Council of Nice, that the Father was always Father. The fame we have seen, about Sixty years before, from what has been cited out of Dionyfius of Alexandria, and Novatian. The Testimony of Origen, cited by Pamphilus, with others mention'd, carry it up Forty Years higher, to about the Year 210. Irenaus, above Thirty Years higher, to about 173, within lefs than fourfcore Years of St. John. Tertullian, betwixt the Two last named, seems to have understood this matter differently: For He fays plainly, that there was a Time, when the Son was not; meaning, as a Son; and that God was not always Father. And this is agreeable to his Principles, who always speaks of the Generation as a voluntary Thing, and brought about in Time; as do feveral other Writers. From hence a Question may arise, whether there was any Difference of Doctrine between thofe Writers, or a Difference in Words only. This is a Point which will deserve a moft ftrict and careful Inquiry.

The Authors who make the Generation Temporary, and speak not exprefly of any other, are thefe following: Justin, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Tatian, Tertullian, and Hippo

* Non enim Deus, cum prius non effet Pater, poftea Pater effe cæpit, &c. Pamphil. Apol. p. 877.

† Pater Deus eft, & Judex Deus eft, non tamen ideo Pater & Judex femper, quia Deus femper. Nam nec Pater effe potuit ante Filium, nec Judex ante delictum. Fuit autem Tempus cum & delictum & Filius non fuit. Tertul, Contr. Hermog. c. 3.

lytus,

lytus. Novatian I mention not with Them, because He afferted Both. Let us then carefully examine what their Doctrine was: And that it may be done the more distinctly, let us reduce it to Particulars.

1. They afferted the Co-eternity of the Aóy, or Word, tho' not confider'd precisely under the formality of a Son. This, I prefume, is fo clear a point, that I need not burthen my Margin with Quotations for it. It fhall fuffice only to refer to the Places, if any should * doubt of it. It was a Maxim with Them, that God was always Aounds, never "Aλos; that is, never without his Word, or Wisdom. So far they agreed perfectly with the other Writers, either before, or after, or in their own Time. The Antients, fuppofing the Relation of the Aby to the Father to be as clofe and intimate as that of Thought to a Mind; and that this was infinuated in the very Name, rightly concluded that the Father could not be "Aλozos, or without the Aós, any more than an eternal Mind could be without eternal Thought †. Some have pretended that the Ante - Nicene Writers, who used that kind of reafoning, meant only an Attribute, by the Aéy; and not a real Perfon. But there's no ground or colour

기

Juftin. Martyr. Apol. 1. p. 122. Ox. Ed. Athenag. Legat. C. 10. p. 39. Ed. Ox. Theophilus Antioch. p. 82. 129. Ed. Ox. Tatian. p. 20 22. Ed. Ox. Vid. Bull. D. F. p. 209. Tertull Contr. Vid. Bull. D. F.

Contr. Noer. c. 10. p. 13. Edit. Fabris.

Prax. c. 5. p. 503. c. 27.

+ See Bull. D. F. p. 206.

P. 245.

Hippolytą

for

for this Pretence, as fhall be shown presently. I fhall only note here, that the * later Writers, who, undoubtedly and confeffedly, took the Aoy to be a Perfon; a real, eternal Perfon; yet make use of the fame Maxim, and the very fame way of reasoning.

2. They did not mean by the Ay, or Word, any Attribute, Power, Virtue, or Operation of the Father; but a real, fubfifting Perfon: whom they believed to have been always in and with the Father, and diftinct from Him, before the Temporary Generation they fpeak of. If this be well proved, other Matters, as we fhall fee presently, will be easily adjufted.

The learned and judicious † Bishop Bull has fufficiently fhown, of every Author fingly, (except Juftin, whom He reckons not with Them) that He must be understood to have believed the real and diftinct Perfonality of the Son; before the Temporary Proceffion, or Generation mention'd. His reafonings, upon that Head, have not been answer'd, and, I am perfwaded, cannot: So that I might very well spare my Self the labour of adding any Thing farther. But for the fake of fuch, as will not be at the Pains to read or confider what He has faid at large; I fhall endeavor to throw the Substance

Alex. Epift. Encyc. Ath. Op. Vol. 1. p. 399. Athanaf. Vol. 1. p. 221. 424.500. 619. Et alibi. Greg. Nazienz. Orat. 35. p. 574. Greg. Nyff. Cat. Orat. c. 1. Cyrill. I. 4. in Joh. c. 48. Thefaur. P.12.23. Damafc. 1. 1. Marc. Diadoch. p. 115.

+ Defenf. F. N. Sect. 3. c. 5,6,7,8,9,10,

of

Qu. VIII. of it into a smaller Compass, in the following Particulars: Only premifing this, that fince all thefe Authors, went, in the main, upon the fame Hypothefis; They are the best Commentators one upon another: And whatever Explication we meet with in any one, two, three, may reasonably stand for the Sense of All; if they have nothing Contradictory to it. Now to proceed.

or

I. Before the Proceffion, or Generation, of which they speak, they suppose the Father not to have been alone; which it is hard to make Sense of, if they only meant that He was with his own Attributes, Powers, or Perfections: As much as to fay, He was wife, and great, and powerful by Himself; therefore He was not alone. Alone, indeed, they own Him to have been, with respect to any Thing ad extra; but with refpect to what was in Himfelf, He was not alone; not fingle, but confisting of a Plurality, having the Aoy always with Him.

2. The fame Aóy, or Word, was always †with Him; convers'd with Him; was, as it

* Μόνο ἦν ὁ Θεός, ε & αὐτῷ ὁ λόγω. Theoph. p. 130. Αὐτὶς μόνος ὢν πολὺς ἦν, οὔτε ἡ ἄλογος, οὔτε ἄσοφος, οὔτε ἀδύνατος, οὔτε ἀδή. 2. All which Words correfpond to the feveral Names of the Son or Holy Spirit; λόγος, σοφία, δύναμις, βολή, (τοῦ πατρὸς) and mean the fame Thing. Hippolyt. p. 13. Contr. Noet. Comp. Greg. Nazianz. Orat, 35. P. 574

Solus autem, quia nihil extrinfecus præter illum, cæterum ne tunc quidem Solus. Habebat enim fecum, quam habebat in femetipfo, Rationem fuam fcilicet. Tertull. Contr. Prax. c. 5. p. 503.

† Σὺν αὐτῷ ο ε λογικής δυνάμεως, αὐτὸς καὶ ὁ λόγω, ὃς ἂν εν

were

were, affifting in Council, according to those Writers; and therefore, certainly, a distinct Perfon. It would be very improper to say that God was in, or with one of his Attributes, or confulted with it: All fuch Expressions must denote a distinct Perfonality.

C

3. The fame individual Aóy, who after the Proceffion was undoubtedly a Perfon, is supposed to have existed before. b Novatian is exprefs. "He who was in the Father, pro"ceeded from the Father. It is the fame individual Aós, according to Theophilus, who is 2arros, always, both before and after his Proceffion, with the Father; and therefore, if He was a real Perfon after, which is not difputed, He must have been fo before. That d very Aoy, or Word, which had been from all Eternity αδιάθετος, ο καρδίᾳ Θε8, becomes afterwards προφορικός. If therefore He was ever

ὅντα

audio. Tatian. c. 7. pag. 20. Ὁ ἀεὶ συμπερὼν αὐτῷ. Theoph. p. 82. Τὸν ὄντα λίμπαντὸς ἐνδιάθετον ον καρδία Θεοῦ. 14. P. 129. A little after, Τοῦτον εἶχε σύμβουλον, ἑαυτοῦ νοῦν – φρόνησιν τῷ λόγῳ αὐτῷ Δαπαντὸς ὁμιλῶν. Idem. p. 29. Si neceffaria eft Deo materia ad opera mundi, ut Hermogenes exiftimavit; Habuit Deus materiam longe digniorem fuam fcilicet. Sophia autem Spiritus: Hæc Illi Confiliarius

Sophiam

fuit. Tert. Contr. Hermog. 3 Θεὸς ἦν ἐν ̓Αρχῇ. τί δὲ ἀρχὴν λόγω δύναμιν παρειλήφαμεν. Tat. p. 19.

b Qui in Patre fuit, proceffit ex Patre, p. 31. Zeno Veronenfis, of the following Century, expreffes it thus: procedit in Nativitatem, qui erat antequam nafceretur, in Patre. Which I add for Illuftration. c Pag. 129.

d Τόπιν τὸν λόγον ἐγέννησε προφορικήν. Theoph. p. 129. Φῶς ἐκ φω τὸς γεννῶν, προῆκεν τῇ κτίση κύριον, τ ἴδιον τῶν αὐτῷ μόνῳ πρόπρον ἐρωτὶν ὑπάρχοντα. Hippol. c. 1o. p. 13. Νᾶς, ὃς προβὰς ἐν κόσμῳ ἐδείκνυτο waisted. c. ii. p. 14. Compare Theoph. p. 129. before cited.

a Per