For, let the possibility of an error in the testimony of so many witnesses, as met in that council, be granted: there is yet a coincidence in that error, which is wholly inexplicable, on any principles with which we are acquainted.

But these difficulties, though sufficiently discouraging, constitute but an inconsiderable part of the obstacles which impede the success of him, who engages in the desperate undertaking, of the equally obscure and presuming individual whose endeavours now call down our animadversion. Though the sentence delivered by the first general council on the important points, on which he has obtruded his opinions, without a solitary qualification to fit him for discussing such questions, had surely been sufficient to oppose to the dogmatism of that sect in which he has enrolled himself; it contains but a small part of the evidence which we can summon in the defence of those truths, on which he has commenced an attack, which is, to speak of it in the softest terms, characterized as much by its impotence as its malevolence.

The documents by which the opinions of the primitive church may be accurately traced, are so various and numerous, that we cannot pursue our researches in any direction, without acquiring that evidence of its fidelity, as a witness and preserver of the faith, which derives invincible strength from the collateral proofs by which it is supported. Whether we appeal to history, or to tradition; to the works of divines, or to the sentence of councils; whether we proceed upon the concession of the Jew, or on the testimony of the Heathen, the success of our researches is in all instances alike. From an examination of the testimony which they respectively bear to the truth, that accumulation of evidence arises, which the sceptic may indeed resist, but cannot easily subvert.

When we descend from merely general remarks, to an induction of particulars, and submit the point in debate to the touchstone of truth, the first voucher to which an appeal may be made, is the testimony of history. At an early period the ecclesiastical annals were examined, by one who was distinguished above all his contemporaries, by his learning and industry; and who possessed every facility of research, in the libraries of Jerusalem, in which the authentic records of the primitive church were deposited from the earliest period *. After a careful examination of those documents, he has stated the result of his inquiry and it could have been scarcely less strong in our favour, had it been invented to answer our purpose. "Thus much,"

* Vid. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. Lib. VI. cap. xx. p. 284. 1. 20. ed. Cant. 1720.

"the

the historian declares*, "I have learned from the monuments of ancient writers, that until the siege of Jerusalem, under Hadrian, a succession of fifteen bishops had presided in the church of Jerusalem: all of whom, being Hebrews by origin, embraced the doctrine held on the person of Christ in its genuine purity."

Had we been at any loss to determine in what sense this declaration should be understood, the historian by whom it was made might be taken as his own interpreter. The account which he has given of the Ebionite heresy will clearly evince in what sense he conceived, that the doctrine relative to the person of Christ, was held by the Church of Jerusalem. As he pronounces their doctrine impious who denied the incarnation, though they acknowledged the divinity of the Logos†; there cannot be room for a cavil, against the consequence, that he considered nothing short of a plenary confession of the Godhead of Christ, an admission of the genuine doctrine.

To the testimony thus delivered by history the most ample confirmation is superinduced by tradition. Without insisting on the evidence of the fifteen bishops who succeeded St. James in the Eastern Church of Jerusalem; the testimony of twelve bishops who succeeded St. Peter in the Western Church of Rome, may be confidently cited in support of the orthodox. cause. This testimony has been collected by a primitive writer ‡, who, in the line of succession, was but one remove from the Apostles; having enjoyed the intimacy of a disciple of the last surviving Evangelist §. In what sense he understood the testimony thus born by that primitive church to the person of Christ, it must be superfluous to state when his testimony is produced ||.

Vid. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. IV. cap. v. p. 143. 1. 23. Toσrov de ἐξ ἐγγράφων παρείληφα, ὡς μέχρι τῆς κατὰ ̓Αδριανὸν πολιορκίας, πεντεκαίδεκα τὸν ἀριθμὸν αὐτόθι γεγόνασιν ἐπισκόπων διαδοχαί· ὃς πάντας Εβραίας φασὶν ὄντας ἀνέκαθεν, τὴν γνῶσιν το Χρις, γνησίως καταδέξασθαι.

+ Id. ibid. Lib. III. cap. xxvii. p. 121. 1. 20–36. Conf. Dem. Evang. Lib. IV. cap. ii. xv. p. 146. 171. sqq. ed. Par. 1628.

‡ Vid. S. Iren. adv. Hær. Lib. III. capp. ii, iii, iv. p. 174, sqq. ed.

Bened.

f Conf. S. Iren. ibid. cap. iii. § 4. p. 176.

S. Iren. ibid. cap. iv. § 2. "Cui ordinationi assentiunt multæ gentes barbarorum, eorum qui in Christo credunt, sine charta et atramento scriptam habentes per Spiritum in cordibus suis salutem, et veterem traditionem diligenter custodientes; in unum Deum credentes fabricatorem cœli et terræ, et omnium quæ in eis sunt, per Christum Jesum Dei Filium. Qui propter eminentissimam ergo figmentum suum dilectionem, eam quæ esset ex Virgine generationem sustinuit, ipse per se hominem adunans Deo, &c.”

In the same chapter in which he declares that God would judge the Ebionites, who of all the primitive heretics, exclusively considered our Redeemer a man born like themselves; he asserts the divinity of our Lord; and states this to be the doctrine, which had descended traditionally to the church in whatever regions she had published the gracious terms of the Gospel *.

The testimony of history thus confirmed by tradition, derives still further corroboration from the evidence of that succession of writers, who have followed each other, in a long line commencing with the age of the Apostles. On the first attempt which was made to impeach the integrity of the church as a witness of the truth, the vindicators of her testimony supported her defence on the concurrence of the Sacred Text, and the ing terpretation of the ecclesiastical writers. They maintained, that previously to the age in which this novel charge was advanced, many had written in defence of the truth, against the heathens and hereticks; and that all of them asserted the orthodox doctrine of the divinity of Christ, in terms the most full and explicit. These writings were examined at an early period by a person fully competent to appreciate the weight of their testimony §; but they were found on experiment to justify the stress which was laid on their authority. The principal part of these works exist either wholly or partially at the present day; and a learned prelate of our church, equally distinguished by the extensiveness of his erudition and the strength and comprehensiveness of his mind, has carefully examined their evidence ; but the result of his inquiry has been the production of accumulating proof in support of the orthodox doctrine. By a full induction he has unanswerably demonstrated, that but one opinion prevailed in the church on the person of Christ from the earliest period; and that this opinion corresponded, even in the minutest respect, with the plenary sentence which was passed on the question before us in the first general council.

As the body of evidence which we thus quote in defence of the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, is full and connected; it may be easily proved to be universally held, and this from the earliest ages. In the next succession after the Apostles, a curious and learned enquirer, visited the principal churches, dispersed

* Conf. S. Iren. ibid. Lib. IV. cap. xxxiii. § 4. 7. 8. pp. 271, 272. › + Caius ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. Lib. V. cap. xxviii. p. 251. 1. 26.

$qq.

Id. ibid. p. 252. 1. 12-18.

g Euseb. ib. cap. xxi. p. 181. 1. 21–28.

D. Bull. Def. Fid. Nicen. Op. Lat. ed. Lond. 1721,

Id. ibid. Sect. II. cap. xv. p. 153. Conf. Sect. III. cap. *. $24. p. 220.

2

through

through the most remote regions, for the purpose of comparing their different tenets *. As this person was a converted Jew †, his evidence must be conceived superior to every objection. The substance of his testimony has been preserved by Eusebius; and is still direct in our favour. Having enumerated the succession of bishops in the church of Rome, and spoken of his familiarity with the bishop which presided in that city, in his own times, he thus expressly declares ; "but in every succession, and every city, that doctrine is held, which the law, and the prophets, and our Lord himself had inculcated." As it is specifically stated by the historian who preserves this account, that he had left the most plenary testimonials of his religious opi. nions §; and, as the historian himself has acknowledged the divinity of our Lord, and condemned the Ebionites, who abjured it, as heretical and profane; we can be at no loss to determine in what sense he understood the author before us, in representing the catholic church as agreeing in their opinions of the person of Christ.

The testimony which was thus collected by the primitive writers who visited different churches, is indisputably confirmed by the members of the same churches who assembled in one place, for the purpose of delivering their sentence in council. Besides the convention which was held under Victor, bishop of Rome, against the first heretick on record, who held the notions of the modern Unitarians; a synod was held at Antioch, against Paul of Samosata, in which that heretick, though vested with the government of the see, was deposed, for impugning the divinity of the Saviour **. About fifty-six years subsequent to this period the celebrated council of Nice was convened; in which it is no where disputed, that the orthodox doctrine was fully canvassed, and formally recognized and confirmed, by the bishops of the Catholic Church, in a solemn confession, attested by their subscription ††

On the weight of this sentence of the Catholic Church, in deciding the point at issue, we have already stated our opinion;

* Euseb. ibid. Lib. IV. cap. xxii. 181. 1. 31. sqq.

+ Id. ibid. p. 184. l. 7.

p.

* Id. ibid. p. 182. 1. 10. ἐν ἑκάσῃ δὲ διαδοχῇ καὶ ἐν ἑκάσῃ πόλει ἔτως ἔχει, ὡς ὁ νόμος κηρύττει καὶ οἱ προφῆται καὶ ὁ Κύριος,

Id. ibid. p. 181. I. 31–33.

Vid. Supr. p. 227. n. t.

Euseb. ib. Lib. V. cap. xxviii. p. 252. 1. 25–33.

**Conf. Euseb. Lib. VII. cap. xxix. p. 358. 1. 27. sqq. S.

Athan de Synodd. $ 45. Tom. II. p. 759. b.

++ Euseb. Vit. Const. Lib. VII. cap. xiv. p. 585. 1. 4. Socrat Hist. Eccl. Lib. I. cap. viii, p. 22, L 11—13.

and

and had all the monuments of ecclesiastical antiquity irrecoverably perished, from this single sentence the primitive doctrine might be infallibly collected. The venerable assembly who met for the purpose of comparing their opinions, were collected from the remotest parts of the civilized world. To that council flocked the divines from Arabia and Persia on the one side, and of the British isles on the other*. In this vast assemblage of the learning and piety of the habitable globe, there was not a single dissenting voice from the general sentence, which acknowledged the pre-existence of Christ, and admitted his divinity, as at least antecedent to the creation +. But five bishops, and these as inconsiderable in their name as their number, denied his co-eternity and co-essentiality with the Father. For this uniformity of testimony, it is scarcely necessary to repeat, there can be but one mode of accounting; that the opinion in which so many witnesses agreed, must have been coincident with that which they severally derived by tradition from the Apostles of Christ.

Irrefragable as the body of proof is which thus accumulates as we advance, in support of the orthodox faith, it forms but a part of the testimony to which the Church may appeal in defence of the purity of its faith. Those who would question this evidence, as of suspicious authority, in consequence of the corrupted channel through which it is derived, may be finally referred to the Pagans and Jews for a testimony of its integrity. Within a few years of the death of the last surviving Apostle, 'the proconsulate of Asia was committed by Trajan to the younger Pliny. The desertion of the Heathen temples, within the sphere of his immediate jurisdiction, in consequence of the rapid extension of Christianity, excited his alarm, and became the subject of his complaint to the Emperor §. The most effectual means were taken by the proconsul to acquire a just knowledge of the tenets and institutions of a sect, whose history was novel and extraordinary. For this purpose he examined two young persons, of the office of deaconness, by torture, that the strength of their sufferance operating on the weakness of their sex, he might acquire, from their extorted confessions, a perfect insight into the nature of the new religion. The result of this experiment,

* Euseb. Vit. Const. Lib. VII. cap. vii. p. 579. 1. 35. sqq. Conf, cap. xix. p. 588. 1. 37. Soerat. Hist. Ecc. Lib. I. cap viii. p. 18, 1. 48. sqq.

+ Socrat. ibid. p. 22. 1. 11-13.

Id. ibid. p. 22. 1. 14-18.

Plin. Epist. Lib. X. cap. xcvii. p. 722, ed. Varior. 1669.

Id. ibid.

1