Page images
PDF
EPUB

mam fidem facere poteft vel locus ille Pauli, 1 Cor. 13. à v. 4. ad 8. uhi perpetuò dę charitate, tanquam de perfona aliqua loquitur illi permulta tribuens , quæ revera non nifi in personain cadunt. Fauftus Socinus contra Wiekum, 6. 10.

*

So the Raco

ons, answer that it is ordinary in the Scriptures to find the like expressions, which are proper unto Persons, given unto those things which are no Perfons: as when the Apostle faith, Charity suffereth long and is kind, chari. 1 Cor. 13. 4; ty envieth not, charity vaunteth not it félf, is not puffed up, doth not be- 5,6, 7. have it self unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh. none evil, rejoyceth not in iniquity, but rejoyćeth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. All which personal actions are attributed to charity which is no Person, as in vian Catech. * other cases it is usual, but belonging to that person which is charitable ; be- doth enlarge cause that Person which is so qualified doth perform those actions according stating ike to, and by virtue of, that charity which is in him. In the fame manner, † lay, question thus, they, personal actions are attributed to the Holy Ghost, which is no Person, Qui verò ji but only the virtue, power, and efficacy of God the Father of our Lord accipiendi Jefus Christ, because that God the Father is a Person, and doth perform funt in quibus those personal actions, attributed to the Holy Ghost; by that virtue, power, perfonarum and efficacy in himself , which is the Holy Ghost

. As when we read the propriæ & ad Spirit said unto Peter, a Behold three men seek thee; arise therefore and Deum ipfum get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing; for I have sent them : tribuuntur ? we must understand that God the Father was the Person which spake those and returnwords, and which sent those men; but because he did so by that virtue ing this Solo which is the Holy Ghost, therefore the Holy Ghost is faid to speak those modum, quo words and send those men. In the same manner when we read, the Holy in Scripturis Ghost said unto those at Antioch, b Separate me Barnabas and Saul, for tribuatur fæthe work whereunto I have called them; we must conceive it was God the penumero Father who spake those words, who had called Barnabas and Saul, and to quod persowhom they were to be separated : but because God did all this by that Power neque tamen within him, which is his fpirit, therefore those words and actions are attri- res illæ propbuted to the Holy Ghost . This is the sum of their answer; and more than

næ cenfentur, this I conceive cannot be faid in answer to that argument which we urge ut peccato, from those personal expressions attributed to the spirit of God, and, as we

quod decepe

rit, & occidebelieve, as to a Person.

& legi quòd loquatur, Rom. 2. 19. & Scripturæ quòd profpiciat & prenunciet, Gal. 3. 18. & Charitati quòd fit longanimis, &c. 1 Cor. 13. 4, 5, 6, 7. Denique Spiritui, l. e. vento, quòd spiret ubi velit, c. 6. Vide Socini Epistolam 3. ad Petrum Statori

Quòd fi quis dixerit fatis conftare Paulum eo in loco figuratè loqui, & charitatis nomine eum intelligere qui charitate est præditus, quatenus eâ eft præditus : respondebo, cùm Spiritus S. fit Spiritus Dei, certuinq; fit alioqui fpiritum alicujus perfonæ non posse este perfonam ab ea cujus eft Spiritus distinctam, non minùs conftare cum Spiritui S. ea tribuuntur, quæ personæ & fimul ipfius Dei sunt propria, nihil aliud intelligendum nomine Spiritûs S. effe, quàm ipfum Deum spiritu fuo, id est, virtute atque efficaciâ fuâ agentem atque operantem. F. Socinus, ibid. Quoniam verò Spiritus S. virtus Dei eft, hinc fit ut ea quæ Dei sunt, Spiritui S. attribuantur, & fub nomine Spiritûs S. sæpe Deus ipfe intelligatur, quatenus suam virtutem Deus per Spirituin suum exerit. Catech. Racov, ibid.

b Acts 13. 2. But this answer is most apparently insufficient, as giving no fatisfaction to the argument. For if all the personal actions, attributed in the Scriptures to the spirit, might proceed from the person of God the Father, according to the power which is in him, then might this answer seem satisfactory; but if these actions be personal, as they are acknowledged and cannot be denied ; if the same cannot be attributed to the person of God the Father, whose spirit it is; if he cannot be said to do that by the power within him, which is faid to be done by the Holy Ghost; then is that defence not to be defended, then must the Holy Ghost be acknowledged a Person. But I fhall clearly prové, that there are several personal attributes given in the sacred Scriptures expressly to the Holy Ghost, which cannot be ascribed to God the Father ; which God the Father, by that power which is in him, cannot be said to do ;

and

rit, Rom.7. II.

um.

a Acts 10. 20.

[ocr errors]

and consequently cannot be any ground why those attributes should be given to the spirit if it be not a Person.

To make intercession is a personal action, and this action is attributed Rom. 8.27. to the spirit of God, because he maketh intercession for the faints accord

ing to the will of God.. But to make intercession, is not an act which can be attributed to God the Father, neither can he be said to intercede for us according to that power which is in him; and therefore this can be no Pro. fopopæia, the Holy Ghost cannot be faid to exercise the personal action of intercession for that reason, because it is the spirit of that Perfon which intercedeth for us. To come unto men, as being sent unto them, is a

personal action ; and so the Comforter, or Advocate, who is the Holy John 15. 26. Ghost, did come, being sent; when the comforter is come whom I will send John 103. you from the Father, faith Christ: and again, If I go not away, the com

forter will not come unto you ; but if I depart, I will send him to you. But to come unto men, as being sent, cannot be ascribed to God the Father, who sendeth, but is never fent ; especially in this particular, in which the Father is said expressly to send, and that in the name of the Son (whom the Father will send in my name, faith our Saviour.) When therefore the Holy Ghost cometh to the Sons of men as sent by the Father in the name of the Son, and sent by the Son himself, this personal action cannot be attributed to the Father as working by the power within him, and consequently cannot ground a Prosopopæia by which the virtue or power of God the Father shall be said to do it. To speak and hear are personal actions, and both

together attributed to the Spirit; in such a manner as they cannot be ascribed John 16. 13. to God the Father. When he, faith Christ, the Spirit of truth is come, he

will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself: but whatsoever he shall bear, that he shall speak. Now to speak, and not of himfelf, cannot be attributed to God the Father, who doth all things of himself; to speak what he heareth, and that of the Son; to deliver what he receiveth

from another, and to glorifie him from whom he receiveth by receiving from John 16. 14. him, as Christ speaketh of the Holy Ghost, He shall glorifie me, for be Mall

receive of mine, and shew it to you, is by no means applicable to the Father; and consequently it cannot be true that the Holy Ghost is therefore said to do these personal actions, because that. Person whose spirit the Holy Ghost is, doth those actions, by and according to his own power, which is the Holy Ghost. It remaineth therefore that the answer given by the adverfaries of this truth, is apparently insufficient, and consequently that our argument, drawn from the personal actions attributed in the Scriptures to the Spirit, is found and valid.

I thought this discourse had fully destroyed the Socinian Prosopopæia ; and Credo me indeed as they ordinarily propound their answer, it is abundantly refuted. sc, Spirituin S.

But I find the subtilty of Socinus prepared * another explication of the Pronon efie per- sopopæia, to supply the room where he foresaw the former would not

ferve. Which double figure he groundeth upon this distinction : The fpimagis quàin aliæ vel pro-rit , that is, the power of

God, faith he, may be considered either as a proprietates, el priety and power in God, or as the things on which it worketh are affect

ed with it. If it be considered in the first notion, then if any personal fint perfonæ, cùm nihil fit attribute be given to the spirit, the spirit is there taken for God, and by aliud qu.m the spirit God is signified: "If it be considered in the second notion, then if quædam vir- any personal attribute be given to the spirit, the spirit is taken for that tus & effica- man in which it worketh ; and that man, affected with it, is called the spicia Dei; quz rit of God. fi ut ipsius Dei proprietas, & vis per quam agit consideratur & accipitur, figuræ Metonymiæ aut Prosopopæiæ accommodatissimus est locus : . & Metonymiæ quidem, fi Spiritús S. nomine ipfe Deus cujus est Spiritus, quiq; per eum agit, fignificetur; Profopopæiæ verò, ut quando Deus per Spirituin S. agit, iph Spiritui $. Dei actio tribuatur: fin autem hæc virtus &

efficacia

fatis oftendir

1onam, non

effecta Dei

efficacia Dei consideratur & accipitur, ut res in quibus agit, ab ipfa afficiuntur, utrique isti figuræ fimiliter aptissimus est locus quandoquidem commodiffimè per Metonymiam is qui à Spiritu S. aliquo modo affectus quidpiam agit, quatenus id agit, Spiritus S. seu Spiritus Dei metonymice dici poteit: ut factum eft apud Paulum, cùm ait (1 Cor. 2. 10.) Spiritum (sub. Dei) omnia fcrutari.etiam profunda Dei: ubi Spiritûs Dei nomine fine dubio intellexit hominem Spiritu Dei præditum, quatenus, viz. ab ifto Spiritu afficitur. Jam per Prosopopæiam ipfi Spiritui S, actionem tribui, quæ ipfius Spiritùs ope ab homine fiat adeo elt proclive ut nihil magis. F. Socin. in Resp. ad Wiek. cap. 1o.

So that now we must not only shew that such things which are attributed to the Holy Ghost cannot be spoken of the Father, but we must also prove that

they cannot be attributed unto Man, in whom the Spirit worketh from the : Father : and this also will be very easily and evidently proved. The Holy

Ghost is said to come unto the Apostles as sent by the Father and the Son, and to come as fo fent is a personal action, which we have already shewed cannot be the action of the Father, who sent the Spirit ; and it is as certain that it cannot be the action of an Apostle who was affected with the Spirit which was fent, except we can say that the Father and the Son did fend S. Peter an Advocate to S. Peter: and S. Peter, being sent by the Father and the Son, did come unto S. Peter. Again, our Saviour, speaking of the Holy Ghost, faith, He shall receive of mine : therefore the Holy Ghost in thar place is not taken for the Father; and shew it unto you, therefore he is not taken for an Apoftle: in that he receiveth, the first Socinian Prosopopæia, is improper ; in that he sheweth to the Apostle, the second is absurd. The Holy Ghost then is described as a Person distinct from the Person of the Father, whose power he is, and distinct from the Person of the Apostle in whơm hé worketh, and consequently neither of the Socinian Figures can evacuate or enervate the Doctrine of his proper and peculiar personality.

Secondly, For those Attributes or Expressions used of the Holy Ghost in the sacred Scriptures, and pretended to be repugnant to the nature of a Perfon, either they are not so repugnant, or if they be, they belong unto the Spirit, as it signifieth not the Person, but the gifts or effects of the Spirit. * They

* Spiritum S. tell us that the Spirit is given, and that sometimes in measure, sometimes non effe Deiwithout measure ; that the Spirit is poured out, and that men do drink of it, tatis Persoand are filled with it; that it is doubled and distributed, and something is ta- difcere potes; ken from it; and that sometimes it is extinguished: and from hence they ga- primùm quod ther, that the Holy Ghost is not a Person, because these expressions are incon- ea quæ Spiri

tui S. in Scrie sistent with personality. But a fatisfactory Answer is easily returned to this

pturis attriObjection. "'Tis true, that God is said to have a given the Holy Ghost to buuntur, nulthem that obey him, but it is as true that a Person may be given; so we read licpro Persona in the Prophet Isaiah,' b unto us a fon, is given, and we are assured that God næ conveniso loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, and certainly the Son ant, ut funt of God is a Person. And if all the rest of the expressions be such as they quod ex co pretend, that is, not proper to a Person ; yet do they no way prejudice the detur, idque truth of our Assertion, because we acknowledge the effects and operations of aut fecundùm the Spirit to have in the Scriptures the name of the Spirit, who is the cause of aut absque those operations. And being to that Spirit, as the cause, we have already omni menfushewn those Attributes to be given which can agree to nothing

but a Person ; fundatur ipse we therefore conclude against the Socinians and the t Jews, That the Holy & ex ipso

effundatur, & Ghost is not a Quality, but a Person; which is our first Assertion.

quod eo pones, quòd augeatur, quòd in duplo detur, in partes diftribuatur, tollatur ipfe, & ex ipfo tollatur ; & fimilia in Scripturis extant. Catech. Racov. c. 6. Qu«ft. 12.

bifa. 9.6.

The opinion of the Fews was, That the Holy Ghost was nothing else but the afflatus or energy of God; and therefore they which denied the substantiality of the Spirit were looked upon as symbolizing with the Jews in this particular. Lactantius in libris fuis, & maxiinè in Epistolis ad Demetrianum Spiritùs S. omnino negat substantiam ; & errore Judaico dicit eum vel ad Patrem referri, vel ad Filium, & fanctificationem utriusque Personæ sub ejus nomine demonstrari. S. Hier, Ep. 65. Moses Maimonides sufficiently declareth the opinion of the Jews, who delivering the several significations of 11 maketh the fifth and fixth to be these : Quintò significat influentiam illam intellectualem divinam à Deo Prophetis inftillatam, cujus virtute prophetant. Sextò significant Propositum, & Voluntatem. And then concludes, Vox hæc on quando Deo attribuitur, ubique fumitur partim in quinta, partim in fexta fignificatione, quatenus voluntatem fignificat. More Nevochim, p. 1.6.40.

Sf

Qur

teniur homi

a Aits 5: 32.

ans endea

Our second Assertion is, That the Holy Ghost, in whose name we are baptized, and in whom be profess to believe, is not a created, but a divine and uncreated, Person. And for the proof of this Assertion, we shall first make use of that argument which our Adversaries have put into our hands. The Spirit of God which is in God is not a created Person : but the Holy

Ghost is the Spirit of God which is in God, and therefore not a created Per-
I Cor. 2. II. fon. This argument is raised from those words of the Apostle, For who

knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of man which is in him? even
so the things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God. That this Spi-

rit of God is the Holy Ghost, I find denied by none: That the fame Spirit is * The Socini- in God, appeareth by the Apostles Discourse, and is granted by the * Socinivouring to

ans : That it is so the Spirit of God, and so by Nature in God that it cannot

be a Creature, is granted by the same. It followeth therefore undeniably this place,

that the Holy Ghost is no created Person ; inasmuch as that cannot be a creacThat the Holy Ghost is ed Person which hath not a created Nature; and that can neither have nor 9.00 a Person, be a created Nature, which by Nature is in God. Wherefore although it be darion of their replied by others, that it is not said in the Text that the Spirit is in God,

yet Argument in our Adversaries reason over-weighs their negative observation; and it availeth ibis. That be little to say that it is not expressed, which must be acknowledged to be unische spirit of derstood. "The Holy Ghost then is a Person, (as I have proved) and is not God, and by

of a nature distinguished from that which is in God, (as is confessed, and God for that only denied to be in God, because it is not faid so when it is implied,) things

therefore he is no created Perfon. proper to the divine Nature are attributed and belong to him, and because there is another Person in the divine Essence, and, as they Say, there can be but one, therefore the Holy Ghost is not a Person. Deinde idem (fc. Sp. S. non esie Personain) ex eo patet, quod non fit extra Deum naturâ fed in ipso Deo. Nisi enim naturâ Deo ineflet, non potuisset Paulus Spiritum Dei cum fpiritu hominis qui homini inest naturâ conferre, idque eo in loco, 1 Cor. 2. II. ubi ait, Quis homini um novit que lune hominis nisi spiritus hominis qui ineft homine ? Ița que sunt Dei nemo novit nifi Spiritus Dei. Quoniam verò Spiritus S. in Deo eft, nec tamen in Spiritu S. reciprocè dici poteft effe Deum, hinc apparet Sp. S. non esse Personain. Præterca cùm fuperiùs demonftratum sit unam tantùm eile in Deitate perfonam, & Spiritus S. lit Dei virtus, ut verba Christi ad Apoitolos indicant. Luc. 24. 49. efficitur Spirituin S. non effe personain divinam. Denique fi Spiritus S. esset persona, effentiam quoque divinam eum habere oporteret. Nam ea attribuuntur illi quæ propria funt eflentiæ divine: at superiùs docuimus substantiam divinain unam ejie numero, nec tribus perfonis eile posse communem. Quamobrem Sp. non esse Deitatis perfonam planum eft. Catech: Racovian, c. 6. To the same purpose doth Socinus argue against Wiekus, That the Nature of the Spirit is the Nature of God, and that the Spirit cannot therefore be a Person, because there can be but one Person in the Nature of God. Whereas therefore independently from this place we have proved, That the Holy Spirit is a perfon; and from this place have inferred with them, That the fame Spirit is in God, and of the divine Nature, it followeth, That he is no created Spirit, in a much as nothing in the divine Nature can be creared.

Nature in

which are

2 Mat. 12.31,

do audent

numerare

Secondly, The Holy Ghost is such a one as against whom a Sin may be committed, and when it is fo, cannot be remitted. Bur if he were no Person, we could not commit that Sin against him ; and if he were a created Person, the Sin committed against him could not be irremissible. Therefore he is a Person, and that uncreated. The argument is grounded upon the Words of our

Saviour, a All manner of sin and blafphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but 32. Quomo- the blasphemy against the Holy Ghojt Mall not be forgiven unto men. And

who foever speaketh a word against the Son of man it shall be forgiven him; inter omnia

but whosoever Speaketh a word against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forSpiritum S given him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. By which Scandinuiere words it appeareth there is a Sin or Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost distinct dixerit

, qui from all other Sins and Blasphemies committed against God the Father or the blasphemave Son of God; that this Sin hath an aggravation added unto it, beyond other

Sins and Blasphemies : but if the Holy Spirit were no Person, the Sin could

not be distinct from those Sins which are committed against him whose Spiqui autem blafphemaverit he is; and if he were a Person created, the Sin could receive no such

agrit in spiri- gravation beyond other Sins and Blasphemies. nec in futurum remittetur ei. Quomodo igitur inter creaturas audet quisquam Spiritum computare? Aut quis sic se obligat, ut fi crcaturæ derogaverit, non putet fibi hoc aliqua veniâ relaxandum S. Ambrosi de spiritu S. 1 1. c. 3.

To

hominis remittetur ei,

1

tum S. nec hic

To this they answer, That the Sin against the Holy Ghost is not therefore unpardonable, because he is God, which is not to our purpose, but they do not, cannot Thew that it can be unpardonable, if he were not God. It is not therefore simply, and for no other reason unpardonable, because that Person is God against whom it is committed ; for if so, then any Sin committed against that Person which is God, would be unpardonable; which is false. But that Sin, which is particularly called Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, is a Sin against God, and in such a manner aggravated, as makes it irremissible ; of which aggravation it were uncapable, if the Spirit were not God.

Thirdly, Every created Person was made by the Son of God as God, and is now put under the feet of the Son of God as Man. But the Spirit of God was not made by the Son of God, nor is he now put under the feet of the Son of Man. Therefore the Spirit of God can be no created Perfon. All John 1. 3. things were made by the Word, and without him was not any thing made that was made ; therefore every created Person was made by the Word. God hath put all things under the feet of Christ; and when he faith all 1 Cor. 15.27. things are put under him, it is manifeft that he is excepted which did put all things under him: and being none is excepted beside God, every created Person must be under the feet of the Son of Man. But the Spirit of God in the beginning was not made, yea rather in the beginning made the World, as * fob speaks of God, By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens: nor those which

Fob . is he under the feet of Christ, now set down at the right hand of God, who anciently did with supreme Authority, together with the Father, lent the Prophets ; as

believe the Isaiah testifieth, saying, Now the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent me; to be a created and with the fame Authority, since the Exaltation of our Saviour, sent forth Person, did such as were separated to himself, as appeareth in the case of Barnabas and also teach Saul, and † with the same authority giveth all spiritual Gifts, a dividing to made by the every man severally as he will; so that in this Kingdom of Christ all things son, as Epi

phanius testiare done b by the power of the Spirit of God.

fieth of the

Arians, Nari τέτο δηλόν εσιν ότι ομολογώσι τας αγέλες από το να γείονέναι, και γδ και σει το ΠνεύματG- βλασφημίσι και τολμώσι λίαν Xexlíat had vs. Hær. 69. $.52. Ariani ab Ario, in eo sunt notiflimi errore quo Patrem & Filium, & Spiritum S. nolunt esse unius ejusdemque naturæ, sed effe Filium creaturam, Sp. verò S. creaturam creaturæ, hoc eft, ab ipfo Filio creatum volunt. S. Aug. Her.49. As Eusebius, Tò Š a SoxmovAliev Ilveõnd, Šte Odds, šte yos, és un ir iš naτρος ομοίως το πω και αυτό ή κύνησιν ύληφεν, εν δε τι τ δια το 48 βιομάρων τυχάνει, ότι και πάντα δί αυτό εγχύετο, και χωρίς autó infóélo ida en. De Eccl. Theol. l. 3. c.6. 'Odd jos kóv@wateixñ Jeórnli Telepizpeli wolnoxòs åv en sej Snuiser 176κός τη δυνηθών απάντων ορατών τε και αοράτων, και δη και αυτής τ τ ο Δακλήτα Πνόύμα7ο αάρξεως πάντα και δι αυτά εzfúz70, xj xweis aurð égfót7o ode ir. Ib. Where it is worth our observation, that Eusebius citing the place of S. John, to prove that the Holy Ghost was made by the Son, leaves out those words twice together by which the Catholicks used to refute that Herefie of the Arians, viz. vélover. All things which were made, were made by the Son, but the Holy Ghost was not amongst them, de géfoyer, which were made, and therefore was not made by the Son. Tò'alvor gS' nyeõpect xlirnice πάλιν κλίσματος φασιν είναι, δια το, δια τα 48 τα πάντα γεγχυή, ως εισεν η γραφή, ασωέτως τινας διαρπάζοντες. ο καθώς δρή) το ρητον έχοντες, αλλά κακώς υπονούντες, και λάι ρηλά το καλώς ειρημδύον σ τ κακών αυτών ισόνοιαν μεθερμηνδύοντες: 88 το θάον Ευαγέλιον αεί το Πνόύμα7G- έφη, αλλα αει πάν7ων ή κεκλισδύων, ότι έ τι κλισόν δια τη Λόλα γεγχόη), και αν τα Ably. tags (17 di witš igfórlo, my xweis atsigfúsne side êv, nagexlesvolúns evalvacows XM, a gifovev, iva štw yyeva at , öti távce di curš izfóc70, ss Xweis wig ipfós70, 80 y. Epiph. Hær. 69. 9.56. † S. Chrys. Tom. 5. p. 10. Ταύτα πάντα νεργά το ένα και το αυτο Πνεύμα, διαιρέν, ιδία κάτω καθως βάλε). Καθώς βάλεθαί φησιν και καθώς προτάτη διαιρών, και διαιρέψον αυθεν&ν, εκ αυθεντία ισοκεί μεμον· το αυτίω εξεσίαν ήνπες εμάς τύρησε το Παρί, ταύτίν των αγίω Πνόύμαι αναίθησιν ο ΠώλG- και ώασερ επί το Παρός φησιν· ο 3 Θεός εσιν ο νεργών τα πάν7α αν σασιν, έτω και επί τα αγία Πνεύματο-: ταύτα και πάντα, φησίν, νεργά το ένα και το αυτο πνεύμα, διαιρών ιδία εκάσω καθως βέλε3· είδες απορ7ισμούης εξεσίαν ; ων ηδη εσία μία, δηλον και ότι και αυθεντία μία και αν ισότιμων η αξία, τότων και η δεύαμις και η εξεσία μία. a I Cor. 12, 1.

b Rom. 15, 19.

Fourthly, He, by whose operation Christ was conceived in the Womb of the Virgin, was no created Person: for by virtue of that Conception he was called the Son of God; whereas if a Creature had been the cause of his Corr ception, he had been in that respect the Son of a Creature; nay, according to the Adversaries Principles, he had taken upon him the Nature of Angels. But the Holy Ghost it was by whose Operation Christ was conceived in the Womb of the Virgin. For it was an Angel that said to Mary, (not that an

SE 2

Angel

« PreviousContinue »