be wilfully blind who does not perceive them ;) even those places in which his economy is mentioned, and which refer either to his office or honour, as Messiah, Christ, and our Mediator, certainly speak more highly of him, than of a man or a creature. The economy which is ascribed to him, necessarily pre-supposes his divinity, and establishes it, as the schoolmen say. For what purpose? That the Messiah or Christ, whom the sacred scriptures, in which we profess to believe, preach to us, may be the Saviour of our souls; that he may be to us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, making us wise, righteous, holy, and perfectly happy. He hears, every where, the prayers of his own, which are offered up in his holy name, and of course must be omnipresent, omniscient, and acquainted with the heart. He is always with his church, which is scattered over the whole world, to maintain and defend it by his almighty power, so that neither the powers of this world, nor the gates of hell shall prevail against it. He is seated on the same throne with God the Father, and is worshipped not only by us worms of the dust, but by angels, archangels, and all the heavenly host.And, lastly, he shall come at the end of the world, shining in awful glory and majesty, guarded by angelic attendants, to judge the world; to expose to light not only the deeds but the secrets of all men; to banish his enemies to the regions of misery, and to reward his followers, neither with riches, nor honours, nor with earthly pleasures,

but with heavenly glory and eternal life. Are these things compatible with a mere man, or any other creature? If any man think so, I must say, that he attacks not only faith, but reason itself. Permit this digression.

Enough, I think, has been said to confute the rash assertion of Episcopius, from the testimonies of the ancient fathers. * Let us now proceed to the next part of our subject.

* See a remarkable passage of St. Cyprian to the same purpose with the other fathers quoted in this Chaptet. Def. Nic. Cr. sec. 2, chap. 10, § 2. Appendix, No. 8, p. and 9 p.

CHAPTER II.

Of those who, in the first century, opposed the Christian doctrine of Christ being God and

man.

I. We come next to ecclesiastical history, which whoever will consult, I doubt not, will be surprized to find Episcopius asserting, with such boldness, that, "Among the primitive churches, "from the times of the apostles during three "whole centuries, the faith and profession of "this special filiation of Jesus Christ" (by which he is shown to be the Son of God, and God before all worlds) "was not thought necessary to "salvation." Certainly nothing can be more repugnant to the veracity of all ecclesiastical history, than such an assertion. That the subject may be the better understood, I will repeat what was mentioned at the beginning of this Dissertation, namely, that the primitive church could not, in a more decided manner, declare her opinion of the necessity of believing any article of our religion, than by excommunicating those who denied it, Doubtless the anathema of the church, as Tertullian observes,was formerly held by Christians

as the chief rule of a future judgment." Thus, those whom the church had rejected out of her

pale, until they repented and sought peace with the church, were reckoned out of a state of salvation, according to that old saying, "no salvation out of the church." Indeed Episcopius himself, proposing his own question thus, "Whe"ther this fifth mode of stating the filiation of "Jesus Christ be necessary to be known and be"lieved to salvation, and whether those who deny "it be liable to excommunication?" plainly confesses, that to excommunicate any person for denying any doctrine, is the same as to think and declare that doctrine necessary to be known and believed to salvation. If, therefore, the primitive churches pronounced an anathema against those who denied this fifth mode of the filiation of Jesus Christ, then the belief of it was necessary to salvation, Episcopius himself being judge.But it is certain, from ecclesiastical history, that for the first three centuries, no one ever denied this mode of Christ's filiation, by which he was God of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, but who, unless he immediately retracted and condemned his own heresy, was excommunicated; was excluded from the communion of the church as a stranger and an alien to the body of Christ. This is what is undertaken to be proved in this and the following Chapter.

II. Cerinthus and Ebion, who disquieted the church in the days of the apostle, were the chief devisers of that impious heresy which denies the divinity of our Saviour. The only difference of