Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n age_n year_n young_a 486 4 6.3661 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A65532 The antapology of the melancholy stander-by in answer to the dean of St. Paul's late book, falsly stiled, An apology for writing against the Socinians, &c. Wettenhall, Edward, 1636-1713. 1693 (1693) Wing W1487; ESTC R8064 73,692 117

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

be a just and modest Reprehension of him and what I am sure the Man will meekly take But to make him black and odious by all Arts and to talk of reforming him out of the Church for his peaceable Desires and Well-meaning is imperious beyond Measure and what another would call Tyrannical nor will he name what Spirit it bespeaks especially when the great Argument or Foundation of all against what he has said is no better than a Petitio Principii or taking for granted the prime Matter in question namely that the Doctrine of the Trinity as Dr. Sherlock has stated and does defend it is a Fundamental of the Christian Faith This the Dean in his Apology has not offered one Word to prove but quitting his Adversaries and shutting both Eyes and Ears against all that has been said against his Novelties on this Subject violently falls upon exposing the peaceable Man which was indeed much the easier Project but whether either Christian or Honourable the World will judg The melancholy Stander-by had asserted in his 7th Page the Doctrine of the Trinity as duly stated to be one of the Fundamentals of Christian Religion And it is most plain by what he propounds as the Medium of Peace that the stating it according to Scripture and in Scripture-Language he esteems the most due stating it the Dean likes not this says it is a Proposal of old Hereticks and not only would have the Philosophical Terms now a long time usual in this Point received for Peace-sake but as Fundamental in Faith Nay and not content herewith he gives new Definitions of or affixes new Notions to these Terms and would have all pass upon us still under the Colour of Fundamentals The melancholy Stander-by to speak the whole Truth neither could nor can admit either of these namely either that Philosophical Terms never used by Scripture and besides of various Use or uncertain Signification should be made Fundamentals of Faith or that the Doctor 's new Explication of them should pass at all and his Reasons may perhaps appear anon But in what he writ he express'd not this his Dissent so as to contest either of these Points Only as he would not enter into the Controversy himself so he desired chiefly by reason of the Mischief he thought he saw arising from thence it might be at present forborn by all and he is still as willing as ever to decline engaging on either Point only in his own Defence against what the Dean has endeavoured to load him with he must now say that if any should join Issue with the Dean upon the first Article of the Nicene Creed I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD c. which is a Fundamental and the true Catholick and Apostolick Faith It will soon appear that Dr. Sherlock has in his Book contradicted and to his Power overthrown that Faith as much as ever Johannes Philoponus or Joachim the * So the Text of the Decretal stiles him Florentine Abbot or as others the Abbot of Floria or Flency the two greatest and most antient Leaders of the Tritheists ordinarily assigned ever did for according to the best Accounts of them neither of these expresly maintained more Gods than one nay they expresly disclaimed such Assertion only they so taught the Nature and Distinction of three Persons as that their Doctrine inferred three Gods from which Charge the Invention of mutual Consciousness will never clear Dr. Sherlock ' s Definition of a Person in the Godhead for such Consciousness whatever he says to the contrary can infer only an Vnity of Accord not of Substance and Nature whereas it is an Unity of Substance and Nature that the Council and Fathers have held but these things require more Words than the present Design admits To make the Sum of my Sentiments or what I would be at plainer §. 3. The holy Scripture states the Trinity under the Notion of Three bearing witness in Heaven for I have much more to say for that exagitated Text than to allow it wanting in any Copies on any other Reason but their Imperfection and affirms these three one but how they are one it determines not And Faith being a Belief of the Witness of God and Baptism a Seal or Badg of Faith when we are baptized we are baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost as owning and assenting to or professing and vowing to acquiesce in their Witness touching all the whole Will of God and Method of Salvation published in the Gospel This is Scripture and here the melancholy Stander-by would stop as to Faith in this Point of the Trinity To the Incarnation there is yet no occasion to speak The Fathers in the Council of Nice did not as far as ever I could perceive by any genuine Monuments of theirs vote the Term three Persons the Incarnation of the Son of God or his Divinity though made Man was the Controversy before them rather than the Trinity and the great Product of that Council was the word Homoousion in Assertion of the Son 's being of the same Substance with the Father But the Greek Fathers of that Age did soon use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in this Case is most aptly rendred Subsistence and contend for three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Subsistences Now as to the common Definition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in divinis that is to my best Memory pretended to be taken out of Justin Martyr by Damascen a Father of much latter Age I said to my best Memory for my Condition is such at present and has been such upward of four Years that I am without the Use of the best part of my Books and now near 150 English Miles distant from a Library Yet I thank God I am Master of Justin and Damascen more ways than one be it spoken without Affront to Dr. Sherlock in case of my having read other Books I had read them near two and thirty Years ago But to return to the Definition spoken of as now I take it out of my old perhaps too imperfect Notes runs thus In the Holy Trinity an Hypostasis is an unbegun or if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damas●en Dialectic cap. ult Word may be pardoned a beginningless manner of the eternal Existence of each that is of Father Son and Holy Ghost So that according to this Author it superadds nothing to the Divine Essence which is one and common to all the three save a bare manner of Existence or Subsistence Only by the way I must note as to the Authority of that Piece in the Works of Justin Martyr whence this Definition comes namely the Expositio rectae fidei it is sufficiently proved by Scultetus Rivet and others to be none of Justin's genuine Works The Latin Fathers which came soon upon the Heels of the Council and of the Greek Fathers above spoken of suspected this Word Hypostasis and St. Jerome particularly contended there
my Author last cited the Subject to be beyond Expression For saith he our Thoughts of God are commonly more true than our Expressions But God more truly is than we can think But to return again to History and Mr. Dean The Coessentiality or Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father was the Point determined against Arius in the Council of Nice which was indeed previous or preliminary to one Part of the Doctrine of the Trinity but the Controversy of the Trinity of Persons was not raised but by the Followers of Arius not by himself as Baronius both witnesses and proves and therefore could not be decided in the Council of Nice If therefore we were to stand only to the Decrees of the Council of Nice in the Matter of the Trinity our Faith herein would be comparatively very short For by that Council neither was there affirmed a Trinity of Persons nor Unity of the three It is not therein so much as determined what the Holy Ghost is Mr. Dean therefore did me wrong if he intended those Words The Council of Nice Pag. 13. on whose Authority we must rest namely in Point of the Trinity should be understood to be my Words He may be permitted to confound the learned and subtil Disputations of Athanasius in behalf of the Divinity of Christ which Point indeed was determined in the Council of Nice and the Controversy of the Trinity in Unity to which there was some consid●●●●● Advance made in the Council of Constantinople he I say may be admitted to confound these two together and to rest for both upon the single Authority of the Council of Nice because in that Council he will find Athanasius and so may hope to hook in the Confession commonly called the Creed of St. Athanasius I use the Terms of our own Liturgy but I expresly avouched the Authority of the Nicene and first Constantinopolitan Councils in Conjunction as having betwixt them setled the Doctrine of the Trinity yet not in the hard Words which after-Ages used For in these two Councils though there be in effect three Persons declared yet is not the term three Persons used but both the Matter and the Language wherein the Decision is made looks much liker that of the Scripture than what we find in a certain later Creed when Men proceeded to draw Consectaries from these Councils Definitions and put such their Consectaries into hard artificial and intricate Terms and then imposed all for Faith with so much Nicety that it is at least as easy to mistake as to understand the Truth and sometimes really the Mistake is much the more obvious I cannot forbear an Instance or two out of the Creed just now mentioned usually ascribed to Athanasius but if Vossius be in the right compiled much after his Age by one Anastasius as he conjectures if my Memory fail not for I have not my Book by me that Creed then thus proceeds THE FATHER IS ETERNAL THE SON ETERNAL AND THE HOLY GHOST ETERNAL AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE ETERNALS BVT ONE ETERNAL AS ALSO THERE ARE NOT THREE INCOMPREHENSIBLES NOR THREE VNCREATED BVT ONE VNCREATED AND ONE INCOMPREHENSIBLE Suppose now a Man should thus argue hence If there are three yet not three uncreated but one uncreated then two of the three must be created For the three must be either created or uncreated that is eternally existent But it is further also added that there are not three Eternals but one Eternal therefore supposing the Father to be uncreated and eternal as of the three most properly and essentially Uncreatedness and Eternity belongs to him insomuch as the Son is his Begotten and the Holy Ghost proceeds from him supposing I say the Father uncreated and eternal it seems hence unavoidably to follow the Son and the Holy Ghost are created and not eternal for there are not three Uncreated nor three Eternals The same may be said in like manner as to the other Attributes of Incomprehensible and Almighty And if any should profess the Son and Holy Ghost created or not eternal would not all cry out immediately Heresy Blasphemy It will not be sufficient here to say It is confessed before that the Son is uncreate and the Holy Ghost uncreate c. for that Confession is now contradicted by saying there is but one uncreate What shall we then do to extricate our selves from the Niceties of this Creed How few of the People have the Clew Verily not one in a thousand of the Laity that ' Hic ponuntur adjectivè istae dictiones viz. coaeterni c. ibi autem adjectivè Glossa ad verbum Coaeterni De summa Trinitate c. 1. Firmiter credimus say sing or receive this Creed and it may be not one in an hundred of the Clergy But to salve all behold a wholesom Distinction out of a known Gloss When we say the Father Son and Holy Ghost are all three uncreate we take Uncreate as an Adjective and then the Proposition is true When we say there are not three uncreate we take it as a Substantive For if we should say there are three uncreated taking it as a Substantive it were Heresy And so in the case of Eternal when we say the Father is eternal the Son eternal the Holy Ghost eternal and all three eternal we take Eternal as an Adjective But if we should take Eternal as a Substantive then we must deny that there are three Eternals surely then by the way must we also deny that there are three infinite Minds and that even according to Athanasius himself But to come again to the Gloss Can now any Man living give me a Reason why Uncreate or Eternal should be less an Adjective when understood of an uncrete Substance or Essence than it is when understood of an uncreate Person And yet taking it either substantively or adjectively if I should so use it as to deny there are three uncreated Persons I am as much a Heretick as if I should say there are three uncreated Essences There is therefore very happily a further Remedy in the said Gloss namely that Hic designat Personas ibi Essentiam Gl. ubi supra when we profess all three are uncreate and coeternal we must understand or supply the word Person When we say there is but one Uncreate and one Eternal we must understand Essence or Nature In fine then if we have not Metaphysicks enough and Grammar enough to find out when a Word is to denote the Essence and when the Person or perhaps when it is to be taken adjectively when substantively we shall be led by the very Letter of this Creed to profess Heresy and Blasphemy instead of the true Faith Were it not now better that this Creed were either made plainer or totally laid aside than urged and used as it is But indeed neither of the two Councils mentioned made any such Creed as this nor as I really believe did Athanasius himself He and others of the
Fathers perhaps did dispute or opine to this or the like Effect but surely they never designed to impose such a Form of Belief under such damning Clauses as are contained herein This may the rather be concluded for that Gregory Nyssen penn'd the Constantinopolitan So Baronius Creed in that Council ten Years at least after Athanasius his Death And amongst other Fathers of that Council Gregory Nazianzen and Jerome cited here to little Purpose by Mr. Dean approved it as it is without the pretended Athanasian Criticisms and Severities nay without the very Filioque I had Reason therefore as to the Doctrine of the Trinity not to go beyond the Decisions of these Councils but to acquiesce in their Authorities What further Authority beyond that of the Church interposed in the Council of Nice I have no mind to speak I will also pass by here as small Faults some Blunders of Mr. Dean's which he is guilty of in his huddle of Fathers making St. Athanasius St. Hilary and St. Basil to write largely against these Heresies which former Councils had condemned whereas they all three died when there had but yet one Council sat and therein as far as with Certainty appears but one Heresy namely that of Arim condemned for I cannot allow the Quarto Decimani to have been Hereticks they could not therefore write against Heresies condemned by Councils But waving these and other Exceptions which I might justly make touching all these Fathers Writings on this Subject as being impertinently cited against me I say after all if the Worship of the Trinity might be left as these Fathers and particularly as St. Hilary in the End of his twelfth Book of the Trinity left it whose Words I produce not for a Reason any one may guess who pleases to consult them the Differences in this Controversy amongst Protestants would be nearer a Compromise And thus as to my Adhesion to the Authority of these Councils My next Charge is what I confess was great News to me that I am §. 16. Pag. 14. well vers'd in Mr. Hobbs's Divinity Truly though I neither have nor ever had any Esteem for Mr. Hobbs's Divinity yet I could wish my self better skilled in it for then I should better know it when I meet with it in other Mens Writings disguised now 't is said a certain great Person no Stranger to the Temple has lately espoused it under a very slighty Disguise and I should be able more perfectly to wipe off the Imputation of being a Disciple to it at present without any Consciousness to my self cast upon me I could here tell Mr. Dean a very true Secret that there were two Books which I was afraid to read when I was young lest they should corrupt me and Mr. Hobbs's Leviathan was one And having neglected it when my Curiosity was strongest I never read it since So that it would be very strange should I be well vers'd in a Man's Doctrine which I never read But the best of it is Mr. Dean shews here also his great Reading and cites Mr. Hobbs just as before he did the Fathers at random without giving us any Text out of him And I neither have by me nor in case I had have I leisure to search all Mr. Hobbs's Works to see whether he has any such Assertion as Mr. Dean alledges In answering Arguments from Testimony the Testimony it self ought first to be examined And this not appearing I must for that Reason wave any more particular Answer to this Charge Only as to what follows in the Apology I will renew my Request to Mr. Dean as being a Person of Learning for that small Favour that he will hereafter be consistent with and not contradict himself and particularly that he will no more affirm that Point made plain and easy which he confesses difficult and incomprehensible And to prevail with him for this Boon I will promise publickly to beg his Pardon for the Affront of making this my Request to him a second time if I do not immediately prove that in this Matter of the Trinity which here in his Apology he confesses to be an incomprehensible Mystery he does not say again and again in his Vindication thereof that he has made it plain and easy and so has contradicted himself in the Point objected First I say he confesses here the Divine Nature the Trinity of Divine Persons and the Unity of the Divine Essence to be incomprehensible Secondly He says in his Vindication of the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity p. 48. that he will not pretend to fathom such a Mystery as this Here he is for the Incomprehensibility of it Then in his Preface to his Vindication he tells us the writing that Book cost him many Thoughts and those who have a mind throughly to understand it must not think much if it cost them some notwithstanding all that he has done to explain the Mystery Here 's the Difficulty of it acknowledged still Yet a little before in the very self-same Preface he says he has given a very easy and intelligible Notion of a Trinity in Vnity And in his Vindication p. 66. that his Account thereof gives a plain and intelligible Solution of all the Difficulties and seeming Contradictions in the Doctrine of the Trinity And again p. 68. in a kind of an Epiphonema This is a very plain and intelligible Account of this great and venerable Mystery as plain and intelligible as the Notion of one God or of one Person in the Godhead Notions which are very easy and intelligible and whereof all the Difficulties and seeming Repugnancies or Contradictions have received a plain and easy Solution are certainly comprehensible and easy For what hinders them from being so Or what do we mean in our present State by comprehending any Notion or Doctrine but a clear understanding it without any Difficulty or Perplexity That which I said therefore of some Writers pretending to make this Controversy comprehensible and easy is verified in him though I did not name him and so is no spiteful and scandalous Imputation of mine to him as he in his good Nature and sweet Language is pleased to stile it but was justly and truly spoken with Humility and peaceable Design And he must one Day answer if he do not repent for this his second slandering me with Spite against him whom Pag. 11 15. God knows I both loved and honoured and at present wish him as well as my own Soul nor do I reprehend any thing in him which I would bear in my self But now I may set my Heart at Rest as to this Controversy if Mr. Dean will stand to the Profession he has made for he says all that any Man therefore that he pretends to in vindicating the Doctrine of the Trinity Pag. 16. is to prove that this Faith is taught in Scripture This is that which I would be at and have contended for that we may have nothing obtruded upon us for Faith in
Dean thinks fit to deal with me I am not ashamed of any Part of what I said My Argument then stood thus As indeed all Controversies amongst Protestants are most unseasonable in such a Juncture wherein under God nothing but an Union of Counsels and joining Hands and Hearts can preserve the Reformation and scarce any thing more credit and justify it than an Union in Doctrinals so above all other Controversies none can well be thought of worse tim'd than this Of which ill timing it I gave a very particular Proof too warm it seems for him to touch upon and therefore he slipp'd it away between his Fingers as if it had not been But how answers he my Argument First he disjoints it then answers to what Parts of it he pleases and to those Parts in what Order he pleases And finally never considers the Parts as connected and together adding Strength to the main Conclusion Indeed such dealing as this with some Scorn interlaced is his usual way of confuting What he says worth notice I shall reflect upon The first Member of my Argument he thinks fit to ampliate and will say a little more that they i. e. all Controversies amongst Protestants which was the Subject of my Proposition are always unseasonable for there is no Juncture seasonable to broach Heresies and oppose Truth But may there be no Controversies especially amongst Protestants which broach not Heresies The Denial of the Trinity duly stated I allow to be Heresy But we in the first Member of the Argument speak of all Controversies amongst Protestants Now do all Dissensions amongst Protestants arise to Heresy on one side or other God forbid Again in times of publick Peace may there not be very seasonably amicable Conferences and Arguings between those who dissent from one another in order to clearing Difficulties and so to brotherly Accord Even those Treaties are certainly some kind of Controversies though some Men may be very unfit for them and therefore have little Kindness for them and those I stand to it ought to be held in due Season But at present I did not think even these kind of Arguings seasonable but would have them also suspended and was of Opinion that as things stand all Protestants suffering each other to worship God in his own way according to the Conscience of each should join against a common Enemy What I said may be Truth and advisable and as far as I yet see is so What Mr. Dean adds is not true and his Proof of it is very insufficient to say no worse For he would prove all Controversies to be always unseasonable because some are so I will not tell him that even Heresies may be and daily are in University-Disputations and like Theological Exercises strongly argued for and Truth opposed not only for exercising and ripening Scholars but that all the Strength Heresies have may be detected and enervated and the weaker Side of Truth secured so that thus also all Controversies asserting Heresy and opposing Truth are not always unseasonable So great a Disputant as Mr. Dean ought not to have advanced so universal a Proposition without more Caution As to his defending Fundamental Truths I have already spoken However seasonable the defending them may always be I say in a word the changing of them can be never so Next he repeats two other Members of my Argument and begins with carping at the last thus Is the Vnion in Doctrinals ever the greater that Socinians boldly and publickly affront the Faith of the Church and no body appears to defend it I answer that I am not for any Affronts in what Cause soever for I seldom see they do good but most of all am I against Affronts to the publick Faith of the Church The Socinians I am informed were silent some while upon my Paper till others blew the Coals afresh It is utterly against my Mind and grieves my Soul if they do affront the establish'd Church and 't is more than I know God forbid I should excuse them for it I would have them and all Men to be peaceable meek and humble But in case of such Affronts the Church God be blessed has better Ways to vindicate the Faith and her own Honour than the Fancies and new Notions of private Doctors who consult her not but run perfectly upon their own Heads and advance their own Principles being busy and intermeddling in every Controversy that is moved I boldly aver less would be said against the Truth did not such Persons appearing for it by their pretended Defences of it and by the haughty Stile and Manner of penning them give new Matter to the Adversary Those daily fresh Provocations and the Effects of them are what I did in part and must still insist upon as one main Reason for my Suit for Forbearance But will the World think that we are all of one Mind because there is §. 22. disputing but on one side Then they will think us all Socinians c. I answer Let us go on in Conformity to our Church-Doctrine and especially in an holy humble peaceable obliging Conversation and touching our Judgment in Doctrinals the World will sooner credit our Practice and the Articles or Confession the Liturgy Catechism Homilies Constitutions and such publick Acts of our Church than twenty little Vindications of private Doctors And as for the Pamphlets of some obscure and anonymous Persons I still say again 't is Opposition for the main that gives them Celebrity and Life Heresies have from Age to Age still been transmitted to Posterity by sundry Consutations they have received Had we had only the Holy Scripture and our Creed with a few practical and devotional Books delivered down to us we should have been united in a plain Faith in Charity and Holiness built thereupon and the very Names as well as the Errors of the antient Hereticks had been long since buried and unknown Whereas every Age now by what has been writ against Heresies know how to refine and new vamp them What further are in my poor Opinion the meetest Ways to provide against Socinianism as well as all the other isms or dissenting Parties I shall speak perhaps anon In the mean time I must not let pass a very signal Favour of Mr. Dean's to render me if he could obnoxious to the Government in making me privy to a very dangerous Secret or great Truth fit for all Governments to Pag. 23. consider truly their Majesties Chaplain in ordinary ought to admonish the Government of their Oversights a Truth he says which I have unwarily confess'd and he is in the right of it for I thought not of it nay I neither before knew nor do I now believe it to be generally a Truth that every Schism in the Church is a new Party and Faction in the State which are always troublesom to Government when it wants their Help This may be true of every vast or multitudinous Schism when the Number infected come to