Page images
PDF
EPUB

body. They maintained, that of Arius and his immediate the God of sabaoth exercised followers. a cruel tyranny in the seventh heaven; that he engendered the devil, who begot Abel and Cain of Eve. These tenets they defended by books of their own composing, called, "The Revelation of the Prophets," and "The Harmony."* ARIANS, a denomination in the fourth century, which owed its origin to Arius, presbyter of Alexandria, a man of a subtile turn, and remarkable for his eloquence. He maintained that the Son was totally and essentially distinct from the Father; that he was the first and noblest of all those beings whom God the Father had created out of nothing, the instrument by whose subordinate operation the almighty Father formed the universe, and therefore inferior to the Father both in nature and dignity. He added that the holy Spirit was of a different nature from that of the Father and of the Son, and that he had been created by the Son. However, during the life of Arius, the disputes turned principally on the divinity of Christ. Such is the representation which is given of the opinion

The modern defenders of this system, to prove the subordination and inferiority of Christ to God the Father, argue thus:-There are various passages of scripture where the Father is styled the one, or only God. Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God. (Matt. xix. 17.)—The Father is styled God with peculiar high titles and attributes. (See Matt. xv. 32. Mark v. 7, &c.) It is said in Ephesians iv. 6, There is one God and Father of all, who is above all.-Our Lord Jesus Christ expressly speaks of another God distinct from himself. (See Matt. xxvii. 46. John xx. 17.)-Our Lord Jesus Christ not only owns another than himself to be God, but also that he is above and over himself. He declares that his Father is greater than he. (See John xiv. 28.) He says he came not in his own, but in his Father's name and authority; that he sought not his own, but God's glory; nor made his own, but God's will his rule. And in such a posture of subjection he came down from heaven into this earth, that it should seem that

Echard's Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 542.

His followers deny that Christ had any thing which could properly be called a divine nature, any other way than as any thing very excellent may by a figure be called divine, or his delegated dominion over the system of nature might entitle him to the name of God.

nature which did pre-exist did not possess the supreme will, even before it was incarnate.Christ's saying that he is of the Father, must mean that he is derived from him; and this necessarily implies that he is neither self-existent nor eternal, as the being derived from must exist before another being can be derived from him.-Christ professes his knowledge to be limited, and inferior to the Father's. Of that day knoweth no man; no not the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. (Mark xiii. 32.)-In like manner the apostles declare his subjection to another, not only as his Father, but his God; which is emphatically expressed in calling the most blessed God the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, after his humiliation was over. (See Ephes. i. 17.) And the head of Christ is God. (1 Cor. xi. 3.) It is said in 1 Cor. xv. 24, that Christ will deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; therefore he will be subjected to him, and consequently inferior.-There are various passages of scripture in which it is declared, that all prayers and praises ought primarily to be offered to the Father. See Matt. iv. 10. John iv. 23. Acts iv. 24. 1 Cor. i. 4. Phil. i. 3, 4.

The ancient Arians were divided among themselves, and

torn into factions, which regarded each other with the bitterest aversion. Of these the ancient writers make mention, under the names of SemiArians, Eusebians, Aetians, Eunomians, Acacians, Psatyrians, and others. But they may all be ranked with the utmost propriety into three classes. The first of these were the primitive and genuine Arians, who rejected all those forms and modes of expression which the moderns had invented to render their opinions less shocking to the Nicenians. They taugat simply, that the Son was not begotten of the Father; i. e. produced out of his substance, but only created out of nothing. This class was opposed by the Semi-Arians, who in their turn were abandened by the Eunomians, or Anomaans, the disciples of Aetias and Eunomius. The Semi-Arians held, that the Son was oμoloussos, i. e. similar to the Father in his essence, not by nature, but by a peculiar privilege. The Eunomians, who were also called Aetians and Exucontians, and may be counted in the number of pure Arians, maintained that Christ was reportós, i. e. unlike the Father in his essence, as well as in other respects. Under this general division were comprehended many subordinate sects, whose subtilties and re

finements have been but obscurely developed by ancient writers.

The opinion of the Arians concerning Christ differs from the Gnostics chiefly in two respects (1.) The Gnostics supposed the pre-existent spirit which was in Jesus to have been an emanation from the supreme Being, according to the principles of the philosophy of that age, which made creation out of nothing to be an impossibility. But the Arians supposed the pre-existent spirit to have been properly created, and to have animated the body of Christ, instead of the human soul.(2.) The Gnostics supposed that the pre-existent spirit was not the maker of the world: but was sent to rectify the evils which had been introduced by the Being who made it. But the Arians supposed that their Logos was the being whom God had employed in making the universe, as well as in all his communications with mankind.

Those who hold the doctrine which is usually called Low Arianism, say that Christ pre-existed; but not as the eternal Logos of the Father,

or as the Being by whom he made the worlds, and had intercourse with the patriarchs, or as having any certain rank or employment whatever in the divine dispensations. As this doctrine had not any existence till late years, and the author of it is unknown, it has not got any specific name among writers.

In modern times, the term Arian is indiscriminately applied to those who consider Jesus simply subordinate to the Father. Some of them believe Christ to have been the creator of the world ; but they all maintain that he existed previously to his incar nation, though in his pre-existent state they assign him different degrees of dignity. Hence the terms High and Low Arian.* [See Unitarians of Dr. Price's description. See also Pre-existents.]

ARMENIANS, a division of eastern christians, thus called from Armenia, a country they anciently inhabited, The principal points in their doctrine are as follow:-(1.) They assert with the Greeks, concerning the trinity, the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father only.-(2.)

Mosheim, vol. i. pp. 335, 342, 343. Formey's Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 76. Priestley's History of Early Opinions, vol, iv. p. 168. Clarke's Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, pp. 1, 43, 46. Emlyn's Extracts, pp. 9, 10, 11, 21. Parves's Humble Attempt, pp. 6, 7. Theological Repository, vol. iv. p. 276. Doddridge's Lectures, p. 401. Lowman's Tracts, p. 253. "Evans's Sketch, p. 26.

They believe that Christ at his descent into hell freed the souls of the damned from thence, and reprieved them to the end of the world, when they shall be remanded to eternal flames.-(3.) They believe that the souls of the righteous shall not be admitted to the beatific vision till after the resurrection, notwithstanding which they pray to departed saints, adore their pictures, and burn lamps before them. They use confession to the priests, and administer the eucharist in both kinds to the laity. In the sacrament of baptism, they plunge the infant thrice in water, and apply the chrism with consecrated oil, in form of a cross, to several parts of the body, and then touch the child's lips with the eucharist. --They observe a number of fasts and festivals. The fasts observed annually in the Ar- ARMINIANS. They demenian church are not only rive their name from James more numerous, but kept with Arminius, who was born in greater rigour and mortifica- Holland in the year 1560. tion than is usual in any other He was the first pastor at christian community. In the Amsterdam, afterwards prorights and ceremonies of the fessor of divinity at Leyden; Armenian church there is so and is said to have attracted great a resemblance to those of the esteem and applause of the Greeks, that a particular his very enemies by his acdetail might be superfluous. knowledged candour, peneTheir liturgies also are either tration, and piety. They

essentially the same, or at least ascribed to the same authors.

The Armenian was considered as a branch of the Greek church, professing the same faith, and acknowledging the same subjection to the see of Constantinople, till near the middle of the sixth century. At that time the doctrine of the Monophysites spread far and wide through the regions of Africa and Asia, comprehending the Armenians also among its votaries. When they receded from holding communion with the Greeks, they made no change in their ancient episcopal form of church government: they only claimed the privilege of choosing their own spiritual rulers.

The Armenian priests are permitted to marry once only; but their patriarchs and bishops must remain in a state of strict celibacy.*

Broughton's Historical Library, vol. ii. pp. 329, 330,
Dallaway's History of Constantinople, pp. 383-385.

received also the denomination of Remonstrants, from an humble petition, entitled their "Remonstrances," which they addressed in the year 1610 to the states of Holland.

The principal tenets of the Arminians are comprehended in five articles, to which are added a few of the arguments they make use of in defence of their sentiments.

1. That the Deity has not fixed the future state of mankind by an absolute unconditional decree; but determined from all eternity to bestow salvation on those who he foresaw would persevere unto the end in their faith in Jesus Christ, and to inflict everlasting punishments on those who should continue in their unbelief, and resist unto the end his divine succours. For, as the Deity is just, holy, and merciful; wise in all his counsels, and true in all his declarations to the sons of men, it is inconsistent with his attributes, by an antecedent decree, to fix our commission of so many sins in such a manner, that there is no possibility for us to avoid them. And he represents God dishonourably, who believes that by his revealed will he hath declared he would have all men to be saved, and yet by an antecedent secret will he

would have the greatest part of them to perish. That he hath imposed a law upon them, which he requires them to obey on penalty of his eternal displeasure, though he knows they cannot do it without his irresistible grace; and yet is absolutely determined to withhold this grace from them, and then punish them eternally for what they could not do without his divine assistance.

par

2. That Jesus Christ, by his death and sufferings, made an atonement for the sins of all mankind in general, and of every individual in particular; that, however, none but those who believe in him can be partakers of their divine benefit. That is, the death of Christ put all men in a capacity of being justified and doned, on condition of their faith, repentance, and sincere obedience to the laws of the new covenant; for the scriptures declare in a variety of places that Christ died for the whole world. God so loved the morld, that he gave his onlybegotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him might not perish, but have everlasting life-He is the propitiation not only for our sins, but for the sins of the whole world-Christ tasted death for every man. (John iii. 16, 17. 1 Johnii. 2.Heb. ii. 9.)

« PreviousContinue »