is only this: whether God the Son be a Creature or no. The Doctor talk'd of the Son's having divine Powers, and all divine Powers. It was very proper to ask you, whether He hereby meant infinite Powers or no; and withal to fhow, if you fhould not answer directly, that He could not mean it, confiftently with the Arian Hypothefis, which He feem'd, in other parts of his Performance, to efpouse. You will not yet fay directly, that the Son's Perfections are finite, nor deny them to be infinite: So hard a thing it is to draw you out of your ambiguous Terms; or to make you speak plainly what you mean. All you are pleas'd to fay, is, that the Powers or Perfections of the Son are not abfolutely infinite: As if Infinity were of two Sorts, abfolute and limited; or might be rightly divided into Infinity, and not Infinity. Inftead of this, I could wish, that words may be used in their true and proper meaning. If you do not think the Perfections of the Son are infinite, and yet are unwilling to limit them; let them be called indefinite, which is the proper word to exprefs your meaning; and then every Reader may be able to understand us, and may fee where we differ. We are now Both agreed, that the Doctor, by divine Powers, did not mean infinite Powers. Now let us proceed to the next Query.

QUERY

Whether if the Doctor means by divine Powers, Powers given by God (in the fame Senfe as Angelical Powers are divine Powers) only in a higher degree than are given to other Beings; it be not equivocating, and faying nothing: nothing that can come up to the Senfe of thofe Texts before cited, *or to thefe following? Applied to the one God. Thou, even Thou, art Lord alone; Thou haft made Heaven, the Heaven of Heavens with all their Hoft, the Earth and all Things that are therein, &c. Neh. 9. 6.

In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth, Gen. 1. I.

I'

To God the Son.

were all

made by Him, Joh. 1.3. All Things were Things created; He is By Him before all Things, and by Him all Things confift, Coloff. 1. 16, 17.

Thou, Lord, in the Beginning, haft laid the Foundation of the Earth; and the Heavens are the work of. thy Hands, Heb. 1. 10.

F the Doctor means, by divine Powers, no more than is intimated in this Query, I must blame Him first for equivocating and playing with an ambiguous Word; and next for reftraining and limiting the Powers of the Son of God; * Qu. 6. p. 89.

not

That

not only without, but against Scripture; and confequently for giving us, not the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, but his own. there is no ground, from the Texts themselves, for any fuch Limitation as is now fuppofed, is tacitely implied in the Doctor's own Confeffion; that the Son is excluded from nothing but abfolute Supremacy and Independency: So naturally does Truth fometimes prevail, by its own native Clearness and Evidence, against the Strongest and most fettled Prejudices. Indeed, the thing is very clear from the Texts themfelves cited above; efpecially when strengthened with Those now produced under this Query. That the Son was, and is endowed with creative Powers, is plain from thefe Texts, and others which might be added; and is confirmed by the unanimous Suffrage of Catholick Antiquity. And that the Title of Creator is the diftinguishing Character of the one Supreme God, is fo clear from Scripture, that He who runs may read it. Now let us confider what you have to except, in order to elude the force of this Argument.

*

The Son of God, you fay, is manifeftly the Father's Agent in the Creation of the Univerfe; referring to Ephef. 3.9. and to Heb.1.2. from whence you infer, that He is fubordinate in Nature and Powers to Him. This you have (p.58.) and in your Notes (p.55.) you

Nehem. 9. 6.

Ifa. 40. 12, 13.— 18, 19, 20, 21, &c. Ifa. 42.5.8. Ifa. 43. 1. 10. Jer. 10. 10, 11, 12.

infist much upon the Distinction between di' auτῇ, and ὑπ' αὐτό, explaining the former of an inftrumental, and the latter of an efficient Caufe; of which more in due time and place. As to the Son's being Agent with, or Afiftant to the Father, in the work of Creation, we readily admit it; and even contend for it. The Father is primarily, and the Son fecondarily, or immediately, Author of the World; which is fo far from proving that He is inferior, in Nature or Powers, to the Father; that it is rather a convincing Argument that He is equal in Both. A Subordination of Order, but none of Nature, is thereby intimated. *Eufebius, whom you quote (p. 55.) out of Dr. Clarke, and tmiftranflate to ferve your purpose, does not deny the proper Efficiency of the Son in the Work of Creation. All He afferts is, that the Creation is primarily and eminently attributed to the Father, because of his Aufania, his Prerogative, Authority, Supremacy, as Father, or first Person; not denying the Son's proper Efficiency, but only (if I may fo call it) original

airos, and

See Eufeb. Contr. Marcel 1. 1. c. 20. p. 84. + The learned Doctor, and, after Him, You conftrue autod, by efficient, and miniftring Caufe. As if a miniftring Caufe might not be efficient, or must neceffarily be oppofed to

it.

This is excellently illuftrated by the elder Cyril. Пarges Brandirres τὰ πάντα κατασκευάς, τι ν πατρὸς νεύμαν ὁ φὸς τὰ πάντα ἐδημιέςγησεν· ἵνα τὸ μὲν νεῦμα τηςῇ τῷ πατρὶ τῷ αὐθεντικην ἐξεσίαν, και ὁ φὸς δὲ πάλιν ἔχη εξεσίαν τ' ἰδίων δημιεργημάτων και μήτε πατήρ ἀπαλλοτριωθῇ τὸ διασοτείας τῶν ἰδίων δημιεργημάτων, μήτε ὁ φός το ἄλλα δημιουργημάτων βασιλεύῃ, ἀλλὰ ἢ ὑπ' αὐτο. Gatech. 11. p. 146.

Ed. Oxon.

Effici

*

Qu. XI. Efficiency; that is, making Him the Second and not the firft Perfon; not Father but Son. Indeed, the general Opinion of the Antients center'd in this; that the Father, as Supreme, iffued out Orders for the Creation of the Univerfe, and the Son executed them. And this was afferted, not only by the Ante-Nicene Writers, but t Poft-Nicene too; and fuch as ftrenuously defended the Catholick Faith against the Arians. I have before obferved that the Antients had a very good meaning and intent in affigning (as it were) to the Three Perfons, their feveral Parts or Provinces in the Work of Creation: And let no Man be offended, if, in this way of confidering it, the Son be fometimes faid ὑπηρετεῖν, οι ὑπεργείν, or the like. This need not be thought any greater difparagement to the Dignity of the Son, than it is, on the other hand, a difparagement to the Dignity of the Father to be reprefented as having the Counsel and Affiftance of two other Perfons; or as leaving every Thing to be wifely order'd, regulated, and perfected by the Son and Holy Spirit. These Things are not to be strictly and rigorously interpreted according to the Letter; but oixovoμixas, and Jongens. The defign of all was: 1. To keep up a more lively Senfe of a real Diftinction of Perfons. 2. To teach us the indivifible Unity and Co-cffentiality

See Irenæus, p. 85. Tertullian, Contr. Prax. c. 12. Hippolyt. Contr. Noct. c. 14.

+ See Petavius de Trin. 1. 2. c.7. Bull. D. F. p. 80.111.

of