same in both), but only in this, that the Father hath that essence of himself, the Son by communication from the Father. From whence he acknowledgeth that he is from him' (John vii. 29), that he 'liveth by him' (John vi. 57), that the 'Father gave him to have life in himself' (John v. 26), and generally referreth all things to him, as received from him. Wherefore in this sense some of the ancients have not stuck to interpret those words,* the Father is greater than I' (John xiv. 28), of Christ as the Son of God, as the second person in the blessed Trinity; but still with reference not unto his essence, but unto his generation, by which he is understood to have his being from the Father, who only hath it of himself, and is the original of all power and essence in the

6

* From the very comparison here instituted some of the Fathers infer the divinity of Christ, and his consubstantiality with the Father. Thus ATHANASIUS, (cont. Arianos, orat. 1), having declared that the Son must be of a different nature from the creatures, since he is their Maker, and rather of the substance and essence of the Father, thus supports his latter position : [A TOUTO Yag, X.T.λ.]" On this account the Son himself said not, The Father is better than I, lest he should infer that he was of a different nature, but My Father is greater than I; greater, not in dignity (or vastness, mɛyebu Tivi) or in age, but on account of his generation of the Father. Now, in the very expression 'He is greater' he implies his identity of substance." I carry on this reasoning in the words of Basil, quoted by Pearson himself in loco. "From this very text I confidently assert the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father :f or comparison can properly be made only of things of the same nature. We call one angel greater than another angel; one man more righteous than another man; and one bird swifter than another bird: if then comparisons be made of things of the same nature, and the Father be said, on comparison, to be greater than the Son, then is the Son of the same essence [μoovσios] with the Father."

are.

Son. I can of mine own self do nothing,' (John v. 30), saith our Saviour, because he is not of himself; and whosoever receives his being, must receive his power from another, especially where the essence and the power are undeniably the same, as in God they 'The Son then can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do,' because he hath no power of himself but what the Father gave: and seeing he gave him all the power, as communicating his entire and individual essence, therefore what things soever he doth, these also doeth the Son likewise' (John v. 19), by the same power by which the Father worketh, because he had received the same Godhead in which the Father subsisteth. There is nothing more intimate and essential to any thing than the life thereof, and that in nothing so conspicuous as in the Godhead, where life and truth are so inseparable, that there can be no living God but the true, no true God but the living. The Lord is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting King,' saith the prophet Jeremy (x. 10); and St Paul putteth the Thessalonians in mind how they turned from idols to serve the living and true God,' (1 Thess. i. 9). Now, life is otherwise in God than in the creatures: in him originally, in them derivatively; in him as in the fountain of absolute perfection, in them by way of dependence and participation; our life is in him, but his is in himself: and as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself' (John v. 26);

6

both the same life, both in themselves, both in the same degree, as the one, so the other; but only with this difference, the Father giveth it, and the Son receiveth it. From whence he professeth of himself that the living Father sent him, and that he liveth by that Father; (John vi. 57).

;

"We must not, therefore, so far endeavour to involve ourselves in the darkness of this mystery as to deny that glory which is clearly due unto the Father whose pre-eminence undeniably consisteth in this, that he is God not of any other, but of himself, and that there is no other person who is God but is God of him. It is no diminution to the Son to say, he is from another, for his very name imports as much; but it were a diminution to the Father to speak so of him and there must be some pre-eminence where there is place for derogation. What the Father is, he is from none; what the Son is, he is from him: What the first is, he giveth; what the second is, he receiveth. The first is a Father indeed by reason of his Son, but he is not God by reason of him: whereas the Son is not so only in regard of the Father, but also God by reason of the same."

Thus far the Right Reverend Prelate. To endeavour to explain the mystery which he thus states, and founds on its scriptural basis, is far from my intention; but I may perhaps offer a suggestion which may bring him, to whom it has not occurred, one little step nearer to a conception of the eternal generation of the Son of God. We find some traces

of the attributes of Jehovah in the characters which he has impressed on his works, and especially in his rational and accountable creatures: in the instinctive approval of virtue; in the kind and noble affections of the soul; in the dictates of conscience, at the same time supreme and rigidly just; in these, and other the like things, it cannot be denied that we find some traces of the image of God in man.

And there is a divinely implanted affection of man's heart, itself as lovely as any of these, which has as much and as beneficial influence on his character and happiness. I mean a desire of companionship; of some being with whom to participate in whatever is good in his feelings, in whatever is happy in his fortunes, in whatever is noble in his conceptions, in whatever is magnificent in his endeavours, in whatever is exhilarating in his hopes; a desire of some being in whom he may see himself reflected; in whose recognition of what he feels himself to be, he may have, as it were, an independent evidence of his being, character, and well-being. Multiply the goodness, the happiness of man, and elevate his attainments as you please, and you do in the same degree increase this characteristic appetite: and if it be not only good and lofty in itself, and the cause of goodness; but if it be increased also in intensity with our growth in goodness, in happiness, and in perfection, it is surely not less worthy to be thought a trace of the divine image in us, than any of our best affections or highest endowments. Suppose, then, that such is the essential

nature of God; that he too will have a fellow; an express image of his person; one in whom he may be well pleased; one with whom he may take counsel, to whom he may say, not in the figurative majesty of an earthly monarch, but in the propriety of a selfrepeating essence; " Let us make man after OUR own image." That God should will this, we know would be, that it should come to pass; and that it is his very nature so to will it, is not beyond our conception: but if so, then it follows, that from all eternity God had such a compeer; one coeternal with himself, yet from him deriving existence: and, if he so willed, one coequal with himself, though from him deriving power and dominion. In other words, paternity is as much inherent in God as deity itself; and as he was God from all eternity, so was he from all eternity the Father.

But there is much more danger in the seeming irreverence of such speculations, than in leaving a mystery wholly unexplained. Upon this subject we can deliver authoritatively, that only which the word of God declares concerning it; and this, we may be assured, is all that it is important that we should know; but that we should know thus much is important. It is important that we should know the relation between the Father and the Son, with the necessary priority and preeminence of the one, and the necessary subordinateness of the other; that we may understand Christ's mission, and whatever there is in the Christian religion which hath any dependence on the paternity of the first per