Neighbour's House is on Fire or the Air infected with the Pestilence and the Enemies of God and his Servants are in a Combination and lie in wait to deceive the Ignorant and Vwary it 's every Man's Duty to extinguish the Flame c. This is very true and the Unitarians have a good Title to these Considerations But what has any Athanasian or Tritheistic Writer to do with ' em The Fire and Pestilence and Craft of Athanasius have done too too much Injury to the Christian Faith already and has deceiv'd this very unwary Writer and all his Elect if any one can truly be said to be deceiv'd by another who imposes upon himself by such inconsiderable Sophistry as runs through bis whole inconsiderable Pamphlet He first takes it for granted that by the Holy Ghost we are to understand a single intelligent Being or Subsistence distinct from the Father the most High God and then takes upon him to prove that this Being is the most High God too We will be so civil to him for once as to admit the first to be true but the Holy Scriptures and the reason of all Mankind will never admit the second to be so too for if they are not one but two distinct individual Beings they cannot both be the most High God Yes replies the Socinian Slain that must be granted me too as I will make it appear by twenty demonstrative Arguments Twenty Demonstrations is a round number but one good Demonstration is as good as a thousand and I can produce a thousand at any time of the day out of the 1st and 2d Book of Chronicles as good and as conclusive as any of the 20 in the Socinian Slain but then I must expose my self and the Holy Scripture too as the Socinian Slain hath done but God forbid I should be guilty of his Faults But the Socinian Slain p. 3. tells you The Holy Ghost made the Heavens and the Earth and cites for a Proof Gen. 1.2 Who I pray is this Holy Ghost a 3d Divine Being distinct in Number Will and Understanding i. e. distinct in Person from the Father and the Son If so then we have three Creators three Gods three distinct Beings of infinite Wisdom and Power which is two too many for Divine Revelation and the most evident Reason of Mankind No matter for that the Socinian Slain will rather choose to have it so than have his Arguments exploded as absurd And therefore on he goes right or wrong with his wonderful and surprizing Proofs and tells you in the next place that P. 4. The Holy Ghost is omniscient and therefore c. And 1st He is so because he knows all the deep things of God and 2ly because he knows all the deep things of Man The latter of these two may be known without being omniscient and the former are known to God alone Infinite Mind can only know what is in infinite Mind but then that infinite Mind is but one If he believes the Holy Ghost is one infinite Mind or Understanding distinct from another infinite Mind and yet knows all that the other Infinite can comprehend then this Author's Faith is condemn'd by the Universal Church the late Oxford-Decree and by the Holy Scriptures but if he believes God to be one infinite Mind and Being who alone is conscious to his own Thoughts and no other Being besides him is privy to 'em as every Man knows his own Mind and no other Man can know what 's in his Mind till he reveal it to him which is the true Sense of 1 Cor. 2. 10 11. we are agreed for undoubtedly God knows all that he knows The rest of his Arguments are all of a piece till you come to the 18th unless you will except the eleventh where he tells you The Holy Ghost is the most High God because Sin and Blasphemy against him are unpardonable Now this seems the most concluding and decisive Proof of all the 20 Demonstrations nay as the Author manages it it will prove more a great deal than ever he design'd it should For if the Holy Ghost be God because Sin and Blasphemy against him are unpardonable then the Father and Son cannot be so because all manner of Sins and Blasphemies against them will be forgiven Mat. 11.31 And now let this Writer consider if he has not finely prov'd the Deity of the Holy Ghost and excluded the other two Divine Persons from the most sacred Order of his most high Gods He has given the 3d a greater Prerogative than the 1st and 2d Persons and so instead of proving him God equal to the Father and the Son has prov'd him God superiour in this respect to both which is such a way of proving he never had been guilty of had he but consulted his own Reason or a good Commentator and if he did it knowingly 't is very likely to be an unpardonable Sin The Socinian Slain has but one Argument more that merits a Remark and that 's his eighteenth The Holy Ghost says he P. 21. is one God with the Father and Son and therefore is the most High God I mean with respect to his Essence since every Body will grant that the Father is so What dos this Author mean by one God with the Father and Son one Being with the Father and Son or that the Father Son and Holy Ghost are but one single Being If this be his meaning tho it be not well expressed yet it looks more like a Divine Unity and is indeed the nominal Trinity and not the Tritheistic against which I write Or dos he mean by one God with the Father and Son that the Holy Ghost is a God of the same Divine Kind with the Father and the Son If this be his Sense as some other Passages seem to countenance then without breach of Charity I must charge him tho I am sorry for it with down-right Tritheism or Polytheism which I take to be a much heavier Accusation than any he can charge or has fairly brought against his real Well-wishers the Unitarians But the Author has another ambiguous Phrase in his Proof and that is That the Holy Ghost is most High God with respect to his Essence What is he not so then with respect to his Person if he be not so in Person I don't see how he can be so at all for what he is not as a Person he is mot any other way for all he is is Person No no the Socinian Slain can find out a way wherein he is the most High God tho he be not so in Person How I pray not by Proxy certainly No but in Essence Now I would fain know of the Author of the Socinian Slain what Essence signifies in this place and in other Passages of his Book for he seems to use it in no certain Sense which is unfair The Schoolmen have us'd a Term in their Metaphysical Writings 1. For common Nature or kind of Being 2. For particular Nature or
A Letter to a Friend WITH REMARKS Upon two Pamphlets lately published In Defence of TRITHEISM VIZ. A BRIEF ENQUIRY By J. T. And THE SOCINIAN SLAIN By J. H. In malâ causâ non possunt aliter at causam Malam quis coégit eos habere August LONDON Printed Anno Domini M.DCC. SIR I Have at your request read over two little Books you were pleas'd to put into my hands viz. The Brief Enquiry which I find was written by J. T. and The Socinian Slain written as 't is reported by one J. H. And really Sir when I have perus'd such Discourses written with an Air of Candour and Sincerity and when I see the Authors so very zealous in defending their own Mistakes and find them loading with heavy Aggravations the Opinions of others I cannot but extreamly regret the ill usage of those important Truths they undertake to confute and I assure you am at the same time no less concern'd that so much Zeal as these two Writers have express'd should be mispent in a wrong Cause and not barely so but in opposition to the most Natural and most Scriptural Notion that the best of Men and the best of Christians have ever had of the Deity How unhappily have these Men and a great many others who have earnestly contended in these Controversies in conclusion prov'd nothing so effectually as this That Education and Interest are irresistable that they will put such a biass upon a wise Man's Judgment and manner of reasoning which without extraordinary Care and divine Assistance will become almost insuperable to him I say almost and not altogether insuperable because I 'm perswaded there is no Man so much under the power of Mistake in the common necessary Points of Religion but may be undeceiv'd if he makes his Enquiries with any tolerable degree of Candour and Ingenuity But when a man sets up for absolute Certainty in a controverted Point and speaks and dictates like an inspired Writer there remains no remedy for his Errors till he is cur'd of his Infallibility What opinion these two Persons have of their own Performances is certainly known to God and their own Consciences alone but they give abundant satisfaction to the World that they are Men who have not temper enough for any Contronversy nor skill enough to manage this The late Bp of Worcester Bp Chichester Bp Sarum Bp Glocester Mr. How The most eminent Writers both for Learning and Dignity have written against us with the Decency of Gentlemen and the Temper of good Christians they make it appear that they can be candid and charitable to an Adversary and how warmly soever they are engag'd in the Debate yet they keep within the bounds of Religion and good Breeding And tho the Cause they engaged in was never to be confuted yet 't is own'd if it could have been they certainly had done it But this Brace of Writers have taken up the Dispute when the field was quitted by the most sober and most learned of our Opponents and when the most celebrated University of Oxon had decreed in our favour and condemn'd the vulgar Tritheistic Trinity and the Rev. Dean of Paul's had in his State of the Socinian Controversy with a Modesty that became a Man of his Dignity and Learning handsomely retracted or at least prudently soften'd whatever had the countenance and appearance of Tritheism in his former Writings With what good Grace then can these two Writers of the lowest Class who it may be were never taught in any Class undertake to revive the Debate that was given over by the best and wisest Gentlemen of the Tritheistic Party Do they think they can say somewhat better than any that have written before them sure they are too modest to be of that opinion or is it because they will say and argue as no body would besides them this may be true enough indeed for they both of them argue and prove in that unusual Method that one may see at the first blush that they understand not what they say nor whereof they affirm They knew certainly when they began to write that this Controversy whatever others might be was terra incognita to 'em both and yet which is very much to be admir'd they are as positive and as decretory as if they acted by Legantine Authority from the Holy See and came not to debate but decide this controverted Point The Brief Enquiry Pref. tells his Readers with very great gravity Gentlemen pray take notice I write only for Truth but I remember the time when he durst not dispute for it and made an honest and true confession that he could not And he adds ibid. That Christian Charity must not be abus'd towards those who root up the Foundations of Religion no nor must it be abus'd towards any Persons whatever nor on any account whatever To abuse Christian Charity would be a great abuse indeed but to abuse it for the sake of ill Men would still be a much greater abuse But I suppose he would insinuate that the Vnitarians root up the Foundations of Religion and that to treat 'em charitably would be to abuse Christian Charity which ought not to be done God forgive him for his uncharitable Insinuation and we will too but let him remember there is not a more scurvy abuse of the Christian nor of any Religion indeed than to affirm that it teaches us not to exercise Charity towards Men of a different Opinion But tho the Brief Enquirer be so very wary how he abuses Christian Charity yet to the great scandal of all pious Christians he cares not what abuses he flings at Christ and the Christian Religion provided he can expose the Vnitarians for abating a few pages a good part of his Book consists in odious Comparisons of Christianity with Mahometanism and Christ with Mahomet and if Christ be not the Supreme God and of the same Essence with the Father he wickedly infers to the just abhorrence of all that love the Lord Jesus in truth and sincerity P. 14 and 51. That Christ was an Impostor and Deceiver that the Jews justly sentenc'd him to death for Blasphemy and rejected his Apostles that the Christian Religion is Idolatry and Superstition and the Messiah is not yet come c. And these terrible Inferences are not made en passant and by the by but he continues to copy Monsieur Abbadie's rude scandalous and impious Expressions for several pages together If says he p. 15. Jesus Christ is not true God of the same Essence with the Father the Mahometan Religion is preferable to the Christian and Mahomet a greater Prophet than Christ because the Christian Religion brings in Idolatry and the Mahometan abolishes it c. How gladly would the Brief Enquirer prove the Mahometan to be the better Religion why else dos he take that for granted to prove it which every Body denys viz. That the Christian Religion brings in Idolatry for there is no Christian but the
Antichristian Enquirer and his Abbadie who insinuates a Charge of Idolatry against the Christian Religion upon account of the Honour therein given to Christ Even those Christians who are for a co-equal Adoration of three co-equal co-eternal Beings abhor the charging Idolatry upon the Christian Religion much less will they or can they be thought to countenance so detestable an Accusation who declare for the supreme Honour and Adoration of one single Infinite All-sufficient Being who is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ He proceeds in his detestable Inferences and asserts p. 16. That the Worship of Jesus Christ is Idolatry if he is not God How dares the Enquirer assert that to honour him whom God the Father has honour'd 2 Pet. 1.17 and highly exalted is Idolatry that to give him a Name above every Name and confess him Lord to the Glory of God the Father is Idolatry Phil. 2.9 10 11. see Joh. 5.22 23. What Notion I wonder has this hasty Enquirer of Worship and of Idolatry I dare be his Security that he is a perfect Stranger to the true Notion of either of 'em how loudly soever he may declaim with the dreadful Charge of Idolatry for I would demand of this bold Enquirer where is the Idolatry if the Holy Jesus have all the honour and veneration paid him but that alone which he himself gave to his Father and our Father and to his God and our God to whom he ascended Yet this Bold Enquirer p. 16. takes a fresh start from this very Charge too too like a good Mussulman to extol his holy Prophet Mahomet for a very considerable Teacher and a great Reformer of Mankind How deplorable a Case is it that some Men write just as they have liv'd like true Mahometans and have presented the World with a fair occasion to conclude they would be extreamly gratify'd if their Arabian Prophet's Religion were establish'd in England for a good Mussulman may keep a good Conscience and a brace of Concubines at the same time for they are not incommunicable The Enquirer p. 16. to shew you his good liking of Mahomet and his Doctrine insists upon it in a large Vindication and Encomium on both How can we but have a great opinion of Mahomet He hath taught Men so and so c. What can bespeak a Man more inspired of God Surely he was a very great Prophet and all he hath taught ought to be own'd as Divine P. 17 18. He is a greater Prophet than all under the Law yea preferable to Christ himself which says he p. 19. will appear if you consider his Doctrine or the success of his Ministry He hath establish'd his Religion upon firm Foundations and taken wiser Methods and was much wiser and better than Christ he had greater Candour Truth and Charity greater care of and zeal for the Glory of God than Jesus Christ who makes himself one with the most High God P. 21. If Christ was not God Mahomet spoke more truly and plainly than Christ had more Wisdom and took more care not to entangle the Souls of Men. P. 22. Nay if Christ was not true God he was an Impostor and his Disciples Deceivers and the Christian Religion is a Cheat Superstition and Idolatry What a terrible Outrage is here upon the Christian Religion These are the execrable Consequences the confident Enquirer presumes to draw from his obscure equivocal and unexpounded Premises and has taken a scandalous liberty of publishing this Raillery upon the Christian Religion in a Chistian Nation and with his own name in the Title Page Are these the Fruits of his Zeal and his Orthodoxy Must Christianity it self be decry'd and vilify'd if it be not the thing he mistakes it to be Is this the rare Method of confuting the Vnitarians this will rather serve to confirm 'em in this Truth That they and the Christian Religion must stand and fall together and he that designs to confute them and what they maintain does in effect undertake nothing less than a Confutation of Jesus Christ and the Divine Writings of the New Testament What this Enquirer is maintaining in the remainder of his Book is a full and complete instance of this for he produces Text upon Text and one Scripture upon another to shew that another distinct Being is a most High God beside him who is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and unless you will grant him this Sense and admit this Proof to be sufficient he 'll reject the H. Scriptures and give the preference to his beloved Alchoran for that teaches as he informs you That none other but the eternal Father is God p. 21. whereas he looks upon it as certain and evident that Jesus Christ and his Apostles taught that another nay a third distinct Being are truly and properly Gods coequal in Nature and Perfection and have equal right to Divine Honour and Adoration P. 24 25 26. That Jesus Christ is God in the highest and chiefest sense he begins to prove from the Names the incommunicable Names of God ascribed to him Yet Jesus Christ no where once stiles himself God or ascribes to himself the nature of God and God has no incommunicable Name that I could ever meet with no Name but what is given to other Beings besides himself If the giving the Names of God to any Being besides him be Blasphemy J. T. I doubt will renounce his Bible as well as Christ and embrace the Doctrine of the Alchoran which some affirm best suits with his Life and good Opinion He finds in his Bible the Names of God given to Angels good and evil to Princes and Prophets nay he himself takes all the pains he can to prove that the Names the incommunicable Names of God are given to Jesus Christ Now if the Man Christ Jesus be not God then Mr. Taylor has prov'd that the Names of God are not incommunicable for he proves that they are given to Christ so that it must follow either that the Names may be given to different Beings in a different Sense or that God and Jesus Christ are but one Being or that the Scripture-phrases are misapplied which it may be he will rather incline to believe But he goes on to inform you p. 25. That Jehovah is a Name only belongs to the most High God Psal 83.18 Thou whose Name alone is Jehovah This is a very pleasant Proof for if there be another Person or Being besides the Father of whom it may be said Thou whose Name is Jehovah then the Father's Name alone is not Jehovah for J. T. says it belongs to another Person or Being who is a Son and not a Father so that this proof destroys it self for if the Father's Name alone be Jehovah so as that Name is not to be given to any other besides him then Jesus Christ who is another Person or Being besides him has not and cannot have that Name given or ascribed to him but if Jesus Christ has that name