Obrazy na stronie

that there would have been treatises written expressly against the Unitarians long before the time of Tertullian, if they had been considered in any obnoxious light, or had not been a very great majority of the christian world.

6. That the Unitarian doctrine was very prevalent, even among learned christians, in the age which followed that of the apostles, and was then supposed to b6 that which was taught by them, may,» with considerable probability, be inferred from the Clementine Homilies, and Recognitions, of which some account was given, vol. i.p. 113, What is particularly remarkable relating to this work (for the two were originally the fame) is, that, though it was written by a philosopher, and upon subjects which related to the doctrine concerning the person of Christ, it contains no mention of that doctrine which made so great a figure afterwards, and which in time bore down all before it, viz. that of the personification of the logos. No person, I should think, could peruse that work with care, without concluding, that the orthodoxy of the, subsequent pe* riod had made but little progress then. The fame questions are discussed, and the same objections are answered, but on quite different principles, and without taking the least notice of any different principles.

If we cannot infer from this circumstance, that such a system as that of Justin Martyr, or the orthodoxy of the third century, did not exist, or was not much prevalent, so as to have attracted much notice, in the second; it must at least be allowed, as I observed before, that the writer of this work, being indisputably a man of genius and learning, would ascribe to Peter and Clement such opinions, and such a mode of answering the Gnostics, as he thought would pass for theirs. And as the work was probably a very popular one, from the different editions and modifications of it (being published afterwards, with Arian, and again with trinitarian adulterations) and used, as Epiphanius fays, by the Ebionites as a sacred book, we may likewise, infer, that the theological doctrines of it were generally thought to be those of the apostolic age, though with such additions as tha z philophilosophy of the times could supply. A man must have had less knowledge and less judgment than the writer of this work was evidently possessed of, to have put into the mouths of Peter and Clement Unitarian doctrines, and Unitarian modes of answering the Gnostics, if it had not been supposed that Peter and Clement, though no philosophers, were at least Unitarians.

To the passages quoted from this work before, I shall here add another, in which, contrary to the orthodox doctrine of the world not having been made by God himself, but by the logos, and without noticing any such doctrine, he gives a fine enumeration of the attributes of the one true God, and represents him as the demiurgus, the immediate maker of the world, and all the several parts of it, the heavens and the heavenly bodies, the earth and water, mountains and seas, fountains and fruits, &c. &c*

* A10, a rexvov xtoyttK, «!"£%£, aMo n ppomtrv; vcpt Ts 9«t, n oil auloi Imv®- sriv Sfoj, iy xiyi©-, xj nalnp, ayo&o; Kj Sixm©-, iitjMHpyos, pcocfoSu/M;, £^sh/jimv, rpoipeu; svegyelris, pihaySpaTsiav vajuIfvotv, ayvnav trvixGxtevuV) aiavi®", mams; noun, avuynpil©-, reu(

Dr. Lardner observes (Credibility, vol. 2. p. 819.) that the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions deserve a more particular examination than has yet been given to them. And indeed, in the view in which I have mentioned them, and also, in many others, they are justly intitled to it; as they contain a particular-account of the opinions of those times, especially of the manner in which Christianity was treated and defended by philosophers. More may he learned concerning the theology and philosophy of those times, from this single work, than from many others. It is true that the philosophical doctrines in it are absurd enough; but the age afforded np better, and they are exhibited in a very pleasing dress.

f a Toy fttyav cuova a; xrsigov ml-as, o tspanv ttya-xyjAaat;, K) ynf H&ajafy uJidf T«jUXEU(r«{, arpae £V apava> Sioseij, wirya* yw f^wo-af, xa^n; iKtpwat, cgn ufaxraf, Sctteurtrav wtposieroj, avt/*a{ Te Ac) nvtu/Mxlix 3ia7a|a{ * o To mipiz%fiv aufta cv airtiqa tsi^ayu mtvfuSi @nMi ourQsfcni aa<pa>ivay.Mi. Horn. 2. sect. 45. p. 632.


S E C T I O N . II.

Direst Evidence in Favour of the Gentile Christians having been generally Unitarians,

J^UT there is no occasion to argue in this manner from circumstances, and the nature of the thing, since it appears from the evidence of all history, so as never to have been questioned by any writer of reputation, that the Unitarians had not any places of worship separate from those of other christians in early times. It was allowed by Mofheim, a zealous trinitarian, who fays, (Hist. vol. 1. p. 191) "However, ready many "have been to embrace this erroneous doc"trine, it does not appear that this sect "formed to themselves a separate place of '* worship, or removed themselves from "the ordinary assemblies of christians." But does it not also follow from the fame fact, that these Unitarians were not expelled from christian societies by others, as they certainly would have been, if they had been considered as heretics?

« PoprzedniaDalej »