation of St. Paul the Doctrine of St. Peter and many more concerning which Citations the Reader may see what Mr. du Pin has observed at large Cent. 3. p. 113. Dr. Bull 's next approved Father is the great either Prophet or Impostor Hermas in his Book called the Pastor or Shepherd We grant that St. Paul mentions one Hermas Rom. 16.14 and we doubt not that the Author of the Shepherd would be understood to be that Hormas for he makes himself contemporary with Clemens Romanus mentioned also by St. Paul Phil. 4.3 Vision 2 d. Chap. 4. The Shepherd of Hermas is distinguished into 3 Books whereof the first contains 4 Visions the second 12 Commands the third 10 Similitudes but both the Commands and Similitudes may be called Visions and Prophecies because they are Representations and Charges made to him by Angels The Scene of these Visions is Arcadia and that we may be assured that this Author would be taken for a Prophet and would have his Book pass for a Divine Revelation he introduces the Angel in his 2 d Vision Chap. 4. as commanding him that he should prepare 3 Copies of these Visions one for Clement then Bishop of Rome to be sent by him to all the Churches another for Grapte who should instruct out of it the Widows and their Children the third Hermas himself was to read to the Presbyters of the City of Rome This is the Book and Author in which Dr. Bull finds or thinks he finds some Passages in favour of our Saviour's Divinity as I said at first we must carefully examine what is the true Character of this Work and Writer By what has been said it is evident to every one that this pretended Hermas either was a Prophet or an Impostor there is no Middle between these two when the Person pretends to Visions to Conferences with Angels and such like extraordinary things That the pretended Hermas was not a Prophet is certain to me by these Arguments 1. He owns in the third Command that he was a most egregious and common Liar he saith expresly that he scarce ever spake a true Word in his whole Life but always lived in Dissimulation and that to all Men. He weeps hereupon and doubts whether he can be saved but his Angel assures him that if for the time to come he will leave off his Lying he may attain to Blessedness He that was so addicted to lying 't is no wonder that he has counterfeited also Visions and Colloquies with Angels or that to gain Credit to his Chimeras and Follies he father'd them on Hermas an Apostolical Man and Friend of St. Paul as others before him had laid their spurious Off-springs to the Apostles themselves But 2. Some of his Celestial Visions contain manifest Falshoods particularly he maketh his Angel to tell him that the whole World is made up of twelve Nations Simil. 9. Chap. 17. Being a Person altogether ignorant of secular Learning as appears in all his three Books 't was almost impossible but that in his feigned Conferences with Angels he should sometimes make them to speak divers things both false and absurd 3. To add no more on this Trifler he has been judged to be no Prophet by the whole Catholick Church in that his Book is not reckoned among the Canonical Books of Scripture were it a real Revelation from God by the Ministry of Angels as the Author pretends and so esteemed by the Catholick Church it must have been put among the Canonical Books It is true when it first appeared it imposed on some Churches by the Boldness of its Pretence and therefore was read in those Churches as other genuine Parts of Scripture were but even then very many of the more Judicious rejected it and as the Church began to fill with learned and able Persons it was not only every where laid aside but censured as both false and foolish Of so many of the Antients as condemned it we need only take notice of Eusebius who speaking of the Books used by Christians whether privately or in publick says Some Books are received by common Consent of all others are of questioned and doubtful Authority and finally others are supposititious and counterfeit of which last kind saith he are the Acts of Paul the Revelation of Peter the Shepherd of Hermas and the pretended Epistle of Barnabas Euseb H. E. l. 3. c. 25. Dr. Bull 's third Author is Ignatius but neither is this Writer a whit better or honester than the pretended Barnabas or the counterfeit Hermas I do not mean to deny that we have still the Epistles that are quoted by the Antients Origen and Eusebius under the Name of Ignatius but this I affirm that they were forged under Ignatius his Name about the time that so many other Impostures were published under the Names of Aposiles and of Apostolical Men of which the Learned know there were almost an infinite Number Let us see first what the Criticks of the contrary Perswasion have to alledg for the Epistles of Ignatius we may hear Mr. Du Pin for them all because he has written last and more largely than any other He observes that St. Polycarp being thereto desired by the Philippians sent them the Epistles of Ignatius to which he also prefixed an Epistle of his own directed to the same Philippians Well we acknowledg that Polycarp writing to the Philippians tells them towards the Close of his Epistle that he had sent them according to their Desire the Epistles of Ignatius that had by any means come to his Knowledg or Hand He adds that in these Epistles Ignatius treats of Faith and Patience
Justin Martyr who saith himself in his first Apology that he presented his Apology in the Year 150. The Epistles of Barnabas and Ignatius and the Prophecies and Visions of Hermas were not it should seem yet come out of the Mint or were so well known to be Impostures that no Body durst to alledg them in these Controversies The Question between Dr. Bull and the present Unitarians is concerning the Fathers and Monuments of the Apostolick Succession whether these held our Saviour's Pre-existence and Divinity Eusebius answers us out of a laudable Author that Justin Martyr opposed our Doctrine that is he giveth up to us the whole Apostolick Succession which is as much as the Socinians ever claimed As to the Hymns or Psalms of the Brethren which he saith spoke of Christ as the WORD of God and attributed to him Divinity 't is plain that he spoke rashly and at adventures when he added they were composed by the Brethren from the very first for seeing the Authors of them were unknown so also of necessity must their Date Is doubt not these are the Psalms in Honour of Christ which were put down in the Patriarchal Church of Antioch under this Censure that in very deed they were novel Compositions by later Men and containing some dangerous Strains As we learn from a Letter of the Council at Anticch apud Euseb H. E. l. 7. c. 30. Having said what was necessary concerning the Apostolick Fathers I might now proceed immediately to the Primitive Fathers so called to distinguish them from the Fathers that lived after the Nicene Council or the Year 325 who are simply called Fathers But because I would have nothing else to do in the 2 d and 3 d Parts of this Answer to Dr. Bull but only to examine and discuss his impertinent and most fraudulent Citations out of the Fathers and to oppose to them the certain and clear Testimonies of the same and other Fathers therefore here I will consider the two Passages in Dr. Bull 's Defence of the Nicene Council which in my opinion are the only Parts of his Book that needed to be at all remarked on by the Socinians The first is concerning the Grounds on which Justin Martyr and the following Fathers built their new Doctrine of our Saviour's Pre-existence and that he was tho a Ministerial and Subordinate yet an Agent in the Creation of all things The other is whether the Explication of the Trinity or how three Divine coeternal co-equal Persons and Spirits can be but one God given by Dr. Bull as out of the Fathers be not an undeniable unavoidable Tritheism Of the Grounds on which Justin Martyr and the following Fathers built their Doctrine of our Saviour's Pre-existence and that he is a Ministerial Creator AFter Dr. Bull had quoted some Passages of the Fathers wherein they say it was the Divine WORD who appeared so often to the Patriarchs as to Adam Abraham Jacob Moses He takes notice also that some learned Men of the Moderns at p. 20. he calls them viri quidam doctrissimi deride these Citations as mere Dreams of the good Fathers and hold it for a certain Truth that it was only an Angel who appeared so often and on so many Occasions to the Patriarchs but the Angel say they is called Jehovah and God because on those Occasions he represented the Person and Authority of God He notes again that others may object hereupon if the Fathers were mistaken in the Ground on which they did build their Supposition of our Saviour's Pre-existence 't is but too probable that they have erred also in the Supposition it self namely that the Lord Christ did pre-exist or had a Being before he was born of the Virgin Mary He answers to the several Arguments of the viri quidam doctissimi and I intend here to examine his Answers 1. They argue that indeed it is said at Exod. 3.4 God called to Moses out of the midst of the Bush but it is owned in the preceding 2 d Verse that it was indeed an Angel of the Lord that appeared to Moses in a Flame of Fire in the midst of the Bush and St. Stephen also assures us Acts 7.30 There appeared to Moses an Angel of the Lord in a Flame of Fire in the midst of a Bush Dr. Bull replies 1 st The Divine WORD who is the true God might be called here an Angel because he appeared in such manner as Angels were wont to appear 2 dly Some of the Fathers said that it was an Angel that appeared in the Bush but the Divine WORD was in the Angel and it was God in the Angel that spoke to Moses these Words I am the God of thy Fathers 3 dly 'T is an absurd nay horrible Opinion to think or maintain that the Angels ever as it were acted the Person and part of God by assuming his incommunicable Name Jehovah or his Person Authority and Attributes He saith it was never heard of that an Ambassador in delivering the Message or Commands of his Master took on him the Person and Stile of his Master but all Ambassadors say only thus saith my Master Now in answer to these Elusions first Mr. Bull has but imperfectly reported the Argument of those learned Men to whom he endeavours to answer For they not only alledg that the Person who is called Jehovah at Exod. 3.4 is declared at ver 2. of the same Chapter and by St. Stephen at Acts 7.30 to be only an Angel therefore called Jehovah and God because he represented the Person and Authority of God but they prove this by Examples and by very cogent Reasons Moses tells the Israelites from God Exod. 23.20 I send an Angel before thee in the way to bring thee into the Place that I have prepared Beware of him obey his Voice provoke him not for he will not pardon your Transgressions for my Name is in him Who sees not here that the Meaning is the Angel being to represent my Person and to exercise my Authority therefore my Name is in him or therefore he is called by my Name even Jehovah or the LORD which is the Name by which this Angel is all along called in the following History set down in the subsequent Chapters and Books of Moses Again when it is said at Gen. 7.16 that Noah and his Sons and the Creatures that were to be preserved being entred into the Ark the LORD Heb. Jehovah shut them in and when the Angel that wrestled with Jacob is called Gen. 32.30 God is there not an absolute necessity of saying that these Angels had the Names Jebovah and God given to them on the account that they were heavenly Messengers that represented the Person of God For is it congruous to say God shut the Door and God wrestling with Jacob prevailed not against him In a word the viri doctissimi show first that 't is expresly said concerning a mere Angel that the Name of God was in him And next that very often the
in the Nicene Council as he undertakes to prove and thinks he has proved yet his Performance amounts to no more but this that of the Writers or Fathers who preceded the Nicene Council about 20 were for the Divinity of our Saviour and more than 200 against it II. The Characters of the Fathers and their Works more particularly of St. Barnabas Hermas and Ignatius WHEN a Man appeals to the Judgment and Authority of any sort of Writers the first thing to be considered is what is the Character of those Writers and their Writings Were the Writers skilful in that sort of Learning of which they are called to be Judges Are the Works or Writings that are imputed to them certainly genuine really and undoubtedly theirs If so yet have they not been corrupted by notorious Additions or Detractions so that 't is questioned by indifferent and impartial Persons what was written by the Author and what by the Interpolator Farther whereas Dr. Bull 's Book is concerning the Faith of the Nicene Fathers that it agreed perfectly with the Faith of the Fathers who flourished and wrote before that Council it will be another necessary Question what was the Faith of the Nicene Fathers either concerning the Divinity of our Saviour or concerning the pretended Trinity Lastly Dr. Bull has indeed given us his Opinion concerning the Faith of the Ante-nicene Fathers but what say other famous Criticks who tho they were zealous Trinitarians yet being more sincere and impartial it may be they grant that the Doctrine of the Ante-nicene Writers of the Church was no less than diametrically contrary to the Nicene Faith as well as to the Reform that has been made of that Faith by the Divines of the Schools I shall resolve all these Questions in proper Places at present to the first Question What is the true Character of these Writers to whom Dr. Bull has appealed He answers concerning one that he is doctissimus most learned of another that he is peritissimus most able and not to transcribe all his Flowers on these Fathers he dubs them all Doctores probati approved Doctors which is the least he ever says of them It is in some degree excusable because it may be imputed to his Zeal or his Art that he vends all his Geese for Swans but sure the very silliest Idolaters of his weak Book will hardly approve of it that he divides even all the Divine Attributes too among these his supposed Friends For one he calls sanctissimus most holy another is beatissimus most blessed a third is optimus most gracious and a fourth maximus the most high There is hardly a Page of his Book but you meet with one or more of these Extravagancies I suppose he tarried longer at School than is ordinary and so being an old Declamer he could never since speak but only in the superlative Degree no not when it borders on Blasphemy it self But tho it is true that few I believe none but Dr. Bull have spoke or thought of the remaining Ante-nicene Fathers at this wild rate yet the Opinion that Men generally have of these Authors is that they were certain most grave learned sage and experienced Divines and called Fathers not more for their Antiquity than for their profound Judgment and perfect Knowledg in all the Parts of the Christian Religion Because the Heads and Patrons of Sects affect to quote the Fathers and if possible to fill their Margin with References to Places in the Fathers it is therefore almost universally supposed that so great Deference has not been paid to them without most just Cause for it 'T is in the Father that the Papist finds the whole Doctrine of the Council of Trent in the Fathers the Lutheran finds also his Articles the Calvinist and the Church of England theirs The very Presbyterians Anabaptists and Antinomians are now turned Father-mongers and in the Fathers find their Discipline and Doctrine no less than their Opposers find also theirs In short there is such a scuffling for the Fathers by all Parties that 't is no wonder if Persons who have not themselves read 'em have a very raised and noble Idea of these Writers But all the Glory of the Fathers I speak of the Ante-nicene Fathers and except also Origen out of the Number is wholly due to the Vanity of modern learned Men who quote these Books not because indeed they value them but because being antient Monuments known to few and understood by fewer he seems a great learned Man who can drop Sentences out of these antique Books But let us begin to see what indeed they were The first of the Fathers and their Writings alledged by Dr. Bull is an Epistle if it please Heaven of St. Barnabas the Apostle I confess that St. Barnabas the Evangelist and Coadjutor of St. Paul is also honoured with the Title of an Apostle Acts 14.4 but that he left behind him an Epistle I shall desire a better Proof than I have yet seen What Dr. Bull says of him is Our most learned Hammond and the most high Vossius believe this Epistle was written by St. Barnabas chiefly for this Reason because it is cited under the Name of Barnabas by Clemens Alexandrinue Origen and othe Antients Nor can those of the adverse Party alledg any thing to the contrary but only this that the Author of this Epistle expounds too mystically some Passages of the Old Testament No no other Reason to be alledged why this Epistle was not written by the Evangelist Barnabas Does he not know that divers Criticks have observed that if the Antients had really believed that St. Barnabas the Companion Fellow-Evangelist and Fellow-Apostle of St. Paul had wrote this Epistle they would undoubtedly have reckoned it among the Canonical Books of Scripture as St. Paul's Epistles are And has not Eusebius informed us why this Epistle was not counted Canonical when he says Some Books are received as Holy Scripture by the common Consent of all namely the four Gospels the Acts the Epistles of St. Paul the first Epistle of St. John the first of St. Peter and if you will the Revelation of St. John some other Books are of questioned and doubtful Authority as the Epistles of James and Jude the second of St. Peter the second and thrid of St. John but these following are counterfeit pieces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Acts of Paul the Revelation of Peter the pretended Epistle of Barnabas c. these are Counterfeits Dr. Bull may consider at his leisure of what Weight the Judgment of his most learned Hammond and the most high Vossius may be when put into the Scale against Eusebius speaking not his own but the Sense of the Primitive Church And when his Hand is in let him tell us what might be in the Mind of the pretended Barnabas as Eusebius calls him to scandalize all the Apostles by saying that before they were called to be Apostles they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most
and all other things that tend to Edification in Christ But here two Doubts arise First whether the Epistles that we now have were the same that are intended in the Epistle of Polycarp or so much as directed to the same Persons or Churches The Reason of the doubt is the Epistles that we now have treat of nothing less than Faith and Patience nay they treat not of Faith and Patience at all much less if it could be are they a Collection of all things that tend to Edification in Christ they are very far from being a kind of Summary of the Christian Doctrine either in Faith or Morals They are Letters of Compliment and Respect not of Instruction or Exhortation The other Doubt is of what Authority and Credit is this Epistle of Polycarp on which the Credit of the Epistles of Ignatius wholly depend Mr. Du Pin answers It is quoted by St. Ireneus Supposing now what Mr. Du Pin has not proved nor can prove that the Epistle of Polycarp intended by Ireneus is in part that Epistle of Polycarp which we now have because both the one and the other are directed to the Philippians I say supposing this yet divers learned Criticks are of opinion that the genuine Epistle written by the true Polycarp and which Ireneus intends concludes with the 12 th Chapter where he solemnly gives them his valedictory Blessing so that the following Chapters which speak of Ignatius his Epistles and other Matters have probably been added by him whoever he was who contrived Epistles in the Name of Ignatius No says Mr. du Pin nor can that be for Ireneus who praises that Epistle of Polycarp quotes also certain Words which are found in the very Epistles of Ignatius But I do not know that Ireneus quotes any Epistle of Ignatius or so much as names the Man but only repeats a Saying of a certain Christian Martyr which Saying the Forger of the Epistles of Ignatius thought fit to insert into those Epistles which himself wrote in the Name and Person of Ignatius In short I say Eusebius and before him Origen owned the present Epistles of Ignatius because they considered the Matter but lightly as not being any way concerned to disprove them And Ireneus older than they quotes an Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians as also elsewhere some Words that are now found in an Epistle imputed to Ignatius but supposing that we now have that Epistle of Polycarp yet it seems likely that the Epistle did then conclude with the 12 th Chapter without any mention of the Epistles of Ignatius and we cannot be assured that Ireneus quotes the Words of one of the Epistles of Ignatius rather than that the Forger of those Epistles borrowed those Words from Ireneus If it be said but why all this Suspiciousness it will be hard to prove any Matter of Fact of remote Ages if such close and strict Proofs be required I answer there is too much Cause to start these Doubts and Suspicions For we have the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians as also the Epistles of Ignatius and the Martyrdoms of Ignatius and Polycarp whereof the latter is contained in an Epistle pretended to be written by the Church of Smyrna with this Advertisement at the end of them This Epistle concerning the Martyrdom of Polycarp was transcribed by Cains from the Copy of Ireneus who was a Disciple of Polycarp And I Socrates transcribed it at Corinth from the Copy of Caius After which I Pionius wrote it from the Copy before-mentioned having searched it out by the Revelation of Polycarp who directed me to it having gathered these things together now almost corrupted by Time that Jesus Christ may also gather me together with his Elect ones Here then is an Epistle namely the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna concerning the Martyrdom of Polycarp and as the Advertisement saith other things that were almost corrupted thorow Process of Time namely a Relation of the Martyrdom of Ignatius and seven Epistles of Ignatius all these miraculously discovered to Pionius the good by Polycarp after his Death It should seem Polycarp could not rest even in Rest nor be blessed in Blessedness till he had broke from the Abodes of Bliss and appeared to honest Pionius to make known to him where these Golden Remains were to be found If we should understand the Advertisement so as saying that the Epistle concerning Polycarp's Martyrdom came to Pionius by Revelation and the other Pieces and Epistles were collected by the proper Industry of Pionius yet thus the whole Collection depends on the Credit of Pionius who with most I doubt has utterly ruined his Credit as a Publisher of antient Monuments by his Pretence that at least part of them are by Revelation The Clowns will certainly cry out Away with Impostors let Pionius take his Bandle to himself both his own Collection and Polycarp's Revelation for coming from him we must needs believe them to be true alike Could not this Knave will they say be content to personate first the Church of Smyrna in a most palpable Fiction then the Assistants at the Martyrdom of Ignatius and finally Ignatius himself but he must seek too to confirm his counterfeit Wares by Revelations from Heaven by Visions and Apparitions of departed Saints We demand Authorities out of the Antients concerning the pretended Divinity of our Saviour from Writings and Monuments that are verified by some good humane Testimony our Opposers answer us out of Books which some of their Fraternity received by Apparitions by Revelations from the Dead but if once we allow of such Proofs what end will there be of Fictions The departed Saints were first called up to bear witness to certain Epistles and Books but in the next Age when the first Cheat had taken with many they were made to witness to their Bones and Reliques in order to their being inshrined and worshipped this last sort of Apparitions were every whit as true as the first They will prove they say their consubstantial co-eternal Trinity not only from the Antenicene Fathers but from the Apostolical Fathers that is the Fathers that had Converse with the very Apostles and flourished some of them to the Year 150 but when these Authors are produced they are Barnabas the Apostle the Prophet Hermas the Martyrdoms and Epistles of Polycarp and Ignatius whereof the two former we have seen are rejected as spurious by the Catholick Church the other are grounded on Visions and Apparitions to one Pionius But let us consider the Contents of these pretious Pieces the Pionian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Martyidom of Polycarp saith That when the Fire began to blaze to a great height the Flame making an Arch like the Sail of a Ship against a full Wind incompass'd the Martyr's Body at a distance without hurting it while from his Body proceeded a Smell like to Frankincense or some other rich Spices The first of these Miracles would make the Boys wonder and shout
and by himself as the Athanasian Creed speaks a most perfect God are but one God is so monstrous a Paradox that we might justly wonder such a contradictory and impossible Doctrine being unhappily got abroad was not immediately hissed again into the Hole from whence the Chimera first sallied did we not know that the Propagation and Conservation of this Affront to common Sense and to all the Principles of Knowledg and Silence was the Work and Effect of such penal Laws as would equally have restored the whole Body and System of Paganism While the Question about the Trinity was disputed only by Argument and Authorities of Holy Scripture the Proverb was all the World is against Athanasius and Athanasius is against all the World And in Constantinople it self the then capital City of the whole Roman Empire the Trinitarian Conventicle was so thin that it had more Benches than Men to fit on them and their Preacher was forced to comfort his almost empty Fold with such Reflections as these The Unitaries says he have the Churches but we we Trinitarians are the Temples of God they have the People but the Angels are with us my Flock indeed is little I easily tell all my Sheep but they hear my Voice they follow me and will not follow Strangers Greg. Nazianz. Serm. 35. against the Arians But the Empire falling at length to a Prince who was a bigotted Trinitarian he applied the Imperial Authority and the Awe of his Armies which comfilied for the most part of Souldiers and Officers who had been born bred and continued Pagans to establish Trinitarianism by Terrors and Force He 't was Theodosius and his Successors began with taking the Churches 〈◊〉 in all Unitarians by military Force then they were prohibited to hold their Assemblies Conventicles they were now called within the Preciucts of Cities or Towns Next he called general Councils but admitted none to Session or Vote but Trinitarians to whose Creeds and Canons all that stood for any the very least Church-Preferment must subscribe before they were admitted to their Places Afterwards all Disputes against the Decisions of these Councils were forbid to all without Exception to Churchmen and military Officers on pain of Deposition to Lay-men if they were free under the Penalty of Banishment to Servants under pain of corporal Chastisement and that too saith the Law after the severest manner They proceeded farther they required all Persons to deliver up all Heretical Books that they might be publickly burnt denouncing horrible Punishments to such as should presume to hide or conceal any such Books While the Civil Power acted his Part in this outragious manner the Ecclesiasticks were as industrious another way the Underlings of them sought the Favour of their Superiours by turning Informers against the Hereticks and their Assemblies others that could read and write took upon them the corrupting or as they then spoke the correcting the Bibles adding and leaving out as themselves pleased Nor would they have left to us any Remain of genuine Christianity or suffer'd a single Unitarian to escape their Barbarities but that their Divisions concerning their own Doctrine their own Disputes de Asini umbrâ diverted often their Rage and Treachery from the Scriptures and the Unitaries to the Members of their own Party and Communion Dares Dr. Bull or any other deny any thing of this when they do this and much more shall be proved upon them from the most allowed of their own Historians and from the Codes which contain the Imperial Constitutions We may say then that Trinitarianism is not so much a Religion as the Law of the Bizantine or Constantinopolitan Emperors it was first introduced by military Force then confirmed by Edicts of the Arbitrary Emperors of Constantinople Well but when Folly and Impiety are once establish'd by Law and are the only way to Preferment there will never want a great Number who will court the Favour of the Government by endeavouring to represent the current Doctrine of the Times as possible nay as reasonable and agreeable to Scripture and from hence came the Explications of the Trinity by the Parasites of those times whom now in regard of their Antiquity we call the Fathers These Explications were various and contrary to one another Dr. Bull has made choice of the most tolerable and passable Accounts given by the Fathers and tho he has patched up one Hypothesis or Explication out of many and divers I will be content to take it as he gives it He represents it as the ordinary Explication of all the Fathers as well the Ante-nicene as Post-nicene let us see what it is and then make our Reflections upon it They said there are three infinite Persons known by the Names of Father Son and Holy Spirit each of which has all Divine Perfections and in their highest Degree They are so many distinct tho not divided or separated Substances and Essences they are as much three Spirits as they are three Substances and Persons each has his own proper and personal distinct Understanding Will and Almighty Energy It is true that they said also that the three Divine Persons are consubstantial or have the same Substance but they did not mean thereby the self-same Substance or the same Substance in Number but the same for Kind and Properties that is their Substances are alike Divine Immortal and Unchangable They are consubstantial to one another as Stars are consubstantial to Stars that is their Substances tho divers in Number have the same Properties and Qualities In short the Father Son and Spirit are distinct intellectual Substances and are consubstantial or of the same Substance as their Substances or Essences are alike infinite immutable and immortal they are also and therefore distinct Beings and because they are intellectual and spiritual they are three Minds and three Spirits as much as they are three Persons and Substances Lastly because each has all possible real Perfections therefore each of them is true God I dare to affirm before-hand that Dr. Bull is so well satisfied that this is the Notion that the Fathers had of the Trinity that he will own it for theirs and his and will not disingenuously deny that he intended this Explication or Account of the Trinity in the several Chapters of his Defence of the Nicene Faith where he speaks either designedly or incidentally of this Point And his Book has given him such a Reputation all over Europe even in the Catholick Countries and his Citations out of the Fathers so plainly evince that this was their Sense that I believe no Trinitarian will be so rash or hardy as to call him Heretick or to attack or write against him as such tho others of less Esteem are now loudly challenged of Heresy for this very Explication In very deed it is the Doctrine of the Post-nicene Fathers and of all the real Trinitarians and since the Revival of these Controversies divers learned Writers by Name Dr. Cudworth the late
them to be one God because mere Contact is only a juxta-Position not a real Vnion All Philosophers but only the Platonists who understand not Physicks or the Nature of things will assent to this Reasoning and I doubt not it was one of the Causes why the Schoolmen who were learned Philosophers unanimously agreed that three distinct Divine Substances are most certainly three Gods and they the Divines of the Schools have been followed by all the Divinity-Chairs in Christendom from about the Year 1200 to this present time I do not believe there is a Chair in Christendom that will own more than one Divine Substance or will admit that three Divine Substances can be one God Dr. Bull will not approve his Hypothesis to the Chairs or to Universities or Schools of Learning I am of opinion however that so arrogant a Man as Dr. Bull will not let go his Hypothesis it being too the Doctrine of the Fathers and of a great many learned Men who treat of these Questions as Divines not as Philosophers and Dr. Bull having acquired so great a Reputation all over Europe by his Book the Chairs and Nominal Trinitarians will not it may be adventure to attack him But if after all Dr. Bull fearing the Numbers and Reputation of the Nominal Trinitarians will deny his Hypothesis and in hopes to compound with them pretend that it differs not or not materially from the Doctrine of the Schools besides that all discerning and ingenuous Men will laugh at his Pusilanimity I shall not desire an easier Task than to prove from his own Book and from innumerable Quotations of the Fathers that both they and he hold three distinct Divine Substances and consequently so many Minds and Spirits both which are rejected as Heretical nay as Tritheistical by the Schools and their Followers I will conclude this first Part of my Answer with observing that tho Dr. Bull says here that the Fathers believed the three Divine Persons are one God because the second and third are derived from the first have like Substances and Properties with him and all of them do mutually immeate one another yet this is not the Explication of any particular Father much less of all of them but an Hypothesis that Dr. Bull has pieced up from the Writings of divers Fathers The Fathers explained the Unity in Trinity each of them his own way One said the three Persons are one God because they are in one another by mutual Love and Agreement Another said they are one God because of the Subordination and perfect Subjection of the second and third Persons to him who is the first God Another they are one God because the Son and Spirit are propagated from the Father Another because they unanimously govern the World that is they are one God because they are one Monarchy and thereby as it were one Ruler Some of them said three Divine Persons and three infinite Spirits are God and the Godhead in such Sense as all Men are called Man or Mankind As three golden Coins of the same Emperor are called Aurum Gold not Aura Golds in the Plural So in proper speaking three Divine Persons because like three Men or three golden Coins they are consubstantial that is have the same specifick Substances and Properties they are in proper speaking to be called God not Gods This was a very ridiculous Reasoning contrary both to Grammar and Philosophy and yet it was the Explication of some of the most learned of the Post-Nicene Fathers Briefly these two things I affirm That Dr. Bull 's Explication of the Unity of God is indeed taken out of some of the Fathers but it was not as 't is laid down by him the particular Explication given by any one of them much less the agreed and common Explication of all of them but part of it is from some other Parts of it from other Fathers Secondly the Fathers advanced several other Explications on which some of them insisted more and rather than on any part of Mr. Bull 's The Ante-Nicens chiefly urged the Unity of Love or else of Monarchy the most learned but least judicious of the Post-Nicens served themselves of the pretended Consubstantiality or that the three Persons having like Substances and Properties are therefore one God as all Men or Mankind are called Homo and as three or more golden Coins are called Aurum Gold never Aura Golds. But of these things I shall speak fully in the Conclusion of the third Part of this Answer to Dr. Bull. The CONCLVSION I Have said what I intended in this first Part. In the Second I will report the Doctrine of the following Fathers concerning the Trinity and the Person of our blessed Saviour in their own Words By the following Fathers I mean those Fathers who flourished from about the Year 150 to the Nicene Council or the Year 325. In the last Part I shall discover Dr. Bull 's Frauds and Mistakes detect his Sophistries and Elusions and confront his Misrepresentation of the Fathers with the Confessions and Judgment of the Criticks who have either published or commented on the Writings of the Fathers Here and now it remains only that I inform the Reader who hath not seen Dr. Bull 's Books why I have answer'd so indifferently and without any particular Deference to the Merit of his Learning and Abilities for it cannot be denied that this Gentleman is a dextrous Sophister or that he has read the principal Fathers with a more than ordinary Application Diligence and Observation Dr. Bull has written two Books his Defence of the Nicene Faith and Judgment of the Catholick Church designedly and directly against the Unitarians whether they be Arians or Socinians In the first of these he attacks more particularly Chr. Sandius a very learned Arian and the Author of Irenicum Irenicorum who was Dr. Zwicker M. D. a Socinian Dr. Zwicker is complemented by Dr. Bull with such Flowers as these Bipedum ineptissimus the greatest Fop in Nature Omnium odio qui veritatem candorem amant dignus deserving the Hatred of all Lovers of Truth and Sincerity Of Sandius he saith He hath ship-wrack'd his Conscience as well as his Faith a Trifler a mere empty Pretender He adds at p. 331. He hath only transcribed the Author of Iren. Irenicorum and in one Place he prays for Sandius as one that is mad This and such as this is Dr. Bull 's constant Language concerning these two very learned Men nor doth he ever reply to them without pretending an absolute and incontestable Victory and casting some most unworthy Scorn or other upon them by occasion of his supposed Advantage He never calls the Arians by any other Name but Ariomanitae the mad Arians and Socinianism is always with him the Atheistical Heresy I do not remember that he ever calls our Doctrine by a better Name In short he hath expressed such a Malevolence and hath so notoriously and infamously broke the Cartel of Honour and Civility