Page images


the Father sometimes his own, sometimes his beloved, but * never his adopt- *Legi & releed Son; he who by those proper and peculiar appellations is + distinguish'd i Scripturas,

Jesum Filium from us, who can claim no higher filiation than that which we receive by Dei nusquam the privilege of Adoption; he is truly the Only-begotten Son of God, not- adoptione in

veni. Ambrowithstanding the fame God hath begotten us by his Word; and the reason faller com. why he is fo, because the Divine Essence was communicated unto him in his in Ep. ad Rom. natural and eternal Generation, whereas only the Grace of God is conveyed Dices mihi, unto us in our Adoption. Indeed if we were begotten of the Essence of God doptivum as Christ was, or he were only by the Grace of God f adopted, as we are, Christe:m Dothen could he by no propriety of speech be called the OnW Son, by reason minum noi. of so many brethren : but being we cannot aspire unto the first, nor he de- co tibi, quia fcend unto the latter, it remaineth we ackn

him. notwithstanding nec Apoftoli

im. notwithitanging eum fic nothe first difficulty, by virtue of his natural and peculiar Generation to be minârunt, nec the Only-begotten Son. ten Son. Bains !!!

fancta Dei &

Catholica Ecclefia consuetudinem habuit fic eum appellare. Synod. Epift. Concil. Francoford. From whence they charge all those to whom they write that Synodic Epifle, that they should be satisfied with such expresions as they found in the Scriptures: Intelligite, fratres, quæ legitis, & nolite nova & incognita nomina fingere, fed quæ in S, Scripturâ inveniuntur tenere. 7 S. Aug. hath observed that S. Taul made use of yobetia, that he might distinguish the filiation of Chrift from ours. At vero etiam nos, quibus dedit Deus poteftatem filios ejus fieri, de natura atque substantia sua non nos genuit. ficut unicum Filium, fed utique delectione adopravit. Quo verbo Apostolus fæpe uri non ob aliud intelligitur, nifi ad difcernendum Unigenitum, De confenf. Evang. I. 2. c. 3. And 6. Ambros. takes notice that the name of true destroneth 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 adoprivi 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 cæpit : privatur enim hujus veritate noininis, fi in Unigenito non est de Patre veritas naturalis. Fulgentius ad Thrasim. l. 3. c. 3. Si divina illa Filii fempiternaque nativitas non de natura Dei Patris, fed ex gratia, .creditur substitille, non debet Unigenitus vocari, fed tantummodo genitus. Quoniam ficut ei nomen geniti Jargitas adoptionis paternæ contribuit, fic eum ab Unige, niti nomine nobis quoque tributa communio paternæ adoptionis exclufit. Unigenitus eniin non vocatur, quamvis genitus poffit vocari, cum genitis. ib. c.4.11

But though neither Men nor Angels be begotten of the fubftance of God, or by virtue of any such natural Generation be called Sons ; yet one perfon we know, to whom the Divine Essence is as truly and really communicated by the Father as to the Son, which is the third person in the blesfed Trinity, the Holy Ghost. Why then should the Word by that Communication of the Divine Essence become the Son, and not the Holy Ghost by the fame? or if by receiving the same nature, he also be the Son of God, how is the Word the Only-Son.? To this I answer, Thar the Holy Ghost receiveth the fame Essence from the Father which the Word receivech, and thereby becometh the fame God with the Father and theWord: but though the Essence be the same which is communicated, yet there is a difference in the communication ; the Word being God by Generation, the * Non omne Holy Ghost by procefsion: 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 nascitur Ghost 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 Mascon

i Aug. contra out of Adam, and in the fame nature with him, and yet was not born c. 14. who of him, nor was she truly the Daughter of Adam ; whereas Seth proceed-gives the same

solution to the ing from the same person in the fimilitude of the fame nature, was truly and frame 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 fubftantia Pa

à me, si de

tris eft Filius de fubftantia Patris est etiam Spiritus Sanctus, cur unus Filius fit, & alius non fit Filius. Ego respondeo, five capias, five non capias; De Patre est Filius, de Patre est Spiritus S. sed ille genitus eft, iste procedens. Torrão Tót8 wilave To ogu to pevacka ixeive ye rõ cigfuráte pocê cert Abror og d'Afrov Alveõnce. , as aólov, c'm tô vă fure psovTo 3), w's Nueva na, enrog bóp fuor župet egeros gS TW sólã có Nyeõua, Š Eugtevas pefuos ada guvor sa waoguaztáv, x tarogolópoluor. Theodorei. Serm. 2. P. 504. Nunquam fuit non Pater, à quo Filius natus, à quo Spiritus Sanétus non natus, quia non cft Filius. Gennad. D. Ecclef. Dog. Deus Pater innascibilis non ex aliquo, Deus Filius Unigenitus ex aliquo, hoc eft, ex Pa tre Spiritus S. innascibilis ex aliquo, hoc eft, ex Patre. Ifaac. lib. Fidei. Quod neque natum neque factum est, Spiritus 6. eft, qui à Patre & Filio procedit. S. Ambros. in Symb.

I as

as Seth did, by way of generation, that is, by natural fecundity. The Holy Ghost proceederh from the Father in the same nature with him, the Word proceedeth from the same person in the same fimilitude of nature also : bur the Word proceeding is the Son, the Holy Ghost is not, because the firft procession is by way of Generation; the other is not. As therefore the Regeneration and Adoption of man, so the Procellion of the Holy Ghost doth no way prejudice the eternal Generation, as pertaining solely to the Son of God.

Seeing then our Saviour Jesus Christ had a real being and existence be.fore he was conceived by the Vitgin Mary ; seeing the being which he had antecedently to chat Conception was not any created, but the one and indivisible Divine Essence; feeing he had not that Divinity of himself ori. ginally, as the Father, but by communication from him ; seeing th munication of the same Effence unto him was a proper Generation; we cannot

but believe that the same Jesus Christ is the begotten Son of God: and fee'De he living the same Essence was never so by way of Generation communicated * unto sòs Qvorve as any, we must also acknowledge him the Only-begotten, distinguish'd from the x:x?n) sa Holy Ghost, as Son; from the adopted Children, as the natural Son. w j peovog fornis, önce The necessity of the belief of this part of the Article, that Jefus Christ is Tres co im Tod the proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the substance of the Father, Cuando öv, ģen ment and by that singular way of Generation the Only Son, appeareth first in the erfouelles regis confirmation of our Faith concerning the Redemption of Mankind. For this

TIegu. S. Bafil. dorh lhew such an excellency and dignity in the person of the Mediator as Hom. de Fide.

will assure us of an infinite efficacy in his actions, and value in his sufferings. * Heb. 10. 4. We know a it is not posible that the blood of bulls and goats Jhonld take a

way 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 sins of other men ; there ap

pearing no fuch difference as will shew a certainty in the one, and an imporby Cor.6.20. fibility in the other. But since we may be bbought with a price, well may we and 9: 23. believe the blood of Christ sufficiently precious, when we are assured that it is

Aets 20- 28. the d blood of God: nor can we question the efficacy of it in purging our conHeb. 9. 14. science from dead works, if we believe Christ offered up himself through the

Eternal Spirit. If we be truly sensible of our sins, we must acknowledge that in every one we have oftended 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 person is, the more reverence is due unto him, and every injury tendech to his dishonour : but between God and man there is an infinite disproportion ; and therefore every offence cominitted against him must be esteemed as in the highest degree of injury. Again, as the gravity of the offence beareth proportion to the person offended; to the value of reparation ariseth from the dignity of the person fatisfying; because the fatisfaction consistech in a reparation of that honour which by the injury was eclipted; and all honour doth increase proportionably as the person yielding it is honourable. If then by every sin we have offended God, who is of infinite eminency, according unto which the injury is aggravated ; how

shall we ever be secure of our reconciliation unto God, except the person · who hath undertaken to make the reparation be of the same infinite dignity;

so as the honour rendred by his obedience may prove proportionable to the offence and that dishonour which arose from our disobedience? This scruple is no otherwise to be fatisfied than by a belief in such a Mediator as is the Only-begotten Son of God, of the fame substance with the Father, and consequently of the same power and dignity with the God whom by our sins we have offended.

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



ci Pet. 1. 19.

raging a Christian in ascribing that honour and glory unto Christ which is due unto him. For we are commanded to give that Worship unto the Son which is truly and properly Divine ; the same which we give unto God the Father, who hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men should John 5. 22, honour the Son even as they Honour the Father. As it was represented to 23. 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 such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, saying, blessing, honour, glory, and power be unto him that fitteth upon the throne, and unto the lamb, for ever and ever. Again, we are cominanded to fear the Lord our God, and to * serve him; and Deut. 6. 3, 4

*The emphasis that with such an emphasis, as by him we are to understand him alone, be- appears inthis. cause the Lord our God is one Lord. From whence if any one arose among that it is not the Jews teaching under the title of a Prophet to worship any other be bar fide him for God, the judgment of the † Rabbins was, that notwithstand-bui nayn inn ing all the Miracles which he could work, though they were as great as & ipfi fervies, Moses wrought, he ought immediately to be strangled, because the evidence peculiar reof this truth, that one God only must be worthipped, is above all evidence striction as of sense. Nor must we look upon this Precept as valid only under the Law,

; by the Chalas if then there were only one God to be worshipped, but since the Gof- dee Paraph. pel we had another ; for our Saviour hath commended it to our observa- 71277 tion, by making use of it against the Devil in his temptation, saying, a Get & in conspethee hence, Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, du ejus fer

a, vies, by the and him only shalt thou serve. If then we be obliged to worship the God LXX. ZEM. TAS of Israel only, if we be also commanded to give the fame Worlhip to the móveu nãiesc Son which we give to him ; it is necessary we should believe tha

THS' and that

the restriction apSon is the God of Israel. When the Scripture bringeth in the first-begot-proved by our ten into the world, it faith, Let all the Angels of God worship him; but Saviour, Mat. then the same Scripture calleth that first-begotten c Jehovah, and the Lord Moi Mim of the whole earth. For a man to worship that for God which is not praf. in SeGod, knowing that it is not God, is affecte nd gross Idolatry ; to wor-a Mata. To

der Zeraim. ship that as God which is not God, thinking that it is God, is not the same b Heb. 1.6. degree, but the same sin: to worship him as God who is God, thinking Psal. 97. 5:

6 Ει 3 μονογυης that he is not God, cannot be thought an act in the formality void of Idosos como song latry. Left therefore while we are obliged to give unto him Divine wor- isin, oderier ship, we should fall into that sin which of all others we ought most to ab- ange exey wegs

τα κλισα κοιhor, it is no less necessary that we should believe that Son to be that erer-wiæv. Theod. pal God, whom we are bound to worship, and whom only we should ferve. Hæret. Fab.

1. 5. 6. 2. Our belief in Christ as the eternal Son of God is neceilary to" raise us unto a thankful acknowledgment of the infinite love of God appearing in the sending of his only begotten Son into the world to die for finners. This love of God is frequently extolled and admired by the Apostles. God so loved the world, faith S. John, that he gave his only be-d7ohn 3.16. gotten Son. «God commended his love towards us, faith S. Paul, in that e Rom. 5. 8. while we were yet finners Christ died for us; in that he spared not his and 8. 32. own Son, but delivered him up for us all. f In this, faith S. 7obn again, ftohn A. was manifested the love of God towards us, because 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 sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. If we look upon all this as nothing else but that God should cause a man to be born after another manner than other men, and when he was so born after a peculiar manner, yet a mortal man should deliver him to die for the sins of the world; I see no such great expression 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 absolute necessity in respect of God, but that he hath as



freely designed our Redemption as our Creation ; considering the misery
from which we are redeemed, and the happiness to which we are invited,
we cannot but acknowledge the singular love of God, even in the act of
Redemption it self; but yet the Apostles have raised that considerati-
on higher, and placed the choicest mark of the love of God in the chu-
sing such means and performing in that manner our reparation, by send-
ing his Only-begotten into the World; by not sparing his own Son, by
giving and delivering him up to be ícourged and crucified for us; and the
estimation of this act of God's love must necessarily increase proportionably
to the dignity of the Son fo fent into the World; because the more wor-
thy the person of Christ before he suffered, the greater his
unto such a suffering condition; and the nearer his relation to the Father,
the greater his love to us for whose fakes he sent him fo to suffer. Where-
fore to derogate any way from the Person and Nature of our Saviour be-
fore he suffered, is so far to undervalue the love of God, and consequently,
to come Thort of that acknowledgement and thanksgiving which is due un-
to him for it. If then the sending of Christ into the World were the high-
est act of the love of God which could be expressed; if we be obliged unto
a return of thankfulness fome way correspondent to such infinite love ; if
fuch a return can never be made without a true sense of that infinity,
and a sense of that infinity of love cannot consist without an appre-
hension of an infinite dignity of nature in the person fent ; then it is ab-
solutely necessary to believe that Christ is so the Only-begotten Son of the
Father, as to be of the fame substance with him, of Glory equal, of Ma-
jelty co-eternal.

By this discourse in way of explication every Christian may understand what it is he says, and express his mind how he would be understood, when he maketh this brief Confession, I believe in Christ the only Son of God. For by these words he must be thought to intend no less than this; I do profess to be fully assured of this assertion as of a most certain, infallible and neceffary truth, That Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Mefias, is the true, proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the substance of the Father, which being incapable of divifion or multiplication ; is so really and totally commu- · nicated to him, that he is of the lame Essence with him, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God. And as I assert him to be the Son, so do I also exclude all other persons 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 iaid to be begotten, and are called Sons, but are so only by adoption, as 'tis natural. And thus I believe in God the Father, and in Jefus Christ his Only Son,

Dur Lord. A fter our Saviour's Relation founded upon his eternal Generation, fol* For though 12

loweth his Dominion, *in all ancient Creeds, as the necessary consein the first . quent of his Filiation. For as we believe him to be the Son of God, so must Rules of Faith mentioned by we acknowleage nin

in we acknowledge him to be our Lord, because the Only Son must of necessity 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 find not Dominum no- not be looked upon as Sons of God, but as Servants of Christ. .' ftrum, yet in all the Creeds afterwards we find those words; probably inserted because denied by the Valentinians, of whom Irenæus, Avad tõro Ewiñes difyrw, šde g5 Kieroy óvoseo HV auto, 9 ayri, I. 1. c. I.



Three things are necessary, 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-phrase, or language of the Holy Ghost: Secondly, the full fignification of the same in the adequate latitude of the sense, as it belongs to Christ: Thirdly, the application of it to the person making confession of his Faith, and all others whom he involves in the fame condition with himself, as saying, not my, nor their, but Our Lord.

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 absolutely taken is * frequently used by the Evangelists and Apostles determinately for * Mark 16:10 Chrift, insomuch that the Angels observe that Dialect, a Come, see the place 20. Luke 12. where the Lord lay. Now for the true Notation of the word, it will not 42. and 24. be so necessary to enquire into the use or origination of the Greek, much John 4. 1. less into the Etymology of the correspondent Latin, as to search into the and 6.23. Notion of the Jews, and the Language of the Scriptures, according unto and 20:22:18. which the Evangelists and Apostles fpake and wrote.

20, 25. and And first, it cannot be denied but that the word which we translate the 21.7. Acts 9.

.1. 6. IO, IT, Lord, was used by the Interpreters of the Old Testament sometimes for 15, 17, 27, #men with no relation unto any other than human Dominion. And as it 31,42.andır. was by the Translators of the Old, so is it also by the Pen-men of the 16, 24. and

13. 47, or. * New. But it is most certain that Christ is called Lord in another notion Kiito. than that which signifies any kind of human Dominion ; because, as fo, a Mat. 28. 6. bthere are many Lords, but he is in that notion · Lord which admits of no verball com

't For whosoemore than one. They are only d Masters according to the flesh; He e the sider the figLord of glory, the Lord from heaven, King of Kings, and Lord of all nification of other Lords,

Scriptures, I

think he will scarce 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 so used by any of the old Greek Authors. Julius Pollux, whose business is to observe what words and phrases may be properly made use of in that language, tells us the Gods may be called Ogos or Adipoyes but mentions not Kuera, as neither proper, nor any name of God with them at all. Nor did they anciently use it in their OEconomicks; where their constant terms were not Kúero but decórns, and dgn and they had then another kind of notion of it, as appears by the complaint of the servant in Aristophanes, Tô Cápala go on iã t xúeroy'xeglev o dainas, saro' iwwelcoy. In which words, if they were interpreted by the Scripture usage, Kúer would fignifie the Master, and twonpedia the person bought, that is, the Servant; whereas the place requires an interpretation wholly contrary; for ionuli is not here aloccarello, but úlood cols, or wrnod wife , as the Scholiast, Suidas and Moschopulus have observed, that is, nct the Servant, but the Master who bought him. And though those Grammarians bring no other place to prove this active signification beside this of Aristophanes, by which means it might be fill questionable whether they had rightly interpreted him without any authority; yet Phrynichus will sufficiently secure us of this sense. 'ETUXov lwinpc oixiev alegr. erτώθα δεν έχωρά η Από το πρία, με το εωνημών δόκιμον. 'Εωνη μεμG- then here is he which buyeth, that is, the Master : and consequently xúer not the Master, but the Servant bought, whom he supposeth originally to have power over his own body. Indeed it was not only distinguished, but in a manner opposed to decorns as appears by that obserυation of Ammonius, thus delivered by Eultathius in OdyJ. Ξ. ΚύρμG- γωαικός και φών άνης και παλης, δεσπότης και αρΓυρωνήtan. As 1198 is generally translated xúer when it signifieth Lord or Master in respect of a servant or inferior. So Sarah called her husband, Gen. 18.12. 1 Pet. 3.6. fo Eleezer his Master Abrahain, Gen. 24. frequently. Thus Rachel saluted her Father Laban, Gen. 31. 35. and Jacob his Brother Elau, Gen. 33. 8. Potiphar is the riere of Joseph whom he bought, Gen. 39. 2. or. and Jofeph in power is ro saluted by his brethren, Gen.42. 10. and acknowledged by his Servant, 44.5. The general name in the law of Moses for servant and master is tras and xier, Exod. 21.2, 4. It is indeed plain that the ancient Jews used this word to signifie no more than humane power, that we find the name of man ro translated, as i Sam. 17. 32. a5 2017 159 S78 Heih CouterÉTO xudia tê xveis ét' awtin. * For xúera is used with relation and in opposition to wurdicum, Acts 16. 16. in the sense which the later, not the ancient, Greeks used it : Ilaudioxn, rộto imi frega chung oi vuồ Ti0'écow oi j as maior eri op velvio G, as Phrynichus observes, as it is opposed to oixé ans, Luke. 16. 13. (according to that of Ætymol. Kúero de mess to isiv, čxe õ regs À oixéthw) to dona, Mar. 10.24. and 18.25,0c. And in the Apostolical rules pertaining to Christian Economicks, the Master and Servant are dgn and xsee. As alo by day of addition xóeo tỷ sexus, Mat. 9. 38. xoe o to du khan QP; Mat. 20.8. xue * oxies, Mark 13.35. Infomuch as xuiere is sometimes used by way of address or salutation 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 Masters, as Mat. 13.27. or Sons to Parents, as Mat. 21. 30. or inferiors to men in authority, as Mat. 27.63. but of strangers; as when the Greeks spake to Philip, and desired him, saying, Kúere, Sinopste * 'Incón idéšv, John 12. 21. and Mary Magdalen Speaking unto Christ, but taking him for a Gardener, Kúere, o Co ibésaras autou, John 20. 15. And it cannot be denied but this title was sometimes given to our Saviour himself in no higher or other sense 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, Kúers, áv7amuece óx ¢ HS, rj ogé ce isi Bale, John 4. II. And the infirm man at the Pool of Bethesda, when he wist not who it was, said unto him, Kúent, avgwa oy 8xxw, John 5.7. The blind man, to whom he had restored his fight, with the same salutation maketh confession of his igno- rance, and his faith, Tis ist, zuers; and w1566w, róese, John 9. 36, 38. ,b i Cor. 8.5.

c 16. ř. 6. and Eph.4.5. d Col. 3. 22. ei Cor. 2. 8. and 15.47.

Rev. 19. 16.


« PreviousContinue »