ing is left but what is common to all theistic systems of religion known among men."1

Wesley wrote of the Trinity as an incomprehensible mystery. Those who attempted to explain it "darkened counsel by words without knowledge." To him it was a fact revealed in God's Word, and therefore an object of faith, although the manner of it, not being revealed, is therefore not an object of faith.2

The doctrine of the Trinity is essential to Christianity; without it there is no Christology. The knowledge of the Three-One God is interwoven with all true Christian faith and with all vital religion. It can never be surrendered, since to surrender it would be to destroy every evangelical feature of the gospel.

When faith is firmly fixed upon this foundation the Christian beholds God as his Father, Jesus Christ as his Saviour, and the Spirit as his Sanctifier and Comforter, and has communion with the Father, and with the Son, and with the Holy Ghost.

1 Theology, vol. i, pp. 375, 392.

2 Works, vol. ii, pp. 23, 24.

ARTICLE II

OF THE WORD, OR SON OF GOD, WHO WAS MADE VERY MAN

The Son, who is the Word of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin; so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one person, never to be divided; whereof is one Christ, very God and very Man, who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for the actual sins of men.

I. THE ORIGIN

This Article was taken from the Augsburg Confession. It constitutes the first part of the third Article of that formula. Archbishop Cranmer, and the German divines who came in 1538 to advise with the English Reformers, made it a part of the Thirteen Articles. It became a part of the Forty-two issued in 1553. In 1562 the clause, "begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father," taken from the Würtemberg Confession, was added to it, and with this addition it passed into the Thirty-nine Articles and was adopted by Wesley in his abridgment.1

II. THE AIM

This Article is aimed against heresies that arose in the first four centuries, and its phraseology is that which was

1 As prepared by Wesley the Article contained the words, "begotten from everlasting of the Father." In 1786 they were omitted, whether by accident or design may never be known. They are also omitted from the Service book of the English Wesleyans. The doctrine of the eternal Sonship was disputed among Methodists, denied by Adam Clarke and defended by Richard Watson and Richard Treffry.

adopted at that time to condemn the errors then prevalent. Most of these heresies had relation to the person of Christ. Errors on this point of Christian doctrine appeared very early, and at various times became so widespread as to shake the foundations of the Church. In the first century of its history the humanity of Christ was more bitterly assailed than his divinity. The earliest Errorists were the Gnostics and their most extreme branch, the Manichees. After the death of the apostles these heretical sects increased rapidly. Their speculations were bold and almost endless. Some taught that the body of Christ was a mere phantom; that he was not born of the Virgin Mary according to the flesh, but in appearance only. Others taught that Jesus was not an incarnation of God; that every one who could soar to the same height of contemplation might attain the same powers with Christ, and that Christ differed in no respect from the good of all ages.

The most important controversies on this subject arose from the teachings of the Arians, the Apollinarians, the Nestorians, the Eutychians, and the Monothelites. Arius taught that the human body of Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, and that the Divine Word was in the place of the soul. Apollinaris taught that our Lord took a human body and a sensitive animal soul, but that the place of the rational soul was supplied by God the Word; and that the divine nature in Christ performed the functions of reason and supplied the place of mind, the spiritual and intellectual principle in man.1

Nestorius taught that the person of Jesus is only the instrument or the temple in which the divine Logos dwells. This controversy was of long continuance. Opposing councils were held and contending factions bit

1 See Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Cent. IV, part ii, chap. v.

terly fought and disturbed the Church, each apparently caring more for victory over its opponents than for the truth. Nestorius was condemned and exiled without a hearing by the Council of Ephesus in the year 431. The sentence was severe; the condemnation was a travesty of justice and a reproach. At a later period his doctrines spread through Egypt, Syria, Arabia, India, Tartary, and parts of China.

The Nestorians at length formed their own church government and laws. Their doctrines were defined as follows: "That in the Saviour of the world there were two persons, of which one was divine, even the eternal Word, and the other, which was human, was the man Jesus; that these two persons had only one aspect; that the union between the Son of God and the Son of man was formed in the moment of the Virgin's conception, and was never to be dissolved; that it was not, however, a union of nature or of person, but only of will and affection; that Christ was therefore to be carefully distinguished from God, who dwelt in him as in his temple, and that Mary was to be called the mother of Christ and not the mother of God.”1

In violent opposition to the errors of Nestorius, Eutyches arose and, swinging to the other extreme in doctrine, founded a sect as prejudicial to the interests of the Christian Church and to truth as those he so strenuously condemned. He taught that in Christ there is but one nature, that of the incarnate Word. By this he was taught to deny the humanity of Christ. He was deposed and banished by the Emperor Marcian, and afterward condemned, in his absence, by the Council of Chalcedon, in 451. This Council enjoined upon all Christians as an article of faith almost the same formula

1 Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Cent. V, part ii, chap. v.

as had been given by the Council of Ephesus twenty years earlier: "That in Christ two distinct natures were united in one person, and that without any change, mixture, or confusion."1

The views of the Monothelites were expressed in such ambiguous terms as to make it difficult at this day to understand exactly what they believed. Some say they taught that the human will in Christ was wholly swallowed up in the divine will; others, that it was so completely subservient to the divine will as always to move in unison with it. This sect arose through an effort of the Emperor Heraclius to bring together into the Eastern Church various dissenting sects. He attempted to do this by offering the compromise proposition, “That in Jesus Christ there was, after the union of the two natures, but one will and one operation." Heraclius published an edict favoring this doctrine, hoping thereby to establish peace. It was well received for a time, but opposition soon arose and rent the Church and the empire into two factions. The Monothelites were condemned by the sixth General Council.

During the Middle Ages the Church of Rome ruled with an iron hand. At the period of the Reformation, however, when the restraints of ecclesiastical authority were thrown off, the liberated mind, untaught and often prompted by prejudice and passion, adopted views which had no foundation in reason or in revelation. The ancient heresies as to the person of Christ were revived under new forms, and many others sprang up. There was a lamentable state of confusion on nearly every point of Christian doctrine.

In Germany and Holland the Anabaptists and Davidians had arisen, and invaded England in the reigns of

1 Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Cent. V, part ii, chap. v.