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 |
|
A62587
|
A sermon concerning the unity of the divine nature and the B. Trinity by John, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.
|
Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.
|
1693
(1693)
|
Wing T1222; ESTC R6941
|
17,786
|
42
|
things concerning God which we are very well assured he hath declared concerning Himself though these things by our Reason should be incomprehensible And this is truly the Case as to the matter now under debate We are sufficiently assured that the Scriptures are a Divine Revelation and that this Mystery of the Trinity is therein declared to us Now that we cannot comprehend it is no sufficient Reason not to believe it For if this were a good Reason for not believing it then no man ought to believe that there is a God because his Nature is most certainly incomprehensible But we are assured by many Arguments that there is a God and the same natural Reason which assures us that He is doth likewise assure us that He is incomprehensible and therefore our believing Him to be so doth by no means overthrow our belief of His Being In like manner we are assured by Divine Revelation of the truth of this Doctrine of the Trinity and being once assured of that our not being able fully to comprehend it is not reason enough to stagger our belief of it A man cannot deny what he sees though the necessary consequence of admitting it may be something which he cannot comprehend One cannot deny the Frame of this World which he sees with his eyes though from thence it will necessarily follow that either that or something else must be of it self which yet as I said before is a thing which no man can comprehend how it can be And by the same Reason a man must not deny what God says to be true though he cannot comprehend many things which God says As particularly concerning this Mystery of the Trinity It ought then to satisfy us that there is sufficient evidence that this Doctrine is delivered in Scripture and that what is there declared concerning it doth not imply a Contradiction For why should our finite understandings pretend to comprehend that which is infinite or to know all the real Differences that are consistent with the Unity of an Infinite Being or to be able fully to explain this Mystery by any similitude or resemblance taken from finite Beings But before I leave this Argument I cannot but take notice of one thing which they of the Church of Rome are perpetually objecting to us upon this Occasion And it is this That by the same reason that we believe the Doctrine of the Trinity we may and must receive that of Transubstantiation God forbid Because of all the Doctrines that ever were in any Religion this of Transubstantiation is certainly the most abominably absurd However this Objection plainly shews how fondly and obstinately they are addicted to their own Errors how mishapen and monstrous soever insomuch that rather than the Dictates of their Church how absurd soever should be called in question they will question the truth even of Christianity it self and if we will not take in Transubstantiation and admit it to be a necessary Article of the Christian Faith they grow so sullen and desperate that they matter not what becomes of all the rest And rather than not have their Will of us in that what is controverted they will give up that which by their own confession is an undoubted Article of the Christian Faith and not controverted on either Side except only by the Socinians who yet are hearty Enemies to Transubstantiation and have exposed the absurdity of it with great advantage But I shall endeavour to return a more particular Answer to this Objection and such a one as I hope will satisfy every considerate and unprejudiced mind that after all this confidence and swaggering of theirs there is by no means equal reason either for the receiving or for the rejecting of these two Doctrines of the Trinity and Transubstantiation First There is not equal reason for the belief of these Two Doctrines This Objection if it be of any force must suppose that there is equal evidence and proof from Scripture for these two Doctrines But this we utterly deny and with great reason because it is no more evident from the words of Scripture that the Sacramental Bread is substantially changed into Christ's natural Body by virtue of those words This is my Body than it is that Christ is substantially changed into a natural Vine by virtue of those words I am the true Vine or than that the Rock in the Wilderness of which the Israelites drank was substantially changed into the Person of Christ because it is expresly said That Rock was Christ or than that the Christian Church is substantially changed into the natural Body of Christ because it is in express terms said of the Church That it is his Body But besides this several of their own most learned Writers have freely acknowledged that Transubstantiation can neither be directly proved nor necessarily concluded from Scripture But this the Writers of the Christian Church did never acknowledge concerning the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ but have always appealed to the clear and undeniable Testimonies of Scripture for the Proof of these Doctrines And then the whole force of the Objection amounts to this that if I am bound to believe what I am sure God says though I cannot comprehend it then I am bound by the same reason to believe the greatest Absurdity in the World though I have no manner of assurance of any Divine Revelation concerning it And if this be their meaning though we understand not Transubstantiation yet we very well understand what they would have but cannot grant it because there is not equal reason to believe two things for one of which there is good proof and for the other no proof at all Secondly neither is there equal reason for the rejecting of these two Doctrines This the Objection supposes which yet cannot be supposed but upon one or both of these two grounds Either because these two Doctrines are equally incomprehensible or because they are equally loaded with Absurdities and Contradictions The First is no good ground of rejecting any Doctrine merely because it is incomprehensible as I have abundantly shew'd already But besides this there is a wide difference between plain matters of Sense and Mysteries concerning God and it does by no means follow that if a man do once admit any thing concerning God which he cannot comprehend he hath no reason afterwards to believe what he himself sees This is a most unreasonable and destructive way of arguing because it strikes at the foundation of all Certainty and sets every man at liberty to deny the most plain and evident Truths of Christianity if he may not be humor'd in having the absurdest things in the World admitted for true The next step will be to persuade us that we may as well deny the Being of God because his Nature is incomprehensible by our Reason as deny Transubstantiation because it evidently contradicts our Senses 2dly Nor are these two Doctrines loaded with the like Absurdities and Contradictions So far
from this that the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in the Scriptures and hath already been explained hath no Absurdity or Contradiction either involved in it or necessarily consequent upon it But the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is big with all imaginable Absurdity and Contradiction And their own Schoolmen have sufficiently exposed it especially Scotus and he designed to do so as any man that attentively reads him may plainly discover For in his Disputation about it he treats this Doctrine with the greatest contempt as a new Invention of the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent III. To the Decree of which Council concerning it he seems to pay a formal submission but really derides it as contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind and not at all supported by Scripture as any one may easily discern that will carefully consider his manner of handling it and the result of his whole Disputation about it And now Suppose there were some appearance of Absurdity and Contradiction in the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in Scripture must we therefore believe a Doctrine which is not at all revealed in Scripture and which hath certainly in it all the absurdities in the World and all the Contradictions to Sense and Reason and which once admitted doth at once destroy all Certainty Yes say they why not since we of the Church of Rome are satisfied that this Doctrine is revealed in Scripture or if it be not is defined by the Church which is every whit as good But is this equal to demand of us the belief of a thing which hath always been controverted not only between us and them but even among themselves at least till the Council of Trent And this upon such unreasonable terms that we must either yield this Point to them or else renounce a Doctrine agreed on both Sides to be revealed in Scripture To shew the unreasonableness of this proceeding Let us suppose a Priest of the Church of Rome pressing a Jew or Turk to the belief of Transubstantiation and because one kindness deserves another the Jew or Turk should demand of him the belief of all the Fables in the Talmud or in the Alchoran since none of these nor indeed all of them together are near so absurd as Transubstantiation Would not this be much more reasonable and equal than what they demand of us Since no Absurdity how monstrous and big soever can be thought of which may not enter into an Understanding in which a Breach hath been already made wide enough to admit Transubstantiation The Priests of Baal did not half so much deserve to be exposed by the Prophet for their Superstition and folly as the Priests of the Church of Rome do for this sensless and stupid Doctrine of theirs with a hard Name I shall only add this one thing more That if this Doctrine were possible to be true and clearly prov'd to be so yet it would be evidently useless and to no purpose For it pretends to change the substance of one thing into the substance of another thing that is already and before this change is pretended to be made But to what purpose Not to make the Body of Christ for that was already in Being and the Substance of the Bread is lost nothing of it remaineth but the Accidents which are good for nothing and indeed are nothing when the Substance is destroy'd and gone All that now remains is to make some practical Inferences from this Doctrine of the Unity of the Divine Nature And they shall be the same which God himself makes by Moses which Text also is cited by our Saviour Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is one Lord and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind and with all thy strength And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self So that according to our Saviour the whole Duty of Man the love of God and of our neighbour is founded in the Unity of the Divine Nature I. The love of God The Lord thy God is One Lord therefore thou shalt love Him with all thy heart c. this is the first and great Commandment And it comprehends in it all the Duties of the first Table as naturally flowing from it As that we should serve Him only and pay no Religious Worship to any but to Him For to pay Religious Worship to any thing is to make it a God and to acknowledge it for such And therefore God being but One we can give Religious Worship to none but to Him only And among all the parts of Religious Worship none is more peculiarly appropriated to the Deity than solemn Invocation and Prayer For he to whom men address their Requests at all times and in all places must be supposed to be always every where present to understand all our desires and wants and to be able to supply them and this God only is and can do So likewise from the Unity of the Divine Nature may be inferr'd that we should not worship God by any sensible Image or Representation Because God being a singular Being there is nothing like Him or that can without injuring and debasing his most spiritual and perfect and immense Being be compared to Him As He himself speaks in the Prophet To whom will ye liken me saith the Lord and make me equal And therefore with no Distinction whatsoever can it be lawful to give Religious Worship or any part of it to any but God We can pray to none but to Him because He only is every where present and only knows the Hearts of all the children of men which Solomon gives as the reason why we should address our Supplications to God only who dwelleth in the Heavens So that the Reason of these two Precepts is founded in the Unity and Singularity of the Divine Nature and unless there be more Gods than One we must worship Him only and pray to none but Him Because we can give Invocation to none but to Him only whom we believe to be God as St. Paul reasons How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed II. The love likewise of our Neighbour is founded in the Unity of the Divine Nature and may be inferr'd from it Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is One Lord therefore thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy self And the Apostle gives this reason why Christians should be at unity among themselves There is One God and Father of all and therefore we should keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace that is live in mutual love and peace The Prophet likewise assigns this reason why all Mankind should be upon good terms with one another and not be injurious one to another Have we not all One Father hath not One God created us Why do we then deal treacherously every man against his brother And therefore when we see such hatred and enmity among Men such divisions and animosities among Christians we may not only ask St. Paul's question Is Christ divided that we cannot agree about serving him either all to serve him in one way or to bear with one another in our differences I say we may not only ask St. Paul's question Is Christ divided but may ask further Is God divided Is there not One God and are we not all his Offspring Are we not all the Sons of Adam who was the Son of God So that if we trace our selves to our Original we shall find a great nearness and equality among men And this equality that we are all Gods creatures and Image and that the One only God is the Father of us all is a more real ground of mutual love and peace and equity in our dealings one with another than any of those petty differences and distinctions of strong and weak of rich and poor of wise and foolish of base and honourable can be to encourage men to any thing of insolence injustice and inequality of dealing one towards another Because that wherein we all agree that we are the Creatures and Children of God and have all One common Father is essential and constant but those things wherein we differ are accidental and mutable and happen to one another by turns Thus much may suffice to have spoken concerning the first Proposition in the Text There is one God To Him Father Son and H. Ghost be all Honour and Glory Dominion and Power now and for ever Amen FINIS 1 Cor. 8. 4. Deut. 4. 35. Isai. 44. 6. v. 8. Adversus Marcionem l. 1. c. 10. 1 Cor. 8. 6. Serm. II. L. 5. Joh. 15. 1. Eph. 1. 23. Deut. 6. 4. Mark 12. 29 30 31. Isai. 46. 5. 1 Kings 8. 39. Rom. 10. 14. Eph. 4. 6. Mal. 2. 10.