Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The profession of faith in Christ, as sitting on the right hand of God, is necessary ; First, to mind us of our duty, which must needs consist in subjection and obedience. The majesty of a king claimeth the loyalty of a subject; and if we acknowledge his authority, we must submit unto his power. Nor can there be a greater incitation to obedience, than the consideration of the nature of his government. Subject we must be, whether we will or no: but if willingly, then is our service perfect freedom; if unwillingly, then is our averseness everlasting misery. Enemies we all have been ;* under his feet we shall be, either adopted or subdued. A double kingdom there is of Christ; one of power, in which all are under him; another of propriety, in those which belong unto him: none of us can be

μετὰ τὸ τέλος τοῦ κόσμου ὁ Χριστὸς οὐ βασιλεύσει· καὶ ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν, ὅτι ὁ Λόγος ἐκ Πατρὸς ἐξελθὼν, οὗτος εἰς Πατέρα πάλιν ἀναλυθεὶς οὐκέτι ἐστί. Catech. 15. This was the particular heresy of Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra, followed by Photinus, born in the same place, and therefore termed by St. Cyril, περὶ τὴν Γαλατίαν ἀναφυεῖσα. Τι consisted of two parts; first, that the kingdom of Christ did wholly cease at the end of this world : secondly, that the Word was resolved again into the Father, and consequently did not only cease to reign, but also cease to exist. Which is yet more plainly expressed by Eusebius in his second Book against Marcellus: Καὶ πάλιν, τοῦτον ἀθρόως παυσθήσεσθαι μετὰ τὸν τῆς κρίσεως καιρὸν, τοῦ μὲν Λόγου ἑνωμένου τῷ Θεῷ, ὡς μηδὲν ἕτερον εἶναι πλὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ· τῆς δὲ σαρκὸς ἐρήμου καταλειφθησομένης ὑπὸ τοῦ Λόγου, ὡς μήτε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ ποτὲ ὑφεστάναι, μήτε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώ που ἂν ἀνείληφε. c. 1. This heresy of Mare cellus, St. Basil properly calls an impiety, εἰς τὴν ὑπόστασιν τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χρισ στοῦ. Epist. 78. And again, Epist. 52. εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ὕπαρξιν τῆς τοῦ μονογενοῦς Θεύ τητος which be there more fully expresseth : "Ος (Μάρκελλος) Λόγον μὲν εἰρῆσθαι τὸν Μονογενή δίδωσι, κατὰ χρείαν καὶ ἐπὶ καιροῦ προελθόντα, πάλιν δὲ εἰς τὸν ὅθεν ἐξῆλθεν ἐπα ναστρέψαντα, οὔτε πρὸ τῆς ἐξόδου εἶναι, οὔτε μετὰ τὴν ἐπάνοδον ὑφεστάναι. This existence of the Word and the kingdom of the Son, that heresy made coeval; beginning when the Word came from the Father, that is, at the incarnation; and ending when the Word returned into the Father, that is, at the day of judgment. Which is manifestly delivered by the eastern bishops in that profession of faith, which they sent to those in Italy: ̓Αλλ ̓ ἐκ τότε Χριστὸν αὐτὸν γεγονέναι καὶ υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐξ οὗ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἐκ τῆς παρθένου σάρκα ἀνείληφε, πρὸ τετρακοσίων ὅλων ἐτῶν. Ἐκ τότε γὰρ τὸν Χριστὸν ἀρχὴν βασιλείας ἐσχηκέναι θέλουσι, καὶ τέλος ἕξειν αὐτὴν μετὰ τὴν συντέλειαν καὶ

κρίσιν. Τοιοῦτοι δὲ εἰσὶν οἱ ἀπὸ Μαρκέλλου καὶ Φωτεινοῦ τῶν ̓Αγκυρογαλατῶν, οἳ τὴν προαιώνιον ὕπαρξίν τε καὶ θεότητα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τὴν ἀτελεύτητον αὐτοῦ βασιλείαν ἀθετοῦσιν, ἐπὶ προφάσει τοῦ συνίστασθαι δοκεῖν τὴν μοναρχίαν. Socrat. Hist. Eccles. l. ii. c. 19. But although Marcellus did thus teach the kingdom of Christ not to be eternal, yet his heresy did not so much consist in the denial of this eternity as of the subsistence and person of our Saviour: for otherwise he did truly teach that Christ was an eternal King; as appeareth out of his own words in his book against Asterius the Arian, cited by Eusebius : Οὐκοῦν ὅρον τινὰ δοκεῖ ἔχειν ἡ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον αὐτοῦ οἰκονομία τε καὶ βασιλεία· οὐδὲν γαρ ἕτερον βούλεται ἢ τοῦτο τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ ̓Αποστόλου ῥηθέν, ἕως ἂν θῇ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ· οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὰν τοὺς ἐχθροὺς σχῇ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν, οὐκ ἔτι χρήζει τῆς ἐν μέρει ταύτης βασιλείας, πάντων καθόλου βασιλεὺς ὑπάρχων. contr. Marcell. 1. ii. c. 4. And therefore he made the same confession with the catholics, when he delivered an account of his faith to Julius, bishop of Rome: Πιστεύω δὲ ἑπόμενος ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς, ὅτι εἷς Θεὸς, καὶ ὁ τούτου μου νογενὴς Υἱὸς Λόγος ὁ ἀεὶ συνυπάρχων τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ μηδεπώποτε ἀρχὴν τοῦ εἶναι ἐσχηκὼς. ἀληθῶς ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐ κτισθεὶς, οὐ ποιηθεῖς, ἀλλ ̓ ἀεὶ ὧν, ἀεὶ συμβασιλεύων τῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατρὶ, οὗ τῆς βασιλείας, κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ̓Αποστόλου μαρτυρίαν, οὐκ ἔσται τέλος. S. Epiphan. Hares. lxxii. f. 2.

'Inimicus eras; eris sub pedibus ejus aut adoptatus, aut victus.' S. August, in Psal. cix. §. 9.

† Βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ δύο οἶδεν ἡ γραφὴ, τὴν μὲν κατ ̓ οἰκείωσιν, τὴν δὲ κατὰ δημιουργίαν βασιλεύει μὲν γὰρ ἁπάντων καὶ ̔Ελλήνων καὶ Ἰουδαίων καὶ δαιμόνων καὶ τῶν ἀντιτεταγμένων, κατὰ τὸν τῆς δημιουργίας λόγον βασιλεύει δὲ τῶν πιστῶν καὶ ἑκόντων καὶ ὑποτεταγμένων, κατὰ τὸν τῆς οἰκειώσεως. S. Chrysost. Hom. 59. in 1. ad Corinth.

excepted from the first; and happy are we, if by our obedience we shew ourselves to have an interest in the second, for then that kingdom is not only Christ's but ours.

Secondly, It is necessary to believe in Christ sitting on the right hand of God, that we might be assured of an auspicious protection under his gracious dominion. For God by his exaltation hath given our Saviour "to be the head over all things to the church;" (Eph. i. 22.) and therefore from him we may expect direction and preservation. There can be no illegality, where Christ is the lawgiver; there can be no danger from hostility, where the Son of God is the defender. The very name of head hath the signification not only of dominion but of union; and therefore while we look upon him at the right hand of God, we see ourselves in heaven. This is the special promise which he hath made us, since he sat down there; To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame and am set down with my Father in his throne." (Rev. iii. 21.) How should we rejoice, yea rather how should we fear and tremble, at so great an honour!+

*

Thirdly, The belief of Christ's glorious session is most necessary in respect of the immediate consequence, which is his most gracious intercession. Our Saviour is ascended as the true Melchisedech, not only as the "king of Salem, the king of peace," but also as the "priest of the most high God;" (Heb. vii. 1, 2.) and whereas "every priest," according to the Law of Moses, "stood daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which could never take away sins; this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God." (Heb. x. 11, 12.) And now Christ being set down in that power and majesty, though the sacrifice be but once offered, yet the virtue of it is perpetually advanced by his session, which was founded on his passion: for he is "entered into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." (Heb. ix. 24.) Thus, "If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." (1 John ii. 1.) And " he is able also to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." (Heb. vii. 25.) What then remaineth to all true believers but that triumphant exclamation of the apostle, "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth; who is he that con

This is the exclamation of St. Chrysostom upon those words of St. Paul: Βαβαί! ποῦ πάλιν καὶ τὴν ̓Εκκλησίαν ἀνήγαγεν; ὥσπερ διά τινος ἕλκων μηχανῆς, εἰς ὕψος αὐτὴν ἀνήγαγε μέγα, καὶ αὐτὴν ἐκάθισεν εἰς ἐκεῖνον τὸν θρόνον· ἔνθα γὰρ ἡ κεφαλὴ, ἐκεῖ καὶ τὸ σῶμα, οὐδενὶ γὰς μέσῳ διείργεται ἡ κεφαλὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα· εἰ γὰρ διείργεται, οὐκ ἂν εἴη σῶμα, οὐκ ἂν εἴη κεφαλή. Hom. 3. in Epist. ad Ephes.

† Εννόει τὸν θρόνον τὸν βασιλικὸν, ἐννάει τῆς τιμῆς τὴν ὑπερβολήν· τοῦτο καὶ γεέννης, είχε βουλοίμεθα, μᾶλλον ἡμᾶς φοβῆσαι δυνήσεται. Εἰ γὰρ μὴ γέεννα ἦν, τὸ τιμηθέντας τοσαύτην τιμὴν ἀναξίους εὑρεθῆναι καὶ κακοὺς, τίνα οὐκ ἂν ἔχοι κόλασιν ; τίνα τιμωρίαν ; ἐννόησαν τίνος ἐγγὺς ἡ κεφαλή σου κάθηται (τοῦτο μόνον καὶ ἀπόχρη πρὸς πᾶν ὁτιοῦν), τίνος ἐν δεξιᾷ ίδρυται, Idem, ibidem.

demneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." (Rom. viii. 33, 34.) For he which was accepted in his oblation, and therefore sat down on God's right hand, to improve this acceptation continues his intercession; and having obtained all power by virtue of his humiliation, representeth them both in a most sweet commixtion; by an humble omnipotency, or omnipotent humility, appearing in the presence, and presenting his postulations at the throne of God.*

Having thus explicated the session of our Saviour, we are next to consider the description of him at whose right hand he is set down; which seems to be delivered in the same terms with which the CREED did first begin, I believe in God the Father Almighty: and indeed, as to the expression of his essence, it is the same name of God; as to the setting forth his relation, it is the same name of Father: but as to the adjoining attribute, though it be the same word, it is not the same. notion of Almighty. What therefore we have spoken of the nature of God, and the person of the Father, is not here to be repeated, but supposed; for Christ is set down at the right hand of that God and of that Father, which we understand when we say, I believe in God the Father. But because there is a difference in the language of the Greeks between the word which is rendered Almighty in the first Article, and that which is so

St. Augustin, discoursing upon that place of St. Paul, 1 Tim. ii. 1. "1 exhort that first of all, supplications, prayers, and intercessions, be made for all men," observeth what is the nature of intercession: Pro interpellationibus autem quod nostri habent, secundum codices credo vestros postulationes posuisti. Hæc interim duo, id est, quod alii postulationes, alii interpellationes interpretati sunt, unum verbum transferre voluerunt, quod Græcus habet ivre. Et profecto advertis: sed nosti aliud esse interpellare, aliud postulare. Non enim solemus dicere, postulant interpellaturi, sed interpellant postulaturi. Veruntamen ex vicinitate verbum usurpatum, cui propinquitas ipsa impetrat intellectum, non est velut censoria notatione culpandum. Nam et de ipso Domino Jesu Christo dictum est, quod interpellat pro nobis. Numquid interpellat, et non etiam postulat? Imo vero quia postulat, pro eo positum est, interpellat. Evidenter quippe alibi de eo dicitur, Si quis peccaverit, Advocatum habemus apud Patrem, Jesum Christum justum, ipse est exoratio pro peccatis nostris. Quanquam fortassis codices apud vos etiam in eo loco de Domino Jesu Christo non habent interpellat pro nobis, sed postulat pro nobis. In Græco enim, quo verbo hic positæ sunt interpellationes, quas ipse posuisti postulationes, ipsum et illic ver.

bum est, ubi scriptum est, interpellat pro nobis. Cum igitur et qui precatur oret, et qui orat precetur, et qui interpellat Deum, ad hoc interpellet, ut oret et precetur, &c.' Epist. lix. ad Paulinum, Quæst. 5. §. 14.

+ In the first Article it is Παντοκράτως, in the sixth Пavтodúvaμos. Page 69, 70. And this distinction is very material, and much observed by the Greeks: as Dionysius Areopagita (whosoever that is) in his book De Divinis Nominibus, in the 8th chapter, explicates the δυναμωνυμίαν, οι navrodúvaμov, and in the 10th chapter παντοκράτως, as two distinct names with different notions of God. Of the Пavroxgárog, which we have already considered, he gives this account: Τὸ μὲν γὰρ λέγεται, διὰ τὸ πάντων αὐτὸν εἶναι παντοκρατορικὴν ἕδραν, συνέχουσαν καὶ περιέχουσαν τὰ ὅλα, καὶ ἐνιδρύουσαν καὶ θεμελιοῦσαν καὶ περισφίγγουσαν, καὶ ἀῤῥαγὲς ἐν ἑαυτῇ τὸ πᾶν ἀποτελοῦσαν, καὶ ἐξ ἑαυτῆς τὰ ὅλα καθάπερ ἐκ ῥίζης παντοκρατορικῆς προάγουσαν, καὶ εἰς ἑαυτὴν τὰ πάντα καθάπερ εἰς πυθμένα παντο κρατορικὸν ἐπιστρέφουσαν, καὶ συνέχουσαν αὐτὰ, ὡς πάντων ἕδραν παγκρατῆ, τὰ συνεχί μενα πάντα κατὰ μίαν ὑπερέχουσαν πάντα συνοχὴν ἀσφαλιζομένην, καὶ οὐκ ἐῶσαν αὐτὰ διεκπεσόντα ἑαυτῆς, ὡς ἐκ παντελοῦς ἑστίας κινούμενα, παραπολέσθαι. c. x. §. 1. But of the Suvaavia he gives another account, as we shall see hereafter.

rendered in the sixth, because that peculiarly signified authority of dominion, this more properly power in operation; therefore we have reserved this notion of omnipotency now to be explained.

In which, two things are observable; the propriety, and the universality; the propriety in the potency, the universality in the omnipotency; first, That he is a God of power; secondly, That he is a God of infinite power. The potency consisteth in a proper, innate, and natural force or activity, by which we are assured that God is able to act, work, and produce true and real effects, which do require a true and real power to their production and in respect of this he is often described unto us under the notion of a mighty God. The omnipotency or infinity of this power consisteth in an ability to act, perform, and produce, whatsoever can be acted or produced, without any possibility of impediment or resistance: and in this respect he is represented to us as an Almighty God. And therefore such an omnipotency we ascribe unto him: which is sufficiently delivered in the Scriptures, first by the testimony of an angel," for with God nothing shall be impossible;” (Luke i 37.) secondly, by the testimony of Christ himself, who said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible." (Mark x. 27.) Now he to whom all things are possible and to whom nothing is impossible, is truly and properly omnipotent. Thus whatsoever doth not in itself imply a repugnancy of being or subsisting, hath in reference to the power of God a possibility of production; and whatsoever in respect of the power of God hath an impossibility of production, must involve in itself a repugnancy or contradic

tion.

This truth, though confessed by the heathens, hath yet been denied by some of them; but with poor and insufficient arguments, that we shall need no more than an explication of the doctrine to refute their objections.

First, then, we must say God is omnipotent, because all

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

nare, aut revocare defunctos; nec facers
ut qui vixit non vixerit, qui honores gessit
non gesserit, nullumque habere in præterita
jus præterquam oblivionis : atque (ut face-
tis quoque argumentis societas hæc cum
Deo copuletur)ut bis dena viginti non sint,
ac multa similiter efficere non posse, per
quæ declaratur haud dubie naturæ poten-
tia, idque esse quod Deum vocamus.' Pin.
Nat. Hist. I. ii. c. 7. Add unto these that
objection of Elymas the sorcerer, recorded
by Dionysius Areopagita: Kairos si
Ελύμας ὁ μάγος. Εἰ παντοδύναμός ἐστιν ὁ Θεὸς,
πῶς λέγεται τι μὴ δύνασθαι πρὸς τοῦ καθ ̓
ὑμᾶς θεολόγου; Λοιδορεῖται δὲ τῷ θείω Παύλω
φήσαντι, μὴ δύνασθαι τὸν Θεὸν ἑαυτὸν ἀρτήσαν
bai. De Divinis Nominibus, c. 8,

1

power, whatsoever is in any creature, is derived from him; and well may he be termed Almighty, who is the fountain of all might. There is no activity in any agent, no influence of any cause, but what dependeth and proceedeth from the principal agent or the first of causes. There is nothing in the whole circumference of the Universe but hath some kind of activity, and consequently some power to act* (for nothing can be done without a power to do it): and as all their entities flow from the first of beings, so all their several and various powers flow from the first of powers: and as all their beings cannot be conceived to depend on any but an infinite essence, so all those powers cannot proceed from any but an infinite power.

Secondly, God may be called omnipotent, because there can be no resistance made to his power, no opposition to his will, no rescue from his hands.t "The Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?" (Isa. xiv. 27.) "He doth according to his will, in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What dost thou ?" (Dan. iv. 35.) According to the degrees of power in the agent and the resistent, is an action performed or hindered if there be more degrees of power in the resistent than in the agent, the action is prevented; if fewer, it may be retarded or debilitated, not wholly hindered or suppressed. But if there be no degree of power in the resistent in reference to the agent, then is the action totally vigorous; and if in all the powers, beside that of God, there be not the least degree of any resistance, we must acknowledge that power of his being above all opposition, to be infinite. As Jehosaphat said, “In thine hand, O God, is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee?" (2 Chron. xx. 6.) From hence there is no difficulty with God to perform any thing: no greater endeavour or activity to produce the greatest than the least of creatures; but an equal facility in reference unto all things which cannot be imagined but by an infinite excess of power, above and beyond all resistance.

:

Thirdly, God is yet more properly called omnipotent, because his own active power extendeth itself to all things ;§ neither is there any thing imaginably possible, which he cannot do. Thus when God several ways had declared his power unto Job, "Job answered the Lord, and said, I know that thou

Ἡ ἀπειροδύναμος τοῦ Θεοῦ διάδοσις εἰς πάντα τὰ ὄντα χωρεῖ, καὶ οὐδέν ἐστι τῶν ὄντων ὁ παντελῶς ἀφήρηται τὸ ἔχειν τινὰ δύναμιν, ἀλλ ̓ ἡ νοερὰν, ἡ λογικὴν, ἡ αἰσθητικὴν, ἡ ζωτικὴν, ἢ οὐσιώδη δύναμιν, ἔχει· καὶ αὐτὸ δὲ, εἰ θέμις εἰπεῖν, τὸ εἶναι δύναμιν, εἰς τὸ εἶναι ἔχει παρὰ τῆς ὑπερουσίου δυνάμεως. Dionys. Areopag. De Divin. Nom. c. 8. §. 3.

† 'Neque enim veraciter ob aliud vocatur omnipotens, nisi quia quicquid vult

potest; nec voluntate cujuspiam creaturæ voluntatis omnipotentis impeditur effectus.' S. August. Enchir. ad Laur. c. 96.

Nisi omnipotens esset, non una eademque facilitate summa atque ima fecisset.' Fulgent. de Fide ad Petrum, c. 3. Quis est omnipotens nisi qui omnia potest? S. August. de Trin. 1. iv. c. 20. §. 27.

« AnteriorContinuar »