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
to be that of the Father , by which he made the worlds , conversed with the patr iarchs , and at length * ' united God to man" in the person of Jesus Christ , only differing' on the question of its distinct and permanent personality .
It is further remarkable that Origen speaks in a peculiar manner of " the Logos of Gjud , and who was with him / ' and was " from the beginning . " Many persons , ( I imagine , ) upon recollecting the sense in which Origen and similar writers used such language , will be inclined to believe he meant
that the Logos was from the beginning a person existing with the Father , as one person with another , and was not before his incarnation the Logos of the Father as an attribute ; hence , by what he says after , of knowing the Logos only according to the flesh , as contrasted with the above , he meant to condemn the Sabellian doctrine , which
denied the proper and permanent personality ; and that , therefore , he had no thought of simple Unitarians . If any think the above arguments invalid , I shall only remind them , at present , that I have said of Origen and the other two authors before noticed , they lived at too late a period to
answer Dr . P . ^ s purpose In quoting them , as I intend to say more on this circumstance at the close of my letter . In the mean time , I shall Bring forward what I think to be positive evidence , that the common people were no more simple ; Unitarians than were those learned persons whom Dr . P . acknowledges held Sabellian tenets , and
distinguishes as philosophical Unitarians First . It appears that simple Unitarianism was broached , about the close of the second or beginning of the third century , by Theodotus , who was thereupon immediately excommunicated as
an heretic ; so that , contrary to the Doctor ' s opinion , simple Unitarians were deemed heretics , and treated as such , from their very origin , although Sabellianism had been long tolerated That Theodotus was excommunicated , Dr . P . himself informs his readers
( HI . 237 ) : " We find / ' says he , " that all the Unitarians continued in communion with the Catholic Church till the time of Theodotus , about the year 200 , when it is possible that upon his excommunication some of his most zealous followers might form themselves into separate societies / 3 The
Untitled Article
Doctor , indeed , denies that Theodotus was excommunicated for Unitarianism ; and says it must have been for something else : what that something else was , however , lie could not tell us , but only that he was excommunicated by Victor , who was himself an Unitarian , or at least favoured Unitarians .
To this I answer , the passage he refers to proves that Victor , or , as he is sometimes called , Victorinus , favoured Sabellians . See Vol . III . p . 304 , where it is said , " Praxeas introduced his heresy into Rome , which Victorinus endeavoured to strengthen . He said that Jesus Christ was God the Father ' ,
omnipotent" &c . Now , that this Victor should excommunicate a man who taught that Jesus Christ was not God at all 9 is no wonder ; and , that it was
on this very ground Eusebius expressly declares , as quoted in the above page . He says , " Victor excommunicated Theodotus , the leader and father of that God-denying heresy , who first said that Christ was a mere man . " The
distinction which I make between Sabellians and simple Unitarians , and which the Doctor did not make , I think appears by the above to be of some importance : I will add , it seems to me to be a just distinction , and one which materially affects many of his arguments , as founded on his historical
oms . Secondly . I think the common people of the two first centuries , and later , were not simple Unitarians , but of the
same opinions as the learned , they being the leaders and teachers of the multitude , who were their disciples and followers . The Doctor himself says , ( II . 48 , ) f < Marcellus was popular
among the lower people : " , Vol . IIL p . 350 , he says , " His" ( Basil's ) " strongest apprehensions were from the Unitarians , the disciples of Sabellius , Marcellus and Paulus Samosatensis" P . 329 , he also says , " In a treatise ascribed to Athanasius , the
more simple are represented as easily taken with the assertion , that God the Logos suffered in the flesh . " Here the common people are described as admirers and disciples of Sabellian teachers , and as easily taken with Sabellian doctrine ; surely , then , it cannot be reasonably thought they were simple Unitarians . Thirdly . The creed , so early as the time of lrenaeus , ( A . D . 160 , ) and as
Untitled Article
Difficulties on the Unitarian Hypothesis . 523
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Sept. 2, 1821, page 523, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2504/page/19/
-