Page images
PDF
EPUB

gi Scripturas,

veni. Ambro

the Father fometimes his own, fometimes his beloved, but *never his adopt- *Legi & rele ed Son; he who by those proper and peculiar appellations is † diftinguifh'd Jefum Filium from us, who can claim no higher filiation than that which we receive by Dei nufquam the privilege of Adoption; he is truly the Only-begotten Son of God, not- adoptione inwithstanding the fame God hath begotten us by his Word; and the reafon fiafter Com. why he is fo, because the Divine Effence was communicated unto him in his in Ep. ad Rom. natural and eternal Generation, whereas only the Grace of God is conveyed Cur times a unto us in our Adoption. Indeed if we were begotten of the Effence of God doptivum as Chrift was, or he were only by the Grace of God adopted, as we are, Chriftum Dothen could he by no propriety of speech be called the Only Son, by reafon minare? Diof fo many brethren: but being we cannot afpire unto the firft, nor he de- co tibi, quia fcend unto the latter, it remaineth we acknowledge him, notwithstanding nec poto Apoftoli the first difficulty, by virtue of his natural and peculiar Generation to be minârunt, nec the Only begotten Son.

[ocr errors]

Dices mihi,

minum no

fancta Dei & Catholica Ec

clefia confuetudinem habuit fic eum appellare. Synod. Epift. Concil. Francoford. From whence they charge all thofe to whom they write that Synodic Epifle, that they should be fatisfied with fuch expreffions as they found in the Scriptures: Intelligite, fratres, quæ legitis, & nolite nova & incognita nomina fingere, fed quæ in S. Scripturâ inveniuntur tenere. ts. Aug. hath obferved that S. Paul made use of yoberia, that he might diftinguish the filiation of Chrift from ours. At verò etiam nos, quibus dedit Deus poteftatem filios ejus fieri, de natura atque fubftantia fua non nos genuit, ficut unicum Filium, fed utique delectione adoptavit. Quo verbo Apoftolus fæpe uti non ob aliud intelligitur, nifi ad difcernendum Unigenitum, De confenf. Evang. 1. 2. c. 3. And S. Ambrof. takes notice that the name of true destroyeth that of adopted: Adoptivum filium non dicimus filium effe natura, fed eum dicimus natura effe filium qui verus eft filius, De Incar. Sacr. c. 8. Si unicus, quomodo adoptivus, dum multi funt adoptivi filii? Unicus itaque de multis non poteft dici. Council. Francof. Quod fi etiam Unigenitus Filius factus dicitur ex gratia, non vere genitus ex natura, proculdubio nomen & veritatem Unigeniti perdidit, poftquam fratres habere jam cœpit: privatur enim hujus verita te nominis, fi in Unigenito non eft de Patre veritas naturalis. Fulgentius ad Thrafim. l. 3. c. 3. Si divina illa Filii fempiternaque nativitas non de natura Dei Patris, fed ex gratia, creditur fubftitiffe, non debet Unigenitus vocari, fed tantummodo genitus. Quoniam ficut ei nomen geniti largitas adoptionis paternæ contribuit, fic eum ab Unige niti nomine nobis quoque tributa communio paternæ adoptionis exclufit. Unigenitus enim non vocatur, quamvis genitus poffit vocari, cum genitis. Ib. c. 4..

But though neither Men nor Angels be begotten of the fubftance of God, or by virtue of any fuch natural Generation be called Sons; yet one perfon we know, to whom the Divine Effence is as truly and really communicated by the Father as to the Son, which is the third perfon in the bleffed Trinity, the Holy Ghost. Why then fhould the Word by that Communication of the Divine Effence become the Son, and not the Holy Ghoft by the fame? or if by receiving the fame nature, he alfo be the Son of God, how is the Word the Only-Son? To this I anfwer, That the Holy Ghost receiveth the fame Effence from the Father which the Word receiveth, and thereby becometh the fame God with the Father and theWord: but though the Effence be the fame which is communicated, yet there is a difference in the communication; the Word being God by Generation, the Non omne Holy Ghost by proceffion: and though every thing which is begotten id quod proproceedeth, yet every thing which proceedeth is not begotten. Where- cedit nafcitur; fore in the Language of the facred Scriptures and the † Church, the Holy quod nafcitur Ghoft is never faid to be begotten, but to proceed from the Father; procedit. s. nor is he ever called the Son, but the Gift of God. Eve was produced Max. 1.3. out of Adam, and in the fame nature with him, and yet was not born c. 14. who of him, nor was the truly the Daughter of Adam; whereas Seth proceed- gives the fame ing from the fame perfon in the fimilitude of the fame nature, was truly and fame arguproperly the Son of Adam. And this difference was not in the nature pro- ment, Quæris duced, but in the manner of production; Eve defcending not from Adam

[ocr errors]

*

t

ficut omne id

Aug. contra

folution to the

[ocr errors]

substantia Patris eft Filius

de fubftantia Patris eft etiam Spiritus Sanctus, cur unus Filius fit, & alius non fit Filius. Ego refpondeo, five capias, five non capias; De Patre eft Filius, de Patre eft Spiritus S. fed ille genitus eft, ifte procedens. П THTH WI

τὸ φάναι, ἐξ ἐκείνο γε τὸ ἀλωνήτε φιῦτοι * Λόδον καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· τ μ, ὡς λόγον, ἐκ τῶ να ενώρθρον· τὸ 3, ὡς Πνεῦ μα, εκπορόυόμθμον ξυμπρόεισι γδ τῷ Λόγῷ τὸ Πνεῦμα, ο ξυγγενώμθρον ἀλλα ξανὸν καὶ παρομαρτον, καὶ ἐκποςανόρθμον. Theodo ret. Serm. 2. p. 504. Nunquam fuit non Pater, à quo Filius natus, à quo Špiritus Sanctus non natus, quia non cft Filius. Gennad. D. Ecclef. Dog. Deus Pater innafcibilis non ex aliquo, Deus Filius Unigenitus ex aliquo, hoc eft, ex Pa tre Spiritus S. innafcibilis ex aliquo, hoc eft, ex Patre. Ifaac. lib. Fidei. Quod neque natum neque factum eft, Spiritus 5. eft, qui à Patre & Filio procedit. S. Ambrof. in Symb.

as

* Ως με εν
εὸς φυσικῶς
κέκλη, τὰ τὸ

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

μονος χυής, όλα

Κυλλαβών, ε

δενός καταμετ

Hom. de Fide.

Heb. 10. 4.

and 7.23.

C1 Pet. I. 19.

d

as Seth did, by way of generation, that is, by natural fecundity. The Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father in the fame nature with him, the Word proceedeth from the fame perfon in the fame fimilitude of nature alfo; but the Word proceeding is the Son, the Holy Ghost is not, because the first proceffion is by way of Generation, the other is not. As therefore the Regeneration and Adoption of man, fo the Proceffion of the Holy Ghost doth no way prejudice the eternal Generation, as pertaining folely to the Son of God.

Seeing then our Saviour Jefus Christ had a real being and existence before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary; feeing the being which he had antecedently to that Conception was not any created, but the one and indivisible Divine Effence; feeing he had not that Divinity of himself originally, as the Father, but by communication from him; feeing the communication of the fame Effence unto him was a proper Generation; we cannot but believe that the fame Jefus Chrift is the begotten Son of God: and feeing the fame Effence was never fo by way of Generation communicated *unto any, we must also acknowledge him the Only-begotten, diftinguish'd from the Holy Ghoft, as Son; from the adopted Children, as the natural Son.

d

may we

The neceffity of the belief of this part of the Article, that Jefus Chrift is ἔχει ἐν ἑαυτῷ the proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the fubftance of the Father, * and by that fingular way of Generation the Only Son, appeareth firft in the es_confirmation of our Faith concerning the Redemption of Mankind. For this gy. S. Bafil. doth fhew fuch an excellency and dignity in the perfon of the Mediator as will affure us of an infinite efficacy in his actions, and value in his fufferings. We know it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away fins and we may very well doubt how the blood of him, who hath no other nature than that of man, can take away the fins of other men ; there appearing no fuch difference as will fhew a certainty in the one, and an impof1 Cor. 6. 20. fibility in the other. But fince we may be bought with a price, well believe the blood of Chrift fufficiently precious, when we are affured that it is Acts 20 28. the blood of God: nor can we queftion the efficacy of it in purging our conHeb. 9. 14. Science from dead works, if we believe Chrift offered up himself through the Eternal Spirit. If we be truly fenfible of our fins, we must acknowledge that in every one we have offended God; and the gravity of every offence must needs increase proportionably to the dignity of the party offended in respect of the offender; because the more worthy any perfon is, the more reverence is due unto him, and every injury tendeth to his dishonour: but between God and man there is an infinite difproportion; and therefore every offence committed against him must be esteemed as in the highest degree of injury. Again, as the gravity of the offence beareth proportion to the perfon offended; to the value of reparation arifeth from the dignity of the perfon fatisfying; because the fatisfaction confifteth in a reparation of that honour which by the injury was eclipted; and all honour doth increase proportionably as the perfon yielding it is honourable. If then by every fin we have offended God, who is of infinite eminency, according unto which the injury is aggravated; how fhall we ever be fecure of our reconciliation unto God, except the person who hath undertaken to make the reparation be of the fame infinite dignity; fo as the honour rendred by his obedience may prove proportionable to the offence and that dishonour which arose from our disobedience? This fcruple is no otherwife to be fatisfied than by a belief in fuch a Mediator as is the Only-begotten Son of God, of the fame fubftance with the Father, and confequently of the fame power and dignity with the God whom by our fins we have offended.

Secondly, The belief of the eternal Generation of the Son, by which he is the fame God with the Father, is neceffary for the confirming and encou

с

among

23.

appears in this, that it is not

ותעברו Barely

ןקרמוהר

תפלה

vies, by the

reftrittion ap

4. IO.

raging a Christian in afcribing that honour and glory unto Chrift which is due unto him. For we are commanded to give that Worship unto the Son which is truly and properly Divine; the fame which we give unto God the Father, who hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men should John 5. 22, bonour the Son even as they honour the Father. As it was reprefented to S. John in a Vision, when he heard every creature which is in heaven, and Rev. 5. 13. on the earth, and under the earth, and fuch as are in the fea, and all that are in them, faying, bleffing, honour, glory, and power be unto him that fitteth upon the throne, and unto the lamb, for ever and ever. Again, we are commanded to fear the Lord our God, and to * ferve him; and Deut. 6. 3, 4. that with fuch an emphasis, as by him we are to understand him alone, be*The emphafis cause the Lord our God is one Lord. From whence if any one arose the Jews teaching under the title of a Prophet to worship any other be- & fervies ei, fide him for God, the judgment of the Rabbins was, that notwithstand- bu aynını ing all the Miracles which he could work, though they were as great as & ipfi fervies, Mofes wrought, he ought immediately to be strangled, because the evidence peculiar rewith fuch a of this truth, that one God only must be worshipped, is above all evidence friction as of sense. Nor must we look upon this Precept as valid only under the Law, by the Chalis expreffed as if then there were only one God to be worshipped, but fince the Gof- dee Paraph. pel we had another; for our Saviour hath commended it to our observation, by making use of it against the Devil in his temptation, faying, a Get & in confpethee hence, Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, &tu ejus ferand him only fhalt thou ferve. If then we be obliged to worship the God LXX. of Ifrael only, if we be alfo commanded to give the fame Worship to the ovalSon which we give to him; it is neceffary that we should believe that the σεις: and that Son is the God of Ifrael. When the Scripture bringeth in the firft-begot-proved by our ten into the world, it faith, Let all the Angels of God worship him; but Saviour, Mat. then the fame Scripture calleth that first-begotten Jehovah, and the Lord MofesMaim. of the whole earth. For a man to worship that for God which is not Pref. in SeGod, knowing that it is not God, is affected and grofs Idolatry; to wor- Mat. 4. 10. fhip that as God which is not God, thinking that it is God, is not the fame b Heb. 1.6. degree, but the fame fin: to worship him as God who is God, thinking Pfal. 97. 5. that he is not God, cannot be thought an act in the formality void of Ido- is, warte v Εἰ 5 μονογυής latry. Left therefore while we are obliged to give unto him Divine wor- is, div fhip, we fhould fall into that fin which of all others we ought moft to ab-xewey's hor, it is no less neceffary that we should believe that Son to be that eter-vi. Theod. nal God, whom we are bound to worship, and whom only we should ferve. Hæret. Fab. Thirdly, Our belief in Chrift as the eternal Son of God is neceffary to raise us unto a thankful acknowledgment of the infinite love of God appearing in the fending of his only begotten Son into the world to die for finners. This love of God is frequently extolled and admired by the Apoftles. God fo loved the world, faith S. John, that he gave his only "be- a John 3. 16. gotten Son. God commended his love towards us, faith S. Paul, in that Rom. 5. while we were yet finners Chrift died for us; in that he spared not his and 8. 32. own Son, but delivered him up for us all. In this, faith S. John again, £John 4. 9. was manifefted the love of God towards us, becaufe that God fent his 10. only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and fent his Son to be the propitiation for our fins. If we look upon all this as nothing else but that God fhould cause a man to be born after another manner than other men, and when he was fo born after a peculiar manner, yet a mortal man should deliver him to die for the fins of the world; I fee no fuch great expreffion of his love in this way of redemption, more than would have appeared if he had redeemed us any other way. 'Tis true indeed, that the reparation of lapsed man is no act of abfolute neceffity in respect of God, but that he hath as

e

der Zeraim.

a

с

freely

ὥσπερ ἐν

τα κλιτά κοι

1.5. c. 2.

e

8.

* For though in the first Rules of Faith

freely defigned our Redemption as our Creation; confidering the mifery
from which we are redeemed, and the happiness to which we are invited,
we cannot but acknowledge the fingular love of God, even in the act of
Redemption it felf; but yet the Apoftles have raised that confiderati-
on higher, and placed the choiceft mark of the love of God in the chu-
fing fuch means and performing in that manner our reparation, by fend-
ing his Only-begotten into the World; by not fparing his own Son, by
giving and delivering him up to be fcourged and crucified for us; and the
eftimation of this act of God's love muft neceffarily increase proportionably
to the dignity of the Son fo fent into the World; because the more wor-
thy the perfon of Chrift before he fuffered, the greater his condefcenfion
unto fuch a fuffering condition; and the nearer his relation to the Father,
the greater
his love to us for whofe fakes he fent him fo to fuffer. Where-
fore to derogate any way from the Perfon and Nature of our Saviour be-
fore he fuffered, is fo far to undervalue the love of God, and confequently,
to come short of that acknowledgement and thanksgiving which is due un-
to him for it. If then the fending of Chrift into the World were the high-
eft act of the love of God which could be expreffed; if we be obliged unto
a return of thankfulness fome way correfpondent to fuch infinite love; if
fuch a return can never be made without a true fenfe of that infinity,
and a fenfe of that infinity of love cannot confift without an appre-
henfion of an infinite dignity of nature in the perfon fent; then it is ab-
folutely neceffary to believe that Chrift is fo the Only-begotten Son of the
Father, as to be of the same substance with him, of Glory equal, of Ma-
jefty co-eternal.

By this discourse in way of explication every Chriftian may understand what it is he says, and exprefs his mind how he would be understood, when he maketh this brief Confeffion, I believe in Chrift the only Son of God. For by these words he must be thought to intend no lefs than this; I do profess to be fully affured of this affertion as of a moft certain, infallible and neceffary truth, That Jefus Chrift, the Saviour and Meffias, is the true, proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the fubftance of the Father; which being incapable of divifion or multiplication; is fo really and totally communicated to him, that he is of the fame Effence with him, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God. And as I affert him to be the Son, fo do I also exclude all other perfons from that kind of Sonship, acknowledging none but him to be begotten of God by that proper and natural Generation; and thereby excluding all which are not begotten, as it is a generation; all which are laid to be begotten, and are called Sons, but are fo only by adoption, as 'tis natural. And thus I believe in God the Father, and in Jefus Chrift his Only Son,

A

Dur Lord.

Fter our Saviour's Relation founded upon his eternal Generation, followeth his Dominion, *in all ancient Creeds, as the necessary confequent of his Filiation. For as we believe him to be the Son of God, so must mentioned by we acknowledge him to be our Lord, because the Only Son must of neceffity Irenæus and be Heir and Lord of all in his Father's House; and all others which bear the Tertullian we name of Sons, whether they be men or Angels, if compared to him must not be looked upon as Sons of God, but as Servants of Christ.

find not Dominum no

ftrum, yet in

all the Creeds afterwards we find those words; probably inserted because denied by the Valentinians, of whom Irenæus, Δια τέτο ὃ Σωτήρα λέγεσιν, ὅδε γδ Κύριον ὀνομάζειν αὐτὸν θέλεσι, I. I. C. I.

There

Three things are neceffary, and more, cannot be, for a plenary explication of this part of the Article. First, the proper notation of the word Lord in the Scripture-phrafe, or language of the Holy Ghoft: Secondly, the full fignification of the fame in the adequate latitude of the fenfe, as it belongs to Chrift: Thirdly, the application of it to the perfon making confeffion of his Faith, and all others whom he involves in the fame condition with himself, as faying, not my, nor their, but Our Lord.

a

First then, we must observe that not only Christ is the Lord, but that this title doth fo properly belong unto him, that the Lord alone abfolutely taken is frequently ufed by the Evangelifts and Apostles determinately for *Mark 16.19, Chrift, infomuch that the Angels observe that Dialect, Come, fee the place 20. Luke 12. where the Lord lay. Now for the true Notation of the word, it will not † 42. and 24. be fo neceffary to enquire into the use or origination of the Greek, much John 4. 1. lefs into the Etymology of the correfpondent Latin, as to fearch into the and 6. 23. Notion of the Jews, and the Language of the Scriptures, according unto and 20. 2, 18, which the Evangelifts and Apoftles fpake and wrote.

f

34.

and II. 2.

20, 25. and

1. 6. 10, II,

13. 47, exc.

a

all nification of

Κύριο in the Scriptures, I think he will

And firft, it cannot be denied but that the word which we tranflate the 21. 7. Acts 9. Lord, was used by the Interpreters of the Old Teftament sometimes for 15, 17, 27, men with no relation unto any other than human Dominion. And as it 31,42. and11. was by the Tranflators of the Old, fo is it alfo by the Pen-men of the 16, 24. and *New. But it is most certain that Chrift is called Lord in another notion ke than that which fignifies any kind of human Dominion; becaufe, as fo, Mar. 28. 6. † For whofoethere are many Lords, but he is in that notion Lord which admits of no ver hall conmore than one. They are only Mafters according to the flesh; He the fider the figLord of glory, the Lord from heaven, King of Kings, and Lord of other Lords, fcarce find any footsteps of the fame in the ancient Greeks. In our Sacred Writ it is the frequent name of God, whereas I imagine it is not to be found fo ufed by any of the old Greek Authors. Julius Pollux, whose business is to obferve what words and phrafes may be properly made use of in that language, tells us the Gods may be called to or Daimoves but mentions not Kue, as neither proper, nor any name of God with them at all. Nor did they anciently use it in their OEconomicks; where their conftant terms were not Kue but dewórns, and dox and they had then another kind of notion of it, as appears by the complaint of the fervant in Ariftophanes, T Cual go sx ix + xverov`reglervo daiμar, áλλa & inov. In which words, if they were interpreted by the Scripture ufage, Kies would fignifie the Mafter, and imp the perfon bought, that is, the Servant; whereas the place requires an interpretation wholly contrary; for iam is not here loc, but logáras, or wrnod, as the Scholiaft, Suidas and Mofchopulus have observed, that is, net the Servant, but the Mafter who bought him. And though thofe Grammarians bring no other place to prove this active fignification befide this of Ariftophanes, by which means it might be ftill questionable whether they had rightly interpreted him without any authority; yet Phrynichus will fufficiently fecure us of this fenfe. 'Eruxov iwvuyoiníar i alegr. cvταῦθα ἐδὲν ἐ[χωρεί τ απὸ τὸ πρίας μπάρει το εωνημθύ ο δόκιμον. Εωνημα then here is he which buyeth, that is, the Mafter and confequently ner not the Mafter, but the Servant bought, whom he fuppofeth originally to have power over his own body. Indeed it was not only diftinguished, but in a manner opposed to deatorns as appears by that obfervation of Ammonius, thus delivered by Euftathius in Ody. Ε. Κύριο γευαικὸς καὶ τῶν ἀνὴς καὶ παλης, διασότης 5 αρΓυρωνή As is generally tranflated xves when it fignifieth Lord or Mafter in respect of a fervant or inferior. So Sarah called her husband, Gen. 18. 12. 1 Pet. 3.6. fo Eleezer his Mafter Abraham, Gen. 24. frequently. Thus Rachel faluted her Father Laban, Gen. 31. 35. and Jacob his Brother Efau, Gen. 33. 8. Potiphar is the nie of Joseph whom he bought, Gen. 39. 2. &c. and Jofeph in power is fo faluted by his brethren, Gen. 42. 10. and acknowledged by his Servant, 44.5. The general name in the law of Mofes for fervant and master is was and nie, Exod. 21.2, 4. It is indeed fo plain that the ancient Jews used this word to fignifie no more than humane power, that we find the name of man co tran Based, as I Sam. I7.32. 25 ba ba " ON MY ồn COMTOTO xa gia rổ xu MỠ VÀ CỦA TÔI xver is used with relation and in oppofition to audioxy, Acts 16. 16. in the fenfe which the later, not the ancient, Greeks ufed it: Παιδίσκη, τότο ἐπὶ θεραπαίνης οἱ ναῦ τιθέασιν· οἱ ἢ ἀρχαῖοι ἐπὶ τ νεάνιδα, as Phrynichus obferves, as it is oppofed to oixerns, Luke. 16. 13. (according to that of Etymol. Kiel & wogs Ti isiv, ixH 5 wegs & oixétlu) to deλ, Mat. 10.24. and 18. 25,&c. And in the Apoftolical rules pertaining to Chriftian OEconomicks, the Mafter and Servant are dλ and xves. As alfo by way of addition xver to dresoμs, Mat. 9.38. xve‹ тö áμж‹λãï; Mat. 20.8. xves & oixías, Mark 13.35. Infomuch as xves is fometimes used by way of address or falutation of one man to another, (as it is now generally among the later Greeks, and as Dominus was anciently among the Latines, Quomodo obvios, fi nomen non occurrat, Dominos falutamus, Sen.) not only of Servants to Mafters, as Mat. 13. 27. or Sons to Parents, as Mat. 21. 30. or inferiors to men in authority, as Mat. 27.63. but of ftrangers; as when the Greeks fpake to Philip, and defired him, faying, Kueu, Jiaouf ✈ 'Incy idev, John 12.21. and Mary Magdalen Speaking unto Chrift, but taking him for a Gardener, Kvent, Hi Cù ibásaras autov, John 20. 15. And it cannot be denied but this title was fometimes given to our Saviour himfelf in no higher or other fenfe than this: As when the Samaritan woman faw him alone at the well, and knew no more of him than that he appeared to be one of the Jews, she said, Kvese, ävlanμa 8x éxes, xj rò Oging isi Batu, John 4. 11. And the infirm man at the Pool of Bethesda, when he wift not who it was, faid unto him, Kves, avfewer &x ixw, John 3.7. The blind man, to whom he had restored his fight, with the fame falutation maketh confession of his ignorance, and his faith, Tis isi, xves; and wisdów, niere, John 9. 36, 38. b 1 Cor. 8.5. c1b. y. 6. and Eph.4.5. e I Cor. 2. 8. and 15.47.

των.

:

d Col. 3.22.

V

f Rev. 19. 16.

Nor

* For

« PreviousContinue »