Imágenes de páginas

and his “ Primitiva & Apostolica Traditio de Xti Divinitate contra Zuickerum.” These works prove the acknowledgment of this great truth by the primitive Christian church, so abundantly, that it is extraordinary this fact should ever have been called into question again. Yet bishop Horseley was again obliged to correct the errors, and check the presumption of Dr. Priestly on the same topic; and his Charge, and controversial Letters on that subject, will be read with great satisfaction and improvement by the student who desires to investigate it. They have been republished by his highly respectable son, the Rev. Heneage Horseley, with an Appendix vindicating and supporting the assertions and arguments of his distinguished father.

I have also had occasion in my Notes, frequently to refer to Mr. Wardlaw's Dis. courses on the chief points of the Socinian Controversy; the five first of which contain a masterly view of the scriptural proofs 'of the Trinity, while in his Answer to Mr. Yates he refutes many of the most important Unitarian objections, and removes many of the most plausible difficulties alleged against the proofs for the Trinity, deduced from Scripture.

I would here notice a useful tract, entitled THE UNITARIAN REFUTED, by the Rev. G. A. Baker, M. A. printed at Bath, 1817, in which the chief scriptural proofs for the Divinity of Christ, and the doctrine of the Trinity, are exhibited, accompanied with Notes selected from the New FAMILY BIBLE.

This compilation is very useful as far as it goes; had it noticed the principal texts from which the objections or difficulties are raised against this important doctrine, and the solutions of those objections or difficulties, with which that excellent work to which he refers, would furnish bim, the interest and utility of his publication would have been greatly increased, at least to theological students. I cannot, however, forbear expressing my entire concurrence with him, in recommending the New Family Bible, (better known by the name of Mant's and D'Oley's Bible,) as a most useful and valuable undertaking, and expressing with Mr. Barker my hope, that as such, it may be encouraged and employed by every sincere friend and well-wisher to the Christian church.

But the most masterly and accurate view of the scriptural proofs of our Lord's Divinity is, I conceive, to be found in Dr. Waterland's three successive Tracts in defence of that truth, in the controversy excited by Dr. Clarke's Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, and continued between Dr. Waterland and Mr. Jackson.

Having thus stated the chief writers, whose works may be most easily and advantageously consulted, in the entire subject of the Trinity, I will proceed to notice some of the leading topics on which particular information may be wished for by the student, with brief references to the authors where it may be found. In the selection of these topics, I shall advert more particularly to those which the limits I had prescribed to myself in the preceding Discourses and Notes, did not permit me to dwell on.

1. Amongst which, the following are the chief: The Personality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost ; the Bishop of Lincoln on Article Five, most clearly proves the personality of the Holy Ghost, from p. 176 to the end.

Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Article Eight. “I believe in the Holy Ghost," is also exceedingly full and satisfactory on this head, advancing proofs very similar to those selected by the Bishop of Lincoln, and adding to them others also very convincing. His statement of the office of the Holy Ghost, with respect to the believer, is peculiarly important and instructive.

Mr. Wardlaw's Ninth Discourse on the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit, appears to me clear and convincing.

2. Argument for the Trinity, from the plural form of the names applied to God in the Old Testament, and from the application of the names of God to Christ, so as to imply his partaking the divine nature.

On this subject, Pearson on the Creed, Article Two, on the clause, “ His ONLY Son," is most full and convincing: And on the clause, “OUR LORD,” the appli. cation of the peculiar names of the Supreme God to Christ, so as to establish his divine nature and dominion, is fully shown.

Vide also Mr. Nares on the improved version, from p. 36 to 57, first edition.

Of the full import of the word aoros as used by St. John, consult the same author, from p. 61 to 79. Of other titles of God ascribed to Christ, consult the same work in the Comment on the First of St. John, from page 88 to 106. Consult also Dr. Thomas Randolph's “ Prælections Theologicæ de Testimoniis divinæ Naturæ Christi quæ ex Collatione Veteris & Novi Testamenti peti possunt, Oxford, 1784."

One object of these Prælections is to prove, that Jesus Christ was the same with that Jehovah who created the world, appeared to the Patriarchs, inspired the Prophets, and conducted the whole system of the divine dispensations to mankind. In this work the comparison of the prophecies concerning our Lord, which are quoted in the New Testament, with their accomplishment, is very clear and full.

3. Remarks on the uses of the definitive article in the Greek text of the New Testament, containing many new proofs of the Divinity of Christ, from passages which were wrongly translated in the common English version, by Mr. Granville Sharp; to which is added an appendix, containing, first, a Table of Evidences of Christ's Divinity, by Dr. Whitby: second, A plain Argument from the Gospel history for the Divinity of Christ, by the former learned editor; and two other appendices added by the author, (I believe Bishop Burgess,) third edition, London, 1803.

4. On the authority of the primitive church being favourable to the doctrine of the Trinity, in addition to the works I have previously referred to, and to the Creeds of Tertullian, Iræneus, and the Church of Jerusalem, as preserved by Cyril, the student will find a still more ancient testimony in Justin Martyr's Exposition of the true Confession of Faith, or concerning the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity, vide “ Opera Justini Cum Versione Latina Joannis Lange Lutetiæ Parisiorum, A.D. 1615, p. 372 to 390.”_ This excellent Tract, written in the second century by one of the most learned and illustrious members of the Christian church, a philosopher, an apologist, and a martyr, would alonę be sufficient to establish the reception of the doctrine of the Trinity by the primitive church. It thus commences : “ As we have sufficiently confuted both the Jews and the Greeks in our former tracts, it remains that we should expound the sound Confession of Faith, that by pointing out the truth, every one may know how he ought to think of it; for it is not simply the glorifying the Father and the Son which secures our salvation, but the sincere (or sound) confession of the Trinity, which secures the enjoyment of those good things which are laid up for the truly religious and pious.” This illustrious teacher then proceeds to establish this great truth, in a train of reasoning which would at this day, approve itself to the soundest judgment and the most enlightened mind; asserting the unity of the Godhead, the consistency of this with the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit; the identity of their essence and the distinction of persons, and adducing the most clear, decisive, and select scriptural authorities, at the head of which stand the Baptismal form instituted by our Lord, and the Apostolic Benediction in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. But I must refer my reader, who desires information from this high authority, to this tract, which will repay his search.

Next to the tracts of Justin, Tertullian, and Iræneus, stands the work of Novatian, (a Presbyter of Rome,) on the Trinity, annexed to the works of Tertullian in Rigaltius's edition, Lutetiæ Parisiorum, 1663, p. 706 to 730. The eight first chapters of this tract, to p. 711, are employed in expounding the existence, attributes, and the glory of God. He then proceeds to state, “ that the same rule of truth obliges us to believe, after the Father, also in the Son of God, Christ Jesus the Lord our God, (Dominum Deum nostrum,) the Son of God, of the true and only God, the Creator of all things, This Jesus Christ, I will again affirm, is the Son of this God, promised in the Old Testament, and exhibited in the New.” He then states briefly the prophecies concerning Christ, affirms his union with human nature, and then proves that the Scripture marks out Christ to be God, as plainly as it affirms him to be man, (chap. xi. and the following :) proving this doctrine by the very same texts of Scripture on which its advocates now rely; and concludes that he is not only man, because he was the Son of Man, but also God, because he is proved to be the Son of God. But the

student who wishes to examine this very condensed collection of scriptural arguments and testimonies on this important subjcct, I must refer to the work itself. The Bishop of Lincoln has given a specimen of his reasoning, in his Comment on the Second Article, p. 136 ; this, however, forms but a very inconsiderable part of the proofs adduced in this Tract of Novatian, in which are united great closeness, as well as acuteness of argument, derived from the clearest Scripture authorities. These writers, as their age is fixed by Dr. Lardner, viz. Justin A. D. 140, Iræneus 178, Tertullian 200, and Novatian 250, all preceded the Council of Nice, A. D. 325, and distinctly prove how early and universal was the agreement of the Catholic Church, as to the Divinity of Christ, and show that the decision of that Council was not the cause of establishing this great truth, but was founded on its clear previous acknowledgment by the primitive and apostolic church.

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »