66 XXVI. Secondly, This doctrine is conducive to CONSOLATION. 1st, O how delightful is it to behold in the very intimate union, or rather unity, of the Three Divine persons, a pattern and representation of our own union with Christ, and, through Christ, with God! This astonishing idea is suggested by our Lord's prayer, -"That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; "- - - that they may be one, even as we are one; I in "them, and thou in me." 2dly, O how pleasant is it to believe that the Father, who has adopted me for a son, is God; who, being himself Lord of all, is able to make me an heir of all things;-to reflect that the Son, to whom my soul is betrothed, is, equally with the Father, God, and the King of glory;—to know that the Holy Spirit, by whom I am sealed unto the day of complete salvation, is, in like manner, God, and, consequently, truth itself!* 3dly, O how delightful is it for me, when meditating on the mystery of the Sacred Trinity, to behold in the face of the eternal Father, the kindness of his unbounded love towards me;-in the face of the co-eternal Son, the endearing familiarity of the purest brotherly love ;t-and in the light of the Holy Spirit, the bonds of my union with God! XXVI. In the third place, it is useful for ADMONITION.37 It serves to admonish us, 1st, That we Christians, who ought to "be followers of God, as dear chil"dren,” should live together in perfect harmony, being" of one accord, of one mind;"x" endeavouring to 66 keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." y 2dly, That we should reverence the divine majesty of our Father;-that we should, with alacrity, throw open the doors of our hearts to the Son, the king of glory;that we should not "grieve," nor" vex," nor" quench,” the Holy Spirit, who is a person of the same divine dignity with the Father, and the Son; but consecrate our whole selves to him as temples sacred to his honour,-solicitously avoiding all approaches to that sin against Him, which shall never be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.d I conclude with the words of Synesius, in his third Hymn.* "I praise thee as One; I praise thee as Three. "While Three, thou art One; while One, thou art Three." DISSERTATION VII. ON FAITH IN GOD THE FATHER. 1. It is an approved and well-known observation of Divines, that the term FATHER, when applied to God, is sometimes taken essentially,* and sometimes personally. Taken essentially, it is common to the whole undivided Trinity. In this view, it is employed chiefly with reference to the creatures; for that on account of which God is denominated the Father of mankind and of other creatures, is not peculiar to any one Person, but pertains equally to each. He is called "the Fa"ther of all," because he created all," and "the Father "of Spirits," because "he formeth the spirit of man "within him ;" and, also, because he exercises a watchful providence over mankind, extending his care to every individual. "He hath made of one blood," said the Apostle Paul to the Athenians, "all the nations "of men. He is not far from every one of us; for "in him we live, and move, and have our being; as cer"tain also of your own poets have said, For we are also * Ουσιωδῶς. a Mal. ii. 10. + Υποστατικως. Zech. xii. 1. comp. Jer. xxxviii. 16. b Heb. xii. 9. "his offspring."d Now these expressions are to be deemed no less applicable to the Second and the Third, than to the First Person in the Godhead. II. The name FATHER, however, now falls to be considered by us personally, as the designation of the First Person. We shall observe that he is from himself; that he alone begat the Son, in an incomprehensible manner; and that from him, together with the Son, the Holy Spirit proceeded, in a manner equally ineffable. All that the Scriptures propound as the distinguishing properties of the Father, are comprised in this description. III. The first of these properties, is the Father's being the FIRST PERSON.* When we call the Father the first person, let it be observed, we do not understand the expression as relating to the order of DURATION; as if he were before the other persons with regard to age or time. For the " goings forth" of the Son," have been from of old, even from everlasting." "The LORD possessed," this personal wisdom, "in the beginning of his way, before his works of old," before all time. Hence Athanasius has justly said; "The "Son is of the Father without beginning, and begotten "of him from eternity." The Spirit also, through whose agency Christ was offered up as a spotless sacrifice to God, (which without any inconvenience, and even with great propriety, may be understood of the Third person,)38 is called " the Eternal Spirit."s Eter 66 *Patris Personalis Primitas. † Ὑιὸν ἐκ τ8 Πατρὸς ἀναρχως και αϊδίως γεγεννημένον. Exposit. Fidei. .2 .Mic. v מקדם מימי עולם 6 Prov. viii. 22. 8 Heb. ix. 14. 38 See NOTE XXXVIII. nity, indeed, is so essential a property of God, that a person not eternal ought not to be acknowledged as Divine. "Eternal power," is part of that which may be known of God from the suggestions of nature itself." What is eternal, too, could have nothing prior to it, even for a moment. Athanasius has, accordingly, well said in his Creed; "The Godhead of the Father, and "the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is one; and their ma"jesty CO-ETERNAL.”* IV. Again, we do not call the Father the First person, in the order of NATURE or CAUSALITY. This is nowhere affirmed in Scripture, beyond which it is not safe to speak on so awful a mystery. A cause is properly defined, that which gives existence to something else. But this cannot take place among the Divine persons, whose essence is one and the same. It is wrong, too, where the nature is one, as here, to entertain any conception of priority or posteriority of nature. The ancient Greek Christians, I am aware, admitted the cause and what is caused,† amongst the Divine persons. But though they thus employed phrases which scarcely merit approbation, their meaning was sound; they explicitly denied all priority and inequality of nature. Let us see how Damascenus expresses himself on this topic. "When "we say that the Father is the head of the Son, or greater than the Son, we by no means affirm that he "is PRIOR IN TIME OR SUPERIOR IN NATURE TO "THE SON, for by him he made the worlds: We in"tend nothing but this, that the Father is the cause "of the Son; that is, that the Son was begotten of the "Father, not the Father of the Son." We disap * Καὶ συνδιαιωνιζῆσα (alii legunt συναΐδιος) ή μεγαλειότης. + Tò àítiov xai to TITOY. See Forbes, lib, i. cap. 20. Το De Orthodoxa Fide, lib. i. cap. 9. h Rom. i. 20. |