Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

sisteth properly in this, that as the branch is from the root, and river from the fountain, and by their origination from

et radicis fruticem, et fontis fluvium, et solis radium.' Tertul.adv. Praxeam, c. 8. Nec frutex tamen a radice, nec fluvius a fonte, nec radius a sole discernitur; sicut nec a Deo Sermo.' Tid. Ἔστι μὲν γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ τέλειον ἔχων τὸ εἶναι καὶ ἀνενδεές, ῥίζα καὶ πηγὴ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. S. Basil. Hom. 26. [24. § 4. Vol. II. p. 193 D.] 'Dominus Pater, quia radix est Filii.' S. Ambros. in Luc. 1. x. c. 1. [§ 5. Vol. 1. p. 1505 в.] ut et de Fide, 1. iv. c. 5. [c. 10. § 132. Vol. 11. p. 545.] St Cyril of Alexandria speaking of the baptismal institution: T μὲν γὰρ ἀνωτάτω ῥίζαν, ἧς ἐπέκεινα τὸ σύμπαν οὐδέν, ἐννοήσεις τὸν πατέρα· τὸν δέ γε τῆς ἀνωτάτω ῥίζης ἐκπεφυκότα καὶ γεγεννημένον παραδέξῃ τὸν υἱόν. De S. Trin. Dial. 2. [Vol. v. p. 422 E.]

5 ̓́Αναρχος ὁ πατήρ, πηγὴ τοῦ τῆς δικαιοσύνης ποταμοῦ, τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὁ Taтhр. S. Cyril. Hieros. Catech. 11. [c. 20. p. 159.] 'In hac ergo natura filius est, et in hoc originis fonte subsistens processit tanquam ex sapiente sapientia, ex forti virtus, ex lumine splendor.' Vigil. Taps. Disp. [Dial. contra Arianos etc. 1. ii. c. 25. p. 165.] Ως πνεῦμα θεοῦ καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ πεφηνός, αἴτιον αὐτὸν ἔχον, ὡς πηγὴν ἑαυτοῦ, Kaκεîlev Týуašov. S. Basil. Homil. 28*. Λέγει περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἡ θεία γραφή, Κλίνω, φησίν, ἐπ' αὐτοὺς ὡς ποταμὸς εἰρήνης· ἐκπορευόμενος δηλονότι ἐκ τῆς ἀληθοῦς πηγῆς τῆς ζωῆς, τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς OeórηTOS. Act. Concil. Nic. 1. ii. c. 22. [Labbe, Vol. II. p. 213 E.] And St Cyril of Alexandria,,who often useth this expression, gives us the full signification of it in these words, upon the first chapter of St John, p. 12. [John i. 1. Vol. IV. p. 12 A.] 'Adikhoel δὲ ὅλως οὐδὲν τό, ὡς ἐν πηγῇ, τῷ πατρὶ τὸν υἱὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐννοεῖν· μόνον γὰρ τὸ ἐξ οὗ τὸ τῆς πηγῆς ἐν τούτοις ὄνομα onuaível. 'Patrem quidem non genitum, non creatum, sed ingenitum profitemur; ipse enim a nullo originem ducit, ex quo et Filius nativi

tatem, et Spiritus Sanctus processionem accepit. Fons ergo ipse et origo est totius divinitatis.' Concil.Toletan. xi. [Præfatio. Labbe, Vol. vi. p. 541 A.] 'Quanto magis Dei vocem credendum est et manere in æternum, et sensu ac virtute comitari, quam de Deo Patre tamquam rivus de fonte traduxerit?' Lactan. de ver. Sap. [Div. Inst.] 1. iv. c. 8. et rursus, c. 29. 'Cum igitur et Pater Filium faciat, et Filius Patrem, una utrique mens, unus spiritus, una substantia est: sed ille quasi exuberans fons est, hic tamquam defluens ex eo rivus; ille tamquam sol, hic quasi radius a sole porrectus.'

6

'Caput quod est principium omnium, Filius: caput autem, quod est principium Christi, Deus.' Concil. Sirm. accepted and expounded as orthodox by St Hilary: 'Caput enim omnium Filius est, sed caput Filii Deus est.' de Synod. c. 60, p. 1185 c. [See also Labbe, Vol. II. p. 786 A. 'Caput enim et principium omnium Filius est. Caput vero et principium Christi, Deus.' Prima Confessio Sirmiana, cap. xxv. Κεφαλὴ γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἀρχὴ πάντων ὁ υἱός· κεφαλὴ δέ ἐστι τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ Θεός. Concil. Antioch. Labbe, Vol. II. p. 594 c.] Cum sit ipse omnium caput, ipsius tamen caput Pater est.' Ruff. in Symb. § 6. [p. 63.] Tu capitis primique caput, tu fontis origo.' S. Hilar. ad Leonem. [v. 9, p. 1369 B.] OUTE dúo elolv ἀρχαί, ἀλλὰ κεφαλὴ τοῦ υἱοῦ ὁ πατήρ, μían ȧpxh. S. Cyril. Hieros. Catech. 11. [§ 14, p. 156.] Caput Filii Pater est, et caput Spiritus Sancti Filius, quia de ipso accepit.' S. August. Quæst. Vet. Test. 9. [Quæst. Nov. Test. 87, Vol. II., App. p. 80 c.] St Chrysostom is so clearly of the opinion that 1 Cor. xi. 3 is to be understood of Christ as God, that from thence he proves him to have the same essence with God: Ei yàp κεφαλὴ γυναικὸς ὁ ἀνήρ, ὁμοούσιος δὲ ἡ

*This Homily is not given in more recent editions, it will be found p. 434, ed. 1532.

them receive that being which they have; whereas the root receiveth nothing from the branch, or fountain from the river; so the Son is from the Father, receiving his subsistence by generation from him; the Father is not from the Son, as being what he is from none.

Some indeed of the ancients may seem to have made yet a farther difference between the persons of the Father and the Son, laying upon that relation terms of greater opposition. As if, because the Son hath not his essence from himself, the Father' had; because he was not begotten of himself, the Father had been so; because he is not the cause of himself, the Father3 were. Whereas, if we speak properly, God 39 the Father hath neither his being from another, nor from himself; not from another, that were repugnant to his paternity; not from himself, that were a contradiction in itself. And therefore those expressions are not to be understood positively and affirmatively, but negatively and exclusively, that

κεφαλὴ τῷ σώματι κεφαλὴ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ Θεός, ὁμοούσιος ὁ υἱὸς τῷ #arрl. [Hom. 262. in 1 Cor. Vol. x. p. 229 B.] So likewise Theodoret upon the same place [Vol. I. p. 233.] 'Η δὲ γυνὴ οὐ ποίημα τοῦ ἀνδρός, ἀλλ ̓ ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ ἀνδρός. οὐδὲ ὁ υἱὸς ἄρα ποίημα τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ θεοῦ. So St Cyril: Κεφαλὴ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ θεός, ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ κατὰ φύσιν· γεγέννηται γὰρ ὁ λόγος ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ πατρός. Ad Regin. Ep. I. [de Recta Fide, Vol. v. part 2, p. 64 A.]

1 Lactan. Div. Inst. 1. i. c. 7. S. Hilar. de Trin. 1. ii. c. 6, p. 791 c. Zach. Mitylen. [p. 284.]

Lactan. ib. Synes. Hymn. iii. 148. 3 S. Hieron. in c. 3. ad Eph. ['Deus vero qui semper est, nec habet aliunde principium, et ipse sui origo est, suæque causa substantiæ, non potest intelligi aliunde habere quod substitit.' Comment. in Ephes. iii. Vol. VII. p. 600 E.]

semetipso sit accipias, nemo sibi ipse et munerator et munus est.' S. Hilar. de Trin. 1. ii. c. 7. [p. 792 D.] 'Qui putat ejus esse potentiæ Deum ut seipsum ipse genuerit, eo plus errat, quod non solum Deus ita non est, sed nec spiritalis nec corporalis creatura: nulla enim omnino res est quæ seipsam gignat ut sit. [Et ideo non est credendum, vel dicendum, quod Deus genuit se*.'] S. August. [de Trin. i. 1. Vol. VIII. p. 749 E.]

5 This appeareth by those expositions which have been given of such words as seem to bear the affirmation; 23 αὐτογένεθλος, αυτοφυής, αὐτόγονος, αὐτογενής, &ς. Αὐτογενής, αὐτογένεθ. λος, οὐκ ἔκ τινος γεννώμενος. Hesych. And Αὐτολόχευτος, Θεὸς ἀγέννητος, αὐτ TOYévvηTOS. Idem. And after him Suidas: Αὐτολόχευτος, αὐτογέννητος, ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ἀγέννητος. And if αὐτογέννητος be not αὐτόθεν γεννητός, no more is αὐτόθεος to be taken for αὐτόθεν, οι ἐξ auroù Ocós. Eusebius in his Panegyrical Oration gives this title to the Son: Οία τοῦ καθόλου θεοῦ παῖδα γνήσιον καὶ αὐτόθεον προσκυνεῖσθαι. Hist. 1. x. c. 4. And in his Evangelical Demonstration calls him: avroνοῦν, καὶ αὐτολόγον, καὶ αὐτοσοφίαν, καὶ * The words in brackets do not belong to the citation from St Augustine.

4 Αναρχος οὖν ὁ πατήρ, οὐ γὰρ ἑτέρωθεν αὐτῷ, οὐδὲ παρ ̓ ἑαυτοῦ τὸ eival. S. Greg. Naz. Orat. [20. § 7. Vol. 1. p. 380 c.] 'O dyévvntos où γεγέννηται, οὔθ ̓ ὑφ ̓ ἑαυτοῦ, οὔθ ̓ ὑφ ̓ érépov. S. Athan. "Sirursum quod a

he hath his essence from none, that he is not begotten of any, nor hath he any cause of his existence. So that the proper

εἴ τι δὲ αὐτόκαλον καὶ αὐτοάγαθον. 1. iv.
c. 2. and in the thirteenth chapter of
the same book with relation to the
former words: τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος αὐτοζωή
τυγχάνων, καὶ αὐτοφῶς νοερόν, καὶ ὅσα
ἄλλα προκατείλεκται. Theodoret terms
him: αὐτοδύναμον καὶ αὐτοζωὴν καὶ
αὐτοσοφίαν. contra Anathem. quartum
Cyrilli. [Vol. v. p. 23.] St Basil:
αὐτοζωήν, in Psal. xlviii. [c. 4. Vol. I.
p. 181 D.] et de Spiritu Sancto, c. 8.
§ 19. and αὐτοδικαιοσύνην, Ep. 141.
[Ep. 8. § 7. Vol. III. p. 85 c.] St
Chrysostom: αὐτοαθανασίαν, αὐτομα-
καριότητα. [Hom. 18. in 1 Tim. § 1.
Vol. XI. p. 6543]. St Athanasius
gives him them, and many more to
the same purpose. [Αληθινὸς υἱός, &c.
Athanas. Oratio contra Gentes. § 46.
Vol. I. p. 46 A. et B.] And before all
these Origen: Ὃν μὲν νομίζομεν καὶ
πεπείσμεθα ἀρχῆθεν εἶναι Θεόν, καὶ
υἱὸν Θεοῦ, οὗτος ὁ αὐτολόγος ἐστί, καὶ
ἡ αὐτοσοφία, καὶ ἡ αὐτοαλήθεια. c. Cels.
1. iii. § 41. [Vol. I. p. 474 Α.] And
again: Τίς μᾶλλον τῆς ̓Ιησοῦ ψυχῆς, ἢ
καν παραπλησίως κεκόλληται τῷ Κυρίῳ,
τῷ αὐτολόγῳ, καὶ αὐτοσοφίᾳ καὶ αὐτο-
αληθείᾳ καὶ αὐτοδικαιοσύνῃ; l. vi. § 47.
[p. 669 F.] Εἰκὼν μὲν τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ πρωτ
τότοκος πάσης κτίσεως ἐστιν ὁ αὐτολόγος,
καὶ ἡ αὐτοαλήθεια, ἔτι δὲ καὶ ἡ αὐτοῦ
σοφία. Ibid. § 63. [p. 680 D.] And
certainly in the same sense that αὐτὸς
is joined with one attribute, it may
be joined with any other, and with
the Godhead: because all the attri-
butes of God are really the same,
not only with themselves, but with
the essence. But in what sense it
ought to be understood, when thus
used by the fathers, it will be neces-
sary to inquire, lest it be so attributed
to the Son, as it prove derogatory to
the Father. St Basil, I confess, may
seem so to speak, as if the Son were
therefore αὐτοζωή, because he hath
life of himself, not from the Father
(and consequently he may be termed
αὐτόθεος, as God of himself, not from

the Father), for he denieth those words, “I live by the Father,” (John vi. 57,) to be spoken of Christ according to his divine nature, and that only for this reason, that if it were so understood he could not be called αὐτοζωή: Εἰ διὰ τὸν πατέρα ὁ υἱὸς τῇ, δι ̓ ἕτερον καὶ οὐ δι ̓ ἑαυτὸν ζῇ, ὁ δὲ δι' ἕτερον ζῶν αὐτοζωὴ εἶναι οὐ δύναται from whence he concludeth: εἰς τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν οὖν καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὴν θεότητα, τὸ εἰρημένον νοεῖν δεῖ. contra Eunom. 1. iv. [Vol. 1. p. 290 D.] But because the authority of that book is questioned, I shall produce the same author upon the same Scripture, speaking to the same purpose, in his 141st epistle, [Ep. 8. § 4. Vol. III. p. 83 E.] which is unquestionably genuine: 'Ενταῦθα δὲ τὸ ῥητὸν οὐ τὴν προαιώνιον, ὡς οἶμαι, ζωὴν ὀνομάζει πᾶν γὰρ τὸ δὲ ἕτερον ζῶν αὐτοζωὴ εἶναι οὐ δύναται. Το which testimonies I answer, first, that those words of his, ὡς οἶμαι (as I think) shew that he doth not absolutely deny these words of Christ to be understood of his Divinity, of which the rest of the fathers quoted before did understand it; and not only they, but St Basil himself, in his book de Spiritu Sancto, c. 8. § 19. [Vol. III. p. 16 E.] hath delivered a clear resolution of this point according to that interpretation, wholly consonant to his doctrine of the Trinity in other parts of his works: Ὅμως μέντοι, ἵνα μήποτε ἐκ τοῦ μεγέθους τῶν ἐνεργουμένων περισπασθῶμεν εἰς τὸ φαντασθῆναι ἄναρχον εἶναι τὸν κύριον, τί φησὶν ἡ αὐτοζωή; Εγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα, καὶ ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ δύναμις; Οὐ δύναται ὁ υἱὸς ποιεῖν ἀφ' ἑαυτοῦ οὐδέν. καὶ ἡ αὐτοτελὴς σοφία; Εντολὴν ἔλαβον, τί εἴπω καὶ τί λαλήσω. Christ therefore as αὐτοζωὴspake those words, "I live by the Father," and by them shewed his origination from him, from whom he received his life, power, and wisdom, as receiving his essence, which is the same with them: wherefore those former passages are to be

* The work is included among the genuine writings in the Benedictine edition.

notion of the Father in whom we believe is this, that he is a person subsisting eternally in the one infinite essence of the Godhead; which essence or subsistence he hath received from no other person, but hath communicated the same essence,

looked upon, as if avròs in composition did not deny origination, but participation, or receiving by way of affection. And that he understood it so, appears out of the places themselves: for in the first, after ὁ δὲ ἕτερον ζῶν αὐτοζωὴ εἶναι οὐ δύναται, immediately followeth, οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ κατα χάριν ἅγιος, αὐτοάγιος: and in the second, after πᾶν γὰρ τὸ δι ̓ ἕτερον ζῶν αὐτοζωὴ εἶναι οὐ δύναται, followeth likewise, ὡς οὐδὲ τὸ ὑφ' ἑτέρου θερμανθὲν αὐτοθερμότης εἶναι. The meaning then of St Basil must be this, that he which receiveth life from another merely as a grace or favour, as the saints receive their sanctity, cannot properly be termed αὐτοζωή, no more than they αὐτοάγιοι : or if he receive it by derivation or participation, as water receiveth heat from fire, he deserveth the same name no more than water heated to be called αὐτοθερμότης. And this is fully consonant to the expressions of the rest of the ancients: as particularly Athanasius, Οὐ κατὰ μετοχὴν ταῦτα ὤν, οὐδὲ ἔξωθεν ἐπιγινομένων τούτων αὐτῷ κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοῦ μετέχοντας, καὶ σοφιζομένους δι ̓ αὐτοῦ, καὶ δυνατοὺς καὶ λογικοὺς ἐν αὐτῷ γινομένους· ἀλλ ̓ αὐτοσοφία, αὐτολόγος, αὐτοδύναμις ἰδία τοῦ πατρός ἐστιν, αὐτοφῶς, αὐτοαλήθεια, αὐτοδικαιοσύνη, αυτοαρετή. in fine Protrept. [Orat. contra Gentes § 46. Vol. 1. p. 46 A.] And to the same purpose: Οτι οὐ μεθεκτὴν ἔχει τὴν δωρεὰν ἀλλ' αὐτοπηγὴ καὶ αὐτόῤῥιζα πάντων ἐστὶ τῶν ἀγαθῶν, αὐτοζωή, καὶ αὐτοφῶς, καὶ αὐτοαλήθεια" in the MS. Catena in the King of France's Library. Petav. de Trin.l. vi. c. 11. All therefore which these compositions signify, is either a negation of a derivative participation, or an affirmation of a reality and identity of substance, as yet farther appears by St Epiphanius: αὐτοουσία ἐστὶν ὁ θεὸς πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱός, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὐχ ἑτερουσίας and Origen himself upon St John:

in

αὐτοδικαιοσύνη ἡ ουσιώδης Χριστός ἐστι, [Vol. iv. p. 107 E.] as also ǹ AŬTOαλήθεια ἡ ουσιώδης, καὶ ἵν ̓ οὕτως εἴπω, πρωτότυπος τῆς ἐν ταῖς λογικαῖς ψυχαῖς ἀληθείας. Το conclude, there is a catholic sense in which the Son is termed αὐτόθεος, αυτοσοφία, &c. by the ancient fathers; and another sense there is in which these terms are so proper and peculiar to the Father, that they are denied to the Son. Indeed αὐτόθεος, in the highest sense, ἀφ' ἑαυ τοῦ θεός, positively taken, belongeth neither to the Son nor to the Father, as implying a manifest contradiction; because nothing can have its being actually from itself, as communicated to itself, and that by itself: but in a negative way of interpretation, by which that is said to be of itself, which is and yet is not of or from another, αὐτόθεος belongs properly to the Father, neither generated by, nor proceeding from another; and in that sense it is denied to the Son, because he is generated by the Father, as: ex θεοῦ θεός, ἐκ σοφοῦ σοφία, ἐκ λογικοῦ λόγος, καὶ ἐκ πατρὸς υἱός, saith St Athanasius cont. Ar. Or. iv. § 1. [Vol. 1. p. 618 B.] from whence he thus proceeds: ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ ἄν τις εἴποι αὐτοσοφίαν εἶναι καὶ αὐτολόγον τὸν θεόν, ἀλλ ̓ εἰ τοῦτο, εἴη ἂν αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ παι τὴρ καὶ υἱός. Ibid. § 2. [p. 618 D.] And again: eἰ δὲ αὐτοσοφία ὁ θεός, καὶ τὸ ἐκ τούτου ἄτοπον εἴρηται παρὰ Σαβελλίῳ. [p. 618 E.] Lastly, in another sense in which avròs in composition is taken not in obliquo, but in recto, αὐτόθεος, that is, αὐτὸς ὁ θεός, God himself, and αὐτοζωή, αὐτὴ ἡ ζωή, life itself: so all these terms are attributed to the Son as truly, really, and essentially, as to the Father. And that the fathers took it so appears, because they did sometimes resolve the composition: as when Eusebius calleth Christ αὐτόθεον, in the Panegyric before cited, presently after he

2 Cor. xiii. 14.

which himself subsisteth, by generation to another person, who by that generation is the Son.

Howsoever, it is most reasonable to assert that there is 40 but one Person who is from none; and the very generation of the Son and procession of the Holy Ghost undeniably prove, that neither of those two can be that Person. For whosoever is generated is from him which is the genitor, and whosoever proceedeth is from him from whom he proceedeth, whatsoever the nature of the generation or procession be. It followeth therefore that this Person is the Father, which name speaks nothing of dependence, nor supposeth any kind of priority in another.

From hence it is observed that the name of God, taken absolutely', is often in the Scriptures spoken of the Father; Rom. viii. 3. as when we read of God sending his own Son; of the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God; and generally wheresoever Christ is called the Son of God, or the Word of God, the name of God is to be taken particularly for the Father, because he is no Son but of the Father. From hence he is styled one God; the true God; the only true God; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. vill. 6. 1 Thess. 19.

Eph. iv. 6.

John xvii. 3. 2 Cor. i. 3. Eph. i 2

Which, as it is most true, and so fit to be believed, is also a most necessary truth, and therefore to be acknowledged, for the avoiding multiplication3 and plurality of gods. For

speaketh thus, Hist. Eccles. 1. x. § 4,
Τί γὰρ καὶ ἔμελλε τοῦ παμβασιλέως
καὶ πανηγεμόνος καὶ αὐτοῦ θεοῦ λόγου
ἐνστήσεσθαι τῷ νεύματι; where αὐτοῦ
θεοῦ is the same with αὐτοθέου.

1 Οθεν οἱ ἀπόστολοι, καὶ πᾶσα
σχεδὸν ἡ θεία γραφή, ὅταν εἴπῃ ὁ Θεός,
οὕτως ἀπολύτως καὶ ἀπροσδιορίστως,
καὶ ὡς ἐπίπαν σὺν ἄρθρῳ, καὶ χωρὶς
ἰδιώματος ὑποστατικοῦ, τὸν πατέρα
onλoî. Theod. Abucara Opusc. 42.

2Unxit te Deus, Deus tuus. Id enim quod sit, tuus, ad nativitatem refertur; cæterum non perimit naturam. Et idcirco Deus ejus est, qui ex eo natus in Deum est. Non tamen per id quod Pater Deus est, non et Filius Deus est. Unxit enim te Deus, Deus tuus; designata videlicet et auctoris et ex eo geniti significatione, uno eodemque dicto utrumque illum in

naturæ ejusdem et dignitatis nuncupatione constituit.' S. Hilar. de Trin. 1. iv. c. 35. [p. 848 c.] 'Deo enim ex quo omnia sunt Deus nullus est, qui sine initio æternus est. Filio autem Deus Pater est, ex eo enim Deus natus est.' Ibid. c. 37. [p. 849 B.] 'Cum autem ex Deo Deus est, per id quoque Deus Pater Deo Filio et nativitatis ejus Deus est, et naturæ Pater: quia Dei nativitas et ex Deo est, et in ea est generis natura qua Deus est.' Id. 1. xi. c. 11. [p. 1089 A.] So St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. xi. [ο. 17, p. 158.] Θεὸς ὁ γεννήσας, Θεὸς ὁ γεννηθείς· Θεὸς μὲν τῶν πάντων, Θεὸν δὲ ἑαυτοῦ τὸν πατέρα ἐπιγραφόμενος.

3 Μή μοι-εἴπητε, δύο θεοὺς κηρύτα τει, πολυθείαν καταγγέλλει. οὐ δύο θεοί, οὐδὲ γὰρ δύο πατέρες· ὁ μὲν ἀρχὰς εἰσάγων δύο, δύο κηρύττει θεούς. S. Βα

« FöregåendeFortsätt »