Spirit, the Spirit of Adoption, the Spirit which knoweth all the things of God. Neither let any man think, that our refufing to call the

μHeiar airỡ nỳ ånebî naTdantiv eis + üseegr ñuïv Saxe diava. Contra Eunom. lib.3.

Spirit a Creature, is denying bis Perfonality, [or real Subfiftence:] For it is the part of a pious mind, to be afraid of faying any thing concerning the Holy Spirit, which is not revealed in Scripture, and rather be content to wait till the next Life, for a perfect knowledge and understanding of bis Nature.

§ XXII.

The Holy Spirit of God does not in Scripture generally fignify a mere Power or Operation of the Father, but a real Perfon.

See the Texts, No 1017, 1032, 1043, 1045, 1046, 1048, 1059*, 1077, 1138, 1129, 1143, 1144, 1147, 155, 1171, 1172.

See above, § 18; and below, § 23.

§ XXIII.

They who are not careful to maintain these perfonal characters and diftinctions, but while they are folicitous (on the one hand) to avoid

the

the errours of the Arians, affirm (in the contrary extreme) the Son and Holy Spirit to be (individually with the Father) the Self-exiftent Being: Thefe, feeming in Words to magnify the Name of the Son and Holy Spirit, in reality take away their very Existence; and fo fall unawares into Sabellianifm, (which is the fame with Socinianifm.)

See above, § 18 and 22.

Notes on $23.

It is fo manifeftly declared in Scripture,(faith No. vatian,) that He [viz. Chrift] is God; that most of the bereticks, ftruck with the Greatnefs and Truth of bis Divinity, and extending bis Honour even too far, have dared to fpeak of him not as of the Son, but as of God the Father bimfelf.

Ufque adeò Hunc manifeftum eft in Scripturis effe Deum tradi, ut plerique hereticorum, divinitatis ipfius magnitudine & veritate commoti, ultra modum extendentes honores ejus, aufiffent non filium, fed ipfum Deum patrem promere & pu tare. De Trin. cap. 18.

Ἔσω δέ τινας, ὡς ἐν πλήθει τις Μόντων καὶ δεχομλύων δια oaviar, dia The TOTWTHαν υποτίθεος Η σωτῆρα είναι * ἐπὶ πᾶσι θεόν· ἐ ̓ ἔτι γε ἡμεῖς τοιῖτον, δι πειθόμιμοι αὐτῷ λέγοντι, ὁ παλὴς ὁ πέμ μας με μέζων με οξί. contr. Celf. lib. 8.

And Origen: Be it fo (faith he,) that fome among us, (as in fuch a multitude of Believers there cannot but be diverfity of opinions,) are To rafh as to imagin our Saviour to be Himfelf the Supreme God over all; Yet WE do not fo, who believe his own words, My Father which fent me is greater than I. And Athanafius: Was Ἤ ἐκ απεσάλη μερίς υπό το

U 3

παι

not the Son (faith he) fent by the Father: He him. felfevery where declaresfo: And He likewife promifed to fend the Spirit, the Comforter; and did fend him according to bis Promife. But now they who run the Three Perfons into One, de

πατρὸς ὁ τὸς; διαμαρτύρει τ πανταχε κι αποςέλλειν το πνεῦμα τὸ ράκλητον ἐπαγγέλ λε). καὶ δὴ κὶ ποςέλλει και ἢ ὑπέ χεσιν' Αλλ ̓ ὁι ἢ ῥιάδα μονάδα wives, rodien nỳ † &Tosoλω ὥσπερ ἢ λύνησιν ἐπιχειρῖσιν. contra Sabell.

of the Son and Spirit.]

froy (as much as in them lies) both the Generation [of the Son,] and the Miffion And Bafil: If any one (faith he) afirms the fame Perfon, to be the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, imagining One Being under diferent Names, and One real Subfiftence under three diftint Denomi. nations; we rank fuch a perfon among the fews.

Ἔιτις ἳ αὐτὸν πατέρα λέξεω και το, καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· καὶ ἕν 3, και μίαν υπόςασιν υπό πράγμα πολυώνυμον ὑποτίθετ διῶν προσηγοριῶν ἐκφωνομλύτι· * τοιῖτιν ἡμᾶς ἐν τῇ μερίδι * Ιεδαίων τάπομμ. Mona chis fuis, epift. 73.

જા

Μέχρι 7 νω ἐν πᾶσιν, οἷς επιςέλλεσι, γράμμασι, * μ' δυσώνυμον Αρειον ἄνω καὶ κάτω αναθεματίζοντες καὶ ἢ ἐκκλησιῶν ἐξορίζοντες ε διαλείπεσι Μαρκέλλῳ ἢ των και διάμερον ἐκείνῳ ἢ ἀσέβειαν ἐπιδειξαμέ νω, καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὕπαρξιν τ * μονους θεότη]Θ- ασεβή, σαντι, καὶ κακῶς τὰ λόγο πρι σηγορίαν ἐκδεξαμβρῳ, ἐδεμίαν μέμψιν ἐπενεγκόντες φαίνον9. Ad Athanaf. epift. Sz.

And again: Unto this very Time, in all their Letters, They fail not to as nathematize and expellout of the Churches the hated Name of Arius: But with Marcellus, who has introduced the directly contrary impiety, and profanely_taken away the very Exiftence of the Divinityofthe Only-begotten Son, and abufed the fignification ofthe word [ΛόγΘ,] (interpreting it of the internal Reafon of the Father ;) with This man they seem to find no fault at all.

And

And Nazianzen, fpeaking fomewhere of the fame Opinions, calls thofe men [ayav de Joótus] over-Orthodox, who by affirming the Son and Holy Spirit to be Self-exiftent, did confequently either destroy their Perfonality, that is, their Existence; or introduce Three co-ordinate Self-exiftent Perfons, that is, [TONEagxiara Plurality of Gods.

The Learned Bibop Bull, fpeaking of the Antient Writers before the Council of Nice: Though perhaps (faith he) they do Somewhat differ from the Divinity of the Schools; on which, Petavius lays too much stress in these my fteries.

And again: He [viz. Petavius] thought every thing jejune and poor, that was not exactly agreeable to the Divinity of the Schools, itSelf more truly in moft things jejune and poor.

Quanquam fortafsè a Scholafticâ Theologiâ, (cui plus æquo in his myfteriis tribuit Petavius,) nonnihil difcrepent. Sect. 2. cap. 13, § 1.

Scilicet illi jejuna & enecta funt, quæcunque Scholafticæ Theologiæ, in plerifque vere jejunæ & enectæ, ad amuffim non exiguntur. Sect. 3, cap. 9, $8.

§ XXIV.

The Word, God, in the New Testament, fometimes fignifies the Perfon of the Son. See the Texts, N. 533-545.

§ XXV.

The reason why the Son in the New Teftament is fometimes ftiled God, is not fo much upon Account of his metaphyfical Subftance, how Divine foever; as of his relative Attributes and divine Authority over Vs. See the Texts, No 533. See beneath, $51.

-545·

Notes on $25.

So far indeed as the Argument holds good from Authority to Substance, fo far the Inferences are juft, which in the School-divinity are drawn concerning the Subftance of the Son. But the Scripture it felf, being written as a Rule of Life; neither in This, nor in any Other matter, ever mentions any metaphyfical Notions, but only Moral Doctrines, and Natural Truths fo far as they happen to be connected with Moral.

The word, God, when fpoken of the Father bimfelf, is never intended in Scripture to exprefs Philofophically his abstract metaphyfical Attributes; but to raife in us a Notion of his Attributes relative to Us, his Supreme Dominion, Authority, Power, Justice, Goodness, &c.

And hence (I fuppofe) it is, that the Holy Ghoft in the New Teftament is never exprefly ftiled God; because whatever be his real metaphyfical Subftance, yet, in the divine Oeconomy, he is no where reprefented as fitting upon a Throne, or exercising Supreme Dominion, or judging the World; but always as execu