come, and the necessity of believing the same, we have given sufficient light to every Christian to understand what he ought to intend, and what it is he professeth, when he saith, I believe in him who shall come to judge the quick and the dead. For thereby he is conceived to declare thus much : I am fully persuaded of this, as of an infallible and necessary truth, that the eternal Son of God, in that human nature, in which he died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, shall certainly come from the same heaven into which he ascended, and at his coming shall gather together all those which shall be then alive, and all which ever lived and shall be before that day dead: when, causing them all to stand before his judgement-seat, he shall judge them all according to their works done in the flesh; and passing the sentence of condemnation upon all the reprobates, shall deliver them to be tormented with the devil and his angels; and pronouncing the sentence of absolution upon all the elect, shall translate them into his glorious kingdom, of which there shall be no end. And thus I believe in Jesus Christ, WHO SHALL JUDGE THE QUICK AND THE DEAD. 37 PEARSON. I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY GHOST. IN this Article we repeat again the first word of the CREED, I believe; whereas a conjunction might have been sufficient, but that so many particulars concerning the Son had intervened. For as we are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: so do we make confession of our faith, saying, I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost'; and the ancients, whose Creed was something shorter, made no repetition of the act of faith, but only an addition of the object, And in the Holy Ghost3. And as we repeat the act of faith in this Article, so some did also in the second, I believe in Jesus Christ3. Wherefore being this word, I believe, is taken here only by way of resumption or repetition, and consequently must be of the same sense and importance, of which it was in the beginning of the CREED, 1 'Sed enim ordo rationis et fidei auctoritas, digestis vocibus et litteris Domini, admonet nos post hæc credere etiam in Spiritum Sanctum, olim Ecclesiæ repromissum, sed statutis temporum opportunitatibus redditum.' Novatian. de Trin. c. 29. Schlictingius the Socinian, in his Preface to the Polonian Confession of Faith, endeavoureth to persuade us, that this Article of the Holy Ghost is not so ancient as the rest; which being diametrically opposite to that original of the Creed, which I have delivered, the baptismal words, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it will be necessary to examine his reason, which is drawn only from the authority of Tertullian; who, in his book De Virg. Veland. c. 1. reciting the rule of faith, makes no mention of the Holy Ghost and De Præscr. Hæret. propounds. this Article no otherwise: Quam ut credamus Christum in cælos ereptum sedisse ad dextram Patris, misisse vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti*. c. 13. But this objection made for the novelty of this Article is easily answered: for Irenæus, before Tertullian, hath it expressly in his Confession, 1. i. c. 10. [§ 1. p. 2 So the ancient Greek MS. kai 3 As the ancient Saxon Creed set forth by Freherus. *This is the substance of the passage referred to, not an exact quotation. 307 it may well receive the same explication here which it received there; to that therefore the reader is referred. For although the ancient Fathers did frequently make use of this language to prove the Divinity of the Spirit', and did thence argue that he is really and truly God, because we believe in the Holy Ghost; yet being that language is not expressly read in the Scriptures in relation to the Spirit, as it is in reference to the Son; being to believe in the Holy Ghost, is only the expression of the Church contained in the CREED; being in the same Creed many of the ancients, without any reprehension, have used the same phrase in the following Articles expressly, and where the preposition is not expressed, it may very well be thought it was understood: therefore I think fit to acquiesce in my former exposition, and lay no great force in the preposition. It will therefore be sufficient for the explication of this Article, if we can declare what is the full and proper object of 308 our faith contained in it, what we are obliged to believe concerning the Holy Ghost. And as to this we shall discharge our undertaking, and satisfy whatsoever is required in this exposition, if we can set forth these two particulars, the nature 1 Gregory Nazianzen, disputing for the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, proveth that he is no creature thus: ̓Αλλ' εἰ μὲν κτίσμα, πῶς εἰς αὐτὸ πιστεύομεν, ἢ ἐν αὐτῷ τελειούμεθα; οὐ γὰρ ταὐτόν ἐστι πιστεύειν εἰς τι, καὶ περὶ αὐτοῦ πιστεύειν τὸ μὲν γάρ ἐστι θεότητος, τὸ δὲ παντὸς πράγματος. Orat. xxxvii. [xxxi. § 6. Vol. 1. p. 560 a.] Epiphanius seems to speak thus much, shewing that though the Fathers of the Nicene Council had determined nothing particularly of the Holy Ghost, yet they sufficiently shew that he is God, by those words; καὶ εἰς Πνεῦμα ἅγιον. ‘Εὐθὺς γὰρ ἡ ἔκθεσις ὁμολογεῖ καὶ οὐκ ἀρνεῖται· Πι· στεύομεν γὰρ εἰς ἕνα Θεόν Πατέρα παντοκράτορα. Τὸ δὲ πιστεύομεν οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηται, ἀλλὰ ἡ πίστις εἰς τὸν Θεόν. Καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηται, ἀλλ ̓ εἰς Θεὸν ἡ πίστις. Καὶ, εἰς τὸ ̔́Αγιον Πνεῦμα καὶ οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηται, ἀλλ ̓ εἰς μίαν δοξολογίαν, καὶ εἰς μίαν ἕνωσιν θεότητος, καὶ μίαν ὁμοουσιότητα, εἰς τρία τέλεια, μίαν δὲ θεότητα, μίαν οὐσίαν, μίαν δοξολογίαν, μίαν κυριότητα, ἀπὸ τοῦ πιστεύομεν καὶ πιστεύομεν καὶ πιστεύομεν. Hæres. lxxiv. [§ 14. Vol. 1. p. 904 B.] Agnoscamus verbi ipsius privilegium. Credere illi quilibet potest hominum; credere vero in illum, soli debere te Majestati noveris. Sed et hoc ipsum aliud est Deum credere, aliud est credere in Deum. Esse Deum et diabolus credere dicitur, secundum Apostolum; nam et dæmones credunt et contremiscunt. In Deum vero credere, [nisi qui pie in eum speraverit, non probatur. In Deum ergo credere,] hoc est fideliter eum quærere, est tota in eum dilectione transire. Credo ergo in illum, hoc est dicere, Confiteor illum, colo illum, adoro illum, totum me in jus ejus ac dominium trado atque transfundo. In professionis hujus reverentia universa divino nomini debita continentur obsequia.' Paschasius in Præfat. Operis de Spiritu Sancto. and the office of that blessed Spirit. For the name of Ghost or Gast in the ancient Saxon language signifieth a spirit, and in that appellation of the Spirit of God his nature principally is expressed. The addition of holiness, though it denote the intrinsical sanctity essentially belonging to that Spirit, yet notwithstanding it containeth also a derivative notion, as signifying an emanation of that holiness, and communication of the effects thereof; and in this communication his office doth consist. Whatsoever therefore doth concern the Spirit of God, as such, and the intrinsical sanctity which belongeth to that Spirit, may be expressed in the explication of his nature; whatsoever belongeth to the derivation of that sanctity may be described in his office; and consequently more cannot be necessary, than to declare what is the nature, what the office, of the Spirit of God. For the better indagation of the nature of the Holy Ghost, I shall proceed by certain steps and degrees; which, as they will render the discourse more clear, so will they also make the reasons more strong, and the arguments more evident. And first, as to the existence of the Spirit of God, it will be unnecessary to endeavour the proof of it: for although the Acts xxiii 8. Sadducees seem to deny it, who said that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit; though it hath been ordinarily concluded from thence that they rejected the Holy Ghost', yet it cannot be proved from those words that they denied the existence of the Spirit of God, any more than that they denied the existence of God who is a spirit; nor did the notion which the Jews had of the Spirit of God any way incline the Sadducees, who denied the existence of the angels and the souls of men, to reject it. The resurrection, angel and spirit, which the Sadducees refused to acknowledge, were but two particulars; for it is expressly added, that the Pharisees confessed both; of which two the resurrection was one, angels and spirits were the other; wherefore that which the Sadducees disbelieved was the existence of such created spiri 1 As Epiphanius: Πνεῦμα δὲ ἅγιον ouk loao. Hæres. xiv. [Vol. I. p. 31 Β.] Τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον Σαδδουκαῖοι μὲν οὐδὲ εἶναι τὸ παράπαν ἐνόμισαν, οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀγγέλους, οὐδὲ ἀνάστασιν, οὐκ οἶδ' ὅθεν τὰς τοσαύτας περὶ αὐτοῦ μαρτυρίας ἐν τῇ Taλaiâ diaжTúσaνres. Greg. Naz. Orat. xxxvii. [xxxi. § 5. Vol. 1. p. 558 E.] 2 Φαρισαῖοι δέ, φησίν, ὁμολογοῦσι τὰ ἀμφότερα. καὶ μὴν τρία ἐστί· πῶς οὖν λέγει ἀμφότερα; ἢ ὅτι πνεῦμα καὶ ἄγγελος ἓν ἐστι; S. Chrysost. ad locum. [Hom. 49. § 1. Vol. Ix. p. 364 D.] tual natures, as the angels and the souls of men are conceived In order to the determination of which question, our first assertion is, That the Holy Ghost, described to us in the word 309 of God, and joined with the Father and the Son in the form of baptism, is a person. We are all baptized in the name of 1 To conclude the nature of the Holy Ghost, which is not so immediately expressed in the Scriptures, it will be needful so to place our assertions, as that they may occur to all other misconceptions. Now the old notions (and more they cannot now 19. |