Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A52613
|
A letter of resolution concerning the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation
|
Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.
|
1691
(1691)
|
Wing N1507B; ESTC R217844
|
25,852
|
20
|
of the Father or that he or the Holy Ghost are GOD. It saith no higher thing of them than it saith of the Holy Catholick Church I believe in the Holy Ghost I believe in the Holy Catholick Church for so all know this Creed is read in the Original Greek and by all the Fathers Is it now Sir conceivable that these Doctrines should be as Trinitarians pretend a Tradition constantly preserved when their own Criticks reject the Works of those first Fathers as certainly spurious or forged that speak any what directly or explicitly of the Trinity and other depending Points and Questions and when besides their common and only Creed is undeniably Socinian I deny not Sir that the Fathers of the first 300 Years whose Writings have been suffered to come down to Posterity began to corrupt the true Doctrine concerning the Person of our Saviour making him to be much greater than he was From about the Year 150 some of them were got into the Opinions that were afterwards called Arianism or the Arian Trinity But this I affirm and all the Criticks among the Trinitarians do own it that those Fathers spoke not of the Trinity and of the Points and Questions thereon depending as the Church now doth they so held a kind of Trinity as not to destroy the Unity of GOD or that only the Father is truly and properly GOD. But this was a Digression I proceed to our fifth Reason against these Doctrines They have been partly the direct and necessary Causes partly the unhappy Occasions of divers scandalous and hurtful Errors and Heresies particularly of those which compose the gross Body of Popery 'T is well observed by some that one Absurdity or Error being introduced 't is always the Ground and Occasion of many more This Aphorism was never more sadly verified than in the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation For no sooner were these Doctrines by the Countenance of sanguinary and arbitrary Edicts of the Bizantine Emperours become the more general and current Belief of the Churches but there immediarely broke in after them that Swarm of absurd and heretical Doctrines which have no less than subverted the true and primitive Christianity 1. The first-born of the Trinity was the Supremacy of the Pope A few Bishops not a fifth Part of the Bishops of the Catholick Church having presumed in the Council of Nice Anno 325 to determine for the whole Catholick Church so great a Point as this that there is more than one Divine and Eternal Person they sent the new Creed and Acts of that Council to the Churches and Bishops who had not been present at it to be by them subscribed Hereupon the Bishops of Asia assembling themselves in about 30 provincial Councils rejected the Word Consubstantial or of the same Substance with the Father in which the whole Mystery of Trinitarianism and the Stress of the Nicene Creed does lie they would by no means admit of this Word So faith Marcus Ephesin the most Learned of the Greeks Concil Florent Sess 5. The Bishops of Germany and of Belgium now the Low-Countries and of Gaul now France and of the three Provinces of Great Britain would not receive the Creed of Nice giving this Reason that the Word Consubstantial is unscriptural So saith St. Hilary that great Adversary of the Arians and other Unitarians towards the beginning of his Book de Synod The Bishops of Africa seem not so much as to have taken into their Archives or Registries the Acts Canons or Creed of Nice For in the Year 418 in a Contest between them and the Bishop of Rome they sent to Constantinople and Alexandria for Copies of the Acts of the Nicene Council Concil Carthag 6. Anno 418. The Nicene Council being thus refused and despised by all the considerable Nations professing Christianity the Nicene Faction of Bishops began to consult of a way how to settle their beloved Doctrine by political Arts and at length they resolved upon this Expedient Anno 347 having got on their side the Emperor Constans and finding that the Bishops and Church of Rome were thorowly in their Interests they assembled in Council at Sardica and there made those famous Canons on which all learned Men know the Authority and Supremacy of the Bishops of Rome is wholly grounded and which those Bishops have ever since exercised They designed by these Canons to secure the Bishops and other Ecclesiasticks of the Nicene Party now called Trinitarians in their Bishopricks and other Church-Dignities and to eject from time to time all Vnitarians But these Politicians were quite out in hoping for such an Effect they were so far from governing the Catholick Church by those Canons that they served to no other purpose but the inslaving the Makers of them and their Successors to the Popes of Rome But for a fuller Account Sir of this Sardican Council or rather Conventicle I refer you to the Acts of Athanasius lately published in which the History of these Betrayers of the Catholick Church is fully related 2. In the Year 431 it was concluded and determined by the Trinitarian Faction assembled in Council at Ephesus that GOD the Son was truly and properly incarnate in the Womb of the Virgin Mary and was born of her so that Mary was not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mother of Christ but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mother of God This blasphemons and contradictory Conclusion being once made immediately they fell to worshipping and praying to her If GOD the Son is to be worshipp'd and invovated shall we turn our Backs on the Mother of God Shall not she be able to help us at least by way of Intercession to whom the Angel said Thou art highly honoured of GOD and who was as it were Wife to GOD the Father and in very Deed Mother to GOD the Son Father Simon in the 3d Chapter of the Critical History of the Religions of the East saith It is chiefly since the Birth of Nestorianism that is since the Council of Ephesus that so much respect hath been shown to the Virgin Mary He means she was not so much worshipp'd and invocated till that Council had determined against Nestorius that she is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mother of GOD. But Father Simon will never be able to show that Holy Mary was at all worshipp'd or prayed unto till the Ephesin Council had decreed that she is to be deem'd the Mother of GOD. I do challenge him or any for him to produce any Testimony of the Ancients for the Worship and Invocation of Mary that is so ancient as the Ephesin Council This Father should therefore have dealt as ingenuously and freely in this Case as is his manner in most others or should have said nothing at all of this matter but have chose some other Instance to confirm what he had to say He should have owned what he knows to be the Truth that as the Doctrine of the Incarnation produced this impious and sensless Conclusion that
A Letter of Resolution concerning the Doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation YOU are pleased Sir to demand of me the general Reasons why the Vnitarians or as others now call us the Socinians have departed from the Catholick Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation in which all other Sects and Denominations of Christians do agree and contend also for them as Fundamental Doctrines 'T is true Sir that we are alone in our Belief or Opinion of but one GOD or what is the same but one who is GOD even the GOD and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ And as we are alone so we are a little Flock If our Reasons were no more considerable than our Number we should be very contemptible to our Opposers The Case was once otherwise there is no Ecclesiastical Historian but has noted the time when All the World was against Athanasius and Athanasius against all the World But it avails very little that we can say Fuimus Trees suit Ilium And that which you have demanded of me is What are our Reasons not how it has come to pass or by what Persecutions we have been reduced to so small a Number I answer therefore Our first Reason is The Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation have no solid or good Foundation in Revelation or Holy Scripture A Stranger in this Controversy who hears the Sermons or reads the Books of some of our Opposers would think that the Question between us and the Trinitarians is on their side as clear in Revelation as 't is confess'd to be on ours in Point of Reason for this is the Fault with which they continually charge us that we exalt Reason above Revelation and that we pretend that a Force how great soever is to be put upon the Words of Revelation rather than we will admit of any Doctrine which is contrary to Reason Now First 'T is not true that we prefer our Reason before Revelation On the contrary Revelation being what GOD himself hath said either immediately or by inspired Persons 't is to be preferred before the clearest Demonstration of our Reason But because we cannot suppose without Disrespect and Injury to GOD to his Goodness and Veracity that he has so made us that our Faculties should be deceived in what they clearly and distinctly perceive and because GOD hath in Revelation frequently appealed to our Faculties to our Understanding and Reason therefore we conclude that what is clearly and distinctly discerned by Reason as true or false is so And from thence we infer that what is false in Reason can never be true in Revelation or by Revelation So that whatsoever in Revelation doth seem to contradict Reason can be nothing but our Blunder our unskilful injudicious and too close Adherence to the mere Letter and Words of Revelation 'T is so true that we ought to interpret the most clear Revelation so as not to contradict evident Reason that if we neglect this Rule we shall oft times make Revelation contrary to and inconsistent with it self as well as to or with Reason We shall be forced for Instance to say the Lord Christ is a Rock a Way a true Vine a Door and twenty more such different and contrary things because Revelation has clearly and expresly called him all these I desire therefore to know Why our Opposers take care not to make themselves contemptible by maintaining 'tis a Scripture-Doctrine that the Lord Christ is a Rock a Way a true Vine a Door on the Account that such a Doctrine though founded on the express Words of Holy Scripture is contrary to Reason and yet have no regard to avoid the Imputation of Folly Incogitance and Inadvertence by contending this is a Scripture-Doctrine which is no less contrary to Reason and natural Light even this that there are three Almighty and Infinite Persons and yet but one GOD. No Man ever had by Nature or Reason nor can have any other Notion of Three Gods but only this Three Infinite and Almighty Persons Is it supposable that GOD should give forth contrary Manifestations of himself that he should teach us by Nature and Reason to apprehend one GOD as but one Almighty and Infinite Person and yet command us by Revelation to believe one GOD is Three such Persons Or can we our selves obey contrary Commands or believe contrary Manifestations concerning the same thing at the same time This Foundation being laid we say Three Divine Persons an Almighty Father an Almighty Son and an Almighty Spirit distinct from both being in Reason and common Sense but the Periphrasis and Circumlocution for Three Gods so that we can have no other Conception of Three Gods but only Three such Persons that Revelation which by Confession of all Parties obliges me to believe but one GOD can never be supposed to require me to believe Three Almighty Persons So also Reason assuring me that the Disproportion between Infinite and Finite is such that they can never be commensurate or made one and the same That Revelation or Holy Scripture which tells me GOD is infinite that the Heaven of Heavens contains him not cannot be interpreted or understood as bidding me believe that a Person who is GOD or an Infinite Person and such they say every Person of the Trinity is can be Whole and All Incarnate that is united and commensurate to a finite Man We abide Sir by this Argument here we fix our Foot never to be removed that the Inconsistence of the Trinity and the Incarnation with Reason and natural Knowledg being undeniably evident therefore those Doctrines can have no real Foundation in Divine Revelation that is to say in Holy Scripture But Secondly As we consider that though Revelation is to be preferred before Reason and always interpreted by Reason for the Causes already given so we cannot but profess our selves surprized that any should have the Confidence to pretend that there is clear and express Revelation on behalf of the Trinity and Incarnation In the Name of Wonder what do these Gentlemen mean by express and clear Revelation do they mean that they have found out some Texts which directly and expresly say There is a Trinity of Divine Persons who are but one GOD or which say The Son or second Person of the Trinity was incarnate If they have any such Texts to produce we shall grant them they have an express Revelation for those Doctrines But in very Deed they mean no such thing but by clear and express Revelation they mean what was never meant by any but themselves nor by themselves in any other Case or Question but this of the Trinity They mean the Trinity and Incarnation are provable by certain most remote and strained Consequences from some such Texts of Revelation or Scripture as either are of suspected Authority and Credit in the Original among the Learned of their own Party or are denied by the Learnedest of their own side to be truly translated or finally are interpreted by their own