believed otherwise Pope Leo III assented to the definition of the Council of Aquisgrane An. 809. concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son and yet would by no means allow that it should be added to the Creed nor would he deny Salvation to those who believed otherwise but when that Question was asked him returned this Answer That whosoever has subtilty enough to attain to the Knowledge of this or knowing it will not believe it cannot be saved but there are many and this among the rest deep Misteries of the Holy Faith which all cannot reach to some by reason of Age others for want of understanding and therefore as we said before he that can and won't cannot be saved And therefore at the same time he commanded the Constantinopolitan Creed to be hung up at Rome in a Silver Table without the addition of the Filioque nor can any man tell when this was added to the Creed however we never read the Greeks were Anathematized upon this account till Pope Vrban II. 1097. and in the Council of Florence under Eugenius IV. 1438 9. Ioseph the Patriarch of Constantinople thought this Controversie between the two Churches might be reconciled and the Filioque added in a sense very consistent with the belief of the Greek Church As for what he adds that the Greek Church condemned this addition as Heretical I desire to know what Greek Council did this Vossius a very diligent Observer gives no account of it the quarrel of the Greeks with the Latins was That they undertook without the Authority of a General Council to add to the Creed of a General Council when the Council of Ephesus and Chalcedon had Anathematized those who did so and therefore for this reason the Greeks Anathematized the Latin Church without declaring the Filioque to be Heretical and as that Learned Man observes this was the true cause of the Schism that the Greeks thought the Pope of Rome and a Western Synod took too much upon themselves to add to the Creed of a General Council by their own Authority without consulting the Eastern Church which was equally concerned in matters of Faith But the Comical part is still behind for he says The Greeks laugh at Athanasius 's menace and say he was drunk when he made the Creed and for this he refers us to Georgius Scholarius or Gennadius who was made Patriarch of Constantinople by Mahomet when he had taken that City I confess I have not read all that Gennadius has Writ and know not where to find this place and he has not thought fit to direct us but this I know that whether Gennadius says this himself or only reports it as the saying of some foolish Greeks for I cannot guess by our Author which it is whoever said it said more then is true for Athanasius neither made the Creed drunk nor sober for as most Learned Men agree he never made it at all though it bears his name but I wish I could see this place in Gennadius for I greatly suspect our Author Gennadius being a very unlikely Man to say any ill thing of Athanasius upon account of the Filioque who himself took the side of the Latin Church in this dispute and as Vossius relates gives Athanasius a very different and more honourable Character 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The great Athanasius the Preacher and Confessor of Truth But there is nothing smites me more than to hear this Arian or Socinian or whatever he is affirm That the Greeks have clearly and demonstratively proved that the Holy Spirit is from the Father only For that which is proved clearly and demonstratively I hope is true and then this alone is a confutation of his brief Notes for the Greeks taught and proved demonstratively as he says that the Holy Spirit so proceeds from the Father only as to be of the same Substance and One God with the Father And the Catholick Faith is this Catholick Faith is as much as to say in plain English the Faith of the whole Church now in what Age was this which here follows the Faith of the whole Church The Catholick Faith I grant is so called with relation to the Catholick Church whose Faith it is and the Catholick Church is the Universal Church or all the true Churches in the World which are all but one whole Church united in Christ their Head the Profession of the true Faith and Worship of Christ makes a true Church and all true Churches are the One Catholick Church whether they be spread over all the World or shut up in any one corner of it as at the first Preaching of the Gospel the Catholick Church was no where but in Iudaea Now as no Church is the Catholick Church of Christ how far soever it has spread it self over the World unless it profess the true Faith of Christ no more is any Faith the Catholick Faith how universally soever it be professed unless it be the true Faith of Christ nor does the true Christian Faith cease to be Catholick how few soever there be who sincerely profess it It is down-right Popery to judge of the Catholick Church by its multitudes or large extent or to judge of the Catholick Faith by the vast Numbers of its Professors were there but one true Church in the World that were the Catholick Church because it would be the whole Church of Christ on Earth and were the true Christian Faith professed but in one such Church it would be the Catholick Faith still for it is the Faith of the whole true Church of Christ the sincere belief and profession of which makes a Catholick Church Not in the Age of Athanasius himself who for this Faith and for Seditious Practices was banished from Alexandria in AEgypt where he was Bishop no less than four times whereof the first was by Constantine the Great What shall be done unto Thee thou lying Tongue What impudence is this to think to sham the World at this time a day with such stories as these when the Case of Athanasius is so well known or may be even to English Readers who will take the pains to read his Life written with great exactness and fidelity by the learned Dr. Cave But when he thinks a second time of it will he say that the Church of God in Athanasius's Age was not of the same Faith with him What thinks he of the Nicene Fathers who condemned Arius In which Council Athanasius himself was present and bore a considerable part and so provoked the Arian Faction by his Zeal for the Catholick Faith and his great skill and dexterity in managing that Cause as laid the Foundation of all his future Troubles Will he say that Constantine the Great who called the Council at Nice in the Cause of Arius and was so zealous an Asserter of the Nicene Faith banished Athanasius for this Faith No his greatest Enemies durst not make
A VINDICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE Holy and Ever Blessed TRINITY AND THE INCARNATION OF The Son of God OCCASIONED By the Brief NOTES on the Creed of St. Athanasius and the Brief HISTORY of the Vnitarians or Socinians and containing an Answer to both By WILLIAM SHERLOCK D. D. Master of the TEMPLE The Second Edition IMPRIMATUR Z. Isham R. P. D. Henrico Episc. Lond. Ã Sacris Ian. 9. 1690. LONDON Printed for W. Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstans Church in Fleet-street 1691. TO THE READER I Will make no Apology for publishing this Vindication of the Great and Fundamental Mysteries of our Religion for if ever it were necessary it is now when Atheists and Hereticks some openly some under a disguise conspire together to ridicule the Trinity and the Incarnation I confess the Book is too big could I have made it less as at first I intended but when I was once engaged I saw a necessity of going farther and I hope no man will have reason to complain that I have said too much but those who will find a great deal too much said for them to answer My Original Design was to vindicate the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation from those pretended Absurdities and Contradictions which were so confidently charged on them and this I 'm sure I have done for I have given a very easie and intelligible Notion of a Trinity in Vnity and if it be possible to explain this Doctrine intelligibly the Charge of Contradictions vanishes and whether men will believe this Account or not they can't deny but that it is very possible and intelligible and if we could go no farther that is enough in Matters of Revelation But I hope I have done a great deal more than this and proved That it is the true Scripture Account of it and agreeable to the Doctrine of the Ancient Fathers and have vindicated the Scripture Proofs of a Trinity and Incarnation from the pitiful Sophistries of the late Socinian Historian I have not indeed answered particularly the whole Book in Order and Method as it lies which was too tedious a Work and not necessary but I have considered whatever was most material in it and have avoided nothing because it was hard to Answer but because it needed no Answer as I am ready to satisfie the World whenever a just Occasion calls for it for having dipt my Pen in the Vindication of so glorious a Cause by the Grace of God I will never desert it while I can hold a Pen in my Hand I must thankfully own that the writing of this Book has given me clearer and more distinct Notions of this Great Mystery then I had before which is the Reason why the Reader will find some things explained towards the end which I spoke doubtfully of at first as particularly the difference between the Eternal Generation of the Son and the Procession of the Holy Ghost and I hope this is a pardonable Fault The writing this Book has cost me many Thoughts and those who have a mind throughly to understand it must not think much if it cost them some and if they cannot be contented to bestow some serious Thoughts on it it will be lost labour to read it I pray God give success to it and open the Eyes of those Men before it be too late who are so industrious to write or disperse such Brief Notes and Brief Histories as are valuable for nothing but Blasphemy and Nonsense for I will be bold to say That Socinianism after all its pretences to Reason is one of the most stupid sensless Heresies that ever infested the Christian Church THE CONTENTS SECT I. COncerning the Nature of a Contradiction and how to know it page 1. Many Contradictions pretended where there are none as in the Notion of a Spirit and of God 3 How to discover when a pretended Contradiction is not real but in our imperfect Conception of things 4 It is absurd to dispute against the Being of any thing from the difficulty of conceiving it 5 What the natural Boundaries of Humane Knowledge are 9 SECT II. The Athanasian Creed contains nothing but what is necessary to the true Belief of the Trinity and Incarnation 10 The Dispute between the Greek and Lat. Church about the filioque 17 SECT III. Concerning the necessity of the Catholick Faith to Salvation and a Brief History of Athanasius 21 That the Catholick Faith is necessary to Salvation 25 What is meant by keeping the Catholick Faith whole and undefiled 28 The Scriptures being a compleat Rule of Faith do not make Athanasius's Creed an unnecessary Rule 29 The great usefulness of ancient Creeds 31 Pope Leo III. would not deny Salvation to those who disowned the filioque 33 What is meant by the Catholick Faith 35 The History of Athanasius 37 SECT IV. The Catholick Doctrine of a Trinity in Unity and Unity and Trinity explained and vindicated from all pretended Absurdities and Contradictions 45 What it is that makes any Substance numerically One 48 The Unity of a Spirit nothing else but Self-consciousness ibid. And therefore mutual consciousness makes Three Persons essentially and numerically One. 49 The unity of a Mind or Spirit reaches as far as its Self-consciousness does 50 That this is the true Scripture Notion of the Unity of the Father Son and Holy Ghost ibid. The Unity between Father and Son explained 51 The union of created Spirits an union in Knowledge Will and Love 52 The same union between Father Son and Holy Ghost ibid. But this which is only a moral union between Creatures is an essential union between Father Son and Holy Ghost as it is the effect of mutual Consciousness 55 This proved from Scripture as to the unity between Father and Son 56 This makes all Three Divine Persons coessential and coequal 58 That the Holy Spirit is One with Father and Son by a mutual Consciousness proved from Scripture 64 This Notion contains the true Orthodox Faith of a Trinity in Unity 66 For it does not confound the Persons but makes them distinct ibid. Nor divide the Substance but makes them numerically One 68 This makes the Doctrine of the Trinity as intelligible as the Notion of One God ibid. The material Images of Substance confound our Notions both of One God and of a Trinity in Unity 69 God must be considered as Eternal Truth and Wisdom 70 Wisdom and Truth a pure and simple Act and contains all Divine Perfections 71 Three infinite Minds must necessarily be mutually conscious to each other 74 No positive Notion of Infinity but only in a Mind 75 No infinite Extension 76 What the true Notion of Infinite is that it is absolute Perfection 78 That there are no absolute Perfections but those of a Mind 79 Extension is no Perfection nor to be Omnipresent by Extension 80 The same absolute Perfections of a Mind by a mutual Consciousness may be entire and equal in Three infinite Minds 81 This reconciles the
and what is the Rule of Faith are two very distinct Questions and to apply what is said of the Catholick Faith to the Rule of Faith becomes the Wit and understanding of an Heretick This is the very Argument which the Papists use against our Authors Compleat and Infallible Rule of Faith the Scriptures that they do not contain all things necessary to Salvation because they do not prove the great Fundamental of the Protestant Faith that the Canon of Scripture which we receive is the Word of God now what Answer he would give to Papists with reference to the sufficiency of Scripture let him suppose I give him the same Answer in Vindication of the Catholick Faith of the Athanasian Creed and we are right again But his parting blow is worth some little observation That if the Scriptures be a compleat Rule of Faith then this Creed of Athanasius is at least an unnecessary Rule of Faith But why did he not say the same thing of the Apostles Creed or Nicene Creed or any other Creeds as well as of the Athanasian Creed for it seems a Creed as a Creed for there is no other sense to be made of it is a very unnecessary thing if the Scripture be a compleat Rule of Faith And thus both Catholicks and Hereticks even his dear Arians and Socinians have troubled themselves and the World to no purpose in drawing up Creeds and Confessions of Faith But this Author ought to be sent to School to learn the difference between a Creed and a Rule of Faith A Rule of Faith is a divinely inspired Writing which contains all matters to be believed and upon the Authority of which we do believe a Creed is a Summary of Faith or a Collection of such Articles as we ought to believe the Truth of which we must examine by some other Rule the sum then of our Author's Argument is this That because the Scripture is the Rule of Faith and contains all things necessary to be believed therefore it is very unnecessary to collect out of the Scripture such Propositions as are necessary for all Christians explicitely to believe He might as well have proved from the Scriptures being a compleat Rule of Faith that therefore there is no necessity of Commentators or Sermons or Catechisms as that there is no necessity of Creeds But as senseless as this is there is a very deep fetch in it for he would have no other Creed but that the Scripture is the Divine Infallible Compleat Rule of Faith which makes all other Creeds unnecessary and then he can make what he pleases of Scripture as all other Hereticks have done before him But let me ask this Author whether to believe in general that the Scripture is the compleat Rule of Faith without an explicite belief of what is contained in Scripture will carry a Man to Heaven There seems to me no great difference between this general Faith in the Scriptures without particularly knowing and believing what they teach and believing as the Church believes We suppose then he will grant us the necessity of an explicite belief of all things contained in the Scripture necessary to Salvation and ought not the Church then to instruct People what these necessary Articles of Faith are and what is the true sense of Scripture about them Especially when there are a great many damnable Heresies taught in the Church by Men of perverse Minds who wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction and does not this shew the necessity of Orthodox Creeds and Formularies of Faith And this puts me in mind of the great usefulness of ancient Creeds though the Holy Scripture be the only Divine and Infallible Rule of Faith viz. That they are a kind of secondary Rule as containing the Traditionary Faith of the Church It is no hard matter for witty Men to put very perverse senses on Scripture to favour their heretical Doctrines and to defend them with such Sophistry as shall easily impose upon unlearned and unthinking Men and the best way in this case is to have recourse to the ancient Faith of the Christian Church to learn from thence how these Articles were understood and professed by them for we cannot but think that those who conversed with the Apostles and did not only receive the Scriptures but the sense and interpretation of them from the Apostles or Apostolical Men understood the true Christian Faith much better than those at a farther remove and therefore as long as we can reasonably suppose this Tradition to be preserved in the Church their Authority is very Venerable and this gives so great and venerable Authority to some of the first General Councils and therefore we find Tertullian himself confuting the Hereticks of his days by this argument from Prescription or the constant Tradition of all Apostolick Churches which was certain and unquestionable at that time and as much as Papists pretend to Tradition we appeal to Tradition for the first Three or Four Centuries and if the Doctrine of the Athanasian Creed have as good a Tradition as this as certainly it has it is no unnecessary Rule though we do not make it a primary and uncontroulable Rule as the Holy Scripture is where there are two different Senses put on Scripture it is certainly the safest to embrace that sense if the words will bear it which is most agreeable to the received Doctrine of the Primitive Church contained in the Writings of her Doctors or Ancient Creeds or such Creeds as are conformed to the Doctrine of the Primitive Church Then for taking ought from this Creed the whole Greek Church diffused through so many Provinces rejects as Heretical that Period of it The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son contending that the Holy Spirit is from the Father only which also they clearly and demonstratively prove as we shall see in its proper place And for the menace here of Athanasius that they shall perish everlastingly they laugh at it and say He was drunk when he made that Creed Gennad Schol. Arch Bishop of Constantin This Addition of the Filioque or the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and from the Son which was disputed between the Greek and Latin Church is no corruption of the Essentials of the Christian Faith about the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity as I observed before nor does Athanasius deny Salvation to those who do not believe it For he that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity does not relate to every particular Word and Phrase but to that Doctrine which immediately proceeds That the Trinity in Vnity and Vnity in Trinity is to be Worshipped which the Greeks acknowledged as well as the Latins and therefore agreed in the Substantials of Faith necessary to Salvation And that I havereason for what I say appears from this that after the Latins were perswaded that the Holy Ghost did proceed from the Son they were far enough from denying Salvation to those who
Faculties and Powers more but these being only Faculties and Powers neither of them is a whole entire Mind the Understanding alone is not the whole entire Mind nor Reflexion nor Love but the Mind is whole and entire by the union of them all in One but these being Persons in the Godhead each Person has the whole Divine Nature The Son has all that the Father has being his perfect and natural Image and the Holy Spirit is all that Father and Son is comprehending all their infinite Perfections in Eternal Love and they are all the same and all united into One God as the several Faculties and Powers are in One Mind 7. For this proves that these Divine Persons are intimately conscious to each other which as I before showed makes them One numerical God for as the same Mind is conscious to all its own Faculties and Powers and by that unites them into One so where there are Divine and Infinite Persons instead of Faculties and Powers they must be mutually conscious to each other to make them all One God 8. This proves also that though there are Three distinct Persons there can be but One Energie and Operation Father Son and Holy Ghost is the Maker and Governour of the World by one inseparable and undivided Energie neither of them do nor can act apart as the several Powers of the Mind all concur to the same individual Action Knowledge Self-reflection and Will do the same thing which is the Effect of Knowledge brought into act by Reflection and Will and yet the Effect may be ascribed to Knowledge and ascribed to Will as the making of the World is to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost not separately to either but as they act in Conjunction and produce the same Effect by One individual Energie and Power 9. This proves also that Father Son and Holy Ghost must be co-eternal as the several Powers and Faculties must be co-temporary and co-exist in the same Mind Understanding cannot be without a Power of Reflection nor that without Will and Love And I suppose no man will say that there could be any imaginable instant wherein God did not know and love himself This Account is very agreeable to what St. Austin has given us who represents the Father to be Original Mind the Son his Knowledge of himself and the Holy-Spirit Divine Love as I have done and gives the very same Account of their Union Cùm itaque se mens novit amat jungitur ei amore verbum ejus quoniam amat notitiam novit amorem verbum in amore est amor in verbo utrumque in amante dicente When the Mind knows and loves it self its Word is united to it by Love and because it loves its Knowledge and knows its Love its Word is in Love and Love in its Word and both in the loving and speaking or knowing Mind This is the Eternal Generation of the Son Itaque mens cùm seipsam cognoscit sola parens est notitioe suoe cognitum enim cognitor ipsa est when the Mind knows it self it is the sole Parent of its own Knowledge for its self is both the Knower and the Thing known that is the Son is begotten of the Father by a reflex Knowledge of himself and he gives us the same Account of the Difference between Generation and Procession that One is a new Production if I may so express it inventum partum repertum that is the Production of its own Image of its own Wisdom and Knowledge by Self-reflexion the other comes out of the Mind as Love does and therefore the Mind is the Principle of it but not its Parent Cur itaque amando se non genuisse dicatur amorem suum sicut cognoscendo se genuit notitiam suam in eo quidem manifeste ostenditur hoc amoris esse principium undè procedit ab ipsa quidem mente procedit quae sibi est amabilis antequam se amet atque ita principium est amoris sui quo se amat sed ideo non rectè dicitur genitus ab ea sicut notitia sui quâ se novit quia notitia jam inventum est quod partum vel repertum dicitur quod saepe praecedit inquisitio eo fine quietura This I hope is sufficient both to explain and justifie this Doctrine which is the great Fundamental of the Christian Religion of a Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity and that Account I have given of it It must be confessed that the ancient Fathers did not express their Sense in the same terms that I have done but I will leave any indifferent and impartial Reader to judge whether they do not seem to have intended the very same Explication which I have now given of this venerable Mystery As for the Schoolmen they generally pretend to follow the Fathers and have no Authority where they leave them Sometimes they seem to mistake their Sense or to clog it with some peculiar Niceties and Distinctions of their own The truth is that which has confounded this Mystery has been the vain endeavour of reducing it to terms of Art such as Nature Essence Substance Subsistence Hypostasis Person and the like which some of the Fathers used in a very different Sense from each other which sometimes occasioned great Disputes among them not because they differed in the Faith but because they used words so differently as not to understand each others meaning as Petavius has shewn at large The more pure and simple Age of the Church contented themselves to profess the Divinity of Father Son and Holy Ghost that there was but One God and Three who were this One God which is all the Scripture teaches of it But when Sabellius had turned this Mystery only into a Trinity of Names they thought themselves concerned to say what these Three are who are One God and then they nicely distinguished between Person and Hypostasis and Nature and Essence and Substance that they were Three Persons but One Nature Essence and Substance but then when men curiously examined the signification of these words they found that upon some account or other they were very unapplicable to this Mystery for what is the Substance and Nature of God How can Three distinct Persons have but one Numerical Substance What is the distinction between Essence and Personality and Subsistence The Deity is above Nature and above terms of Art there is nothing like this mysterious Distinction and Unity and therefore no wonder if we want proper words to express it by at least that such Names as signifie the Distinction and Unity of Creatures should not reach it I do not think it impossible to give a tolerable Account of the School-terms and distinctions but that is a work of greater difficulty than use especially to ordinary Christians and I have drawn this Section to too great a length already to enter upon that now SECT VI.
things which is the Explication of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 begotten before the whole Creation and therefore no part of the Creation himself and by him all things consist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all things were not only made by him but have their Subsistence in him as the Apostle tells us in God we live and move and have our being that this does not relate to the new Creation as the Socinians would have it is very plain For 1. in this Sense Christ if he were meer Man was not the first-born of every new Creature for I hope there were a great many new Creatures that is truly good and pious men before Christ was born of his Virgin Mother 2. Nor in this sense were all things in Heaven and Earth visible and invisible Thrones Dominions Principalities and Powers that is all the Orders of Angels created by him For the greatest part of visible things especially in the Apostles days when so little part of the World was converted to the Christian Faith were not new made by him and none of the invisible things were new made by him good Angels did not need it and he came not to convert fallen Angels but to destroy the visible Kingdom of the Devil in this World and to judge them in the next 3. Nor in this sense were all things made for him for he is a Mediator for God to reduce Mankind to their Obedience and Subjection to him and therefore when he has accomplished his Work of Mediation and destroyed all Enemies in the final Judgment of the World he shall deliver up his Kingdom to his Father that God may be all in all of which more presently 4. And therefore the Apostle proceeds from his Creation of the Natural World to his Mediatory Kingdom which proves that he did not speak of that before And he is the Head of the Body the Church who is the beginning the first-born from the dead that in all things he might have the preheminence as the Maker of all things visible and invisible he is said to be before all things begotten of his Father before the Creation of the World as Head of the Church he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also the beginning the first who rose from the dead that he might be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first upon all Accounts before the Worlds and the first-born from the dead That he was God's Minister and Servant he proves by several Texts as that he was appointed or made which has the same sense by God the Apostle and High-Priest of our Profession but here is a restriction to his being High-Priest and therefore no danger of Blasphemy though he be God for we may observe that though the Jewish High-Priest were but a man yet he was a Type of a High-Priest who is more than man even the Eternal Son and Word of God as some of the Learned Jews acknowledge for the Son of God is the only proper Mediator and Advocate with the Father as Philo Iudoeus often calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or High-Priest and shows that the Garments of the High-Priest were Figures of Heaven and Earth which seems to signifie that the Eternal Word which made the world is the true High-Priest And the Story Iosephus tells of Alexander looks this way that when Iaddus the High-Priest went out to meet him dressed in all his Pontifical Attire he approached him with great Reverence and Veneration and his Captains wondering at it he told them That that God who appeared to him and sent him upon that Expedition and promised him Victory and Success appeared to him in that very Habit. I am sure the Apostle distinguishes Christ from High-Priests taken from among men and makes his Sonship the Foundation of his Priesthood Christ glorified not himself to be made an High-Priest which shows that it is no Servile Ministry but he that said unto him Thou art my Son this day have I begotten Thee As he saith also in another place Thou art a Priest for ever after the Order of Melchizedec And what the Mystery of this Melchizedecian Priesthood was he explains 7 Hebrews that Melchizedec was first by Interpretation King of Righteousness and after that also King of Salem which is King of Peace Without Father without Mother without Descent having neither beginning of days nor end of life but made like unto the Son of God which is a Priest continually As for his next Quotation that Christ is Gods I know not what he means by it for there is no doubt but Christ is God's Son God's Christ God's High-Priest serves the ends and designs of God's Glory and what then therefore he is not God By no means he may conclude that therefore he is not God the Father because he acts subordinately not that therefore he is not God the Son His next Proof is that God calls him his Servant by the Prophet Isaiah but it is his Servant in whom his Soul is well-pleased which is the peculiar Character of his Son and is that very testimony which God gave to Christ at his Baptism by a voice from Heaven This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased His next Proof is that he humbled himself and became obedient which is all he cites but what does he prove from this that Obedience is part of his Humiliation And what then therefore he is not God because he voluntarily condescends below the Dignity of his Nature does he forfeit the Dignity of his Nature and yet this is the plain Case as the Apostle tells us in that place that He being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God but made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men and being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself and became obedient unto death even the death of the Cross. And this is a wonderful Proof that he is not God because being in the form of God that is being God he voluntarily condescended to the meanest and most servile state of Human Nature for the Salvation of sinners But the sting of all is behind that for this submission and obedience he was rewarded and exalted by God and a God is not capable of a reward or exaltation being Supreme himself and yet as it follows for this God hath highly exalted him and given him a Name above every Name Now it seems very strange to me that Christ's advancement to the supreme Government of the World should be made an Argument against his being God or the Eternal Son of God for is it fitting and congruous for God to make a meer Creature the Universal Lord and Soveraign of the World to advance a meer man above the most glorious Angels to be the Head of all Principalities and Powers which would be an Indignity to the Angelical
there the Effect is as early as its Cause because the Cause cannot subsist without its Effect as the Sun cannot be a Sun without Light and Fire cannot be Fire without Heat And this is the Case here the Son is begotten by the Father and is God of God Light of Light the Holy Ghost proceeds from Father and Son but Father Son and Holy Ghost are essentially but One God and therefore unless the same One God can be afore and after himself in the Trinity there can be no afore or after but all Three Persons are Coeternal because they are essentially One Eternal God and it is in vain to confound our Minds with conceiving an Eternal Generation for that is as intelligible as an Eternal Being we can see the necessity of both but cannot comprehend either no more than we can Eternity It is demonstrable something must be Eternal and it is as certain that an Eternal Mind eternally knows it self and loves it self for there can be no infinite Mind without a reflex Knowledge of himself which is his Eternal Son nor without the love of himself and his One Image which is the Holy Spirit of which I have sufficiently discoursed already And thus we are come to the last part of our Task what concerns the Incarnation of Christ which after all that has been said to prove Christ to be the Eternal Son of God incarnate will take up no great time for what ever difficulties there may be in the Philosophy of the Incarnation or how God and Man is united into One Person it will not shake my Faith who see a thousand things every day which I can give no Philosophical Account of and which a little Philosophy would teach considering men not to pretend to give any account of and yet we believe our Eyes without understanding the Philosophy of things and why we should not believe a Divine Revelation to without it I know not But let 's hear what he has to say The right Faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Iesus Christ the Son of God is both God and Man Then the Lord Christ is two Persons for as he is God he is a Person Very right And as he is a Man he is a Person that we deny that he is a distinct Person from the Godhead when united to God But a rational Soul vitally united to a Human Body is a Person Right when it is by it self and so a Soul without a vital Union to a Human Body is a Person and a Beast which has no reasonable Soul but only an Animal Life as a Man has together with a Human Soul is a Person or a Suppositum or what he will please to call it but it is a distinct living subsisting Being by it self but when the Rational and the Animal Life are united in Man he is not two Persons a Rational and an Animal Person but one Person and therefore we neither need own Christ to be two Persons with Nestorius which yet is much more innocent than to deny his Godhead nor deny him either to be God or Man for he is God-Man in one Person as a Man is a Reasonable and Animal Creature united into One Person though we may find the reasonable and animal life subsisting apart and when they do so they are two and but one when united This is explained in the Creed by the Union of Soul and Body for as the reasonable Soul and Flesh is One Man so God and Man is One Christ which he says vainly enough is the only offer at Reason that is to be found in the whole Creed Well! we are glad any thing will pass with him though it be but for an offer at reason and let us hear how he confutes it 1. He says In the Personal Vnion of a Soul with a Body the Vnion is between Two finite things but in the pretended Personal Vnion of God to Man and Man to God the Vnion is between finite and infinite which on the Principles of the Trinitarians I wish he had told us what those Principles are is impossible For we must either suppose that finite and infinite are commensurate that is equal which every one knows is false or that the finite is united but to some part of the infinite and is disjoyned from the rest which all Trinitarians deny and abhor I beg your pardon Sir they were never so silly as to think of it but they abhor to see such Sacred Mysteries treated with so much Ignorance and Impudence Since he is for confuting the Doctrine of the Trinity by raising Difficulties about the manner of this Union how God and Man are united into One Person I desire he would first try his skill in inferior things and tell me how the parts of Matter hang together which though every Body thinks he knows I doubt no Body does Then I would desire to know how Soul and Body are united how a Spirit can be fastened to a Body that it can no way release it self though never so desirous of it till the vital Union which no Body knows what it is is dissolved Why the Soul can leave the Body when the Body is disabled to perform the Offices of Life but cannot leave it before The Soul I say which we Trinitarians believe to be a Spirit which can pass through Matter which cannot be touched or handled or held by Matter and yet feels the impressions of Matter is pleased or afflicted with them and sympathizes with the Body as if it could be cut by a Knife or burnt with a Fever or torn by wild Beasts as the Body is And since he apprehends there can be no Union without Commensuration and therefore a finite and infinite Being cannot be united because they are not Commensurate I desire to know whether he thinks the Soul and Body are Commensurate whether the Soul have parts as the Body has which answer to every part of the Body and touch in every Point These will be very new Discoveries if he can say any thing to them if he can't it is his best way to deny the Union of Soul and Body because he cannot understand it to assert that man has no Soul but only a Body because it is impossible that Matter and Spirit should ever be united into one Person and Life which is to the full as unreasonable as to deny the Personal Union of God and Man because he cannot understand how finite and infinite which are not Commensurate nor can be because neither a finite nor infinite Spirit have any parts to be measured can be united But in great good Nature he has found out a Salvo for the Trinitarians That God indeed is infinite and every Soul and Body even that of Christ finite yet the whole God and the whole Man are united because as the whole Eternity of God doth Coexist to a moment of time so the whole Immensity of God is in every Mathematical point of place
only in the superior and governing Nature as it ought to be because in that the Natures are united into One Person and that must govern and take care of the whole Thus the Mind in man is conscious to the whole man and to all that is in man to all the motions of Reason and Sense but Sense is not conscious to all the Actings of Reason which is the superior Faculty though it is conscious as far as is necessary to receive the Commands and Directions of Reason for the Body moves at the command of the Will and it is so far conscious to its Commands Thus in the Person of Christ who is God-man the Divine Word is conscious to his whole Person not only to himself as the Divine Word but to his whole Humane Nature not by such Knowledge as God knows all men and all things but by such a Consciousness as every Person has of himself But it does not hence follow that the Humane Nature is conscious to all that is in the Word for that destroys Humane Nature by making it Omniscient which Humane Nature cannot be and its being united to the Person of the Word does not require it should be for an inferior Nature is not conscious to all that is in the superior Nature in the same Person This Union of Natures does require that the inferior Nature be conscious to the superior as far as its Nature is capable and as far as the Personal Union requires for so Sense is in some degree conscious to Reason and it cannot be one Person without it And therefore the Human Nature in Christ is in some measure in such a degree as Human Nature can be conscious to the Word feels its Union to God and knows the Mind of the Word not by External Revelations as Prophets do but by an Inward Sensation as every man feels his own Thoughts and Reason but yet the Human Nature of Christ may be ignorant of some things notwithstanding its Personal Union to the Divine Word because it is an inferior and subject Nature And this I take to be the true account of what our Saviour speaks about the Day of Judgment Of that day and hour knoweth no man no not the Angels in Heaven but my Father only where our Saviour speaks of himself as a man and as a man he did not at that time know the Day of Judgment though personally united to the Divine Word who did know it for as he is the Divine Word so our Saviour tells us That he seeth all that the Father doth and therefore what the Father knows the Eternal Word and Wisdom of the Father must know also But yet the Human Nature of Christ was conscious to all the actings of the Divine Word in it as we may see in the Story of the Woman having an Issue of Blood twelve years who in the midst of a great Crowd of People came behind him and touched his Garment and was immediately healed our Saviour presently asked who touched him and when all denied it and Peter wondered he should ask that Question when the Multitude thronged him and pressed him Iesus said some body hath touched me for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me he felt the miraculous Power of the Divine Word working in him as a man feels what is done in himself This I think gives some account how God and Man may be united into One Person which though it be a great Mystery which we cannot fully comprehend yet is not wholly unintelligible much less so absurd and contradictious as this Author pretends As for what he adds about believing and professing this Faith let him apply it to Christ's being the Messias or any other Article of the Creed and see what Answer he will give to it for what if men can't believe it are we obliged under the penalty of the loss of Salvation to believe it whether we can or no doth God require of any man an impossible Condition in order to Salvation No! but if it be credible and what a wise man may believe and what he has sufficient Evidence to believe he shall be damned not because he can't but won't believe it But what if it be against a mans Conscience to profess it if he profess against his Conscience he sins and if notwithstanding this a man must either profess or be damned then God requires some men to sin in order to their Salvation God requires no man to profess against his Conscience but he shall be damned for not believing it not for not professing what he does not believe it looks like a Judgment upon these men that while they can talk of nothing less than the severest Reason they impose upon themselves or hope to impose upon the World by the most Childish Sophistry and Nonsense And now I shall leave our Note-maker to harangue by himself and perswade Fools if he can that the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation is nothing but Popery or must be parted with for the sake of Iews or be made a Complement to the Morocco Ambassador and his admired Mahomet or must be sacrificed to Peace and Unity and to secure men from damnation who will not believe I will not envy him the satisfaction of such Harangues it being all the Comfort he has for I am pretty confident he will never be able to Reason to any purpose in this Cause again Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be World without end Amen THE END ADVERTISEMENT A Preservative against Popery in two Parts with a Vindication in Answer to the Cavils of Lewis Sabran a Jesuit 4 o. A Discourse concerning the Nature Unity and Communion of the Catholick Church 4 o. A Sermon Preached before the Lord Mayor Novemb. 4. 1688. 4 o. A Practical Discourse concerning Death The Fifth Edition 8 o. The Case of the Allegiance due to Soveraign Powers stated and resolved according Scripture and Reason and the Principles of the Church of England with a more particular Respect to the Oath lately enjoyned of Allegiance to Their Present Majesties K. William and Q. Mary The Fifth Edition 4 o. By William Sherlock D. D. Master of the Temple Printed for W. Rogers The Creed Brief Notes Answer Notes Answer Notes Answer Notes Answer Vossius de tribus Symbel dissert 3 Cap. 29 30. Cap. 31. Ibid. Cap. 48. Ibid. Ibid. Cap. 44. Dissert 2. c. 1. Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Answer Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Aug. lib. contra Serm. Arrian c. 16. Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Creed Notes Answer Creed Notes Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas. Cont. Arium Disput. Tom. 1. p. 116. Paris 1627. Quae ratiocinatio ad id cogit ut dicamus Deum Patrem non esse sapientem nisi habendo sapientiam quam genuit non existendo per se pater sapientia Deinde si ita est filius quoque ipse
his Faith any part of their Accusation though it was the only Reason of their Malice against him but they charged him with a great many other Crimes and that the Reader may the better understand by what Spirit these Men were acted which still appears in this Author I shall give a short Account of the Story The Arian Faction headed by Eusebius of Nicomedia perceiving how impossible it was to retrieve their lost Cause while Athanasius was in Credit and so great Authority in the Church having ripened their Designs against him in their private Cabals prevail with Constantine to call a Council at Caesarea in Palestine at which Athanasius did not appear suspecting probably the partiality of his Judges who were his declared Enemies This was represented at Court as a contempt of the Imperial Orders and another Council was appointed at Tyre which met Ann. 335. with a peremptory Command for his appearance where he first excepted against the competency of his Judges but that being over-ruled he was forced to plead And first he was charged with Oppression and Cruelty particularly towards Ischyras Callinicus and the Miletian Bishops but this fell of it self for want of proof In the next place he was accused for having ravished a Woman and one too who had vowed Virginity The Woman was brought into the Council and there owned the Fact but Timotheus one of Athanasius's Friends personates Athanasius and asks the Woman whether he had ever offered such Violence to her she supposing him to have been Athanasius roundly declared him to be the Man who had done the Fact and thus this cheat was discovered His next Accusation was That he had murdered Arsenius a Miletian Bishop whose hand he had cut off and kept by him for some Magical Uses and the Hand dried and salted was taken out of a Box and shewn to the Council and to make this more credible they had of a long time conveyed Arsenius away and kept him out of sight But he having made his escape about this time and being accidentally met by some Friends of Athanasius was on a sudden brought into the Council where he shewed both his Hands safe to the shame and confusion of the malicious Inventors of that Lye This failing they accuse him of Impiety and Profanation of Holy Things That his Ordination was tumultuary and irregular the contrary of which was evidently true That Macarius his Presbyter by his command had broke into Ischyras's Chancel while he was performing the Holy Offices and overturned the Communion-Table broke in pieces the Sacramental Chalice and burnt the Holy Books all which Ischyras was present to attest but the contrary in every branch of the Accusation was made apparent and the whole Plot discovered by a writing under Ischyras his own hand sufficiently attested After all these shameful baffles they would not give over but sent Commissioners from the Synod to inquire into the matter of fact upon the place and having raked together any thing which they could make look like Evidence though gained by the most barbarous Cruelties and other vile arts they return to the Council who without more ado condemn and depose Athanasius from his Bishoprick and command him to go no more to Alexandria upon this he withdrew himself and went to Court prays the Emperor for a more fair and impartial Tryal who thereupon sent to the Council then adjourned to Ierusalem to come to Constantinople and make good their charge Five Commissioners appeared who joyned with some others whom they could get together formed a small Synod but not daring to insist upon their former accusations start up a new Charge more like to take at Court viz. That he had threatned to stop the Emperors Fleet that yearly Transported Corn from Alexandria to Constantinople which was as true and as probable a story as any of the rest but they told this with such confidence and urged the ill consequences of it so home upon the Emperor that they prevailed with him to banish Athanasius to Triers in Germany If this short story does not make our Author blush he is possessed with the true Spirit of the Tyrian Fathers But to proceed He was also condemned in his own life time by Six Councils as an Heretick and Seditious person of these Councils that at Milan consisted of Three Hundred Bishops and that of Ariminum of Five Hundred and fifty the greatest Convention of Bishops that ever was This consent of the Churches of God against him and his Doctrine occasioned that famous Proverb Athanasius against all the World and all the World against Athanasius This is all Sham. I grant Athanasius was condemned by several Arian Conventicles which he prophanely calls the Churches of God in his own life time but I deny that he was condemned as a Heretick or that he was condemned for his Faith We have seen the account of his condemnation by the Council of Tyre already and for what pretended Crimes he was condemned without the least mention of his Heresie for if this Author understood any thing of the story of those times he must know that though the Arian cause was vigorously and furiously promoted yet it was done more covertly since that fatal blow which was given it by the Council of Nice whose Authority was too sacred to be easily born down and therefore they did not pretend to unsettle the Nicene Faith nay pretended to own it though they did not like the word Homo-ousios and therefore formed various Creeds as they pretended to the same sense without that litigious word which shews that it was not time of day for them to accuse Athanasius of Heresie but of such other Crimes as might condemn and depose him and remove him out of the way that he might not hinder their Designs Thus in the Council at Antioch in the Reign of Constantius 341 the old Calumnies are revived against Athanasius and he deposed again after he had been restored by Constantine the younger and George the Cappadocian a Man of mean Birth base Education and worse Temper for they could find no better Man that would accept it was advanced to the Patriarchal Chair but all this while he was charged with no Heresie in Faith But that his return to Alexandria had occasioned great Trouble and Sorrow there and the effusion of much Blood that being condemned by a Synod and not restored again by the Authority of a Synod he re-assumed his Chair again contrary to the Canons c. Upon this Athanasius fled to Rome where in a Synod of Western Bishops he was absolved and restored to Communion contrary to the earnest Solicitations of the Council of Antioch Anno 347 a Council of Eastern and Western Bishops was called at Sardica where the Eastern Bishops who were most of them Arians or Favourers of that Party refused to joyn with them of the West and acted in a seperate Assembly and had brought with them Count Musonianus and Hesychius an Officer of the