our manner of Expression: For as the Testimony of our Conscience makes us boldly affirm, That our Doctrine is that of the Christian Religion; so our Sincerity makes us confess, That in the man∣ner of Writing, we do not come near the politeness, fineness, and eloquence of others; because we have only attempted to give a religious Explication of what the Holy Scripture teaches us, without studying to pollish and adorn our Discourse:
But though he speaks thus of his Stile, and St.
Je∣rom says also, That this Author is not a very able Penman, yet this Treatise is very well written for a Dogmatical Treatise. I speak not this of the Words or Terms, since we have not now the Origi∣nal Greek, but of the turn of his Thoughts, the methodizing of his Arguments, and the manner of expressing himself about a Mystery so difficult to explain as this of the Trinity. He treats of the Subject in a very clear Method, without diverting from the Difficulties of it. He proposes his Ar∣guments plainly and smoothly: His Reasons are close and convincing, one may observe a Vein of Logick which runs through all his discourse without intermission. He quotes the passages of Scrip∣ture in their natural sence, and makes many very curious and profound Remarks. He uses the most proper and most fit terms for Explication of the Mysteries. He does not too nicely distinguish, and yet he clears up all Difficulties. In a word, it were to be wish'd that all the Schoolmen had taken this Treatise for their Pattern, and had follow'd his Method in treating of the Mysteries of Religion. I forgot to observe that he speaks occasionally of the Incarnation, and that he says, Jesus Christ is God-man; and yet we must not affirm that there are two Persons in him, but believe, that he being God and Man both together, there is attributed to him what agrees to the Nature of God, and the Nature of Man. 'Twas good to observe this against the Error of the
Nestorians.
We have in the Bibliothecae Patrum, Commentaries in Latin, upon all the Canonical Epistles which go under the Name of Didymus. They seem to be Ancient, and they may possibly be a Translation from a Greek Commentary of this Author. He speaks of the Opinion of those who thought that Spirits were from all Eternity, and he neither Condemns nor Approves it. He maintains, That Pre∣destination is nothing else but the Choice which God made of those that he foresaw would believe in Jesus Christ, and do good Actions. He rejects the Millennium, and affirms, That the Pleasures and Joys of Paradise are all Spiritual. He disapproves of servile Fear; He believes with Origen, That the Incarnation of Jesus Christ was profitable to Angels as well as Men, and that it Purifies them from their Faults. He observes, That the Second Epistle of St. Peter is not in the Canon, and believes that it is corrupted. These Commentaries are very clear and intelligible, and contain Useful and Judicious Instructions and Reflections, which are not unworthy of the famous Didymus.
There is also a little Tract, or rather the Fragment of a Tract against the Manichees, translated from Greek by Turrianus, printed by Possevin in his Apparatus, and inserted into the Bibliothecae Patrum, which goes under the Name of Didymus, which agrees well enough with the Treatise of the Holy Spirit written by this Author. There he refutes by Metaphysical Arguments, the Opinion of the Ma∣nichees, who admitted two Principles, the one Good and the other Evil. He explains the sence in which Men are call'd in Scripture Children of Wrath, by saying, They are so call'd, because they become the Object of the Wrath of God by the sins which they voluntarily commit; as others are call'd Children of the Light, and Children of Wisdom, who are Purified by the Light of Truth. He says, That Judas is call'd a Son of Perdition, because he did those things that deserv'd Perdition. He is mightily perplexed when he explains the Reason why the Flesh of Man is call'd Sinful Flesh. He says first of all, That it is so call'd, because it was produc'd by the use of Marriage, which commonly was not free from Sin before the coming of Jesus Christ, who sanctified it: That there is none but Jesus Christ and the First Man, whose Flesh could not be called Sinful; for Jesus Christ was Born of a Virgin, and Adam was made out of the Earth; That all Men being begotten by Men after the Sin of the First Man, are subject to Sin; and that if the Body of Jesus Christ had been form'd in the ordi∣nary way of Generation, it had been liable to Sin, to which all the Posterity of Adam are subject. He adds, That the Use of Marriage, though it is permitted, is called Sin, in Comparison of Virgi∣nity; which is a much more excellent state. After this, he proves that the Devil was not Wicked by Substance, but by Will; He demonstrates, That God is not the Author of Evil, because he crea∣ted a free Agent, which could incline it self to Good or to Evil; That the Divine Conduct cannot be blam'd, and that those who commit Sin ought not to impute it to any but themselves, since it was in their own Power to do Good, and to shun that which is Evil. In a word, That Man is not natu∣rally Wicked, but by his Will only; since he that has been Wicked and Impious, may change his con∣dition by Repentance, and become Good and Vertuous.