very titles of fome of his works excite our regret for the lofs of them. One of them is on the fubmiffion of the fenfes to faith; another on the

foul, the body, and the fpirit; another on God incarnate. A fragment of his, preserved by the author of the Chronicle, called the Alexandrian, fays, that the chriftians do not adore insensible ftones, but that they worship one God alone, who is before all things and in all things, and Jesus Christ who is God before all ages. He lived under the reign of Marcus Antoninus. His unfuccessful but masterly apology prefented to that. Emperor, was before taken notice of. He travelled into the east on purpose to collect authentic ecclefiaftical information, and gives us a catalogue of the facred books of the Old Teftament. He died and was buried at Sardis; a man whom Polycrates, Bishop of Ephefus, his contemporary, calls an eunuch, that is, one who made himself an eunuch for the kingdom of heaven's fake.* Several fuch, I apprehend, were in the primitive times. But the depravity of human nature is ever pushing men into extremes on the right hand and on the left. There foon arofe fome who made a felf-righteous ufe of thefe inftances of felf-denial, and clogged them with unwarrantable exceffes. The contrary extreme is now fo prevalent, that for a man to follow the example of Melito on the fame generous principles which our Saviour expreffes, would be thought very extraordinary, and even ridiculous. But whatever has the fanction of Holy Writ fhould be obferved to the honour of those who practife it, whether agreeable to the tafte of the age we live in or not, unless we mean to fet up the eighteenth century as a Pope to judge the foregoing seventeen. The fame Polycrates

S 2

obferves Matthew xix. Eufeb. B. 4. C. 25. Dupin and Cave.

obferves of him, that his actions were regulated by the motions of the Holy Ghoft, and that he lies interred at Sardis, where he expects the judgment and refurrection.

Bardafanes of Mefopotamia, a man renowned for learning and eloquence, escaped not the pollution of the fantastic herefy of Valentinian. His talents and his love of refinement were probably his fnare; but, as he afterwards condemned the fabulous dreams by which he had been infatuated, and is allowed to be found in the main, fome relics of his former herefy might remain without materially injuring either his faith or his practice. I know no particular reafon for mentioning him at all, but for the fake of introducing a remarkable paffage from him, preferved by Eufebius*, which fhews at once the great progrefs and deep energy of christianity.

"In Parthia," fays he, "polygamy is allowed and practifed, but the chriftians of Parthia practife it not. In Perfia the fame may be faid with respect to inceft. In Bactria and in Gaul the rights of matrimony are defiled with impunity. The chriftians there act not thus. In truth, wherever they refide, they triumph in their practice over the worst of laws and the worft of customs." This eulogium is not more strong than juft; and the influence of God, in fupporting his own truth and his own religion, appeared by fuch fruits as no other religion or philofophy could ever fhew.

Miltiades was usefully engaged in difcriminating the genuine influences of the Holy Spirit from the fictitious, of which unhappy instances had then appeared. False prophets evinced the most stupid ignorance in the beginning, in the end a diftempered imagination and furious frenzy. Miltiades. fhewed

* Eufeb. Precep. Evang. Jortin's Remarks IV.

fhewed that the influence of the Holy Spirit, de fcribed in fcripture, was fober, confiftent, reafonable, of a quite different caft and genius. There is no new thing under the fun; impoftures and delufions exift at this day, and why fhould it not be thought as reasonable now to difcriminate genuine from fictitious or diabolical influences, by laying down the true marks and evidences of each, inftead of fcornfully treating all alike as enthufiaftic? The extraordinary and miraculous influences come chiefly under Miltiades's infpection; they were at that time very common in the Chriftian Church; and delufive pretences, particularly thofe of Montanus and his followers, were common alfo. The difcerning reader will know how to apply these things to our own times.

Apollinarius of Hierapolis wrote feveral books under the reign of Marcus Antoninus. We have at present only their titles. One of them was a Defence of Chriftianity, dedicated to the Emperor. The work of which we know the most, from a fragment preferved in Eufebius, is that against the Montanifts, which will fall under our observation in the next chapter.

Athenagoras, towards the latter end of this century, wrote an apology for the Chriftian Religion. His teftimony to the doctrine of the Trinity, contained in it, expreffes fomething befides a speculative belief of it. It seems to have appeared to him of effential confequence in practical godliness. He is a writer not mentioned by Eufebius. Du Pin does him injustice by obferving that he recommends the worship of angels. I have not access to his apology, but fhall give a remarkable quotation from Dr. Waterland, to whom I am obliged for the only valuable information I have of this author.

S. 3

author. Speaking of chriftians, he defcribes them as men that made fmall account of the prefent life, but were intent only upon contemplating God, and knowing his Word, who is from him, what union the Son has with the Father, what communion the Father has with the Son, what the Spirit is, and what the union and diftinction are of such so united, the Spirit, the Son, and the Father.

If this is true, (and Athenagoras may well be credited for the fact) it is not to be wondered at, that the primitive chriftians were fo anxiously tenacious of the doctrine. It was the climate in which alone chriftian fruit could grow. Their fpeculations were not merely abstracted. They found, in the view of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, fomething of energy to raise them from earth to heaven. This could be nothing else than the peculiar truths of the gofpel, which are fo closely interwoven with the doctrine of the Trinity. The right use of the doctrine is briefly, but ftrongly intimated in the paffage, and the connection between chriftian principles and practice appears. In truth, a Trinitarian fpeculatift may be as worldly-minded as any other. His doctrine, however, contains that which alone can make a man otherwise.

CHAP.

Epiphanius Heref. 54. 1. See Dr. Waterland's Importance

of the doctrine of the Trinity.

CHAP. IX.

THE HERESIES AND CONTROVERSIES OF THIS CENTURY REVIEWED, AND AN IDEA OF THE STATE

AND PROGRESS OF CHRISTIANITY DURING THE COURSE OF IT.

IT

T is furely not worth while to enter minutely into the herefies which appeared in this century. Besides that my plan calls me not to notice them at all, any further than they may throw fome light on the work of God's Holy Spirit and the progrefs of godlinefs, in the times in which they appeared. For they could never deferve to be made objects of capital attention on their own account. Yet it was neceffary to examine and confute them. Irenæus did charitably in fo doing. It is, however, to be regretted, that in his celebrated work against herefies, he fhould be obliged to employ fo much time on fcenes of fo much nonfenfe. Let it be remarked in general, that the fame oppofition to the Deity of Chrift, or his manhood, and the fame infidious methods. of depreciating or abufing the doctrines of grace, continued in the fecond century, which had begun in the firft, with this difference, that they were now multiplied, varied, complicated, and refined by endless fubtilties and fancies, in which the poverty of taste and genius, fo common in a period when letters are declining, appears no less than the corruption of chriftian doctrine. Like fpots in the fun, however, they vanished and difappeared from time to time, though revived again in different forms and circumftances. Not one

of