their profound Speculations For to theologize according to them is not only to speak of God and his Attributes but of Angels too of Aeons of Ideas of Emanations and in a word of every thing that belongs to the intelligible World of the Platonists Theology being a Term affected by all the contemplative Gentlemen whether Orthodox or Gnosticks These sort of Folks did not regard the Facts of the Gospel which prove its Divine Authority any otherwise than as grosser Proofs proper for vulgar weaker Minds But for Contemplation the Case was quite otherwise this they thought a noble and powerful Medium by which Souls of the first Rank elevated themselves to the Knowledg of the noblest Truths Yet the Gospel is not founded upon any thing but Facts and the chief Objects of our Faith are certain Facts contained in the Apostles Creed Is it not therefore a putting the Gospel upon another Foot if we carry on our Contemplations to Abstractions and the Ideas of a crude chimerical Metaphysicks 'T is an extravagant System if instead of Facts well proved and rightly circumstanced there be nothing left but a mere Operation of the Understanding and an Ens Rationis which these Gentlemen are pleas'd to call the Word or the Son theologized That great Man Mons Jurieu whom God was pleased to favour with the knowledg of every thing did not fail to set aside this false Theology of the Fathers 7 Ler. Past de la 3. Année Besides the Faith of the Vulgar says he which was immediately founded upon the Sacred Writings the Doctors fram'd a Theology that is they undertook to expound the Mysteries in a sense beyond that wherein the Holy Scriptures themselves have delivered them And 't is in that they have disagreed and one must not wonder at it because the things they went about to explain were profound and it may be inexplicable and because they made use of a false Philosophy which they brought into their Theology And by so doing they have ruined Theology and at last Religion in all Ages The Faith of the Antients therefore must not be condemned as if it were changed altho they disagreed in their Theology And it must be noted that this Theology should not be admitted into the Faith that is Articles of Faith should not be formed out of Theological Expositions Is not this much for the Honour of the Theology of the Antients According to Mons Jurieu these good Doctors could not theologize the Son without hazarding the Faith and consequently one ought not to receive amongst the Articles of Faith their theological Explications concerning a Son begotten and not made an Internal Word and a Word brought forth c. Nevertheless it 's well known that the Fathers consider'd the theological Sense not only as true but as that which the Spirit of God had chiefly in its view So that they who would impose the Faith of the theological Sense of the Word because the Fathers urg'd it are themselves obliged to receive all the other theological Senses which the same Fathers have given to so many other Terms in Scripture and which they believe to be no less the Purport and Design of the Holy Ghost which yet is not done but they are looked upon even as ridiculous Why therefore is it not acknowledged bona Fide also that the Exposition of the Logos or Word is one of those wretched Allegories so much declaimed against at that day and an Article of that false Theology which is incompatible with the Christian Faith But let us pay as much respect to the Fathers as we can let us preserve their Theology be it so provided that the theological Sense be not said to be designed for any other than contemplative and seraphic Minds and that no more than the Faith or Belief of the plain natural sense be requir'd of Men as Men Origen was too fair to desire more than this he acquaints his Readers at the beginning of his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Sacred Writers did not concern themselves with abstruse Matters and speculative Subjects which few of them whom they called to the Christian Religion were capable of understanding but confined themselves to those few clear Articles which were necessary for the Reformation of the World to bring them into a State of Righteousness and give them hopes of Immortality Leaving the more refined Contemplations which were not contrary to prime Truths to the commendable Curiosity of those whom Nature and Education had qualify'd for such Enquiries Dr. Rust in his Discourse of Origen and the chief of his Opinions has observed also That there were necessary Truths which the Apostles had clearly taught and the Church received the contrary whereto cannot be received without retrenching an essential part of Religion But that there were besides some Contemplations about which the Scriptures had not determin'd any thing and that the Truth as to these matters was purposely concealed by the Holy Ghost as Origen thought to excite their Study and Industry who were Lovers of the Truth that the Discovery of so great a Treasure might be a Recompence for their pious Enquiries Without doubt all the other Fathers agreed in this very Principle with Origen that the contemplative Subjects were not necessary nor essential to Religion that they did not oblige ordinary Christians and that they were left to the commendable Enquiries of the Curious Servetus who constantly imitates the Fathers agrees in this tho he was in other respects a great Admirer of Platonism and Contemplation The Apostles says he de Trinit lib. 2. p. 50. did not rashly publish this great Mystery of the Incarnation of the Word 't was after several Essays and having fasted and prayed that St. John pronounced these Words In the beginning was the Word c. 'T was sufficient to Salvation to believe that Jesus was the Christ or the Messias the Son of God the Saviour of the World The common People were justified by this Faith alone altho they did not exactly know his Divinity You therefore pious Readers who are not able to comprehend the manner of his Generation nor the whole Fulness of his Divinity always believe that he is the Messias begotten of God and thy Saviour This is the only thing you should believe that you may live by him But let us hear Origen speak for himself 't is in his Preface to St. John that one shall find the famous distinction he makes between the intelligible and the sensible Gospel and how he there divides Christians into two Classes the one of those who are Children in the Faith and are led by the Rudiments of the Gospel and the other of those intelligent and elevated Minds who are capable of understanding the Divinity of the glorified God That Doctor or Teacher says he who is willing to profit all Persons cannot however make the secret and sublime Christianity known to such who can only understand the plain and the revealed Christianity Wherefore
hereof you need only read his Book de Temulentia where he pusheth on very far his Allegory of a Spiritual Marriage between God and Wisdom saying that the latter was deliver'd of an only and well-beloved Son that is the sensible World He makes use of the same Expression in the Book of the Life of Moses where he calls the World the most perfect Son of God One of our Authors Steph. le Moine in Notis ad Hippolyti Sermonem hath sincerely acknowledg'd this Truth It is true saith he that Philo the Jew hath often spoke of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he calls the Angels the Words of God and what is more he calls the World so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Philo borrow'd these ways of Expression from the Platonists for dwelling at Alexandria where there were many of these Philosophers he took from their Opinions very many things which he inserted in his Writings As to Josephus his Studies were wholly different for not having had any Commerce with the Platonists you cannot discover in him that Genius and Inclination to Allegory so much observ'd in Philo so that we cannot trace any thing of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in him It is objected that Philo hath given the Name of God to the Word of Plato which he had not done if he had understood the World by it 'T is remarkable saith Cudworth in his Intellect Syst p. 549. that Philo altho a great Enemy to Polytheism doth not stick to call the Divine Word according to the Platonists a second God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without thinking to thwart his Religion and the first Commandment of God But this Author excuseth Philo but ill saying That the Commandment speaks only of created Gods whereas Philo held his second God to be eternal and consequently an uncreated God It is absurd to think that a Jew would have admitted of a second uncreated God as if there could be many uncreated Cudworth over-lookt that Philo speaking as a Platonist allegorizeth upon the intelligible World which he calls the second God inasmuch as he looks upon it as an Emanation of the Divine Understanding even as the Plan and the Idea of a Building is the Emanation of the Understanding of an Architect that intends to build it according to this Image Which is a Comparison very samiliar to the Platonicks as you will find it in Philo himself in the beginning of his Book de Mundi Opificio The intelligible World saith he is nothing else but the Word of God preparing it self to create the World even as an intelligible City is nothing else but the Reasoning of the Architect that designs to build a City according to the Plan that he form'd of it in his Mind Now can any one be ignorant that this internal Word this City or this intelligible World are nothing else but the Understanding of the Architect and consequently the Architect himself From whence we discover the reason why Philo who own'd the second God of the Platonists would not platonize yet further being unwilling to admit of their third God for fear of contradicting his Religion which could not allow the created World to be a God the Platonists calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Creature If he went no further 't is because he might carry on his Allegory so far as to the making of a second God of the Image which is in the Divine Understanding and which is God himself But he could not without danger carry it on as far as the visible World which is a Creature so as to make it a third God seeing this third God as Petavius remarks Annot. ad Syness in Calv. Encomium is nothing else in the opinion of the Platonists and Stoicks but the sensible World only Cicero 2. de Natura Deor. And is the same that Philo calls the only Son whose Father is God and his Mother Wisdom which ought to be distinguish'd from that other which the same Author calls the Word of God and the intelligible World I say the Word this being the Name he always gives to the intelligible World never calling it the Son as he doth the sensible World See Maldon in Joh. 1.1 But when Philo sometimes gives the Name of God to the Soul of the World he understands by the Soul of the World no more as Cudworth hath own'd than the Word it self or the second God to whom he might give different Names according to the diversity of Notions that he form'd either of God or of the Wisdom or Power c. But however it be 't is always whilst he considers the thing in God and never out of God nor in the created World In this same Sense St. John said that the Word that made all things was in God and that the Life or the Soul was in that Word not distinguishing at all the Soul from the Word as the Platonists did You may judg by this whether Mr. Le Clerc had good ground to quote Philo in his Paraphrase upon St. John as one of those who were not ignorant of the Mystery of Three in the Deity Philo having said first That in the literal Sense the three Men that appear'd to Abraham were three Angels he afterwards goes on to the hidden and allegorick Sense where he saith that it is God accompany'd by his two Powers whereof the one is that Power that created the World the other that Wisdom which conducts and governs it God saith he between these two Powers presents to an enlighten'd Soul sometimes one Image only sometimes three For our Soul seeth but one Image when being purified by Contemplation she raiseth her self above all Numbers and advanceth to that pure and simple Idea which is one and independent of all others On the contrary the Soul considers three of them when not being as yet initiated in the Mysteries of the first Order she stops at the smaller viz. when not being capable of comprehending him who is consider'd in himself and without any foreign Aid she seeks him in his several Relations of Creator and King The Mystery of Three then according to him is for low Souls who are not capable of comprehending God in his Unity independently of all Creature and that seek him in the Works of Creation and Providence But the great Mystery of purified Souls is to raise themselves by a Contemplation transcending all Creatures towards that only and simple Idea that hath nothing common with the rest Lastly he pretends that there is a third Sense differing from that of the Contemplation which he seems besides to call the Letter of the Scripture according to which 't is he who is with his two Powers But this last cannot be the literal Sense seeing it would be contradictory to say that in the literal Sense they were three Angels and yet in the same Sense it was he who is with his two Powers Besides that by this means he would confound this last Sense with the second which
Resemblances tho it continued the same at the bottom But the second Method fix'd on the Number Three which were always reckoned in the same Order and had almost always the same Names given them could not be liable to the same Confusion especially among Christians who applied it constantly to the Father Son and Holy Ghost Besides they could explain themselves clearly in this last Method and speak of it distinctly whereas the other in its very rise was a politick Method prudentially invented and which was understood either ill or not at all because it kept secret and allegorical Furthermore the same distinction of gross and subtil Platonism ought to take place in reference to the other two Systems viz. in relation to the Creator Matter and Form and with respect to the Father the intelligible World and the sensible World If you distinguish not well between the Allegory and the Letter nothing will prove more intricate or unintelligible Lastly the principal Cause of this Confusion is these two Methods being so often intermix'd for if you mind it the Fathers sometime philosophizing according to the spurious Platonism insist rigidly on the sense of the three Hypostases and sometimes treading in the Footsteps of the true and antient Platonism do only allegorize and by their Emanations seem rather to mean the Powers of the supreme Being than Spirits subsisting Sometimes nothing will serve their turn but Subsistences Substances a true Generation and a real Procession At other times 't is a quite different thing they mean only the Powers and different Oeconomies of God manifesting himself in the Creation of the World to which they seem to give improperly the Name of a generated Son and Wisdom brought forth which doubtless is the Cause why so much Sabellianism overspreads their Writings We need not wonder henceâ—â—â—th if their Trinity is sometimes so inconsistent with the Vnity of God this proceeds from their gross Platonism Whereas in other Places their Three Principles suffer the Vnity to remain intire which proceeds from their refin'd Platonism CHAP. XIII The Christians have contriv'd a twofold Word grounded upon the two Words of Plato They meant only by Generation the Prolation of the second Word which happened a little before the Creation of the World SOCRATES reduc'd Philosophy to Morality his Disciple Plato advanced it further even to Theology by making three Persons or three Divine Hypostases of the three Divine Properties by whose concurrence the World was created or rather by conceiving a Creator infinitely Good with an Vnderstanding drawing the Plan of the World and an Energy that performs it These Theologic Philosophers allegorizing after their wonted manner changed the intelligible World into the Word and the sensible World into a Son The one is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Fathers in like manner distinguish'd the two Words whereof the one is internal the other brought forth and consider'd only the second as a Son because properly speaing they called Generation only that which was perform'd at the beginning of the World They say When God wil'ed to create the World he brought forth or generated the Word May you not easily perceive that such Modes of Speech owe their rise to the Mystic Philosophy which consider'd the whole World as the Son of God and as a Son generated by his Word or Command Yes these Turns of Expression owe their birth to some Poetical ones of the Heathens like those of Orpheus related by Justin in Protrep ad Gentil I swear saith the Poet by that Voice which the Heavenly Father uttered when he formed the whole Creation Then it was according to Justin that God generated his Word because he brought it forth in order to create the World All this is well meant and grounded upon the Words of Moses The only difference I remark in the System about these two Words is seeing Allegory is arbitrary some have fix'd it on the sensible World which they made to be the Son of God as many of the Philosophers we quoted have done because they consider'd it as the Production of the Divine Speech or Power but others fixed their Allegory upon the intelligible or Ideal World even on the Speech it self as thrust forth which they considered as a Production of the Divine Vnderstanding This last System was followed by the Christians when they personalized either the Word brought forth as the first Fathers and the Arians or the Internal and Mental Word as the Fathers of the Council of Nice and the Athanasians did Dr. Bull being forc'd to own this Truth pretends to clear the difficulty by distinguishing a twofold Generation of the Word the one Eternal and the other Temporal and maintaining that the Fathers consider'd the first as Real the second as Metaphorical but just the contrary hereof is true Theophilus of Antioch distinguisheth carefully the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Thought of God from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Word generated Athenagoras and Tatian tell us of a Son who was in God in Idea and potentially before he actually existed as a Person Tertullian saith There was a time when the Son was not a Son and that the Father was not always a Father that the Word which he distinguisheth from Reason was not from the beginning Novatian declares expresly chap. 31. that the Procession of the Son which was done when the Father willed it that is to say when he resolved to create the World That this Prolation say I made the Son a second Person Origen and Clement make a difference between the Word which was God and the Word which was made Flesh meaning that the former was the internal Word which is the Divine Vnderstanding and God himself and by the latter the Word brought forth which is only an Emanation from the former Prudentius calls J. C. Verbigena begotten of the Word where you may see manifestly the two Words the one generating and the other generated the one being the essential Wisdom of God the other is its Production And the first Word is so far from being the Son that Prudentius considers it as the Father Lastly not to be redicus Marius Victorinus makes to great a difference between the Word speaking and the Word silent that he calls the former the Son and the latter the Father All these Fathers generally tell us that before the Word was generated it was in the Heart of God in the Womb of his Vnderstanding in his Bowels whence it came forth as it were from its Seed and Bud. Either all these Terms mean nothing or they denote that the Son did not then exist otherwise than in the Design and Intent of the Father that he came forth thence when by the virtue of the Divine Prolation he did receive a real Existence Now it is not the first Existence but the second which the Fathers constantly and properly call the Generation of the Son or in other words
change or vary and the things we make them to signify may not vary at all in our Minds or suffer the least Alteration The Facts for instance mention'd in the Apostles Creed are things of that nature the Ideas whereof are preserv'd without any Change As its Articles are plain few in Number without any Speculations and contain only the Primitive Doctrines of Christianity it was easy therefore to preserve the sense and to have always a true Knowledg of them 'T is a Faith as I may say that 's born with us that offers it self to our Understandings from the Moment we enter into the Church that is in the Mouth and Heart or every Christian and there is no need of ascending into Heaven of consulting Councils nor of descending into the Deeps to know it and employing Missions of Dragoons to impose the Lelief of it Wherefore Cyril in Catech. 5. Ruffinus in Expos Symbol Jerom in Epist 61. ad Pâ—mmach c. 9. Hilarius de Synod had good reason to say That the Creed was not only written upon Paper but upon the Tables of the Heart and in the Mind of Man Expressions that Jeremy and St. Paul make use of about the Precepts of the Gospel to signify that there 's no need of a Teacher to learn them because Reason is capable of suggesting them and Memory of retaining them The Passage of St. Hilary is the more remarkable because he makes an express Opposition between this Faith graven upon the Heart and that which is only in the Letter and the Writings of Men For he congratulates the Western Bishops for their maintaining the Apostolic Faith for the Spirit wherewith they were animated and that they knew not the Forms of Faith which were written by Mens Hands The Spirit here does not signify the Holy Ghost as Mons Du Pin supposes but the Spiritual Sense in opposition to the Literal Which shews that there was no need of writing down the Apostles Creed in the first Ages of the Church Every one had the sense of it in his Mind As it was short and plain and consisting only of the principal Facts and Primitive Truths which constitute the very Essence and Spirit of the Christian Religion it was easy for the most illiterate to keep it in mind as to the Substance of it for the rest every one expressed himself as he pleased Hence it was that 't was very late before any Formula was drawn up and that too with some difference in the Terms and Number of Articles particularly in those which seem to explain one another It ought not to be wonâ—red at after this if it be not found among the antient Doctors to be just as we have it at this day They received it only by Tradition and worded it upon occasion every one in his own way The Christians says Dupin Tom. 1. p. 30. had this Faith so ready in their Minds that they did not stick to any certain Form hence came the difference in point of Form of the Creeds mentioned by the Fathers Moreover it must not be supposed that when some particular Christians came at length to enlarge the Apostles Creed by their Platonic Speculations the People entered into those Notions and Philosophical Ideas They always kept themselves to that Simplicity of Faith which the general Spirit of Religion had imprinted upon their Minds The Christian Religion says Mons Le Vassor Traite de l'Examen ch 2. p. 69. was at no great distance from its first and primitive Simplicity till the Council of Nice If Origen and some others before that attempted to adjust it to the Principles of Pagan Philosophy their novel Speculations were not generally received In short Origen shews us that nothing but the Word revealed was preached to the People that is to say Jesus Christ crucified but the Word-God glorified was reserved for Persons of the higher Class that is for Favourite Souls who had spiritualized themselves in Plato's School Wherefore History tell us that to bring in this Platonizing Faith into the Church and to make Entrance for it into the Minds of ordinary Christians there was â—eed of no less than the Anthority of Emperors the Cabals of Councils and the Violence of Penal Laws Monsieur Jurieu speaks to the very same effect Says he all the vain empty Speculations of the Doctors of that time the Fathers of the three first Ages did no harm to the pure Faith of the Church that is the People Tabl. du Socin 1 part Let. 6. p. 269. The Speculations had not yet reached the People they continued in the Simplicity For the rest it was for the Speculative Divines and Philosophers bred in Plato's School such as the Justin Martyrs the Tatians and the Athanagoras's were and other Platonizing Doctors of that sort Then Jurieu concludes saying There 's no body but knows that Theological Explications are not matters of Faith 'T is true we must do this Justice to Jurieu as to own that he made room for the Mystery of God in three Persons in this Simplicity of the Primitive Faith But it would really be a wrong done to his Judgment and good Sense to believe that he spoke it seriously For in short if he would not affirm that the Belief of three Persons which are but one God was one of those Platonizing Speculations against which he so much declaims at least he ought to own that 't is an Explication that has nothing of Simplicity in it and which by consequence cannot be a matter of Faith I desire him to remember a Remark he has made in his seventh Pastoral Letter That when Learning was scarce among Christians two or three Learned Men drew the People into their Opinions He could have informed us better that two or three Platonizing Fathers for they were the Learned Men of the Age were able to mislead the People from the Simplicity of their Faith to the Theology of Plato If it be true that the People knew this profound Theology Mons Jurieu has spoken more truly than he thought For we find at the bottom of the Letter that two Learned Platonists Origen who had his Admirers in the East and St. Austin who had his in the West have not only led the People into their Opinions but likewise all the Learned Men that came after them who have only copied from them And consequently this Theology whether it be to be found only among the Learned or with the People too was none other than a strange Faith which the Learned brought into the Church and after drew the People into it It amounts to the same thing either the People understood it not or if they did 't was by surprize that the Learned impos'd their Mysteries and made the common People receive a Pagan Notion for the Doctrine of J. C. CHAP. XX. Of the Divine Polity or Oeconomy taught by the Fathers HAving given some account of the way of Allegories us'd by the Fathers I must not forget to say something
and of Spirit begotten and unbegotten made a God in the Flesh the true Life in Death born of Mary and of God This Father arguing against the Josephites does not oppose to their Error the eternal Generation of the Son of God but his Birth of a Virgin by the Holy Spirit I would say he does not speak of a God incarnate but of a Man who was made God in the Flesh that is to say who was born a God or made a God by his Birth because he was born of God and of the Virgin Mary In this Sense Ignatius assures us that our Physician is partly Flesh and partly Spirit since by his wonderful Conception he partook equally of the fleshly or Human and of the Spiritual and Divine Nature He adds this Physician is begotten and unbegotten since he was begotten of a Woman like other Men and at the same time unbegotten having no Man for his Father Lastly he says that this Physician was born of the Virgin Mary and of God which explains all the rest for 't is as much as to say that he was born of the Virgin Mary by the Power of the Spirit of God and not by her Intercourse with Joseph This word God as you may see being there manifestly oppos'd to Man or to Joseph Jesus Christ our God as Ignatius further says in the same Epistle was conceived of the Virgin Mary according to the Divine Dispensation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being in truth of the Seed of David but by the intervention of the Holy Spirit Where one sees the same Antithesis continued which we observ'd in the foregoing Passage that is between God and Mary and between the Seed of David and the Power of the Spirit The true Oeconomy according to Ignatius is not the Incarnation of the Supreme God but the miraculous Conception of the Messiah who is both God and Man by his Birth of a Woman by the Power of God This is a Physician who was made God in the Flesh being born of the Virgin Mary and of God of David and of the Holy Spirit This is the true Divine Dispensation this is the great Mystery of the Christians The same Author in his Epistle to the Church of Smirna presents us with another Passage sutable to this occasion For thus he speaks of Jesus Christ That he was truly of the Race of David or the Son of David according to the Flesh but the Son of God according to the Will and Power of God in that he was truly born of a Virgin Monsieur Daillé having mark'd out this Passage of Ignatius as Heretical since he makes the Generation of the Son to depend on the Will and Power of the Father Bp Pearson gives this account of it in his Vindic. Ignat. Par. 2. c. 9. That 't is clear this Father does not speak of the Eternal Generation of the Son but of his Incarnation which as the World owns was by the Will and Power of God For which reason adds Pearson the Interpolator having a mind to pervert these Words by applying 'em to the Divine Nature he was forc'd to change their Order 'T is sufficient that this Learned Person affirms that in this Passage there 's nothing of an eternal Generation and that Ignatius speaks not but of Jesus Christ in allusion to the Words of the Angel The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee c. Wherefore that which c. shall be called the Son of God 'T is enough that he owns this Conception was so wonderful as to intitle Jesus Christ to the Name and Dignity of the Son of God As for the word Incarnation which Ignatius does not use we 'll excuse it in Pearson 't is a Term of art unknown to the good Father and signifies in the Platonizing Divinity that the Supreme God was made Man And if it be certain that Ignatius did not speak in this Passage but of the miraculous Conception of Jesus Christ can it be doubted whether he discours'd upon that same Subject and by no means on the eternal Generation in the two other Passages I am about to cite and which are very like to this here In the mean time Dr. Bull has the rashness to produce them for a Proof of that which he calls the two Natures of our Saviour that is that of a Supreme God and that of a Man like one of us in his Judic Eccles p. 5 seq Who would not wonder at the Artifice of Divines who have the Skill to pervert these Passages to serve their Notion of the Eternal-Generation We can furthermore shew you the Footsteps of this plain antient Divinity in other of the Fathers who Platonize more than Ignatius as in Justin and Irenaeus But we shall have another opportunity of examining the Theology of those two Fathers at present the Passage in Ignatius will suffice whereby to judg of the rest The only Reflection that remains is that Ignatius having so often distinguish'd between the Son born of God and of Mary and the Son born of David and the Holy Spirit 't is upon this Foundation that the distinction of the two Natures in Christ is founded in the true sense of it or if you please his twofold Filiation the one Divine the other Human. He is the Son of God says the Author of the Questions and Answers to the Orthodox Quest 66. in that he was born of the Holy Spirit and the Son of Joseph in that he was born of Joseph's Wife 'T is in this the Mystery consists He was born of Joseph's Wife this is but a legal Filiation with regard to Joseph and he was born of the Spirit of God this is a proper and natural Filiation with respect to God So that in this last respect it may be said that he is truly Light of Light and God of God I have already said it and I 'll repeat it again The Fathers thought that the Holy Spirit which overshadowed the Virgin Mary in some sort united it self to the Flesh of Jesus Christ so as never to be separated from it and 't is upon this perpetual Inhabitation that they have philosophized in their manner upon the two Natures of our Saviour Grotius aim'd at this Theology in one of his Notes upon Colos 1.19 The Plenitude of Divine Vertues says he dwelt in Jesus Christ that is to say 't was perpetually and inseparably united and not by intervals as in the Prophets This is what 's called the Hypostatick Vnion This in effect is the personal Union of the Divine with the Human Nature even this Shekinah or this perpetual Inhabitation of the Spirit of God in Jesus Christ To go farther in quest of other Mysteries betrays a Vanity of Mind The Fathers compriz'd all in what I have said and upon it they built those profound Speculations with which their Books are fill'd If at some times they went farther and spoke of the Word in a manner not agreeable with the ground I have laid down 't is
Points but by little and little and by degrees For it did not define nor pronounce any thing in express Terms about the Deity of the Holy Ghost during the four first Ages very near 'T is certain Gregory Naz. Orat. 20. Ep. 26. excuses the Conduct of St. Basil who tho he was right in his Opinion of the Deity of the Holy Ghost would not however for Peace-sake call it God openly and expresly because he knew there were many otherwise good Catholicks who would be offended if that Name should be given to the Holy Ghost that being not ordinarily and publickly done among the Catholicks till after the second General Council held in 381. Which is as much as to say that at last Time and Custom had placed the Holy Ghost in the Number of the Gods Good God! almost four intire Centuries of the Church which were the brightest and the purest did determine nothing about the Deity of the Holy Ghost just before the end of the 4th they durst not speak of it but shily for fear of offending the very Orthodox themselves Where was then the Trinity Was the Tradition then lost What that of the Orthodox and the Catholicks who rejected or at least were offended at an Article so fundamental What greater Crime could Hereticks have been guilty of Whence came it that the third Person was admitted so very late Prudence they tell us would have the Notion conceal'd for a time But why was not that of the second Person concealed too Are there not the same prudential Reasons for that too I think I perceive the difference of the case The third was not known to the Platonizing Fathers themselves but in a very confused manner and was not by the greatest part of them held for any other than a Creature The Second was in high esteem with all the Platonic Party deifyed by the whole Sect the Favourite Notion and principal Machine of the System 'T was easy to introduce this among the Gods of their Christian Religion which at that time was modell'd according to Plato's Notions But for the third which was not so much in favour 't was difficult to admit it into that Rank without great Address and Precaution In the mean time their over-cautiousness has prov'd a Disadvantage to both the third interferes with the second who should have been produced at the same time with his Brother or both eternally concealed For it the third cannot defend it self what will become of the second which is his elder Brother He is not of better Blood nor of a nobler Stock Can we doubt after such convincing Proofs of the antient Tradition but by the Virgin Church whereof Hegesippus speaks in Euseb Hist Eccles l. 3. c. 32. this antient Nazarene meant the Church of the Circumcision which had not yet imbibed Platonism as by the Seducement of Error and Science falsly so called that had its Birth under Adrian's Reign he meant the Platonizing Doctrine of the Gnostics which was then brought into the Church 'T was Philosophy that intirely ruin'd the true Religion as the Apostles had foretold In short Valesius observes upon the Passage I shall by and by cite out of Eusebius that this Historian too much extends the words of Hegesippus ascribing thro Mistake to the Universal Church what Hegesippus spoke only of the Church of Jerusalem or Judea But Hegesippus his being so particular is remarkable He would have us observe by it that fatal Epocha when the Nazarene Christian Bishops were succeeded by the Gentiles and by that means Platonism came in the room of that pure and unmixt Truth which St. James his Successors had preached which happened exactly in the Reign of Adrian that is when the Jews were driven out of Judea and the Christians of the Circumcision with them Sulpitius Severus in his Hist l. 2. c. 45. had reason to say the Christian Faith which according to him is the Platonizing Doctrine drew great advantages from this Dispersion He would have said that the Nazarenes then ceasing the Observation of the legal Ceremonies made no further scruple to unite with the Gentile Church But this is not all the greatest advantage that accrued to the Gentile Church was that Platonism meeting no longer with any Opposition from the Primitive Faith which the Nazarenes had inviolably preserv'd it spread far and wide and like an Inundation overspread the whole Church not excepting that of Jerusalem that antient Repository of the Apostolick Tradition which then lost its Simplicity and Virginity as Hegesippus expresses it 'T was at this time the Gentiles in the Person of Pope Victor rose up against the Christians of the Circumcision and oppress'd 'em by taking from 'em an Apostolick Tradition touching the Day when the Passover was to be celebrated And if they could wrest from 'em this Tradition in a point of mere Practice it was more easy to strip 'em of a Tradition in a point of Doctrine concerning the Nature and Person of Jesus Christ the former being much more easily retained than the latter There must have been a great noise and hurly-burly to alter the former whereas for the latter 't was enough if they took the method of explaining and illustrating or pretended an accommodation to a Sense more noble and profound 'T is of this Innovation attended with Tyranny that the Artemonites complain as Euseb tells us Hist Eccles lib. 5. c. 28. Their Complaint was that their Doctrine which was the same Truth that the Antients and Apostles had taught and which had been preserved intire till the time of Pope Victor was corrupted under Zephirin his Successor The Anonymous who relates this endeavours to confute 'em by alledging Authors who liv'd before Victor and had ascrib'd Divinity to Jesus Christ or had called him God But I have demonstrated that this Theology of the Antients is grounded only upon the Birth of our Saviour of a Virgin by the Holy Ghost and does by no means go so far as the Platonick Notion of his Generation The first of these the Artemonites did not disown for they believ'd Jesus Christ to be the Son of God by Mary If the Anonymous would prove from the Antients against the Artemonites that Jesus Christ was God's Son begotten before all Ages how comes it to pass that he finds no antienter a Patron of his Platonizing Opinion than Justin Martyr who wrote after the fatal Epicha when the Succession of the Nazarene Bishops ended and after the rise of the first Gnosticism Basilides and Valentinus c. that is after the Church had lost its Virgin Purity and the Gnostick Opinions had corrupted the antient Theology The Authorities of his date are to be suspected Why does he not ascend as high as Barnabas Hermas Clemens Romanus and Polycarp Would he have wanted the Honour of having these Apostolick Men for his Vouchers if he had thought 'em opposite to Artemon He does not go so far back as Ignatius which makes it to be suspected either
that he did not believe Ignatius favour'd the Opinion of Christ's Pre-existence or that the Epistles of that Father were a Forgery after his time 'T is to the first and earliest Antiquity we must ascend Artemon will be in the right if he rejects those latter Testimonies and produces more antient ones for his own Doctrine But the Anonymous cites Scripture and so does Artemon appeal to it alledging that his Doctrine is the same Truth that the Apostles had taught That therefore is the thing in question We shall see hereafter who has the most reason to appeal to this most Primitive Authority for I intend to examine in what sense the Son of God is there deify'd The Anonymous makes another small attack upon the Artemonites for their seeming to insinuate that Victor was not against their Doctrine but that Zephirin was the first that did persecute it I will not repeat here what I have remark'd touching the deposing of Theodotus that Victor might excommunicate him as an Ebionite without breaking Communion with the Artemonites who maintained the Orthodox Doctrine of the miraculous Conception of our Saviour 'T is sufficient at present to shew that the Words of Artemon may fairly signify that Victor was the first who attack'd the Apostolick Faith but that Zephirin intirely destroy'd it So far is Artemon from ranking Victor among those who preserv'd the Truth intire that he seems to say on the contrary that he began and Zephirin completed its Ruin Victor began by excommunicating one single Christian Theodotus and certainly Zephirin concluded by excommunicating the whole Orthodox Church or all the other Great Men who joined with Artemon in the defence of expiring Truth as the Fable concerning their Bp Natalis that comes after inclines one to think I call it a Fable for nothing is more extravagant than to talk of Angels whipping and scourging the Artemonite Bishop into the bosom of the Church How were the Angels the first who made Converts by Dragooning Is there any thing that can more discredit this Romance of the Anonymous Another Story that Eusebius has tack'd to this is when he makes the Anonymous say that Theodotus was the first Author of the Error ascrib'd to him which is false take his Heresy in what sense you please Dr. Bull endeavours to cover the Reputation of Eusebius by a certain wretched distinction but he does not observe that Eusebius contradicts him for he goes on to say in the same Book that Theodotus was the first whom Victor excommunicated which supposes that he was the first who suffer'd for his adherence to this Doctrine but not the first who published it If he was the first Martyr for it it does not follow that he was the first Author of it 'T is highly probable that the great noise of the Excommunication of Theodotus upon the very account that this Persecution was new and unheard of made him pass in after-times for the very Author of that Opinion for which he was persecuted Not to insist on it at present that Eusebius makes no scruple a little to corrupt the Story at all times when he can by that Fraud give the Air of Antiquity to his Platonick Logos or of Novelty to the opposite Doctrine which he hated with all his heart he has been catcht in so many other Places that the Presumptions against him cannot but be very violent For instance where he makes Josephus say that on the Day of Christ's Passion a Voice was heard in the Temple of Jerusalem saying Let us go hence And witness another Passage where he makes the same Josephus say Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 2. c. 9. that 't was an Angel who appear'd over the Head of Herod Agrippa whereas Josephus expressy says it was an Owl One plainly discerns where the pious Fraud lies he would not have it be thought that the Jewish Historian did not agree with St. Luke Thus it appears in spite of all the Efforts of Eusebius that 't was in the time of Victor and Zephirin that the pure Faith of the first Christians fell with the Church of the Nazarens which from that time have often pass'd for Hereticks The new Succession of Gentile Bishops Euseb lib. 4. c. 5. began with one Mark and Platonism enter'd into the Church with the new Bishops Saturninus Basilides and the whole Class of the Gnosticks made a mighty progress afterwards under colour of discovering Secrets unknown heretofore to the Church About the same time Carpocrates his Heresy was broach'd another Mysteryman To speak the truth the infamous Practices of these Pretenders to Illumination were not long born withal in the Church Human Nature alone without the Succours of Religion knew how to quit it self of it in a short time But as for their Philosophy the Church managed that to her purpose after some sifting and refining 't was adjusted to the more specious part of her Religion for the support of her new Opinions which being pure Speculations the Affections were not so far concern'd about 'em as to take notice of their Repugnancy And the Mind which is naturally desirous of Knowledg found its account in 'em and the natural Veneration Men have for Mystery and for every thing they do not comprehend had the greatest Stroke in this matter and gained the Point So one sees how by insensible Methods and Degrees the Gospel which is a Doctrine purely practical was exchanged for Contemplation Mystery and Fanaticism CHAP. XIII An Account of the first Christians call'd Nazarens TO conclude it may not be amiss to give my Readers an Idea of the first Christians called Nazarens There were two sorts of 'em as many of the Fathers and some of the Moderns have observ'd The former improperly so called and more properly Ebionites for they believ'd Jesus Christ to have been the Son of Joseph and obliged the Gentiles to keep the Law of Moses Among these such who held Jesus to be the Christ were tolerated and accounted Christians but the others had not that Character because they made Moses's Law necessary to Salvation and held Jesus for no more than a just Man or a Prophet who suffer'd in the Cause of Righteousness and Truth They would not have the Benefits of his Mission to extend to the Gentiles or in a word that he was the promis'd Messiah and had any Power in Heaven Some believed he was not truly rais'd from the Dead others believed he was that he might receive the Reward of a Good Man but not that he might be made Lord of the World They could not be persuaded to think that Jesus who was come in the Flesh that is in so low and mean a Condition could be the glorious Messiah the Christ so often promis'd by the Prophets The other sort of Nazarens properly so called were the Believers of Judea to whom that Name was given as the Name Christian was to the Gentile Proselytes These believ'd Jesus Christ to be born of a Virgin by the Holy
Ghost and in this Sense they called him the Son of God and not only so but they confess'd this Son of God to be the Christ For 't is thus the Words of St. Austin must be understood de Haeres c. 9. and not as Dr. Bull expounds 'em Judic Eccles p. 47. by a Hysteron Proteron in this manner that the Christ was the Son of God that is according to him a Son begotten before all Ages Danaus a better Critick than he made no blunder in his Exposition of St. Austin's Words The Nazarens says he believ'd that Jesus the Son of Mary was the Christ and 't is certain the Words ought to be taken in this Sense Dei filium consitentur Nazaraei esse Christum says the Father In short they did not oblige the Gentiles to observe the Law which they thought themselves ought to keep as being Jews by birth but they afterward abandon'd it too as an Obligation that ceas'd as soon as they were driven out of Judea by the Emperor Adrian There is a great confusion among Ecclesiastical Writers in their Judgment of these Nazarens Some look upon 'em as Hereticks with others they pass for Orthodox The latter Fathers as Epiphaenius St. Austin and Theodoret place 'em in their Lists of Hereticks but the more antient Fathers as Irenaeus and Tertullian have not set 'em down in that Catalogue 'T is easy to conjecture whence this Disagreement comes Sometimes they pass'd for Orthodox 1st Because their Opinion that Jesus Christ was born of a Virgin by the Holy Ghost c. being originally the Orthodox Faith some Remains of that Tradition maintain'd their Honour for a time 2ly Because Eusebius after Hegesippus had given 'em this Testimony that their Faith was sound as we have before shewn Now this Historian who gave his Opinion of 'em according to his own Prejudices mistaking their true Sentiments has drawn other Platonizing Christians after him into the same Mistake 3ly The Nazarens believ'd that by virtue of the miraculous Conception of our Saviour God was truly his Father and for this reason they give him the Title of the Son of God and it may be of God too sometimes The Platonizing Christians suffered themselves to be amused with big Words having their Minds pre-ingaged in Ideas they had put upon 'em beforehand so that they were so far from treating the Nazarens as Hereticks that they have often made 'em speak in the Platonick manner always supposing thro prejudice that whoever said these Words Son of God meant by 'em a Son begotten before all Ages But sometimes also they reckened 'em Hereticks either because they confounded 'em with the Ebionites or because their Opinion rightly understood was look'd upon as Heretical after Platonism prevail'd When all those in short who went for the Divinity of Christ no farther than his Generation from God and the Virgin Mary and who refus'd to subscribe or assent to the Platonick Generation before all Ages all such I say were no better treated than the Ebionites who believed Christ to be the Son of Joseph they were all anathematiz'd without hopes of absolution 'T is from this confusion of Ideas that we meet with so much obscurity in the History of the Nazarens Dr. Bull who knew not how to clear up this Perplexity runs himself into greater Difficulties He teazes and fatigues himself to maintain his own Sentiments under the Expressions of the Nazarens and to reconcile the irreconcilable Censures of the Platonizing Fathers about ' em But what signifies all this ado The truth is nothing of his Platonism was in the least known to the Nazarens All his Citations are grounded upon the equivocal Sense of these Words the Son of God True it is they went beyond the Ebionites and believ'd Jesus Christ was more than a mere Man because they believ'd him to be born of a Virgin by the Holy Ghost Yet the Nazarens must be Hereticks say the Doctor what he will if they are to be try'd by his Platonick Faith But they are also Orthodox say others what they please if they are examin'd by the Rule of Orthodoxy that prevail'd in the first Age of the Church the Footsteps whereof have been preserv'd by some Writers in succeeding Ages as I have already proved FINIS
at last was changed into that of a Generation of Plato's Word or Logos To pass for the present the consideration of those Objections pretended to have great weight which are taken from the suppos'd Impossibility of a change in the Tradition of the Church as the Author of the Fathers vindicated argues I must tell him 't is in vain for him to attack us with those very Weapons with which he has already been beaten in France We will make our Defence at the same rate he has done his on another occasion Justin Martyr if you please shall not be the very Innovator who changed the Tradition of the Church all at once 't is not in that manner Error is equally introduc'd that 's agreed But you must own whether you will or not that Justin was the first who brought in the new Mode of expressing himself in matters of Faith the first who made use of a Stile that was strange and unknown to his Predecessors Clemens Barnabas Hermas and Polycarp and who spoke a philosophic Jargon wherein appears throout the swelling Notions and Expressions of Plato and nothing of the Simplicity of J. C. But to what purpose was this new Language unless it was to begin the Innovation under colour of Embeilishing of Accommodation and more ample Explication and that this was for prudential Reasons and for the purpose of the Divine Oeconomy This is the very way that Error has always taken The Doctrine of Mahomet which establish'd it self by force was indeed made and introduced all at once by one Man alone But the Doctrine of Antichrist took time and came in by degrees it began with the Imposture and Finenesses of Philosophy and us'd no Force nor Violence till by its Seducements it had gain'd the upper hand Justin Martyr at first imploy'd his Philosophy in the Cause and Pope Victor afterwards his Tyranny and thus you see how the Innovation was compleated it came in as the Proverb has it like a Fox and reign'd like a Lion CHAP. V. Further Reflections upon the forementioned Passage in Bp Pearson's Vindication of Ignatius Part 2 c. 1. HItherto I have considered this remarkable Passage in Bp. Pearson only with regard to this particular design which was to shew in what sense Jesus Christ was deify'd or spoken of as a God among the first Christians I have yet three further Reflections which have a more general aspect upon the whole extent of this Controversy 1st Remark My 1st Remark is upon the Passage in Pliny concerning the Worship of the antient Christians who as he relates it sang Hymns to Jesus Christ as to a God Now here I say that Pliny speaks of the Christians in his Pagan Stile that 't is the Language of an Idolater so that the least consequence cannot be drawn for the Divinity of Jesus Christ in the modern Sense of it for he speaks after the same manner of Christ as if he had been to speak of his Deify'd Heroes See Biblioth Vniv Tom. 10. p. 346 347. Mons Le Clerc has well observ'd in his Rules of Criticism that all sorts of Authors are wont to express the Sentiments and Behaviour of the Persons whose History they write in terms current and received at the time of their writing and in the Country where they liv'd And that if this be not well minded one may easily mistake the Phrase of one Country for another and confound their Meaning 2d Remark Bp Pearson pretends it was customary in the first Age to call Jesus Christ God Monsieur Valois maintains on the contrary that the Antients did not usually ascribe that Name but to the Father only 'T is not difficult to determine which of these two Criticks was in the right Pearson's Remark has no other ground but the Stile of Ignatius alone which is the very thing in question Whereas Valesius his Observation is founded upon the constant Usage of the Fathers in the first Century viz. Clemens Barnabas Hermas and Polycarp who most certainly have never given the Name of God to Jesus Christ in the Writings which are incontestably theirs So that since Ignatius has done otherwise supposing the Epistles are truly his it must be said according to Valesius his Observation that Ignatius did vary from the Practice in his time or that the word God has been foisted in by the Copists as the History of Thaddeus 3d Remark My last Remark is of much greater importance than the two former and intirely decisive in this Controversy For in this Passage of Bp Pearson you may take notice that what he affirms will effectually and at once defend all kinds of Unitarian Hereticks from the formidable Authority of the Platonizing Fathers with which they are always baited The Fathers who wrote after Ignatius says Pearson the Doctors of the 2d and 3d Century are used to borrow their thoughts from the Pagans and sometimes to blend 'em with the Christian Religion Take notice that al this is said with regard to Jesus Christ and remember too that the second Century is the fatal Epocha wherein the Church lost the Purity and Simplicity of her Principles which happened as Hegesippus observes soon after the Death of the Apostles when Platonism prevail'd To come to matter of Fact the Fathers of the first and second Century namely the Justins the Athenagorasses the Theophilusses the Irenaeusses the Clemens Alexandrinusses the Tertullians the Origens c. these Fathers who wrote after Ignatius have mingled Pagan Notions with the Christian Religion therefore those Fathers ought not to be heard in this Controversy as good Witnesses of the Christian Faith and as to the point of Christ's Divinity ought to be regarded as Demi-Pagans The Vnitarian Hereticks likewise ought not in reason to be attack'd with their Authority and consequently the Notion of Christ's Divinity ought to be reduc'd to the state and account given of it by the Writers of the first Century who were not form'd in the Schools nor bred up in Libraries who were not imbu'd with the Sentiments of the Academy or the Portico In fine every Sentence and Expression in their Writings that regards Christ's Divinity and has not the Purity and Simplicity of the first Century cannot be look'd upon as any other but as a smatch of Paganism CHAP. VI. The Theology concerning the Word or Logos is nothing else but a Philosophick Speculation partly grounded upon the Divine Power that entred and dwelt in the Messiah at the moment of his Conception TO prove this that the Theology concerning the Word or Logos is nothing else but a philosophick Notion partly grounded upon the Divine Power that enter'd and dwelt in the Messiah at the moment of his Conception there 's nothing more to be considered than 1st That the most antient Authors go no further in search after Christ's Divinity than his Birth of a Virgin Ignatius in his Epistle to the Ephesians satisfies us of this Truth There is says he but one Physician who is of Flesh