Bingham understood these matters well, and has expressed them justly and fully in these few lines h. "The Arians

put an equivocal and poisonous sense upon them, (the "words of the Council,) giving out, after the Council was "ended, that they had not only abolished the word con"substantial, but with it condemned the Nicene faith "also: which was strange surprising news to the bishops "that had been at Ariminum. Then says St. Jerome, Ingenuit totus orbis, et Arianum se esse miratus est: The "whole world groaned, and was amazed to think she should "be reputed Arian. That is, the Catholic bishops of the "whole world (for there were three hundredi of them 66 present at the Council) were amazed to find themselves ❝so abused, and represented as Arian, when they never "intended in the least to confirm the Arian doctrine." But as to the extent of the Nicene faith, both at that time and after, I have spoken more particularly of it in another place, and need not here repeat. Only the reader may permit me to sum up the whole in the same words, or nearly as before. "There never was a council "on the Arian side so free, so large, so in every respect

unexceptionable, as the Council of Nice was: but what"ever opposition was made to it, was carried on with such "wiles and subtilties and refined artifices, (to say nothing "of cruelties,) as every honest man would be ashamed

hæretici ferebantur, contestantes corpus Domini, et quicquid in Ecclesia sanctum est, se nihil mali in sua fide suspicatos. Hieron. ibid. 301.

b Bingham's Antiquities, b. vi. ch. 3. s. 10. Compare Dr. Berriman, Hist. Acc. p. 228, &c.

i He might have said, three hundred and twenty. But I believe Jerome meant more than that three hundred and twenty by the totus orbis: he meant all the orthodox; for all of them suffered in the slander raised against their brethren, most of them as orthodox as themselves: so it affected them all, and all were amazed at the injurious aspersion. This place therefore of Jerome, rightly understood, is so far from saying, that the whole world was then Arian, that it is saying the contrary; namely, that the whole world was Anti-arian: for by totus orbis he manifestly there means the orthodox, who had been slandered as Arian, and were really Anti-arian. They were the whole world in his account, the Arians being but few in comparison. * Defence, vol. i. Query xxix. p. 331-334.

"of: and notwithstanding all that the Arians could do,

they were not able long to maintain their ground; but "the men who sustained the shock, and kept up the "credit of the Nicene faith, were not only the most nu"" merous, but appear to have been as wise, and as judi"cious, and as pious men as ever the Church was adorned "with since the times of the Apostles'."

From what hath been said under the present article, it is manifest, that the impugners of our Lord's Divinity have been all along condemned as guilty of heresy for the first three centuries and more; so that as far as the constant judgment and practice of the Church in their decrees and censures, during that time, can be conceived to bear weight, the doctrine of our Lord's true and proper Divinity, and of consequence, the doctrine of a real and coeternal Trinity, must be looked upon as a fundamental of the Christian faith.

III. Besides what has been pleaded upon the first topic relating to creeds, and upon the second relating to heretics; there is yet a third head to go upon, namely, the sentiments of Ante-Nicene Fathers, such as they have occasionally delivered in their writings, distinct from what they have reported either of creeds or heresies. And these are what I am next going to produce, according to order of time, to show what they thought of the necessity or importance of faith in the ever blessed Trinity. Perhaps I may have anticipated some things under the last head, which might properly have come in here; or I may chance to take some things in here, which might properly have come in there: but it is of no great moment which head they are brought under, so long as both center in the saine conclusion, and the two parts may be considered as supplemental to each other.

1 See this Council defended more at large by Dr. Berriman, in his Remarks on Mr. Chandler, p. 19-42. and in his Review of the Remarks, p. 28-41.

107. IGNATIUS.

I begin with Ignatius, who writes thus: "Be not led "aside by strange doctrines, nor by antiquated tales, "which are unprofitable: for if we yet live according to "Judaism, it is as much as declaring that we have not "accepted grace m; for the most holy Prophets lived ac"cording to Christ Jesus. And for that cause were they persecuted, being inspired by his grace, that the unbe"lievers might be convinced that there is one God who "hath manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is "his eternal Word, not proceeding from silence", who in "all things pleased him that sent him." The Judaizing heretics (whether Cerinthians, or Ebionites, or Gnostics at large) are the persons here pointed at without dispute: and the Judaism here principally charged was, their denial of Christ's real and eternal Divinity. The Jews would not own a proper Son of God P, an eternal subsisting Logos, but pertinaciously disputed that point with the Christians; as may appear sufficiently, besides other evidences, from Justin's celebrated Dialogue with Trypho. So here we may observe, how emphatically Ignatius expresses the Christian faith in opposition to those Judaizers, by asserting Christ to be God's Son, and his eternal Word, not proceeding from silence, as those

- Εἰ γὰρ μέχρι νῦν κατὰ [νόμον] Ἰουδαϊσμὸν ζῶμεν, ὁμολογοῦμεν χάριν μὴ εἰληpiva. Ignat. ad Magnes. s. 8.

• Τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ ὅς ἐστιν αὐτοῦ Λόγος ἀΐδιος, οὐκ ἀπὸ σιγῆς προελθών. Ibid.

• Hæc est secunda hujus Epistolæ pars, quæ eos maxime præmunit contra hæreticos, eos præcipue qui Judaismum introducere conabantur; contra quos clare et expresse disputat. Erant autem ii ea tempestate, qui divinam Christi naturam negabant, ut Ebionitæ, Cerinthiani, Nazaræi, et Helxaitæ. Pearson not. in loc. p. 43. Conf. Vindic. p. 55.

Ρ Ἰουδαῖος δὲ οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογῆσαι, ὅτι προφήτης τις εἶπεν ἥξειν Θεοῦ υἱόν. Origen. contr. Cels. lib. i. p. 38.

Οὐ πάνυ τι Ἰουδαῖοι λέγουσι Θεὸν ὄντα τὸν Χριστὸν καταβήσεσθαι ἢ Θεοῦ υἱόν. Ibid. lib. iv. p. 162.

Ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ πολλοῖς Ιουδαίοις καὶ σοφοῖς γε ἐπαγγελλομένοις εἶναι συμβαλών, πώς δενὸς ἀκήκοα ἐπαινοῦτος τὸ, Λόγον εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὡς ὁ Κέλσος εἴρηκε. Ibid. c 2. p. 79.

Judaizers taught. I forbear to enter into the dispute about σy, which has been already exhausted by Bishop Pearson, Bishop Bull, and other learned men. What I am most concerned to observe is, that Judaism was the common and just reproach thrown upon all the impugners or underminers of Christ's Divinity: for that was part of the distinguishing character of the Christian faith, as opposed to the Jewish, in those days 9. As to Cerinthus and Ebion, the early impugners of Christ's Divinity, it is well known that they were Judaizers, and brought their heresy along with them, transplanting it from the Synagogue to the Church. Those that followed them in their heresy were judged so far to desert the Christian cause, and to side with the Jews. Tertullian, though directly pointing to Praxeas, yet makes the charge general against all that deny a real and divine Trinity '. Novatian passes the like censure upon as many as denied Christ's Divinitys. Theodotus, though a Gentile Christian, is charged with Jewish blindness upon the same scoret. Paul of Samosata is observed to have given up Christ's Divinity in complaisance to Jews". And the Arians afterwards, on the same account, are frequently censured by orthodox Christians, as revivers of Judaism x.

a I say, in those days. For that the ancienter Jews were generally in like sentiments, is not probable, but the contrary. Of which see Allix's Judgment of the Jewish Church; and Considerations on Mr. Whiston's Historical Preface, p. 75, &c. and Primitive Christianity vindicated, p. 17, &c. and Stillingfleet on the Trinity, c. ix. p. 203, &c.

Judaicæ fidei est res, sic unum Deum credere, ut Filium adnumerare ei nolis, et post Filium Spiritum-Pater et Filius et Spiritus unum Deum sistunt. Tertul, adv. Prax. c. 31.

Ignari et imperiti Judæi hæredes sibi hæreticos istos reddiderunt. Novat. c. 15. ed. Welchm. alias c. 23.

t Cæcitatis Judaicæ consors. liv. lv.

Philastr. Hær. 1. Conf. Epiphan. Hær.

Theodorit. Hæret. Fab. lib. ii. c. 8. Athanas. vol. i. p. 386. Epiphan. Hær. lxv. 2, 7. Philastr. Hær. lxiv.

* Athanas. de Decret. Synod. N. p. 209, 233. Orat. ii. 484. Basil. Homil. xxiv. tom. ii. p. 189. edit. Bened. Greg. Nyssen. contr. Eunom. Orat. i. p. 15.

I now return to Ignatius, who, after charging those impugners of Christ's Divinity with Judaism, intimates their thereby forfeiting the grace of the Gospel. Then he proceeds to lay down the true Christian doctrine of a Son of God, an eternal Word, not produced in time, or from silencey. And since he asserts that the denial of that doctrine is Judaizing, and is renouncing the grace of the Gospel, it amounts to declaring that the article of Christ's Divinity is an essential of Christianity.

A. D. 155. JUSTIN MARTYR.

Justin Martyr, in a Fragment produced by Dr. Grabe, lays a very particular stress upon the article of Christ's Divinity, as the reconciliation of God and man is nearly concerned in it. The passage runs thus: "When man's "nature had contracted corruption, it was necessary that "he who would save it, should do away the principle of "corruption. But this could not be done without unit"ing life by nature [or essential life] with the nature so "corrupted, to do away the corruption, and to immortal"ize the corrupt nature ever after. Wherefore it was "meet that the Word should become incarnate to deliver "us from the death of natural corruption "."

Here Justin asserts, that it was necessary for essential life (or life by nature) to be united with human nature, in order to save it: which is the same as to say, that it was necessary for God to become incarnate, in order to save lost man. So important did he take that article to be, conceiving that the redemption of mankind depended

> Simplicissima et optima sententia videtur, quod Ignatius, contra omnes veteres hæreticos Filii æternitatem negantes, asseruerit Christum non esse instar humani Verbi quod post silentium prodit, sed Verbum Patri coæternum. Ittigius, Histor. Eccl. Sæc. ii. p. 118.

• Φύσει δὲ τῆς φθορᾶς προσγενομένης, ἀναγκαῖον ἦν ὅτι σῶσαι βουλόμενος ἦ τὴν φθοροποιὸν οὐσίαν ἀφανίσας· τοῦτο δὲ οὐκ ἦν ἑτέρως γενέσθαι, εἰ μήπερ ἡ κατὰ φύσιν ζωὴ προσεπλάκη τῷ τὴν φθορὰν δεξαμένῳ, ἀφινίζουσα μὲν τὴν φθορὰν, ἀθανατὸν δὲ τοῦ λοιποῦ τὸ δεξάμενον διατηροῦσα, διὰ τοῦτο τὸν Λόγον ἐδέησεν ἐν σώματι γενέσθαι, ἵνα τοῦ θανάτου τῆς κατὰ φύσιν ἡμᾶς φθορᾶς ἐλευθερώση. Grab. Spicileg. vol. ii. p. 172. Et in notis ad Bull. Judic. c. vii. s. 5. p. 344.