Page images

shall do that, and shall restore the just that have been from

the beginning unto life, he shall converse among men a thou“sand years, and shall rule them with a most righteous govern“ment. Which elsewhere the Sibyl proclaims, Hear me, o 'ye men, the eternal King doth reign, &c.' Then (continues Lac“ tantius) they that shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, “ but by the space of those thousand years shall generate an “ infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy and dear " to God. And they that shall be raised from the dead, shall “ be over the living as judges. And the gentiles shall not be

utterly extinguished, but some shall be left for the victory of God, that they may be triumphed over by the just, and reduced to perpetual servitude. About the same time the “ prince of devils, the forger of all evil, shall be bound with chains, and shall be in custody all the thousand years of the “ celestial empire, under which righteousness shall reign over “ the world. After whose coming the just shall be gathered together from all parts of the earth, and, the judgment having " sat, the holy city shall be placed in the midst of the earth, in “ which the builder thereof, God, shall abide, together with his ruling just ones. Which city the Sibyl thus points out, ' And

the city which God made, the same he made brighter than " 'the sun, moon, or stars.' Then shall be removed that dark

ness by which the heavens was obscured, and the moon shall “ be as bright as the sun, and the sun sevenfold brighter than it “ is. The earth shall abound with fruitfulness spontaneously. “ The world shall be glad and the whole nature of things shall “joy, being delivered from the curse. Beasts and birds shall “ not prey on one another, but shall be at peace, the lion and “calf lying down together, &c. Finally come those times which

the poets, under the title of the golden age, say have already

come; mistaking the prophets, who often speak of things as “ done, (from the certainty of them,) which nevertheless are “ future. So also the Sybils in divers places affirm, that men “ shall live a most quiet and plentiful life, and shall reign to

'gether with God; and the kings of the nations shall come

' from the utmost bounds of the earth with their gifts, an “shall adore and honour the great King, &c.'” Chap. xxiv.

Objections refuted, &c.*

IV. Sundry objections are wont to be advanced, not in direct opposition to the testimonies here adduced, but conflicting with them. Which objections do indeed resolve themselves into one ; viz. that the first author of the millennary opinion was Cerinthus, a heretic, who held carnal and abominable notions respecting it; which things Eusebius reports on the testimony of one Gaius, and which Augustine and Jerome, writers of much later date than those I have adduced, do also allege. I shall first give the sum of the matter from Eusebius.

About the same time (viz. of the sect of the Ebionites,) we · learn that there was one Cerinthus, author of another heresy. “Gaius, whose words we have before alleged, in the controversy carried about in his name, writeth thus of him. Cerinthus “ . also, by revelations written as of a great apostle, brought “'unto us certain monstrous things, feigning them to have been revealed unto him by angels ;-viz. that the kingdom of Christ

after the resurrection should become earthly; and that in Jeru

salem our flesh should again serve concupiscence and the lust "of the flesh. And being wholly set to seduce, as an enemy to

the Word of God, he said there should be a term of a millennary feast allotted for marriage.' Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his second book, after mention made of the Revelation of St. John, received by tradition of old, reported

thus of this man Cerinthus. Cerinthus, who founded the Cerinthian heresy, gave his figment a name for the further "• credit thereof. His kind of doctrine was this: he dreamed

that the kingdom of Christ should become earthly, and set

upon those things which he lusted after, now, whilst covered "' with his flesh, and compassed in his skin ;-that is, the satis

fying of the belly, (and twv únoyasepa, eorum quæ sub ventre " sunt,) with meat and drink, and with marriage. And that he "might the more colourably bring his devilish devices to pass, "he dedicated thereunto holy-days, oblations, and slaughter “' for sacrifices.' So far Dionysius. But Irenæus, in his first

* That the Treatise itself may not be too long suspended, the testimony of Writers, who were in the time of Dr. Homes of comparatively modern date, are postponed for the Appendix. Ed.

book against heresies, layeth down certain more detestable

opinions of his. And in his third book he reporteth a history, “ worthy the memory, as received by tradition of Polycarp, " saying, “That John the apostle on a certain time entered into “ a bath, to bathe himself; and understanding that Cerinthus

was therein bathing himself, John started aside and departed forth; not abiding to tarry with him under the same roof, signifying the same to his company, and saying, let us speedily go hence, lest the bath come to fall, wherein Cerinthus, the enemy

of truth, batheth himself.' 1. Now in reply to these things I shall first shew that Eusebius was an Arian, and therefore unworthy of credit in this matter; for how can he allow to Christ a glorious kingdom, who denies his Deity.

I cannot give a better or more certain account, than that which the renowned Magdeburgenses give in the following collection ;y who, having prefixed this title in capitals, “ EUSEBIUS CÆSARIENSIS,” that all may be put out of doubt which Eusebius they mean; and having enumerated all the books of the said Eusebius, (which also demonstrate that they mean Eusebius Historicus Pamphilus, Bishop of Cæsarea, now in question,) go on in these words : Nunc de doctrina Eusebii, &c." I will give it you in English, and let the captious consult the original, whether I do not translate right. “ Being now about to speak some few

things concerning the doctrine of Eusebius, in the first place

we give this monition, that Jerome every where holds him “ forth, suspected of the error of Arianism. For in his apology against Ruffinus, he saith, 'that he was indeed a most learned

man, but not a Catholic ;ż who throughout six of his books "" (which he means is uncertain, unless perchance those con

cerning Gospel preparation) did nothing else but declare, that

Origen was of the same faith with him, i. e. of the Arian “ falsehood.' Again, in the same Apology; 'I have (saith Je

rome) praised Eusebius for his Ecclesiastical History, &c.; am “I therefore an Arian, because Eusebius that compiled those ·books is an Arian? Of which thing also concerning him, Athanasius doth not give us an obscure report, in the Decrees

y Magdeburg. Histor. Eccles. cent. 4, cap. x, sect. 3.

z In thosé times they took the word catholic in the same sense as we do orthodox, a Lib. 2, cap. vi. Yea, Arius himself wrote to Eusebius Nicomediensis, that he (the said Eusebius Cæsariensis) was of the same opinion with him, as Theodoret in the same place doth demonstrate.

of the Nicene Council; viz. that Eusebius was an Arian, before he subscribed to the form of faith dictated in that Coun“cil; but that he afterwards repented. Moreover, the Epistle " of Eusebius to Paulinus, extant in Theodoret,a is full of Arian

dotage. But as concerning some parts of Christian Religion,

he (the said Eusebius Cæsariensis) speaks indifferently.” And having given some instances, they go on in these words ; “ Of " the error of Eusebius we have spoken before ; to wit, that he

was a professed Arian before the Council of Nice, &c. Tra

pezentius b did judge that there are some things in Eusebius's “ Books of Evangelical Preparation, that are not different from “ Arian pravity.” Thus far Centuriæ Magdeburgenses in the place before quoted : out of whom we might allege much more, but for brevity. Leamed Scultetus also judged, that the said Eusebius never cordially believed the co-equality of Christ with the Father. Likewise the great chronologer, Helvicus, says of him ; “Eusebius Historicus, Arianus, Athanasio infensus : “ post consilium tamen redit ad saniorem mentem.'

The same judgment concerning him doth Symson give in his Chronology. Upon so good proof, we may safely infer, that the opinion of Eusebius Cæsariensis, against the kingdom of Christ for the thousand years, is not to be valued ; seeing he denied the Deity of Christ, and the authority of the Book of the Revelation.

2. Next, in regard to Cerinthus being a Millennarian, and his voluptuous opinions thereon, let the Reader first take notice, that if Cerinthus did say, that the kingdom of Christ after the resurrection should become carthly, yet we say not so; though we affirm, that the church shall be resident on earth for a thousand years after the first resurrection. For the true church of believers hath been on earth from the creation to this day, and yet, as believers, not earthly, but the spiritual body of Christ, The holy angels and Christ Jesus have conversed on earth, and yet they were not thereby earthly. And if Cerinthus said, that in Jerusalem our flesh again should serve the concupiscence and lust of the flesh, &c.; yet our souls abhor any thought thereof. But now I shall prove, that Cerinthus was not a Millennarian ; at least that he was not so called, (or accused, if you will,) by the most approved authors of antiquity, who speak of him and his heresies : so that we have more cause to suspect Eusebius, Gaius, snd Dionysius, to be guilty of great credulity, than to charge these opinions on Cerinthus. Take in the first place Mr. Mede's answer,

b This George Trapezuntius, a most skilful man in both languages, was he that translated Eusebius Cæsariensis' fourteen books of Evangelical Preparation, out of Greek into Latin.

An non hinc merito, gc.” set forth long after I was a good way entered on this work. “May not one “justly suspect that same Gaius to have been one of the num“ ber of the heretical Alogi, c who denied, saith Epiphanius,

lòyov Dei, the word of God; and therefore they ascribed to

Cerinthus, as well the Gospel of John, as the Apocalypse ? The time doth altogether agree to that: for Theodorus the “champion of the Alogian standard, was cast out of the church " by Pope Victor ; and Gaius flourished in the time of Zephirus, “who next succeeded Victorius. Nevertheless, the words of “ Gaius may be taken in this sense ;—as if he had said, Cerinthus

had feignedly fathered upon the great Apostle, I know not “what Apocalypses ; (beside that one and only Apocalypse ;) out “ of which feigned Apocalypses that forging fellow endeavoured " to prove, that, after the resurrection, the kingdom of Christ

should be earthly, wherein men should serve the lusts of the flesh, and the enticements of carnal pleasure. But whatever was the mind of Gaius, it is very likely he was deceived concerning Cerinthus. For if this had been the heresy of Ce

rinthus, how could it be, that Justin, Irenæus, Melito, "Tertullian, and Hippolytus should be ignorant of it ? “ Irenæus and Tertullian have professedly numbered up the “ heresies of Cerinthus ; and yet of this heresy there is deep “ silence ! How therefore came it to be known to Gaius?

Nevertheless it seems that the words of Gaius, an obscure

[ocr errors]

c Alogi are, according to the signification of the word, men without the Word, or without reason; and therefore by the ancients they are oft called brutes, and charged with denying the word of God; both the axiomatical, in the letter, and the substantial, viz. Christ, in the flesh.


« PreviousContinue »