Page images

While these errors denied the real existence of the , of the essential properties of human nature had been body of Christ, the Apollonarian heresy rejected the wanting, he would not have been man; if, as some of existence of a human soul in our Lord, and taught that the preceding notions implied, Divine and human had the Godhead supplied its place. Thus both these been mixed and confounded in him, he would have views denied to Christ a proper humanity, and both been a compounded being, neither God nor man. Nowere, accordingly, condemned by the general church. thing was deficient in his humanity, nothing in his

Among those who held the union of two natures in Divinity, and yet he is one Christ. This is clearly the Christ, the Divine and human, which, in theological doctrine of the Scripture, and it is admirably expressed language, is called the hypostatical or personal union, in the creeds above quoted; and, on that account, they several distinctions were also made which led to a di- are entitled to great respect. They imbody the sentiversity of opinion. The Nestorians acknowledged ments of some of the greatest men that ever lived in two persons in our Lord, mystically and more closely the church, in language weighed with the utmost care united than any human analogy can explain. The and accuracy; and they are venerable records of the Monophysites contended for one person and one na- faith of distant ages. ture, the two being supposed to be, in some mysterious These two circumstances, the completeness of each manner, confounded. The Monothelites acknowledged nature, and the union of both in one person, is the two natures and one will. Various other refinements only key to the language of the New Testament, and were, at different times, propagated; but the true so entirely explains and harmonizes the whole as to sense of Scripture appears to have been very accu- afford the strongest proof, next to its explicit verhal rately expressed by the Council of Chalcedon, in the statements, of the doctrine that our Lord is at once fifth century,—that in Christ there is one person; in truly God and truly man. On the other hand, the imthe unity of person, two natures, the Divine and the practicability of giving a consistent explanation of the human; and that there is no change, or mixture, or testimony of God" concerning his Son Jesus Christ” confusion of these two natures, but that each retains on all other hypotheses, entirely confutes them. In its own distinguishing properties. With this agrees one of two ways only will it be found, by every one the Athanasian Creed, whatever be its date.--"Perfect who makes the trial honestly, that all the passages of God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul, and hu- holy writ respecting the Person of Christ can be ex man flesh subsisting-Who although he be God and plained; either by referring them, according to the rule man, yet he is not two; but one Christ: One, not by of the ancient fathers, to the Ocoloyta, by which they conversion of the Godhead into flesh ; but by taking meant every thing that related to the Divinity of our the manhood into God; one altogether, not by con- Saviour; or to the Olkovoura, by which they meant fusion of substance, but by unity of person ; for as his incarnation, and every thing that he did in the flesh the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and to procure the salvation of mankind. This distinction man is one Christ.” The church of England, by is expressed in modern theological language, by conadopting this creed, has adopted its doctrine on the hy- sidering some things which are spoken of Christ, as postatical union, and has farther professed it in her said of his Divine, others of his human nature; and second article. "The Son, which is the Word of the he who takes this principle of interpretation along Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the with him will seldom find any difficulty in apprehendvery and eternal God, of one substance with the Fa- ing the sense of the sacred writers, though the subjects ther, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed themselves be often, to human minds, inscrutable. Virgin of her substance; so that the two whole and Does any one ask, for instance, if Jesus Christ was perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and man- truly God, how he could be born and die? how he hood, were joined together in one person, never to be could grow in wisdom and stature? how he could be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God and very man.” subject to law ? be tempted ? stand in need of prayer?

Whatever objections may be raised against these how his soul could be “exceeding sorrowful, even unto views by the mere reason of man, unable to compre- death ?" be “forsaken of his Father ?" purchase the hend mysteries so high, but often bold enough to im- church with “his own blood ?" have “a joy set before pugn them, they certainly exhibit the doctrine of the him ?" be exalted ? have “all power in heaven and New Testament on these important subjects, though earth” given to him ? &c. The answer is, that he was expressed in different terms. Nor are these formula- also MAN. ries to be charged with originating such distinctions, If, on the other hand, it be a matter of surprise, that and adding them to the simplicity of Scripture, as they a VISIBLE MAN should heal diseases at his will, and often unjustly are by those who, either from lurking without referring to any higher authority, as he often errors in their own minds, or from a vain affectation did; still the winds and the waves; know the thoughts of being independent of human authority, are most of men's hearts; foresee his own passion in all its cir. prone to question them. Such expositions of faith cumstances ; authoritatively forgive sins; be exalted were rendered necessary by the dangerous specula- to absolute dominion over every creature in heaven and tions and human refinements to which we have above earth; be present wherever two or three are gathered adverted; and were intended to be (what they may be in his name; be with his disciples to the end of the easily proved from Scripture to be in reality) summa- world; claim universal homage, and the bowing of the ries of inspired doctrines; not new distinctions, but knee of all creatures to his name; be associated with declarations of what had been before taught by the the Father in solemn ascriptions of glory and thanksHoly Spirit on the subject of the hypostatical union of giving, and bear even the awful names of God, names natures in Christ; and the accordance of these admi- of description and revelation, names which express Dirable summaries with the Scriptures themselves will vine attributes :-what is the answer ? Can the Soci. be very obvious to all who yield to their plain and un- nian scheme, which allows him to be a man only, properverted testimony. That Christ is very God, has duce a reply? Can it furnish a reasonable interpretabeen already proved from the Scriptures, at consider- tion of texts of Sacred Writ, which affirm all these able length; that he was truly a man, no one will be things ? Can it suggest any solution which does not found to doubt; that he is but one person, is sufficiently imply that the sacred penmen were not only careless clear from this, that no distinction into two was ever writers, but writers who, if they had studied to be mismade by himself, or by his apostles, and from actions understood, could not more delusively have expressed peculiar to Godhead being sometimes ascribed to him themselves? The only hypothesis explanatory of all under his human appellations; and actions and suffer- these statements is, that Christ is God as well as man, ings peculiar to humanity being also predicated of him and by this the consistency of the sacred writers is under Divine titles. That in him there is no confusion brought out, and a harmonizing train of sentiment is seen of the two natures, is evident from the absolute man-compacting the Scriptures into one agreeing and mutuner in which both his natures are constantly spoken of ally adjusted revelation. in the Scriptures. His Godhead was not deteriorated But the union of the two natures in Christ in one by uniting itself with a human body, for “ ine is the hypostasis, or person, is equally essential to the full true God;" his humanity was not, while on earth, ex- exposition of the Scriptures, as the existence of two alted into properties which made it different in kind to distinctively, the Divine and the human; and without the humanity of his creatures; for, “as the children it many passages lose all force, because they lose all were partakers of flesh and blood, he also took part of meaning. In what possible sense could it be said of the SAME. If the Divine nature in him had been im- THE Word, that "he was made (or became) FLESH,” perfect, it would have lost its essential character, for it if no such personal unity existed ? The Socinians is essential to Deity to be perfect and complete; if any | themselves seem to acknowledge the force of this, and therefore translate " and the Word was flesh," affirm- , and while we allow that God could not die, yet that ing falsely, as various critics have abundantly shown, there is a most importar t sense in which the blood of that the most usual meaning of yıvouat is to be. With Christ was “the blood of God.” out the hypostatical union, how could the argument of We do not attempt to explain this mystery, but we our Lord be supported, that the Messiah is both David's find it on record; and, in point of fact, that careful apSun and David's Lorp? If this is asserted of two propriation of the properties of the two natures to each persons, then the argument is gone; if of one, then respectively, which Dr. Pye Smith recommends, is not iwo natures, one which had authority as Lord, and the very frequent in the New Testament, and for this obviother capable of natural descent, were united in one ous reason, that the question of our Lord's Divinity is person. Allowing that we have established it, that the more generally introduced as an undisputed principle, appellative “ Son of God" is the designation of a Divine than argued upon. It is true, that the apostle Paul lays relation, but for this personal union the visible Christ it down, that our Lord was of the seed of David, “ accould not be, according to St. Peter's confession, “ the cording to the FLESH," and " the Son of God according Son of the living God." By this doctrine we also learn to the SPIRIT OF HOLINESS." Here is an instance of how it was that “the church of God” was "purchased the distinction; but generally this is not observed by by his own bloom.” Even if we concede the genuine the apostles, because the equally fundamental doctrine reading to be “the Lord,” this concession yields no- was always present to them, that the SAME PERSON thing to the Socinians, unless the term Lord were a who was FLESH was also truly Gon. Hence they scruhuman title, which has been already disproved, and ple not to say, that "the Lord of Glory was crucified," unless a mere man could be "LORD both of the dead that "the Prince of Life was killed," and that he who and the living," could wield universal sovereignty, and was "in the form of God," became "obedient unto be entitled to universal homage. If, then, the title death, even the death of the cross.” " THE LORD" be an appellation of Christ's superior na- We return from this digression, to notice a few other ture, in no other sense could it be said that the church passages, the meaning of which can only be opened by the was purchased by his own blood, than by supposing doctrine of the personal union of the Divine and human the existence of that union which we call personal; a natures in Christ. “ For in him dwelleth all the fulunion which alone distinguishes the sufferings of Christ ness of the Godhead BODILY" (Col. ii. 9); not by a type from that of his martyred followers, gave to them a and figure, but, as the word owpatixws signifies, really merit which theirs had not, and made * his blood" ca- and substantially, and, for the full exposition, we pable of PURCHASING the salvation of the “church.” must add, by personal union; for we have no other For, disallow that union, and we can see no possible idea by which to explain an expression never used to meaning in calling the blood of Christ “ the blood of signify the inhabitation of good men by God, and which God," or, if it please better, "of the Lord;" or in what is here applied to Christ in a way of eminence and pethat great peculiarity consisted, which made it capable culiarity."(6) of purchasing or redeeming.

“Who, being the brightness of his glory, and the exDr. Pye Smith, in his very able work on the Person press image of his person, and upholding all things by of Christ, has rather inconsiderately blamed the ortho- the word of his power, when he had by HIMSELF dox, for “the very serious offence of sometimes using purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Malanguage which applies to the Divine nature the cir- jesty on high,” Heb. i. 3. To this passage, also, the cumstances and properties which could only attach to hyspostatical union is the only key. Of whom does the his humanity," as giving unhappy occasion to the ob- apostle speak, when he says, "when he had BY HIMSELP jections and derisions of their opponents. As he gives purged our sins;" but of Him who is " the brightness of no instances, he had his eye probably upon some ex- his glory, and the express image of his person?' He, by treme cases; but if he meant it as a remark of general HIMSELF,“ purged our sins;" yet this was done by the application, it seems to have arisen from a very mis- shedding of his blood. In that higher nature, however, taken view, and assumes that the objections of oppo- he could not suffer death; and nothing could make the nents lie rather against terms than against the doctrine sufferings of his humanity a purification of sins by HIMof Christ's Divinity itself.

SELF but such a union as should constitute one person : This is so far from being the case, that if the ortho- ---for, unless this he allowed, either the characters of dox were to attend to the caution given by this writer Divinity in the preceding verses are characters of a on this subject, they would not approach one step merely human being; or else that higher nature was nearer to the conversion of those who are in this fun- capable of suffering death; or if not, the purification damental error, supporting it, as they do, by perver- was not made by HIMSELF, which yet the text affirms. sions so manifest and by criticisms so shameless. I am In fine, all passages which (not to mention many no apologist, however, of real " errors and faults” in others) come under the following classes have their true theological language; but the practice referred to, so interpretation thus laid open, and are generally utterly far from being “a serious offence," has the authority unmeaning on any other hypothesis. of the writers of the New Testament. Argumenta- 1. Those which, like some of the foregoing, speak of tively, the distinction between the Divine and human the efficacy of the sufferings of Christ for the remisnatures, according to the rule before given, must be sion of sins. In this class the two following may be maintained; but when speaking cursorily, and on the given as examples. Heb. ii. 14, “ Forasmuch, then, assumption of the unquestionable truth of the hypo- as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he static union of the Divine and human natures,-a manner also himself likewise took part of the same; that of speaking, which, it is hoped, all true Christians adopt, through death he might destroy him that had the power as arising from their settled convictions on this point, --- of death," &c. Here the efficacy of the death of Christ those very terms, so common among the orthodox, and is explicitly stated; but as explicitly is it said to be the 80 objectionable to those who “deny the Lord that death of one who partook of flesh and blood, or who bought them,” must be maintained in spite of “ deri- assumed human nature. The power of deliverance is sion,” or the language of the New Testament must be ascribed to him who thus invested himself with a nadropped, or at least be made very select, if this dan- ture below that of his own original nature; but in that gerous and, in the result, this betraying courtesy be lower nature he dies, and by that DEATH he delivers adopted. For what does Dr. P. Smith gain, when cau- those who had been all their lifetime subject to bondage. tioning the believer against the use of the phrase "the The second is Colossians i. 14, &c. “In whom we have blood of God,” by reminding him that there is reason redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of to prefer the reading "the church of the Lord, which sins, who is the image of the invisible God," &c. In he hath purchased by his own blood ?" The orthodox this passage, the lofty description which is given of the contend, that the appellation "THE LORD," when applied Person of Christ stands in immediate connexion with to our Saviour, is his title as God, and the heterodox the mention of the efficacy of “his blood," and is to be know, also, that the blood of the Lord” is a phrase considered as the reason why, through that blood, rewith us entirely equivalent to “the blood of God.” demption and remission of sins became attainable. They know, too, that we neither believe that “God” | Thus" without shedding of blood there could be no re. nor“ THE LORD” could die; but in using the esta- mission;" but the blood of Jesus only is thus effica. blished phrase, the all-important doctrine of the existence of such a union between the two natures of our (6) " Ewpatikus, i. e. vere, perfectissime, non typice, Lord as to make the blood which he shed more than et umbraliter, sicut in N. T. Deus se manifestavit. Est the blood of a mere man, more than the blood of his autem inhabitatio illa et unio personalis, et singularis. mere humanity itself, is maintained and exhibited; sima.”-GLAS!05.

cious, who is "the image of the invisible God," the system, the two natures are distinct, and the Divine is

Creator” of all things. His blood it could not be but impassable. for the hypostatical union; and it is equally true, that “In answer to this method of arguing, we may adbut for that he could have had no blood to shed: be- mit that the Godhead cannot suffer, and we do not precause, as the iroage of the invisible God," that is, God's tend to explain the kind of support which the human equal, or God himself, his nature was incapable of death. nature derived, under its sufferings, from the Divine,

2. In the second class are all those passages which ar- or the manner in which the two were united. But from gue from the compassion which our Lord manifested in the uniform language of Scripture, which magnifies the his humiliation, and his own experience of suffer- love of God in giving his only-begotten Son, which ings, to the exercise of confidence in him by his people speaks in the highest terms of the preciousness of the in dangers and aillictive circumstances. of these blood of Christ, which represents him as coming, in the following may be given for the sake of illustra- the body that was prepared for him, to do that which tion. Heb. iv. 15, 16, " For we have not a high priest sacrifice and burnt offering could not do: from all this which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infir- we infer, that there was a value, a merit, in the sufmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, ferings of this Person, superior to that which belonged yet without sin. Let us, therefore, come boldly unto to the sufferings of any other: and as the same Scrip the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and tures intimate, in numberless places, the strictest union find grace to help in time of need.” Several similar between the Divine and human nature of Christ, by passages occur in the early part of the Epistle to the applying to him promiscuously the actions which beHebrews, and the argument of them all is precisely the long to each nature, we hold that it is impossible for us same. The humiliation of our Lord and his acquaint- to separate, in our imagination, this peculiar value ance with human woes may assure us of his sympa- which they affix to his sufferings, from the peculiar thy; but sympathy is not help; he is represented, dignity of his person. therefore, as the source of “succour," as the “ Author “The hypostatical union, then, is the corner-stone of of Salvation," " the Captain of our Salvation," in our religion. We are too much accustomed, in all our consequence of the sufferings he endured; and to him researches, to perceive that things are united, without all his people are directed to fly for aid in prayer, and, our being able to investigate the bond which unites by entire trust in his power, grace, and presence, to them, to feel any degree of surprise that we cannot an. assure themselves that timely succour and final salva- swer all the questions which ingenious men have protion shall be bestowed upon them by him. Now here, posed upon this subject; but we can clearly discern, in also, it is clear, that the sufferer and the Saviour are those purposes of the incarnation of the Son of God the same person. The man might suffer; but sufferings which the Scriptures declare, the reason why they have could not enable the man to save; they could give no dwelt so largely upon his Divinity; and if we are carenew qualification to human nature, nor bestow upon ful to take into our view the whole of that description that nature any new right. But, besides the nature which they give of the Person by whom the remedy in which suffered, and learned the bitterness of human the Gospel was brought; if, in our speculations conwoes by experience, there is a nature which can know cerning him, we neither lose sight of the two parts the sufferings of all others, in all places, at all times; which are clearly revealed, nor forget, what we canwhich can also ascertain the “time of need" with not comprehend, that union between the two parts exactness, and the “grace" suitable to it; which can which is necessarily implied in the revelation of them, effectually "help" and sustain the sorrows of the very we shall perceive, in the character of the Messiah, a heart, a power peculiar to Divinity, and, finally, bestow completeness and a suitableness to the design of his " eternal salvation." This must be Divine; but it is coming, which of themselves create a strong presumpone in personal union with that which suffered and tion that we have rightly interpreted the Scriptures."(7) was taught sympathy, and it is this union consti- On this evidence from the Holy Scriptures the doctutes that “GREAT High PRIEST” of our profession, trine of the Divinity of our blessed Saviour rests. Into that “merciful and faithful High Priest," who is able the argument from antiquity my limits will not allow “to succour us when we are tempted.” Thus, as it ine to enter. If the great " falling away,” predicted by has been well observed on this subject, “It is by the St. Paul, had involved, generally, this high doctrine; if union of two natures in one person that Christ is quali- both the Latin and Greek churches had wholly defied to be the Saviour of the world. He became man, parted from the faith, instead of having united, with. that, with the greatest possible advantage to those out intermission, to say “Thou art the King of Glory, whom he was sent to instruct, he might teach them the o Christ,” “Thou art the everlasting Son of the Fanature and the will of God; that his life might be their ther," the truth of God would not have been made of example; that by being once compassed wiůl the infirmn- "none effect.” God would still have been true, though ities of human nature, he might give them assurance of every man, from the age of inspiration, had become "g his fellow-feeling; that by suffering on the cross he might liar.” The Socinians have, of late years, shown great make atonement for their sins; and that in his reward anxiety to obtain some suffrages from antiquity in their they might behold the earnest and the pattern of theirs. favour, and have collected every instance possible of

"But had Jesus been only man, or had he been one early departure from the faith. They might, indeed, of the spirits that surround the throne of God, he could have found heretical pravity and its adherents, withnot have accomplished the work which he undertook : out travelling out of the New Testament; men, not for the whole obedience of every creature being due to only near the apostolic age, but in the very days of the the Creator, no part of that obedience can be placed to apostles, who rejected the resurrection, who consented the account of other creatures, so as to supply the de- not “to wholesome doctrine,” who made shipwreck of fects of their service, or to rescue them from the pu- faith,” as well as of a good conscience, who denied "the nishment which they deserve. The Scriptures, there only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, “the Lord fore, reveal, that he who appeared upon earth as man, that bought them.” This kind of antiquity is, in truth, is also God, and as God, was mighty to save; and by in their favour: and, as human nature is substantially this revelation they teach us, that the merit of our the same in all ages, there is as much reason to expect Lord's obedience, and the efficacy of his interposition, errors in one age as another; but, that any body of depend upon the hypostatical union.

Christians, in any sense entitled to be considered as an *All modern sects of Christians agree in admitting acknowledged branch of the church of Christ, can be that the greatest benefits arise to us from the Saviour found, in primitive times, to give any sanction to their of the world being man; but the Arians and Socinians opinions and interpretations of Scripture, they have contend earnestly, that his sufferings do not derive any failed to establish. For full information on the subject value from his being God; and their reasoning is spe- of the opinions of the primitive churches, and a full re cious. You say, they argue, that Jesus Christ, who futation of all the pretences which Arians and Socisuffered for the sins of men, is both God and man. nians, in these later times, have made to be, in part, You must either say that God suffered, or that he did supported by primitive authority, the works of Bishop not suffer : if you say that God suffered, you do in- Bull, Dr. Waterland, and Bishop Horsley(8) must be deed asfix an infinite value to the sufferings, but you affirm that the Godhead is capable of suffering, which (7) Dr. HilL. is both impious and absurd: if you say that God did (8) See also Wilson's Illustration of the Method of not suffer, then, although the person that suffered had explaining the New Testament by the early Opinions of both a Divine and a human nature, the sufferings were Jews and Christians concerning Christ; and Dr. JAMIE merely those of a man, for, according to your own l son's Vindication, &c.

consulted; and the result will show, that, in the inter- | opinion; and as to the Arian hypothesis, it falls, with Socipretation of the Scriptures given above, we are sup- nianism, before that series of proofs which has already ported by the successive and according testimonies of been adduced from holy writ, to establish the eternity, all that is truly authoritative in those illustrious ages consubstantiality, coequality, and, consequently, the which furnished so many imperisliable writings for the proper Divinity of our Redeemer; and, perhaps, the true edification of the future church, and so many martyrs reason why not even the semi-Arianism, argued with and confessors of “ the truth as it is in Jesus."

so much subtlety by Dr. Samuel Clarke, has been able Among the numerous errors, with respect to the to retain any influence among us, is less to be attributed Person of our Lord, which formerly sprung up in the to the able and learned writi of Dr. Waterland and Church, and were opposed, with an ever watchful zeal, others, who chased the error through all its changeful by its authorities, three only can be said to have much transformations, than to the manifest impossibility of influence in the present day, Arianism, Sabellianism, conceiving of a being which is neither truly God nor a and Socinianism. In our own country, the two former creature; and the total absence of all countenance in are almost entirely merged in the last, whose character- the Scriptures, however tortured, in favour of this opiistic is the tenet of the simple humanity of Christ. nion. Socinianism assumes a plausibility in some of Arius, who gave his name to the first, seems to have its aspects, because Christ was really a man ; but semiwrought some of the floating errors of previous times into Arianism is a mere hypothesis, which can scarcely find a kind of system, which, however, underwent various a text of Scripture to pervert. modifications among his followers. The distinguishing tenet of this system was, that Christ was the first and most exalted of creatures; that he was produced in a peculiar manner, and endowed with great perfec

CHAPTER XVII. tions, that by him God made the world; that he alone proceeded immediately from God, while other things The PERSONALITY AND Deity of THE HOLY Ghost. were produced mediately by him, and that all things The discussion of this great point of Christian docwere put under his administration. The semi-Arians trine may be included in much narrower limits than divided from the Arians, but still differed from the or- those I have assigned to the Divinity of Christ, so many thodox, in refusing to admit that the Son was homoou- of the principles on which it rests having been closely sios, or of the same substance with the Father ; but considered, and because the Deity of the Spirit, in seve. acknowledged him to be homoiousios, of a like sub-ral instances, inevitably follows from that of the Son, stance with the Father. It was only, however, in ap- As the object of this work is to educe the doctrine of pearance that they came nearer to the truth than the the sacred Scriptures on all the leading articles of faith, Arians themselves, for they contended that this likeness it will, however, be necessary to show the evidence to the Father in essence was not by nature, but by pe- which is there given to the two propositions in the title culiar privilege. In their system Christ, therefore, was of the chapter :-that the Holy Ghost (from the Saxon but a creature. A still farther refinement on this doc- word Gast, a Spirit) is a PERSON; and that he is God. trine was, in this country, advocated by Dr. Samuel As to the manner of his being, the orthodox doctrine Clarke, which Dr. Waterland, his great and illustrious is, that as Christ is God, by an eternal FILIATION, so opponent, showed, notwithstanding the orthodox terms the Spirit is God by procession from the Father and the employed, still implied that Christ was a created being Son."" And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and unless an evident absurdity were admitted (9)

giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the The Sabellian doctrine stands equally opposed to Son, who, with the Father and Son together, is worTrinitarianism and to the Arian system. It asserts the shipped and glorified.”(1) “The Holy Ghost is of the Divinity of the Son and the Spirit against the latter, and Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor denies the personality of both, in opposition to the for- begotten, but proceeding."(2) “ The Holy Ghost, promer. Sabellius taught that the Father, Son, and Holy | ceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one sub. Ghost are only denominations of one hypostasis; instance, majesty, and glory with the Father and the Son, other words, that there is but one person in the God- very and eternal God."(3) The Latin church introhead, and that the Son or Word are virtues, emana- duced the term spiration, from spiro, to breathe, to detions, or functions only: that, under the Old Testa- note the manner of this procession ; on which Dr. ment, God delivered the law as Father; under the New, Owen remarks, "as the vital breath of a man has a dwelt among men, or was incarnate, as the Son; and continual emanation from him, and yet is never sepadescended on the apostles as the Spirit. Because their rated utterly from his person or forsaketh him, so dorh scheme, by denying a real Sonship, obliged them to the Spirit of the Father and the Son proceed from them acknowledge that it was the Father who suffered for by a continual Divine emanation, still abiding one with the sins of men, the Sabellians were often, in the early them.” On this refined view little can be said which ages, called Patripassians.

has obvious Scriptural authority; and yet the very term On the refutation of these errors it is not necessary by which the third Person in the Trinity is designated to dwell, both because they have now little influence, wind or BREATH may, as to the third Person, be deand chiefly because both are involved in the Socinian signed, like the term Son applied to the second, to conquestion, and are decided by the establishment of the vey, though imperfectly, some intimation of that manScriptural doctrine of a Trinity of Divine Persons in ner of being by which both are distinguished from each the unity of the Godhead. If Jesus Christ be the Di- other, and from the Father; and it was a remarkable vine Son of God; if he were “sent" from God and “re-action of our Lord, and one certainly which does nos turned" to God; if he distinguished himself from the discountenance this idea, that when he imparted the Father both in his Divine and human nature, saying, Holy Ghost to his disciples, “he BREATHED on them, as to the former, “I and my Father are ONE," and as to and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost;" Johor the latter, "My Father is GREATER than I;" if there be xx. 22.(4) any meaning at all in his declaration, “ that no man But whatever we may think as to the doctrine of knoweth the Son but the Father, and no man knoweth spiration," the PROCESSION of the Holy Ghost rests the Father but the Son,” words which cannot, by any on direct Scriptural authority, and is thus stated by possibility, be spoken of an official distinction, or of an Bishop Pearson : emanation or operation, then all these passages prove “Now this procession of the Spirit, in reference to a real personality, and are incapable of being explained the Father, is delivered expressly, in relation to the Son, by a modal one. This is the answer to the Sabellian and is contained virtually in the Scriptures. First, it is

expressly said, that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from (9) Dr. SAMUEL CLARKE's hypothesis was, that there is one Supreme Being, who is the Father, and two sub- (1) Nicene Creed.

(2) Athanasian Creed. ordinate, derived, and dependent beings. But he ob- (3) Articles of the English Church. jected to call Christ a creature, thinking him something (4) “The Father hath relation to the Son, as the Fabetween a created and a self-existent nature. Dr. C. ther of the Son; the Son to the Father, as the Son of appealed to the fathers; and Petavius, a learned Jesuit, the Father; and the Holy Ghost, being the spirit or in his Dogmata Theologica, had previously endeavoured breath of the Father and the Son, to both.”-Lawson's to prove that the ante-Nicene fathers leaned to Arian- Theo. Pol. But though breath or wind is the radical ism. Bishop Bull, in his great work on this subject, signification of avevpa, as also of spiritus, yet, prohaand Dr. WATERLAND, may be considered as having fully bly from its sacredness, it is but rarely used in that put that question to rest in opposition to both.

sense in the New Testament.

the Father, as our Saviour testifieth, "When the Com-," the Father," is by all acknowledged to be Divine ; forter is come, whom I will send unto you from the and the ascription to each of them, or to the three in Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from union, of the same acts, titles, and authority, with worthe Father, he shall testify of me," John xv. 26. And ship of the same kind, and, for any distinction that is this is also evident from what hath been already as- made, in an equal degree. This argument has already serted : for being the Father and the Spirit are the same been applied to establish the Divinity of the Son, whose God, and being so the same in the unity of the nature of Personality is not questioned ; and the terms of the God, are yet distinct in the personality, one of them proposition may be as satisfactorily established as to must have the same nature from the other; and be the Holy Spirit, and will prove at the same time both cause the Father hath been already shown to have it his Personality and his Divinity. from none, it followeth that the Spirit hath it from him. With respect to the Son, we have seen that, as so

"Secondly, though it be not expressly spoken in the great and fundamental a doctrine as his Deity inight Scripture, that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Fa- naturally be expected to be announced in the Old Testher and Son, yet the substance of the same truth is tament revelation, though its full manifestation should virtually contained there; because those very expres- be reserved to the New; so it was, in fact, not faintly sions which are spoken of the Holy Spirit in relation shadowed forth, but displayed with so much clearness to the Father, for that reason because he proceedeth from as to become an article of faith in the Jewish Church. the Father, are also spoken of the same Spirit in re- The manifestation of the existence and Divinity of the lation to the Son; and iherefore there must be the same Holy Spirit may also be expected in the law and the reason presupposed in reference to the Son, which is prophets, and is, in fact, to be traced there with equal expressed in reference to the Fatl r. * Because the certainty. The Spirit is represented as an agent in Spirit proceedeth from the Father, therefore it is called creation, “ moving upon the face of the waters ;” and the Spirit of God and the Spirit of the Father. It is it forms no objection to the argument, that creation is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which ascribed to the Father, and also to the Son, but a great speaketh in you,' Matt. x. 20. For by the language of confirmation of it. That creation should be effected by the apostle, the Spirit of God is the Spirit which is of all the three Persons of the Godhead, though acting in God, saying, “The things of God knoweth no man but different respects, yet so that each should be a Creator, the Spirit of God. And we have received not the and, therefore, both a Person, and a Divine Person, can spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God,' 1 | be explained only by their unity in one essence. On Cor. ii. 11, 12. Now the same spirit is also called ihe every other hypothesis this Scriptural fact is disal. Spirit of the Son; for • because we are sons, God hath lowed, and therefore no other hypothesis can be true. sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts,' Gal. If the Spirit of God be a mere influence, then he is not iv. 6: the Spirit of Christ; Now if any man have not a Creator, distinct from the Father and the Son, bethe Spirit of Christ, he is none of his,' Rom. viii. 9; cause he is not a Person ; but this is refuted, both by · even the Spirit of Christ which was in the prophets, the passage just quoted and by Psalm xxxiii. 6, “ By 1 Peter i. 11; the Spirit of Jesus Christ, as the apostle the WORD OF THE LORD were the heavens made; and speaks, 'I know that this shall turn to my salvation all the host of them by the BREATH (Heb. Spirit) of his through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of mouth.” This is farther confirmed by Job xxxiii. 4, the Jesus Christ,' Phil. i. 19. If then the Holy Ghost be “SPIRIT of God hath made me, and the breath of the called the Spirit of the Father, because he proceedeth Almighty hath given me life;" where the second clause from the Father, it followeth that, being called also the is obviously exegetic of the former, and the whole text Spirit of the Son, he proceedeth also from the Son. proves that, in the patriarchal age, the followers of the

• Again: because the Holy Ghost proceedeth from true religion ascribed creation to the Spirit, as well as the Father, he is therefore sent by the Father, as from to the Father; and that one of his appellations was him who hath, by the original communication, a right "the Breath of the Almighty.". Did such passages of mission; as the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, stand alone, there might, indeed, be some plausibility whoin the Father will send, John xiv. 26. But the in the criticism which solves them by a personification; same Spirit which is sent by the Father, is also sent but, connected as they are with that whole body of by the Son, as he saith, “When the Comforter is come, evidence, which has been and shall be adduced, as to whom I will send unto you. Therefore the Son hath the concurring doctrine of both Testaments, they are the same right of mission with the Father, and conse- | inexpugnable. Again: if the Personality of the Son quently must be acknowledged to have communicated and the Spirit be allowed, and yet it is contended that the same essence. The Father is never sent by the they were but instruments in creation, through whom Son, because he received not the Godhead from him; the creative power of another operated, but which creabut ihe Father sendeth the Son, because he communi- tive power was not possessed by them: on this hypocated the Godhead to him: in the same manner, nei- thesis, too, neither the Spirit nor the Son can be said ther the Father nor the Son is ever sent by the Holy | to create, any more than Moses created the serpent into Spirit ; because neither of them received the Divine na- which his rod was turned, and the Scriptures are ture from the Spirit: but both the Father and the Son again contradicted. To this association of the three sendeth the Holy Ghost, because the Divine nature, Persons in creative acts may be added a like associacommon to both the Father and the Son, was commu- tion in acts of PRESERVATION, which has been well nicated by them both to the Holy Ghost. As therefore called a continued creation, and by that term is exthe Scriptures declare expressly, that the Spirit pro- pressed in the following passage: Psalm civ. 27-30, ceedeth from the Father; so do they also virtually teach, These wait all upon thee, that thou mayest give them that he proceedeth from the Son."(5)

their meat in due season. Thou hidest thy lace, they In opposition to the Doctrine of the Personality and are troubled; thou takest a way their breath, they die, Deity of the Spirit, stands the Socinian hypothesis, and return to dust; thou SENDEST FORTH THE SPIRIT, which I state before the evidence from Scripture is they are created, and thou renewest the face of the adduced, that it may be seen, upon examination of earth.” It is not surely here meant that the Spirit, by inspired testimony, how far it is supported by that au- which the generations of animals are perpetuated, is thority. Arius regarded the Spirit not only as a crea- wind; and if he be called an attribute, wisdom, power, ture, but as created by Christ, koloHQ KtoMatos, the or both united, where do we read of such attributes, creature of a creature. Some time afterward, his Per- being “sent," "sent forth from God?" The Personsonality was wholly denied by the Arians, and he was ality of the Spirit is here as clearly marked as when considered as the exerted energy of God. This appears St. Paul speaks of God" sending forth the Spirit of his to have been the notion of Socinus, and with occasional Son," and when our Lord promises to “sendthe modifications, has been adopted by his followers. They Comforter; and as the upholding and preserving of sometimes regard him as an attribute, and at others created things is ascribed to the Father and the Son, resolve the passages in which he is spoken of into a so here they are ascribed also to the Spirit, “ sent forth periphrasis, or circumlocution for God himself; or, to from” God to create and renew the face of the earth." express both in one, into a figure of speech.

The next association of the three Persons we find in In establishing the proper Personality and Deity of the inspiration of the prophets. “God spake unto our the Holy Ghost, the first argument is drawn from the fathers by the prophets,” says St. Paul, Heb. i. 1. St. frequent association, in Scripture, of a Person, under Peter declares, that these "holy men of God spake as that appellation, with two other Persons, one of whom, they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” 2 Pei. i. 21 ;

and also that it was the Spirit of CHRIST which was (5) Discourses on the Creed.

in them," 1 Pet. i. 11. We may defy any Socinian to


« PreviousContinue »