Censure from both the Vniversities Shall the Books of Buchanan and Milton and Goodwin and Baxter and Hunton and Hobbes and Owen c. be justly censur'd and condemn'd to Flames for Blaspheming the King And shall such as these escape for Blaspheming the great God the most adorable Trinity and our most holy Religion Shall Men be allowed to dally and play Stolida Procacitate as Martial's Words are with the most tremendous Mysteries and incomprehensible Things of Faith Shall Men be allow'd with rude and licentious Hands to break down the sacred Inclosures of our Faith that Hedge of Thorns as I remember the Reverend Dean well calls it in his Apology and endeavour with a kind of Sacrilege to dispossess and rob the Church of those Terms and Distinctions she hath been so long in Possession of and with which she hath so long successfully defended her Faith of a Holy Trinity in Vnity and Vnity in Trinity Have these Primitive Terms and Distinctions long before ever the School-men were in Being been always sufficient to encounter with and effectually to baffle and defeat the most numerous and most subtle Hereticks or no If not then it seems that which we call the Catholick Faith in this Article hath been all along till now a baffled indefensible Faith If they have as most certainly they have why are they not as sufficient now as they have been all along What need have we of Self-Consciousness and Mutual Consciousness and Three distinct infinite Minds or Spirits In Reference to the Sacred Articles of Religion saith Mr. J. B. Book p. 65. and it is the best thing said in his whole Book in which I heartily agree with him we ought to have a double Care not only to think but speak inoffensively To take Care that our Words as well as our Opinions be Orthodox and especially ought we to be thus cautious in the mysterious Articles of the Trinity and Incarnation where a Word disorder'd I had almost said a Comma displac'd may render us in the Judgment of the warm contending Parties guilty of no less than Heresie 'T is St. Augustin 's Observation concerning the Mystery of the Trinity That nec Periculosiùs alicubi erratur nec laboriosiùs aliquid quaeritur It is no where more dangerous to err nor more difficult to apprehend than in this mysterious Subject A wise Person will have a great Care to keep the beaten Path to speak in the receiv'd Language of the Church The Learned Calvin gives us his own Experience Expertus pridem sum quidem saepiùs quicunque de verbis pertinaciùs litigant fovere occultum virus That they who obstinately quarrel against the Phrases of the Church are Hereticks in their Hearts I have no hard Thoughts of the Reverend Dean God knows my Heart No Man hath a truer Honour and Veneration for him than my self I only wish he had taken this double Care not only to think but to speak inoffensively I wish he had taken a greater Care to keep the beaten Path to speak in the receiv'd Language of the Church and then who can doubt but that he who hath so admirably well acquitted himself against our Popish Adversaries who hath so baffl'd and triumph'd over our dissenting Adversaries and who hath been such a severe and just Scourge to Protestant Reconcilers Trimmers and Comprehension-Men who can doubt but that he would have had the same Glory and Success against our Socinian Adversaries But to undertake a Defence of the Catholick Faith of a Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity by Self-Consciousness and Mutual Consciousness however ingenious it may be however defensible it may be is going a new and unusual Way to work or at least with new and unusual Terms contrary to a common and good Rule in Divinity Novae Insolitae Locutiones in Mysteriis Fidei non sunt usurpandae But to assert Three distinct infinite Minds or Spirits whatever Genebrard One School-man may say as Learned and a more Orthodox Man than he pronounces Certè Perniciosum Dogma est Tres constituere Spiritus aeternos distinctos Nam Januam aperit non solum ad Arianismum sed Palam Gentilismum sapit Benedict Aretius Loc. Theolog. Loc. 1. p. 4. It is certainly says he a Pernicious Doctrine to constitute Three eternal distinct Spirits For it not only opens a Door to Arianism Vitandi sunt omnes modi loquendi qui Haereticis vel in Speciem favere videntur Qui igitur de Tribus Personis adorandae Trinitatis loquuntur ii uti non debent supradicto loquendi modo dicentes eas esse Tres Substantias ne favere videantur Arianis Macedonianis Valentino Gentili ejus Sectatoribus Rob. Baronii Philof Theol. Ancillans Exercitat 1. Artic. 9. p. 41. but it plainly relishes of Heathenism The Reverend Dean himself as well as Mr. J. B. notwithstanding what his Genebrard says allows it to be new and unusual and therefore be sure to assert it and insist upon it is not as Mr. J. B. gravely advises it is not to have a great Care to keep the beaten Path to speak in the receiv'd Language of the Church which he says a wise Person will do If the Reverend Dean means no more by Three distinct infinite Minds or Spirits than Three distinct infinite Persons why should he alter the constant universal Language of the Church Why should he not be satisfied with asserting a Trinity only of Three Divine Persons which in an ineffable incomprehensible Manner are One infinite Spirit or God Why should Occasion be given to the Enemies of the Tri-Une God and our most Holy Religion to blaspheme Cannot a Trinity of Divine Persons in One infinite undivided Essence be defended unless we assert Three distinct infinite Minds or Spirits How hath it been defended all along hitherto But this is not the worst of it That which I chiefly mean that which calls loudest for a Decretum Oxoniense for a Theological Censure from both the Universities is the foul pernicious Spirit of Latitudinarianism which being transform'd by an infernal Artifice appears much abroad like an Angel of Light like the only Complaisant Sober Moderate Peaceable Healing Angel But Sheep's Clothing is such a common Disguise and worn so very thin that we can easily look through it and see the ravening Wolf under If the false Prophets will be playing their juggling Tricks we need not be deceiv'd by them unless we will our selves Our Blessed Saviour who would have us enter in at the strait Gate Matt. 7.13 15 16. and to go the narrow Way which leadeth unto Life and to avoid as we would Death the wide Gate and the Latitudinarian Way which he saith leadeth to Destruction hath commanded us to beware of false Prophets and that we may know them he hath given us a certain infallible Direction by their Fruits that is as the Word Fruits is certainly here to be understood by their Designs and Doctrine Behold then the working of
instead of arguing with the Animadverter from Scripture and how like an unlearned Divine and unstable Christian he wrests St. Paul's Words where they are not hard to be understood by every little Novice in Divinity Let us next consider what Reason he hath to swagger and triumph at the rate he doth with his Logicks as he calls it very often in his Book and so 't is more than probable the Critick writ it in his Copy sent to the Press For we may not well suppose that it should be so very often Printed Logicks if he had not very often writ it so in his Copy and therefore I little doubt but that it was at last put amongst the Errata and alter'd in his Preface by the Advice of some wiser Friend Secondly This terrible Man of Logicks then goes on and tells us That had the Animadverter that Skill in Logick he so often upbraids others with the want of he would have understood that if this Proposition be true The Father is God it is by the Rules of Logick capable of a Conversion of putting the Predicate in the place of the Subject and the Subject in the place of the Predicate without any Alteration of the Signa Logica omnis nullus aliquis c. where the Subject and the Predicate are both singular as says he I believe them in this Proposition the Father is God and I have the Consent of the Schools on my Side That is If the Animadverter had understood Logick he would have understood by the Rules of Logick what by the Rules of Logick he cannot and should not understand and what is directly contrary to the Rules of Logick Had this Logical Braggadochio but a little common Sense as well as so much Logicks he would have understood that in this very place Tritheism p. 230 where he says the Animadverter is guilty of downright Blasphemy in noting this for an absurd and illogical Proposition to say that God is the Father the Animadverter immediately subjoins his Reason why according to the Rules of Logick it must be so because says he The Predicate in this Proposition viz. God is the Father is of less Compass than the Subject which where it is not larger ought to be commensurate to it at least Had Mr. J. B. I say but common Sense or had he not scandalously wanted that Skill in Logick which 'tis generally believ'd the Animadverter hath and which I doubt not Mr. J. B. in a short time will feel that he hath he could not but have seen this to be the Animadverter's Reason why he could not understand that this Proposition the Father is God is by the Rules of Logick convertible by a simple Conversion For the Learned Animadverter understands well if Mr. J. B. does not that a good and true Conversion must contain a good Consequence of the Proposition converting to the Proposition converted And that it may do so as the Conimbricenses have stated it according to the Sence of all Logicians it is necessary as they express it Vt Termini non sumantur in unâ latiùs angustiùsve quam in alterâ Logicians are universally agreed that the Subject of a Proposition is always without any Exception that I know of a narrower Compass than the Predicate or at least of an equal but never of a larger And is not the Predicate in this Proposition God is the Father of less Compass than the Subject God is unquestionably predicated of Father Son and Holy Ghost but not so the Father Father Son and Holy Ghost are God is indisputably a true Catholick Proposition but I hope Father Son and Holy Ghost are the Father is not so 'T is the Catholick Faith that the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God and each Proposition is infallibly Logical and true But the Father is not predicated of the Father but identically and to predicate him of the Son and of the Holy Ghost as unquestionably we may God that is to say the Son is the Father as we may say the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is the Father as we may say the Holy Ghost is God is horridly false and damnably Heretical And can any thing then be plainer than that the Term God is of a larger Compass than the Term the Father And if so nothing can be plainer than that this Proposition the Father is God cannot by the Rules of Logick be capable of a simple Conversion of the Transposition of the Predicate into the place of the Subject Salvâ veritate Well but doth the Animadverter understand what Mr. J. B. believes That in this Proposition the Father is God the Subject and Predicate are both singular and that he hath the Consent of the Schools on his Side Yes yes The Animadverter no doubt understands it very well He understands that God is one or singular as well as that the Father is one or singular And therefore he cannot understand three distinct infinite Minds or the Orthodoxy of the admirable Genebrard's Three Gods no more than he can understand that there are three distinct Fathers And the Animadverter understands too That as Mr. J. B. hath the Consent of the Schools on his Side that the Father and God are both singular so the Animadverter hath the same Consent of the Schools on his Side that as the Father is singular Incommunicably so God is singular Communicably The Father is so Singular as to be Incommunicable to the Son and the Holy Ghost and can therefore be predicated of neither God is so Singular as to be Communicable notwithstanding to Father Son and Holy Ghost and can therefore be predicated of all Three Conjunctly and of each of the Three Distinctly Indeed this is a Communication of one singular undivided Essence to Three distinct Persons which is most mysterious peculiar only to the incomprehensible God cannot be adequately exemplify'd in any thing else and can never be fully comprehended But yet so by divine Revelation infallibly it is And if God be not a Terminus Communis to the Three Divine Persons I would fain know how the Term God can be predicated of the Son and the Holy Ghost as well as of the Father I would fain know how this Man denying it can reconcile his Faith with the Athanasian Creed the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God Whether by it he doth not bring himself under a more unavoidable Dilemma of denying the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost that the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God than the Animadverter doth by denying that God is the Father of denying the Divinity of the Father that the Father is God And whether lastly it be not an Argument of a very Peculiar Forehead or of some very great Defect within it for a Man to deny as this Man does what is so very plain and obvious that every Body of common Sense who believes the Trinity must needs
Lord Jesus Christ And he means too That the Father who is here predicated of God is not only the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the First Person of the Ever-Blessed Trinity but that he is predicated of God as distinct from the Son and the Holy Ghost For would he say or mean that the Father in Conjunction with the two other Blessed Persons is predicated of God no Orthodox Man no true Worshipper of the most adorable Trinity would oppose him and the Animadverter so declares himself on his Side Tritheism p. 230. but he contrary to the Sence and Faith of the Holy Catholick Church of every honest simple Christian of which more by and by declares That the Term Three intelligent Persons is not adequately and convertibly predicated of God that is That God is not Father Son and Holy Ghost and that the same Expressions of Scripture which prove that the Father is Predicated of God confute it Now this being undeniably his Sence of the Term Father is it not a most unpardonable Blunder in such an Undertaker as this Man is to prove that the Father in his Sence is predicated of God by a Text of Scripture where 't is most certain the Term Father is taken in quite another Sence Is this wise Considerer of the Doctrine of the Fathers and the Schools and pretended Baffler of them both so wretchedly ignorant as not to know that the Term Father attributed to God is as Homonymous as the Term God and that the Father is taken as God is sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First The Word Father as 't is taken personally ratione ad intra in respect of his Son begotten of him from all Eternity for the First Person only of the Blessed Trinity begetting from all Eternity a Con-substantial Son in this Sence the Father is distinct from the Son and the Holy Ghost Secondly As the Word Father is taken essentially ratione ad extra in Respect of the whole Creation for the whole Divine Essence in this Sence the Father is not distinct from the Son and the Holy Ghost in this Sence the whole Trinity is the Father the Son is the Father and the Holy Ghost is the Father In this Sence is the Word Father sometimes taken both in the Old and New Testament Certè constat says Hieron Zanchius Nomine Patris non semper intelligi in Scripturis Personam Patris sed totum Deum ipsum Jehovam Patrem Filium Spiritum sanctum De tribus Elohim Par. 2. lib. 5. cap. 5. and in this Sence it is certain is it here taken in 1 Cor. 8.6 where St. Paul tells us That to us there is but one God the Father Let him see Zanchius loc citat Let him see Bishop Pearson on the Creed Art 2. p. 26. Let him see Dr. Hammond's Paraphrase Estius in loc Let him see whom he will he will not find I dare say so much as one honest Man that will tell Him that the Father here is taken as he takes the Word before Hypostatically for the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ He might altogether as well and as effectually if he had pleas'd have knock'd down the Animadverter with the 1st Verse of the 1st Chapter of Genesis where Moses tells us That in the Beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth For this indeed is all that the Apostle here tells us That to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things That is though to the Heathens there are Gods many and Lords many yet we Christians are assur'd they are mistaken and are Idolaters and therefore we acknowledge and believe but one God the Father to us there is but one God the Father the Father who in the Beginning created the Heaven and the Earth the Father Almighty as we profess in our Creed Maker of Heaven and Earth of whom therefore the Apostle adds are all things nimirum per Creationem Non enim Filium intendit Apostolus hâc vice omnia comprehendere Estius in loc In this Sence of the Word Father all things are of him by Creation and Conservation and God is the Father of all things by Creation rather than Procreation says Bishop Pearson loc supr citat and therefore in this Sence our Blessed Saviour the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity cannot be of him and cannot be his Son unless Mr. J. B. will have him to be a Creature a Factitious Improper and Metaphorical God only And indeed that I am afraid will appear at last to be at the Bottom of this Man and to be the grand Design and ultimate End of his Book notwithstanding its gaudy deceitful Title of which more by and by I heartily pray to God that it may appear otherwise for his own Soul's Sake not for any Fear I have that ever he or his Pen will do any great Mischief to the Catholick Faith with any who will carefully attend him and have not a Mind to be perverted But if Mr. J. B. means honestly that the Father which he would have to be properly and naturally predicated of God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the First Person of the Ever-Blessed Trinity distinct and only hypostatically distinct from God the Son who is one and the same true God of one and the same undivided Infinite Eternal Essence with God the Father then in this Sence God the Father in the Passage he alledges from 1 Cor. 8.6 is not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ unless he will say That God is the Father of us and of all other things in the same Sence that he is the Father of his only begotten Son our Blessed Lord Christ Jesus And then either he must say that the Lord Jesus is a Creature a Son only in a borrow'd Metaphorical Sence by Creation as we and all things else are and as he is said to be the Father of the Rain in Job 38.28 or else he must say that God the Father of whom are all things as the Apostle says is the Father of all things by a proper Eternal Generation as 't is certain he is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ And then which will be the more horrid Blasphemer the Animadverter or Mr. J. B. But if to avoid this he will allow it to be plain as most plain it is That the Father in this Passage of St. Paul is certainly not to be taken in the Sence he applies it to then plain it is That this Mighty Divine betrays his gross Ignorance in a plain Text of Scripture or like a mighty pertinent Philosopher undertakes to prove that God is the Father in a Sence of the Word in which his Adversary denies it from a Sence of the Word in which his Adversary and no Body else denies it And thus having I think made it very evident to any impartial Reader how loosely this Man argues or rather how ridiculously he expostulates 2 Pet. 3.16