« PreviousContinue »
mage of the Father, an ex ο πατής με μείζων με βίν. act Likeness in all things: Epist. ad Alex. apud There Only referving to the Father dorit. lib. I, the peculiar Property of Selfexistence; as our Saviour himself declares, My Father is Greater than I.
And Conftantine the Αιτία με με, ο πατήρ αλGreat: The Father, is the tiativ Ö, è ýós. Orat. ad Cause of' the Son; and the Sanctorum cætum, apud ExSon, is Caused by him. And Eusebius: The Fan
Και και με καθ' εαυτόν τίther is Perfect of Himself, ne sj apūross ais mathe, a and First, as Father, and as the cause of the Sons Subat 4 ous dosas TIGA fistence; receiving ang
δεν ας συμπλήρωσιν τ εαυτό thing from the Son, to the debunto considera už aarbela completing of his own Divi νων. “ο και ως εξ αιτία
zego nity. But the Son, as being vos còso deirepo HY Derived from a Cause, is yds ratésnney, Second to him whosé Son he ?pos rý rò ) rý Toués de nos is; having received from the anpa's. Demonft. Evang. lib. Father both bis Being, and 4.6. 3. his being such as he is.
And Athanafius: The 'Altid av Jes oi. Nature of God, is the Cause ois, xj * ýš sij mijie gedé. both of the Son and Holy Mat, rj xridews Tions. Spirit, and of all Crea. Dissertat. Orthodoxi & A.
nomai. And again: The Father,
'Αλλ' ότι ο πατής, τέλειον having his Being Perftet [of Exar no 79, xj drendet is himself,] and Indefectible (or Independent;] is the Seas nj angh všuð sej * ardi
U&TO. Orat. contr. Sabell. Root and Fountain of the Son and Spirit.
And the Synod of Sar Αυτό το όνομα της πατρός, dica : The very Name of us sov Bayš. Apud TheFaiher, implies something odorit, lib. 2.c. 8. Greater than that of Son.
And Hilary: Who will Quis Patrem non potionot confess that the Father is rem confitebitur, ut inSuperiour? He that is Un- genitum a genito, ut Pabegotten, than be that is Be trem a filio, ut eum qui gotten? The Father, than miserit ab eo qui miffus the Sou? He that Sent,than eft, ut volentem ab ipso be that is sent by bim? He qui obediat? & ipse nothat commands, than he that bis teftis eft, Pater major obeys? Our Saviour himself me eft. De Trin. 1. 3. testifies This to us, saying, My Father is greater than I.
And Bafil : The word Το σατήρ τι άλλο σημαίFather, what else does it Vers n oxiro airia & rý dexon signify, but the Cause and do auto gluon s'éva ; contr, Original of That which is be- Eunom. I. gotten of him?
Again : We affirm that, ‘Huer's ģ, xe vue en aitiwr according to the natural ora neys Ta' F ou APS géow, resder of Causes and Effets, Téléx40cm yð † waleeg. gethe Father must have the refú. Ibid, Prebeminence before the So. And again: We know
"Evcl 28 oed de pelo ágfúrntov, but One Unbegotten, and juicer 7 aylw dexli, này One Original of All things; Telégg. Tš xveis iwS 'Ingã Xereven the Father of our Lord sã. Epift.78. Jesus Chrift.
And, among Moderns, the Learned Bp Pearson : In the very Name of Father (faith he ) there is something of eminence, which is not in that of Son; and some kind of priority we must afcribe unto him whom we call the First, in refpe&t of Him whom we term the Second Per. fon : And as we cannot but ascribe it, so muft we indeavour to preserve it. Expof. on Creed, pag. 34.
Again : The Son has his Being from the Father, who Only hath it of Himself, and is the Original of all Power and Efence in the Son, I can of mine own self
do nothing, Saith vur Saviour ; because He is not of Himself : And whosoever receives bis Being, must receive bis Power from another. pag. 34.
Again : We must not therefore so far indeavour to involve our selves in the darkness of this mystery, as to deny That Glory which is clearly due unto the Father ; whose prebeminence undeniably confifteth in this, that he is God not of any other, but of himself; and that there is no other person who is God, but is God of Him. It is no diminution to the Son, to say he is from another; for his very Name imports as much : But it were a diminution to the Father, to speak so of Him : And there muft be fome Prebeminence, where there is place for Derogation. What the Father is, he is from None; what the Son is, he is from Him: What the first is, he giveth; what the second is, he receiveth. The First is
The First is a Father indeed by reason of his Son, but he is not God by reason of him ; whereas the Son is not only so [ viz. a Son] in regard of the Father, but also God by reason of the fame. pag. 35.
Again : Which Order (viz. the Priority of the Father] hath been perpetuated in all Confeffions of Faith, and is for ever inviolably to be observed. For That which is not instituted or invented by the Will or Design of man, but founded in the Nature of Things themselves ; is not to be altered at the pleasure of Max. Now this Priority doth properly and naturally result from the Divine Paternity; so that the Son must necessarily be Second unto the Father, from whom he receiveth his origination, and the Holy Ghoft, unto the Son. pag: 37.
Again : The Difference consisteih properly in This; that as the Branch is from the Root, and ebe River from the Fountain, and by their origination from them receive that Being which they bave; whereas the Root receiveth nothing from the Branch, or Fountain from the River ; So the Son is from the Father, receiving his Subfiftence by Gene
ration from him; the Father is not from the Son, as being what he is from None. pag. 38.
Again : It is most reasonable (faith he) to affert, that there is but one person who is from None ; and the very generation of the Son and procession of the Holy Ghost undeniably prove, that Neither of those Two can be That perfor. For whosoever is generated, is from Him which is the Genitor ; and whosoever proceedeth, is from Him from whom he proceedeth; whatsoever the Nature of the generation or procesion be. It followeth therefore, that This person is the Father ; which name speaks nothing of dependence, nor supposeth any kind of priority in another. - From hence he is stiled One God, the True God, the Only True God, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. pag. 43.
Again : Which as it is most true, [that the Father is the One God, ] and so fit to be believed ; is also a most neceffary Truth, and therefore to be acknowledged, for the Avoiding multiplication and plurality of Gods. For if there were more than one, which were from None ; it could not be denied but there were more Gods than One, Wherefore This origination in the divine Paternity, hath Antiently been look'd upon as the Assertion of the Unity. pag. 40
And again: There can be but One Person originally of Himself subsisting, because a Plurality of more perJons so. Subsisting would necessarily infer a Plurality of Gods - The Father of our Lord Jejus Christ is originally God, as not receiving his eternal Being from any ather. Wherefore it necessarily follows that Jesus Chrift, who is certainly not the Father, cannot be a person subfifting originally of himself. The Father bath the Godhead, not from the Son nor any other ; whereas the Son hath it from the Father. pag. 134 (See more above, Part I, in the Notes on the Text, No414.]
And the learned Bishop Nam Totum re&è dici: Bull: The Father (faith tur Pater, quà eft ingine he) is rightly stiled the tebinto• fiquidem DiviWhole, as being the Foun- nitas, quæ in Filio eft & in tain of Divinity. For the Spiritu Sancto, Patris est, Divinity which is in the Son quia a Patre derivatur. Deand in the Holy Spirit, is fenf. Sect. 2. cap. 8. $ go the Fathers Divinity, becaufe derived from Him.
Again : This Afertion Hæc autem Thefis no. [ of the Sons Subordina- tatu imprimis digna est tion) is particularly to be propter Neotericos quofheeded, upon the account of dam, qui filium propriè Some Modern Writers, who dici posle artosov, hoc eft, earnestly contend that the a Seipso Deum, pertinaci Son may properly be stiled ' ftudio contendunt. Hæc God of Himself: which fententia tum ipforum hyOpinion is both contrary to pothesibus qui illam detheir own hypotheses who fendunt, tum Catholico maintain it, and to the Ca- consensui repugnat. Ibid. tholick Doctrine.
Sect. 4. cap. I. $ 7. Again : Which Things Quæ égoxào quandam manifestly denote some Sur Patris supra Filium, etiam periority of the Father over quà maximè propriè Dei the Son, even in That respect filius eft, manifeitè figniwherein he is most properly ficant. Ibid. Sect. 4. cap. the Son of God.
2. $ 3. Again : He [viz. the A nullo ille ortus prinFather ] is derived from cipio, nulli subjectus eft ; no Original, is subject to neq; magis ab alio missus, None; and can no more be quàm ab alio natus dici said to be sent by Any, than poteft. Contrà Filius Dei, to be begotten of Any. On quà ex Deo Patre natus, the conitary the Son of God, eo certè nomine Patri on That
Account, be suam omnem auctoritaGause he is begotten of God tem
acceptam refert; X 4