"in all things like unto us, excepting fin, but begotten of the Father before the world, according to the deity; and in the laft days, for us and our falvation, "was of the virgin Mary the mother of our Lord, according to the humanity, " &c."

VI. In the fixth century were a fort of hereticks called Bo-o-nofians, who held that Chrift was not the proper but adoptive Son; against whom Juftinian bishop of Vale in Spain wrote; and Arianifm fpread and prevailed under the Gothic kings in feveral parts. Fulgentius fpeaks of the tenets of the Arians in this time, that the Word or Son of God was not of the fame fubftance with the Father. This author wrote an answer to ten objections of theirs: to the first, concerning diversity of words and names used, he replies, "When Father and Son are "named, in these two names a diverfity of words is acknowledged, but nei"ther by thofe two different words the nature of both is fignified, for the diverfity of thofe names does not divide the natures, but fhews the truth of "the generation, as from one true Father, we know that one true Son exifts." To the fecond objection, concerning the ineffability of generation, he observes, "because the generation of the Son is unfpeakable, it is not unknowable, nor "does it follow, because it cannot be declared, that it cannot be known "."

Chilpericus, king of the Franks, endeavoured to revive the Sabellian heresy, but was oppofed by Gregory Furnenfis: befides Fulgentius and Gregory, there were others in this age who afferted and defended the eternal generation and Sonship of Chrift, as Fortunatus, Caffiodorus, Gregorius Magnus, and others'; and even by a fynod confifting of Gothic bishops *, in number fixty three. In the fame century the famous Boetius declares his faith in God the Father, in God the Son, and in God the holy Ghoft; that the Father has a Son begotten of his substance, and co-eternal with him, whofe generation no human mind can conceive of '.

VII. In the feventh century, towards the beginning of it, rofe up that vile impoftor Mahomet, as bitter an enemy to the true, proper and eternal Sonship, of Chrift, as ever was, for which he gave the following brutish and stupid reafons; "because God did not need a Son, because if he had a Son, they might “not agree, and fo the government of the world be disturbed "." Reasons which require no answer. Not to take notice of the several councils at Toletum,

m

Altreg. Thcolog. Hift. loc 3. p. 236. vid. Forbes. inftruct. Hift. Theolog. 1.4. c.6. p. 189, 199%

held in this century, in which the article of Chrift's eternal Sonfhip was afferted and maintained, I would obferve what is faid in a Roman fynod, confifting of a hundred and twenty five bishops, in which Agatho the Roman pontiff prefided; "We believe, fay they, in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and "earth, and of all things vifible and invifible; and in his only begotten Son, "who was begotten of him before all worlds "."

VIII. In the eighth century, the notion that Chrift, though the true, proper, and natural Son of God according to the divine nature, yet according to the human nature was only the Son of God by adoption and grace, an adoptive Son, was propagated by Elipandus and Felix, Spanish bishops, but condemned by the council at Frankfort, called by Charles the great "; and the eternal Sonship and generation of Chrift was afferted and maintained by Damafcene, Bede, Albinus, and others °.

IX. In the ninth, tenth and eleventh centuries, the controversies were chiefly about Image-worship, Tranfubftantiation, &c. yet in thefe and the following centuries, we have teftimonies from various writers to the truth of Christ's proper and eternal Sonship by generation; it would be too numerous to produce them all; it will be fufficient to fay, it was not oppofed by any, but plainly and strongly affirmed by Rabanus, Macerus, and Haymo in cent. 9. by Theophilact, in cent. 10. by Anfelm, in cent. 11. by Peter Lombard and Bernard, in cent. 12. by Thomas Aquinas and Albertus Magnus, in cent 13. but in these and the following centuries, till the Reformation, Satan had other work to do than to stir up men to oppofe the Trinity, or any of the divine perfons in it, having enough to do to fupport the hierarchy of Rome, and the peculiar tenets of Popery, against the witneffes who rofe up at different times to oppose them, and to endeavour to carry the pride and tyranny of the bishop of Rome to the highest pitch poffible.

X. When the Reformation began in the fixteenth century, and spread throughout many nations in Europe, great evangelical light broke forth among the Reformers; and Satan fearing his kingdom would greatly fuffer hereby, went to his old game again, which he had played with fo much fuccefs in the first ages of christianity, namely, to ftir up an oppofition to the doctrine of the Trinity, and the perfon of Chrift; which was firft begun by Servetus in Helvetia,

who afterwards came to Geneva and there ended his life". Blandrata, infected with his principles, went into Poland, and there artfully fpread his poifon in the reformed churches, affifted by others, and which at length iffued in a divifion in those churches; when Fauftus Socinus, who had imbibed fome bad notions from the papers of his uncle Lelius about the Trinity, came into Poland, and joined the Antitrinitarians there, and strengthened their caufe, and where the notions of him and his followers took root and flourished much: and from thence have been transplanted into other countries. Those men, who were men of keen parts and abilities, faw clearly that could they demolish the article of Chrift's Sonship by eternal generation, it would be all over with the doctrine of the Trinity; and therefore fet themselves with all their might against it ". Socinus himself fays of it, not only that it is error and a meer human invention, and which he reprefents as if it was held to be more animantium; but that it is most abfurd, most unworthy of God, and contrary to his abfolute perfection and unchangeable eternity; and afferts, that Chrift is not called. the only begotten Son of God, because generated of the substance of God; and that there is no other, nor ever exifted any other only begotten Son of God, befides that man, Jefus of Nazareth: and exprefsly fays, it clearly appears, that the human nature of Chrift is the perfon of the Son of God; and elsewhere 9 makes the fame objection to Sonship by generation as Mahomet did, for he fays, "Those who accommodate the Word brought forth in Prov. viii. 24. to the Son, "are not, according to the judgment of the Homooufians, to be reckoned very "diftant from the blafphemy of the Turks, who when they hear that the Chrif"tians fay, God has a Son, afk, Who is his wife?" And in this article concerning the Sonship of Chrift, and also with refpect to the doctrine of the Trinity, the Remonftrants', in the seventeenth century and onwards, seem to agree with them; but the contrary has been maintained by all found divines and evangelical churches, from the Reformation to the prefent time, as appears by their writings and harmony of confeffions: fo that upon the whole it is clear,

Servetus has there blafphemous words concerning eternal generation, debuiffent dicere quod pater "celebat uxorem quandam fpiritua'em, vel quod folus ipfe mafculo-fœmineus, aut hermaphroditus, "fimul erat pater & mater, &c nam ratio vocabuli non patitur ut quis dicatur fine matre pater." Servetus de Trinit. error. Septen. 1. 1. A. D. 1;31. And again, "Si Logos filius erat natus ex "patre fine matre, dic mihi quomodo peperit eum, per ventrem an per latus." Ibid. 1. 2. p. 52. apud Hornbeck Socin. confolat. tom. 1. p. 17. Servetus would not own Chrift to be the eternal Son of God, only the Son of the eternal God. Socinus apud Hornbeck Ibid. p. 20.

n Vid. Racov. Catech. c. 1. qu. 17-20. Wolzogen de effentia & natura Dei, c. 9 p. 25, &c. • Chrift. Relig. Inftitut. inter opera ejus, vol. 1. p.655.

Refpons. ad Vujekum, c. 7. p. 607. vol. 2.

P Quod regni Polon. c.4. f.2. p. 698,699.

Vid. Peltii Herman Remonftr. & Socin.

artic. 4. paragr. 1. 4. p. 15, 19.

VOL. II.

4 C

that

that the church of God has been in the poffeffion of this doctrine of the eternal generation and Sonship of Chrift, from the beginning of christianity to the present age, almost eighteen hundred years; nor has there been any one man who profeffed to hold the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the three diftinct divine perfons in the unity of the divine effence, that ever oppofed it, till the latter end of the Seventeenth century: if any fuch perfon in this course of time can be named, let him be named: none but the followers of Simon Magus, Cerinthus, Ebion, Carpocrates, the Gnosticks, &c. in the two firft centuries, and then by the Sabellians, Samofatenians, Arians, Photinians, Mahometans, Socinians, and more lately by the Remonftrants, fuch as are Antitrinitarians. The only two perfons I have met with who have profeffed to hold the doctrine of the Trinity, as it has been commonly received, that have publicly expreffed their doubts or diffatisfaction about the phrase eternal generation, I mean fuch as are of any note or character, for as for the trifling tribe of ignorant writers and fcribblers, who know not what they fay nor whereof they affirm, I make no account of them; I fay, I have met with only two of this fort. The one is Roell, a Dutch Profeffor at Franeker, who lived at the latter end of the laft century; this man profeffed to believe that there are three diftinct divine perfons, the Father, Son, and Spirit, and that these three are one; that the second perfon in the Trinity was begotten by the Father from all eternity, and that this is the firft and chief reason that he is called a Son; nor did he object to the use of the phrase eternal generation, nor did he difufe it, but explained it to another fenfe than that in which it was commonly taken, that is, that it only fignified the co-existence of the second perfon with the firft, and communion of nature with him. But as the fame may be said of the first and third perfons, the phrase of generation so understood might be faid of them as well as of the fecond; he therefore was obliged to have recourfe to the oeconomy of falvation, and the manifeftation of the three perfons in it'. On the whole, he was opposed by the very learned Vitringa', and his opinion was profcribed and condemned by almost all the fynods of the Dutch churches, and he was forbid by the authority of his fupreme magiftrate to propagate it; and moft of the fynods have decreed, that the candidates for the miniftry fhall be examined about this opinion, before they are admitted into the miniftry". The other perfon, who has objected to the eternal generation of the Son of God, is Dr Thomas Ridgley, Profeffor of Divinity in London, towards the beginning of the prefent century": who ftrongly afferts, and contends for the doctrine of a Trinity of divine diftinct perfons

in the Godhead, and yet strangely adopts the Socinian notion of Sonship by office, and makes the eternal Sonship of Christ to be what he calls his mediato rial Sonship. There is indeed a third person of great fame among us, Dr Isaac Watts, who has expreffed his diffatisfaction with the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son of God, but then he is not to be reckoned a Trinitarian, being fo manifeftly in the Sabellian scheme, as appears by his Dissertations published in 1725. infomuch that the celebrated Fred. Adolphus Lampe, who published his Theological Difputations concerning the holy Spirit, two or three years after, spares not to reckon him among the groffer Sabellians: his words are *, Nupe"rius novum fyftema Socinianum de Trinitate Anglice J. WATS edidit, additis quibufdam differtationibus eam illuftrantibus, quarum quinta ex profeffo de fpiritu S. agit. Exiftimat quidem fect. 2. p. 126. eatenus fe a Socino, Schlictingio, "Crellio effe diftinguatum, quod virtutem in Deo non accidentalem, fed ef"fentialem, feu fubftantialem pro fpiritu S. habeat: hoc tamen ita facit, ut non "cenfeat hanc notionem conftanter ubique obtinere: nam fæpius cum craffiori"bus Sabellianis fpiritum S. effe Deum ipfum, p. 130. 1. 49. defendit." Upon the whole, fetting afide the faid perfons, the teftimonies for and against the eternal generation and Sonship of Chrift ftand thus:

For ETERNAL GENERATION, &c.

Ignatius, Polycarp, Juftin Martyr, Irenæus, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Clemens of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Gregory of Neocafaria, Dionyfius of Alexandria, the three hundred and eighteen Nicene Fathers; Athanafius, Alexander bishop of Alexandria, Epiphanius, Hilary, Fauftinus, Gregory of Nazianzum, Bafil, Gregory of Nya, Ambrose, Jerom, Ruffinus, Cyril of Jerufalem, befides the many hundreds of bishops and prefbyters affembled at different times and in different places, as, at Syrmium, Antioch, Ariminum, Seleucia, and Conftantinople, and elsewhere; Auguftine, Chryfoftom, Leo Magnus, Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria, Pau

AGAINST IT.

Simon Magus, Cerinthus, and Ebion, and their respective followers; Carpocrates and the Gnofticks, Valentinus, Theodotus the currier, Artemon, and others their affociates; Beryllus of Boftra, Praxeus, Hermogenes, Noetius and Sabellius, the Samofatenians, Arians, Aetians, Eunomians and Photinians, the Prifcillianifts and Bonotians; Mahomet and his followers; the Socinians and Remonftrants; and all Antitrinitarians.

4C 2

* Lampe difp. 2. de fpiritu, f. c. 3. f. 13. p. 11.

linus,