Abbildungen der Seite
[ocr errors]

'named by Euodius the bishop of that place, as ecclesiastical
history informs us. A name' no sooner invented, but em-
braced by all believers, as bearing the most proper significa-
tion of their profession, and relation to the Author and Master
whom they served. In which the primitive Christians so
much delighted, that before the face of their enemies they
would acknowledge no other title but that, though hated, re-
viled, tormented, martyred for it.* Nor is this name of
greater honour to us, than obligation. There are two parts of
the seal of the foundation of God, and one of them is this,
“ Let every one that nameth the name of Christ, depart from
iniquity.” (2 Tim. ii. 19.) It was a common answer of the
ancient martyrs, 'I am a Christian, and with us no evil is
done.'+ The very name was thought to speak something of
emendation ;I and whosoever put it on, became the better
· man. Except such reformation accompany our profession,
there is no advantage in the appellation ;s nor can we be ho-
noured by that title, while we dishonour him that gives it.
If he be therefore called Christ, because anointed; as we de-
rive the name of Christian,' so we do receive our unction,
continued as the most proper appel- αντί γένους, και αντί παντός επαλλήλως
Jation which could be given unto our wuolóyel. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. I. v. cap.
profession, being derived from “ the 1. The same doth St. Chrysostom
Author and finisher of our faith.” “At testify of St. Lucian: Joias el marpi-
nunc secta orditur in nomine utique δος; Χριστιανός είμι, φησί. Τι έχεις
sui auctoris. Quid novi, si aliqua Érindevpa; Xplotlavós eius. Tivaç apo-
disciplina de magistro cognomentum γόνους; ο δε προς άπαντα έλεγέν, ότι
sectatoribus suis inducit? Nonne phi- Xplotiavós ciui. Orat. 75.
losophi de auctoribus suis nuncupan-

't So Blandina in the French per-
tur Platonici, Epicurei, Pythagorici? secution : 'Hv aúrñs åválnyes kai ává-
Etiam a locis conventiculorum et παυσις και αναλγησία των συμβαινόν-
stationum suarum Stoici, Academici ? twv, Néyelv őri Xplotiavý ciui, kai
Nonne Medici ab Erasistrato, et nap' juiv ovdèv paõlov yivetai. Euseb.
Grammatici ab Aristarcho, coqui et- Hist. Eccl. I. v. c. 1.
iam ab Apicio? Neque tamen quen I'Alii quos ante hoc nomen vagos,
quam offendit professio nominis cum viles, improbos noverant, ex ipso de-
institutione transmissi ab institu- notant quod laudant, cæcitate odii in
tore.' Tertull. Apol. c. 3.

suffragium impingunt. Quæ mulier! * As we read of Sanctus, a deacon quam lasciva! quam festiva! qui juat Vienna, in a hot persecution of the venis ! quam lascivus! quam ama. French Church, who being in the sius! facti sunt Christiani: ita nomen midst of tortures, was troubled with emendationis imputatur.' Tertull. several questions, which the Gentiles Apol. c. 3. usually then asked, to try if they § . Totum in id revolvitur, ut qui could extort any confession of any Christiani nominis opus non agit, wicked actions practised secretly by Christianus non esse videatur. Nothe Christians; yet would not give men enim sine actu atque officio suo any other answer to any question, nihil est. Salvian. de Gubern. Dei, l. than that he was a Christian. Tooaúty iv. in init. p. 100. al. 89. 'Eáv TIS TO παραστάσει αντιπαρετάξατο αυτοϊς, ώστε όνομα λαβών του χριστιανισμού ενυβρίζω μήτε το ίδιον κατειπείν όνομα, μήτε τον Χριστόν, ουδέν όφελος αυτό από της EOvous, uńte rólews 60ev ñv, pýta ei tpoonyopías. S. Basil. ad Amphiloch. doīdos û klúteposeini állà apòs Epist. 199. al. 2. can. 45. πάντα τα επερωτώμενα απεκρίνατο τη Il Christianus vero, quantum inΡωμαϊκή φωνή, Χριστιανός είμι. τούτο terpretatio est, de unctione deducikai àvti óvónaros, kai ávrì nólews, kai tur.' Tertull. Apol. c. 3.

from him. For as “the precious ointment upon the head ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard, and went down to the skirts of his garments;" (Psal. cxxxiii. 2.) so the Spirit, which without measure was poured upon Christ our head, is by him diffused through all the members of his body.* For “God hath established and anointed us in Christ:" (2 Cor. i. 21.) “ We have an unction from the Holy One, and the anointing which we have received from him, abideth in us.” (1 John ii. 20. 27.) Necessary then it cannot choose but be, that we should know Jesus to be the Christ: because he is Jesus, that is, our Saviour, by being Christ, that is, anointed; so we can have no share in him as Jesus, except we become truly.' Christians, and so be in him as Christ, anointed with that unction from the Holy One.

Thus having run through all the particulars at first designed for the explication of the title Christ, we may at last clearly express, and every Christian easily understand, what : it is we say, when we make our confession in these words, I believe in Jesus Christ. I do assent unto this as a certain truth, that there was a man promised by God, foretold by the . prophets, to be the Messias, the Redeemer of Israel, and the . expectation of the nations. I am fully assured by all those predictions, that the Messias so promised, is already come. I am as certainly persuaded, that the man born in the days of Herod of the Virgin Mary, by an angel from heaven called Jesus, is that true Messias, so long, so often promised: that, as the Messias, he was anointed to three special offices, belonging to him as the mediator between God and man; that he was a Prophet, revealing unto us the whole will of God, for the salvation of man; that he was a Priest, and hath given himself a sacrifice for sin, and so hath made an atonement for us; that he is a King, set down at the right hand of God, far above all principalities and powers, whereby, when he hath subdued all our enemies, he will confer actual, perfect, and eternal happiness upon us. I believe this unction, by which he became the true Messias, was not performed by any material oil, but by the Spirit of God, which he received as the Head, and conveyeth to his members. And in this full acknowledgment, I BELIEVE IN Jesus Christ.

His only Son. AFTER our Saviour's nomination immediately followeth his filiation: and justly after we have acknowledged him to be the Christ, do we confess him to be the Son of God; because

. ? Inde apparet Christi corpus August. in Psal. xxvi. nos esse, quia omnes ungimur; et * Τοιγαρούν ημείς, τούτου είνεκα. omnes in illo et Christi et Christus καλούμεθα Χριστιανοί, ότι χρειόμεθα sumus, quia quodammodo totus žalov OkoĪ. Theophil, ad Autol.' I. i. Christus caput et corpus est.”. S. p. 77.

these two were ever inseparable, and even by the Jews themselves accounted equivalent. Thus Nathanael, that true Israelite, maketh his confession of the Messias : Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel.(John i. 49.) Thus Martha makes expression of her faith : “I believe that thou art the Christ the Son of God, which should come into the world.” (John xi. 27.) Thus the high-priest maketh bis inquisition: “I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God." (Matt. xxvi. 63.) This was the famous confession of St. Peter: “We believe and are sure, that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God.” (John vi. 69.) And the Gospel of St. John was therefore written, that “we might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” (Johd xx. 31.) Certain then it is, that all the Jews, as they looked for a Messias to come, so they believed that Messias to be the Son of God (although since the coming of our Saviour they have denied it):* and that by reason of a constant interpretation of the second psalm, as appropriated unto him. And the primitive Christians did at the very beginning include this filial title of our Saviour together with his names into the compass of one word.+ Well therefore, after we have expressed our faith in Jesus Christ, is added that, which always had so great affinity with it, the only Son of God.

In these words there is little variety to be observed, except that what we translate the only Son, that in the phrase of the

For when Celsus, in the person in unico filio ejus:' ş. 8, 9. which is of a Jew, had spoken these words: so far from being in his apprehension και είπεν έμος προφήτης εν Ιεροσολύμοις the same with unigenitus, that he TOTÈ, ŐT! Htet DeoŨ vids, tūv ooiwy wpi- refers it as well to Lord as Sop: 'Hic της, και των αδίκων κολαστής: Origen ergo Jesus Christus, Filius unicus says they were most improperly at- Dei, qui est et Dominus noster unicus, tributed to a Jew, who did look in- et ad Filium referri et ad Dominum deed for a Messias, but not for the potest.' So St. Augustin in Enchirid. Son of God, i.e. not under the notion C. 34. and Leo Epist. 10. Which is of a Son. 'Ioudaios our àv Spoloyñ- therefore to be observed, because in σαι ότι προφήτης τις είπεν ήξειν θεού the ancient copies of those epistles, , υιόν. δ γαρ λέγουσιν έστιν, ότι ήξει o the word unicum was not to be found; XplotdS ToŨ Okoão cai tolláris on Sn- as appeareth by the discourse of ViTomou zpos ýpās euféwg Tepi vion Okoũ, gilius, who, in the fourth book against we oudevòs ÖVTOS TOLOÚTOV, oudè #popn- Eutyches, hath these words: * Illa TEVIÉVTOS. Adv. Cels. I. i. §. 49. primitus uno diluens volumine quæ + That is, IXOYX [np. 'Indoñs Xplotòg Leonis objiciuntur Epistolæ, cujus θεού Υιός Σωτήρ.] Nos pisciculi hoc sibi primo capitulum iste, nescio secundum ixtův nostrum Jesum quis, proposuit; Fidelium universitas Christum in aqua nascimur.' Tertull. profitetur credere se in Deum Patrem de Bapt. c. 1. which is thus inter- omnipotentem, et in Jesum Christum, preted by Optatus : Cujus piscis Filium ejus, Dominum nostrum,'l. iv. nomen secundum appellationem Græ- §. l. That which he aims at, is the camin uno nomine per singulas literas tenth epistle of Leo, in which those turbam sanctorum nominum continet, words are found, but with the addiixbus, quod est Latine, Jesus Christus tion of unicum, which, as it seems, Dei Filius Salvator.'lib, iii. c. 2. then was not there; as appears yet

1 The Latins indeed generally use farther by the words which follow, s. the word unicum. So Ruffinus: Et 2. • Miror tamen quomodo hunc


[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Scripture and the Greek Church is, the only-begotten. It is then sufficient for the explication of these words, to shew how Christ is the Son of God, and what is the peculiarity of his generation; that when others are also the sons of God, he alone should so be his Son, as no other is or can be so; and therefore he alone should bave the name of the only-begotten.

First then, It cannot be denied that Christ is the Son of God, for that reason, because he was by the Spirit of God born of the Virgin Mary; for that which is conceived (or begotten)* in her, by the testimony of an angel, is of the Holy Ghost; and because of him, therefore the Son of God. For so spake the angel to the Virgin; “ The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee (or, which is begotten of thee) shall be called the Son locum iste notavit, et illum præter- nifies not always to beget, but somemisit, ubi unici filii commemoratio- times to bear or bring forth; as ń yuvú nem idem beatus Leo facit, dicens, gov 'Elcoáßet yevvhoel vióv ool, Lukei. Idem vero 'sempiterni genitoris uni- 13. and verse 57: kai éyévvngev vióv. genitus sempiternus, natus do Spi- So του δε Ιησού γεννηθέντος εν Βηθλεέμ, ritu S. ex Maria Virgine :' which Matt. ii. 1. must necessarily be unwords are not to be found in the same derstood of Christ's nativity, for it is epistle. Howsoever it was in the most certain that he was not begotten first copies of Leo: both Ruffinus and or conceived at Bethlehem. And St. Augustin, who were before him, this without question' must be the and Maximus Taurinensis, Chryso- meaning of Herod's inquisition, ToŨ logus, Etherius and Beatus, who were Xploròs yevvãrai, where the Messias later, read it, et in Jesum Christum was to be born. But though yevvğv filium ejus unicum.' But the word have sometimes the signification of used in the Scriptures, and kept con- bearing or bringing forth; yet év stantly by the Greeks, is μονογενής, αυτη γεννηθέν cannot be s0 interthe only-begotten.

preted, because it speaks of some* For the original is tò év avtõ yev- ibing as past, when as yet Christ was vndéve and it is the observation of St. not born, and though the conception Basil, o'k cipntai, tò kunlèv, állà, tò was already past, and we translate it Yevvndév. Homil

. in Sanct. Christ. so," which is conceived;" yet St. Gen. §. 4. Indeed the vulgar trans- Basil rejects that interpretation : yevlation renders it, quod in ea natum est, vậv is one thing, ovllaußáveiv another. and in St. Luke, quod nascetur san- Seeing then the nativity was not yet ctum; and it must be confessed this come, and yevvnlèv speaks of somewas the most ancient translation. thing already past, therefore the old For so Tertullian read it: 'Per vir- translation is not good, quod in ea ginem dicitis natum, non ex virgine, natum est. Seeing, though the conet in vulva, non ex vulva, quia et ception indeed were past, yet yevvậv Angelus in somnis ad Joseph, Nam signifieth not to conceive, and so is quod in ea natum est, inquit, de Sp. S. not properly to be interpreted, that est.' De carne Christi, c. 19. and of which is conceived. Seeing yevvớv is that in St. Luke : · Hæc et ab An- most properly to beget, as À yevYNTIKY gelo exceperat secundum nostrum the generative faculty: therefore I conEvangelium, Propterea, quod in te na- ceive the fittest interpretation of those scetur, vocabitur sanctum, filius Dei.' words, {v avrõ Yevvnlèv, that which Adv. Marcion. I. iv. c. 7. Yet quod is begotten in her, And because the in ea natum est cannot be proper, angel in St. Luke speaks of the same while it is yet in the womb; nor can thing, therefore I interpret tò yevvuthe child first be said to be born, and uevov év goû, in the same manner, then that the mother shall bring it that which is begotten of thee. forth. It is true indeed, yevvớv sig

of God.” (Luke i. 35.) And the reason is clear, because that the Holy Ghost is God. For were he any creature, and not God hiinself, by whom our Saviour was thus born of the Virgin, he must have been the Son of a creature, not of God.

Secondly, It is as undoubtedly true, that the same Christ, thus born of the Virgin by the Spirit of God, was designed to so high an office by the special and immediate will of God, that by virtue thereof he must be acknowledged the Son of God. He urgeth this argument himself against the Jews; “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” (John x. 34.) Are not these the very words of the eighty-second Psalm? (ver. 6.) “ If he called them gods," if God himself so spake, or the Psalmist from him, if this be the language of the Scripture, if they be called godsunto whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken," nor the authority thereof in any particular denied), “Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world,” whom he hath consecrated and commissioned to the most eminent and extraordinary office," say ye of him, Thou blasphemest, because I said I am the Son of God ?" (John x. 35, 36.)

Thirdly, Christ must therefore be acknowledged the Son of God, because he is raised immediately by God out of the earth unto immortal life. For 6 God hath fulfilled the promise unto us, in that he bath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.” (Acts xiii. 33.) The grave is as the womb of the earth; Christ, who is raised from thence, is as it were begotten to another life: and God who raised him, is his Father. So true it must needs be of him, which is spoken of others, who are “ the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.” (Luke xx. 36.) Thus was he“ defined, or constituted, and appointed the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead :” (Rom. i. 4.) neither is he called simply the first that rose, but with a note of generation, “ the first-born from the dead." (Col. i. 18.)

Fourthly, Christ, after his resurrection from the dead, is made actually heir of all things in his Father's house, and Lord of all the spirits which minister unto him, from whence he also hath the title of the Son of God. 66 He is set down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?” (Heb. i. 3-5.) From all which testimonies of the Scriptures it is evident, that Christ hath this fourfold right unto the title of the Son of God: by generation, as begotten of God; by commission, as sent by him; by resurrection, as the first-born; by actual possession, as heir of all.

But beside these four, we must find yet a more peculiar ground of our Saviour's filiation, totally distinct from any

« ZurückWeiter »