Page images
PDF
EPUB

the body. They erased that passage of Saint John which says, Every spirit which confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.*

APHTHARTODOCITES, a denomination in the sixth century; so called from the greek aplaprès, incorruptible, and doxew, to judge; because they held that the body of Jesus Christ was incorruptible, and not subject to death. They were a branch of the Eutychians. See Eutychians. APOCARITES, a denomination in the third century, sprung from the Manicheans. They held that the soul of man was of the substance of God.‡

APOLLINARIANS, a denomination in the fourth century, who were the followers of Apollinaris, bishop of Laodicea. He taught that Christ's person was composed of a union of the true divinity and a human body, endowed with a sensitive soul; but deprived of the reasonable one, the divinity supplying its place. He added that the human body, united to the divine spirit, formed in Jesus Christ one entire divine nature.§

*Broughton, vol, i. p. 58.

APOSTOLICS, a denomination in the twelfth century, who had at their head one Gerard Saggarel of Parma. They were so called, because they professed to exhibit in their lives and manners the piety and virtues of the holy apostles. They held it unlawful to take an oath, renounced the things of this world, and preferred celibacy to wedlock.

AQUARIANS, a denomination in the second century, who, under pretence of abstinence, made use of water instead of wine in the eucharist.¶ See Encratites.

ARABICI, so called because they sprung up in Arabia in the year 207. It is uncertain who was their author. They denied the immortality of the soul, believed that it perished with the body; but maintained at the same time, that it was to be again recalled to life with the body, by the power of God.**

ARCHONTICS, a denomination which appeared about the year 175; so called because they held that archangels created the world. They denied the resurrection of the

+ Ibid. + Ib. p. 60. Formey's Ecclesiastical History vol. i. p. 79.

Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 457. Dufresnoy's Chron. Tables, vol. ii. p. 239. ¶ Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, vol, i. p. 178.

** Mosheim, vol. i. p. 249. Broughton, vol. i. p. 73.

of Arius and his immediate

body. They maintained, that
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 Pro-
phets," and "The Harmony.
ARIANS, a denomination
in the fourth century, which
owed its origin to Arius, pres-
byter of Alexandria, a man
of a subtile turn, and remark-
able 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 Bature 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 express ed 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 taught 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 abandoned by the Eunomians, or Anomæans, the disciples of Aetias and Eunomius. The Semi-Arians held, that the Son was opotovçoç, 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 réporis, 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 incarnation, 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. 355, 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.

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. 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.

When

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 Armenian church are not only more numerous, but kept with greater rigour and mortification than is usual in any other christian community. In the rights and ceremonies of the Armenian church there is so great a resemblance to those of the Greeks, that a particular detail might be superfluous. Their liturgies also are either tration, and piety. They

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

ARMINIANS. They derive their name from James Arminius, who was born in Holland in the year 1560. He was the first pastor at Amsterdam, afterwards professor of divinity at Leyden; and is said to have attracted the esteem and applause of his very enemies by his acknowledged candour, pene

*Broughton's Historical Library, vol. ii. pp. 529, 330.
Dallaway's History of Constantinople, pp. 383-382.

« PreviousContinue »