Se&t. 7.

Ad Rom.

Sect. 5.

χωρίςτις Θεῖ Ιησε Χρισν. ἐν Ἰησῦ Χρισῷ, τῷ Θεῷ ἡμῶν. Ad Trall 2 Oeds nuv Inos xgists. Befides others, where one would think this Abridger meant Chrift by Præf. §. 3. the Word God, fingly and abfolutely taken; fuch AdSmyrn 25 ἔῤῥωθε ἐν χάριτι Θεῖ. ἵνα ὁ γεμG ᾗ κατά Θεόν. ἀντὶ ἐμᾶ Sect. 13. To's TS DE Hen, &c. What can be the Mean- Ad Polyc. ing of fo often changing the ufual Words, and Ad Rom. fo frequently calling Chrift God; fo much more Sect. 9. frequently, I mean, than the Scriptures, or any other Remains of the Apoftolical Age do; but to ferve the Turns of the Athanafians, who were then bufy in advancing the Divinity of our Bleffed Saviour above the Ancienter Chriftian Doctrine in that Matter? Now this cannot in Reafon be fuppos'd to be Omiffion in the Larger Epiftles; fince they ftill call our Saviour God, as often, and in the fame Manner as the First Chriftians did; but must be Interpolation in the Smaller: And fo muft, in all probability, have been defign'd for the Purposes of the Athanafians in the Fourth Century.

(2.) The fame Smaller Epiftles not only feveral times avoid the Ancient Language about the Holy Ghoft, as it is contain'd in the Larger, Ad Eph. but thrice directly omit that undoubted Expref- Sect. 21. fion of the Church, v d'μan ází. Which very well agrees with the Athanafians, when they AdPhilad. chang'd the Original Doxology in that Age.

Ad Rom:

Se&t. 8.

Sect. 11.

(3.) Thefe Smaller Epiftles have plain Marks of the Athanafian Doctrine of the Trinity, by introducing twice, very clofely and needlefly, thefe Words ; ἐν ὑῷ, καὶ ἐν πατρὶ, καὶ ἐν πνώματ' with Ad Mag the fame Particle to each Perfon: And the Son nef. §. 13. in the firft place. And το Χρισῷ, καὶ τὰ πατεὶ, καὶ τὸν Tel: duan, with the fame Article to every one, and the Son again in the firft place: While all thofe Noble Texts in the Larger Copy, where the Three Divine Perfons are diftinctly enumerated,

G 4

with

Ad Philadelph. Sec. 6.

AdSmyrn

Sect. 4.

with proper Hints of the due Subordination and Inferiority of the Son and Spirit, are entirely omitted. And thofe lait mentioned Words of theirs follow fuch others, as plainly fhew the fame Delign: ὑποτάγητε τῳ ἐπισκόπῳ, καὶ ἀλλήλοις, ὡς Ιησές Χρισὸς τῷ πατεί, κατὰ σάρκα και οι ἀπόςολοι των Χρισῷ, καὶ τω πατεί, καὶ τω πνεύματι. Whence came the Words or in this Place? fince they are not in even the Larger Copy; but to guard against that ancient and undoubted Chriftian Doctrine that Chrift, even as to his Divinity, was ever obedient to his heavenly Father; Which began now to be difrelifh'd by the Athanafians: and to bring in the Holy Spirit, in common with the Father and the Son, as the Lord, and God, and Governor of Chriftians; contrary to all the firft Books of our Religion befide.

(4.) Thefe Smaller Epiftles do not only leave out all that Noble Teftimony in the Larger, which fhews that the Son of God had no Human Soul, and that the ages inftead thereof inhabited in a Human Body, but their Author puts in one Paffage, as it were on purpose, to contradict that Arian or Chriftian Notion: For fo docs he affert of our Saviour, το τελείς ανθρώπι Shou That he was a compleat or perfect_Man; which Words, tho' capable of a true Senfe, yet feem here to refer to the later Notion of a Human Rational Soul in Christ, contrary to the Original Doctrine of the Gofpel. Thefe Four Characters do plainly enough fhew, that these Smaller Epiftles were intended against the Arians, and for that Orthodoxy which arofe in the Fourth Century; and that under the Conduct chiefly of Marcellus and Athanafius. But then, they do not diftinctly fhew who was their Author; at what exact Time they were forg'd; nor whether their Compiler belong'd more properly

to

to Marcellus or to Athanafius. For tho' these Two Hereticks were all along intimate Friends, and joint bitter Enemies to the Arians; nay and, in the main, of the very fame Doctrine in thefe Matters; yet were they efteem'd so far separate Men, and their refpective Followers feparate Parties; and did ufe fome fuch different Phrafes, Terms of Art, and Distinctions, that while the one has commonly pafs'd in the later Ages for a pernicious Heretick, the other has been efteem'd the grand Fountain and Standard of Orthodoxy; because the Phrafes, Terms, and Diftinations of the one fell to the ground, and were rejected; while thofe of the other prevail'd in the following Ages, and did thereby become Orthodox. Now in this Cafe I venture to affirm, that the Smaller Epiftles have molt plain Characters of the peculiar Doctrines, Phrafes, and Language of Marcellus; and fo were, in all probability, compos'd or extracted by him, or fome of his peculiar Followers. At leaft, if Athanafius, or any of his peculiar Followers did it, it muft have been before there was any confiderable Difference in their Notions and Language in these Matters. Now that we may know the real Opinions of Marcellus, I fhall not only refer to diftinct Paffages in the Margin, but shall here give the Reader an Authentick Account of them, and that in the Words of the Learned Montfaucon, the principal Patron of this Marcellus in our Age. Jam ex Eufebio ipfo, fays he, qui Diatrib. contra Marcellum fcripfit, loca adferamus ad Marcel de Cauf. lianam illam hærefin intelligendam opportuna. Ait Marcel. itaq;, Hanc effe Marcelli opinionem, Verbum filens an- lect. Nov. ap. Colte Creationem in Patre fuiffe, Unum cum Deo Patre, Tom. II. Sempiternum, atrov, non genitum, ita ut Pater qui- Præfat. dem & Filius diverfis nominibus efferantur, fed Unum P.55. tamen fint effentia & hypoftafi: są wodoes îv ov

τα

Uti Sabellius docuit. Verbum item ante emilionem effe fimile verbo noftro filenti; quor us in suit

VT cum emittitur vero ad operationem effe fimile verbo noftro cum loquimur. Illud porro Verbum cum carnem adfumpfit tunc Filium Dei factum fuiffe, Fefum Chriftum vocatum, Regemq; appellatum, item imaginem Dei invifibilis, & primogenitum omnis creaturæ. Nihil autem horum prius extitiffe; ac poft judicium hæc omnia amiffurum effe. Ipfumq; nudum effe Verbum humano fimile, non autem Filium effe Dei vivum & fubfiftentem: Non fuiffe Dei imaginem antequam bomo fieret. Exiftentiam, maziv, & ais

Filii Dei tollere Marcellum ait; ac dicere ipfum fuiffe nudum folummodo verbum ad juffa exequenda. Marcellum item, qui in Sabellium invehitur, Sabellio paria fentire; quiPatrem & Verbum Unum effe dicat; ipfumq; tres sous negare, & Unam bany TETROW TOV Truuor, id eft, Subftantiam tri-perfonalem & trinominem dicere. This is Eufebius's Account of the Matter, and well agrees with the other Original Accounts befide. Where, by the way, we may fee how very near our Modern Orthodoxy is to the infamous Heresies of Sabellius and Marcellus. I defire Dr. Cave, Dr. Grabe, and the other Learned among the Orthodox, to fhew us plainly and clearly the Difference between them. But let us now prove, that these very Doctrines, every one of these very Doctrines of Marcellus are contain'd in thefe Smaller Epiftles; and that in fuch parts of them as are peculiar to them, and not taken out of the Larger, nay, in direct Oppofition to the Doctrines contain'd in the Larger. And,

(1.) We have already feen that these Small Epistles are directly level'd against the Arians all along. Now Marcellus is well known to have been a violent Enemy to, and Writer against the Arians, (2.) Marcel

Marcel.
L.I. C.

L. II.

6.

.P.32.

(2.) Marcellus afferted, that Chrift was God's Contr. bare Word, firft Silent, and then Vocal; that there was an noua, or an in God before his Emiffion; P. 4. and that he did exter, in a particular Manner C.4.p. 19. proceed out of God; inftead of fuppofing he 20. p. 27. was begotten or created by him. See how exactly C.1. this entire Doctrine is in thefe Smaller Epistles, C.2. p.39 in Oppofition to the Chriftian Doctrine in the 41, 42. Larger: svidionan, is cîmer xỳ ég á Ad Eph. πεποίηκεν ἄξια τὸ παξές ότι ο λόγον Ιησέ κεκτημ άλ- Sed. 15. ☺ danπῶς διά) καὶ ' ἡσυχίας αυτὸ ἀκέειν ἵνα τέλειΘ- ᾖ, ἵνα δι ̓ ὧν λαλεῖ πράση, καὶ δι' ὧν σιγᾷ γνώσκη). ὃς πρὸ αιώνων πρα Tare hy, [for Hovnes, in the Larger ] Te Ad Magἐφάνη, ὡς ἐπὶ ἕνα Ἰησῖν Χρισὸν, ἢ ἀφ' ἑνὸς παδὶς προελο net. θέντα, καὶ εἰς ἕνα ὄντα, και χωριστα. εις Θεός όξιν, ὁ φα- Sea. 6, μερώσας ἑαυτὸν διὰ 1ησέ Χρισέ, τὸ ὑς αυτό ὅς ὅταν αυτό λό- 7, 8. γος αΐδια, ἐκ ἀπὸ σιγῆς προελθών. 828 Deòs nμwv 'Ins, Ad Rom. Χριστὸς ἐν πατρὶ ὢν μάλλον φαίνεθ.

631.

Se&. 3.

C. 2.

(3.) Marcellus afferted, that this Word was not L. I. C. 1. a later giadas, the Third or Fourth in order, p. 5. which proceeded from the Father after number- L. II. C... lefs Ages were over, as the ay- of the Valenti- P. 32. nians was fuppos'd to do; but that it was his atabges, God's Eternal, or Coeternal Word. This we have juft now feen to be the exprefs Doctrine of the Smaller Epistles also.

P. 35, &c.

(4) Marcellus afferted, that this Word was therefore an, not only Eternal but Unbegot L. I. C. 1. ten. This we have alfo formerly feen is the ex- p. 5. prefs Doctrine of thefe Smaller Epiftles, and C. 4. that in a Paffage cited with Approbation by P. 23, 25, Marcellus's own Friend Athanafius. So that their 27. Doctrines hitherto are very much the fame, fince they both agreed that our Saviour was did C.2. p.35. , & à vnt, Eternal, and Unbegotten.

L.I.C.r.

P. 32.

(5) Marcellus afferted, that therefore this Word L. I. C. 1. of God was not the Son of God, the Begotten of God, P. 6. or the First born of every Creature, till his Incag

C. 4.

P. 24.