many Learned Divines to which the learned Readers know how to have recourse and the unlearned will not need them nor indeed could understand them This little Treatise aimeth principally at the information of the ordinary rank of Christians and so of the most of whom Tertullian saith Simplices enim sunt ne dicam Idiolae major pars credentium Tert. cont Prax. That if by Gods assistance I may instrumentally promote their beleeving I have my desire for although they cannot understand the subtile objections of the Adversaries yet a good constant Christian may resolve with that generous Faith of the forenamed Father concerning the Mysteries of Christ which Jews and Heathens esteemed folly and as St. Paul saith The foolishness and the weakness of God 1 Cor. 1. 25. o De. Carn Chri. Natus est Dei filius non pudet quid pudendum est Mortuus est Dei filius prorsus credibile est quia ineptum certum est quia impossibile The Mysteries of the Son of God and the death of this Son of God which others account ignominious foolish and impossible the Christian doth therefore account most honourable credible and certain The same we confidently affirm of this Mystery of the Unity of the God-Head and of the Trinity of Persons therein although to unbeleevers it seem ever so improbable But yet God hath not left us altogether without the helps of humane reason by affording us many resemblances of this great Mysterie both in Nature and Morality As will be shewed hereafter CHAP. IIII. The Doctrine of the Trinity is obscurely delivered in the old Testament but cleerly in the New Why the Septuagint Translators concealed it from the Heathens The Resemblances of the Trinity and Unity in Nature The three Persons and their several Properties and joint Unity Why the Fathers used some words not found in the Scriptures SAint Basil observeth upon those words Bas Hexam hom 9. Gen. 1. 26. Let us make man that the Jews denying the second Person said That God talked to himself but what Carpenter saith he being alone would so talk or but with his instruments for if so then he must have said fiat homo i. e. Let man be made but here is faciamus i. e. Let us make which implies another Person and that no creature or Angel because he added In our Image And after our likeness for man was made in the Image of God not of Angels or any other creature Thus he Gregory Naz. also observeth Naz. Orat. 37. That the Old Testament speaketh evidently of the Father but obscurely of the Son And that the Evangelists speak plainly of the Son but darkly of the Holy Ghost because God would not ingage us in this part of Faith until the God-head of the Father and the Son were more cleerly manifested thus by degrees like the Sun-light illuminating man by little and little So Epiphanius noteth against the Pneumatici Epiph. haer 74. who denied the God-head of the holy Ghost that Moses plainly declareth one God and the Prophets two Persons in God and the Apostles a Trinity of Persons And we are told by St. Jerome a Proaem Quaest in Gen. That the Septuagint abstained from revealing the Mystery of Christ and his coming to King Ptolomy who set them on the work of Translation lest he being an Heathen should think that the Jews had two Gods and also because as Basil of Seleucia Bas Seleu. Orat. 9. noteth Gods appointed time for revealing Christ to the Gentiles was not yet come Indeed we finde in after times that both Heathens and Hereticks objected that the Christians had two or three Gods upon a confession of a plurality of Persons For Porphyrius called the Christians Trinity b Aug. de Civ l. 10. c. 29. Three Gods So the Macedonian Hereticks called the Catholicks c Naz. Orat. 37. Tritheitas as if they had three Gods but they were thus answered by Nazianzen That if the Catholicks were so because they confessed Three Persons then must those Macedonians be called Bideitae because they acknowledged two Persons viz. The Father and the Son The Arians confessed Three Persons but they denyed the Vnity of the God-head in them The Sabellians confessed the Unity of the God-head but denyed a Plurality or Duality of Persons therein both these Heresies are refelled by that speech of Christ John 10. 30. I and my Father are one as Prosp. noteth d Prosp Sent. 346. Vnum hoc perculit Arium Sumus hoc Sabellium stravit i. e. in that he saith One this siniteth Arius and in that he saith Plurally We are this confuteth Sabellius This observation he learned of St. Austin who against both those Heresies thus confesseth the Trinity e Aug. de qum que Haeres To. 6. c. 7. Gratias tibi Vera Vna Trinitas Vna Trina Veritas Trina Vna Vnitas For as the Error of Heathens was in beleeving a Plurality of Gods so the error of Jews and Hereticks was in denying a Plurality of Persons in one God Now that it may appear that the Mystery of the Trinity is not so far remote from humane capacity and faith as if to Reason it might seem altogether impossible God hath given us many resemblances thereof which are obvious and easie to be discerned which Similitudes must not be thought fully to correspond in all particulars to the Divine Trinity as we learn in Logick Omne simile est dissimile Nullum simile est idem Similitudo non Currit quatuor pedibus c i. e. Every like is also unlike No like is the same Similitudes do always halt with one foot But it will be enough if we can finde some one particular wherein they are assimulated We see that one man may sustain three several Offices or Persons as One may be a Merchant a Souldier and a Magistrate These are different Offices yet one man is all Marsilius Ficinus in his Preface to the Book of Mercurius Trismegistus tells us that he was therefore called Trismegistus i. e. Thrice Greatest because he was the Greatest Philosopher the Greatest Priest and the Greatest Prince So the elder Pliny tells us that Cato the elder was the best Orator the best Commander and Plin. Hist l. 7. c. 27. the best Senator here is one man is all these though every one of these Offices differ each from other even as the Father Son and Spirit are all but one God yet are Persons distinct one from another Dionysius Areop resembleth the Trinity to Dionis de Div. Nom. c. 2. three Lamps in a Room which though they be several and distinct yet the light of all is but one light Nazianzen compares it with Naz. Orat. 37. the Sun Sun beam and Light and to Fire Heat and Light and to the Spring Well and Stream and to the Arm the Hand and the Finger and to the Root the Body and the Boughs of a Tree St. Ambrose to the three
Ambr. de Dignit Hom. c. 2. Faculties of the Soul Vnderstanding Will and Memory St. Ierome tells us that Christ was therefore baptized in Jordan because that Hier. in Mat. c. 16. River represented the Trinity for that it was called Jordan because it issued from two Heads the one called Jor the other Dan All these Threes are severally distinct and yet unseparated in Nature One Sun One Fire One Water One Arm. One Tree One Soul And one Jordan Yet when we say the Three Persons are but of one Essence the Reader is to be informed that we are not so to be understood as if we affirmed that there is no Essential or Quidditative difference between these Three Persons for the Three Divine Persons must needs be distinct and different in some Essential difference otherwise they all must be confessed to be but One Person Therefore something there must be whereby the Father is Father and not Son and so in the other Persons to constitute them Persons distinct each from other For in Logick we learn that even the very Accidents have their respective Essence such as it is to make them what they are so must the several Divine Persons have and to this our Orthodox Divines consent for thus they write Personae habent unum esse absolutum Essentiale Naturale Sed diversum esse Relativum Personale i. e. The Three Persons have but one Essence absolute of their own nature but Diverse Essences Relative and Personal So that these several Essences or Acts and Quiddities are not in the absolute nature or God-head of them but in the Relative Personalities for they are all Absolutely but One God and yet they are distinct and several Persons they are intirely and truly One thing and as truly Three several things Which St. Anselm as it seemeth to me doth very acutely thus determine and express Anselm de incarn c. 3. Tres Res sunt una res viz. Vna res Absoluta Tres res Relativae In uno Communi unum sunt sc Dietate In tribus Proprietatibus Diversae sunt i. e. The Divine Persons are Three things and they are but One Thing viz. They are Three things Relatively but One thing Absolutely for in one common thing they are but One that is one in Essence or God-head but Three in Persons or Proprieties Thus he and much more to this purpose If it be enquired what those Propertics are which are peculiar to each Person and that do distinguish every Person each from other In this we are plentifully resolved by former Writers Richardus de St. Victore thus sets Rich. de St. Vict. de Trinit c. 15. and 25. down their personal Proprieties Pater dat solum Filius accipit dat Spiritus accipit solum i. e. The Father giveth only The Son receiveth and giveth The Spirit receiveth only from both There cannot be another Property or Person which neither giveth nor taketh for if so then we should be driven to confess a Quaternity of Persons instead of a Trinity Nazianzen sets down the Proprieties in these words Ingenitus Genitus Procedens i. e. Naz. Orat. 23. and Orat. 28. Basil Epist 349. Unbegotten Begotten Proceeding And St. Basil thus Paternitas Filiatio Sanctificativa potestas i. e. Fatherhood Sonship Sanctificative power for although the Father and the Son do Sanctifie yet they do it not immediately by themselves but mediately by the Holy Ghost who is the Spirit of Sanctification If therefore each Person have any one thing peculiar and proper to it self and incommunicable to any other of the Divine Persons this Property must needs prove it to be a several and distinct Person And if there be any one Person in the God-head which doth neither give to the Other nor receive from the Other This must needs prove a Person without any communion with the other and so the Vnity would be lost Now that it may by the Scriptures appear that there are several Proprieties in the several Persons and those incommunicable to the other Persons We read that The Son is the Image of the Father but it is never read that the Father is the Image of the Son or Spirit So it is said The Word or Son was made flesh but neither the Father nor the Spirit are ever said to be made flesh So the Son is called The only Begotten so is not the Father or the Spirit therefore the Ancient Writers called the Father Ingenitum Innascibilem Impassibilem i. e. Not Begotten not Born not Passible nor can the Father be said to proceed from the Son or Spirit But these Properties cannot be affirmed of the Son who is Begotten born and suffered nor of the Holy Ghost who proceedeth from the Father and the Son Besides these The Scripture doth cleerly declare the several Personalities in the God-head by our Saviours words Joh. 14 15. I will pray the Father and he shall send another Comforter Here is evidently a distinct Trinity I and He and Another As touching the Vnity of the Three Persons the Arians utterly deny it and therefore they expostulated with the Catholicks because in the asserting thereof they used some words which were not found in holy Scriptures as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Essence and Consubstantiality and they nick-named the Catholicks calling them Homousians because the Nicene Fathers had inserted the word Homousion in their Creed One Pascentius was so offended therewith that simply mistaking it to be the name of a man he required that the Church would anathematize or excommunicate Homousion as b Aug. Epist 174. Austin reports But Athanasius made this answer to the Arians b That they themselves used many more words c Athan. in Decret Nicaen Concil which were not Scriptural As That the Son was not always That the Father was not always a Father That the Son was Factura i. e. a Creature and that he was made of nothing whereupon one Sect of the Arians were called d Soz. lib. 4. c. 28. Exoucontii and that those frequent Arian words Homoiousion and Innascibilis were not found in the Scriptures and that the Catholicks were forced to use new words because the Arians raised new Heresies although among the Catholicks the self same Ancient Doctrine had continued immutable for upon the like occasion even the holy Scripture it self had assumed a new word as we read Act. 11. 26. That whereas before the Church-Members were called Disciples and Brethren now they are by a new name called Christians First at Antioch and this because false Brethren and false Teachers arose teaching Doctrines contrary to the Apostles and yet these Brethren were called Disciples and named themselves from men as John Baptists Disciples did and as those mentioned 1 Cor. 1. 12. said I am of Paul I am of Apollo I of Cephas c. therefore the Church to prevent a Schisme would have all that professed Christ to be called
excepted against by Arius himself And long after that time we finde these words cited by Fulgentius in his Book entituled Objectionum Arianarum discussio near the end pag. 87. of the Basil Edition An. Dom. 1621. Yet Fulgentius lived about 200. years after Arius was dead The rankest Arians at first used in their Doxologies to glorifie all the three Persons by name although with some words differing from the Catholick Custome but in their Baptisms they invoked all the Three Persons alike so as we now do And although Arius had taught his Sectaries to use other words in their Doxologies then the Catholicks used as Glory be to the Father by the Son with the Holy Ghost yet as d Theod. Her Fab. lib. 4. Theodoret very gravely observeth Arius himself durst not ptesume to alter the form of Invocation in Baptisms but baptized as the Catholick Church did In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet in after times his Sectaries presumed to change the Baptismal form of words prescribed by Christ as we find in Nicephorus and is by me elsewhere shewed There were some also which said that the God-head was separately and intirely existent alone by it self and not only residing in the Three Persons but was a fourth thing e Aug. Ep. 22 2. Quasi quarta Divinitas i. e. as a fourth Divinity which doth communicate and infuse it self into the Three Persons as St. Austin relates in an Epistle to Consentius so that these men would have the God-head to he thought to be a fourth Person distinct from the other Three so that instead of a Trinity we should beleeve a Quaternity of Divine Persons But this opinion cannot be approved for the God-head in their sence could not so be called a Person because it is as they confess communicable to the other Persons But as our Divines generally agree in this definition or description of a Person f Melancht in loc com Persona est substantia vel subsistentia individua intelligens incommunicabilis If the God-head be a Person then it must be incommunicable And if it be communicable then it cannot be a Person So likewise the Heresie of Nestorius who denied the Personal Vnion of the God-head and Manhood in Christ and thereby divided Christ making two Persons of One did thus bring in a fourth Person So the Heresie of Macedonius who denyed the God-head of the Holy-Ghost instead of a Trinity allowed but a Binity of Persons These Heresies so moved and disturbed the Church Catholick that for the asserting this holy necesary and scriptural Doctrine of Three Persons in one God-head they were forced to use this word Trinity There is yet another Quarrel about the word Person because this word is not found in Scripture to be so used as the Church both present and Primitive have applied it for even those that do confess that there is a Trinity in the God-head yet why this Trinity and these Three should be called three Persons is that that troubleth them Indeed the Scripture often nameth Three the Father Son and Spirit and it saith There are Three but even St. Austin himself often demandeth a Aug. de Trin. lib. 5. c. 9. lib. 8. proaen Tres Quid and Quid Tria For certain then there are Three but what to call them and how to answer when we are asked Three what the Scripture is silent and b Id ibid Magna inopia laborat eloquium humanum i. e. our language wanteth words to express it The same penury of words is noted in the Greek Tongue by Nazianzen who tells us c Naz. Orat. 21. Romana lingua non distinguit hypostasin ab Ousia hinc Personarum vocabulum introductum i. e. Because our Language doth not distinguish subsistence and substance therefore instead of a more proper expression we use the word Person to signifie Subsistence Observe here that Nazianzen calls Greek the Roman Tongue because Greece was then under the Romans and was therefore called Romania and the Inhabitants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the grand City Constantinople standing in Thracia was called new Rome and the Inhabitants of Greece were all subjects and some Citizens of Rome so conversing with the Latines which is the reason that we find so many Latine words even in the Greek Testament and in many other Greek Writers both Heathen and Christian Now because the Scripture saith There are Three and that we dare not say there are Three Gods therefore we call them Three Persons because we find not any fitter word to express that which without words we apprehend and beleeve Neither do we call them Persons as if we would have it thought that the Scriptures did so say but because the Scriptures do not gain-say it but if we should call them Three Gods then the Scripture will contradict us where it saith Hear O Israel Deut. 6. 4. the Lord our God is one Lord we therefore call them Persons that so we may answer in a word when we are asked What Three This is the resolution of St. Austin concerning the word Person used by the Latine or Western Church In like manner the Eastern or Greek-Church called them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Persons and so our English Translation rendred those words Heb. 1. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Image of his Person and so doth the Geneva both English and Latine Translation And if we should keep the Original word and instead of Three Persons call them Three Hypostases people would be little or nothing the wiser And Austin tells us that d Aug. de Tri◠l. 7. c. 6. They that call them Three Hypostases may as well call them Tria Prosopa i. e. Three Persons The Eastern Fathers have many words by which they express the Three Persons As e Naz. Orat. 28. 29. Basil Epist 349. and in Asset Nazianzen and Basil calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. Proprieties Subsistencies and Persons But the Latines generally call them Persons Indeed the Church was even necessitated and forced to call them Persons because of Heresies which used this very word and thereby miscalled the Divine Persons for the Samosatenians said that the Father and the Son were but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. one Person and so also said the Sabellians that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. One Person and one Subsistence as we find in f Epiph. haer 65. Epiphanius And in g Chrys hom 32. Antioch Chrysostom And h Aug. de Trin. lib. 5. cap. 9. St. Austin himself in one place confesseth that he did not then know the difference between those two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Substance and Subsistence but because he found that the Greek Church called them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. One Substance and Three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
or Advocation is Authoritative in Plenitude of power so that now the presenting of his glorious Person in Heaven is a sufficient Advocate his performance of the Law together with his Passion Death are the Plea and the tongues that effectually move for us because the vigor and efficacy thereof is and for ever will be looked on by the God-head as a full satisfaction to Divine Justice which Doctrine is singularly expressed by the great Apostle Ro. 8. 3. Who shall lay any thing to the charg of Gods elect It is God that justifieth it is Christ that dyed That is risen again who is at the right hand of God who also maketh intercession for us of which Right hand we are next to consider SECT IV. Of Christ's Session at the right hand of God The difference between the right hand of God and the right hand of the Father with the abuses of that Article why Christ withdrew to Heaven Of the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Temple of the Iewish Monarchy and their Pseudo-messiah or the great Anti-Christ NO one Phrase in Scripture doth more express the Kingly and omnipotent power of Christ in Heaven and in Earth then this of his sitting at or on the Right hand of God for the understanding whereof I shall offer to the consideration of the Reader the four questions following First What it is in Christ that is so exalted To this we say That Christ consisteth of two ingredients viz God head and Man hood and that this sitting at the Right hand is not to be understood of his God-head but of his Man-hood as he is the Son of Man the Son of David the Son of the Virgin-Mother for by this humane nature he became passible subject to poverty hunger and thirst weariness injuries buffetings scourging and death therefore as by this part only he is said to be humbled to death the Death of the Cross so in this part only may he be said to be exalted for by his God-head he ever was at the Right hand of God and God over all blessed for ever As he Rom. 9. 5. is God the word he can not be said to be exalted but as the word was made flesh It is our nature only that the Son of God ennobled and carried to the right hand of God and we have shewed before that the prophecies of Christ's exaltation were said only of the Son of David that is of Christs humane nature for otherwise he is not the Son of David If it be said that we may not seperate his God-head from his Man-hood for this is to make two Persons of one and was the heresie of Nestorius To this we answer That it is true that the two natures of Christ neither can nor may be severed or divided asunder by any Real separation but yet they may and must be distinguished separated or abstracted mentally or Mathematically as School-men say that is we may in our mind consider one part alone without considering the other although both do really consist together as a Mathematician considereth the longitude of a body without considering the matter of it So we in this exaltation of Christ consider only his humane or assumed nature This is the judgment of the Ancient Church delivered by Theodoret a Theo. Dialog â—â—confu Sede De homine Christo dicitur i. e. That this Sitting is meant only of the Man Christ Secondly Who it is that so exalted Christ Whether the Person of the Father only or the Person of the Holy Ghost or whether the Son exalted himself To this we answer that the whole God-head and every Divine Person therein exalted Christ even the God-head of the Lord Jesus exalted the Manhood of the same Lord Jesus for there is but one God-head in all the Three Persons therefore all the Three Persons exalted the humane nature of the Son This truth the Scripture often sheweth though something mysteriously for David saith of Christ The Lord said unto my Lord sit Psal 110. 1. thou at my right hand That is The God-head of the Son of God said to Christ for David calls Christ His Lord only for this reason because the Lord Christ was to be the Son of David by taking flesh from David for otherwise how is not the Lord that said it Davids Lord as well as the Lord to whom it was said This is that Scripture wherewith Christ posed the Pharisees If David call him Lord how is he his Son David Mat. 22. 45. calls Christ The Lord in respect of his God-head but he calls the same Christ his Lord because he was to be the Son of David by his assumed humane nature His Divine Nature was Davids Lords his humane Nature was Davids Son The same David had said before of Christ God thy God hath anoynted thee with the oyl of gladness The meaning is that the God-head Psal 45. 7. of Jesus was to be the Anoynter and the Oyl and Unction of Jesus and therefore the God-head is called his God because the Lord Jesus by his God-head anoynted Christ or The Son of God anoynted and exalted the Son of Man So Christ on the Cross said My God my Mat. 27. 46. God why hast thou forsaken me Now did Christ speak to his own God-head The Son of Man spake to the Son of God which he therefore calls his God The forsaking here mentioned is not so to be construed or understood as if now in this agonie his God-head had quite departed from him or that the union of the God-head and Manhood were then dissolved far be it from us to think so but the meaning is that his God-head did now expose and give up and deliver the Manhood to death and left it to the will and fury of that People The God-head suspended and with-held protection from the manhood and did not send Legions of Angels to deliver him although the God-head was still united with the Manhood Thirdly At whose Right hand Christ is said to sit Whether at the Right-hand of one or of all the Persons of the Trinity This I conceive requisite to be examined because all our Liturgical Symbols or Creeds mention Christ's sitting at or on the Right-hand of the Father which is certainly true because every Person in the Trinity is the Creator and therefore the Father of all Creatures although only the Person of the Father is to be acknowledged to be Father of the Word or Son of God But yet this Symbolical expression doth not so cleerly declare this Mystery as the words of the holy Scriptures do wherein Christ is never said to sit at the right hand of the Father but at the right hand of God Now the right hand of God is the right hand of every Person in the God-head and not only the right hand of the Person of the Father So that the meaning of this sitting of Christ must be this That the humane nature of Christ is advanced to sit at the right
as Christ is 1 2. Chapt. The Difficulties of apprehending the Mystery of the Trinity and other Christian Doctrines Of Philosophers Jews and Christians professing their ignorance in matters of Nature and Religion 8 3. Chapt. More concerning those Difficulties and of our ignorance in Theological Doctrines of the Trinity and Predestination and of the over-great boldness of some in handling those Mysteries 16 4. Chapt. That the Doctrine of the Trinity is obscurely delivered in the Old Testament Why the Septuagint concealed it The resemblance of the Trinity in things Natural and Moral The distinct proprieties of the Three Persons and their Unity Of the use of some Words in Religion which are not found in the Scriptures 25 5. Chapt. More of Words not Scriptural Of the Word Trinity and of the Word Person Why the Trinity is called Three Persons VVhy Baptism is administred in the name of the Trinity 34 6. Chapt. Of the Scriptural VVord Hypostasis The Grammatical and Theological signification thereof VVhy the Three Divine Persons are called Hypostases That the God-head resideth only in these Three Persons and not otherwise The Ubiquity both of the God-head and of these Three Persons 43 7. Chap. Of the Holy Ghost That he is one of the Divine Persons That he is to be prayed unto is shewed by Scripture and by practise of the Church That he is confessed in Creeds and invocated in Baptismes and Doxologies 53 8. Chapt. Of Scandals hindring the faith of the Trinity 1. By forbidding the corporal worship of the Lord Jesus 2. By disuse of the Doxologies and Creeds even in Baptismes 3. By dissolving the Order Episcopal ordained by the Holy Ghost Of Presbytery That it is no Scriptural order of Sacerdocy St Jerom's Epistle to Euagrius explained 63 9. Chapt. More of Scandals 1. By scandalous Ministers 2. By dis-use and abuse of the Lords Prayer Of Christs Earthly Kingdome and his corporal return before his coming to the last Judgment That prosperity in unjust causes is no sign of Gods approbation Of the Regal Stile Gratia Dei Something concerning publick Thanks-givings 78 10. Chapt. Of Millinarians and their imaginary fifth Monarchy That it is an Heresy against the faith of the Trinity Mr Mede's Argument for Christ's Earthly Kingdome is answered That Christs Kingdome shall last after the final Judgement and continue for ever 87 Sect. 2. Of Christ's Kingdom over all the World and every Creature That it ceased not at his death That neither the Roman Consistory nor the Presbyterian Vestry can be called Christs Throne How it is in this World and yet not of this World That the Policy of Christ's Kingdome is altogether unlike and divers from worldly Policy 96 Sect. 3. Of Christ's Kingdome and Acts in Heaven Of his Melchisedechical Priest-hood there The manner of his Intercession Advocateship and Mediatorship for us in Heaven That it is not by Sacrificing or praying for us there What Priestly Act he there performeth 110 Sect. 4. Of Christ's Session at the Right hand of God The difference between the Right hand of God and the Right hand of the Father with the abuses of that Article VVhy Christ withdrew to Heaven Of the re-building of Ierusalem and the Temple Of the Jewish Monarchy and their Pseudo-Messiah or the great Antichrist 122 Sect. 5. The signification of the Jewish feast of Atonement and of the High-priests entring the Sanctum Sanctorum and of the Mercy-seat sprinkling of blood Scape-goat and Jewish Sacrifices why God disliked them The signification of the Altar Of Jewish and Christian Liturgies 135 11. Chapt. More concerning Millinarism The dreadful and bloody Consequences thereof Of new Millinarian Saints and the Meek VVhat Earth or Land is promised to the truely Meek The Title of Saint unduely placed is an abuse of the Holy Ghost The Conclusion 146 The Preface HAving formerly discoursed concerning the absolute Godhead of Jesus Christ and shewed that he is the only and most high God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Divines use to say and the I am i. God absolutely and independently for an Antidote against the late Socinian commentary on the Hebrews It seemeth requisite and seasonable to consider the same Lord Jesus in his Relative Personality as he standeth in relation to the Father and so is the Eternal Son of the Eternal Father In the contemplation whereof I shall be necessitated briefly to discourse the Sacred Doctrine of the whole blessed Trinity and each several Person thereof And because this profound and mysterious Doctrine is far above the reach of our Natural reason and comprehension and therefore to be not only Reverendly but also Warily and Circumspectly handled it being confessed both by Heathen and Christian Writers a Tacitus Sanctius reverentius visum est de actis Deorum credere quam scire and b Cicero De Potestate Deorum timide pauca dicamus i. e. it seemeth more reverend to believe the power of God then to presume to pry into it and to speak sparingly and timerously thereof because as Origen saith c Orig. in Eze. hom 1. De Deo vera dicere periculosum est i. e. It is dangerous to speak of God albeit we speak nothing but the Truth I therefore do here most earnestly implore the assistance of the Father of Lights to illuminate the hearts both of the Writer and Reader that from him we may receive all needful evidence for our apprehension and for our faith in the holy Trinity which now we are to discourse of and to shew that there are Three Persons in the Godhead and that they all are Coëssential Coëqual and Coëternal Errata Page 5. l. 17. r. patre p. 9. l. 9. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 17. l. 19. r. Salvianus p. 21. l. 16. r. ipse p. 23. l. 9. r. Abulenses p. 24. l. 9. r. Idiotae p. 34. l. 10. r. contentiosius p. 41. l. 31. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 44. l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 60. l. 1. r. are that temple p. 69. l. 21 22. r. signing p. 75. l. 13. r. voted p. 76. l. 7. dele those godly p. 78. l. 10. r. in Marcione p. 109. l. 2. r. ne gentes l. 22. r. spirit p. 110. l. 9. r. whether p. 125. l. 2. r. lord p. 129. l. 15. r. premisses p. 130. l. 24. r. take p. 136. l. 22. r. the feast p. 137. l. 12. r. propitiation p. 147. l. 25. r. men p. 150. l. 5. r. women p. 151. r. them p. 153. l. 2. r. auri l. 12. r. devour l. 17. r. foul toad found p. 158. l. 2. r. Augustine p. 159. l. 4. r. paraechial l. 13. r. metuant l. 25. r. alio fastu In the Margin In the Epistle p. 4. l. 3 4. r. extinguunt In the Book p. 7. l. 1. r. Bas cont Eunom p. 11. l. 7. r. Dion Laer. p. 16. l. 2. r. Rom. 11. 33. p. 17. l. 3. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 21. l. 2.
by one new name Christians which is thought to be prophesied by Isaiah when he said Isaiah 62. 2. Thou shalt be called by a new name Finally because the Arians used the word Triousion teaching thereby that the Three Persons were of three several Natures and Essences therefore the Catholicks to assert the Vnity of the God-head in all and every Person most significantly used the word Homousion Thus Athanasius e Atha in Disput cum Ario. c. To. 4. Notwithstanding this true and just allegation The Arians perswaded Constantius the then Arian Emperor by Edict to forbid that any new words should be used in matters of faith and this upon a pretence of a Scriptural inhibition because St. Paul thus chargeth Timothy O Timothee depositum Custodi devitans 1 Tim. 6. 20. Hil. advers Const lib. 1. profanans vocum novitates But St. Hilary addressed this answer That St. Paul did indeed command Timothy to avoid novelties yet they were only profane Novelties Now you command us to avoid new words which are holy and tending to Piety which is all one as if you should forbid a new Antidâ—te against a new poison or a new War against new enemies Thus he But there are other new words of as great concernment which some have found fault with without cause as is next to be shewed CHAP. V. Of the word Trinity Why it is used the real Warrant for it in Scripture Why Baptisme is administred in the name of the Trinity And why the Trinity is called three Persons THere are some that cavil even at the word and appellation of the Trinity because they finde not this word literally in the Scriptures who yet cannot deny that the same thing and Doctrine is really found there but both Heathen and Christian Writers reprove such Wranglers as stand upon words when the thing it self is evident a Cic. cont Salust Vbi rerum testimonia adsunt quid opus est verbis And b Aug. Epist 174. dedâ—ct Christ l. 4. c. 11 Quid est contensiosius quam ubi de re constat certare de nomine And Bonorum ingeniorum indoles est in verbis verum amare non verba A good disposition and an humble Christian will embrace an old truth though clothed with a new word The Scriptural evidence for the reality and truth of the thing is cleer For at the Baptism of Christ the Three Persons did distinctly sensibly and separatly shew or declare their presence at one time The Father audibly by a voice The Son and Spirit visibly and therefore c Chrys hom 24. Antioch hom 46. 31. Idem Serm. de Epiph. To. 6. St. Chrysostom calls the Baptism of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Epiphanie or manifestation of Messiah and he also calls that Apparition Theophania i. e. the appearing of God And moreover tells us of this Festival of the Epiphany which even in his days was solemnized by the Church That is was kept for the commemoration not of the Nativity but of the Baptism of Christ and for this reason the Church of England appointed that on the Feast of Epiphany the third Chapter of St. Luke should be read as a Lesson proper for that day wherein the Baptism Luk. 3. 21. of Christ and this Apparition is declared for therefore it was called Epiphany because at this Baptism the Lord Jesus was by the Father and the Holy Ghost openly proclaimed to be That Son of God and that Messiah which had been before promised and Prophesied in whom only God would be well pleased and be at peace with man And surely that Heavenly and Mysterious Apparition of the two other Persons was also for a further reach and purpose namely to declare to the world that this Jesus was that man which was assumed into Personal union with the God-head and that this Emmanuel or God incarnate was hereby declared to be assumed into the number of the Trinity at that time Although in respect of his pure God-head and as he was God the Word he was One of the Persons of the Trinity before and also from Eternity And although this Emanuel or God incarnate was one of the Three Divine Persons at the first instant and moment of his Incarnation yet he was not so declared and manifested to be so until this glorious Apparition For this very cause it may with great reason be thought that in correspondence to this Apparition at his own Baptism when he afterwards prescribed the form and words of Baptism for all Christians He strictly commanded that they should be baptized In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost In the Original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 28. 19. i. e. into the Name which signifieth that they should be baptized into the Trinity For name doth often signifie the very thing it self which is named as Divines call that word by which a thing is call'd Nomen Nominans and they call that thing which is named Nomen Nominatum Baptism is the Sacrament of our entrance and admission into the body of Christ so by those words Christ signified that he would have Christians to be by Baptism offered and tendred for their admission into the fellowship union communion and society or spiritual corporation with the Father Son and Holy Ghost and this himself had declared before when he thus prayed to the Father Joh. 17. 21. for all Beleevers That they all may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee That they also may be One in us And so St. John telleth us 1 Joh. 1. 3. Truly our fellowship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and because this communion or fellowship is wrought by the holy Spirit being the Cement or Ligament by which we are to be united and joyned to the Trinity therefore St. Paul mentioneth the Communion of the Holy Ghost with Christians 2 Cor. 13. 13. And the fellowship of the Spirit Phil. 2. 1. Another evidence real we have by the words of St. John 1 Joh. 5. 7. There are Three that bear witness in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these Three are One These words do so cleerly declare both a Trinity in the God-head and an Unity of the Three that it is no marvel that the Arian Faction did raze them out of that Epistle in so much that they were omitted in divers Copies after the days of Arius But we finde them alledged before Arius was known by St. Ciprian in his Tractate De simplicitate Praelatorum pag. 164. in the Basil Edition of Froben And again we finde them cited by Athanasius to Arius himself in his disputation held with the said Arius at the Nicene Council as is set down in his Book entituled Disputatio cont Arium the words are found pag. 717. in the Basil Edition Ex Officina Frobeniana An. Dom. 1556. which Scripture was not then
Father and the Son under the name of Wisdom Prov. 8. 22. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting I was brought forth just so doth the Psalmist express the Eternal generation of the Son Psalm 1103. Ex utero ante Luciferum genui te so was the old reading of those words in Jerome and Austin Brought forth and from the womb these words signifie that by Wisdom the Son is meant and the mention of the Womb of the Father doth signifie that this Son is of the same substance with the Father as children of the womb are of the same substance with their Parents and Before the morning Star signifieth that the Son was before time or any other Creature And that it may appear that by Wisdom the Son of God is meant the words of the Apostle will declare 1 Cor. 1. 24. where he calleth Christ The wisdom of God And as the Psalmist tells us that God made all things in wisdom So the Gospel tells us who this wisdome is viz. The Son The Word The Father created all things but he created them by the Son which St. John expresseth in these words Joh. 1. 3. All things were made by him that is by the Son or Word and this St. Paul doth clearly apply to Christ Col. 1. 16. For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers so that even the most glorious Arch-Angels and Angels are but the Creatures of this Son of God and this Wisdom of God Finally These men that tell us That God hath not always a Son may as well tell us that God had not always Wisdom But as they dare not deny the Wisdom of God to have been from Eternity so neither can they without very great impudence deny the Word or Son of the Father to have been from everlasting I will conclude this Chapter with the words of St. Basil who thus argued against the Anti-Trinitarians out of the words of St. John k Basil Hom. 16. To him that shall say There was a time when the Son or Word was not you may answer If this speech be true which the Gospel delivereth In the beginning was the Word I pray when was that time when he was not CHAP. IIII. Of the Holy Ghost That he is one of the Three Divine Persons and that he is to be prayed unto which is shewed both both by Warrant of Scripture and by the practice of the Primitive Christians and of the Church of England wherein he is confessed in Creeds and invoked in Baptisms and Doxologies THe Macedonian Hereticks confessed the Divine Personality of the Father and the Son but they denied the Person of the Holy Ghost and there are some among us who although they will not openly deny the Divinity and Person of the Holy Ghost yet they are doubtful and suspensive therein And this because they cannot or will not finde that any Prayers in Scripture are used or directed to the Holy Spirit as they are both to the Father and the Son They finde the Son of God praying to the Father Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit And Forgive them Father they know not what they do They Luk. 23. 46. 34. find also St. Stephen praying to the Son Lord Act. 7. 59. Jesus receive my Spirit For the satisfaction of such as these who are neither maliciously nor obstinately wedded to this error I will endeavour to shew both the Personality of the most Holy Spirit and also that he is to be prayed unto and both these by the evidences and precedents of holy writ and by the practice of our of our owne Church and also of the Primitive Christians First That the Holy Ghost is a Divine and distinct Person in the Trinity as well and as truly as either the Father or the Son We find that the Scriptures record and report many diverse actions and operations of the Holy Ghost which must needs be the performances of a Person for He appeared as a Dove And as fiery Tongues He teacheth He leadeth into all truth He brought into the Apostles memories whatsoever Christ had said He decreed in a Council Acts 15. He forgiveth sins by the Apostles by whom he was received and entertained for that purpose Joh. 20. 22. He is an Advocate or Comforter He distributeth gifts He spake by the Prophets and in the Apostles He calleth and maketh Ministers Act. 13. 2. And Bishops Act. 20. 28. where the very Original word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I know not why our Translators rendred Overseers when in other places they Translated the very same word Bishops which is the very Text word without any alteration but only as it is formed to out English Idiom In a word this Holy Spirit is produced by St. John as a witness that Jesus is the Christ 1 John 5. 6. Secondly for Prayer We say that the Scripture doth evidently set down a Warrant and a Precedent of Prayer to the Holy Ghost which you will finde if you observe the words of St. Paul 2 Cor. 13. 13. The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you This is a Prayer and here is not only a mention of the Holy Ghost but indeed all these words Grace Love and Communion do relate principally if not only to the Holy Ghost for the Spirit is the Grace and the Love of the Father and the Son and the grace of Jesus and the Love of the Father are conveyed unto us only by the Communion and Inspiration of the Holy Spirit The Spirit is the Conduit of them and the Cement or Ligament by which our conjunction fellowship Union or Communion is wrought and by which we are joyned and united in one Mystical body or corporation with the whole Trinity and this is the meaning of that saying of St. John Baptist concerning the Baptism of Christ He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost for those that are Mat 3. 11. baptized into Christ are by this Spirit united to him in one mystical body and so become One with him and by this Union with Christ they are united with the whole Trinity and therefore there is mention of the Holy Ghost in the formal words of Baptism because our Union is wrought only by this holy Cement of the Spirit for this reason it is that the Apostle prayeth for the Communion of the Holy Ghost Communion signifieth a mutual union of the Spirit with us and of us with the Spirit Communio is as much as Counio or uni◠cum The Scriptures are so plentiful in precedents of Prayers to the Holy Ghost that you may find them at least in thirteen of St. Pauls Epistles and at the beginning of every one of them for thus we read Rom 1. 7. Grace
might save for the poor They tell us that the forbearing of one meals meat That one Jewel or Ring or one trunck of apparrel would feed and cloth many poor Christians Origen * Orig. in Lev. hom 10. pronounceth a blessing on them that imploy the parcimony of fasting for feeding of the hungry for as one of our English Arch-Bishops used to say in homely Latine but with a good meaning g Rog. Archiep Ebor. Bonus Servatius facit bonum Bonifacium i. e. Good Husbandry makes good Hospitality Charity is now when there is most need of it waxen cold among us upon another reason viz. by the Scandals of two factions for the Romanists say that our Solifidians have made men uncharitable by requiring only a bare Dogmatical or Doctrinal faith And the Solifidians say that Romanists have made Charity superstitious by their doctrine of Merit certainly both sides err for although Almes-deeds cannot merit Heaven nor deliver us from sin and eternal death so as Christ doth yet they may and often do deliver from temporal Vengeance and temporal death as the perfect works and obedience of Christ deliver from eternal punishments The advice of the Wise Dan. 4. 27. and Honourable Prophet Daniel was to this purpose O King let my counsel be acceptable to thee and break off thy sins by righteousness and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity The merciful distribution of Almes is called a 2 Cor. 9. 6. Sowing to signify that as the Earth returneth us our seed with increase so much more will God to our profit at least by with-holding deserved vengeance and giving us a longer time for amendment and happily will add b Joh. 1. 16. Grace for grace so that if the Grace of Charity be improved he will add the grace of faith and perseverance as he did to the Centurion Act. 10. 4. But then our Almes must be done without looking on our selves as if we were benefactors and doners unto God but as humble Debtors or Farmers paying and returning his due rent not with any presumption of redeeming or buying off our Sins but in the form of an humble Suppliant and Petitioner and with tears of Compunction just as a good man will give some recompence such as he can to his injured Brother as a Testimony and acknowledgement of the offence of his sorrow So a good Christian considereth his Almes as a part of his repentance Such Charitable distributions are of greater concernment then some will take notice of seeing our Saviour himself vouchsafed to be ministred unto by those devout Women Mary Magdalen Joanna Luc. 8. 2 3. Susanna and others not for any personal need that himself had for he did Miraculously feed more then 5000 at one time but as a pattern to us and for an encouragement he hath declared that what is given for his sake to his poor members is really given to himself He adviseth us a Luc. 6. 30. to give to every man that asketh this we should do least that poor Creature that is denied prove to be a poor Christ and then no marvel if our God stop his Ears at our supplications when we have stopped our Ears at his for the greatest and most honourable Christians are but beggers to him and every day do or should of him beg their daily bread This Christian duty is moreover sweetned by most gracious promises of reward as high as any other even with the inheritance of heaven when it is said Come ye blessed of my Father c. A great purchase for a small price and this not because Heaven is Vile or Cheap but because our Lord is gracious The old Testament calleth this Charitableness a lending to the Lord so doth the new Testament where Christ saith Do good and lend hoping for nothing again for if it be demanded Prov. 19. 17. Luc. 6. 35. how that can be called a lending which is an absolute gift the answer is that though it be a free gift to the poor yet it is a lending to God because he doth ingage himself to re-pay The Fathers translate the word Lend by faeneratur as lent to God upon Usury or increase which they call a Aug. Epist 215. immortal Usury as if the Scripture took notice of our covetousness thereby to invite us to works of Charity for our own profit The holy Woman Hannah said truly The Lord 1 Sam. 2. 7. maketh poor and maketh rich There is no doubt but that one grand reason why God permitteth so many poor to be in the World is to give us occasions and objects of Charity and this for the great benefit of the charitable giver for God needeth not our gifts no more then he doth our prayers We have more need to give then he hath to receive by the hands of the poor he could and can make all rich his great house the World is stored with provision sufficient for all his creatures If it were not he can supply defects and as Chrysostome notes he can rain down showers of Gold and all necessaries as we read in our own and forrain Histories of showers of flesh of Milk of Wool and of Rivers of VVine and Fountains of Oil as in Scripture of Manna and Quailes whereby it is apparent that the precept of Almes was intented for the benefit of the giver This is the reason that the Scriptures promise Treasures in Heaven and that the merciful are blessed and shall obtain Heb. 14. 13. mercy that our Almes are Sacrifices and Jam. 1 27. well pleasing to God certainly if Almes be Sacrifices then the Poor the Sick the Widow the Orphant and aged are the Altars on which his Sacrifices are to be laid The Apostle tells us That pure Religion is to visit the Fatherless and VVidows verily that Religion which neglecteth these duties is an impure Religion The ancient Fathers have left us many comfortable incouragements for it They say a Ambr. The man is blessed from whose house the poor never returns empty b Aug. That the charitable Almes-giver when he dies he departs with firm security and consolation c Chryst That at the great judgement the Saints and Angels will take notice of and commend their Charities That the poor whom they have relieved shall then openly declare them to have been their Patrones and Preservers as is intimated Luke 16. 9. That then Mercy will stand between them and Hell and will not suffer any of the merciful to pass that way Thus they But though neither Men nor Angels should then take notice of them yet it is most certain that the God of men and Angels will acknowledge and reward their persons and mercifulness And least we should be tired with long expectation of reward The Word of God seemeth to provide for that by promises of temporal requitals and those Mar. 10. 30. very considerable as we read Psal
Hypostases the Stations or Mansions of the God-head wherein it dwelleth and resideth for ever for this reason it is said Joh. 10. 38. The Father is in me and I in him i. e. The God-head of the Father is in in the Son and the God-head of the Son is in the Father and the God-head of the Father and the Son is in the Holy Ghost One God-head is communicated to all the Persons But it cannot be said that the Person of the Father is in the Son because the Persons are incommunicable wherefore as young Logicians reading or hearing of Vniversals and by their senses perceiving no things but Individuals upon inquiry where to finde these Genera Species they are taught that the residence or existence of Universals is only in particulars so young Christians are to know that the Abiding Mansion and Residence of the God-head is only in these Three Persons no where else If it be said that the God-head is every where and therefore not to be limitted or confined to residence in the Three Persons To this we answer that although it is certainly true that the God-head is every where yet the Existence or Residence of the God-head in the Three Persons doth not exclude it from any place nor confine or limit it within any bounds or in the least hinder its Vbiquity for albeit the God-head is really present in all places and more also although all places are contained inclued in the infiniteness of the God-head yet this God-head is no where but where it resideth in the Three Persons for these Three Divine Persons are also every where The Prophet saith of the Father Do not I fill Heaven and Earth And the Psalmist saith of the Spirit Joh. 10. 38 Jer. 23. 24. Psalm 139. 7. Joh. 3. 13. Whether shall I go from thy Spirit c. And the Son of God saith of himself The Son of man which is in Heaven and this he said in respect of his Divine Person when his body was not in Heaven but upon the Earth And when he was about to ascend into Heaven even then he said Lo I am with you always even unto the end of the world Mat. 28. 20. Neither doe those other passages in Scripture any way contradict the Ubiquity of the Divine Persons as when it is said Ex. 19. 20. The Lord came down upon Mount Sinai and of Sodom Gen. 18. 21. I will go down now and see c. And in the Gospel where it is said of the Father and the Son Joh. 14. 23. We will come unto him and make our abode with him As if the God-head or Divine Persons were not there before But these Speeches are to be understood of Gods appearing or manifesting himself in such places or to such persons where he is always really present but doth not alwayes shew or manifest his presence And in this the Ancient Expositors agree Chrysostom saith a Chrys Serm. de Spirit To. 6 Divinitas non migrat a loco in locum sed est de apparentia corporea i. e. God doth not go from place to place but those sayings signifie his visible appearance in some assumed body So St. Ambrose upon those words Gen. 3. 8. God walked in the Garden b Ambr. de Paradiso c. 14. Ambulatio Dei est praesentia apparens i. e. The walking of God signifieth only the appearing of his presence where he was truly present before and after them Fulgentius more home and cleerly saith c Fulg. ad Thrasim l. 2 Substantialiter ubique est Trinitas sed adventus Descensus sâ—gnificant manifestationem ejus i e. The Trinity is really or substantially every where but when it is said they came or descended these words signifie that God manifested his presenee there This is the reason of that Scripture-phrase so often used of the Lords appearing as Gen. 17. 1. The Lord appeared to Abram to signifie that God then manifested his presence there where he was before although he did not there appear before to Abraham This I trust is enough to shew the meaning and full importance of this considerable and weighty word Hypostasis Now touching the Coeternity of the Three Persons both the old and new Hereticks deny it for the Arians said d Athan in Decret Nicaen Concil Pater non semper Pater nec filius semper filius i. e. That God the Father was not always a Father and that the Son was not always a Son But St. Austin often opposed this Error and thus expressed his determination e Aug. de Temp. Serm. 131. 181. Deus non anteà Deus caeperit esse posteà pater sed sine initio Deus semper pater semper fuit pater semper habuit filium i. e. God was not first God and afterwards Father but ever God and ever Father he was always a Father and had always a Son Indeed Tertullian noteth that God was not always to be stiled * Tert. cont Herm. Dominus i. e. Lord though always God and Father and he observeth that in Scripture God is not called Lord until man was made And true it is that although the Father be from Eternity the Father of the Son or Word yet he could not be called either the God or the Lord of the Son but upon supposition of the Sons Incarnation and therefore not until man was created for as soon as man was made the Son of man was in the Loins of Adam John Crellius thus intituled his Book which he wret against the Trinity De uno Deo Patre i. e. Of One God the Father If his meaning were hereby to acknowledg God-head and Paternity to be Coeternal then it must needs follow that God must have an Eternal Son othewise he cannot be an Eternal Father for so St. Basil noteth g Bas cont Eunom l. 4. Si pater ante filium erat cujus pater erat si non filii i. e. If the Father were before he had a Son whose Father was he if not the Sons And although he be an Eternal Father of his Eternal Son yet he cannot be called the Eternal God or Lord of the Son as Epiphanius hath evidently shewed by distinguishing these two Appellations of Father and God thus h Epiph. in Ancor Deus vocatur Pater Filii propter aeternam generationem and Deus propter incarnationem i. e. God is truly called the Eternal Father of the Son because the Son was begotten from Eternity but he is called the God or Lord of the Son in respect only of the Incarnation of the Son just so the holy Psalmist speaketh cautelously in shewing that the Father cannot be called either the God or the Lord of the Son but only with respect had to the humane generation of the Son Psal 22. 10. Thou art my God from my Mothers belly as I have formerly shewed elsewhere King Solomon delivereth the very same Doctrine of the Coeternity of the