Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

Witness. That they were distinct sects. The Ebionites are said, by the Defendant Priestley, not to have been heretics; and that, as the ancient Fathers did not mention them as heretics, the belief, therefore, of these Fathers, which was that of Unitarianism, was not heretical. 1 Now Origen informs us that there were two sects of Ebionites, and that one of them did believe the miraculous conception of Christ 2: and Irenæus, whose authority is most valuable, and whose expressions are particularly concise, tells us, that "they used only the Gospel of St. Matthew." It was no wonder, then, that the Ebionites disbelieved the divinity or pre-existence of Christ, if either of these doctrines had been taught them by the Apostles. But, my Lord, though these Ebionites rejected the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John, this was by no means all they disclaimed. Those "primitive Unitarians," as the Defendants call them; those good Christians, who are said "not to have been looked upon as heretical by the early Church;" these men took the liberty (so we are informed by Irenæus, Origen, and Eusebius);-I say, they took the liberty of getting rid of all St. Paul's Epistles at once, calling that Apostle an apostate from the

[blocks in formation]

Law.1 After seeing this, who can doubt whether the Ebionites were heretical ?

Att. Gen. My Lord, as the witness is so familiar with the ancient Fathers as to have them, I may say, ad unguem, I propose, with the permission of the Court, to call upon him to produce passages from those Fathers, which bear upon the doctrines and positions of the Defendants indiscriminately.

Court. Do so, if you please.

Att. Gen.

Then be so good as to state to the Court, sir, what early Father of the church calls Christ Almighty.

Witness. The passage affording the most unequivocal proof of this, you will find in Clemens Alexandrinus," He who hath the Almighty God, the Word, is in want of nothing;" — and here I would observe:

[ocr errors]

Court. Stop.-That has been already adduced by the witness Horsley.

Witness. Still, my Lord, I would bear my testimony to this being applied to Christ for the same reason I repeat the observation, that the same Father, in allusion to the words of St. Paul, has said, "For I have espoused you to one hus

1 Iren. I. 26. 2. p.105. Orig. cont. Cels. v.65. p. 628. Eus. H. E. iii. 27. p. 121. See Burton, p. 443.

says,

band, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ;" where, for the name of Christ, is substituted "the Almighty God."-Tertullian also "The titles of the Father, God Almighty, Most High, Lord of Hosts, King of Israel, I AM, as far as the Scriptures teach us, we say that those titles belong to the Son, and that the Son came under those titles, and always acted according to them."-"He was God Almighty by his own right, inasmuch as he is the Word of God Almighty."2 Att. Gen. Now, sir, as to the Son being consubstantial with the Father.

Witness. Origen makes a resemblance of Christ's proceeding from the Father to the vapour which proceeds from a corporeal substance, and the wisdom of Christ rising from him like a corporeal efflux,-"both which likenesses," he says, "most plainly show, that there is a communion of substance between the Son and the Father; for an efflux seems to be of one substance with that body, from which it is an efflux or vapour." "3 And

1 Τοῦ παντοκράτορος Θεοῦ. -
2 Adv. Prax. c. xvii. p. 510.

Strom. iii. 12.

3 Aporrhœa enim òμooúσtos videtur, id est, unius substantiæ cum illo corpore ex quo est vel aporrhœa vel vapor.- Ep. ad Heb. vol. iv. p. 697.

The two expressions, " vapour of the power of God," and "efflux of the glory of the Almighty," are taken from the apocryphal Book of Wisdom, vii. 25.— p. 320.

Dionysius of Alexandria, says, "I have proved that the accusation which they bring against me is false, of saying that Christ was not of one substance with God." And again, "Christ was by nature Lord, and the Word of the Father, by whom the Father made all things, and is declared by the holy writers to be of one substance with the Father." 1

In both passages the word ouooúσios, of one substance, is used; which expression caused such violent disputes at and after the Council of Nice: and this term, Dionysius says, was used by the earlier writers, and he is accused of not having adopted it, which we see he denies; and yet, from the Council of Nice to the present day, there are those who assert that the word was invented and first used at that Council; whereas, by looking at the creed drawn up by the Council of Antioch, A. D. 269, the same word occurs more than once. Att. Gen. Now, sir, as to Christ's eternity. Witness. I can show this to satiety. Ignatius says of Christ, "Wait for him who is beyond all time, eternal, invisible, who for our sakes became

1 Τὸν Χριστὸν ὁμοούσιον εἶναι τῷ Θεῷ.— Καὶ ὁμοούσιον τῷ Πατρὶ εἰρημένον ὑπὸ τῶν ἁγίων πατέρων. — Ex Elench. et Apol. p. 90. et contr. Paul Samos. p. 214.

2 In the creed of the Antiochan Fathers the word oμoovσios occurs twelve times in twice that number of lines.- Vide Concil. Eph. part. iii. c. 6. p. 979. And Bull's Defen. Fid.

sect. 2.

[ocr errors]

visible." Justin Martyr in his comment upon the seventy-second Psalm, which we know to be prophetical of the reign of Messiah, denies that it was spoken of Solomon, as the Jews conceived, but that it expressly spoke "in honour of the Eternal King, that is, Christ; for Christ is declared to be a King, and a Priest, and God, and Lord, and Angel, and Man, and Chief Captain, and a Stone, and a Child born; first made capable of suffering, then returning into Heaven (εἶτα εἰς οὐρανὸν ἀνερχό μevos), and again coming thither with glory, and in possession of the eternal kingdom, as I prove from all the Scriptures." 2- Justin in his epistle, says of Christ, also, "He who was from the beginning, who existeth for ever, in these latter days accounted a Son." - Irenæus is still more express; "The Son, who always co-existed with the Father, in times past, and from the beginning, always reveals the Father both to Angels and Archangels, and to principalities and powers, and to all to whom he wishes to reveal." Origen, in the same manner,

[ocr errors]

4

-

says, "The Word, who in the beginning was God

1 Ep. ad Polycarp. c. 3. p. 40. Tòv äxpovov, тòv åóparov,

τὸν δι' ἡμᾶς ὁρατὸν, &c.

2 Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. c. xxxiv. p. 130.

Ep. ad Diognet. c. xi. P. 240.

+ Iren. 1. ii. c. 30. Semper autem co-existens Filius Patri olim et ab initio semper revelat Patrem et angelis, &c.

« ElőzőTovább »