the scripture allusions he makes, and the scripture history he adopts as the basis of both Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained, and even the scripture phrases and attributes he ascribes to the One he invokes; for it is evident that, at the beginning of Paradise Lost, and at the opening of the seventh book, as well as here at the beginning of Paradise Regained, he refers to Moses, prophets, and evangelists, and applies to the Person whose aid he implores, the very phrases and agencies they attribute to the Spirit of God, agencies and attributes that can be possessed only by the Infinite Spirit-so evident is this, we say, that to suppose that the poet meant to address any other than the Holy Spirit, is to make the venerable and severe Milton a profane and contemptuous trifler, not only with the Spirit of God, but with the word of God, and even with the understanding of men. Such a supposition cannot be, for a moment, entertained. Milton's invocations are devout supplications to the "Third Subsistence of Divine Infinitude, the Illumining Spirit," for both illumination and strength to

"Assert eternal Providence,

And justify the ways of God to man."

We have now, as we think, gained high vantage ground, from which to ascertain what Milton holds of the Son of God, in Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained. If, as we have shown, he holds the Holy Spirit to be truly divine, this is, to say the least, strong presumptive evidence that he holds the Son to be so too; for it is generally acknowledged that the person and character of the Spirit are less fully and clearly defined, even in the word of God, than those of the Son. Milton himself notices this fact. (See Christian Doctrine, Vol. IV. of Prose Works, pp. 151, 169.) If, then, he makes the Spirit of God truly divine, much more would he the Son of God.

Concerning the character Milton gives the Son of God, in Paradise Lost, space does not allow long discussion; nor does the subject need it. In numerous passages of the great epic, Milton ascribes to the Son of God the names and char.

acters of the Supreme Being, and clothes him with powers and prerogatives that none but Jehovah can possess. He calls Him "God," "Almighty," "Omnipotent," and "Jehovah,” without any qualification. He ascribes to Him omniscience, omnipresence, existence from eternity, absolute, independent, or self existence. The passages in which these names and attributes of the one only God are ascribed to the Son of God, are so numerous that they hardly need be referred to. They are found throughout the seventh book, frequent in the third and eighth, and not unfrequent in other parts of the sublime epic. See bk. vii. 1. 243, 261, 339, 589, 590, 602; bk. viii. 1. 398, 405-108, 415.

Besides these names and attributes, Milton makes the Son Himself say to Adam:

“What think'st thou, then, of Me, and this My state?

Seem I to thee sufficiently possess'd

Of happiness, or not, Who am alone

From all eternity? for none I know

Second to Me, or like, equal much less."

Adam replies:

"Supreme of things!

Thou in Thyself art perfect, and in Thee

Is no deficience found.".

No need that Thou

Should'st propagate, already infinite,

And through all numbers absolute, though One."

Bk. viii. 1. 403-421.

Numerous passages, also, as definitely and unequivocally ascribing supreme Divinity to the Son, are found in the third book. See 1. 138-143, 168-173, 305-415.

That Milton follows, very closely, the word of God in speaking of the Son of God, adhering for the most part to the very phrases and figures of Inspiration, is so plain and patent that all his critics have remarked it; nor does it escape the observation of the ordinary reader. Like the word of God, he hesitates not to represent the Son or the Father as existing in finite forms, forms that strike the sense,

and acting in finite modes and agencies; in deliberating, counselling, and decreeing; as changing place in space and time; as affected with sentiments and emotions such as we feel. Milton does this, seeming to be assured, all the time, that he does not degrade or lower the Godhead in thus applying to him words and images that Inspiration has sanctioned. He seems to feel, as he says, "that the holy scriptures contain nothing unsuitable to the Divine character and dignity; and that God has not, in the guide He has given to His creatures, ascribed to Himself any attribute He would not willingly have them ascribe to Him." Prose Works, IV. p. 17.

While Milton, at one time, ascribes to the Son modes of being and action that are finite, or at least less than infinite, and at another the existence, the powers, and prerogatives that belong to Jehovah only, does he contradict himself, or make the character of the Son mixed, and make it impossible for us to ascertain what he holds Him to be? By no means. These passages are to be understood, and the character of the Son therein determined, not by restricting it to the lower, but by reference to the higher attributes in them. The infinite does not exclude the finite, but consists with it, while the finite does exclude the infinite. In other words, the Infinite Being can possess modes and act through agencies that are less than infinite that are finite; but no merely finite being can either possess really divine attributes, or exercise infinite prerogatives. These are, like God's nature, incommunicable. The Creator may act the creature, and, in the mystery of godliness, become the creature; but the creature cannot become the Creator. Milton's ascription of finite powers and agencies to the Son of God, then, does not prove that he did not hold Him to be infinite, and no more than finite. His ascription of divine attributes and infinite prerogatives to Him, does prove that he held Him to be something more than finite- to be infinite - verus Deus and summus Deus.

Besides the characters given to the Son and the Spirit separately, in Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained, there

are passages that are best understood as adopting the unity of these Persons in the Godhead, or the Trinity. Such is that in the seventh book of Paradise Lost, where the poet represents

"The King of Glory, in his powerful word

And Spirit, coming to create new worlds."-1. 204-.

This seems another full endorsement of the tripersonal Godhead" Of Reformation in England," in 1641. Thus we have a continuous and unbroken testimony that Milton held the supreme Divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and the reality of the Trinity, beginning in 1641 and then so full and positive as to admit of no doubt, and reaching down to 1671, but three years before Millon's death.

Of" The Letters of State."

Additional strength, if it be needed, can be given to this chain of testimony from Milton's Letters of State. These cover a period of ten years, from 1649 to 1559. They show, throughout, how strongly attached was their author to the "evangelic" or "orthodox faith," for this latter is the phrase he most frequently uses in these Letters, especially when addressed to those that are known to be the exponents of this faith, or its practical advocates and defenders. In his Letters, for example, to "The States of the United Provinces," in 1655, concerning the efforts of the duke of Savoy to persecute and destroy the Piedmontois, he says:

"We make no question but that you have already been informed of the Duke of Savoy's Edict, set forth against his subjects inhabiting the valleys at the feet of the Alps, ancient professors of the orthodox faith; by which edict they are commanded to abandon their native habitations, stripped of all their fortunes, unless, within twenty days, they embrace the Roman faith; and with what cruelty the authority of this edict has raged against a needy and harmless people, many being slain by the soldiers; the rest, plundered and driven from their houses, together with their wives and children, to combat cold and hunger among desert mountains and perpetual snow. These things with what commotion of mind you heard related, what a fellowfeeling of the calamnities of brethren pierced your breasts, we readily conjectured from the depth of our own sorrow, which certainly is most heavy

and afflictive. For, being engaged together by the same tie of religion, no wonder we should be so deeply moved with the same afflictions upon the dreadful and undeserved sufferings of our brethren. Besides, that your conspicuous piety and charity towards the orthodox, wherever overborne and oppressed, has been frequently experienced in the most urging straits and calamities of the churches. For my own part, unless my thoughts deceive me, there is nothing wherein I should desire more willingly to be overcome, than in good will and charity toward brethren of the same religion, afflicted and wronged in their quiet enjoyments; as being one that would be accounted always ready to prefer the peace and safety of the churches before my particular interests."

After expressing the hope that what the States of the United Provinces had done, together with what Great Britain had done, would lead the duke of Savoy to "restore his subjects to their habitations and estates, and grant them their pristine freedom in the exercise of their religion," he continues :

"But if he still persist in the same obstinate resolutions of reducing to utmost extremity those people (among whom our religion was either disseminated by the first doctors of the Gospel, and preserved from the defilement of superstition, or else restored to its pristine sincerity, long before other nations obtained that felicity), and determines their utter extirpation and destruction; we are ready to take such other course and counsels with yourselves, in common with the rest of our conformed friends and confederates, as may be most necessary for the preservation of just and good men, upon the brink of inevitable ruin; and to make the duke himself sensible that we can no longer neglect the heavy oppressions and calamities of our orthodox brethren." - Prose Works, II. pp. 253, 254.

Also in Letters to the "Evangelic Cantons and Cities of Switzerland," on the same subject, after alluding to the "abundant proof of their singular love and affection for the orthodox faith," he says:

"Seeing then, by the most strict communion of religion, that you, together with ourselves, are all brethren alike, or rather one body with these unfortunate people, we thought it convenient to write to your lordships concerning our brethren."

...

A little further on, he calls these inhabitants of these Alpine valleys, "professing our religion," "most dearly beloved brethren in Christ."