Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

it; or were so silly, as not to discern the advantage they were to make of it; or so imprudent, as to accuse them of other things, which could be easily disproved, rather than to accuse them of those things which could not be denied. The children of this world were now grown fools in their generation. He that can believe these things, let him believe them!

I shall add this only, that when the least occasions were once given to suspect that the martyrs were worshipped by the Church, the heathens immediately laid hold on the pretence, especially Julian* and Eunapius, who urged the accusation with all the stings of malice; as their predecessors in this cause against Christ would certainly have done, had there been the least colour for it.

But to return to the Virgin Mary: we have seen that in these latter ages the doctrine of her worship is grown to be no mean part of the body of divinity, with the doctors of the Roman Church. There is no end of writing books to her honour, and to excite and direct devotion to her. A sermon cannot be preached, but she must be addressed to with an Ave Mary; nor a large volume written, but it is odds, that it is concluded with "praise to God, and to the virgin mother Mary." One would therefore expect to find all things full of veneration and address to the blessed Virgin in the writings of the primitive Fathers, that is, to meet with it at every turn in their expositions of the faith, in their exhortations to devotion and piety, and in all their homilies to the peeple. But if you look for any such thing, I will be bold to say, you will lose your labour; unless it were some satisfaction to find, that the world is very much altered from what it was, and the state of religion not a little changed.

But the worst is, that what these Fathers say of her, is but very little in comparison, and that not of set purpose, but incidentally and occasionally, as they were led to it by other things. I know not how the Fathers can be excused, but that the Scriptures speak as sparingly of her as they.

It were something, however, if their occasional passages concerning her intimated a greater regard to her service in their practice, than they have shewn in their writings; or if they discovered but some obscure prints and footsteps of such a devotion to her, as we seek for. Let us therefore see after what manner they speak of the blessed Virgin.

[ocr errors]

Cyril. contra Julian. 1. 6. [vol. 6. p. 201. Lutet. 1638.]

[ocr errors]

I observe, that the highest strains in her service run upon a comparison between her and Eve. Thus Justin Martyr,* who says very little else of her, tells us, that "Eve being a virgin conceived by the word of the serpent, and brought forth death but the Virgin Mary receiving the message of the angel, conceived in faith; therefore that which was born of her was holy, viz. the Son of God." He proves also against Trypho,† that Christ was to be born of a virgin, according to the prophets.

After Justin comes Irenæus, and with greater circumstance pursues the forementioned comparison, against those stupid heretics, that denied God to be the Creator of all things, and that he used his own works. For against these, Irenæus, amongst other arguments, produced this, that Christ took flesh of Mary. And then he proceeds to shew, how convenient it was that he should be born of a virgin. First, he opposes the disobedience in the case of the forbidden tree, by which sin came into the world, to that obedience which was performed upon a tree, by him that brought life to the world. He opposes also the cheat that was put upon Eve, to the truth that was told Mary. He opposes the virgin Eve, now designed to be a wife, to the virgin Mary, who was also espoused; and the virgin Eve deceived by an evil angel, to the virgin Mary believing a good angel. "And," says he, "as Eve was seduced. and forsook God, so Mary was induced to obey God, that the virgin Mary might be a comforter§ of the virgin Eve; and that as mankind was, through a virgin, bound over to death, so they should be released through a virgin. One thing being thus rightly balanced against another, the disobedience of a virgin by the obedience of a virgin." The sum of all is this, that there appeared a notable congruity, in divers respects, that as Eve, a virgin, led the first man Adam into transgression,

* Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 327. Paris. [p. 195. Par. 1742.] + P. 290. [Ibid. p. 163.]

Iren. lib. 5. c. 18, 19. [p. 315, 316. Venet. 1734.]

§ The word which I translate comforter, is in Latin advocata; from whence Bellarmine and Fevardentius conclude very absurdly, in behalf of invocation of saints, though Irenæus meant what we usually understand by advocate. But by the fidelity of the Latin translator, in keeping to the ecclesiastical use of words, it seems evident, that the Greek word in Irenæus was арáкληтos; which, how it is to be translated, see M. Daille, who has largely treated this matter; and I doubt not to say, has made an end of it. De Relig. cultus Object. p. 41, &c. [Genev. 1664.]

in whom all mankind fell; so the Virgin Mary brought forth him into the world, the second Adam, the Lord from heaven, who was to redeem all mankind. No honest man will go about to make less of these passages; but he must be a very subtle man that can make more of them.

Now,

And yet Fevardentius triumphs in this testimony, as if he had found here the Primitive Church, and all antiquity, for the invocation of the blessed Virgin. And no less satisfied he was with a like strain of Irenæus against those heretics, in another place, who said, that "Christ took nothing from the Virgin Mary,' "* and by consequence that she was not really his mother, nor he really, but only seemingly, a man. amongst other things, Irenæus argues the contrary, from the congruity of our Saviour's being born of a virgin, that a virgin might bring as much good to the world, as a virgin had done mischief; whereby it became plain, that God defeated the devil in a congruous way; who, by the virgin Eve, had seduced Adam, and brought death upon his posterity. But why did not Irenæus complain, that this heresy overthrew the very foundation upon which the Church gave a superexcellent worship to Mary, viz. because she was the mother of God? Nay, why did not he silence this wild conceit, by alleging the worship which she every where received upon this account? Fevardentius elsewhere makes a mighty matter of Irenæus' pressing heretics with catholic tradition. Why therefore was not so obvious and convincing an argument as the catholic tradition and practice of worshipping the Virgin Mary brought forth upon this occasion? Even because there was no such tradition or practice to be alleged, as any man that is not overruled with prejudice must confess. It is a sign that ancient testimonies run very low with them, when they are fain to make much of these.

But if Irenæus forgot this argument, it is something strange that Tertullian after him should forget it too: for writing against the same stupid opinions, he uses just the argument that Irenæus had done before him : "The image and similitude of God," saith he, "being captivated by the devil, God recovered it by a work that defeated the devil in his own way. For the word that was a foundation of death had crept into Eve, being

* Adv. Hær. lib. 3. c. 32, 33. [ut supra, p. 218, 219.]

+ Emula operatione. Tert. de carne Christi, c. 25. [c. 17.] [p. 321. Par. 1695.] Adv. Praxeam, c. 27. [Ibid. p. 516.]

yet a virgin; and agreeably the word that should restore life, was to be received by a virgin; that mankind, who by means of that sex, fell into perdition, might, through the same sex, be recovered to salvation. Eve had believed the serpent, Mary hath believed Gabriel; the offence which the former hath committed in believing, the latter hath blotted out by believing." And what he means by blotting out Eve's offence, is plain from what follows, that "Mary brought forth him who was to save even his murderers," and that "Christ was to come of her for the salvation of man." What Tertullian

says of her beside, is very little, and by the bye; as that she was a virgin, because "Christ was said to be made of a woman;" and that being born of her, "he was therefore of the house of David ;" and the like.

Clemens Alexandrinus, to illustrate a moral lesson tells us, "that Mary was a perfect virgin after the birth of her Son,"* and mentions a particular proof of it, which some affirmed. And farther he says not, that I can remember.

:

His scholar Origen acknowledged also the perpetual virginity of Mary and in his homilies upon the 1st chapter of St. Luke, where he could not avoid speaking of her, he hath these passages: "Somebody,"+ saith he, "I know not who, hath run into such a madness, as to affirm that Mary was renounced by our Saviour, inasmuch as after his birth she was joined to Joseph." Now if the Church had then believed the story of her assumption (which has been so poetically described to us of late): if the Church had then, for an hundred and fifty years together, served her as the queen of heaven, with solemn rites of worship; that man who ventured to disparage the blessed Virgin in this fashion, was foolish to admiration. But if Origen knew that the Church had given her these honours from the beginning, he was wise enough to have stopped this madman's mouth with that argument, or rather to have said nothing of him; since nobody could need any instruction to hold him for a ridiculous fellow. But he thought fit to instruct the people, how they should answer this man; and that in this manner : "If Mary was pronounced blessed in those hymns that were uttered by the instinct of the Holy Spirit; how can any man say that our Saviour denied her ?"

* Strom. lib. 7. [p. 889. Venet. 1757.]

In loc. Hom. 7. [vol. 3. p. 940. Par. 1740.]
Contempl. of Life, &c.

[ocr errors]

66

Origen speaks verv honourably of the blessed Virgin; but yet he represents her as an instance of human frailty; and one that needed forgiveness of sins, as well as the Apostles; and that because she was offended, as he (it seems) was persuaded, at the passion of Christ. What," says he, "do we think that when the Apostles were scandalized, the mother of our Lord was free from it?" And so he interprets those words, "A sword shall pierce through thy own soul also," by this paraphrase, "the sword of unbelief shall pierce thy own soul, and thou shalt be smitten with the edge of doubtfulness." I doubt it will not be convenient to inquire of Origen any further.

As for Athenagoras, Minutius Felix, St. Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius, they have left us nothing at all concerning her; unless St. Cyprian says, somewhere, that "Christ was conceived in the womb of a virgin," &c. But if that be all, I am sure he neglected some very inviting occasions of putting his people in mind of a great deal more; which he ought not to have neglected, if the doctrine of the Primitive Church concerning the blessed Virgin had been the same with that of the pretended Catholic Church at this day.

And so we are gotten out of the three first ages. But perhaps Athanasius makes amends for all that were before him, in the sermon upon the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin. That sermon, I confess, is a very surprising thing to any man, that considers there was not the least preparation for the doctrine it would pretend to establish, in the foregoing ages. But then this (as well as many other things that go under the name of Athanasius) is none of his; as Bellarmine, and others of his party (obliged by the strength of truth) have actually confessed and in all probability, it was written no less than 348 years after his death. In his genuine works there is more frequent mention of the Virgin, than in the Fathers before him; especially in his Orations against the Arians, which he wrote about the year 360. But we must go further down, to find where her worship began, for as yet there is no appearance of it.

Hilary, who wrote about the same time, says nothing new in this matter. * He does industriously assert the virginity of Mary, which, and the like things, were done by some of those that went before him. But of her worship not a word.

To conclude; the Fathers do generally speak of her without

* Hilar. Pictav. Com. in Matth. p. 497. [vol, 1. p. 670. Veron. 1730.]

[blocks in formation]
« FöregåendeFortsätt »