bodies and yet be Angels or Spirits still much more must it be believed that God could do the same Thus still he prosecutes his Argument and all his care was to prove not that Christ was God for that was granted on all hands but that he was Man which some denyed upon that very ground because he was God without controversie Again in his book of Prescriptions against Hereticks De Praescrip p. 36. He lays down somewhat like the form of a Creed and agreeable to our own Where first he says They believed one God the World's Creator who produced all things out of nothing by his Word that Word his Son was called by the name of God variously seen by the Patriarchs always heard in the Prophets at last brought by the power and Spirit of God the Father into the womb of the Virgin Mary He took flesh of Her and was born of Her and so became the Man Jesus Christ c. Here we have our Saviour's Existence antecedently to his birth of the blessed Virgin not only asserted but declared as the general Doctrine and Tradition of the Catholick Church and that less than two hundred years after our Saviour's Passion and made use of as a Prescription against an Heretick Now Marcion if he had not been well assured that Tertullian asserted no more than what was the current Doctrine of the Catholick Church might easily have baffled all Tertullian's pretence to Prescription by shewing him that all the Christians of the former Age were utterly ignorant of his pretended Articles of Faith but we never hear of any such Reply made Tho' we have no reason to doubt but that the Hereticks of those ages were as earnest to maintain their Errors as those are who tread in their footsteps in this After this in the same book Tertullian reflects upon other capital Hereticks So he tells us that Cerinthus maintained fol. 41. that Christ was only of the seed of Joseph a meer Man without any Divine Nature He tells us again that Theodotus of Byzantium blasphemed Christ for He too brought in a Doctrine quâ Christum Hominem tantummodo diceret Deum autem illum negaret Wherein he taught that Christ was a meer Man and that he was not God that He was indeed born of a Virgin thro' the Holy Ghost fol. 42. otherwise He was only a Man no better than others but as his Goodness gave him a greater authority than others If Tertullian then took Theodotus to be an Heretick on account of this Doctrine it can scarce be doubted but he 'd have taken Socinus and his Partners for the same had they liv'd in those days and I find our Socinians doing so much right to this Theodotus as fairly to reckon him among the Patrons of their opinions If we go farther with Tertullian we find him assaulting the same Heretick Marcion again and arguing God's extraordinary goodness from that great Humiliation of himself to take humane nature upon him He concludes his argument at last with this Totum denique Dei mei penes vos dedecus Adversus Mar. l. 2. f. 68. sacramentum est Humanae salutis c. All that which in your opinion is so disgraceful to the God I believe in is the Seal of our Salvation God converst with Man that Man might learn to do those things that are divine God acted suitably with Man that Man might endeavour to act agreeably to God God was found in a mean state that Man might be exalted to the utmost He that despises such a God can hardly be thought to believe in God crucified In another book against the same Marcion he argues from the antient apparitions of Angels that Christ tho' God had a true and real body We will not yield to thee says he that Angels had only a fantastick body but those bodies they assumed had a true solid humane substance this elsewhere he makes good it follows If it were not hard for Christ to exert the true sence and action of a Man in imaginary flesh it was much easier to make true and substantial flesh as he was the Author and maker of it to be the subject of true common sence and action Thy God was fain to appear in an imaginary body l. 3. fol. 72. because he was not able to produce a real one But my God who without pursuing the common course of nature could make real flesh of Earth could have invested Angels with real bodies of any kind whatsoever For with a word He made the world of nothing and shaped it into so many various bodies as we see Then he tells us Angels had flesh truly humane and connate with the time they appear'd in because Christ only himself was to be flesh of flesh that by his Birth he might purifie ours that by his Death he might free us from the slavery of Death he rising again in that flesh in which he was born only that he might die Therefore He appear'd in a true body accompanied with Angels to Abraham but not a body that was born because it was not that body which was to die In consequence of this discourse which proves our Saviour's Pre-existence to his Birth fol. 73. he urges his Adversary with that name of Immanuel or God with us from whence proving the reality of his divine he regularly infers the equal reality of his humane nature If we proceed we find the same Father publishing his Faith in the beginning of his book against Praxeas He was an Heretick so far yet from believing Christ to be a Creature or a meer Man that he asserted it was God the Father who was born of the Virgin and crucified and Dead and that He was Jesus Christ In opposition to him the Father declares As we are instructed by the Holy Ghost Adv. Prax. fol. 144. which leads us into all truth We believe one God and that the Word is the Son of that one God who was begotten of him by whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made that he was sent by the Father into the Virgin and born of Her Man and God the Son of Man and the Son of God and called Jesus Christ This was then his Faith and with him Christ had a being before he was born into the World and was what we assert the Creator of all things Thus afterwards he tells us in the same book the Father is God fol. 147. the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God and dilates upon and vindicates that truth He tells us that the Father is God Almighty and most high fol. 149. and that the Son justly claims the same titles and that the Father and the Son are one God and indeed c. 21.22 fol. 219 220. the farther proof of this is the general design of that book He confirms the same Doctrine in his Apology for Christianity against the Gentiles Besides these books he wrote one particularly concerning the
we think of the multitude who were instructed by them and what reason may we conclude our Saviour had to admire the Centurion's faith Matth. 8.10 and to declare he had not found so much no not in Israel It 's needless now to look back upon that gross Idolatry which once like some subtle poyson had infected every vein of that unhappy Nation though other lighter punishments had fail'd the Captivity of Babylon had pretty throughly purged out that folly nay so far as made that head-strong people flie out into the other extreme of a superstitious aversion even to ornamental Statues and where there could be no danger of which humour Josephus gives us several instances But about our Saviour's time though not the same yet Errors every whit as fatal and pernicious had over-spread them they were not visible Idolaters they worship'd not the Host of Heaven nor the ridiculous Idols of the adjacent Nations but they idoliz'd the empty figments of their own brains making void the Law of God by their own traditions Matth. 15.9 and teaching for doctrines the Commandments of Men Their different Sentiments in Religion had divided the whole Nation into factions and all Men were grown the followers of the Pharisees or Saducees or Essenes and among the several Parties Religion it self was almost crusht to nothing As for the Saducees tho' they made a powerful Faction in the State yet their Opinions were so gross and absurd as virtually overthrew all the reason of Religion they deny'd the Resurrection of the Dead Acts 23.8 an opinion taken up by some professing Christianity in Tertullian's time whom therefore he calls Propinquos Saducaeos Christianorum De carne Christi Vid. Drusium de tribus Sectis l. 3. p. 138 c. the Christian Saducees and Partiarios sententiae Saducaeorum followers of the opinion of the Saducees of whom since that Father speaks somewhat dubiously if I might put in my own conjecture I should conclude they maintain'd the same Error which some now adays are propagating viz. That we shall not rise with the same bodies with which we die but something of a finer composition which is in effect to deny the Resurrection it self for such a thing as they propound is not a resurrection but a new creation or a new formation at least of somewhat which was not before so that indeed it 's onely Saducisme a little more cunningly insinuated In that the Saducees deny'd the existence of a Spirit they asserted of consequence the Corporeity of God Belli Judaici l. 2. c. 12. and deny'd the Soul's immortality 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Josephus They deny the permanence or continuation of the Soul they deny'd any rewards or punishments hereafter so the same Historian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They take away all punishments and rewards after Death and Origen more at large Fragmento in Matthaeum Saducaei censent post hanc vitam nihil homini repositum praemii sive ad virtutem profecerit sive nunquam vel studuerit à vitiorum terminis excedere The Saducees hold that after this life whether a Man live virtuously or make himself a slave to vice it 's the same thing since there 's no reward attending either Now adding to these what Scripture charges them with Elâ—ncho Trihaerefews Setrarii c. 16. ad num 120. that they say there are no Angels a passage which puzles the great Scaliger extremely because the Saducees are said to receive the five Books of Moses as Divine in which Books Angels are often mention'd for any to be Religious where there 's nothing to be hoped for from it no effects to be found either of God's anger or his love is what seems very irrational and takes away the whole design of the Messiah's coming and vacates all the promises to piety in the Gospel Such absurdities made the Saducees odious to those who had any sence of Religion among their brethren and they were generally look'd on as unfit for any to hold communion with therefore we may observe that whereas our Saviour owns the Scribes and Pharisees as sitting in Moses's Seat and commands his disciples to hear them i. e. to obey their prescriptions so far as agreeable to the Law of Moses He utterly excludes the Saducees whom he charges with Ignorance of God's Power and his Word from any such Prerogative and bestows very little pains to confute such absurd and palpable Heresies As for the Essenes they were the spawn of the Pharisees a very severe Sect if we may believe Jewish authors Scaliger in Elâ—nekâ— c. 25. we find 'em no where mentioned in Scripture by name of which some imagine the reason to have been because they liv'd privately in the Countrey not concerning themselves at all in civil or publick affairs by which means they escaped our Saviours reproofs and well they might if Scaliger's account of them be true That they were not an ambitious crew of cheats as the Pharisees nor grosly impious as the Saducees however having so scandalous ancestors as the Pharisees we may rationally conclude they were somewhat tainted with their vain superstitions Nay if Josephus the Jewish Historian were any way prudent in his choice the Essenes must have been the more superstitious of the two parties or some other way the worse since Josephus who knew the Essenes very well and observed their customes and their manners throughly chose rather to associate himself with the Pharisees than with them their publick tenets were for the most part good according to those accounts now extant of them but whereas their Ascetick life seem'd to recommend them much to the common vogue and that no where commanded we may conclude that when our Saviour denounces so many woes against the Hypocrisie of the Scribes and Pharisees they were not without their shares in the intention of his reproofs for indeed we find the blessed Jesus generally reflecting upon those who were the guides of the Jewish people in matters of Religion they being blind and leading the blind both fell unhappily into the ditch and such blind guides were those as well as others otherwise they who have the character of being in extraordinary manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Josephus ubi supra or extraordinary lovers of one another would certainly have taken greater care to instruct the vulgar in the real import of that Law of which they themselves had so venerable an opinion and a sort of men who were so very eminent for their virtues themselves would by their Doctrines and examples have prevented the vacating the Laws of Morality so grosly by the silly niceties of impertinent Traditions And Men who had their minds so wonderfully adapted for the most sublime matters would certainly have clos'd very readily with our Saviour who spoke so incomparably and taught with so unusual and therefore surprising an authority but we meet with no such extraordinary effects of their pretendedly divine Philosophy but the Jewish people
Trinity where among other things quoting the words of the Prophet Hosea I will not save them by my bow nor by horses Hos 1.7 nor by horsemen but I will save them by the Lord their God He infers from thence If God promises them Salvation in their God or by him and yet saves them only by Christ why should any Man be afraid to call Christ God since he is called so by his Father in Scripture Nay if the Father saves none but by God no man can be sav'd by God the Father who does not confess Christ to be God in and by whom God promises to give salvation whosoever acknowledges him to be God shall obtain Salvation in Christ De Trinit fol. 236. who is God whosoever acknowledges him not to be God shall not be sav'd by him With a great deal more to the same purpose In conclusion he takes notice of some who in those days argued at the Socinian rate That if Christ were God and Christ suffered Death then the Deity suffered death to which he answers appositely enough That if Christ had been only God and had dyed their conclusion had been true but Christ being man as well as God his Humanity suffer'd indeed but his Divine Nature was unprejudiced untouch'd Thus have we largely and impartially examined this Father about this Doctrine of Christ's being God and his assertions are so plain and direct and the Heresies he impeach'd in his writings of such a nature that they both concur exactly in the confirmation of the same that our Saviour was truly and really God equal with his Father and the most high God We have another glorious luminary of the same Church S. Cyprian that holy Martyr of Jesus Christ and the laborious Bishop of Carthage who as he was a great admirer of the writings of Tertullian so concurred with him in the same Doctrine of the Divinity of Jesus Christ S. Cyprian then in his book of the vanity of Idols having setled that fundamental truth That there is only one God presently shews that our Saviour is God too this he would not have done had he judged the inference good that to believe Jesus Christ was God was to make two Gods He would not so soon contradict himself nor go about to set up a new Idol when he was endeavouring to exterminate the old Thus then He tells us That whereas the Jews a stubborn and rebellious people had long abus'd the Goodness of God God was resolved to call to himself from among the Gentiles a People that should shew forth better effects of his mercy than they did the Manager of this Goodness Cyprian de Idolor vanit Edit Ox. p. 15. Grace and Method was He who is the Word and Son of God who had been foretold by all the Prophets the enlightner and teacher of all Mankind This Son is the Power the Fulness the Wisdom the Glory of God He enter'd into the Virgin assumed flesh by the co-operation of the Holy Ghost God united with Man He is our God He is Christ who put on the nature of those Men whom He leads to his Father Christ would be what Man is that Man might be what Christ is In his second book of Testimonies against the Jews p. 34 35. he spends one whole chapter in heaping up such Scripture texts as before Socinian Commentaries were thought on were judg'd sufficient proofs that Christ was God In particular he insists on those passages of the 45 Psalm which are applied to our Saviour so directly by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews 1 Joh. 5.7 That famous place There are three that bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one has been much controverted it seems to be a very plain text for the Trinity and consubstantiality or equality or sameness of nature in the Father Son and Holy Ghost but Criticks observe that this verse is wanting in several Copies of considerable Antiquity and Dr. Burnet in his account of the Library in Swisserland See his Lett. takes notice of its being wanting in several Manuscripts he had purposely examined yet after all our S. Cyprian much more antient than the eldest Manuscript he or any other Critical Writerâ— have yet given us an account of in his book of Church-unity quotes it as we read it iâ— our Bibles Socinus takes it for granted thâ— passage was inserted into the Bible by somâ— zealous Trinitarian who made use of anâ— fraud to advance their own Error S. Hiâ—rome who had found it wanting in somâ— Copies in his time which was about 400 years after Christ imputes the want of it more rationally to Arrian transcribers who finding themselves pinch'd with so plain a text when they could not answer it resolved to take it quite away This he signifies in a short Epistle to Eustochium printed formerly frequently in the Latin Bibles of late omitted as is observed by the learned Dr. Fell late Bishop of Oxford in his notes on S. Cyprian S. Cyprian by quoting the verse as we have it confirms S. Jerome's opinion and renders that of Socinus ridiculous for he quoted it before the Arrian Heresie was founded and that twice in his Works therefore could he have no such design as Socinus insinuates Yet S. Cyprian's opinion is that whosoever does not believe this Unity of the Father and the Son De Vnit Ec. p. 10â— as laid down in that Text does not believe the Law of God nor hold the Faith and Truth of the Father and the Son to his Salvation The â—ame S. Cyprian recommending Patience to Christians and that in a time when the â—aging Persecution made it extremely neâ—essary he advances it by the example of Christ for says He Jesus Christ Deus Dominus noster Our God and our Lord â—as taught us this virtue not only in his Words De bono Patientiae p. 213. â—ut in his Actions which he clears as Tertullian before him by his Descent from Heaven to earth assuming our nature and â—iffering in it Again in his account of â—he Council of Carthage held about those â—ho had been baptised by Hereticks among the suffrages of the Bishops there present Fortunatus Bishop of Thuchabore declares Jesus Christus Dominus Deus noster p. 233. c. 17 Dei Patris Creatoris filius Jesus Christ our Lord and God the Son of God the Father and Creator has founded his Church not upon Heresies c. 29.235 but upon a Rock The same title is given him by Euchratius Bishop of Thenâ— the same by Venantius Bishop of Tinisa a Confessor had not this been agreeable to the common sentiments of the Church in those days it would certainly have been the occasion of some contests and others would have observed and reflected on the incautiousness of their Collegues but we meet with no differences on this occasion therefore we rightly conclude they spoke agreeably to the Catholick
Doctrine S. Cyprian himself is mighty frequent in such passages so in his Epistle to Rogatianus he calls out Lord Jesus Christ our King and Judge and our God Ep. 3. p. 6. Ep. 11. p. 23. and what higher characters could be given him In his Epistle to his Presbyters and Deacons he encourages them to assiduity in Prayer by the consideration of having Jesus Christ our Lord and God our Advocate and Mediator Plebi Thibaeri p 123 125. p. 146 148. so again in his fifty first Epistle to Cornelius Bishop of Rome in his fifty eighth Epistle twice in h s sixty second to Januarius and others Christ is our Judge our Lord and our God so in his sixty third in his Epistle to Jubaianus concerning the invalidity of the Baptism of Hereticks He argues against that Baptism thus If any one says he can be truly baptis'd by Hereticks he may then by that Baptism obtain remission of sins if He obtain remission of his sins he is sanctified and is made the temple of God I ask then of what God if of the Creator he cannot be his temple because he believed not in him if you say of Christ neither can he be his temple Epist 73. p. 203. who denyes Christ to be God if you say he 's the temple of the Holy Ghost seeing the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are all One how can the Holy Spirit be pleas'd with him who is an enemy to both the Father and the Son Here the force of the Martyrs argument lyes only in the Identity of nature in â—he Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and the poyson of Heresie consists effectually in denying the Lord Jesus Christ to be God but he would not have argued thus had not the Divinity of Christ been the general and well known Doctrine of the Church p. 212. He uses the same argument again in his 74. Epistle to Pompey to name no more Now â—n conclusion who can imagine that a holy Martyr so great an enemy to Idolatry so careful to refute the vulgar Error of a â—lurality of Gods should yet so very frequently use such suspicious expressions as must needs make the World believe he â—wned Christ for God and consequently multiplied those Gods himself which he expos'd others so much for if the whole objection were not to be removed by that assertion that the Father was God and the Son God yet they were not two but one God an Identity of their nature necessarily inferring the Vnity of the God-head The same Africa affords us yet another Writer of great antiquity and learning Arnobius in his several books against the Pagan Religion in his first book reflecting upon several of their Gods he takes notice how much they were grieved that Christ should be worshipped by Christians and received for and esteemed as a God And whereas Pagans derided Christians Arnobius adver gentes l. 1. p. 21. Edit Leidensis for accounting him a God whom they owned to have been born a Man he retorts upon them that They were guilty of that crime but says He supposing all you object in that respect were true would not Christ on account meerly of those benefits he confers upon us deserve to be call'd and to be thought a God He argues from their own principles who thought every considerable Invention of any Man was enough to procure his being Deified as Bacchus for finding out the use of Wine Ceres for Bread Minerva for Oyl c. But in the mean time Arnobius openly enough acknowledges that Christians did receive Christ as God He speaks yet more plainly soon after Christ for his benefits ought to be called God Nay He really is God without any scruple or ambiguity and would you have us deny him Worship or disown his Government But will some angry Pagan cry out is Christ a God We answer he is God and a God of infinite Power too and which will more exasperate an infidel he was sent from the supreme King to us upon the greatest errand in the World Perhaps the Pagan being more enraged at this will demand a Proof of what we say there needs certainly no greater proof of Christ's Divinity than an exact examination of his actions If it be objected that He was a Magician and performed his mighty works only by unlawful arts Let them who object this shew us any of their Magicians who ever did any thing like what was done by Christ or if they have done any thing of a prodigious nature it has still been by invoking some other Being but Christ without any Helps without any Magick Rites or Observations did all he did by the power of his own Name and what was proper and agreeable to and worthy of a True God nothing he did was hurtful or mischievous but helpful saving and the kind effects of divine Bounty And was he Mortal was he only one of us at whose ordinary commands Weaknesses Sicknesses Fevers and all bodily Pains were gone at once Was he one of us l. 1. p. 27. c. whose very Look the Devils could not endure Was he a meer Man whose slightest touch could cure the bloody Issue whose hand could make Hydropick humours vanish who could make the Lame run the Wither'd Hand recover its motion the Blind to see nay those who were born without eyes to see the light Was He a meer Man at whose word the angry Seas laid down their rage the rugged Storms and Tempests sunk while He with a dry foot walkt upon the swelling billows and trod upon the Oceans back the waves themselves standing amazed at the prodigious action and humble nature submitting to her Founder And so he proceeds in a florid and pathetick stile by an induction of particulars and a relating of circumstances to prove that Christ must be True God and that all the Idols of the Heathen were none Again a little after he tells the Pagans Christ was the high God the God from the beginning a God sent from unknown kingdoms God sent by the Prince of all things to be the universal Saviour whom neither the Sun nor Stars if they have any sence nor the Governours nor Princes of this World nor those mighty Gods who assuming that terrible name affright poor mortal creatures were able to find out or so much as to guess what He was or whence He came at whose very look then when he was clothed with flesh p. 32. the universal fabrick trembled and fell into a sudden disorder Again Arnobius brings in the Pagans objecting If Christ was God why was He seen in the form of a Man Why was He put to Death as Men are to this he answers Was there any other way whereby that invisible power which had no Corporeal Substance could suit it self to the World or be visibly present in the assemblies of mortal Men than by assuming a covering of solid matter which might be a proper object whereon Men might fix