of the third and fourth centuries had studied the question, and had persuaded themselves that one view of Christianity was supported by Scripture and no other, and then let common sense and common honesty decide, whether they could have acted, at least whether they ought to have acted, otherwise than they did.

I am not advocating polemical violence, or exclusive intolerance. If the opponents of the Sabellian and Arian tenets were led into the same uncharitable and unchristian conduct as the maintainers of those tenets, let us rather try to forget such melancholy scenes: the one party, as well as the other, will stand hereafter before the same Judge; and it may be well for them and all of us, that we shall be tried by a more merciful tribunal than any by which men are inclined to try their fellow men. But I again repeat, that it was not the Church which set the example of prying into or defining the mysteries of God. If there had been no Arians and Sabellians, there would have been no Athanasian Creed. The example was set by persons who were not satisfied with the short and simple creeds which the Church had sanctioned: they gave to words a new and unauthorised meaning, and endeavoured to persuade their hearers that this was the sense which they had always borne. Then it was that the fathers and pastors of the Church felt it to be their duty to protect their flocks. It may suit the language of infidelity or sarcasm, to say that the points of difference are slight, and could not affect salvation; but they who say this, know

well that the fathers of the Church were of a different opinion and I see not how, as honest men, they could suffer a meaning to be given to terms which they believed to be at variance with the Word of God. Whether the Son of God be a son really, or only in name, may be a question which exceeds our comprehension; but the points of difference which it involves cannot be slight. Whether Jesus Christ be of the same nature with God, and consequently, himself God, or whether he is a created being, is a question which human metaphysics in vain attempt to grasp; and he who says that the difference is slight, overlooks the limits between the creature and the Creator, between finite and infinite, between time and eternity. The charge is brought against the Church as if she had decided these matters arbitrarily, according to her own caprice but whoever looks to her confessions of faith, and to the controversial writings of those times, will find her constantly appealing to the words of Scripture, and confirming her interpretation of those words by an uninterrupted tradition from the apostolical times. I do not say that in her confessions of faith she has confined herself to the words of Scripture: it is notorious that she has lengthened her creeds by a laboured phraseology, and by logical deductions; but the question to be decided is, whether in these creeds she has or has not interpreted rightly the doctrines contained in the New Testament. It is trifling with controversy to say that the words of the New Testament are sufficient. It is to be feared that many who say

this know little, or care little, for that holy book ; but the most pious mind may justly be disquieted at finding such opposite doctrines deduced from the same passages. We have therefore to consider, whether the Church has rightly expounded the doctrines preached by the apostles. That she has spoken the language of the majority, is a matter of history, not of discussion; and if it is to be wished that she had not published these creeds at all, we must remember that she was led to this step in her own defence, to counteract what she considered a perversion of the word of God, and to save her members from being perplexed by doubts or misled by error.

It will be my endeavour to shew, that the doctrines of the Athanasian Creed are a necessary deduction from the words of Scripture; and that a person who subscribed the earlier creeds, or who made his profession in the simplest form, which is contained in the New Testament, is bound also to subscribe the articles of the Athanasian Creed. But this must be the subject of a separate discourse.

SERMON XII.

DEFENCE OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED.

MARK XVI. 16.

He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved, but he that believeth not, shall be damned.

IN defending the Church for any of her confessions of faith, there appear to be two points, which we ought principally to consider. We ought to shew, first, that she was justified in imposing any confessions at all: and, secondly, that these confessions are agreeable to the revealed word of God. I have already endeavoured to prove the first of these two points, and to shew, that the Church was not the aggressor in requiring subscription to her definitions of theological mysteries; but that she acted on the defensive, and did not lengthen her creeds, till the more simple forms were rendered useless by a new interpretation of terms; that she did not interfere till she was called upon to check an increasing evil, when her further forbearance would have been culpable, and when silence was, in fact, impossible. I shall at present

endeavour to shew, that the articles, to which she required assent, are fair and natural deductions from the positive declarations of Scripture; and such as no person, who believes the Scriptures, and reflects on the meaning of words, can reasonably refuse to sign. The time would not allow me to consider all the creeds which were drawn up at different councils; and I have selected the Athanasian Creed, as being the longest, the most precise in its terms, the most laboured in its definitions, and that which has brought upon the Church the greatest share of obloquy for intolerance, uncharitableness, and presumption. In attempting to defend this creed, I shall not avail myself of the fact, which appears to be fully established, that it was not the composition of any council, or collective body of churchmen, but merely of some one individual. I shall not rest the defence on a subterfuge such as this. The creed has been adopted by a large portion of Christendom, and among the rest, by our own pure and apostolical Church. We are therefore called upon to shew, that it does not contain the arbitrary and doubtful results of human speculations; but that every part of it is capable of being proved by the Word of God. The controversies, however, are so distinct concerning the divinity of the Second Person of the Trinity, and that of the Third, that at present I shall say nothing concerning the divinity of the Holy Ghost, but only consider what is asserted by the Athanasian Creed concerning the Father and the Son.