Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

and an odious blasphemy, by the Catholic Church, for the first three centuries. Those who maintained it, were also rejected as impious dogmatists, and aliens from true saving faith in Christ. It is truly strange, that Episcopius, should, with pretences and sophistry, attempt to defend the contrary; since he has not produced one solid argument against such plain testimonies. Whatever has been advanced by him in such a cause, shall immediately be examined more minutely.

[ocr errors]

CHAP. IV.

Of the Creeds of the Primitive Church. The first and most ancient Creed, with explanations of it, by Irenaeus and Tertullian.

I. To prove that the faith and profession of that particular filiation of Jesus Christ, by which he was the Son of God before the worlds, and God of God, was not required as necessary to salvation by the primitive Churches, during three whole centuries, from the times of the Apostles, Episcopius brings forward two arguments. The former of which is this: "The creeds of the

churches," says he, "which were first used as badges to distinguish Christians from infidels, "and upon the professing of which, they were "matriculated into Christianity, prove it. In "them no peculiar profession or faith is either "mentioned or required. The most ancient, "and which was used in the first administration "of baptism from the times of the Apostles, was "this; I believe in God, the Father, the Son, and "the Holy Ghost; according to the form pre"scribed by Jesus himself, Go ye, therefore, and "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of

"the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. "None of the explanations of this creed by the "ancient writers, such as Irenaeus,* Tertullian,† "contain this mode of filiation, neither the neces"sity of professing it. And yet Irenaeus speaks "of his creed being so perfect, that the greatest "theological skill could add nothing to it; nor "the greatest unskilfulness detract from it. "Tertullian says the same of his; that though a person knew no more, yet knowing it he knew "what was sufficient. That creed called the

[ocr errors]

Apostles, at what time soever it might have "been composed, was not all framed at the same "time, but by piece-meal, as seems evident to "me, for the different articles were added to "counteract any new heresy. This, like the "preceding, is so accurately composed, that 66 many of the Church of Rome have believed, "though falsely, that all the different articles "had been composed, examined, and approved "separately and singly by the Apostles themselves. "It has been received by all Christian Churches as an undoubted, perfect, and general rule of "the Christian faith, if not as in the first three "centuries, yet as it has continued since the "fourth century to this day.

[ocr errors]

This creed, I affirm, "makes no mention of this particular filiation, "but uses this short form, I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord.”

* Lib. cap. 2 and 3.

† Adversus Hær.

II. I answer, 1st, that this mode of arguing is of no force. It is certainly evident enough from the testimonies which have been quoted, that the belief and profession of this peculiar filiation of Jesus Christ, was thought necessary to salvation, by the primitive churches. Who will, believe him who goes about to prove the contrary, that the Creeds used by them do not plainly enough contain that faith and profession? Indeed we should rather come to an opposite conclusion ; S as it is abundantly evident from other arguments, that the profession of this faith was judged necessary to salvation, by all the primitive churches, and that this peculiar mode of filiation, was clearly laid down in the Creeds and Confessions which they used, at least they believed so. And it is certain that the Catholic doctors, who lived previously to the framing of the Nicene Creed, thought that the doctrine of the true divinity of the Son was contained in all the Creeds received in the churches in their own times. For Irenaeus and Tertullian, as we shall show afterward, plainly affirm, that the doctrine belonged to the rule of faith. Caius, also in speaking of the Artemonites, says, that they despised the ancient rule of faith, which taught that Christ was God.* Also the Fathers of the council at Antioch, in their Synodical Epistle, say, Paul of Samosata was an apostate from the rule of faith, as has

[ocr errors]

Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. V.
cap. ult.

L

« PoprzedniaDalej »