Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 5 (1897).djvu/126

This page needs to be proofread.

104

THE DECLINE AND FALL

IV. Divine incarnation of Apollinaris IV. All those who believe the immateriality of the soul, a of Apouinarin specious and noble tenet, must confess, from their present experience, the incomprehensible union of mind and matter. A similar union is not inconsistent with a much higher, or even with the highest degree, of mental faculties; and the incarnation of an aeon or archangel, the most perfect of created spirits, does not involve any positive contradiction or absurdity. In the age of religious freedom, which was determined by the council of Nice, the dignity of Christ was measured by private judgment according to the indefinite rule of scripture, or reason, or tradition. But, when his pure and proper divinity had been established on the ruins of Arianism, the faith of the Catholics trembled on the edge of a precipice where it was impossible to recede, dangerous to stand, dreadful to fall; and the manifold inconveniences of their creed were aggravated by the sublime character of their theology. They hesitated to pronounce that God himself, the second person of an equal and consubstantial trinity, was manifested in the flesh;^[1] that a being who pervades the universe had been confined in the Womb of Mary; that his eternal duration had been marked by the days and months and years of human existence; that the Almighty had been scourged and crucified; that his impassible essence had felt pain and anguish; that his omniscience was not exempt from ignorance; and that the source of life and immortality expired on Mount Calvary. These alarming consequences were affirmed with unblushing simplicity by Apollinaris,^[2] bishop of Laodicea, and one of the luminaries of the church. The son of a learned grammarian, he was skilled in all the sciences of Greece; eloquence, erudition, and philosophy, conspicuous in the volumes of Apollinaris, were humbly devoted to the service of religion. The

↑ This strong expression might be justified by the language of St. Paul (i Tim. iii. i6), but we are deceived by our modern Bibles. The word (Greek characters) ((Greek characters)) was altered to (Greek characters) (God) at Constantinople in the beginning of the vith century: the true reading, which is visible in the Latin and Syriac versions, still exists in the reasoning of the Greek as well as of the Latin fathers; and this fraud, with that of the three witnesses of St. John, is admirably detected by Sir Isaac Newton. (See his two letters translated by M. de Missy, in the Journal Rritannique, tom. xv. p. 148-190, 351-390.) I have weighed the arguments, and may yield to the authority, of the first of philosophers, who was deeply skilled in critical and theological studies.
↑ For Apollinaris and his sect, see Socrates, 1. ii. c. 46, 1. lii. c. 16 ; Sozomen, 1. V. c. 18, I. vi. c. 25, 27; Theodoret, 1. v. 3, 10, 11 ; Tillemont, M{{subst:e'}}moires Eccl{{subst:e'}}siastiques, tom. vii. p. 602, 638, Not. p. 789-794, in 4to, Venise, 1732. The contemporary saints always mention the bishop of Laodicea as a friend and brother. The style of the more recent historians is harsh and hostile; yet Philostorgius compares him (1. viii. c. 11-15) to Basil and Gregory.

[1] This strong expression might be justified by the language of St. Paul (i Tim. iii. i6), but we are deceived by our modern Bibles. The word (Greek characters) ((Greek characters)) was altered to (Greek characters) (God) at Constantinople in the beginning of the vith century: the true reading, which is visible in the Latin and Syriac versions, still exists in the reasoning of the Greek as well as of the Latin fathers; and this fraud, with that of the three witnesses of St. John, is admirably detected by Sir Isaac Newton. (See his two letters translated by M. de Missy, in the Journal Rritannique, tom. xv. p. 148-190, 351-390.) I have weighed the arguments, and may yield to the authority, of the first of philosophers, who was deeply skilled in critical and theological studies.

[2] For Apollinaris and his sect, see Socrates, 1. ii. c. 46, 1. lii. c. 16 ; Sozomen, 1. V. c. 18, I. vi. c. 25, 27; Theodoret, 1. v. 3, 10, 11 ; Tillemont, M{{subst:e'}}moires Eccl{{subst:e'}}siastiques, tom. vii. p. 602, 638, Not. p. 789-794, in 4to, Venise, 1732. The contemporary saints always mention the bishop of Laodicea as a friend and brother. The style of the more recent historians is harsh and hostile; yet Philostorgius compares him (1. viii. c. 11-15) to Basil and Gregory.

[1]

[2]