hath that being which is originally and eternally of itself, and of which all other beings do essentially depend: that by the right of emanation of all things from him, he hath an 157 absolute, supreme, and universal dominion over all things. as God: that as the Son of man he is invested with all power in heaven and earth; partly economical, for the completing our redemption, and the destruction of our enemies, to continue to the end of all things, and then to be resigned to the Father; partly consequent unto the union, or due unto the obedience of his passion, and so eternal, as belonging to that kingdom which shall have no end. And though he be thus Lord of all things by right of the first creation and constant preservation of them, yet is he more peculiarly the Lord of us who by faith are consecrated to his service: for through the work of our redemption he becomes our Lord both by the right of conquest and of purchase; and making us the sons of God, and providing heavenly mansions for us, he acquires a farther right of promotion, which, considering the covenant we all make to serve him, is at last completed in the right of a voluntary obligation. And thus I believe in CHRIST OUR LORD.

ARTICLE III.

WHICH WAS CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY GHOST,

BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY.

THESE words, as they now stand, clearly distinguish the conception of Jesus from his nativity, attributing the first to the Holy Ghost, the second to the blessed Virgin; whereas the ancient Creeds made no such distinction; but without any particular express mention of the conception, had it only in this manner, who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary; or, of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary'; understanding by the word born, not only the nativity, but also the

conception and generation. This is very necessary to be observed, because otherwise the addition of a word will prove the diminution of the sense of the Article. For they which speak only of the operation of the Holy Ghost in Christ's conception, and of the manner of his birth, leave out most. part of that which was anciently understood under that one. term of being born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary.

That therefore nothing may be omitted which is pertinent to express the full intent, and to comprehend the utmost signification, of this Article, we shall consider three persons mentioned, so far as they are concerned in it. The first is he who was conceived and born; the second, he by whose energy or operation he was conceived; the third, she who did conceive and bear him.

For the first, the relative in the front of this carries us clearly back unto the former Article, and tells us that he 158 which was thus conceived and born was Jesus Christ, the only Son of God. And being we have already demonstrated that this only Son is therefore called so, because he was begotten by the Father from all eternity, and so of the same substance with him; it followeth that this Article at the first beginning, or by virtue of its connexion, can import no less than this most certain, but miraculous, truth, that he' which was begotten by the Father before all worlds, was now in the fulness of time conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary. Again, being by the conception and birth is to be understood whatsoever was done toward the production of the human nature of our Saviour; therefore the same relative, considered with the words which follow it, can speak no less than the incarnation of that person. And thus even in the entry of the Article we meet with the incarnation of the Son of God, that great mystery wrapt up in that short sentence of St John, the Word was made flesh.

Indeed the pronoun hath relation not only unto this, but to the following Articles, which have their necessary connexion with and foundation in this third; for he who was conceived and born, and so made man, did in that human nature suffer, die, and rise again. Now when we say this was the

1 'Huic enim quem dudum de Patre natum ineffabiliter didicisti, nunc a Spiritu Sancto templum fa

bricatum intra secreta uteri Virgi-
nalis intellige.' Ruffin. in Symb.
§ 9. [p. 72.]

John i. 14.

Word, and that Word was God, being whosoever is God cannot cease to be so; it must necessarily follow that he was made man by joining the human nature with the divine. But then we must take heed lest we conceive, because the divine nature belongeth to the Father, to which the human is conjoined, that therefore the Father should be incarnate, or conceived and born. For as certainly as the Son was crucified, and the Son alone; so certainly the same Son was incarnate, and that Son alone. Although the human nature was conjoined with the Divinity, which is the nature common to the Father and the Son; yet was that union made only in the person of the Son. of the Son. Which doctrine is to be observed against the heresy of the Patripassians', which was both very

1 The heresy of the Patripassians seems only to have relation to the suffering of our Saviour, because the word signifies no more than the passion of the Father. But it is founded in an error concerning the incarnation, it being out of question that he which was made man did suffer. Epiphanius observes, Noetus was the first which taught this heresy, who lived one hundred and thirty years before him, more or less, and when he was questioned for it, he denied it: dià Tò μηδένα πρὸ αὐτοῦ ἐξεμέσαι ταυτηνὶ τὴν -TIкplav. Hæres. lvii. § 1. [Vol. 1. p. 480 A.] But certainly this heresy was ancienter than Noetus: for the Patripassiani are named by St Cyprian*, Ep. 73. [§ 4. p. 781] and Tertullian his master chargeth it upon Praxeas: 'Duo negotia Diaboli Praxeas Romæ procuravit, Prophetiam expulit, et Hæresim intulit; Paracletum fugavit, et Patrem crucifixit.' Adv. Prax. c. 1. And expressing the absurdity of that opinion: Itaque post tempus Pater natus et Pater passus, ipse Deus Dominus Omnipotens Jesus Christus prædicatur.' c. 2. And De Præscr. adv. Hæret. [adv. omn. Hær. c. 8.+] 'Post hos omnes etiam Praxeas quidam Hæresim introduxit, quam Victorinus corroborare curavit. Hic Deum Patrem Omnipotentem Jesum Christum

esse dicit, hunc crucifixum passumque contendit et mortuum; præterea seipsum sibi sedere ad dextram suam, cum profana et sacrilega temeritate proponit.' After Praxeas, Noetus taught the same: Ετόλμησε λέγειν τὸν πατέρα πεπονθέναι, says Epiphanius, and being questioned for it, he answered: Τί γὰρ κακὸν πεποίηκα; ἕνα θεὸν δοξάζω, ἕνα ἐπίσταμαι, καὶ οὐκ ἄλλον πλὴν αὐτοῦ, γεννηθέντα, πεπονθότα, ἀποθανόντα. Hæres. vii. 8 1. [Vol. 1. p. 479 D. 480 B.] He thought the Father and the Son to be the same person, and therefore if the Son, the Father to be incarnate: Υἱοπάτορα τὸν Χριστὸν ἐδίδαξε, τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον TVεûμа. S. Epiphan. Anaceph. [§ 11. Vol. 1. p. 145 c.] After the Noetiani followed the Sabelliani. So Philastrius, c. 54: 'Sabellius-discipulus ejus, similitudinem sui Doctoris itidem secutus est, et errorem, unde et Sabelliani postea sunt appellati, qui et Patripassiani et Praxeani a Praxea, et Hermogeniani ab Hermogene, qui fuerunt in Africa, qui et ita sentientes abjecti sunt ab Ecclesia Catholica.' So St Augustine: 'Sabelliani dicti sunt quidam hæretici, qui vocantur et Patripassiani, qui dicunt ipsum Patrem passum fuisse.' Tract. 36. in Ioan. [§ 8. Vol. 1, part 2. p. 548 A.] *According to Hippolytus (Ref. ix. 2), the Noetian heresy existed at Rome, during the episcopate of Zephyrinus, so that there can be no doubt that Noetus preceded Cyprian. This treatise is certainly not Tertullian's. No good MS. recognizes it, though in the inferior ones it is prefixed or affixed to the de præscriptione.

ancient and far diffused, making the Father to be incarnate, and becoming man to be crucified. But this very CREED was always thought to be a sufficient confutation of that fond opinion', in that the incarnation is not subjoined to the first,