dispute the Bounds of their Authority but content themselves with the Ancient Constitution of the Church of England But if he understands the Practice of the Primitive and truly Apostolick Church which he threatens these unruly Presbyters with no better than he does K. Edw. VI.'s Reformation which he supposes to be made by the Body of the Bishops in opposition to the Presbyters or else I know not how he applies it he is capable of doing no great good nor hurt Only I can tell him one thing That had he fallen into the hands of K. Edw.'s Reforming Bishops they would have reformed him out of the Church or have taught him another sort of Compassionate Suit than this He concludes with a heavy Charge upon Myself and Dr. Wallis for he mentions none else as if we had receded from the Doctrine taught even in our own Church about the Holy Trinity Do we then deny that there are Three Persons and One God No our business is to prove it and explain and vindicate it but he thinks we explain it otherwise than it has been formerly explained And yet that very Account he gives us of it out of Mr. Hooker is owned by myself and particularly explained by my Hypothesis He has given us no just occasion to vindicate ourselves because he has not vouchsafed to tell us why he dislikes either of us He has cited some broken passages out of my Vindication about Three Eternal Minds which are essentially One Eternal Mind And what is the hurt of this Is not every Divine Person who is God a Mind and an Eternal Mind Is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Eternal and Uncreated Word and Wisdom of God an Eternal and Uncreated Mind Is not the substantial Word and Wisdom of God a Mind Is not the Eternal Spirit which searcheth the deep things of God as the Spirit of a Man knoweth the things of a Man a Mind And if I can give any possible account how Three Eternal Minds should be essentially One does not this at least prove that there may be Three Divine Persons in the Unity of the Divine Essence And should I have been mistaken in this account as I believe I am not must I therefore be charged with receding from the Doctrine of the Church of England As for Dr. Wallis he has nothing to say against him but his calling the Divine Persons Somewhats with which he has very profanely ridiculed the Litany which I gave an account before And now can any Man tell what Opinion this Melancholy Stander-by has of the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation He dares not speak out but gives very broad signs what he would be at He discourages all Men from defending these Doctrines declares That all new Attempts cannot satisfie the old Difficulties which he declares to be unsatisfiable and unsoluble That when we have moved every Stone Authority must define it And yet this Authority extends no farther than to a Negative Belief which he says is all that can reasonably be required of Men of such Mysteries as they cannot understand and thus far he professes himself bound by our Church Articles for Peace sake And this is his Faith of the Trinity not to believe it but only not to oppose it He complains of the Scholastick cramping Terms of Three Persons and One God and thinks the Unity of Three Persons in One Essence to be only a more Orthodox Phrase so that he leaves us no words to express this Doctrine by and therefore it is time to say nothing about it It is a Controversie which exposes our Liturgy and is not only unprofitable but corruptive of and prejudicial and injurious to our common Devotion so dangerous is it to pray to the Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God But then on the other hand he carefully practises that forbearance which he perswades others to towards his Learned Writers of the Socinian Controversies tho' they were the Assailants never perswades them to forbear exposing and ridiculing the Faith of the Church which would have provoked his Indignation had he any reverence for the Holy Trinity and a God Incarnate but only thinks by the Charm of a Negative Faith that they may be required quietly to acquiesce in the publick determinations He tells us over and over how unseasonable and dangerous it is to meddle with such high matters or to offer at any Explication of what is Incomprehensible but it is no fault in them to talk of Absurdities and Contradictions in what they do not understand nay he all along insinuates that these Absurdities and Contradictions which they charge upon the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation are unsatisfiable and unsoluble He bestows high Encomiums upon these Enemies of the Faith but speaks with wonderful Contempt of those who defend it as far as he dares the Fathers and Councils are out of his reach but the Master of the Sentences and the School-men and all Modern Undertakers must feel his displeasure to defend the Trinity exposes our Liturgy and corrupts our common Devotion but to ridicule it makes them very pious and devout Men. GOD preserve his Church from Wolves in Sheeps Clothing And now having vindicated our Ancient Rights and Liberties which the Church always challenged of defending the truly Catholick and Apostolick Faith from the Assaults of Hereticks I shall apply myself as I have leisure to the Defence of my Vindication of the Doctrine of the Holy and Ever-blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of God THE END Earnest Suit p. 1. P. 2. P. 2. P. 3. P. 3. P. 16. P. 3. P. 4. P. 5 Page 7. Page 7. Page 8. Page 8. Page 9. See the Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation pag. 256 c. Page 11. Page 13. Page 7. Page 6. Page 2. Page 6. Page 17. Page 9 10.
And thus for fear we should have believed too much upon the Authority of Councils which is the only bottom he will allow our Faith he gives them a secret stab himself and makes their Authority ridiculous That the several Bishops declared what Faith had been taught and received in their Churches is true That this Authority chiefly carried the Point is false Athanasius grew famous in the Council for his learned and subtile Disputations which confounded the Arians and what Arguments he chiefly relied on we may see in his Works And whoever does but look into the Fathers who wrote against the Arians in those days will find that their Faith was resolved into Scripture and Reason and not meerly or chiefly into Authority And thus he comes to be Plain and Succinct and tells us That of all Controversies we can touch upon at present this of the Trinity is the most unreasonable the most dangerous and so the most unseasonable It is the most Unreasonable 1. Because it is on all hands confess'd the Deity is Infinite Unsearchable Incomprehensible and yet every one who pretends to Write plainer than another on this controversy professes to make all Comprehensible and easy I perceive he is well versed in Mr. Hobbs's Divinity though I can discover no marks of his skill in Fathers and Councils For this was Mr. Hobb's reason why we should not pretend to know any thing of God nor inquire after his Attributes because he has but one Attribute which is that he is Incomprehensible and as this Author argues It is a small favour to request of Persons of Learning that they should be consistent with and not contradict themselves that is That they would not pretend to know any thing of God whom they acknowledge to be Incomprehensible which is to pretend to know what they confess cannot be known Now I desire to know Whether we may Dispute about the Being and Nature of God and his essential Attributes and Perfections and vindicate the Notion of a Deity from those Impossibilities Inconsistencies Absurdities which some Atheistical Philosophers charge on it notwithstanding that we confess God to be Incomprehensible And if the Incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature does not signifie that we can know nothing of God and must inquire nothing about him the Trinity of Divine Persons is as proper an object of our Faith and modest Inquiries as the Unity of the Divine Essence for they are both Incomprehensible And to say That every one who pretends to write plainer than another on this Controversy professes to make all comprehensible and easy may with equal Truth and Authority be charg'd on all those who undertake to vindicate the Notion and Idea of a God or to explain any of the Divine Attributes and Perfections A finite mind cannot comprehend what is infinite but yet one man may have a truer and more perfect Notion of the Nature and Attributes of God than another God is Incomprehensible in Heaven as well as on Earth and yet Angels and Glorified Spirits know God after another manner than we do There must be infinite degrees of knowledge when the object is infinite and every new degree is more perfect than that below it and yet no Creature can attain the highest degree of all which is a perfect comprehension So that the knowledge of God may increase every day and men may Write plainer about these matters every day without pretending to make all that is in God even a Trinity in Unity comprehensible and easy This is a spiteful and scandalous imputation and is intended to represent all those who undertake to write about the Trinity and to vindicate the Primitive Faith of the Church from the scorn and contempt of Hereticks as a company of vain-conceited presuming but ignorant Scriblers who pretend to make the Incomprehensible Nature of God comprehensible and easy But the comfort is we have so good Company that we are able to bear this Charge without blushing even General Councils and those great Lights of the Church Athanasius St. Hillary St. Basil the Gregories St. Chrysostom St. Austin and many others besides all those who in all succeeding Ages to this day have with equal Zeal and Learning defended the same Cause and yet never profess'd to make all comprehensible and easy All that any man pretends to in vindicating the Doctrine of the Trinity is to prove that this Faith is taught in Scripture and that it contains no such Absurdities and Contradictions as should force a Wise man to reject it and either to reject the Scriptures for its sake or to put some strained and unnatural senses on Scripture to reconcile it to the Principles of Reason and this I hope may be done by those who yet acknowledge the Divine Nature and the Trinity in Unity to be Incomprehensible But here he had a very fair opportunity had he thought fit to take it to correct the Insolence and Presumption of his Learned Writers of Controversy who will not allow the Divine Nature to be Incomprehensible and will not believe God himself concerning his own Nature beyond what their Reason can conceive and comprehend Who deny Prescience for the same Reason that they deny the Trinity because they can't conceive it nor reconcile it with the liberty of Human Actions and for the same reason may deny all the Attributes of God which have something in them beyond what we can conceive especially an Eternity without begining and without Succession which is chargeable with more Absurdities and Contradictions than the Trinity it self For a duration which can't be measured and an eternal duration which can be measured and a Succession without a Beginning a Second or Third without a First are unconceivable to us and look like very plain and irreconciâ—â—ble Contradictions This is the true use of the Incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature not to stop all Enquiries after God nor to discourage our Studies of the Divine Nature and Perfections for we may know a great deal and may every day increase our knowledge of what is Incomprehensible thô we cannot know it all but to check the presumption of some vain Pretenders to Reason who will not own a God nor believe any thing of God which their Reason cannot comprehend which must not only make them Hereticks but if pursued to its just Consequences must make them Atheists or make such a God as no body will own or worship but themselves a God adequate and commensurate to their Understandings which must be a little finite comprehensible God In the next place to prove how unreasonable it is to Dispute in Vindication of the Trinity he observes again That this Matter has been sufficiently determined by due Authority but having answered this once I see no need to answer it again To back this he adds That the present issue shews that in this World it never will be better understood for it seems as he says The Master of the Sentences and some Modern Writers
man should believe as he pleases and no man concern himself to confute Heresies or to divide the Church with Disputes which is the true Latitude our Author seems to aim at and then he may believe as he pleases too But pray why should we not write against the Socinians Especially when they are the Aggressors and without any provocation publish and disperse the most impudent and scandalous Libels against the Christian Faith He will give us some very wise Reasons for this by and by when he comes to be plain and succinct in the mean time we must take such as we can meet with He is afraid peâ—â—le should lose all Reverence for the Litany should we go on to vindicate the Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity I should not easily have apprehended this and possibly some of the common people might have been as dull as my self had he not taken care before he parted for fear no body else should observe it to teach people to ridicule the Trinity in their Prayers Dr. Wallis would not undertake to say what a Divine Person signifies as distinguished from Nature and Essence only says a Person is somewhat but the True Notion of a Person he does not know This Author commends this as ever held to by all Learned Trinitarians for indeed all the Doctor meant by his somewhat is That Three Persons signify Three Real Subsistences and are Real Things not a Sabellian Trinity of mere Names And yet in the very next Page he teaches his Readers to ridicule the Litany with the Doctors somewhats O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Somewhats and One God have Mercy on us c. Was there ever any thing more Senseless or more Prophane That because the Doctor would not undertake to define a Person but only asserted in general That a Divine Person was somewhat or some Real Being in opposition to a mere Nominal Difference and Distinction therefore in our Prayers we may as well call the Three Divine Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost Three somewhats Nobis non licet esse tam disertis I am sure he has reason heartily to pray That these Three somewhats as he prophanely calls them would have Mercy on him In the next place he says He is well assured that the late Socinian Pamâ—â—lets would have died away or have been now in few mens hands had not divers persons taken on them the labour to confute them But did his Socinian Friends who were such busie Factors for the Cause tell him so Did they print them that no body might read them Were they not dispersed in every Corner and boasted of in every Coffee-house before any Answer appeared However were it so is there no regard to be had to Hereticks themselves And is it not better that such Pamphlets should be in an hundred hands with an Answer than in five hands without one I should think it at any time a good reward for all the labour of confuting to rescue or preserve a very few from such fatal Errors which I doubt not but is a very acceptable service to that Merciful Shepherd who was so careful to seek one lost and straggling Sheep Heresies and Vices dye by being neglected just as Weeds do for we know the Parable That the Devil sows his tares while men sleep But this is no new Charge the good Bishop of Alexandria met with the same Censures for his Zeal against Arius for it seems that Heresie would have died too if it had not been opposed I doubt this Author judges of other mens Zeal for Heresy by his own Zeal for the Truth which wants a little rubbing and chafing to bring it to life but Heresy is all flame and spirit will blow and kindle it self if it be not quenched But yet if what he says be true That by our unskilful way of confuting Heresie we run into those very Absurdities which our Adversaries would reduce us to This I confess is a very great fault and when he shews me any of those Absurdities I will thankfully correct them for all the Obloquies in the world will never make me blush to recant an Error But before he pretends to that I must desire him that he would first read my Book which I know some men censure without reading it Such general Accusations are very spiteful and commonly have a mixture of spite both against the Cause and against the Person His next Argument is very observable We must not dispute now against Socinians because these Controversies about the Trinity have been above Thirteen hundred years ago determined by two general Councils the Nicene and first Constantinopolitan which are owned by our Church and their Creeds received into our Liturgy Ergo we must not defend this Faith against Hereticks because it is the Faith of two General Councils which are owned by our Church Did Athanasius think this a good Argument against Writing and Disputing against the Arians after the Council of Nice had condemned Arius and his Doctrines Did St. Basil Gregory Nazianzen Nyssen St. Chrysostom St. Jerom St. Austin think this a good Argument who wrote so largely against these Heresies which former Councils had condemned But this Author thinks the best way is to let the Matter stand upon this bottom of Authority that is let Hereticks ridicule our Faith as much as they please we must make them no other answer but that this is the Faith of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Councils and the Faith of the Church of England And can he intend this for any more than a Jest when he knows how Socinians despise the determinations of Councils and particularly with what scorn they treat the Nicene Fathers Is this an Age to resolve our Faith into Church Authority Or would he himself believe such absurd Doctrines as they represent the Trinity in Unity to be merely upon Church Authority For my part I declare I would not I greatly value the Authority of those Ancient Councils as credible Witnesses of the Traditionary Sense of the Church before those Controversies were started but were not these Doctrines taught in Scripture were they manifestly repugnant to the plain and evident Principles of Reason all the Councils in the World should never reconcile me to them no more than they should to the Doctrine of Transubstantion And therefore methinks he might have at least allowed us to have challenged the Scriptures as well as General Councils on our side and to have vindicated our Faith from all pretended absurdities and contradictions to Reason But would any man of common sense who had not intended to expose the Faith of the Holy Trinity have told the world at this time of day That we have no other safe and sure bottom for our Faith but only the Authority of General Councils Nay That the Council of Nice it self on whose Authority we must rest had little else themselves for their Determinations but only Authority That it was Authority chiefly carried the Point
Reason This is not to believe like Men Christianity had never prevailed against Paganism and Judaism upon these Terms for they had Possession Authority and Prescription on their side which is the only Reason and Security he gives us for the Faith of the Trinity That the Established Church is in possession of it If private Christians then must endeavour to satisfie themselves in the Reasons of their Faith when Fundamentals are called in question is it not the Duty of Christian Bishops and Pastors to defend the Faith and to defend the Flock of Christ from those grievous Wolves St. Paul prophesied of Is not this their proper Work and Business And when the Faith is publickly opposed and scorned in Printed Libels ought it not to be as publickly defended When Hereticks dispute against the Faith must we be afraid of disputing for it for fear of making a Controversie of Fundamentals Thanks be to God our excellent Primate is above this fear and has now in the Press a Defence of that Faith which this Writer would perswade all Men to betray by silence and I hope so great an Example may at least prevail with him to let us dispute on without any more earnest and compassionate Suits III. His last Argument is The Unseasonableness of this Controversie He says all Controversies are now unseasonable and I say a little more that they are always so for there is no Juncture seasonable to broach Heresies and to oppose the Truth but if Hereticks will dispute against the Truth unseasonably there is no time unseasonable to defend Fundamental Truths But why is it so unseasonable in this Juncture Because under God nothing but an union of Councils and joyning Hands and Hearts can preserve the Reformation and scarce any thing more credit and justifie it than an Union in Doctrinals To begin with the last first Is the Union in Doctrinals ever the greater that Socinians boldly and publickly affront the Faith of the Church and no body appears to defend it Will the World think that we are all of a mind because there is disputing only on one side Then they will think us all Socinians as some Forreigners begin already to suspect which will be a very scandalous Union and divide us from all other Reformed Churches Let Union be never so desirable we cannot we must not unite in Heresie those break the Union who depart from the Faith not those who defend it When Heresies are broached the best way to preserve the Unity of the Church is to oppose and confute and shame Heresie and Hereticks which will preserve the Body of Christians from being infected by Heresie and the fewer there are who forsake the Faith the greater Unity there is in the Church But nothing but Union of Counsels and joyning Hands and Hearts can preserve the Reformation Must we then turn all Socinians to preserve the Reformation Must we renounce Christianity to keep out Popery This Stander-by is misinformed for Socinianism is no part of the Reformation and so inconsiderable and abhorred a Party when they stand by themselves that all Parties who own any Religion will joyn Counsels and Hands and Hearts to renounce them But what he would insinuate is that we shall never joyn against a common Enemy whose Successes would endanger the Reformation while there are any Religious Disputes among us I hope he is mistaken or else we shall certainly be conquered by France for twenty such compassionate Suits as this will never make us all of a mind and whether we dispute or not if we differ as much as if we did dispute and are as zealous for the Interest of a Party the case is the same But he has unwarily confess'd a great Truth which all Governments ought to consider That every Schisin in the Church is a new Party and Faction in the State which are always troublesome to Government when it wants their help But these Disputes about the Trinity make sport for Papists It must be disputing against the Trinity then not disputing for it for they are very Orthodox in this point and never admitted any Man to their Communion who disowned this Faith or declared that he thought it at any time unreasonable dangerous or unseasonable to dispute for it when it was violently opposed I doubt this Protestant Church-man has made more sport for Papists than all our other Disputes for it is a new thing for such Men to plead for Socinians but no new thing to dispute against them and new Sports are always most entertaining But he has himself started an Objection which if he could well answer I could forgive him all the rest But it will be said What shall we do Shall we tamely by a base Silence give up the Point This is the Objection and he answers There is no danger of it the Established Church is in possession of it and dispute will only increase the disturbance But is there no danger that the Church may be flung out of possession and lose the Faith if she don't defend it No The Adversaries to the received Doctrine Why not to the true Faith cannot alter our Articles of Religion but if they can make Converts and increase their Party they may in time change our Articles and then we shall hear no more of compassionate Suits for forbearance But they can dispute everlastingly and let them dispute on we fear them not But they are Men subtil sober industrious many of them very vertuous and as all must say setting aside their Opinions devout pious and charitable I perceive he is very intimately acquainted with them though St. Paul commands all Christians To mark those which cause divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them 16 Rom. 17. But let them be never so good Men as some of the Heathen Philosophers were must we therefore tamely suffer them to pervert the Faith But they are very zealous and the Presses are open and they will never be silent They are zealous against the Truth and therefore we must not be zealous for it they will write and print and speak against the Truth and will never be silent and therefore we must be silent and neither write nor say any thing for the Truth Was there ever such a Reason thought of as this Well! how long must we be silent Neglect them till a fit time and place But why is not this as fit a time as ever we shall have to prevent their sowing Tares or to pluck them up before they have taken too deep Root Can there be a fitter time to oppose Heresies and to defend the true Christian Faith then when Hereticks are very bold and busie in spreading their Heresies and opposing the Faith But when this fit time is come for I know not what he means by a fit place what shall we do then Will he then give us leave to write and dispute against such Hereticks This he will not say but then let
that be done which shall be judged most Christian and most Wholesome But what is that Will it ever be most Christian and most Wholesome to dispute for the Faith against Heresie If ever it will be so why is it not so now If this never will be Christian and Wholesome what else is to be done to Hereticks in fit time and place unless he intends to Physick ' em And it seems he has a Dose ready prepared to lay all these Controversies to an Eternal Sleep and it is what he calls a Negative Belief a pretty Contradiction but never the less proper Cure for Heresie The Project is this as far as I can understand him That the Socinians shall not be required to own the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation but shall so far agree as not to contradict them nor teach contrary to them Now I should like this very well that they would not oppose the received Doctrine of the Church but I believe he knows some little clattering Tongues which all the Opiates he has can never lay asleep and had he remembred what he had just before said concerning their Zeal and their Eternal disputing and that they will never be silent he would never have proposed so impracticable a thing as the imposing silence on them which makes me suspect that he intends something more than what he says and therefore to prevent mistakes I must ask him a Question or two 1. Whether he will allow us who as he grants are in possession of this Faith of the Trinity and Incarnation to keep possession of it and teach explain and confirm it to our People we will answer none of their Books if they won't write them but if he expects that we should say nothing of or for the Trinity as he would have them say nothing against it we must beg his Pardon we do not think the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation to be of so little concernment as to be parted with or buried in silence We believe Christian Religion to be built on this Faith and therefore think ourselves as much bound to Preach it as to Preach the Gospel and if they will oppose the Faith as long as we Preach it we can have no Truce with them 2dly I hope he does not propose this Negative Belief as he calls it as a Term of Communion that tho' we know they deny the Trinity and the Incarnation yet if they will agree not publickly to oppose and contradict this Faith we shall receive them to our Communion and fling the Worship of the Holy Trinity and of a God Incarnate out of our Liturgies for their sake I grant there may be such things as Articles of Peace when Men joyn in the same Communion notwithstanding some less material Differences while the Substantials of Faith and Worship are secure and oblige themselves not to disturb the Peace of the Church with less Disputes but to make the Essentials of Faith and Worship meer Articles of Peace to receive those to our Communion who deny the very Object of our Worship is as senceless and as great a contradiction to the Nature and End of Christian Communion as it would be to receive Heathens Jews Mahometans into the Christian Church by vertue of this Negative Belief This I know he will not allow for he says We are agreed in the other parts of our common Christianity whereas it is absolutely impossible that we should agree in any thing which is pure Christianity while we differ in the Fundamental Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation the owning or denying of which makes an essential Difference in Religion It alters the Object of our Worship as much as the Worship of One and of Three Persons in the Godhead and as much as the Worship of a God Incarnate and of a deified meer Man differ It alters the way of our Salvation as much as Faith in the Blood and Sacrifice of the Son of God to expiate our Sins differs from believing a great and excellent Prophet and obeying his Laws It alters the Motives and Principles of our Obedience as much as the Love of God in giving his Son differs from his Goodness in sending an excellent Man to be our Prophet and Saviour as much as the Love Humility and Condescension of the Eternal Son of God in becoming Man and in dying as a Sacrifice for our Sins differs from the Love of a meer Man in preaching the Gospel and bearing Testimony to it by his own Blood It changes the hopes and reliances of Sinners as much as the Security of a Meritorious Sacrifice offered by the Eternal Son of God for the Expiation of our Sins differs from the Promises of an extraordinary Man sent as a Prophet from God and as much as the Intercession of a High Priest who is the Eternal Son of God and intercedes in the Merits of his own Blood differs from the Intercession of a meer though of an excellent Man who has made no Atonement for our Sins and has no other Interest in God than what an innocent and obedient Man can pretend to It were easie to enlarge on this Argument but I have directed in the Margin where the Reader may see it discoursed at large Now if this Author for these Reasons will allow us to instruct our People in the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation and not desire us to receive Socinians into our Communion he will do good Service if he can bring them to his Negative Belief and perswade them to be silent if he can't we will try to make them so in time if they have Wit enough to understand when it is fit to be quiet In the next place he takes Sanctuary in the Act of Parliament in favour of Dissenters which he conceives has done very much if not full enough But had he considered how severe this Act is upon his beloved Socinians he might much better have let it alone For no Dissenters have any benefit by that Act who do not renounce Socinianism But he pretends to give Account of Acts of Parliament as he does of other Books without seeing them But we may see what a hearty good will he has to the Cause if the Act has excepted Socinians it is more than he knew and more than he wished for he hoped it had not been done and endeavoured to perswade the World that all the Bishops of England had allowed it for he cannot believe that the Body of the Bishops disallowed or did not with good liking consent to the Act viz. To give Liberty to Socinians as he supposed This is such a scandalous Representation of the Bishops of England as I 'm sure they don't deserve and which in due time they may resent And here without any provocation he sets up the Authority of Bishops against the Lower House of Convocation who never differed upon this Point and I hope never will nor will ever be tempted by such a forward Undertaker to