always had without beginning, without beginning he did communicate; being always Father, as always God. Animals when they come to the perfection of nature, then become prolifical; in God eternal perfection showeth his eternal fecundity. And that which is most remarkable, in human generations the son is of the same nature with the father, and yet is not the same man; because though he hath an essence of the same kind, yet he hath not the same essence; the power of generation depending on the first prolifical benediction, "Increase and multiply," it must be made by way of multiplication, and thus every son becomes another man. But the divine essence, being by reason of its simplicity not subject to division, and in respect of its infinity incapable of multiplication, is so communicated as not to be multiplied; insomuch that he who proceedeth by that communication hath not only the same nature, but is also the same God. The Father God, and the Word God; Abraham man, and Isaac man; but Abraham one man, Isaac another man; not so the Father one God, and the Word another, but the Father and the Word both the same God. Seeing then the propriety of generation is founded in the essential similitude of the Son unto the Father, by reason of the same which he receiveth from him; seeing the full perfect nature of God is communicated unto the Word, and that more intimately and with greater unity or identity than can be found in human generations; it followeth that this communication of the divine nature is the proper generation by which Christ is, and is called the true and proper Son of God. This was the foundation of St. Peter's confession, "Thou art the Son of the living God;" this the ground of our Saviour's distinction, “I go unto my Father, and to your Father." Hence did St. John raise a verity, more than only a negation of falsity, when he said, "we are in the true Son; for we which are in him are true, not false sons, but such sons we are not as the true Son. Hence did St. Paul draw an argument of the infinite love of God toward man, in that he spared not his own proper Son. Thus have we sufficiently showed, that the eternal communication of the divine essence by the Father to the Word was a proper generation by which Christ Jesus al

دو

ways was the true and proper Son of God: which was our fourth assertion.

The fifth and last assertion followeth, that the divine essence was so peculiarly communicated to the Word, that there was never any other naturally begotten by the Father; and in that respect Christ is the only-begotten Son of God. For the clearing of which truth, it will first be necessary to inquire into the true notion of the onlybegotten; and then show how it belongs particularly to Christ, by reason of the divine nature communicated by way of generation to him alone. First, therefore, we must avoid the vain interpretation of the ancient heretics, who would have the restraining term " only" to belong, not to the Son, but to the Father; as if "the only-begotten" were no more than begotten of the Father only. Which is both contrary to the language of the scriptures, and the common custom of men, who use it not for him who is begotten of one, but for him who alone is begotten of

any.

Secondly; we must by no means admit the exposition of the later heretics, who take "the only-begotten" to be nothing else but the most beloved of all the sons; because Isaac was called the only son of Abraham, when we know that he had Ishmael beside; and Solomon said to be the only-begotten before his mother, when David had other children even by the mother of Solomon. For "the only-begotten" and "the most beloved" are not the same; the one having the nature of a cause in respect of the other, and the same cannot be cause and effect to itself. For though it be true, that the only son is the beloved son; yet with this order, that he is therefore beloved, because the only, not therefore the only, because beloved. Although therefore Christ be the only-begotten and the beloved Son of God, yet we must not look upon these two attributes as synonymous or equally significant of the same thing, but as one depending on the other; unigeniture being the foundation of his singular love. Beside, Isaac was called the only son of Abraham for some other reason than because he was singularly beloved of Abraham, for he was the only son of the free-womar, the only son of the promise made to Abraham, which was first this, "Sarah shall have a son," and then, "In Isaac shall

thy seed be called," Gen. xviii. 14; xxi. 12. So that Isaac may well be called the only son of Abraham in reference to the promise, as the apostle speaks expressly; "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac, and he that had received the promises offered up his onlybegotten son," Heb. xi. 17. Avoiding therefore these two expositions, as far short of the true notion of" the only-begotten;" we must look upon it in the most proper, full, and significant sense, as signifying a Son so begotten as none other is, was, or can be: so as the term restrictive only shall have relation not only to the Father generating, but also to the Son begotten, and to the manner of the generation. It is true, the Father spake from heaven, saying, "Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased;" and thereby we are to understand, that whosoever of us are beloved by the Father are so beloved in and through the Son. In the same manner Christ is the only-begotten Son of God; and as many of us as God hath bestowed his love upon, "that we should be called the sons of God," are all brought into that near relation by our fellowship with him, who is by a far more near relation the natural and eternal Son.

Having thus declared the interpretation of the Word, that, properly, as primogeniture consisteth in prelation, so unigeniture in exclusion; and that none can be strictly called the only-begotten but he who alone was so begotten; we shall proceed to make good our assertion, showing that the divine essence was peculiarly communicated to the Word, by which he was begotten the Son of God, and never any was so begotten beside that Son,

And here we meet with two difficulties: one showing that there were other sons of God said to be begotten, of him, to whom either the divine essence was communicated; and then the communication of that to the Word made him not the only-begotten; or it was not communicated, and then there is no such communication necessary to found such a filiation: the other, alleging that the same divine essence may be communicated to another beside the Word, and not only that it may, but that it is so, to the person of the Holy Ghost; whence either the Holy Ghost must be the Son of God, and then the Word

is not the only-begotten; or if he be not the Son, then is not the communication of the divine essence a sufficient foundation of the relation of sonship. These two objections being answered, nothing will remain farther to demonstrate this last assertion.

For the first, we acknowledge that others are frequently called the sons of God, and that we call the same God our Father, whom Christ called his; that "both he that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call us brethren,' Heb. ii. 11. We confess that those whom St. Paul "hath begotten through the gospel" may well be termed the "begotten of God, whose seed remaineth in them:" but withal, we affirm that this our regeneration is of a nature wholly different from the generation of the Son. We are first generated, and have our natural being; after that regenerated, and so receive a spiritual renovation, and by virtue thereof an inheritance incorruptible; whereas the generation of Christ admits no regeneration, he becoming at once thereby God and Son and Heir of all. The state of sonship which we come into is but of adoption, showing the generation by which we are begotten to be but metaphorical; whereas Christ is so truly begotten, so properly the natural Son of God, that his generation clearly excludeth the name of adoption; and not only so, but when he becometh the Son of Man, even in his humanity refuseth the name of an adopted Son. For "when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law," not that he, but "that we might receive the adoption of sons," Gal. iv. 4. He then whose generation is totally different from ours whom he calleth brethren; he whom in the sacred scriptures the Spirit nameth the true Son, the Father sometimes his own, sometimes his beloved, but never his adopted Son; he who by those proper and peculiar appellations is distinguished from us, who can claim no higher filiation than that which we receive by the privilege of adoption; he is truly the only-begotten Son of God, notwithstanding the same God hath begotten us by his Word; and the reason why he is so is, because the divine essence was communicated unto him

in his natural and eternal generation, whereas only the grace of God is conveyed unto us in our adoption. Indeed if we were begotten of the essence of God as Christ was, or he were only by the grace of God adopted as we are, then could he by no propriety of speech be called the only Son, by reason of so many brethren; but seeing we cannot aspire unto the first, nor he descend unto the latter, it remaineth that we acknowledge him, notwithstanding the first difficulty, by virtue of his natural and peculiar generation, to be the only-begotten Son.

But though neither men nor angels be begotten of the substance of God, or by virtue of any such natural generation be called sons; yet one person we know, to whom the divine essence is as truly and really communicated by the Father as to the Son, who is the third person in the blessed Trinity, the Holy Ghost. Why then should the Word by that communication of the divine essence become the Son and not the Holy Ghost by the same? or if, by receiving the same nature, he also be the Son of God, how is the Word the only Son? To this I answer, that the Holy Ghost receiveth the same essence from the Father which the Word receiveth, and thereby becometh the same God with the Father and the Word; but though the essence be the same which is communicated, yet there is a difference in the communication; the Word being God by generation, the Holy Ghost by procession: and though every thing which is begotten proceedeth, yet every thing which proceedeth is not begotten. Wherefore in the language of the sacred scriptures and the church, the Holy Ghost is never said to be begotten, but to proceed from the Father; nor is he ever called the Son, but the gift of God. Eve was produced out of Adam, and in the same nature with him, and yet was not born of him, nor was she truly the daughter of Adam; whereas Seth proceeding from the same person in the similitude of the same nature, was truly and properly the son of Adam. And this difference was not in the nature produced, but in the manner of production; Eve descending not from Adam as Seth did, by way of generation, that is, by natural fecundity. The Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father in the game nature with him, the Word proceedeth from the