Query XX. p. 302.
The [Greek: h.o.m.oousion] itself might have been spared, at least out of the Creeds, had not a fraudulent abuse of good words brought matters to that pa.s.s, that the Catholic Faith was in danger of being lost even under Catholic language.
Most a.s.suredly the very "disputable" rendering of [Greek: h.o.m.oousion] by consubstantial, or of one substance with, not only might have been spared, but should have been superseded. Why not--as is felt to be for the interest of science in all the physical sciences--retain the same term in all languages? Why not "usia" and h.o.m.ousial, as well as "hypostasis", hypostatic, h.o.m.ogeneous, heterogeneous, and the like;--or as Baptism, Eucharist, Liturgy, Epiphany and the rest?
Query XXI. p. 303.
The Doctor"s insinuating from the 300 texts, which style the Father G.o.d absolutely, or the one G.o.d, that the Son is not strictly and essentially G.o.d, not one G.o.d with the Father, is a strained and remote inference of his own.
Waterland has weakened his argument by seeming to admit that in all these 300 texts the Father, "distinctive", is meant.
Ib. p. 316-17.
The simplicity of G.o.d is another mystery. * * When we come to inquire whether all extension, or all plurality, diversity, composition of substance and accident, and the like, be consistent with it, then it is we discover how confused and inadequate our ideas are. * * To this head belongs that perplexing question (beset with difficulties on all sides), whether the divine substance be extended or no.
Surely, the far larger part of these a.s.sumed difficulties rests on a misapplication either of the senses to the sense, or of the sense to the understanding, or of the understanding to the reason;--in short, on an asking for images where only theorems can be, or requiring theorems for thoughts, that is, conceptions or notions, or lastly, conceptions for ideas.
Query XXIII. p. 351.
But taking advantage of the ambiguity of the word "hypostasis", sometimes used to signify substance, and sometimes person, you contrive a fallacy.
And why did not Waterland lift up his voice against this mischievous abuse of the term "hypostasis", and the perversion of its Latin rendering, "substantia" as being equivalent to [Greek: ousia]? Why [Greek: ousia] should not have been rendered by "essentia", I cannot conceive. "Est" seems a contraction of "esset", and "ens" of "essens": [Greek: on, ousa, ousia] = "essens, essentis, essentia".
Ib. p. 354.
Let me desire you not to give so great a loose to your fancy in divine things: you seem to consider every thing under the notion of extension and sensible images.
Very true. The whole delusion of the Anti-Trinitarians arises out of this, that they apply the property of imaginable matter--in which A. is, that is, can only be imagined, by exclusion of B. as the universal predicate of all substantial being.
Ib. p. 357.
And our English Unitarians * * have been still refining upon the Socinian scheme, * * and have brought it still nearer to Sabellianism.
The Sabellian and the Unitarian seem to differ only in this;--that what the Sabellian calls union with, the Unitarian calls full inspiration by, the Divinity.
Ib. p. 359.
It is obvious, at first sight, that the true Arian or Semi-Arian scheme (which you would be thought to come up to at least) can never tolerably support itself without taking in the Catholic principle of a human soul to join with the Word.
Here comes one of the consequences of the Cartesian Dualism: as if [Greek: sarx], the living body, could be or exist without a soul, or a human living body without a human soul! [Greek: Sarx] is not Greek for carrion, nor [Greek: soma] for carcase.
Query XXIV. p. 371.
Necessary existence is an essential character, and belongs equally to Father and Son.
Subsistent in themselves are Father, Son and Spirit: the Father only has origin in himself.
Query XXVI. p. 412.
The words [Greek: ouch hos genomenon] he construes thus: "not as eternally generated," as if he had read [Greek: gennomenon], supplying [Greek: adios] by imagination. The sense and meaning of the word [Greek: genomenon], signifying made, or created, is so fixed and certain in this author, &c.
This is but one of fifty instances in which the true Englishing of [Greek: genomenos, egeneto], &c. would have prevented all mistake. It is not "made", but "became". Thus here:--begotten eternally, and not as one that became; that is, as not having been before. The only-begotten Son never "became"; but all things "became" through him.
Ib. 412.
"Et nos etiam Sermoni atque Rationi, itemque Virtuti, per quae omnia molitum Deum ediximus, propriam substantiam Spiritum inscribimus; cui et Sermo insit praenuntianti, et Ratio adsit disponenti, et Virtus perficienti. Hunc ex Deo prolatum didicimus, et prolatione generatum, et idcirco Filium Dei et Deum dictum ex unitate substantiae".--Tertull.
Apol. c. 21.
How strange and crude the realism of the Christian Faith appears in Tertullian"s rugged Latin!
Ib. p. 414.
He represents Tertullian as making the Son, in his highest capacity, ignorant of the day of judgment.
Of the true sense of the text, Mark xiii. 32., I still remain in doubt; but, though as zealous and stedfast a h.o.m.ousian as Bull and Waterland themselves, I am inclined to understand it of the Son in his highest capacity; but I would avoid the inferiorizing consequences by a stricter rendering of the [Greek: ei mae ho Pataer]. The [Greek: monon] of St.
Matthew xxiv. 36. is here omitted. I think Waterland"s a very unsatisfying solution of this text.
Ib. p. 415.
"Exclamans quod se Deus reliquisset, &c. Habes ipsum exclamantem in pa.s.sione, Deus meus, Deus meus, ut quid me dereliquisti? Sed haec vox carnis et animae, id est, hominis; nec Sermonis, nec Spiritus", &c.--Tertull. Adv. Prax. c. 26. c. 30.
The ignorance of the Fathers, and, Origen excepted, of the Ante-Nicene Fathers in particular, in all that respects Hebrew learning and the New Testament references to the Old Testament, is shown in this so early fantastic misinterpretation grounded on the fact of our Lord"s reminding, and as it were giving out aloud to John and Mary the twenty-second Psalm, the prediction of his present sufferings and after glory. But the entire pa.s.sage in Tertullian, though no proof of his Arianism, is full of proofs of his want of insight into the true sense of the Scripture texts. Indeed without detracting from the inestimable services of the Fathers from Tertullian to Augustine respecting the fundamental article of the Christian Faith, yet commencing from the fifth century, I dare claim for the Reformed Church of England the honorable name of [Greek: archaspistaes] of Trinitarianism, and the foremost rank among the Churches, Roman or Protestant: the learned Romanist divines themselves admit this, and make a merit of the reluctance with which they nevertheless admit it, in respect of Bishop Bull. [2]
Ib. p. 421.
It seems to me that if there be not reasons of conscience obliging a good man to speak out, there are always reasons of prudence which should make a wise man hold his tongue.
True, and as happily expressed. To this, however, the honest Anti-Trinitarian must come at last: "Well, well, I admit that John and Paul thought differently; but this remains my opinion."
Query XXVII. p. 427.
[Greek: Ton alaethinn ka ontos onta Then, tn tou Christou patera].
--Athanas. Cont. Gent.
The just and literal rendering of the pa.s.sage is this: "The true G.o.d who in reality is such, namely, the Father of Christ."