Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, Discourse · Chapter 2
CHAP. II. The Doctrine of the Trinity not received in the Christian Church by Force or Interest.
AS to the first, it will lead me into an enquiry into the sense of the Christian Church, as to this Doctrine, long before Popery was hatched, and at a time when the main force of Imperial Edicts was against Christianity it self; at which time this Doctrine was owned by the Christian Church, but disowned and disputed against by some particular Parties and Sects. And the question then will be, whether these had engrossed Sense, and Reason, and Knowledge among themselves; and all the body of the Christian Church, with their heads and governors, were bereft of common Sense, and given up to believe Nonsense and Contradictions for Mysteries of Faith. But in order to the clearing this matter, I take it for granted, That Sense and Reason are no late inventions, only to be found among our Vnitarians; but that all Mankind have such a competent share of them, as to be able to judge, what is agreeable to them, and what not, if they apply themselves to it; That no men have so little sense as to be fond of Nonsense, when sense will do them equal service; That if there be no Biass of Interest to sway them, men will generally judge according to the evidence of reason; That if they be very much concerned for a Doctrine opposed by others, and against their interest, they are perswaded of the truth of it, by other means than by force and fear; That it is possible for men of sense and reason to believe a Doctrine to be true on the account of divine Revelation, although they cannot comprehend the manner of it; That we have reason to believe those to be men of sense above others, who have shew'd their abilities above them in other matters of Knowledge and Speculation; That there can be no reason to suspect the integrity of such men in delivering their own Sense, who at the same time might far better secure their interest by renouncing their Faith; lastly, That the more Persons are concerned to establish and defend a Doctrine which is opposed and contemned, the greater evidence they give, that they are perswaded of the truth of it.
These are Postulata so agreeable to sense and common reason, that I think if an affront to human Nature to go about to prove them. But to shew what use we are to make of them; we must consider that it cannot be denied, that the Doctrine of the Trinity did meet with opposition very early in the Christian Church, especially among the Iewish Christians; I mean those who strictly adhered to the Law of Moses, after the Apostles had declared the freedom of Christians from the obligation of it. These (as I shall shew by and by) soon after the dispersion of the Church of Ierusalem, gathered into a body by themselves, distinct from that which consisted of Iews and Gentiles, and was therefore called the Catholick Christian Church. And this separate body, whether called Ebionites, Nazarens, or Mineans, did not only differ from the Catholick Christian Church, as to the necessity of observing the Law of Moses, but likewise as to the Divinity of our Saviour, which they denied, although they professed to believe him as the Christ or promised Messias.
Theodoret hath with very good judgment placed the Heresies of the first ages of the Ch…istian Church,Theodoret haeret. l. 1. & 11. under two distinct heads, (which others reckon up confusedly) and those are such as relate to the Humanity of Christ, as Simon Magus, and all the Sets of those who are called Gnosticks, which are recited in his first Book. In his second he begins with those which relate to the Divinity of Christ; and these are of two kinds:
1. The Iewish Christians who denied it. Of these, he reckons up the Ebionites, Cerinthians, the Nazarens, and Elcesaitae, whom he distinguished from the other Ebionites, because of a Book of Revelation, which one Elxai brought among them;Epiphan. Haeres. 19. n. 5.29. n. 17. but Epiphanius saith, he joyned with the Ebionites and Nazarens.
2. Those of the Gentile Christians, who were look'd on as broaching a new Doctri…e among them: of these he reckons Artemon as the first, then Theodotus; whom others make the first Publisher of it, as Tertullian, Tertull de praescript. haeret c 52. Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 28.and the old Writer in Eusebius, supposed to be Caius, who lived near the time, and of whom a considerable Fragment is preserved in Eusebius, which gives light to these matters. The next is another Theodotus, who framed a new Sect of such as set up Mel…hisedeck above Christ. Then follow Paulus Samosatenus, and Sabellius, who made but one Person as well as one God, and so overthrew the Trinity; with whom Marcellus agreed in substance, and last of all Photinus. But Theodoret concludes that Book with this passage, viz. That all these Heresies against our Saviour's Divinity were then wholly extinct; so that there were not so much as any small Remainders of them. What would he have said, if he had lived in our age, wherein they are not only revived, but are pretended to have been the true Doctrine of the Apostolical Churches? Had all men lost their Senses in Theodoret's time? And yet there were as many learned and able Men in the Christian Church then, as ever were in any time.