Archbishop Tennison's reproof of these elder Socinians, for their inconsistency in holding such a doctrine as this of praying to Christ, whom they took to be only a man, endued with divine power, is very observable; and points out the wrongness of praying to him at all, if he be not the Supreme God.

"To say that Christ is a creature, yet made such a God who can hear all prayers; supply all wants, give all graces needful to his body the church, know all the secrets of all thoughts not directed to him, govern and judge with wisdom all the world, and to worship him under this divine notion; what is it else than paying an homage to a presumed creature, which is due only to the One very God! For what apprehensions greater than these do we entertain concerning the true God, when we call upon him, confide in him, or revere him ?"*

The opinion and practice of the ancient Christians, before the council of Nice, has been often shewn from their writings, and will hereafter be pointed out. But I cannot better close this head, than with a passage out of Origen de Orat. p. 48, which I remember not to have seen cited by any

one.

"But if we would learn, says that excellent person, what prayer is, we must take care not to

* Tennison of Idolatry, chap. ix. p. 174.

pray to any creature, no not even to Christ himself; but to the God and Father of the Universe alone: to whom this our Saviour himself offered up his prayers, as we have shewn before; and also teaches us to offer up ours: for being once asked, teach us to pray, (Luke xi. 1,) he teacheth not to pray to himself, but to the Father, saying, Our Father, who art in heaven," &c.

Religious Worship to be paid to God, the Father, and not to the Holy Ghost.

I find not any example of prayer to the Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit, as the third person in the Trinity, as it is called, either in the Scriptures of the Old or New Testament; or any countenance given to such a practice.

But it is most singular and remarkable, that St. Paul's epistles in particular, and those of the other apostles, commonly begin with devout wishes of blessings from God, and from the Lord Jesus Christ; but the Holy Spirit is never named at all at such times; as in the following instances: Rom. i. 7. 1 Cor. i. 3. 2 Cor. i. 2. Gal. i. 3. Eph. i. 2. Phil. i. 2. Coloss. i. 2. 1 Thess. i. 1. 2 Thess. i. 1. 1 Tim. i. 2. 2 Tim. i. 2. Tit. i. 4. Philem. i. 3. 2 Pet. i. 2. 2 John i. 3. It is also farther to be noted, that in the Revelation of St. John, where we have several representations of the worship paid by the Christian church, and the inhabitants of the heavenly world, we have no mention there

made of the Holy Spirit, as a distinct agent, person, or object of worship, but the whole is directed to God, with blessing and honour, &c. to the Lamb that was slain. v. 12.

These omissions must strike a serious observer. They had such an effect upon one person, as to convince him of the utter wrongness of the received doctrine concerning the Holy Spirit. "It cannot be," said he, "if the Holy Spirit be a person, and God equal to the Father, that he should be thus passed by, and left out unnoticed by the apostles of Jesus."

The only text that can be said directly to favour prayer to the Holy Spirit, is 2 Cor. xiii. 8, the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all. But to what hath been above suggested concerning this text, I take the liberty to add what is said by an able writer, in answer to one who had brought this as a proof of prayer being made to the Holy Ghost.

"The text contains but a pious wish of spiritual gifts; and it may as well be said, when St. Paul writes, Col. iv. 18, Heb. xiii. 25, Grace be with you all, that it is a prayer made to Grace. And therefore, if the Holy Ghost never be called 'God; be never prayed to in Scripture; if we are never called the servants, nor church, nor kingdom, nor people of the Holy Spirit; if never required to pray, nor give thanks, nor praise to the Holy Spirit, (but to God, for and by his Spirit,) and

only are bid to be guided by, and not to quench, nor grieve the Spirit; as may be said also of our own conscience: if so, then what ground is there for all these inferences of prayer and giving thanks for all to the Holy Ghost, and joining him with the Father in all our devotions? If any such things might justly be inferred from Christian principles, surely the apostles were as much concerned as any to make such inferences, and to have put them in practice for our imitation."* The practice of Christians for a long time was in strict conformity with the Holy Scriptures on this point. We do not find that the Holy Ghost was admitted into the Christian church, as a separate and distinct person of the

after some ages had passed over.

Deity, until

Not in the

year 325, at the time of composing the Nicene Creed: for that part (the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets) which we have now adopted into the Nicene Creed, was not originally in it, but an addition made to it at the latter end of the fourth century at the second council at Constantinople.t

* Emlyn, Vol. II. pp. 447, 448.

This addition to the Nicene Creed, made at the second general council of Constantinople, was confirmed by that of Ephesus which followed, when it was decreed unlawful to make any additions to it. And yet, not long after, Pope

Some would account for this general silence of the early fathers, by alleging, that the distinct deity of the Holy Spirit was not opposed before the time of Macedonius, on whose account the council at Constantinople was held, and therefore not particularly specified. The real truth is, it was never in their thoughts. They had hitherto satisfied themselves with the plain language and doctrine of the Scripture itself, which we have seen does not favour such a strange worship. “And what is farther a proof of this, the ancient fathers, when they mentioned the objections of the Heathens on this subject, (viz. of Christians holding more Gods than One,) do not speak of them as levelled against the notion of three Gods, but of two only; whereas, if the notion of the divinity of the Holy Ghost had been then fashionable, they would have made the same objection as is now made by the Jews and Mahommedans; not against two Gods, but against three."

I shall only quote Lactantius, Inst. L. iv. c. xxix. "Here some may per hapsask, how the Christians profess to worship but One God, yet we seem to believe and hold two Gods, God the Father and God the Son. This doctrine hath been a great

Nicholas I. added, and the Son, (so that the Creed became as we now read it, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son,) which was the cause of schism betwixt the Greek and Latin church, which continues to our time.-Pearson on the Creed, note, pp. 325, 326.