On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
thrse persons of' one substance , power attd eternity ; " that bis ^ opinions re ^ specting thei Son and' Holy Spirit essentially coincided with 4 he dactrmefc of the Church of England ; and that the general doctrine of the Nieene and Athanasiac * Creecte is co ^ ai « e 4 iri his wrhrn ^ . f " B « t though we think , ' * observes the Professor , " that TeftuiHariV opinions on these points ; coincided in the main with the doctrines of our Church , we are far from meaning to assert * hat expressions may ndt occasionally be found which ate capable of
a different interpretation , and which'Were carefully avoided by the orthodox writers' of later times , when the controversies respecting the Trinity * had introduced greater precision of language . * ' P . 556 * So in another ' place * ' * In his representations of this distinction , ' * ( viz . of the three persons , ) « he sontetknes uses expressions which in after times , when controversy had introduced greater precision of language , were studidusly avoided by thd orthodox . " P . 539 . We must beg leave here , as in a former oase ^ to enter our protest against this method of accounting for the difference that is
found between the ancient and the modern expositions of the dqctrine of the Trinity . The language which was employed by Tertullian expressed as preecisely and as clearly as they could be expressed , the notions he had formed . His language was in later times carefully avoided , because his opinions were not then maintained . Controversy , it is true , gave occasion to different phraseology , because in die progress of controversy n ^ W yiews of the doctrine were taken . The gradual corruption of the doctrine of the divine unity as it was taught by Jesus and his apostles , can be distinctly
traced from the middle of the second century till about the end of the fifth , when it was lost in that labyrinth of unmeaning words constructed by Pseudo * -Athanasius . This corruption wris in an early stage of it 3 progress in the days of Tertullian ; and though he did as much as any one to help it forward , it had not advanced so far as to appear in the language employed by later writers . " With respect to particular expressions , " says our author , " we find that he calls the Son , God of God and Light of Light . ' * It is true ; and it is possible that the Post-Nicene Fathers may have used this language in the sense in which it was used by Tertullian : yet we think that they advanced beyond the point at which he stopped , when they said that the Son
was " very God of very God ; " nor is there any passage m his works from which it can be inferred that he had any notion of the Holy Spirit as " the Lord and giver of life . " The Bishop acknowledges that , " in speaking of the Holy Ghost , Tertullian occasionally uses terms of a very ambiguous and equivocal character : " and no wonder , for in his days no clear notions respecting the Spirit had been formed . With respect to the expressions contained in the Athanasian Creed , no ingenuity can stretch the opinions or the language of Tertullian to such an extent as this : " The Godhead of the
Father , of the Son , and of the Holy Ghost , is all one ; the glory equal , the majesty co-eternal . Such as the Father is , such is the Son , and such is the Holy Ghost . And in this Trinity none is afore or after other ; . none is greater or less than another . " Not one of the Ante-Nicene Fathers , ever w&ed language approaching to this ; b y ^ no one of them was such a < cjotftrine maintained . This account of Tertullian ' s faith , as it respected the doctrine of the Trinity * appears to us the least satisfactory part of the learned Prelate's 1
work : owingchiefly to this circumstance , that writinsr under the influence work ; owing chiefly to this circumstance , that writing under the influence of a desire to vindicate the orthodoxy of Tertullian , he ha * not allowed himself to weigh the expressions of tto Preabytei 1 with his usual accuracy , and to infer from them po more than they really warrant . We must not
Untitled Article
£ 18 Review . ~ - * Dr < mySsTertelluM .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1827, page 518, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1798/page/46/
-