adoption; and not only so, but when he becometh the Son of man, even in his humanity refuseth the name of an adopted Son. For" when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, (not that he, but) that we might receive the adoption of sons." (Gal. iv. 4, 5.) He then whose generation is totally different from ours whom he calleth brethren; he whom in the sacred Scriptures the Spirit nameth the true Son, the Father sometimes his own, sometimes his beloved, but never his adopted Son ;* he who by those proper and peculiar appellations is distinguished from us,+ who can claim no higher filiation than that which we receive by the privilege of adoption: he is truly the only-begotten Son of God, notwithstanding the same God hath begotten us by his Word; and the reason why he is so, is, because the divine essence was communicated unto him in his natural and eternal generation, whereas only the grace of God is conveyed unto us in our adoption. Indeed if we were begotten of the essence of God as Christ was, or he were only by the grace of God adopted,‡ as we are, then could he by no propriety of speech be called the only Son, by reason of so many brethren: but being we cannot aspire unto the first, nor he descend unto the latter, it remaineth we acknowledge him, notwithstanding the first difficulty, by virtue of his natural and peculiar generation, to be the only-begotten Son.

tantummodo adoptio præstatur: sicut nos aliquando, cum essemus peccando filii iræ, alieni eramus a Deo, per proprium et verum Filium, qui non eguit adoptione, adoptio nobis filiorum donata est.' And

of this they give us the true ground in the Synodic Epistle: Unitas personæ quæ est in Dei filio et filio Virginis, adoptionis tollit injuriam.'

Legi et relegi Scripturas, Jesum Filium Dei nusquam adoptione inveni.' Ambrosiaster Com. in Ep. ad Rom. Dices mihi, Cur times adoptivum Christum Dominum nominare? Dico tibi, quia nec Apostoli eum sic nominarunt, nec sancta Dei et Catholica Ecclesia consuetudinem habuit sic eum appellare.' Synod. Epist. Concil. Francoford. From whence they charge all those to whom they write that Synodic Epistle, that they should be satisfied with such expressions as they found in the Scriptures: Intelligite, fratres, quæ legitis, et nolite nova et incognita nomina fingere, sed quæ in S. Scriptura inveniuntur, tenete,' &c.

+ St. Augustin hath observed, that St. Paul made use of viodería, that he might distinguish the filiation of Christ from ours: At vero etiam nos, quibus dedit Deus potestatem filios ejus fieri, de natura atque substantia sua non nos genuit, sicut

Si unicus, quomodo adoptivus, dum multi sunt adoptivi filii? Unicus itaque de multis non potest dici.' Concil. Francof. 'Quod si etiam Unigenitus Filius factus dicitur ex gratia, non vere genitus ex natura, proculdubio nomen et veritatem Unigeniti perdidit, postquam fratres habere jam cœpit privatur enim hujus veritate nominis, si in Unigenito non est de Patre veritas naturalis.' Fulgentius ad Thrasim. I. iii. c. 3. Si divina illa Filii sempiternaque nativitas non de natura Dei Patris, sed ex gratia creditur substitisse, non debet Unigenitus vocari, sed tantummodo genitus. Quoniam sicut ei nomen geniti largitas adoptionis paternæ contribuit, sic eum ab Unigeniti nomine nobis quoque tributa communio paternæ adoptionis exclusit. Unigenitus enim non vocatur, quamvis genitus possit vocari, cum genitis.' Ibid. c. 4.

But though neither men nor angels be begotten of the substance of God, or by virtue of any such natural generation be called sons; yet one person 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 blessed 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 same? 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, that the Holy Ghost receiveth the same essence from the Father which the Word receiveth, and thereby becometh the same God with the Father and the Word: 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 Holy Ghost by procession: and though every thing which is begotten proceedeth, yet every thing which proceedeth is not begotten. Wherefore in the language of the sacred Scriptures and the Church,† the Holy Ghost is never said to be begotten, but to proceed from the Father; nor is he ever called the Son, but the Gift of God. Eve was produced out of Adam, and in the same nature with him, and yet was not born of him, nor was she truly the daughter of Adam; whereas Seth proceeding from the same person in the similitude of the same nature, was truly and properly the son of Adam. And this difference was not in the nature produced, but in the manner of production; Eve descending not from Adam as Seth did, by way of generation, that is, by natural fecundity. The Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father in the same nature with him, the Word proceedeth from the same person in the same similitude of nature also; but the Word proceeding is the Son, the Holy Ghost is not, because the first procession is by way of generation, the other is not. As therefore the regeneration and adoption of man, so the procession 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 before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary; seeing

Non omne quod procedit, nascitur; sicut omne quod nascitur, procedit.' S. August. contra Max. 1. ii. c. 14. §. 1. Who gives the same solution to the same argument: Quæris a me: Si de substantia Patris est Filius, de substantia Patris est etiam Spiritus Sanctus, cur unus Filius sit, et alius non sit Filius? Ego respondeo, sive capias, sive non capias: De Patre est Filius, de Patre est Spiritus S.; sed ille genitus est, iste procedens.' Ibid. Πολλῷ τούτου πιθανώτερον, τὸ φάναι ἐξ ἐκείνου γε τοῦ ἀγεννήτου φῦναι τὸν Λόγον καὶ τὸ ̔́Αγιον Πνεῦμα· τὸν μὲν, ὡς Λόγον, ἐκ τοῦ νοῦ γεννώ μενον· τὸ δὲ, ὡς Πνεῦμα, ἐκπορευόμενον, ξυμ

πρόεισι γὰρ τῷ λόγῳ τὸ Πνεῦμα, οὐ ξυγγεννώ μενον, ἀλλὰ ξυνὸν καὶ παρομαρτοῦν καὶ ἐκποgevóμsvov. Theodoret. Serm. 2. p. 504.

Nunquam fuit non Pater, a quo Filius natus, a quo Spiritus Sanctus non natus, quia non est Filius.' Gennad, de Eccles. Dog. c. 1. 'Deus Pater innascibilis non ex aliquo, Deus Filius unigenitus ex aliquo, hoc est, ex Patre, Spiritus S. innascibilis ex aliquo, hoc est, ex Patre.' Isaac. lib. Fidei, p. 138. Opusc. Dogm. Vet. V. Script. Par. 1630. • Quod neque natum neque factum est, Spiritus S. est, qui a Patre et Filio procedit.' S. Ambros. in Symb. Apost. al. de Trinit. c. 3.

the being which he had antecedently to that conception was not any created, but the one and indivisible divine essence; seeing he had not that Divinity of himself originally, as the Father, but by communication from him; seeing the communication of the same essence unto him was a proper generation; we cannot but believe that the same Jesus Christ is the begotten Son of God: and seeing the same essence was never so by way of generation communicated unto any,* we must also acknowledge him the only-begotten, distinguished from the Holy Ghost, as Son; from the adopted children, as the natural Son.

The necessity of the belief of this part of the Article, that Jesus Christ is the proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the substance of the Father, and by that singular way of generation the only Son, appeareth first in the confirmation of our faith concerning the redemption of mankind. For this doth shew such an excellency and dignity in the person of the Mediator as will assure us of an infinite efficacy in his actions, and value in his sufferings. We know "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins:" (Heb. x. 4.) 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 appearing no such difference as will shew a certainty in the one, and an impossibility in the other. But since we may be "bought with a price," (1 Cor. vi. 20. vii. 23.) well may we believe the blood of Christ sufficiently "precious,' (1 Pet. i. 19.) when we are assured that it is the "blood of God:" (Acts xx. 28.) nor can we question the efficacy of it in purging our conscience from dead works," if we believe "Christ offered up himself through the eternal Spirit." (Heb. ix. 14.) If we be truly sensible of our sins, 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 person is, the more reverence is due unto him, and every injury tendeth to his dishonour; but between God and man there is an infinite disproportion; 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 person offended; so the value of reparation ariseth from the dignity of the person satisfying; because the satisfaction consisteth in a reparation of that honour which by the injury was eclipsed; 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 * Ως μὲν οὖν υἱὸς, φυσικῶς κέκτηται τὰ τοῦ πατρός· ὡς δὲ μονογενῆς, ὅλα ἔχει ἐν ἑαυτῷ συλλαβὼν, οὐδενὸς καταμεριζομένου πρὸς ἕτερον. S. Basil, Homil. de Fide, 6. 2.

God, except the person who hath undertaken to make the reparation be of the same infinite dignity; so as the honour rendered by his obedience may prove proportionable to the offence and that dishonour which arose from our disobedience? This scruple is no otherwise to be satisfied than by a belief in such a Mediator as is the only-begotten Son of God, of the same substance with the Father, and consequently of the same power and dignity with the God whom by our sins we have offended.

66

"*

Secondly, The belief of the eternal generation of the Son, by which he is the same God with the Father, is necessary for the confirming and encouraging 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 honour the Son even as they honour the Father." (John v. 22, 23.) As it was represented to St. John in a vision, when he heard "every creature which is in heaven, and 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 sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever." (Rev. v. 13.) Again we are commanded "to fear the Lord our God, and to serve him ;" (Deut. vi. 13.) and that with such an emphasis, as by him we are to understand him alone, because the Lord our God is one Lord." (Ibid. 4.) From whence if any one arose among the Jews, teaching under the title of a prophet to worship any other beside him for God, the judgment of the Rabbins was,t that notwithstanding all the miracles which he could work, though they were as great as Moses wrought, he ought immediately to be strangled, because the evidence of this truth, that one God only must be worshipped, is above all evidence of sense. Nor must we look upon this precept as valid only under the Law, as if then there were only one God to be worshipped, but since the Gospel we had another; for our Saviour hath commended it to our observation, by making use of it against the devil in his temptation, saying, "Get thee hence Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matt. iv. 10.) If then we be obliged to worship the God of Israel only; if we be also commanded to give the same worship to the Son, which we give to him; it is necessary that we should believe that the Son is the God of Israel. "When the Scripture bringeth in the first

The emphasis appears in this, that it is not barely may et servies ei, but et ipsi servies, with such a peculiar restriction, as is expressed by the

et in וקדמוהי תפלח,Chaldee paraphrase

conspectu ejus servies; by the LXX. xal αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις, and that restriction approved by our Saviour, Matt. iv. 10.

+ Moses Maim. Præfat. in Seder Zeraim.

begotten into the world, it saith, Let all the angels of God wor ship him;" (Heb. i. 6.) but then the same Scripture calleth that first-begotten "Jehovah," (Isa. xii. 2.)* and "the Lord of the whole earth." (Psal. xcvii. 5.) For a man to worship that for God which is not God, knowing that it is not God, is affected and gross idolatry; to worship that as God which is not God, thinking that it is God, is not in the same degree, but the same sin: to worship him as God, who is God, thinking that he is not God, cannot be thought an act in the formality void of idolatry. Lest therefore while we are obliged to give unto him divine worship, we should fall into that sin which of all others we ought most to abhor, it is no less necessary, that we should believe that Son to be that eternal God, whom we are bound to worship, and whom only we should serve.

Thirdly, Our belief in Christ as the eternal Son of God, is necessary to raise us unto a thankful acknowledgment of the infinite love of God appearing in the sending of his onlybegotten Son into the world to die for sinners. This love of God is frequently extolled and admired by the apostles. "God so loved the world, (saith St. John, iii. 16.) that he gave his onlybegotten Son." "God commended his love towards us, (saith St. Paul. Rom. v. 8. viii. 32.) in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us in that he spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all." "In this (saith St. John again, 1 Ep. iv. 9, 10.) was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent his 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. It is 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 itself; but yet the apostles have raised that consideration higher, and placed the choicest mark of the love of God, in the choosing such means, and performing in that manner our reparation, by sending his only-begotten into the world; by not sparing his own Son, by giving and delivering him up to be scourged and crucified for us: and the estimation of this act of God's love must necessarily increase

† Εἰ δὲ μονογενής ἐστιν, ὥσπερ οὖν ἐστὶν, οὐδεμίαν ἄρα ἔχει πρὸς τὰ κτιστὰ κοινωνίαν.

Theod. Haret. Fab. 1. v. c. 2.