Corrupted Much less in Man or totally Disabled that are necessary for Ratiocination which is the Primary Operation of his Species Man 24. Hence the Individuality of a Simple Body or Element if there be any such now would be alter'd if the Degree of Rarity When the Individuation is lost in Simple Bodies and Density be so notably chang'd that a vastly different Operation follows from it and that the Subject which is thought to succeed does enjoy that Degree not meerly successively or in transitu but with some kind of Constancy or for some time so that it will not be immediately reduced to it's former state by Natural Causes For in this case that Degree alters the Species it self of the Simple Body as is shown Ch. 2. § 21. and consequently the Individuation 25. Hence the Individuality of First-Mixt Bodies is lost when they are dissolv'd into Simple Bodies because When in First-Mixt Bodies this changes the Specifick Nature of a Mixt. See Ch 3. § 2 3 4. 26. Hence Demixts are Individually Chang'd when the Proportion of the First-Mixts is alter'd to a high Degree When in Demixts and continues so with some Constancy See Ch. 3. § 7 8. 27. Simple Division if perfectly such takes away the Individual Unity in Homogeneous Bodies For since When in Homogeneous Bodies to Divide is to make more of oâ—â— and what divides the Thing or Individuum as 't is an Ens divides it as 't is Unâ—â— and therefore takes away it's Unity and on the other side since Homogeneous Bodies are such that each part of them does according to it's pitch perform the same kind of Primary Operation It follows that meer Division if it be perfected takes away the Individual Unity Again since neither part of the Divided Body is by Division annihilated each of them after Division â—s Capable of Existence and consequently they being made Two at least by Division they become duo Entia and since they can and do exist Two Individuums 28. Yet meer Division does not necessarily alter the Divided Individuum essentially if it be very Heterogeneous When in very Heterogeneous or Organical Bodies â—â— Organical For since the former Individuum is in that case if not always under such a Species aâ— is Constituted by such a Complexion of Accidents as fits it for it's Primary Operation and the Individuum has moreover a peculiar Complexion of it's own both which being Essential to them they must consequently continue essentially the same while the same Formal Constituent remains because it is still Capable to perform the Substance of it's former Operation It follows that the former Individuum and Species too must continue unless the Division is such that it destroys the said Complexion which as was shown Ch. 2. § 16. and here § 9. is their Essential Form Wherefore the former Individuum is in these only chang'd Accidentally that is â—oses only some virtuality or potentiality of it's Matter some part of it's Quantity or some Qualities immediately affecting that part which is taken from it none of which are Essential to it and these Accidents which the Matter of that part had formerly being sufficient to Determine the Matter of which a New Individuum is made that Matter is so dispos'd before-hand that there needed little but to put it out of the condition of being any longer a Port to fit it for Existence 29. Two contra-distinct Natures may very connaturally if things be well order'd compound One Individual Two contradistinct Natures may Compound One Thing Ens or One Thing And therefore the Soul and Body may make up that One Thing call'd A Man For there can be no doubt but that Things of the most opposite Natures can and do perfectly agree in the Common Generical Notion of Thing and that therefore all their Disagreement Opposition and Inconsistency does spring from their Differences or that we may bring the Discourse from Logical to Metaphysical Language from the Act from which only and not from the Power all Distinction and consequently Contradistinction comes Wherefore when there are not two Distinct Substantial Acts in the Compound as there is in Hirco-ceruus and other Chimera's nothing can hinder their Coalition into One Thing On the other side since there can be no difficulty for the Proper Parts of any Compound to make up One Whole and it has been shown Chap. 1. § 17 18. that the Proper Parts of a Compound Ens as such are Power and Act 't is Clear that there are not more Contradistinct Acts in such an Ens. Wherefore if the Matter or Power on the Body's side can by the Author of Nature be so dispos'd as to require a Form of a Spiritual Nature the Bodily Part will thence become the Proper Matter of that Compound Ens and that Spiritual Nature will be the Proper Act or Form of such a Body and this verè essentialiter as the Council of Vienna has defin'd and so both together will friendly conspire to make up that One Ent call'd a Man The main difficulty then objected is quite taken away and superseded For since only Two Substantial Acts can distinguish and multiply Entia or Things and here is but One Act determining the Power or Matter to This Entity and consequently to Unity under the notion of Thing 't is demonstrable by a Metaphysical Argument as it was Ch. 4. § 1. by a Logical one that Man made up according to this Doctrine of Soul and Body is most truly and properly One Thing as much as any other Natural Compound whatever and not Two Things This Discourse supposes there can be some Dispâ—â—â—ion in a Body requiring a Form which is not educible out of the Power or Matter by Natural Causes Of which see Ch. 4. especially § 10. and the Preliminary there cited 30. There is no show of Impossibility why the Divine and the Human Nature may not join in one Suppositum And the Human Na ture may subsist in the Divine Suppositum or rather why the Human Nature may not subsist in a Divine Person For since an Infinite Being as the Divine Nature iâ— has eminently in it's self all the Perfections belonging to Being of which as was shown above Coroll 6. Subsistence or Standing alone by it's own virtue is one and consequently it can supply by it self immediately any such Perfection so it does not induce any Imperfection in GOD only which can render it impossible it follows that Humane Nature may be made to subsist in a Divine Suppositum provided it draws not after it any Imperfection or Unbecomingness Unworthy of GOD which cannot be said in this case For to communicate or impart it's Subsistence or Personality to another is most Agreeable to an Infinite Goodness when his Wisdom sees it most fit and most Necessary for the Good of a very considerable Portion of the Creation Nor does this put the least degree of Potentiality or Imperfection in the Divine
Nature or makes it a Potential Part or an Informing Form but it supposes the Humane Nature constituted and only supplies it's Subsistence or Personality 't is evident then that this neither alters nor depresses the Divine Nature from it's Higheâ—â— Dignity of being still in it self a Pure Actuality but is rather Agreeable to that Attribute since it only exalts Humane Nature by thus Assuming it or Uniting it to a Divine Person Hypostatically that is according to the Notion of Suppositum to which of it's self it could not otherwise aspire To do which also the Wisest and Best Ends of the Incarnation being well reflected on is as Divines show no way Derogatory but in every respect Agreeable to the Divine Attributes And all the Objections that the Antient Greeks and Modern Adversaries can bring to show â—â— Foolish and Misbecoming GOD seem grounded on this that GOD is Infinitely GREAT which makes the greatest Esclat in their Fancy without considering at the same time that he is Equally that is Infinitely GOOD Which resembles those men'â— way of Arguing who are only sollicitous of magnifying GOD's Power and his Will without considering his Wisdom which according to our manner of Conceiving determines the exercise of those other Attributes 31. Notwithstanding this Hypostatick Union of those two Natures in Yet those Natures and their Properties will remain Unmingled and not Confounded as some Eutychians imagin'd Christ each Nature retains it's own Distinction Essence Properties and Attributes For â—â—â—ce this Union of these two â—â—tures in one Suppositum or Person supposes those Natures Distinctly and Essentially constituted and the giving them meerly to Subsist superâ—â—â—es to the Nature already constituted and therefore can be no part of it's Essential Constitutive consequently it neither alters the Divine Nature noâ— affects the Humane Nature at all by making 〈…〉 Subsist such as it is which is a Notion evidently Extraneòus to the Notion of the Nature and â—ifferent from it Wherefore each of those Natures remains in it's own precise Essential bounds and not Mingled or Confounded with the other as some Eutychians fondly imagin'd 32. Yet all the Actions and Passions of this Subsistent Thing to which soever of those Natures they properly Yet all the Actions and Passions must be attributed to the Suppositum tho' according to such in Nature contrary to what Nestorius fancy'd â—â—long are justly attributed to Christ GOD and Man For â—ince the Suppositum of those two Natures are but One and that Suppositum is Christ's and all Actions and Passions belong to the Suppositum and are attributed to it 't is consequent that the Actions of this diverse-natur'd Suppositum do belong to Christ who has those Distinct Natures in Him Moreover since every thing doâ—â— connaturally Act and Suffer as it is and Christ he having Two Natures or Essences in One Suppositum is truly GOD and Man it follows against Nestorius that all the Actions of Christ are Divine-Human or Theandrical With which yet well consists that some Actions and Sufferings may belong to his Suppositum according to or by reason of the one Nature and not by reason of the other 33. Hence also there can be no show of Contradiction in saying the Divine Nature is Three according to the Hence lastly there is no shew of Contradiction that GOD should be Three according the Notion of Person and yet but One according to the Respect of his Essence or Nature Notion of Subsistence and yet but one according to the Notion of Essence For since as has been shown here § 17. the Respect or Notion of Subsistence is quite different from the Respect of Essence and there can be no Contradiction where Opposites are Affirm'd and Deny'd of the same according to a Different Respect It follows that neither can there be any show of Contradiction in saying the Divine Nature is Three according to the precise Notion or Respect of Subsistence and yet not-Three but One only in respect of the Notion of Essence 34. Advertisement For the clearer understanding some parts of these late Discourses and to render some A large Explication of some Grounds very Useful to take oâ—f all Shadow of Contradiction from divers Chief Mysteries of Christian Faith and to show how Consonant they are to the most Exact Rules of Right Reason Terms we have us'd more distinctly intelligible I take leave to re-min'd my Reader here of what I have frequently inculcated in my former Books viz. first That all our Knowledge which is Solid is of the Thing and taken from the Thing Secondly That we cannot know the Thing Clearly and Distinctly any other way than by having several Partial or Inadequate Conceptions of it which therefore are Knowledges of the Thing in part only Thirdly That hence when ever we speak of Act Power Essence Ens Form Matter Existence Subsistence Quantity Quality or of any other Intrinsecal Mode we neither can nor ought mean any other by those words but the Thing according as it is the Object of those several Abstracted Notions or Considerations we make of it and which are Verify'd of It and consequently since all Verification is made by the Copula Est which signifies Identity which are truly It. Fourthly Hence when we speak of Metaphysical Parts of the Thing according to the meer Notion of Thing we mean that they are Parts of the Thing Metaphysically consider'd or as it is the Object that verifies or has in it what answers to those Conceptions or Notions which do properly belong to ENS or BEâ—â—G because the Supreme Science Metaphysicks does only or chiefly regard or concern her self with such Notions as belong to Being â—â— it's Proper Object In the same manner as the Notions of Length Breadth and Thickness which belong to Quantity as it abstracts from Natural Motion are the Parts or Partial Conceptions of Bodies or of that Thing call'd Body consider'd Mathematically and those Notions which regard Quantity as affecting tâ—â— Thing in order to Natural Action or Passion â—â—â— Rarity Density Divisibility c. are Parts â—â— Partial Conceptions of Body Physically consider'd As likewise are Matter and Form for the same reason if taken under the same consideration of Grounding Natural Action or Passion For as they meerly relate to Being or as they are consider'd precisely as Parts or Partial Conceptions of Ens they belong to Metaphysicks and are there call'd Power and Act. Fifthly Hence the Ens or Thiâ—â— properly so call'd that is the Individuum â—â— call'd by us a Whole because all those Partial Conceptions objectively consider'd are Contain'd and Involv'd in the Individuum anâ— are Verify'd of it as is shown above which being only Inadequate in respect to the Whole Thing they are hence said to be only Parts of It and It a whole in respect of them Sixthly Tho' theâ— be only Different Conceptions of the same Thing yet thus Aparted and Abstracted by our Understanding we can discourse of each of them
contrary to all the Maâ—…ims of Sound Philosophy 34. Lastly If All the Ideas or Notions be Innatâ— and there can be no reason why some should be so and otheâ— Eighth Proof not since the Soul is equally capable of All as of Some only then since to be Actually in a Knowing Power is to Actuate or Inform that Power that is to render that Power Actually Knowing it would follow that the Souâ— in that case having in her all those Notions of which her Nature is capable that is All Notions whatever she would either know all things while she is here or else she would have while here Innumerable Ideas or Materials of Knowledge which never come to be Excited and so are perfectly Useless Which makes the Immediate Act of the First Being which Infus'd them Frustraneous and to no purpose For their own Principles must force them to confess those Ideas which shall never be Excited cannot in that case either serve for Reasoning Contemplation nor Outward Action and therefore the Imbuing the Mind with them here is Preposterous Suâ—…ous and to no end 35. 'T is equally Groundless and Unphilosoâ—…cal in many regards to affirm That the Soul cannot Elicit Ideas out of her self from many heads 〈…〉 the Soul has a Power to Eliâ—… or Produce such Ideas in her â—… upon Occasion of such an Imâ—…ssion made on the Senses For â—… the Reasons given above I mean those â—…hich have been produced § 28 29 30 32. â—… in a manner equally disprove such Ideas â—…se which are properly Innate Secondly 〈…〉 impossible to show by their Grounds any Natural Connexion between that Impression on the â—…ve and the Production of such or such an 〈…〉 nor as far as I can see do they so much 〈…〉 pretend to show how this Effect does ex naâ—…a rei spring from that Cause For 't is conâ—… that the Stroke on the Nerve and the Idea which starts up when it is made there are utterly Unlike one another By which lame account any kind of Impression provided it be Unlike may occasion the Production of any Idea whatever and therefore there would be no Reason why 〈…〉 particular Impression more than another made 〈…〉 the Body should concur any way no not so much as a sutable Occasion to the Production of any particular Idea at all Thirdly Hence they make this Impression on the Nerve to be only an Occasion that is a kind of Conditio sine quâ non and not any sort of Cause contrary to the whole Intention and End of all Philosophy which is to refund Effects into their Proper Causes Fourthly They put the Soul which is of an Indivisible nature to Act upon it self and to be the Sole Cause of such an Idea which is against divers Principles confining upon Self-evidence and easily reducible to it Such as are Nothing that is meerly iâ— Power to such an Effect can reduce st self to Act. Nothing Indetermin'd can produce a Determinate Effect Nothing can change it self An Indivisible Entity cannot work upon it self A Thing in Rest cannot move it self Or in a word the Whole Course of Causes consisting in this that One Thing which is in Act it self is to work upon Another which is in Power to receive that Act is by this Extravagant Doctrine made Needless Absurd and Incoherent 36. Corollary XII From what 's Deduc't above it follows that that Position of That the Position which makes the Soul and Body Two Things hinders the Right Explication of Christian Faith the Cartesians which makes the Soul and Body in Man to be Duae Res or Two Things does not seem to sute well with Christian Faith For since Cartesius does therefore make them Two Things because he finds them to be of Different Natures 't is Evident that he does not Distinguish between the Notion of the Thing which has the Nature in it and of the Nature which is in the Thing or is had by it Whence follows that whereever and whenever there are those two Distinct Natures there must also be two Distinct Things But the Second Person of the Trinity will ever retain the Humanity of Christ and the Humanity of Christ will ever consist of the Corporeal and Spiritual Natures call'd Soul and Body therefore there will ever be according to this Doctrine two distinct Things in the Humanity of Christ-Again since these Two Natures in Christ's Humanity which they call Two Things are Individually or Numerically such and an Individual Thing is the same as a Suppositum the Followers of this Doctrine must hold there are Two Suppositums in Christ according to his Humanity Wherefore since 't is a Fundamental of Christian Faith that there is also in Christ the Divine Suppositum they must be forced to put three Suppositums in Christ GOD and MAN which is strange Language in Christianity Nor will it avail them to alledge that the Divine Personality by Assuming Humane Nature sâ—pplies the Subsistence of both those Natures for this takes not away the Distinction of the Two Natures in the Humanity wherefore if whereever there are two Natures there must be Two Things and those in our case Individually such of force there will remain two Individual Things that is Two Supposita in Christ's Humane Nature and consequently Three in all Whence since Verum vero non contradicit the Christian Tenet of but One Suppositum in Christ being True the Cartesian Doctrine that the Soul and Body in Man are two Things because they are of such Different Natures must needs be False and our main Tenet that the Soul and Body in Man do make but One Thing is both Evident to Reason and Consonant to Faith and to the Creed of St. Athanasius 37. Corollary XIII Hence also it follows from this Thesis of the Cartesians that every Individual Man in This Tenet makes overy Man to be a Monstrous Chimera the World is a Perfect Chimera nay a more Monstrous one than a Hircoceruus a Centaur or any other we use to Instance in For since all Created Beings are either Pure Acts or Compounded of Power and Act that is Matter and Form by Ch. 1. § 33. and the Word Thing signifies What 's Capable of Existing and therefore Two Things must be Capable of Diverse Existences and if they exist actually must actually have Two Existences It follows that the Soul and Body even in this State they have here must have actually Two Diverse Existences Again since their Nature the one being Corporeal the other Incorporeal are far more Distant and more vastly Different than a Goat and a Stag or any other Natures amongst Bodies to clap two such Things thus actually distinct under the Notion of Thing and Existing thus Distinct into One Species call'd MAN makes all the Individuals under that Species to be Chimerical nay greater Chimera's than is a Compound made of any two Things in Nature which are of divers Corporeal Species and exist actually by distinct Existences as a
to which that Common Notion is Apply'd Secondly Whether these Particulars are not Three and no more Thirdly Whether those Three Particulars are not most fitly call'd Persons Fourthly Whether those Three Persons be not most fitly to be call'd Father Son and H. Spirit Fifthly and Lastly Whether the Divine Nature notwithstanding this Plurality of Persons is not still Perfectly and Equally One in Nature or rather more that is under more Respects One in it's self than it would have been in case this Plurality of Persons had been secluded Now if it shall appear by our Explication that the Affirmative of all these is Consonant to Reason working upon our Natural Notions stript of their Imperfections and as such Transferr'd to GOD I hope it will satisfie Dissenters comfort the Faith of those who Believe already and convince every Intelligent Reader that nothing can with true Reason be objected against this Divine Mystery SECT III. The Terms or Words of which we make use in this Explication clear'd from Ambiguity 1. BY the word GOD is meant a most Actual and Self-Subsistent Being Infinite in His Nature and all it's Attributes 2. By the words Divine Nature we understand the same Infinitely Perfect Being But we are to mind the Reader once more of that which cannot be too often inculcated viz. That in all Creatures for Example in Man there is found what answers to diverse Notions in the Line of Substance of which one is more Perfect or Imperfect than Another For an Individual Man conceiv'd precisely under the Superiour Notions of Ens Corpus Mixtum Vivens Animal and Homo signifies only some Common and Inadequate Notion of Him whence nothing in Common being able to Exist but only Singulars as Peter Paul c. hence all those Former are Imperfect in the Line of Ens which signifies Capable of Existing Yet even these Singular or Individual Entities tho' we should allow them in some sort to Exist have not thence all the Completion or Perfection imaginable in that Line for a Thing may be Capable to Exist and yet not Capable to exist Alone or without the Support of Another which we call Subsisting To be Subsistent then which in Intelligent Things we call to be a PERSON being the most Perfect Notion of Ens must be attributed to the Divine Essence or Nature tho' the word Essence does not express it but rather signifies aâ—ter the manner of a kind of meer Form Otherwise the Divine Nature would be conceiv'd to want something which according to our Natural Notions is the utmost Perfection in the Line of Being which is impossible to be thought or said of GOD. who is Infinitely Perfect in Being 3. By the word Father I mean one Particular who communicates the Nature of which Himself is to Another Particular And by Son Him to whom that Nature is thus Communicated but that he does or does not Communicate the same Individual Nature or that he is Before his Son in Time and other Considerations arising from Matter spring from the Imperfection and Limitedness of Creatures and therefore they are not to be Transferr'd to GOD Nor are they Essential to the Notions of Father and Son as will be plain to any Man who reflects that if per impossible a Man did communicate his Individual Nature to Another and that Other had it thus Communicated from him and this Instantaneously he would not in that Supposition be therefore less a Father but more perfectly such because the Nature Communicated is more perfectly the Same Nor do Sooner or Later Instantaneous or Not-Instantaneous enter into the precise Notion of Father and Son as appears from the Definition of Generation which abstracts from all those Considerations Moreover 't is most Evident that in such a case the Person who Communicates his Individual Nature and He to whom 't is Communicated would have hence some very neer Relation to one another and what imaginable Relation could it be but that of Father and Son 4. I take the word Generation in the Sense of that Exact and Received Definition viz. Processio Viventis a Vivente tanquam a Principio Conjuncto in Similitudinem Naturae which I shall show is perfectly Verify'd in the Procession of the Eternal Word All other Considerations are Extrinsecal and Forrein to the Notion of Generation as may be gather'd from § 3. and therefore do not belong to it's precise Notion but spring from the Imperfection of Creatures nor consequently as such ought they be Transferr'd to GOD. 5. The word Person signifies Perseity as some Schoolmen explicate it or what 's so Subsistent of it self or by the merits of it's own Notion or Expression that it needs no other Formal Notion to compleat it nor Word to express it better The Etymology of that word if such a Consideration and not rather the Common Use of it only be much to be regarded seems to be this that as we say a Speech is Dissona when it varies from another in Sense and Consona when it agrees to it So a Thing is call'd Persona when it thorowly or perfectly sounds or speaks the Notion of Ens or expresses the utmost Completion of a Thing under the Notion of an Intelligent Being See § 2. 6. Subsistent and Suppositum signifie the same and are appliable to all Beings whatever whether they be Intelligent that is Persons or no and express their last Completion in the Line of Ens in their several Kinds The Notion of the former seems more to respect it's self or it 's own Absoluteness in the Line of Being The Notion of the Later regards the Nature or the Accidents â—hich it sustains in our Mind or as conceiv'd by â—… The Literal meaning of which kind of Sayâ—ng is That we making diverse Conceptions of â—he same Thing the Formal Conception of the â—â—ture or of it's Modes is not that Formal Conception of a Thing Existing Alone without needing any other farther Notion in our Mind or any other Word to mean or signifie it's standing thus Alone or without Dependency on any other Created Notiâ—â— to compleat or make out that Full Sense Notwithstanding that the Notions of Subsistent â—nd Suppositum do bear such a nice Distinction â—â—â— in regard that which sustains another must 〈…〉 supposed able to subsist of it self hence they â—… not without reason promiscuously used The Explication of the rest of those words of which we shall have occasion to make use will I conceive come in more seasonably in their â—roper Places SECT IV. That the Divine Nature does Verifie some One Notion that is some way Common and some Others that are Particulars 1. SInce all Explications as well as Arguments are to be taken from the Nature of the Thing 〈…〉 from the Subject to be Explicated as being in â—â—ality nothing else but the Unfolding that Nature and the laying open what with a Deep Inspection we discover to be included in it or to belong to it Intrinsecally and since the Nature
afterwards are Accidental 11. To be an Individuum some degree of Constancy Permanency or Stability is requir'd 12. Which Existence supervening does establish 13. The Twisting the Results of so many Causes into one Individuum argues the Design of an All-comprehending Providence 14. This Complexion of Accidents can never be eradicated while the Individuum continues 15. And gives the Compound a Different Genius and Natural Propension 16. Existence can with no show of Reason be pretended to be the Principle of Individuation 17. The Distinction between the Notion of a Subsistent Thing or a Suppositum and the Notion of an Individual Ens clearly manifested 18. How and When the Individuality is lost 19. The First Rule how to know this 20. The Second Rule 22. The Third Rule 22. Hence Simple Division of the Matter or Quantity in Living Bodies does not change the Individuum 23. Much less in Man 24. When 't is Chang'd in Simple Bodies 25. When in First-Mixt Bodies 26. When in Demixts 27. When in Homogeneous Mixts 28. When in very Heterogeneous or Organical Bodies 29. Two Contradistinct Natures may compound One Thing 30. The Divine and Humane Natures may siâ—â—sist in the same Suppositum 31. Notwithstanding those Natures and their Properties must remain Unmingled and not Confounded as some Eutvchians imagin'd 32. Yet all the Actions and Padions must be attributed to the Suppositum tho' according to such a Nature contrary to what Nestorius fancy'd 33. Hence Lastly There is no show of Contradiction that GOD should be Three according to the Respect of Person and yet not-Three but One according to the Respect of Nature or Essence 34. A large Explication of some Grounds very Useful to take off all Shadow of Contradiction from divers Chief Mysteries of Christian Faith and to show how Consonant they are to the most Exact Rules of Right Reason MEDITATION How impossible it is for us to know perfectly all that belongs to our own Individuum By what Wonderful and Untraceable ways GOD's Providence has brought about our Individuation and gives us all our Knowledge and other Endowments How little our Best Performances contributed to the Acquisition of them and how little reason the most Knowing and most Virtuous Man living has to be Proud of the most Laudable Actions GOD has done by him That we ought to comply with the Designs of our Creatour by pursuing the End of our Nature and by what Means this may be best accomplisht CHAP. VI. Some Preliminaries fore-lay'd in order to Demonstrate the Immortality of the Soul § 1. WE cannot but have Different Conceptions of the Essence of MAN 2. And consequently of every Operation of his aâ— he is Man 3. We are therefore to examine whether there be any thing in Man according to his Soul which is above Quantity or Matter 4. There are Three Distinct Operations of Man as he is Intellective 5. The Notion of Ens or Thing is Indifferent to Actual Being and not-being 6. Every Form must denominate the Subject in which it is such as the Form it self is 7. A Notion may either be consider'd Subjectively or Objectively 8. Every Object of our Knowledge must either be the Thing it self in the Mind or something that 's Like it 9. NOTIONS understood objectively are the Things themselves as they are in the Mind and not meer Similitudes of them Prov'd unanswerably 10. Prov'd no less unaswerably by the Concession of the Ideists themselves that the Thing it self must thus be in the Mind 11. In what Sense that saying Every Like is not the Same is verify'd 12. Every Inadequate Notion we have of the Thing is of the Whole Thing Confusedly and Materially tho' it be only of one Metaphysical Part or Considerability of it Distinctly and Formally 13. A Third Unanswerable Proof that the Thing must be in the Mind when we know it 14. The Author's Reason why he builds on this Thesis The Reasons why some others are backwards in Assenting to it 15. Notwithstanding the Immortality of the Soul may be demonstrated tho' this Thesis were wav'd CHAP. VII Of the Immateriality and consequently the Immortality of Man's SOUL § 1. FIrst Leading Demonstration Because her Operations and Objects are receiv'd in her after an Indivisible Manner 2. Dem. II. Because her Capacity is Infinite 3. Dem. III. Because she has Other Natures in her without Altering her own 4. Dem. IV. Because they are in her not as Intrinfecal Modes affecting Her but as Distinct from her Contrary to the Nature of Material Subjects 5. Dem. V. Because the Contrary Thesis is Opposite to the Natural Notions of all Mankind 6. Existence is the only Absolute Notion we have and all the rest are Respective 7. Dem. VI. Because she has in her the Notion of Existence which is every way Indivisible 8. Dem. VII Because she has Actual Respects in her 9. This Demonstration enforced 10. Dem. VIII Because she has in her the Notions or Natures of Vast Quantities which are impossible to be there Themselves as they are in Matter nâ—â— yet any Material Similitudes of them 11. Dem. IX Because the Parts of Motion are perfectly Distinct and Determinate in the Soul which are utterly Undistinguisht and Indeterminate as they are in Material Subjects 12. Dem. 10. Because the Soul has Past and Future Parts of Time Present in her at once 13. Dem. XI Because the Soul can tye together as many Singulars as she pleases in the Notion of One Number of which generally the Fancy can have no Material Resemblance 14. Dem. XII Because Sensible Qualities tho' Innumerable and Contrary to one another are in the Soul without Disordering her in the least 15. Dem. XIII Because the said Qualities as in her do not fight and expel one another as they must were their Subject made of Matter 16. Dem. XIV Because Innumerable multitudes of various and large Figures are in the Soul at once 17. Dem. XV. Because the Soul has in her Universal Notions 18. Dem. XVI Because the Thing is in and by the Soul Divided into such Parts as Material Division cannot reach 19. Dem. XVII Because that kind of Composition which the Soul makes afterwards of these thus-Divided Parts is impossible to be perform'd by a Material Agent 20. Hence is seen the reason why Angels do not thus Compound and Divide and consequently they know the Whole Thing Intuitively 21. Dem. XVIII Because what is meant by the Copula is which we use in all our Affirmative Iudgments cannot be so much as shadow'd or represented by a Material Similitude 22. Dem. XIX Because the Connexion of the Conclusion with Right Premisses is above the force of all Nature or Matter and impossible to be Solv'd or Broken 23. Dem. XX. Because all the Notions the Soul has are most concise and exact even to an Indivisible 24. Dem. XXI Because the Soul is a Pure Act and therefore Immaterial 25 Dem. XXII Because the Soul gives a kind of Being to Non-Entities and Chimeraes
a Spiritual Understanding and not Ideas or Similitudes of them only 10. This Doctrine being grounded on that Logical Maxim All Differences are nothing but More and Less of the Generical Notion the consideration of that Thesis is recommended to the Reader 11. This holds equally in a Soul too when she comes to be a Pure Act. 12. Angels being Pure Acts are Immutable 13. The Distinction of Angels is taken from being More or Less Cognoscitive after their manner 14. This is not to be understood of the Extent of their Knowledge but of the Intenseness or Penetrativeness of it 15. Hence as far as Reason carries us is taken the Distinction of the Three Hierarchies and Nine Quires of Angels 16. The Different Manners by which Angels and Human Souls come to have all their Knowledge 17. That those Angels have Nobler Essences whose each Act of Knowledge has for it's Object a Greater portion of the Universe 18. Which fits them to super-intend the Administration of a Larger Province 19. How Consonant this is to those passages of Holy Scripture which speak of such Operations of Angels 20. An Angel cannot operate upon another Angel so as to Change it 21. Wherefore all it 's External Operations which work a Change in another thing can only be upon Bodies 22. An Angel can thus operate upon Material Beings or Bodies 23. That we only intend to evince here the An est of this Operation of an Angel and not the Manner how it is perform'd 24. Yet no One Angel has an Unlimited Power to operate thus on All Bodies whatever 25. An Angel can Move or Change those Bodies which are within the Sphere of it's Activity in an Imperceptible Time 26. Hence the wonderful Effects recorded in Holy Writ to have been done by Angels are Consonant to Metaphysical Principles 27. That the Ordinary Ministring Spirits or Angel-Guardians of Particular Persons are the Lowest sort of Angels 28. But the Greater and Weightier Affairs ure manag'd and transacted by Archangels 29. The Lower Angels receiv'd Intellectual Light from GOD by means of the Superiour ones in the very Instant they were Created 30. In what manner the Good Angels perform the Will of their Maker without New Instructions 31. That GOD makes use of Holy Angels to procure our Good and of Bad ones to afflict and punish Mankind as His Divine Wisdom sees fitting MEDITATION By what means Metaphysicks has rais'd our Thoughtâ— above the Sordid Mass of Matter to contemplatâ— the Angelical Nature The surpassing Excellency of their Intellectual Essences Decypher'd How Faith has antecedently enlighten'd our Reason and that 't is our Duty to Explicate and Defend it against the Empty Flourishes of the Drollich Renouncers of Faith and Reason both What Gratitude Love and Veneration we owe to those Blessed Ministring Spirits and what Benefit we shalâ— reap by keeping up a Spiritual Communion with them by following their good Inspirations Yet that we ought to honour them so as to remember they are only our Fellow Servants tho' highly Dignify'd by our Common Master BOOK III. Of the most Pure Actuality of Being the Adorable DEITY Of the Existence Essence and Attributes of GOD. § 1. THat there must be Something which is a most Pure Actuality of Being Demonstrated 2. Dem. II. From the acknowledg'd Potentiality of Being necessarily annext or rather Essential to all Creatures 3. Dem. III. Because what is not cannot Act. 4. Dem IV. Because Actual Being or Existence is the Noblest Effect imaginable 5. Dem. V. Because no Power can produce an Effect which is Contradictory to what it self is or to it 's own Nature 6. The foresaid Proofs summ'd up in One and Enforc'd 7. This Actuality of Being gave Being to all Other Things 8. The Objection of the Atheists propos'd viz. That The World was ever 9. First Answer That this does not solve our Demonstration 10. Second Answer That 't is a meer Voluntary Assertion neither Prov'd nor Attempted to be Prov'd nor Possible to be Prov'd 11. Third Answer Farther shewing that our Argument is not Toucht and Reducing it to an Identical Proposition 12. Fourth Answer This Pretence or Voluntary Assertion is shown to be an Absolute Impossibility 13. Fifth Answer That the putting an Infinite Antecedent Time which in their Supposition is absolutely necessary is a plain Contradiction 14. Sixth Answer That the very Notion of the word Infinite apply'd to our case shews also that 't is a manifest Contradiction 15. The putting a Finite Number of Causes giving Being to one another Circularly is as Absurd and Contradictory as the former 16. The Notion of Ens is different from that of Existence and consequently Essence from Existence 17. Philosophers must discourse of the First Being by such Notions as they have 18. The Notion of Existence is the most Actual of any we have 19. And therefore the Fittest to express a Pure Actuality of Being and given us by GOD himself 20. Every Abstract word includes comprehensively the Whole Nature of the Form or Act it signifies without any Limitation 21. Therefore it 's Limitation either proceeds from the Subject or from the Causes that Determine it 22. Wherefore GOD's Essence being EXISTENCE â—â— self is absolutely Unlimited or Actually Infinite 23. Therefore GOD is but ONE 24. Hence Polytheism or the putting Many Gods is a most senseless Absurdity and a plain Contradiction 25. Hence the Christian Doctrine is DIVINE the Dawning of which chaced away that Universal Darkness in despite of all Opposition Humane Power Wit or Learning could make 26 Existence is the Whole Perfection of every thing that Exists 27. Much more when it is Essential and actually Infinite 28. Therefore the Divine Existence or the DEITY Includes or Concenters all imaginable Perfections in it's self 29. Therefore GOD is Infinitely Perfect in all Intellectual and Moral Attributes 30. Therefore GOD is a Spirit 31. And no ways Corporeal 32. Therefore 't is an Indignity to the Divine Nature to apply any such Predicates to Him as belong to Bodies 33. Hence also He is Immutable 34. And a Self-Subsistent Being 35. Also His Essence is most Simple or Uncompounded 36. And his Duration ETERNAL 37. Whence it ought not to be Explicated by a Correspondency to our Time 38. Hence also GOD is IMMENSE 39. 'T is highly Derogatory to this Attribute to explicate it by Commensuration to an Infinite Space 40. Lastly the Divine Nature is of it's self infinitely Knowable or Intelligible 41. Of what comfort this may be to some Humble and Pious Souls 42. That the Author confines himself here to Metaphysical Mediums 43. Notwithstanding all that 's said no Notion or Word we have is Univocally or in the same Sense apply'd to GOD and to Creatures 44. Wherefore all the Words we use when we speak of GOD are in some sort Metaphorical 45. Because each of them signifies some one Notion or some one Perfection whereas the Divine Nature is the Plenitude of All Being and All Perfections center'd
a Power to that Act call'd Existence Agaiâ— since we see that Thing call'd Wood turn'd inâ—â— that Thing call'd Fire we are hence forced 〈◊〉 have the Notion of a Power in the former Thing to become this later Thing that is a Power 〈◊〉 the Notion of Thing or Substance which is clearly distinct from the Power to Existence Lastly since we see that Existent Things v. 〈◊〉 Bodies tho' Unchang'd as to the Notion of Thing have a Power to be many ways Alter'd or otherwise than they were either Inwardly or Outwardly v. g. to be Bigger Hot Related as also to Act or Suffer to be in a different Time or Place to be Situated or outwardly Habited thus or thus it is no less Evident that there is Another sort of Power in the Thing or Individuum tho' remaining the same Thing or Unchang'd as to the Notion of THING to have those Accidental Acts or Modes in it or else Apply'd to it which kind of Power is most Evidently Different from the other two Wherefore 't is manifest that there are Three sorts of Power One which the Whole Thing has to that Act call'd Existence A Second which the Thing according to some Part of it as it were which we call Matter has to be Another Thing A Third which the Thing Existing has to it 's Accidental Acts or to the Modes or Manners how it is 3. The First sort of Power belongs to all Things whatever but the First Self-existent That the First sort of Power belongs to all Things but the First Being Being For since the very Notion of All Things but the First Self-existent Being imports that they are such as have not Actual Being or Existence of themselves or â—…om their own Essence or Nature and therefore not being able to give it to themselves â—…ey must receive it from Another and yet 't is no â—…s manifest they could have had Being given them by that Other or by the First Being because they now Actually have it and a â—…hing cannot actually receive that which it has no Power or Possibility to receive It followâ—… that this Power to have Actual Being or Existence must belong to all Things which we call Creatures that is to all but the First Self-Existent Being 4. This Power of Existing which belongs tâ—… to all Creatures is also Essentiâ—… to them For since we cannot And is Essential to them have a Formal Notion of Nothing nor of a Thing under the precise Notion of Ens but we must conceivâ—… it constituted such by some Formal Cause or other Proper to it's Nature which Formâ—… Constituent of Ens we call it's Essence and Essence speaks something that concerns Beâ—… one way or other and involves it in its Signification and the Essence of Creatures does nâ—… include Actual Being in its Notion because 〈…〉 § 3. they have it from Another it folloâ—… that the Essence of all Entia or Things whateâ—… that are Created or of all Creatures consâ—… meerly in their Potentiality or Power to have Actual Being which we call their Possibility 5. Corollary I. Hence the Proper Definition 〈…〉 Created Ens in Common 〈…〉 That which has a Power to Exâ—… Hence the Definition of Created Ens is That which is capable of Being or That which is Capable Existing I mean as far as can bear an Exact Definition which I say because thâ—… which we use here for a Genus and whiâ—… we are forced to use in such very Commâ—… Notions is a Transcendent and not a Proper Genus which has always a Notion a Determinate Sense and is capable to be Divided by more or less of the Generical Notion as by it's Intrinsecal Differences neither of which is found in the words that which which we are necessitated here to put instead of a Genus 6. This Power to the Act of Existence which as was now shown is Essential to all Created Beings consists That this Power consists in it's Possibility or Non-Repugnance to Being In this that it's Nature is such that it has no Repugnance Chimericalnes or Ground of Contradiction in it's Notion For since an Impossibility and a Contradiction are in effect the same and differ only in this that Impossibility regards only the Incapacity any â—…ing has to Exist in re and Contradiction the â—…capacity it has to exist in the Understanding because 't is Opposite to the nature of Ens which is it's Adequate Object And since all Effects are Possible to GOD which do not imply a Contradiction and those Effects that do so are therefore Impossible to Him because Contradictions and Lies being the Height of Folly they are Diametrically Opposite to GOD's Wisâ—…m by which they are if at all to have existence given them It follows that the Power which Creatures have to Exist or be Created which we call their Possibility consists only in â—…his that there is no Repugnance Chimeriâ—…lnes or Ground of Contradiction in their Natures only which renders them Impossible 7. Hence is seen why UNUM is said to be a Property of Ens and in what the Unity of every Entity What Metaphysieal UNITY is consists For since nothing in Common can exist or which is the same is an Ens but to be an Ens or Capable of Existing it must be determinately This and to be determinately This includes to be Different from all others under the Notion of Ens Also since to be No One signifies to be None and therefore to be No One Ens is to be No Ens hence nothing is Capable of Existing or an Ens unless it is Determinate under the Notion of Ens or not Two Entities but Determinately This and therefore Distinct under that Notion from all others that is unless it be Indivisum in se and Divisum a quolibet alâ—… under the precise Notion of Ens which is the very Notion of UNUM 8. The Essences of Things antecedently to their Actual Being or Existence can only be in the Divine Intellect The Essences of Things are Antecedently to their Existence in the Divine Intellect For since they cannot be themselves Actually until they have that Act which is the Formal Cause of their Being viz. Existence given them because a meer Possibility or Power to be which is all that Creatures have from their own Nature cannot give or denominate them to be actually It follows that all the Existence nay Possibility of Existence or Essence they have antecedently to their Being or Existing in Nature is only in GOD or in the Divine Understanding 9. Corollary II. Hence is Demonstrated from the Altissimae Causae that is from the Supreme Reasons Hence the Cartesian Doctrine leaves no Ens in the world or Mediums in Metaphysicks viz. from the Nature of Ens and Unum that the Cartesians leave no Natural Ens in the World while they put them to be made up of innumerable Particles of their First Matter each of which could exist alone independently on the other and
adds to it still more Indetermination and what 's Common to All and Indeterminate to Any Thing cannot particularize or constitute This or That Thing and only This or That Thing and not Thing in Common or what 's Indeterminate to every Thing can exist in Nature It follows that either there must be no Particular Bodies in Nature that is No One Body or which is the same No Body at all in the whole World or else it must be granted that there must be such an Act corresponding to this Sort of Power which so determines it as to constitute This or That Body in particular Which Second Sort of Act is call'd by the Schools the SUBSTANTIAL or ESSENTIAL FORM and this Second Sort of Power which answers to that Act and is Determin'd by it is call'd MAâ—TER 18. Hence those Things which include in their Natures this Second sort of In what Sence Bodies are said to be Compounded of this Power and its Act. Power and its correspondent Act which use to be call'd Matter and Form are said to be Compounded of them because such a kind of Thing involves in it self and consequently causes in us and verifies the Conceptions of somewhat according to which that Thing is Indeterminate and somewhat according to which it is Determinate under the Notion of Thing or Ens which two Considerations do comprehend all that can be conceiv'd belonging to the Nature of such a kind of Thing as to that Notion precisely which kind of Compound Thing we call a BODY 19. This Second sort of Power called Matter is the sole Ground of all Change and Mutability For since whatever This Second Power Matter is the sole Ground of all Mutability Thing is Determinate is Fixt by that which formally Determines it to be That Thing it is and no Other 't is manifest that from the nature of that Act or Form which by Determining the Matter makes that Thing be what it is no Change into another can proceed Wherefore since by § 17 18. there can be nothing else Conceivable belonging to such a particular Thing or Body but its Power to be such a Thing and its Act which Determines that Power and formally constitutes it such a Thing that is the Matter and the Form and from the Act or Form as far as is on it's part no Mutability or Change from what that Act made it â—…n proceed it follows necessarily that all Change and Mutability under the Notion of Thing must proceed from the Power or Matter Again since all Accidental Acts or Modes do no less in their way Determine and Constitute the Thing to be actually such as that Accident is apt to make it or to be after such a Manner as well as the Essential Act or Form did Determine and Constitute it to be This Thing and no other Thing and that their whole Notion or Nature is terminated in their making it Actually such it follows that from those Accidental Acts or those Modes precisely nothing can have any Ground to be Alter'd or to have Another Mode or Accident Wherefore all Change and Mutability whether Substantial or Accidental can be refunded into nothing but meerly into the Power or Matter as it 's only Ground 20. Corollary IX Hence is demonstrated that if there can be any Pure Acts which have no Power or Matter Hence Pure Acts are Immutable in them as will be shown hereafter there can such aâ— are Angels and Souls Separated they must be naturally Immutable both Substantially and Accidentally See Method to Science B. 3. L. 7. Thesis 6. and Raillery Defeated from § 49. to § 59. 21. The Third sort of Power is that which the Thingâ— consisting of Matter The Third sort of Power respects Accidental Acts. and Form and having over and above it 's Ultimate Act of Existing has to the Modes or Accidental Acts belonging to it as was mention'd § 2. and shown particularly in my Methodâ— B. 1. Less 2. 22. Tho' these Accidental Acts or Modes aâ— is shown above Coroll III. and in my METHOD B. 1. Less 4. § 1 2. Which tho' not properly Things have yet Analogical Essences are not Things in the First and Proper signification of the word Thing but only in a Secondary Improper and Analogical Sense yet they have notwithstanding their Improper and Analogieâ— Essences as has also every Abstract Notion of Conception we have of the Thing and consequently their Nature is sixt to be what it is and no other Whence they have also their Improper but yet Real Metaphysical Verity and First Principles peculiar to their Natures as well as Things properly so call'd or Substances have So that whoever in Discoursing of Quantity â— g. or Action makes Quantity by consequence 〈…〉 to be Quantity or Action not to be Action but destroys the nature of those Modes is as evidently convicted of Contradiction as if he had destroy'd the nature of a Man or an Animal or any other Substance and had made them by consequence not to be what they are as all False Discoursers do 23. Hence is clearly seen what is meant by Metaphysical Divisibility and Composition and that they are not What Metaphysical Divisibility and Composition are â—â—ch as are found between Thing â—â—d Thing in re for this kind of Composition and Division would destroy the Unity and Verity of the Thing beâ—…es that such a Composition is Proper to Artificial things and is contrary to the Constituâ—… of Natural Entities Natural Composition 〈…〉 was shown § 17 18. being made by the â—…eting of the Matter and Form in one such â—… or one Body That Composition and Divisibility then which we call Metaphysical is of the Parts as it were of the Thing as it is in â—our Understanding or of the Thing as concelv'd by us thus and the same Thing as concelv'd by us otherwise For out of our Conception or Understanding there is no Actual Distinction of Matter and Form of Substance and Accidents c. tho' there is Ground in the thing as it is the Object of our Imperfect pitch of Understanding not able to comprehend all that may be thought of it at once why we thus frame Abstract Partial and Inadequate Conceptions of it or which is the same why we thus Divide or Distinguish it And hence it comes that since there can be no Contradiction nor consequently Impossibility unless we Affirm and Deny in the same Respect therefore as there is no Contradiction in such a case in our Understanding because these Respects there are Diverse so there is no Impossibility in Nature but the Thing may be Chang'd Distinguisht Acted upon or Act according to some of those Respects or Conceptions and yet be not-Chang'd not-Act or Suffer according to others of them as will be seen by Instances hereafter 24. Corollary X. This Doctrine particularly this last Clause were the words Ens or Substance Nature Suppositum Person Existence and Subsistence exactly Distinguisht and
distinctly understood will be signally Useful to defeat almost all the Arguments drawn from Reason by the Deists and if well reflected on clears many Objectionâ— brought against the B. Trinity by the Sociâ—ians and other Anti-Trinitarians opposing the Christian Tenet of the Unity of the Divine Nature in Three Persons and to confute as far as it impugns that Tenet it self that Treatise Entituled A Letter to the Reverend the Clergy of both Universities concerning the Trinity and the Athanasian Creed Which tho' it seems to be the utmost Effort of those Parties and has a very plausible Appearance to those who either are not well skill'd in or do not well reflect on the Laws of Predication and the Use of Humane Language in parallel Cases yet it is easie to show that that piece of Wit and Fancy is utterly void of Art and good Sense and that the Christian Thesis it self if rightly represented is perfectly consonant to the Nature of the Subject the DEITY and to Right Reason and that there is no more show of Contradiction that that most Simple Being should verifie Sending and being Sent Generating and being Generated and such like tho' they be Opposites than it is that the same Infinite Being when GOD knows himself which themselves grant should notwithstanding it 's most perfect Simplicity verifie that he is the Knower and thing Known which are as much Relatively Opposite as are any of the Others Lastly it may be shown very evidently that all the while they oppose the Doctrine of the Trinity those witty Gentlemen do quite mistake the whole Question by confounding what the Deity is in it's self abstracting from any order to our Conceptions or rather as it is above our Conceptions according to which consideration we cannot think or speak of it at all with what GOD is as conceiv'd by us or what as He is the Object of our Understanding His Infinite Essence obliges us truly to conceive and affirm of Him All which may perhaps particularly and at large be shown hereafter 25. Corol. VI. The same Doctrine clears the Mystery of the Incarnation Which clears Objections against the B. Trinity and against the Mystery of the Incarnation also from the least semblance of Contradiction and shows how not only Possible but consonant to right Reason it is that the Humanity of our B. Saviour may be Assum'd by the Second Person of the B. Trinity and yet not be Assum'd by either of the other Persons As also how that Person may supply to it or be united to it immediately according to the Subsistence or Personality and yet not be thus United to it formally according to it's Nature or Essence And the same may be said of the same Doctrine in order to some other Revealed Mysteries of Christian Faith which I here forbear to mention 26. Corollary VI. Hence is clearly discern'd what is the Difference between Logical and Metaphysical ABSTRACTION The Difference between Logical and Metaphysical Abstraction and that Logical Abstraction is of the Generical or Specifical that is of more Common Notions from the Inferioâ—â— ones which is done by taking from these later that precise Consideration iu which they Agree leaving out those in which they Disagree that is by taking meerly what belongs to the Genus or Generical Notion and leaving out or Abstracting from the Differences Whereas Metaphysical Abstraction regards only this that the Notion Nature or Essence of the One is not the precise Notion Nature or Essence of the Other or that both the One and the Other are different Respects or Considerations of the Thing tho' they do both of them stand upon the same Level and neither of them be Higher or Lower in the way of Predication or in the Extent of their Notion than the other In which later Sense of the word Abstraction we use to say that our Soul works or knows things by Abstract or Inadequate Notions 27. From what is said above 't is manifest that there can be no Actual Parts in any Ens whatever whether we conceive That Excellent and Useful Maxim That There are no Actual Parts in any Compound whatever Defended and Explicated it under the Notion of Ens or of such an Ens call'd Body or as affected with such an Intrinsecal Mode or Accident v. g. Quantity or any of the rest For since to Distinguish cannot belong to the Power it being of it self or of it's own nature utterly Indistinct or Indetermiâ—â—te it follows that to Distinguish must properly and only belong to the Act. Wherefore in case those Parts were Distinct Actually they must have Distinct Acts and by consequence the Power or Subject must be made Distinct by having those Distinct Acts in it that is the Subjects must be More under that Notion Therefore Unum being the Property of Ens in what Sense soever the word Ens be taken as is shown § 22. there would in that case be no Unity nor consequently Entity under any Notion left in the World To explicate this more â—…y and show it particularly In case the First â—â—rt of Power call'd Ens and it's Act Existence â—â—d each of them it 's Proper Act which constitutes a Thing and so were Two Things nothing in the World that Exists would be One Thing â—or consequently Unum being the Property of Ens A Thing or Any Thing Also if the Second fort of Power Matter and it 's Act or Form that constitutes Body were Two Things there would be no One Thing of that Sort or no one Body and consequently there would be No Body in Nature And since as will be prov'd hereafter L. 2. § 16. the Complexion of Accidents is the Essential Form which constitutes Body were those Accidents Distinct Things from the Matter and the Matter from them or were they Distinct Things from one another and therefore each of them were Capable of Existing alone or properly Entia there would be no One or No Individual Body in the World but every such Thing would be a Multitude or Many and perhaps Innumerable Or were the Parts that compound Quantity or which is the same the Parts of Body as precisely having Quantity in them Actually Distinct as many Schoolmen hold then each of them as was lately prov'd must have a Distinct Act of that sort to make them Distinct Actually whence they would be in that case Diverse Quanta or Things having divers Quantities in them Wherefore it being Demonstrable that Quantitas est Divisibilis in semper Divisibilia there could be no Quantum or Thing of that Kind in the World but would contain many Lesser Quantums in it and therefore there could be no One or No Quantum and consequently No Thing that had Quantity in it found in Nature Add that those pretended Distinct Actual Parts must be distinguisht by § 17. from others by some Act and yet most of them could have no Act iâ— them to Distinguish them from their Comparts For the Second Power
truly One Thing or One Ens and that all these Particulars now enumerated are Nothing but meerly our Different Conceptions Considerations or Notions of it taking those words objectively that is indeed the very same Thing it self as diversly conceiv'd consider'd or apprehended So that the Thing gives us the Ground of Verification and our Understanding the Formal Distinction exprest by the Abstractive or Distinctive Particle as to answer the signification of which word nothing is found in the Thing as it is in re or iâ— Nature 33. From what has been Discourst above concerning Power and Act 't is Demonstrable how many Common How many sorts of Entities are Possible to be Created Sorts or Kinds of Entia can be in the Universe or are Possible to be Created For since nothing is Capable to have Existence given it but what 's Determinate that is This or That and the meer Power to be a Thing call'd Matter is utterly â—â—determinate and Act is the Only Determiner of â—â—tentiality or Power and therefore can also have Determination by Virtue of it's own Nature or rather bears Determination in it's very Notion It follows that there can only be Two Sorts of Things Possible to be Created viz. Those which are Compounded of Power and Act that is of Matter and Form which we call BODIES aâ—… Pure Acts which have no Power or Matter iâ— them which we call ANGELS or SPIRITS 34. Hence 't is inferr'd that EXISTENCE iâ— the most Formal and consequenâ—ly Existence is the Ultimate Act of Ens. the Ultimate Act of all otheâ—… whatever and all others Potâ—â—tial in respect of it For sinâ—â— it has been shown § 3 4 and 5. that the Essences of all Creatures whether they be Pâ—… Acts or Compounded of Act and Power do consist in a Possibility or Power to Exist and much more the Improper Essences of their Accidents â—â— Modes which have of themselves not so much as a Power to exist at all but by means â—â— the Ens or Substance on which both their Essenâ—… and Existence does immediately depend It follows that Existence is the most Formal and Ultimate Act as supervening to all Created Essencâ—… Imaginable and that all other Acts comparâ—… to it are but Potential or as it were Dispositiâ—â— to it Wherefore when Angels are call'd Pâ—… Acts 't is to be understood that they are Pure â—â— Free from that Second sort of Power call'd Matter notwithstanding which the Essences of those Pâ—… Acts are but Potential in respect of that First and Purest Act EXISTENCE 35. Corollary VIII Wherefore Existence â—â— more properly call'd Actualitâ— than Act as having no kiâ—… Wherefore Existence is rather to be call'd Actuality than Act. of Potentiality to any farther Act but is the perfect Quintessence as it were of Act â—â— self without the least Alloy or Mixture oâ— Power as becomes the Immediate Effect of GOD our Creatour who is essentially an Infinite Actuality of Being or which is the same Self-Existent as will be demonstrated hereafter 36. Wherefore since it has been Demonstrated â— 4. That the very Essence of all Created Beings consists in the meer Possibility or Power to have Existence and That there is a GOD. therefore they have not Actual Being from themselves it follows that they must have it from Another to whom consequently Existence is Essential that is from the First Being or from GOD. There is therefore a GOD. But of this in my Third Book ADVERTISEMENT I desire it may be remarkt once for all that by the Words Power Act Matter Form Existence and the same may be said of all the Words I shall use hereafter through this whole Treatise â—â—r those I have publisht formerly I do not mean Idea's or Similitudes or any other Conceits found out or made by my own or any other Man's Wit or Fancy but the very Real Thing it self of which and not of Similitudes we intend â—â— speak conceiv'd by us according to such â—â—spects or Considerations Grounded on it and â—â—ly found in it Without which no Solid Disâ—…rse can possibly be made as is shown in my â—â—THOD B. 1. L. 1. and is demonstrated at large in my SOLID PHILOSOPHY Asserted Preliminary First and Second and in my other Writings MEDITATION On the foregoing Chapter 'T IS time my Soul to turn thy Thoughts upon thy self and to reflect what Advancement of Knowledge thou hast gain'd by those Easiest most Common and most Familiar Notions of POWER and ACT. But first consider How Provident thy Generous Maker has been for thee as soon as then wast deliver'd out of the dark Womb of Nothing and how he has assisted and nourisht thee up in thy helpless Infancy Thy Nature was to be Capable of Knowledge and therefore only Knowledge was the Connatural The Method how GOD's Providence gave us our Elements of Knowledge Food which could give thee Growth and Strength and ripen thee to Perfection How wretched then and miserable hadst thou been had not He like a Loving Father taken care thou shouldst not live perpetually in a Dungeon of Spiritual Darkness and comfortless Ignorance To this end â—e planted thee amongst an Infinite Variety of thy Fellow-Creatures Bodily Substances which play'd continually about thee with such Motions as were agreeable to their several Constitutions These being the Manufacture of an Infinitely Wise Creatour could not but retain in them the manifest Prints of the Wisdom of their Divine Artificer which made â—â—â—m fit Instruments to inform thy Empty Understanding and to instruct thy Rudeness But alas thâ—y could not reach or affect thy Nature which was Spiritual All their Operations were perform'd by Local Motion which being Quantitative and Divisible could not be receiv'd in thy Spiritual and Indivisible Essence This had render'd thee consider'd according to thy peculiar Nature hadst thou been a Distinct Thing from all Bodies whatever Insensible of their smartest Impulses and Incapable of Knowing any thing by their most vigorous Impressions Nor hadst thou as being one of the Lowest Class of Knowing Substances any Right or Title to have Actual Knowledge Infus'd into thee gratis at first as had thy Elder-Brothers by Creation thâ— Angels In this forlorn condition wast thou found in the First Instant thou camest into this Material World viz. only Capable of Knowledge and utterly Unable of thy self to gain any or help thy self in the least For a meer Power which was undetermin'd to all or any Act of Knowledge could not alone enable thee to produce any Particular Act which is necessarily This and Determinate But it belongs to Essential and Infinite Goodness not to leave his poor Indigent Creatures destitute but to take order they should have as far as consists with the best Order of the World all the Perfection their Nature is capable to receive Wherefore His Providence wisely order'd thou shouldst have a Material Compart link'd so intimately to thee as to Compound with thee One Ens or Suppositum and thence partake
Stone and a Tree a Horse and an Eagle a Lizard and a Herring c. Nor is at all to purpose to alledge they are a Compound Thing for this is contrary to many Evident Truths since it has been demonstrated Ch. 1. § 27. that there are no Actual Parts in any Compound whatever Nor can the Parts of Ens joyn to make One Thing otherwise than as one of them is Determinable Potential or has the Notion of Matter the other Determinative of the Other as it 's Form Lastly that Unum or One Thing would be Divisum in se which is against the Nature of Ens. Nor is it to purpose to alledge they are United by their Acting together for this only makes them Coacters such as the Principal Cause and the Instrument uses to be and not One Thing as is clearly shown Preliminary V. § 25. Besides they must Be One Thing ere they can Act as One Thing which as is there shown makes the alledging this for a Reason very Preposterous 38. Corollary XIV From what 's deduced above 't is demonstrated against that every-way-Groundless Opinion That the Pre-existence of Souls is a Senseless Conceit and Impossible of the Pre-existence of Souls Since the Form of an Ens being but a Part of that thing it belongs to and a Part of a Thing not being the Thing it self or the Whole Thing and only the Thing it self being Capable of Existance the Soul which is the Form of Man cannot possibly exist till it informs the Matter and with it makes up that Thing call'd Man 39. Corollary XV. Hence that foppish Opinion of the Transmigration of Souls So is the Pythagorean Transmigration is confuted Since the Form is not Received but in Matter fitted to receive it or Dispos'd for it and with it compounding one Thing which shall have a Primary Operation sutable to the Nature of such a Compound which kind of Disposition can no where be found but in Humane Bodies otherwise every meer Animal and Vegetable might require and therefore have a Rational Soul in them which put there could neither need any Transmigration nor could it be without having two Souls in one Body or Two Forms in the same Matter which would make every such Compound a CHIMERA Whence I am forced to declare that those who talk of GOD's Annexing Reason to the Matter of a Brute bid fair for the Tenet of a Pythagorean Transmigration for to what other end can the starting such a Question or such a wild Supposition tend 40. Corollary XVI Hence is farther shown that to those who ask How the Soul and Body come to be That 't is a Folly to ask how the Soul and Body came to be United United The properest Answer is They were never DISUNITED or TWO A farther reason how they come to be One may be gather'd out of the following Meditation MEDITATION BY this time my Soul we have rais'd our selves by immediate Steps from the Material World our Underling and God's Footstool The Rational Progress and Immediate Steps of our Thoughts hitherto till we are come within Ken of our own Nature Nor can we think we have err'd in that Noble and Necessary Quest There have been no Meandrian Turnings and Windings in our Rational Progress which is the Way we have taken We started first from the Simplest and as we may say Embryo-Notions of POWER and ACT which belong to every Created Being We proceeded next to that sort of Power and Act which compounds the Changeable Nature of BODY We went on to take a view of the Essences of the most Uncompounded Bodies and those of their Simpler Mixts and Demixts till we arriv'd at those most Compounded ones which are Organical such as are Vegetables and Animals divers Parts of which seem to have distinct Natures and Operations of their own But they only seem to have them for out of the Compound they can perform no such Operations at all because those Parts being only Potential or in Power to be Things they are hence of themselves not Actually Things nor capable of Being nor consequently of Acting So that 't is the Compound only that Acts according to such a Part which is somewhat of it because it only Is or is in Act. Lastly We have shewn the Establishment of the Essence of an Animal and that its Primary Operation for which it was ordain'd is like it self meerly Sensitive or Material But must the Climax of BEING stop in that lowest Degree of Entity Base Matter Why it was necessary such a Creature as MAN should be made No surely For how should the Alpha of all Being be the Omega of it too if there were nothing Created here but such a Stupid and Senseless Nature as Body which is utterly unable to ascend to him or raise it self towards him and chuse him for its Last End and Final Good And yet how should meer Matter rise to that vastly higher Story of Being call'd Spiritual or how should it arrive to a next Neighbourhood with an Angel They seem rather Contradictory and in the highest manner Opposite The one is of its own Nature Divifible the other Indivisible The one is a Pure Act the other is meerly Potential being made of Matter which depresses it's Compart while here to a Potential State also The Order of Beings which is the Product of God's Creative Wisdom could not but be contriv'd with all the Beauty of the most exact Harmony which consists in fitting one Thing to another It must then arise by Immediate Degrees otherwise it would not be Compacted but Shatter'd And it had been too great a Leap and had left too wide a Chasm in the Frame of the Creation to ascend or rather skip from meer Matter to a Pure Spirit But what cannot Infinite Wisdom By what means GOD's Infinite Wisdom contriv'd the Union of the Soul and Body in one Thing contrive without either perverting or straining the Proportions of Order or Violating the Natures of Body or Spirit either Wherefore to make the Contexture of Beings Close and not intersticed by Flaws Gaps or Incoherences Divine Providence which disposes all things sweetly order'd there should be some Dispositions in Matter which requir'd to be indu'd with such a Form as was beyond the Power of Matter to produce 〈◊〉 have educed out of it viz. Such as was of a Spiritual Nature tho' of the lowest size to perform with its Assistance Operations beyond the Power of Matter to compass alone that is with a Faculty of Reasoning which partakes in some sort â—â—th Natures or with a Power both of Knowing 〈◊〉 also of Succession in Acquiring or Using that Knowledge Those Dispositions being laid in Matter 〈◊〉 â—â—llow'd necessarily that a Form of a Spiritual Naâ—â—re would be in it For to an Infinite Being streamâ—…enerously his Gifts from his Exuberant Source of â—…ss there needs no more to receive and have the Effects of his Bounty but to be Dispos'd for them or
their Proper Act can supervene or put them in the state or condition of being Actually or Extra causas The Literal meaning of which Philosophical phrase consonantly to the Doctrine now delivered is this that while that Action call'd the Determination of the Potentiality and Indifferency of the Matter was yet on foot and not compleated or brought to Perfection the Ens or Individuum was not as yet otherwise than in fieri as the Schools call it or yet a doing or making that is within the Power of those Determining Causes but as soon as that Action is brought to perfection there results thence as the Ultimate Terminus or End of that Determination an Individuum capable to be put extra Causas or put out of Subjection or Dependence on those Natural Efficients which now had done working having perform'd all that belong'd to them to do At which very instant the never-failing Goodness of the First Being gives actually to the Individuum thus render'd Capable of Being that most perfect Actuality we call Existence by which it is Formally put in a condition of being extra Causas or no longer immediately dependent on them but on GOD only 17. Corollary VI. From this Stability which the Thing has from it's Individuality and from it's being Existent The Distinction between the Notions of a Subsistent Thing or a Suppositum and the Notion of an Individual Ens clearly manifested results Another Formal Conception of Ens call'd it's Subsistence or being of it's self or from the merits of it's own Notion or Nature and also the being That by which only it's Nature and Modes have Being Whence it comes that some define Ens to be Id quod subsistit in se substat Accidentibus which is something more than the bare Meaning or Notion of the word Ens imports which only speaks a Capacity of Existing The word Thing taken in this Sense or under this Consideration is commonly call'd a Substratum Subjectum Suppositum or the Quod both of the Nature and it's Accidents for both these in respect of it are but Quo Res est or that by which it is constituted such either Substantially or Accidentally That this Notion is formally Distinct from the Notion of an Ens or Individuum is most Evident for These regard no more but that the Matter be ultimately Determin'd to be This and thence becomes Capable of Existing But that what 's thus Capable to Exist or Actually Exists does exist of it self without the Assistance of Another and thence gives the Nature and the Accidents that accrue to it to have Being or to Bee whence it has properly the Notion of a Suppositum is too clearly Distinct from the other to need Proving And that the Notion of Subsistence is Different from that of Existence is no less manifest because the Formal or rather Total Effect of Existence being only to make the Thing bee actually or to put it extra Causas is clearly Different from the Notion of Subsisting by it self or sustaining the Modes and the Nature too And indeed if we regard it attentively the Notion of a Subsistent Thing or a Suppositum is Subsequent to the Notion of Thing or Ens and superadds a New consideration to it both as it regards it's Standing by it's self and also that the Nature and Accidents do all stand in their Being by means of it Whence the Notion of a Subsister or a Suppositum or in Intelligent Things of a Person seems to include all the Perfections and to have all the Advantages an Ens or Individuum is Capable of Tho' sometimes the Notions of Ens Being Existing and Subsisting are for want of due Reflexion carelesly confounded 18. From what has been discourst above Ch. 3. and in this present Chapter it How and when the Individuality is â—… will not be hard to determine when the Individuality of the several Bodies in Natureare Chang'd 〈…〉 Lost. There can be no doubt but that this happens when those Bodies can no longer retain that Primogenial Complexion of Accidents which make the Individuum fit to perform that Primary Operation peculiar to it self as 't is Distinct from all other Indiviuums But the difficulty is how we can ever come to know That those Individuating Complexions of the Accidents being so many and mingled with such a peculiar accurate and singular Niceness that 't is impossible we should ever come to Know or Comprehend them exactly and distinctly But I hope this Difficulty that seems at first sight so Insuperable will upon Examination appear to be none at all To clear it then I lay these few Positions 19. First We may observe and plain Experience will inform our ordinary Reflexion that speaking of Mixts The First Rule how to know this no Individual of any Kind when it ceases to be or is Corrupted is Chang'd into Another Individuum of the same Kind V. g. No Individual Stone Tree Horse or Man is thus Chang'd meerly into Another Individual Stone Tree Horse or Man For were this so then indeed the Difficulty would be Insoluble 20. Secondly Hence follows immediately that the Individual Nature is never Chang'd alone but the Specifical The Second Rule Nature always and oft-times the Generical too is Chang'd likewise 21. Thirdly That 't is very easie to know the difference between the Primary Operations of such Bodies as The Third Rule differ Specifically or Generically as is shown above Ch. 2. and 3. and thence to discern when the Species or Genus and consequently the Individuum is Chang'd The reason why the Change of those Former induces a Change in this Later is Because all the Superiour Notions are Essential to the Individuum as Logic demonstrates and Common Sense informs us Peter cannot be This Man unless he be a Man nor can Man be this sort of Animal which is Essential to it or rather part of it's very Definition unless he be an Animal nor can Animal be This sort of Living Thing unless it be Living c. Whence follows that whenever the Individuum is render'd Incapable of performing the Primary Operation of it's Species or Genus under which it is rankt the Individuality is a fortiori perisht and Chang'd For every Individuum is nothing but One of that Kind or Higher Notion under which 't is comprehended And how can it be said to be One of that Kind when that Kind it self as far as concerns it is Chang'd and Gone 22. Hence neither the Specifick Nature nor the Individuation of Vegetables or Animals is lost when a Branch Hence every Simple Division of the Matter in Living Things changes not the Individuation or a Limb is cut off provided that Mixture and Organization of Parts be not destroy'd which enables them to Digest the Nourishing Juice or Aliment requisite to preserve the Compound which is it's Primary Operation 23. Hence the Individuality of Man as Man â—â—ot Chang'd whatever Limbs â—…loses unless those parts be
of that Saying of the Schools Accidentis Essentia est Inhaerentia And the Notion of Thing or as the Schools call it Substance being That which is Capable of Being or which is the same a Power to Existence It follows that the Notion of Thing relates to its Act Existence and that the Ens or Substance which is Capable to be or is the Power to be does respect it as such Whence follows that Existence has no Respect at all in the Line of Ens to any other Notion whatever that perfects it there being none more Actual than it self is nor has it any Reference or Order to any thing but to GOD our Creatour who is the Immediate Cause of it on whom only it depends and whom only of all our Natural Notions for it's Indivisibility Simplicity and Actuality it most resembles From which Discourse 't is clearly seen that Existence or Actual Being is the only Absolute Notion we have and that all the rest either Immediately as Ens or Mediately as the Modes of Ens or Accidents are Respective to It. To begin then with the only Absolute Notion Existence I argue thus 7. Demonstration VI. That Subject is Indivisible or Immaterial that has Objects in her which are every way Indivisible by § 1. But the Soul when she has in her Dem. VI. Because she has the No tion of Existence in her which is every way Indivisible the abstract Notion of Existence has an Object in her which is every way Indivisible Therefore the Soul it self is Indivisible or Immaterial That the Soul has the Notion of Existence in her is Evident by Experience for we know nay cannot but know that we have the Notion of what 's meant by the word is since without this we could neither Affirm nor Deny And 't is farther Demonstrable because the Soul has no Notion at all in it but tâ—â—o ' it or in Order to it For the Ens or Thing with all it's Complexion of Modes in it which constitute the Individuum is no more formally but a meer Power to Existence and every Power is nothing but a kind of Order Degree or Step towards it's Act nay 't is so Confus'd a Notion staying in the Notion of meer Power that 't is no way Distinctly Intelligible without some Order to the Act from which all Distinct Knowledge in our Mind proceeds And that the Notion of this most Distinct and most Perfect Act call'd Existence is every way Indivisible is Evident For it cannot be Divisible Quantitatively or Physically that is Materially since all such Division is done by way of Local Motion that is by Degrees or Part after Part whereas there are no Degrees or Part after Part in the Notion of meet Existence We no sooner alter the Actual Being of a Thing but we destroy it and make it not-bee Nor is there any Middling or Gradual passage from the one to the other it being impossible a Thing should half-be half-not-be or which is the same neither be nor not bee Again even in Material Things Existence presupposes all the Matter Quantity and the Complexion of all the Modes which constituted the Individuum nay it presupposes too all the Motions that anteceded and terminated the precedent Operation of Natural Agents which caus'd the perfect Determination of the Matter or Power to be This Thing which fitted it for Existence and fixt the Thing in Actual Being as is shown above Ch. 5. § 16. Nor is the Notion or Nature of Existence Divisible Metaphysically by our framing different Conceptions of it as we do of other Objects for being in it's self most Simple 't is impossible it should afford us Ground to make different Notions of it as appears by this that No Wit of Man can invent or assign a Genus or a Difference for it nor consequently resolve it into Metaphysical Parts by Defining it Therefore the Notion of Existence is every way Indivisible and consequently it 's Subject the SOUL is also Indivisible and Immaterial 8. We come now to consider those Notions which are Respective Which directs That the Soul has Actual Respects in her us in the first place to reâ—â—ect what a Respect in common means or is and whether it can be any Material Thing or Mode of Thing or can be represented by a Material Similitude A Respect then is an Order Reference or a kind of Alliance which one Thing or Mode has to another Now who sees not that such a thing as Respect is not to be found nor has any place in Material Nature There are nothing in the Material World but such and such Individual Bodies each of which has it's own Distinct Complexion of Accidents by which it is aparted and Distinguisht from all others is Independent on them and enjoys it 's proper Existence and Subsistence Each stands on it's own Bottom without having any thing to do with any other Whence comes then this General Nature as it wâ—re of being Respective to others which we observe is found in all the Notions which belong to all the last Nine Predicaments It is certain that all our Notions except that of Existence are of this Respective Nature as appears by all their Definitions The Modes or Accidents do respect the Thing or Substance as a kind of Form which makes it be such or of such â— Manner as they are apt to determine and denominate it and the Thing is Capable to Exist and so respects Existence as it's Act or Perfection But tho' we run over the whole Beadroll of Individuums in the world we find nothing in any of them which answers to the word Respect Each Thing is what it is and it's Accidents or Modes are the Accidents of that Thing and of no other or respect no other Thing but that which is their Proper Subject And there are in Nature nothing but particular Substances and their Accidents nor have we except the Absolute Notion of Existence any other Natural Notions There is indeed found in them what grounds or gives the Reason why they should be Referr'd to another or respect it when they are put together in a Comparing Power But where is this Reasoning Faculty or Comparing Power found in Matter by which we consider build upon and make use of this Ground or Reason or which is Attentive to lay hold of this Reason why it ought to be Referr'd and make Things actually respect one another and thence actually denominate them Genera or Species Predicate or Subject Inherent that is Dependent for their Being or Independent which we call Subsistent This Notion of Actual Respect then is not to be found in any of the Lordships Territories or Purlews of Material Nature Hence I argue 9. That Subject which has Affections or Determinations in her which are no where found in Matter is Immaterial This Demonstration enforced But the Soul is the Subject of such Operations or Affections viz. Actual Respects Therefore the Soul is Immaterial 10.
of Being amount but to one still-Present Now. Nor can this seem Incredible to any Christian since we all hold that Spiritual Natures are Capable of seeing GOD's Essence as in it self which as is Undeniable infinitely surmounts all the whole Machine of this Material World We have seen that all Physical Qualities do enjoy when in thee another manner of Being and affect Thee their Subject after a quite different way from what they had when they were in Material Nature The most Opposite ones which are perpetually contrasting and restlessly striving to expell one another do by thy Soveraign Power remain at peace in thy Steady Essence which is of 〈…〉 High a Dignity to be mov'd or disturb'd by their Petty Quarrels We have seen that thy Abstracting Power can â—…de these Lower Beings more Subtilly than can the Operation of Fire or any Chymistry of Nature assisted by Art and can take in pieces their very Essences and the Essences of their several Modes by cutting them into their Metaphysical Parts which are too delicate for our Bodily Sight tho' assisted with the best Microscopes to discern or make Observations how they differ Each of which Parts too tho' naturally Impartible have a Distinct Being given by Thee and can be wrought upon by thy Understanding as if they were so many Wholes and this with that most perfect Distinction that they do not in the least interfere in thee tho' they â—â—â— All of them confusedly blended as they stand in Rude and Unpolisht Matter We have seen how by the cement of Existence exprest by the short Monosyllable is thou dost iâ— thy Comparing Power the Laboratory where Truths are fram'd re-connect those thus-divided Parts into Propositions and this with an Union so Close that 't is absolutely Indissoluble by the utmost Force of all the Causes in Nature Nay that thy Spiritual Essence can in some manner Create by giving a kind of Being in Thee to Not-Beings or Nothings In a word we have seen that all the whole Material World and every Part of it that ever came to thy Knowledge do enjoy a New sort of Being in Thee and such a one as is contradictorily Opposite to the Being they had in their Material State All these high Prerogatives dilating thy Essence and Duration to a kind of Infinity above this Narrow World we The most Important Use we ought to make of this Doctrin That our Soul is Immortal have found clearly to be no more but thy Just Due however Unreflecting Atheists whose groveling Souls immerst in Matter cannot or will not raise themselves above Fancy do use their misemploy'd Foolish Wit as the World calls it to devest themselves of their own Dignity and like so many worst Feloes de se by maintaining their Soul is Mortal do give themselves to be Guilty of Eternal Death or which is worse than Death of Annihilation by granting their Souls incapable of Surviving But let us to whom the Providence of our Good Makeâ— has indulg'd these Clear Informations make oâ—â— Right Use of them Since these are Great Truths let Truth have it's Due Effects 'T is so Gross at Errour that it is below Confute to imagine that any Truth is an Idle and Fruitless Speculatiâ—â— The Knowledge of Truth in Particular things does of it's own Nature tend to direct our Outward Actions and Universal Truths such as these are do naturally conduce to enlarge our Soul raise â—â— to High Contemplation and to breed in us Conformable Affections Since then we have the best â—…rance Clear Demonstration can give us that this Material World is below our Essence 't is most fit we should esteem it to be also below our most Serious Thoughts and our Best Affections Let us â—â—ancipate our selves then from the Slavish Adoration with which Worldlings devote themselves to that Dull and Senseless Idol And seeing Evident Reason has perfectly convinced us there is no shadow of Likelihood that our Soul is Mortal let us bend all â—â—â— carefullest Endeavours to provide she may be Happy in her Eternal State when she comes to be â—â—â—â—â—dg'd from her terrene habitation and has got clear of her Body and this World nay is got above it which is the only True Wisdom To the Consideration of which State of hers we advance in our next Discourse Transnatural Philosophy OR METAPHYSICKS BOOK II. Of PURE ACTS VIZ. Of the SOUL SEPARATED and ANGELS CHAP. I. Of the State of the Soul Separated from the Body and what Dispositions in her when the Man Dies will make her Eternally Happy or Miserable 1. THE Soul does at her Separation The Soul at her Separation receives some Change according to her Manner of Existing and Suppositality receive from GOD as he is the Author of Nature some Change according to her Existence and her Subsistence or Suppositality For since in her former State of Union with her Body she was the Form of that Body and therefore Form and Matter being the Parts of every Compound Ens only a Part of Man and a Part of an Ens is not an Ens or Individuum nor consequently capable of Existing much less of Subsisting which as is shown above B. 1. Chap. 5. § 17. superadds some Perfection to the Notion of Existence It follows that seeing the same Soul when separated from the Body she being by Book 1. Chap. 7. Immortal does Exist and also Subsist in regard she Sustains her own Nature and as will be prov'd shortly her Modes too she must be made apt to Exist and Subsist which she was not while in her former State that is she must be Chang'd according to those Considerations or Respects and made an Existent and Subsistent Thing and consequently a Kind of Suppositum And that it belongs to GOD as he is the First Cause to give the Soul this highest Perfection of Being is hence demonstrated For it belongs to an Infinite Actuality or an Infinite Goodness to give to his Creatures all the Goodness and Natural Perfections they are capable to receive especially such as the very Nature he has given them makes them require Now 't is evident that the Nature of the Soul she being Immortal is capable of and requires still to Exist and also to Subsist and be a Suppositum because she had while in the Body Power to have in her as in their Subject that is to Sustain or be the Suppositum of innumerable Accidents Notions or Knowledges which they being Spiritual or Indivisible could not be received in a Divisible Subject the Corporeal part of Man and therefore could only be peculiarly in Her Whence it follows that since 〈◊〉 Ordain'd the Dissolution of the Man or the 〈◊〉 Separation from the Body and had also mâ—de the Soul Immortal it became His Goodness to give her when separated Existence which her Immortal Nature requir'd and also the Power of Subsisting and of being the Subject or Suppositum of those Accidents â— How this is done we may learn by this
Paâ—…el A Quantitative Thing v. g. The Manner how this is done Illustrated Stone has many Potential Parts in it some of one Colour or Figure some of another Now none of those Parts taken singly can Exist or â—ubâ—â—st while they were Parts but only the whole Thing call'd a Stone for only that was a Distinct Individual Thing which only is capable of Existing But because this whole Thing had a Power to be Divided or had Potential Parts in it â—â—â— so was apt to be made more Actual Wholes or 〈…〉 ings hence each Part when thus Divided â—…ade a Distinct whole Ens has immediately its â—â—â—â—icular Existence given it by GOD. And beâ—…se some of those Parts while in the Whole 〈◊〉 some different Modifications in it which another Part had not whence it was independent on any other Part as to the sustaining such Accidents and consequently it has a Power to â—â—â—â—ain them when it should come to be made a Whole therefore it has given it to Subsist independently on the former Whole or any other Part of it and to be a Suppositum to sustain those Accidents Much more are those Perfections of Being â—â—turally due to the Soul which is of an Immortal Nature 3. Notwitstanding each Soul when separated continues the same Individual Yet the same Individual Nature remains in her Soul which it was in the Body First Because in the Body she was the chief Essential Part of the Man And Essence abstract from Existence and consequently from Subsistence and Suppositality So that her being chang'd according to Suppositality or in some manner according to Existence does not alter her particular Essence or Nature Secondly She had her Individuality from the Individual Dispositions in the Embryo which determine the Matter so as to require that such an individual Form or Soul and no other should be infus'd Thirdly She had her Determinate or Individual Pitch of Spirituality or Cognoscitiveness given her at the Instant in which she was first infus'd nor could it be taken away by the succeeding Accidents of Knowledge afterwards both because they superven'd to her Individual Nature or Degree of Cognoscitiveness as also because they were not contrary but agreeable to such a Nature Again were this true Reason wav'd yet since in this Mortal State the Soul gains Notions or Knowledge by means of her Senses from every Circumstance the Man is in and 't is impossible any two Men should be all their Lives in the self-same Circumstances 't is impossible abatiâ—â— their Constitutions individually different that my Soul should have the self-same Complexion of Spiritual Modes of Knowledge and consequent Affections in this World which another Soul has which sufficiently distinguishes her from every other Particular Soul or which is the same Individuatâ— her as she is a Soul Wherefore this Change of the Soul at her â—…ration amounts to no more but to take from 〈◊〉 the Imperfection of being a Part and to â—…fer upon her the Priviledge of a Whole Ens which is given to every new Individuum in Nature that is made such by Division or meer Separation 4. Nothing which was once in the Soul in this â—…e excepting False Judgeâ—…nts All the Modes or Accidenti v. g. all the Knowledges and Affections she had while here do remain still in her is blotted out of her in 〈◊〉 State of Separation For 〈◊〉 whatever is naturally exâ—…d out of any Subject is driven â—â—â—ce by it's Contrary and Conâ—â—â—es by Ch. 7. § 15. do not â—…l one another out of the â—…d but fix one another better there 't is eviâ—â—nt that from this Head or from the Objects which are in the Soul nothing whatever that 〈◊〉 once in the Soul is Effaced out of her but â—…ains there for ever Again since the pecuâ—… Nature of the Soul is not Material or Divisiâ—… but when she is separated she is a Pure Act â—…re can be no Ground from the Subject's side â—â—at Notions or Knowledges should be worn out 〈◊〉 decay by reason of the Alterableness or Fading Genius of the Subject or her Incapacity to retain â—…m still Whatever Knowledge therefore was 〈◊〉 in the Soul will be ever there And the â—…son why in this State they come not into â—â—â—y when we would use them but seem forgotten is because the Phantasms without which the Soul cannot operate being the smallest particles of Matter are either perisht or else lost in a wilderness of innumerable others so that they are not still ready at hand to re-excite our Knowledge of them or make us remember them 5. Every Separated Soul which had any one Notion in her while here does know all Created Truths as soon Each Soul when Separated knows all Created Truths as she is out of the Body For since * B. 1. Ch. 5. §. 2. as has been demonstrated the knowing of a Great Number of Finite Truths do not to any Degree tend to fill the Capacity of the Soul but enlarge and enable it to know still much more there can be no difficulty on the Subjects side why she should not know all Created Truths they being Finite both in their Nature and in their Number On the other side since our Notions are the Ground of Truth and All Truths tho' they be never so many are connected and this by the Identifying particle is which shows they are after some manner iâ— one another Nay which alone suffices since it has been fully demonstrated Method to Science Book 3. Ch. 4. § 14. beginning at § 8. That Every Soul Separate that knows any one Natural Truth does know all Nature at once in the First Instant of her Separation it is evinced that there can be as little difficulty on the part of the Objects to be known as there was on the Subjects side Whence follows that every Soul Separated which had here any one Notion in her especially as she must of her own or the Man's Existence does know all Truths as soon as she is out of the Body 6. To satisfie those who led by Fancy and customary Impressions from Material Objects do make them the How this is very Possible Rule and Measure to judge of Spiritual Natures and thence are very backward to assent to a Truth which seems so Paradoxical and Impossible I take leave to recommend to their serious consideration a far stranger Point which yet all Christians hold viz. That a Holy Soul when separate is capable of seeing clearly the Divine Essence it self in comparison of which all Created Beings are but a sâ—ifâ—e or rather a meer Nothing 7. Hence follows That every Separated Soul comprehends all Time and Place â—â—r since those innumerable Natural Hence every Separated Soul comprehends All Time and Place Objects which â—he then knows are in Distinct Times and Places nay are the very Things whose Extension and Succession do make all Place and Time it is Impossible but that having those Things in her Knowledge she must
own Natures but only a Power to Bee give Actual Being to themselves they must either have it from Another whose Essence is Existence and therefore iâ— Infinite and One or they could not bee â—â— all but be as they really were meer Chimera's And hence it came that they maâ—â— all the Attributes of their imaginary Gods to be Limited and Imperfect they represented them as subject to Squabbles among themselves and liable to a thousand Natural and Moral Defects Which obliged the Wiser sort amongst them asham'd of their Nonsensical and Foppish Superstition that they might in some measure keep up the Repute of their pretended Religion have recourse to our Tenet of One Soveraign Being and to alledge that they meant no more by the rabble of their other Gods but that they were so many Attributes or several Considerations of GOD's Divine Providence overseeing such and such Parts of the World or performing such or such Operations Nor were there Many of them who were Firm in their holding a First Being nor any of them Clear in their apprehension of his Nature and none of them who placed their Eternal Felicity in seeing his Divine Essence nor held this was Attainable by them after this Life nor who erected their Thoughts to the Hope of enjoying that Blissful Sight for want of which Hope they could not raise their Affection to Him above all things which we have shown Book 2. Ch. 1. § 17. § 19. is the only Disposition which could bring them to the True End of their Nature Eternal Happiness Not to speak of those besotted Heathens who made Gods of Senseless Creatures tho' Inferiour to themselves and despicable even to Ridiculousness 25. Coroll II. Hence the Deists if they be not as much besotted as those very Heathens themselves cannot Hence Christian Doctrine is prov'd to be Divine the Dawning of which chas'd away that Universal Darkness notwithstanding all the Opposition Human Power Wit and Learning could make but acknowledge and admire the Wisdom of the Heavenly Doctrine taught us by our Divine Master Iesus Christ which by Calm Reason Good Life joyn'd with Astonishing Miracles without any External Force has chaced and banisht out of the World this Epidemical Phrenzy which had possessed all Mankind but the small Nation of the Iews and will make them see withall how Necessary Divine Revelation was since Human Wit and Learning which was amongst many of those Heathens at the height could neither enable them to rectifie themselves nor make them capable of attaining their Summum Bonum nor cure Mankind of that Universal Dotage of Polytheism nor uphold it self against the Light which Christianity brought into the World but that whereever it dawn'd the shades of Errour concerning the True Deity immediately vanisht and disappear'd Certainly whoever considers what a prodigious Change concerning the Worship of the True GOD Christianity has wrought in a vast part of the World and is still spreading it self and by what Methods it has prevail'd to the utter Extirpation of Idolatry must be wilfully blind if he does not clearly see that Digitus Dei est hic and that it's Doctrine is truly Divine 26. Lem. VI. Existence is the whole Perfection of every Thing that Exists For â—nce whatever is in any thing Existence is the whole Perfection of every thing that Exists besides Existence which is the Lâ—st Actuality in the Line of Being must be Potential in respect of it Again since whatever is Actually a fortiâ—ri can be otherwise it would be a Contradiction a Thing can be while it is whereas 't is a First Principle that A Thing cannot but be while â—â— is It follows evidently that when a Power of Being or which is the same an Ens is Actuated nothing is lost of it but the Privation of Act which Power seems to imply but all that is Positive in it or is that we call Ratio Entis 〈◊〉 remains under a better state whence Power is Eminently included in Existence and as it were swallow'd up in it as in a Greater or Higher Perfection in the Line of Being which involves in it the Lesser or Lower 27. Lem. VII Much more an Existence which is also the Essence of the Thing and â—â— most Actual and withal Infinite Much more when it is Essential and Actually Infinite includes in it Actually and Forâ—ally all the Perfections that can be conceiv'd to belong to Ens in it's whole Latitude This is Evident since 〈◊〉 comprehends in it all that can belong to 〈◊〉 which constitutes Ens in it's largest signification 28. Wherefore the Divine Essence or the DEITY â—â—cludes in it all Perfections imaâ—â—nable Therefore the Divine Existence or the Deity includes or concenters all imaginable Perfections in it's Nature which can any way belong to Ens and this Infinitely â—â—d therefore is Infinitely-perfect For since we call that Perfect in any Kind to which nothing is wanting or which has All in it that can be imagin'd in that kind It follows that the Divine Essence which comprizes in it all the Perfections that can belong to Ens in it's largest Sense and all that can belong to Existence in an Unlimited Signification is infinitely Perfect in All regâ—…s that can belong to Ens or which have Eâ—â—â—â—â— in them 2â— Therefore GOD is Infinitely Perfect in all Intellectual and Moral Attributes that is He is infinitely Therefore 〈◊〉 is Iâ—… in â—â— Intellctual anâ— Moral Attributes Knowing Wise Good Merciful Powerful Veracious Free c. and this in the most perfect manner as becomes a Pure Actuality of Being since all these have something of Perfection in their Notion 30. Therefore he is of a Spiritual Nature as being not only a Pure Act as other Spirits are but a Pure Therefore GOD is a Spirit Actuality of Being which infinitely exceeds their Nature which was Potential in respect of Existence 31. Therefore for the same reason he is not Corporeal For this includes both the First Second and Third Therefore He is not Corporeal sort of Potentiality mention'd at the beginning each of which is diametrically Opposite to the Nature of Pure Actuality 32. Therefore 't is a strange degrading of the Divine Nature Therefore 't is an Indignity to the Divine Nature to apply such Predicates to it as belong to Body to apply to GOD any Corporeal Attributes such as are Place Space Motion c. which are quite Opposite to an Incorporeal Being 33. Therefore the Divine Essence is also Immutable For this implies a Potentiality or Power to be Chang'd Hence also He is Immutable which is inconsistent with a Pure Actuality 34. Therefore GOD is also a Self-Subsistent Being For since his Essence is Actual Being and withall Infinite Anâ— a Self-Subsistent Being in Being which compreâ—ends the whole Nature of Beâ—â—g that which supports it in Being must have no Being 35. Therefore the Divine Essence must be also most Simple or Uncompounded For it can have
no Logical Composition For the same Reason the Divine Essence is most Simple or Uncompounded of Genus and Difference because the Genus is essentially that which has more of it 's Kind under it and there cannot be more where as is demonstrated § 23. there is but One. Nor can it admit any Difference for â—tis the Essence of the Difference to make One Thing differ from Another and in our case there can be no Other where there is but One. Nor can there be in GOD that Logical Composition of Accidents with their Subject For the Subject is Potential in respect of the Accidents or Modes which affect or actuate it Nor can there be in GOD Physical Composition of the Second sort of Power with it's Act call'd Matter and Form because he is Incorporeal and Pure Actuality Nor can this Pure Actuality of Being call'd Self-Existence be compounded Metaphysically for even our low Created Existence is Indivisible and can have no Metaphysical Parts and therefore can have no Metaphysical Divisibility or Composition in it Wherefore all the Distinction of GOD's Essential Attributes does spring wholly from the Shortness and Imperfection of our Understanding which is not able to reach or fathom the Whole Extent of his every-way-Infinitely-Perfect Essence but is forc'd to conceive them by diverse Acts of ours 36. Wherefore GOD's Duration has nothing in it of Preterit and Future but is one Present Indivisible on his And his Duration Eternal part and therefore He is ETERNAL For since it is the highest of Impossibility that Self-existence should not exist his Essence equally includes nay speaks or formally signifies and expresses to have been formerly and to be futurely as it does to be now Wherefore since 't is not possible to imagine any Instant in which GOD has not his whole Essence and this as far as is on his part Indivisibly it follows that in every Instant only which is Present in our Time he has his to-have-been and tobe-hereafter as much as he has to be-at-present But this kind of ever-present ever-standing and unchangeably-Steady Duration includes in it self all the Differences of our Time as was now prov'd and therefore oomprehends all Time even tho' it were Infinite Indivisibly or without Succession of any thing in GOD that is it is one Eâ—er-permanent Present Now Wherefore since this manner of Enduring is infinitely above that of our â—â—â—e which is part after part Fleeting and Divisible and we call that sort of Duration which infinitely exceeds our Time Eternity and GOD has this Duration it follows evidently that GOD is ETERNAL 37. Coroll III. Wherefore 't is highly Derogatory from GOD's Attribute of Eternity to make it consist And therefore not to be Explicated by a Correspondency to our Time in a kind of Correspondency to our Time For this puts his Duration which is Essential to Him to have Parts or a Capacity to be Longer or Shorter Whereas we ought to reflect that there can be no possible Proportion between Being and Moving especially a Being so Actual and Permanent as is the Divine Existenee the one being essentially Divisible the other essentially and in every regard indivisible All Comparison and consequently Proportion can only be conceiv'd between those things which are of the same Kind or have the same Common Notion Whereas Being and Moving do diffet toto Genere the one being the last Formality in the Line of Ens the other only an Accident or Modus Entis and are fo far from being of the same Kind or More and Less of it and therefore capable of bearing any Proportion to one another that the one as was said being most Divisible the other most Indivisible they are Contradictories that is beyond all Degrees only which ground Proportion Opposite to one another 38. Hence also GOD's Essence is IMMENSE or beyond all possibility of being Measurable Which Attribute Hence GOD is also Immense consists in this that His Unlimited and Indivisible Existence comprizes or resumes in it's self and this after an Indivisible manner or in a Way beyond the the Nature of Quantity the whole Nature of Bodily Extension and Space even tho' it were suppos'd Infinite as his Duration which is the same Indivisible Existence comprehends all Corporeal Motion or Time even tho' Time were Infinite Again as Angels are no otherwise in Place but by Operating on Bodies which are in Place so GOD is no otherwise in his Creatures at least Immediately but by Giving and Conserving them in Being which is his peculiar and immediate Operation and every way Indivisible Whence GOD being in each of his Creatures and in the very least of them and this wholly and Indivisibly by giving them this Soveraign Indivisible Effect Being and of his own Nature able to communicate Being to them even in case they could be suppos'd to be Infinite is neither as in Himself nor as in them after a Divisible Quantitative Extended Coextended or Measurable manner and therefore He is absolutely IMMENSE or beyond all Possibility of being subject to be measur'd 39. Whence 't is no less Derogatory from GOD's Attribute of Whence 't is Derogatory to that Attribute to explicate it by Commensuration to an Infinite Space IMMENSITY to explicate it so as to consist in a kind of Commensuration to an Infinite Incomâ—â—bensible Inanc for this makes GOD's Essence Diffus'd and conâ—â—quently of a Quantitative Nature which makes acute Readers apt to suspect that 't is meant to be no better than a more subâ—â—le sort of Body or at least some Act or Form of a Body and therefore but a Compart with it Fancy is but a Bad Adviser even in Ordinary Points of Philosophy but incredibly worse when we are to explicase his Nature and Essential Attributes whose Essence is Self-Existence and most Pure Actuality of Being Existence even amongst us abstracts from all Motion Time Quantity and all other Considerations belonging to Corporeal and even Spiritual Natures and being Indivisible and signifying meer Actuality of Being is Inexplicable by any of them much less GOD's Existence which is infinitely above Ours We will close this Discourse concerning GOD's Attributes by adding one more which I have not observ'd to have been mention'd by Metaâ—hysicians or Divines either 40. From what 's deduced above 't is Demonstrated That the Divine Essence is Infinitely Intelligible or of it 's Lastly The Divine Essence is of it 's own Nature Infinitely Intellible own Nature Easie to be known or seen For since we experience that the Unknowableness or Obscurity of any Object springs from the Nature of Potentiality or some kind of Power in it which it being Indeterminate breeds Confusion and all the Distinct and Clear Knowableness it has arises from it's Act which by Determining the Power renders that Object Distinct from all others and therefore Clearly Perceptible or Intelligible It follows that since the Divine Nature is infinitely more Actual than any thing found in Creatures
it being a most Pure Actuality and it 's Essence being Existence it self the Notion of which is so Self-evident to all Mankind that 't is impossible to be Defin'd or made Clearer by any Explication imaginable it must necessarily be of it 's own Nature Infinitely Intelligible or most capable to be seen or known even by the rudest Understanding of the Silliest Soul when Separate whose Will when it leaves this World is duly Dispos'd for it 41. Coroll IV. This last Thesis will to a great Degree comfort the Theological Virtue of HOPE which is What Comfort this is to Pious Humble and weak Souls to Erect our Souls to Heaven For doubtless some Virtuous Humble Souls when they come to consider and seriously reflect on the Sublime and Infinitely Glorious Majesty of our Great GOD who in altis habitat humilia respicit in Coelo in Terrâ in comparison of whose Exalted Height all the whole World nay all the Greatest Angels and Purest Saints in Heaven are as nothing may be apt to admit the Temptation of some Despondency and fear that 't is above the Capacity of any Created Intellect ever to behold his dazlingly Bright Essence Nay even some Great Divines seem to have had the same Apprehensions when they invented a Quality call'd Lumen Gloriae to dispose and Elevate the Eye of the Mind and fit it for the Beatifical Vision by which Glory being the Sight of GOD and the End or Summum Bonum of our Nature they make the Light of Glory which is the End the Means to it self and withal to no purpose GOD has made our Soul Intellective and capable to see Infinite Truth that is Himself and Sanctifying Grace or the Love of GOD above all things has already elevated that Natural Faculty above what meer Nature could have rais'd it to and GOD's Essence is Infinitely Intelligible And can any Power and Object be more fitted to one another Can there be any difficulty that Essential Truth which is so luminously and radiantly Bright and Clear should be seen by a Power which was made to see Truth But most especially when an over-powering and ardent Affection and Love of it has directed apply'd and addicted the Eye of the Soul to behold that Object Let not then such an Irrational Sollicitude trouble any pious Soul 'T is unworthy Infinite Goodness to be backwards to communicate Himself to his Creatures when they are thus fitly dispos'd to receive his ever-ready Influence Let our only Care be to purifie our Intellectual Eye and purge our Soul from hankering Affections after Unworthy Objects which draw our squinting Sight awry and dim and darken it This once secur'd nothing is more Evident than that GOD will not hide his Blissful Face from us one moment when we are arriv'd into the Region of Light Nor is there any other Eye-bright requisite for the Beatifical Vision but this Purity of Heart if we may believe the Promise of our Good Saviour Beati mundi corde quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see GOD Mat. 5. 42. Innumerable are the Demonstrations which may be brought from divers That the Author confines himself here to Metaphysical Mediums Sciences to prove the Existence of a DEITY and most of the Divine Attributes on which I do not here insist or mention them 'T is a Subject Copious enough to fill whole Volumes Nor is any Scientifical Conclusion in all Nature half so Evident or voucht by so many Pregnant and Unanswerable Arguments Against which the Atheist as far as I have observ'd offers not to alledge any one Demonstration but only raises Difficulties and Objections not from Connected Reason but Roving Fancy Yet I judg'd it sufficient for me here that I might keep within the Bounds of my own Province to produce only such Metaphysical Mediums as follow out of the forelaid Doctrine For besides that such Arguments as are fetcht from the most Common and therefore most Evident Notions which we use to call Altissimae Causae are more Cogent to gain Assent a Few Proofs nay any one Demonstration such Proofs being evidently Conclusive is as Convictive as Thousands especially if it be pursu'd to First Principles and maintain'd against the Objections and Evasions of the adverse Party by showing their Vanity and Insignificancy That those I have brought here are such and thus maintain'd I shall not be afraid to affirm nor civilly to challenge the Atheists to show they are Inconclusive or Defective 43. From the former Doctrine assisted by â—…ght Logick 't is Demonstrable Notwithstanding all that 's said no Notion or Word we have is Univocally or in the same Sense apply'd to GOD and to Creatures 〈…〉 no Notion nor consequentâ—… Word we have can be Uniâ—…cably spoken of GOD as He is 〈…〉 Himself and of Creatures For â—…ce all Distinct Notions which constitute any Nature This and consequently all such Denomination come from the Form or the Act it would follow that some such Act is Univocally Common to God and Creatures which has been â—â—own to be most absurd the former being the Highest and Purest Actuality of Being or Self-Existence the later having no Existence at all in it's Nature or Notion Again were there any such Notion Common to GOD and Creatures that Common Notion would be restrain'd by it's Proper Difference to particularize or constitute the DEITY which puts in GOD the Composition of Genus and Difference and withall some Potentiality which is essentially annext to every Geneâ—â—cal or Common Notion Wherefore no Notion or Word we have can be Univocally predicated of GOD and Creatures 44. Wherefore all the Notions we have of GOD and the Words we use when we speak of Him are Metaphorical Wherefore all the Words we use when we speak of GOD are in some sort Metaphorical For since no word spoken of GOD and Creatures are Univocal or spoken in the same Sense they must when said of Him and them be meant in different Senses Wherefore since when spoken of Creatures they express our Natural Notions which we had from the Creatures themselves and therefore are Proper it follows that the Sense they are taken in when they are transferr'd thence to GOD is in some sort Improper or Metaphorical 45. This is farther confirm'd Because GOD consider'd as in Himself is a Pure Actuality of Being eminently Because each of them signifies some one Perfection or Notion whereas GOD is the Plenitude of All Being and All Perfections center'd in one most Simple Formality including in it self the whole Plenitude of Ens and consequently the Objects of All our Notions and Infinitely more whereas we have no Word that signifies more than some one Notion Again since the word Existence which of all our Natural Notions seems most Proper does signifie only such a Formality or Act but does not signifie that that Act subsists much less that it is Self-subsistent as GOD is it cannot properly signifie
is Repugnant to the Perfect Simplicity of a Pure and Indivisible Actuality Besides by reason of the Formal Distinction of those two Notions as they are conceiv'd by us we are debarr'd from saying that One of them is the Other or that Mercy is Iustice whereas regarding them as they are in GOD we not only may but must say his Mercy is his Iustice because there is but one most Simple Formality in GOD which gives Him the Denomination of Merciful and Iust. 'T is plain then that these two Virtues cannot be in GOD as they are thus formally Distinct or Two as our Notions represent them nor consequently at all unless they be compriz'd in some Formality which eminently contains them both and may be said to be Formally in GOD. Casting then our Thoughts about we find in GOD another Attribute call'd Goodness which includes â—ustice and Mercy both for a Good Man must necessarily be both Iust and Merciful too But is this Form or Act we call Goodness Formally in GOD Let us see We find another Attribute â—n GOD call'd Wisdom which is formally Distinct from the Notion of Goodness and Goodness from it for every Good Man is not Wise nor is every Wise Man Good Wherefore neither of these can be Formally in GOD nor consequently can either of them be predicated properly of GOD according to those Distiâ—ct Notions we have of them for this again would put Formal Distinction in GOD which is a high Imperfection But perhaps Wisdom and Goodness are found in some Third Notion which is formally in GOD. Let us see We find in GOD Entity or Being and both these have as all other Perfections also have Entity in them and the same Ens or Thing may have both these in it and if it fails of having them when as it ought to have them it falls so far short or is Imperfect under the Notion of Ens. Let 's go on and ask Is our Notion of Ens predicated with Propriety of GOD No certainly For the Notion of an Ens amongst us is Distinct from the Notion of Existent and we truly say of those we call Entia or Things that they sometimes Exist and sometimes not-Exist Whence our Notion of Ens not having Actual Being in it can only be this that it has a Power to be which is so far from being Properly said of GOD whose Essence is a Pure Actuality of Being that 't is Diametrically Opposite to it Is our Notion of Existence at least with propriety said of GOD No neither For Existence amongst us signifies only the Act of the Thing or somewhat of it but it does not signifie the Exister which yet GOD most properly is But being once come to Existence we are at the Top and the Highest Purest and Best of of all our Human Notions and can go no farther 52. Whence is clearly deduced that there is no Notion we have or Word Hence is concluded that all the Notions and Words we have whether Affirmative or Negative do full short of the Divine Nature we use which in propriety of Speech may not be Deny'd of GOD because his Infinitely Simple and yet All Perfect Existence includes them all in one All-comprehending Formality And this is the Ground and indeed the Sum of Mystick Theology which teaches us that we truly understand nothing of the Divine Nature as it is in it self Wherefore when they would speak of his Attributes they are forced to use the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Supra quam Bonus suprr quam Infinitus and call him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That of which all things are said meaning that he is the Pleâ—itude of Being all things Deny'd because of the Ineffable Excellency of his Self-existent Being and in this they agree with us so that they tell us Nihil de Deo a nobis proprie pronunciatur quod ejus proprietatem assequatur neque Secundum Privationem â—t Immortalis Similia neque secundum Positionem ut Vita Unum c. The Ground then of Mystick Theology is Good and Solid if the Descant upon that Ground be but as it ought In this they differ from Metaphysicians that These as becomes Philosophers make use of their Best Natural Notions and improve and compound them to express the Divine Excellencies and content themselves with speaking of GOD as well as they can Acknowledging in the mean time with all profound Submission that neither our Thoughts can think or our Words express him with Propriety as He is in Himself Whereas the Mysticks would speak of GOD as He is in Himself if they could but seeing they cannot they fly to Negative Expressions as their Best Refuge but finding that these also fall short they acknowledge the Impropriety of these too and by this means set the Divine Essence in that Sublime height by acknowledging none of our Words â—or Thoughts can reach Him MEDITATION THus by Studying attentively the Book of Creatures and reflecting heedfully on those Natural Notions they gave us which were the most Sublime and most Defaecated How by considering the Visible Things of this World we are come to know the Invisible Things of GOD his Essence and Attributes from Matter we have transcended Nature it self and all the Lower Orbs of Finite Beings and have soar'd up to their Great Creatour and Divine Original Nay we have gain'd some distant Glimmerings of His Essence it self and of all his Glorious Attributes An Object worthy the Contemplation of our Best Thoughts Oh may they ever fix and dwell there in comparison of which our Highest Speculations are but meer Trash and the whole Emyclopaedia of all Human Sciences but Empty Descants on Subjects which are next to Nothing So certain a Truth it is That if we regard the true End of our Nature we were neither born to Love nor to Know any thing but Him or in order to Him We have discover'd under penalty of admitting a Contradiction that is most evidently How demonstratively this has been deduced that since there can be no Notions belonging to Being but either Power to be and Actual Being therefore the Essences of all Beings we can imagine must either of their own Nature have Actual Being in them or not have it and that if they have it not they must necessarily be only Potential to that Act we call Existence that is they can have of themselves only a Power to be and the plainest Light if Reason assures us that what is of it 's own Nature only a Power to be can neither make it Self nor Others to be Actually Whence follows unavoidably that unless there had been ever some Self-Being â—â— something whose very Essence it was to Exist neither it self nor any thing else could have been Actually and that therefore as Certain as it is that any Thing now is so Certain it is that there is and has ever been such a First Being to whom it is Essential to Exist or a GOD. Since then Existence
Uncomplying Slothfulness â—â— Neglect of Duties we give the least way to Temptations or run back in Virtue quench the Irradiations â—â— His Holy Spirit and put an Obstacle to the Efâ—â—â—ence of his Boundless Generosity which stands ever ready to promote us to all those Degrees of Virtue which we heartily and affectionately wish and with â— humble Confidence in the same Goodness pray for Nay when the former World by reason of Original Corruption wanted efficacious Means to dispose Mankind for Heaven the same Goodness did take that Concern into his own hand and did by his Providence ripen the World for Higher Knowledges and dispos'd them by their Inquisitiveness what was Man 's Summum Bonum and their Dissatisfactions about it for that Fulness of Time in which his Wisdom saw it Seasonable and Fit to send them a Divine Master to teach them such a Heavenly Doctriuâ— as Rude Nature was till then incapable to conceive â—â— aim at How does it over-awe and terrifie our Corrupt and Inconstant Nature to know He is infinitely IUST and will infallibly To tremble at His Iustice if we wilfully break his Commands punish severely every Transgression of His Dread Commandâ— nay every Idle Word according to the Degree of it's Demerit Can any Man hope to Byass a Iudge whose Impartiality and Uprightness is Essential to Him Or what Obstinate Sinner dâ—râ—â— hope to contrast with an Angry and Iust GOD whâ— is arm'd with OMNIPOTENCE And yet what Sinner tho' never so Enormous can Despair of Pardon if he heartily And to Hope of Pardon if we sincerely Repent repents and humbly asks it when he reflects and conâ—â—ders that Both Faith and Evident Reason do assure him that GOD is Infinitely MERCIFULL We do scarcely allow that Man to be Good-natur'd or Merciful nay we look upon him as Hard-hearted and Cruel who will not forgive him that has offended him if he be heartily Sorry for his Fault and begs his Pardon And is it not then a kind of Blasphemy to conceit that ouâ— GOD whose MERCY is Infinite and withall Essential to Him should have less Goodness Generosity and Mercy than a Wretched Narrow-hearted and Pâ—evish Mortal Oh What a Sure Anchor of HOPE is this Divine Attribute to poor Sinners whâ— fear the Eternal Wrack of their Soul and are Sinking and almost Overwhelm'd with Despair â—hat an Encouragement and Invitation both to Weak â—…d to Wicked Souls to repent of their Sins heartiâ—… and apply to the Throne of Grace where they â—re sure not to fail of obtaining Pardon if with humâ—â—mble Confidence and Sincere Penitence they 〈…〉 it What Christian who acknowledges that GOD is â—nfinitely WISE and therefore has â—…d the Order of the World after the To Resignation in all sinistâ—r Contingencies to the Infinitely-Wise Disposition of GOD's Providence in his Government of the World Wisest and Best manner can be Unâ—…gn'd when Crosses happen and 〈…〉 Success of Temporal Affairs go not â—…rding to his Wish How Unreaâ—…ble is it to expect from an Allâ—…e Universal Governour that he â—…ld pervert the Best Order of the â—…tion or consent that All the World should be worse for the sake of one inconsiderâ—ble Atome of it Every Generous Man thinks it 〈…〉 fitting to suffer Inconveniencies nay to hazard his life for the Common Good of his own Country What an odious Selfishness is it then to repine at Suffeâ—…g much more for the Common Good of the Universe Especially since the Resign'd Sufferer will gain â—â—comparably greater Advantages by thus entircly Submitting to Providence and humbling himself under â—â— Omnipotent hand of GOD than he can possibly â—…e from the enjoying that Temporal Good for which he was so passionately concerned What Hypocrite can hope to disguise his Base Intentions and Doubling Wiles or to To Sincerity and Unpretended Virtue and Honesty â—ood-wink Him who is Essentially ALL-SEEING Or what more Powerful Motive to make Falseâ—earted Pretenders to Virtue and Honesty leave off their Foolish Insincerity and to take care that their Thoughts and Actions be all of a piece Lastly What Christian heart can be so Insensible of GOD's Noble Kindness and Bounty as not to love God with the whole Bent of his Will who desires no more of us to Especially to love God who is our True Good and Only Happiness as we ought both for what he is in Himself and what he is to us make us Eternally Happy but that we would pursue our own True Interest and love above all things our Eternal Happiness Himself Who is ready to pardon all our Sins at the first asking if we heartily sincerely and penitently ask it Who is ready to help its forward every step we take in Virtue if we be but willing to help our selves and humbly beg his Assistance How can that Man pretend to love any thing who loves not Him in whom are all Things Or to love Himself if he loves not his own only True Happiness These most efficacious Motives to the Best Virtues the Consideration of the Divine Attributes The Imitation of GOD's Moral Attributes are also a most Effectual Means to perfect us in all sorts of Virtue does plentifully afford us besides what the Imitation of His Moral Attributes give us which will make us Perfect as He is Perfect and by Transforming us into His Likeness here raise us to be Perfectly Like Him and in some sort Deifie us hereafter Cum apparuerit similes erimus quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est Ioan. Ep. 1. Ch. 3. V. 2. Transnatural Philosophy OR METAPHYSICKS BOOK IV. Of the several OPERATIONS of Things and of the Manner in common How the First Being administers His World 1. ALL Power of Operating or Acting springs immediately from the All Action springs immediately from the Existence of the Cause â—â—â—stence of the Thing or which is the same from the Thing as it Exists For since the Essence precisely consider'd iâ— only a Power to Exist and what is only a Power to Exist is not and no Operation can proceed from what according to it 's own precise Nature or Notion is not It follows that all Power of Operating or Acting must proceed from the Existence of the Thing or from the-Thing as it Exists 2. Therefore the Power of Operating thus or thus particularly or from which it has such or such a Power of And the Acting in such a manner springs from the Things being of such a Nature or Essence Operating springs from the Thing as it is such or such or as it is this or that Sort of Thing This is Evident from the Former additis addendis Besides were not this so Every Thing might do Any Thing which is against our Constant Experience 3. Therefore all Power of Operating as 't is such an Operation proceeds Therefore the Power of Operation as 't is such is refunded into the Essence from the Essence of the Thing Because the Essence is that which constitutes it formally
when we apply them to the Divine Nature they must be in some sort Metaphorical or Transferr'd thence to GOD. This is equally Evident as the Former For since their Sense and Meaning which Men impos'd on them at first and in which they Us'd them all along was some Created Being or Perfection 't is manifest that That was their First or Proper Signification and consequently if they Apply'd them to GOD afterwards without which as was shown we could not speak of GOD at all nor know any thing of Him they must necessarily be Transferr'd from Creatures to GOD which is to be Metaphorical 7. Prel VII Yet when Divines apply such Words to GOD whom they hold to be Infinitely Perfect they cannot be thought to Intend to Transfer them to Him together with the Imperfection found in Creatures which is annext to their First Signification and consequently Intention and Meaning being the same Sense they cannot mean to apply them otherwise than as devested of their Imperfections So that the Meaning or Signification of those Words thus Apply'd debars all those Imperfections from being any â—art of our Notion when we thus apply them â—uch are the Imperfections of Corporeity and 〈…〉 Notions which arise from Matter or belong 〈…〉 it As also all Limitedness which tho' Essenâ—ial to Creatures is Repugnant to the Divine Nature 8. Prelim. VIII Hence all such Words thus understood notwithstanding their Metaphoricalness are Truly said of GOD. For since by § 7. we do not Intend to Transfer to GOD what is Imperfect in the Notion or Meaning of these Words but only what signifies some Perfection â—nd All Perfection must be Truly attributed to Him who is Infinitely Perfect it follows that all such words thus understood are Truely Apply'd to the Divine Nature Thus when our Saviour CHRIST â—â— call'd The Lamb of GOD or The Lyon of the Tribe of Iudah we do not take or understand those Words under any other Notion signify'd by Lamb or Lion than under those of Meekness and Fortitude Thus when Metaphysicians apply to GOD Mercy Justice Power Wisdom c. which as found in our Understanding are Distinct Formalities of which One is not the other they being well aware that the Divine Nature is One most Simple Formality which includes and verifâ—es all those Attributes do therefore strip them of that Limitation or Imperfection when they apply them to GOD and do not intend to signifie they are thus distinct in GOD as they are in our Understanding but they only mean that such Effects do proceed from GOD as do proceed from a Just Merâ—iful Powerful or Wise Man which is most cerâ—ainly True Which Rule and Reason obtains in all other Metaphorical Expressions or in all our Words whatever us'd by us when we speak of GOD. 9. Prel IX For the same Reason all Words which amongst us connoâ—ate Motion as all Active Verbs and Verbals do must be understood of the Action formally as Terminated or of the Terminus of an Action and must be explicated and understood to mean is For since GOD is a Pure Actuality of Being and his Essence is Self-Existence nothing can be more Opposite to His very Essence than is the Notion of Motion which essentially imports both Potentiality and Change as consequently does our Natural Notion of Action that goes along with it Wherefore all Notions that import that a Thing is in fieri must be remov'd from GOD as far as is possible and only those Notions that signifie it is in facto esse can with any Sense be apply'd to that Sovereign Being Now this Abstraction from Motion can mean nothing but Being one way or other or it cannot be transferr'd to GOD by Prelim. VII Wherefore when we say the Son proceeds from the Father it can only in rigour mean Est a Patre The properest meaning of which word is that GOD is in His Divine Knowledge as His own Object And for the same Reason all Verbs signifying the Time Past or Future are to be remov'd from GOD and only those which signifie the present Time can be apply'd to Him For since whatever is in Divinis or is Intrinsecal to GOD is Eternally such we shall put Past and Future which are Differences of Time in Eternity But above all those words that import or hiâ—t Efficiency are the most Unfit to be Transferr'd to GOD For since Efficiency is impossible to be conceiv'd without an Effect it puts something in GOD which is Effected or Caus'd nor can such a Word 〈…〉 Notion be depur'd from it's most Gross Imperfection as other Notions may Nor will that weak Distinction of Formal and Virtual Efficiency in Diâ—inis serve the turn for this is the same as to say GOD is virtually Imperfect or that some Notion we have of GOD and is verify'd by Him is virtually an Effect that is virtually Not Self Existent and consequently virtually not GOD but a Creature Indeed our homely Language and Low Notions do oblige us to use such words as amongst us do signifie Action but they are all to be understood cum grano salis as is here declar'd Nor ought it to be objected That these Active words cannot signifie a Terminus put or that the thing is done â—â—stantaneously which some may think is against the Notion of Action for Creation is granted to be an Action yet it is never for so much as for one Instant in fieri or a doing being in one Instant in fecto esse or done 10. Prel X. For which Reason that we may avoid all hint of Agency which since whatever Acts must act or do Something which is it's Effect does necessarily induce Efficiency a word or Notion directly Opposite to whatever is in GOD who is Self Existent we shall in our Explication make use of the Inexistency of the Divine Nature Known in it's self as a Knower of it after the manner of a Form as it were which is both peculiar to a Spiritual Nature and has nothing in it of that Gross Imperfection to which our Natural Notion of Action is liable which amongst us is always accompanied with Motion Whereas the Other implies no Imperfection at all either in the Knower or the Thing Known For even amongst us the Object v. g. an Animal loses nothing nor is less Perfect for being Known by us but is in it's self the same Unchang'd Being it was Or rather Intelligibility being one of the Properties of Ens by being Naturally Known or understood it becomes by this means in some Sense Actual whereas before it was only Intelligible that is Potential in that respect Nor are we the worse by Knowing it or having the Object thus in our Knowing Power but evidently Better in regard all Actual Knowledge is our Natural Perfection Add that this way of Inexisting does not necessarily induce any Passiveness in the Subject in which the Object thus Inexists For Angels and Souls Separate have as has been demonstrated all Created Being in them Intellectually and yet
are not in reality Passive by receiving them having no Passive Principle or Matter in them Thus the Essences of all Creatures did Inexist in the Divine Understanding from Eternity Yet none will say this infers any Passiveness in GOD. Indeed while our Soul is in this State she as being the Form of the Body is thence in some sort Passive because the Suppositum the Man is such but when she is a Pure Spirit her Knowledges are not then beat into her as it were by so many dints of the Object but are in her purely by the Formal Inexistence of all Created Truths in one another By which is sâ—en that for the Object Known to be thus in the Knower after the manner of a Form argues no Imperfection in either of them and therefore is with good reason Transferrible to GOD. Perhaps some may think that the subject is in this case a kind of Matter in respect of the Form and that this argues Imperfection But they err in the whole business a â—orm that aduenes to a Material Subject and Intrinsecally Determines it as Modes or Accidents do does indeed induce Imperfection for it smells rank of Materiality or Corporeity but it is quite otherwise here For Modes or Accidents have no Being but by means of their Subject whereas the Things which are known by us have their own proper Existence out of our Soul notwithstanding the Intellectual Manner of Being they have in it Their Essences and that which is in them are â—ngrafted on her Nobler Stock of Being not as an Intrinsecal part of its peculiar Nature to which they owe their Being but as Another thing or as Distinct from it so that both the peculiar Essences of the One and the Other are the same Essentially and Intrinsecally tho' the being of the Soul is Enlarged and Perfected by having Another Being tackt to it as an Extrinsecal Form or by her being or becoming Another in which as Aristotle and Evident Reflexion tells us all Knowledge consists There is a Conceit current amongst many Philosophers that every Spiritual Operation is an Action and hence they may mean to Transfer such a Spiritual Action to GOD But they are in a great Errour Indeed our Formal Iudging and Discoursing may be call'd Actions because they are found in our Soul while in the Body and have Succession in them being accompanied by the Motion of the Phantasms without which the Soul in this State cannot operate but Pure Acts have no such leasurely progress of their thoughts nor do they Compound or Divide their Notions as we do here but all their Knowledge is by Simple Intuition which has nothing of Succession or Motion in it and therefore this sort of Spiritual Operation only is that which can be Apply'd to GOD the Other which is Part after Part being in some respect Quantitative or Corporeal that iâ— most Imperfect Now if we take away the State of Motion there is no Notion left us but that of Being Whence all Knowledge that is purely-Spiritual must be explicated by Being or the Inexistence of the Object in the Knower as a kind of Form which makes the Knower be that Thing which is known in case the Knower be a Created Being because 't is the Form which according to our Natural Notions constitutes a Thing in Being such or such Whence such an Operation sutes not with our Natural Notion of Action which does necessarily at least connotate Motion but is better exprest by a Neuter-Active Verb such as are Stupeo ardeo and such like which signifie that the Affection of Amazement or Burning is in me as a kind of Accidental Form for 't is in this manner the words I know signifie that the Object is in my Knowledge and therefore such a kind of Inexistence of the Object in the Knower may without scruple be Transferr'd to GOD for 't is our greatest Spiritual Perfection and indeed the very Notion of Knowing so that whoever denies this to be in the Divine Nature must at the same time deny him to be Knowing For these Reasons I do judge that in explicating this Mystery we ought to decline the using any Notions that imply or cannotate Agency and Action and to make use of those which have â—â—e Conception of a Form which constitutes the to be such or such A farther Reason may be because Essence Self-Existence Subsistence Personality which we must necessarily attribute to GOD and indeed all Abstract Words whatever have that manner of Signification 11. Prel XI Because in discoursing of this Mystery we shall only make use of such Notions as belong to the Common Heads of Substance and Relation or rather speaking of it as in GOD of Relatum esse 't is our Duty to set these two Kinds of Notions in as Clear a Light as we can To begin then with Substance A Natural Thing or Ens call'd also an Individuum or Substantia Prima only which do exist in Nature and consequently from which only we have all our Natural Notions does give us these Distinct or Abstracted Conceptions of it To take them in Order and consider in the First place what 's most Potential and Imperfect in a Thing we can conceive that it being Mutable there can another Natural Thing be made of it and therefore that it has in it somewhat by which it has a Power to become Another Thing which Power we call Matter For we call that MATTER of which any Thing is made Now this meer Power to be a Thing cannot be held by Virtue of that Sole Notion to be a Thing since nothing is that which it is only a Power to be and if it be not as thus conceiv'd a Thing it cannot be conceiv'd to have any Accident Mode or which is the same Determination of Thing in it which are Subsequent to the Notion of Thing for all these are apt to Determine the Thing which is against the Notion of a meer Power which is utterly Indeterminate Hence is seen clearly why Aristotle gave this exact Description of this Matter or Power to be viz. That which is Nec Quid nec Quantum nec Quâ—le neque aliquid aliud eorum quibus Ens determinatur Proceeding still forwards we may conceive this Individual Thing according to That in it which so Determines this Power call'd Matter as to Individuate it or so distinguish it as to make it This and no Other Which we have shown in our Metaphysicks is perform'd by such a Complexion of Accidents as is found no where but in It which therefore is it's Substantial or Essential Form whence it becomes properly or in the First Sense of that word a Thing or as Logicians call it an Individuum And because nothing in Common can exist but only what 's thus Ultimately Determin'd it is justly conceiv'd to be Capable of Existing or Possible to be which is to be an Ens or to have in it the Nature or Notion of what we call by that word The
of that Act. Whence the Act it self is no Part of the Relation but is Extrinsecal to the precise Notion of it As farther appears hence that Relation is one of those Notions which are call'd Accidental Modes or Accidents whose whole Being such as it is is to affect the Substance in their several ways and denominate them such as they do formally make them Since then Relation does not affect or denominate the Act of the Understanding but the Things which that Act compares and as has been often demonstrated the Accidents or Modes are Really the Same with the Thing which they modifie it follows that Relation is the Thing it self in our Minds conceiv'd consider'd as bearing in it a Respectiveness or â—ther as Referrible to Another To penetrate this betâ—… we will put a kind of Parrallel in the Predicaâ—…nt of Quality A Pint is the same Quantity whereever it is Yet put the same Pint of Water 〈…〉 a Round Glass it will be Round in a Square â—lass and it will be of a Square Figure Yet both these Figures are Identify'd with the same Quantity and the same Substance of the Water whose Modes they are and 't is only the Containers and their Difference which gives them this Different Denomination So Whiteness in those Subjects which are White is Apprehended and Denominated by an Absolute Name and they are both call'd White but put two such Subjects with Whiteness in them in our Mind which is a Comparing kind of Container or a Comparing Power and they come thence to be Apprehended by a Relative Notion and Denominated by a Relative Word Alike So that the Things themselves do give themselves this Relative Notion and Denomination of being Alike taking them as in such a Container as our Mind is which is apt to consider them in order to one another or refer them Actually These Things consider'd no Man of Reason can imagine that tho' we use the Common Word Relation because it passes amongst Learned Men as we do other Abstract Words therefore it means something hovering in the Air as it were without a Subject like a kind of Idea Platonica or that it can be any thing but the very Thing it self which is Related And hence it is that that most Solid and Acute Distinguisher of our Natural Notions Aristotle rather chuses to make use of the Concretes and as he call'd the foregoing Predicaments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so he names Relation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Thingâ— Related or as having in them the Ground of verifying a Respect to Another as I have noted in my Fifth Preliminary to Solid Philosophy Asserted 14. Prel XIV 'T is impossible to conceive a Real Relation without a Correlate answering to it in case it be grounded on Action and Passion or on the Unity of the Form nor to conceive such Correlates without conceiving some kind of Particularity or Difference between them There needs no more to evince this but only to reflect on the Word Ad which gives us the Notion of Relation and withall imports a Rapport or Respect to that which as is evident by it's Contraposition is in some Sense or other Distinct from it or Another 15. Prelim. XV. The Essence of GOD not only being Self-Existence but whatever is an Intrinsecal Attribute of Him being Eternally such it follows that the word is not only gives us the true Sense of what 's Predicated of GOD as is shown Prelim. IX but it must also signifie is Eternally there being no Temporary or Accidental Predications of any thing that is in the DEITY Wherefore we must in the truest Sense mean in all such Speeches that GOD Eternally that is from all Eternity and to all Eternity is Knowing and Loving Himself is Generating his Son is Generated is Proceeding from Father and Son c. So that the word is signifies here the most Absolute Necessity of His Being Eternally so as those Predicates import and not Contingently only as the same Word is does often signifie when we Predicate or speak of Creatures Which 〈…〉 at first amuse the Fancy but as I hope afâ—â—â—wards upon due Reflexion it will rectifie the â—…dgment of some Anti-Trinitarians who weakâ—… apprehending there can be no Pre-existence but 〈…〉 of Time imagine we put some Instant when 〈…〉 Son did not exist and that after he had got Existence the Father ceas'd afterwards to communicate it to Him any longer but left Him to stand done as Sons do here when their Fathers Die oâ— Disregard them and many other such Foolâ—â—ies with which they delude the Ignorant Which as will be shown are abhorr'd by us and most Absurd in a Discourse concerning the DEITY and therefore most ridiculously objected by them SECT II. The State of the Question 1 THE Divine Nature which is the Subject of our present Discourse may be consider'd two manner of Ways One is as to what GOD is in himself as the Mysticks treat of Him in which Sense He Abstracts from all our Natural Notions because He Transcends them and therefore He is altogether Unconceiveable and Unnameable by us in this State and only Intelligible by the Angels and Saints in Heaven to whose Intellectual Eye purify'd from all Sinful Affections and Dispos'd by Perfect Charity he reveals His Blissful and Glorious Face to be seen by a Clear and Simple Intuition The other way is to consider Him as He is the Object of our Natural Notions which having first as is said above Refin'd them from their Imperfection we transfer to Him and thence become Enabled in some sort to speak and discourse of Him Truly tho' with some Impropriety in our Low and Homely Language 2. Since then 't is manifest that we cannot Speak or Discourse of much less Explicate what we cannot conceive or of which we cannot have any Notion 't is Evident that the Divinity being the subject of our intended Discourse is to be consider'd and taken according to the Later manner and not according to the Former in our Discourses concerning it This premis'd since Faith by Prelim. V. is deliver'd to us in Words expressing our Natural Notions the True State of the Question is this Whether the Divine Nature Conceiv'd by us according to such Notions as we had from Creatures which being depur'd first from their ImPerfections we Apply to GOD does not oblige us as we affirm of Him that He is Just Merciful Wise c. So with Equal Reason and Truth to affirm that He is ONE according to His Nature and Essence and withal THREE according to Another Notion or Respect which we fitly call Person To set this Question and our ensuing Explication in a Clearer Light we will divide this Entire Question into Five Distinct or Particular ones viz. First Whether it be not Agreeable to Rational Principles taken from our Natural Notions to affirm that the Divine Nature does verify some One Notion that is Common and some Others that are Distinct or Particulars
of GOD is at present the Subject of our Discourse or that which we are to explicate our Question being Whether GOD is not Truly One in Nature or Essence and Three according to the Notion of Person Hence 't is most fittirg we should take our Rise and Ground our Discourse from the Divine Nature it self consider'd as it is conceiv'd by us according to our Natural Notions as is declar'd above 2. And because many Attributes are held to belong to the Divine Nature therefore to make our Explication more facil and succinct we will pitch upon One or Two Attributes or Predicates which are granted by all to belong to GOD's Nature viz. That it is Spiritual or that GOD is an Infinitely Perfect Spirit 3. Moreover seeing all we know of Spiritual Natures or the First and most Obvious and withall the most True Conception we have of them is that they are such Beings as have Understanding and Will and therefore that they do Know and Love such Objects as are proportion'd to their pitch or Agreeable to their Natures we are thereupon to build our Explication on these Two Operations Proper to our Soul and to other Created Spiritual Natures and thence Transfer â—hem to GOD which we may safely do without danger of putting any Imperfection in GOD in regard those Attributes are the Greatest Perfection of Spiritual Natures and even Essential to them so that we need no more but only abstract from them the Limitedness or Finiteness necessarily annexâ— to all Creatures and conceive GOD to be Infinite under these Considerations as is declar'd Prel VII 4. Farther because that Knowledge and Love are Imperfect which are exercis'd about Unworthy Objects and those are most Perfect which are employ'd about the Best and Noblest Objects that can be imagin'd and only the Divine Nature is the most Excellent Object It follows that since no Notion that is Imperfect is to be Attributed to GOD Therefore the Knowledge and Love which we attribute to Him must be the Knowledge and Love of the Best of all Objects Himself and thence we must affirm without the least fear of Injuring the Divine Nature that GOD Knows and Loves Himself because to deny Him this would make the Divine Nature most highly Imperfect nay more Imperfect than Created Spiritual Natures are especially if they are Pure Acts. 5. Moreover this Knowledge and Love of Himself is as it were the Primary Operation of the Deity as it is a Spirit Wherefore since the Primary Operation of all Creatures we converse with has been prov'd to be That which constitutes their Essences we cannot but judge that considering GOD according to our Natural Notions this Knowledge and Love of Himself is in that regard most Essential to GOD as He is a Spirit 6. This Fundamental Principle then being laid as the Groundwork of all our ensuing Explication since by Prelim. II. and as plain Reason tells us we are to discourse consequently of those True Notions we have of GOD so they imply no Imperfection we are to consider next what Genuine Consequences do follow from this Position 7. It follows then hence immediately that the Divine Nature does Verifie the Notions of Knower and Thing Known Lover and Thing Loved and that there is in the Divine Nature that which answers to those Distinct Notions nay which obliges us to say they are Distinct. For 8. 'T is impossible to conceive that the Notions of Knower and Thing Known and the same is to said of Lover and Thing Loved should be the same Notion and not Contradistinct and some way Opposite to one another First Because plain Sense manifests they are counterpos'd Next the Art of Logick which is entirely Grounded on our Natural Notions and perfectly Distinguishes them informs us certainly that there is a Relative Opposition and consequently an unavoidable Distinction between them Thirdly The Thing Known and Lov'd do evidently import the Object of Knowledge and Love and what 's Objected cannot but be Distinct or some way Other from That to which 't is Objected Fourthly they being clearly Relatives the very meaning of the word Ad which formally expresses all Relation must forcibly signifie there is some sort of Distinction between them Lastly They are Correlatives which can have no Sense but this that they mutually respect one another Now that Knower and Thing Known should mutually respect one another and yet there should not be in some Sense One and Another is perfect Nonsense and meer Contradiction 9. Hence follows that there must be some kind of Distinction in the Divine Nature it self since Predicates that do necessarily bear Distinction in their very Notion are truly verify'd of it Nor can Distinction be in any thing but it must make it some way or other Distinct. 10. Nor can this Distinction proceed from the Imperfection of our Understanding as it does when we distinguish other Divine Attributes but it proceeds from the Soveraign Perfection of the Divine Nature it self which is to Know and Love Himself Nor does our Understanding in conceiving this deform our True Conception of the Deity but the true Conception of the Deity it self does thus Inform our Understanding and obliges us to affirm thus of it 11. Hence this Distinction which those words God Knows and Loves Himself do put in the Divine Nature is Real Not only because the Divine Self-Knowledge does Verifie it but also because it is not grounded on our weak manner of Conceiving it but as was shown §§ 4. 5. on the Perfection of GOD's Essence 12. Hence as we transfer to GOD the Notions of Justice Mercy Power Wisdom c. which we find in Creatures by observing such Effects proceeding from Him as use to proceed from such like Perfections in us or among us so with the same and far better Reason we may transfer to Him the Notions of Knowing and Loving Himself and consequently of Distinction between those Relative Notions of Knower and Known which are in Him and objectively Him by Priel 10. 11. 13. To understand this more clearly we may reflect that the Names of those Virtues which we Transfer to GOD do not in their Notion import that one of them is not another nor hinder but they may all be compriz'd in one Eminently Perfect Attribute I believe that I have shown Solid Philosophy Asserted Reflection XV. that all Virtues even amongst us are comprehended in that one Notion Right Reason working on such or such Objects in such and such Occasions Much more easily may they all be center'd in that one most Perfect Formality of GOD's Essence Whence all the Distinction of those Attributes as they are in GOD must necessarily be refunded into our manner of conceiving them by diverse Acts or Abstracted Conceptions But now when we conceive that GOD Knows Himself and the same may be said of his Loving Himself the business is quite otherwise For the very Notion of Self-Knowledge does essentially import Distinction of Knower and Known Even Knowledge amongst
us does essentially signifie that the Thing Known is in our Knowledge as Another or as Distinct from the Soul as knowing it as is shown in the Book now cited Prelim. II. §§ 22. 23. and particularly § 26. And Reason gives it must be so since when I know a Tree the Nature of a Tree which is in my Mind intellectually is not there as either my Essence nor as any Intrinsecal Mode of me as is manifest it must therefore necessarily be there as Distinct from me or as Another Nay when our Soul knows her self she must some way or other be Distinct from her self by that Knowledge for it cannot with any Sense be deny'd but that she is in that case her own Object and that therefore for that very regard she must be distinguisht some way from her self as Knowing that Object as is shown Prelim. IV. Nor is this any Imperfection in a Created Spirit to have her Objects in her when she knows them as Other or as Distinct from her For 't is the very Notion or Nature of Knowledge which if we take away from her we must at the same time take away her Knowing Power and her Spirituality and put her to be made of Matter it being the Property of Matter and of Material Things to have nothing in them but such Modes which are Intrinsecal to their Subject and Determine it's Potentiality Nay more 't is the highest Perfection of a Spiritual Nature to have things in it which are different from it as is demonstrated in my Metaphysicks Book II. Ch. 2. §§ 6 7 8 9. Whence there being no Imperfection in this Notion but rather it being the best Perfection of a Spiritual Nature we ought with far better Reason than any other Transfer it to GOD and to say that GOD by Knowing Himself is in some Sense or other in Himself as Another or that He is Distinct from Himself as he is a Knower as is seen Prel IV. 14. To finish this Point we may reflect that we may more easily be Mis-led by fancying those other Attributes to be Distinct in GOD because according to our manner of Conceiving they are Diverse from one another and very Many of them But in our case there are but Two single Attributes viz. Self-Knowing and Self-Loving and yet each of those single Attributes imports Distinction and Aliety if I may use that word in it 's own Particular Notion Which shows plainly that the Distinction here spoken of does not arise out of the Number of those Diverse Attributes or from our Distinct Acts of Conceiving them Abstractedly but from each of those Single and Intrinsecal Natures or Notions of Self-Knowing and of Self-Loving which unless we should impiously degrade the Divine Nature from being Spiritual we must be forced to Attribute to Him and consequently some Distinction as these words do most evidently import 15. Hence is farther manifested that since GOD Knows and Loves Himself there is in the Divine Nature some One Notion that is Common and some Others that are Particulars For it is Evident that Knower and Known Lover and Loved are all distinct Notions from one another and therefore Particulars as also that the word GOD is Predicated and Verify'd of each of them For since all True Predication or Verification is made by the Identifying Particle Est 't is consequent that the Divine Nature is in them all and really Them And therefore since the single word GOD is but one Notion and truly said of them All it must be granted to be COMMON to them all 16. And because this Common Notion GOD cannot but most properly signifie the Divine Being which is Infinite in Perfection and to be a Suppositum by Sect. 3. § 6. is to be Compleat or Perfect in the Notion of Ens Therefore the Notion of a Suppositum cannot but be attributed to that Common Notion GOD. Wherefore that Notion is not only Common but also a Suppositum there is then a Common Suppositum in GOD which is predicated of the Particulars truly attributed to Him and as has been prov'd Identify'd with Him 17. In this Notion of the Common Suppositum the Generality of the Jews the Wiser Heathens and all those who deny a Trinity understood the word GOD and perhaps our selves too when there is not in our Prayers or Discourse any Particular Reference to any of the Persons 18. Wherefore this Common Suppositum may not unfitly be call'd the Absolute Notion of GOD and those Particulars the Relative Notions of the same Divine Essence because they meerly spring from those Relations 19. Whence because the Common Suppositum exprest by the word GOD is held by all who use that Word to be Infinite in all those Attributes which we have Demonstrated in the Third Book of our Metaphysicks to belong to the First Being viz. Infinitely Wise Just Good Powerful c. as also Eternal and Self-Existent it follows that all or each of those Particulars which are Predicated of the Word GOD and therefore are Identify'd with Him must also be granted to have all those Infinite Perfections in them which are attributed to Him since GOD who includes all those Attributes is Predicated or Identify'd with them all as is deliver'd accordingly in the Creed of St. Athanasius 20. The Difficulty is how we can with Truth and our due Regard to GOD who is essentially a most Pure Actuality of Being make Him a Genus or a Species Common to more which have the Notion of Inferiours in respect of Him For true Metaphysicks admits no Composition in GOD of Genus and Difference as is seen Book III. § 35. To clear this we are to consider all those several Manners of Predicating given us by Porphyrius and allow'd by all the Learned World call'd the Five Predicables Now the Notions of Genus and Species which are made by Logical Abstraction are Indeterminate and Potential in respect of the Inferiour Notions and the Things that is they as thus consider'd are Substantiae Secundae which reach not to the Notion of Individuum or Substantia Prima only which are properly Entia or Capable of Existing much less do they reach to the Notion of Existence or Actual Being This being so it would be most absurd to Transfer such Notions to GOD who is Pure Existence Nor can we Predicate any thing of Him as a Difference which determines the foresaid Potentiality of the others for in that which is essentially Pure Actual Being there can be no farther Determination made since this is done by the Act and nothing can be more Actual than Pure Actuality of Being it self 21. Wherefore setting these Three Predicables aside there remain those Manners of Predicating call'd Proprium and Accidens Now I conceive that it argues no Imperfection for the Common Suppositum to be Predicated of those Particulars according to this Last manner For first This is not Abstracted from Inferiours or Common to them as a Potential Notion Determin'd by Differences Again To
be thus Predicated it is not requir'd that the Predicate be an Accident it self or found in any of the Heads of those Modes which are Contrâ—â—istinguisht from Substance but the Predicate here may it self be a Substante provided it does not per se or essentially and formally belong to the Subject V. g. When we say a Cup is Golden or which is the same Gold a Spoon is Gold a Ring is Gold the Predicate Gold apply'd to the Cup Spoon and Ring is a Substance and in some Sense Common to them all not as a Potential Notion Determin'd by Differences is common to it's Inferiours and Essential to them but because it does not Essentially belong to Gold to be apply'd to such a Figure therefore it is Accidental or not Essential to it and hence it is said to be Predicated of them Accidentally Now in this manner the Common Suppositum GOD is Predicated of Knowing Known and the other Particulars without any show of Imperfection I do not say that Knowing c. are Accidental to GOD as it is to things of the said Figures to be Gold I abstract from the Matter and take only the bare Manner of Predicating which is not to be said or predicated as a Superiour of Inferiours to which it's Potentiality is Determin'd by Differences but as one Substantial Notion determin'd already as to it 's own Nature is Predicated of another which is either according to it's Notion Substantial or formally belonging to Another Head as those Figures are in respect of Gold and the Absolute Notion of the Divine Essence according to the Distinction of our Natural Notions is to that of Relation in Common 22. Or if we invert the Order of those Propositions and say GOD is Known Knowing c. and so make the Notion of GOD the Common Subject in those speeches in which the Relative ones are Predicated then they may be truly said to be Predicated of him according to the Predicable of Proprium Which soever of those ways we take no Imperfection will be refunded upon GOD nor any Potentiality transfer'd to His most Pure Actuality which is the chief danger to be avoided in our Predications concerning the Divine Nature SECT V. That these Particulars are THREE and no more 1. SInce then this Common or Absolute Suppositum call'd GOD is justly held to be Infinite in Being it follows that He has all the Positive Perfections in the Line of Ens or Substance that can be imagin'd and possesses them all Indivisibly in One most Actual Formality of Being whence 't is impossible to apprehend there should be any Distinction or Plurality at all in GOD as he is thus conceiv'd or under that precise Notion of meerly Being since under that Notion He is Indivisibly One which farther appears hence that even our ordinary Notion of Existence is Indivisible much more must it be such when it is Infinite Wherefore it being no less evidently shown Sect. 4. that there are some Particular Notions or some sort of Plurality Truly and Rightly Transferr'd to GOD and Verify'd of Him This must necessarily spring from our Conceiving GOD under some Other Notion or some Notion that belongs to Another Head or Predicament than that of Substance or meer Being and withall from such a one as does not carry along with it when 't is Transferr'd to Him any Imperfection to the Divine Nature 2. Nor need we look far to find what kind of Notion this is We can no sooner consider that GOD Knows and Loves Himself which is the Ground of all our Explication and as it were the Text on which our Reason descants but we must forcibly and immediately discover that this Distinction in GOD must be taken from that Head of our Notions call'd RELATION For the Knower cannot be a Knower of Nothing but of some Thing or some Object which is Known by him Nor can that Thing or Object be actually Known but there must be some Thing which is a Knower of it which shows those Notions are perfectly Relative to one another 3. Wherefore all the Distinction and Operation which as has been shown is Verify'd to be in the Divine Nature and all the Distinction of the Particulars we lately spoke of must be taken from the Relations according to which the Divine Nature is Referr'd to its self and not formally and immediately from GOD ' s Essence which belongs formally to the Line of Substance 4. Nor need we fear to attribute Distinct and some way Opposite Predicates to GOD and consequently affirm that there is some kind of Distinction and Opposition in Him since the Distinction necessarily imply'd in that Natural Notion we transfer to Him does attribute to Him the Highest Perfection of His Nature as 't is Spiritual and is not Apply'd to Him according to the Notion of Ens or Being but according to Another Respect or Notion which is Different from it and as is shown Prel X. and XI does not induce or require any Distinction formally of the Essence it self Nay when as will be shown Sect. VIII § 7. that very Opposition notwithstanding it forces some kind of Plurality does no less necessarily infer a more perfect Unity if possible in the Divine Nature at least an Unity in more respects than could have been Conceiv'd had there not been that kind of Distinction and Opposition Nor yet can any doubt of the Truth of this Thesis which puts Distinct and Opposite Notions in GOD since His Nature verifies those Distinct Notions and Obliges us to Affirm them of Him or Attribute them to Him 5. Since then these Particulars which as is shown §§ 2. and 3 we truly attribute to GOD must entirely be taken from the foresaid Relations 't is consequent that the Number of them also must be taken from the Number of those Relations 6. And 't is clearly Agreeable to Reason that in those of the Former sort there must be Relation on both sides which must consequently constitute or rather Infers Two Particulars For 't is very Evident from § 2. and indeed is obvious to Common Sense that in our case there is a Mutual Relation between the Knower and Thing Known as is exprest by those very Words nor can we Express them otherwise while we must affirm that GOD Knows Himself As will yet better appear Sect. VII § 9. 7. Which is hence confirm'd because as GOD is essentially Infinitely Intellective or rather Intelligent so He must also be Infinitely Intelligible or rather actually Known otherwise there would want an Adequate Object of the Divine Understanding which would also infer He is not Infinitely Intelligent 8. These Relations are grounded materially and â—eally on the Divine Essence it self consider'd according to it 's own Notion or as it is conceiv'd â—o be Absolute since 't is His Essence it self exprest by the word GOD which Knows and is Known conceiv'd as apt to ground those Relations as it evidently is and not His Essence as it is conceiv'd
Relatively For a Relation cannot be the immediate Reason or Ground of Another Relation otherwise there might be processiâ—s in infinitum But the main Reason why this cannot be is because it is not the Relation it self which is Referr'd but the Thing and Relation must necessarily be in thâ—se things which are Related 9. Wherefore however the Divine Lover when GOD Loves himself cannot but have a Relation to the Thing Loved because Love proceeds from the Goodness of the Object and it's Agreeableness to it 's that is to GOD's Nature yet there is no Mutual Relation from the Thing Loved to the Lover or to the Love of it For the Greatest Good and Perfection of an Intelligent or Knowing Nature is Truth and Truth does formally consist in this that the Object is so in the Understanding as it is in it's self which is in our case that the Divine Object Known is in the Divine Knowledge or truly conceiv'd by it Whence Love proceeds formally properly and immediately from both according to their Relative Notions by which they are Distinguisht and not from the Absolute Notion which is Common to them both Wherefore since by § 9. no Relation can be grounded on another Relation and in case there were a Mutual Relation to the Lover it must proceed or be grounded on the Relations of Knower and Known it follows that there can only be Three Relations and consequently by §§ 4. and 5. as will be shown but Three Particulars in the Deity nor can any more be attributed to it according to our best Reason directed by True Principles and proceeding upon our Natural Notions That the Common Suppositum does not infer a Fourth Particular will be seen Sect. VI. § 10. Corollary Since Divine Love proceeds from this that the Object is so in the Knower as it is in it self which is the Formal Notion of TRUTH Hence 't is seen how much our Love ought to be set on Truth which is the Natural Perfection of our Mind how Like GOD those Noble Souls are whose Chief Affection is addicted to Truth especially Divine Truths On the other side how Ignoble and Unlike GOD those Mean and Depraved Souls are who disregard TRUTH and think the care of Promoting it is below their Empty Temporary Greatness SECT VI. That these Three Particulars are most fitly called PERSONS 1. THE next Question is What Natural Notion of ours does most properly fit those Three Particulars which we have been obliged to put in the Divine Nature and what Word of ours does most fitly and in the Common Usage of it express that Notion For since we have granted in our Fifth Preliminary that Christian Faith was Deliver'd at first in such Language as exprest our Natural Notions that is in such as was Usual in those Times and Places and Intelligible by the Generality in their respective Circumstances it cannot be deny'd but that we stand engag'd to show that our Explication must likewise observe the same Rule as to those Words which we pretend do signifie the Point of Faith it self as exprest in our Catechisms and Creeds 2. To perform this as we ought we will consider first of what Notion or Nature those Particulars must be conceiv'd to be and because we have no Natural Notion but either of Substance or it 's Modes it follows that those Three Particulars we speak of must either be Particular according to the first sort of Notion Substance or else according to some of the Later Wherefore to clear this Point and determine under which of these Notions they are Particulariz'd we are to consider what it is that is thus Particulariz'd and our former Discourse shows that it is the Common Suppositum or that which is that Absolute Notion we call GOD which is here Particulariz'd or has these Particulars in it And indeed there needs no more but these words God Knows and Loves Himself to evince this For it is hence as Evident as plain Words can make any thing that 't is GOD who is the Knower Thing Known and Lover which Notions give us or rather are those very Particulars we speak of Now since the word GOD cannot be thought to belong to or be with any Sense referr'd to any other of those Heads then that of Substance or Being whence as consider'd in an Absolute and not in a Relative Sense he is call'd the First Being hence 't is GOD conceiv'd under the Notion of Being or Substance which is Particulariz'd And though GOD be not particulariz'd Substantially or according to the Manner Substances are particulariz'd amongst us which is that the Common Abstracted Indeterminate or Potential Notions of the Genus or Species be Divided and Determin'd under the Notion of Ens by means of Essential or Intrinsecal Differences and so make more Entia for this as was said lately cannot be said of the Pure Actuality and Unity of the Divine Nature Yet he may be particulariz'd by reason of the Relative Conceptions verify'd of Him which we have shown do not induce any Imperfection at all Yet as it is only the Common Suppositum or GOD taking that word in an Absolute Sense which is Related so it is only what 's signify'd by GOD or the Primum Ens which is the Thing Particulariz'd This being then manifest and Particulars under the Notion of Substance being most necessarily held to be Particular Supposita and if they be Intelligent PERSONS it follows that these Three Particulars or Suppositums in GOD are fitly and properly to be call'd Three Divine PERSONS And he who will deny any part of this Discourse stands obliged to show either that there are not Three Particulars in the Divine Nature or that it is not the Divine Nature under the Notion of Substance which is the Thing Related and thence Particulariz'd or that Particulars under the Notion of Substance are not to be call'd in true Speech Suppositums and if they be Intelligent in a vulgar word PERSONS He must also assign some other Notion under which we are to conceive them and invent some other Name suteing with our Natural Notions by which we may call them And lastly he stands bound to answer the Reasons I have brought in my foregoing Explication for each of those Points None of which if he pleases to go to work like a Scholler and not Act a Banterer and Droll he can I am sure ever be able to perform 3. This being so plain I am sorry I must declare that I am much dissatisfy'd that any Christian Writer speaking of the B. Trinity should assert that the word PERSON is now become a Term of Art Whereas we have no word more Proper or more Usual to express a Particular Subsistent Being that is withall Intelligent than the word Person is For let us ask all Mankind and even the rudest Vulgar how many Persons there are in such a Place They will candidly reckon up to us only the Men and Women and not the Stools Chairs or Irrational
Animals nor can any Man imagine either that they answer'd thus through any Skill or Art they had acquir'd or that they meant to express any Artificial Conception of ours or any thing made by an Artificer but that they intended to signifie by that Word meer Natural Things with which we were well acquainted and daily converst and that they in thus answering us'd the Ordinary Speech of all Mankind who spoke and understood the same Language Again when 't is said it is now become a Term of Art What means the word now Is it us'd by Christians now in any other Sense than it was us'd by S. Athanasius 1330 years ago or by the Christian Church both then before and ever since Or do our Catechisms now-a-days teach us Artificial Conceits For only these are fit to be exprest by Terms of Art I would hope that Learned Man had a better meaning than those Words seem to have and that I am Deceiv'd in him however I thought fit to take notice of it lest it should Deceive others 4. Nor ought it be objected that the word Person is not found in Scripture 'T is a Necessary Liberty the Christian Church ever took to declare the Faith which she had in her Heart by more-Emphatical Words to keep her Thoughts and Tenets from being misunderstood provided those Words express more fully and clearly the same Sense as is found in the Holy Scripture as appears in the word Consubstantial made use of in the Nicene Creed tho' it be no more found in Scripture than the word Person is 5. Yet tho' we must put Three Persons in GOD does not therefore follow that there are Tria â—â—â— or Three Things in Him For the Proper â—otion of Ens amongst us is That which is Caâ—â—le of Existence whence tho' we should deâ—ite that Notion from the Potentiality signify'd â—â— the word Capable which would cost us â—â—me straining the signification of words yet â—â— cannot conceive Three Entities in GOD without conceiving there are Three Existences or â—â—ther Self-Existences in Him which 't is Imposâ—â—ble there should be For Self-Existence necessarily implies Infinite in Being and there can be â—o more but One Infinite in the same kind as has been Demonstrated in our Metaphysicks Nor can it be said that there may be Three Relative Existences in GOD the Notion of Existence being the most Absolute and most Irrespective or Unrelative that can be imagin'd Add That the Formal Constituent of Ens is Essence Wherefore â—f we put three Entia in GOD we must also put Three Divine Essences in Him Of which since each must be Infinite we shall be obliged to put Three Infinites under the same Notion Which seeing each must be distinct from the other and therefore must to distinguish them have someâ—hing in it which the other had not they would consequently limit one another and so none of them would be Infinite Whence it was not amiss which an acute School Divine put in his Publick Theses viz. In Deo sunt Tres Entes non Tria Entia Ignoscant Grammatici perpendant Thâ—ologi 6. But to give a farther Reason why these Three Particulars in GOD cannot be said to bâ— Three Things or Entia and yet must be callâ—â— Three Persons and withall to set this preâ—â—â—â— Point in a clearer Light I discourse thus The Common Notion of Ens or Substance is Divided and Subdivided descending downwards by â—â—trinsecal Differences till we come at the foot of the Scala Predicamentalis or the Lowest Notions call'd by Logicians Individuums which are constituted and distinguishâ— by such a Complexion of Accidents as is found in no other whence it becomes This that is a Substantia Prima which only is properly a Thing in which the Matter being thus ultimately Determin'd 't is hence made Capable of Being that is an Ens. Whereas the Former which were Common Notions are not by virtue of those Common or Universal Natures or as thus exprest by a General Word Capable of Existing or Entia since nothing in Common can exist and therefore must either exist in the Substantia Primâ— or Suppositum as Metaphysical Parts or Inadequate Conceptions of it or not at all Wherefore the Individuum includes all those Common Notions in it self as Parts of it's Essence whence they are all predicated essentially of it Nor can our Natural Notion of Ens be devested of this Imperfection that it is compounded of such Metaphysical Parts which are Superiour and Inferiour in respect of one another Whence that Notion cannot fitly be Transferr'd to GOD in whose most Simple Essence there can be no Compositions no not even that call'd Metaphysical Moreover were this wav'd yet the Notion of Ens being Essentially That which has a Power to â—â— it can never forego that Potentiality nor conâ—â—â—uently be Transferr'd to GOD. For were â—â—â— Potentiality of Being abstracted from it it â—ould either signifie nothing that any way relates â—o Being at all or else it would signifie Actual â—eing or Existence Now Existence may indeed be most fitly apply'd to GOD but in that case â—â—â—â—e the Notion of Ens and Existence are as widely Different as Power and Act it would not be the Notion of Ens which is Apply'd but Another very Different Notion viz. that of Existence Wherefore tho' we call GOD an Ens when the Question is not precisely as here it is about the Perfection or Imperfection of our Notion or Expression yet in our case where we nicely examine what Natural Notions of ours are properly fit to be transferr'd to Him it is manifest that both by reason of it's Metaphysical Composition and also of it's Potentiality it is utterly incompetent to be apply'd to God since in both respects it carries along with it an Unavoidable Imperfection and consequently much less can we say there are in GOD Three Things or Tria Entia The word Substance is with much more Reason transferr'd to GOD because it formally imports a Distinct Notion from Accidents and a Sustainer of them in Being whence it is in a manner the same Notion as a Suppositum or Subsister 7. On the other side taking these Words according to their most formal Signification the Notion of the words Person and Subsistent with which later the Common Use among Learned Men does now confound Suppositum does neither speak Potentiality nor Composition but barely signifies the ultimate Completion in the Line of Rational Being or Independency on any other Created Thing of Notion for their Existing And thence they have a just Title to be Transferrible to the Divine Nature And hence it is that the Distinction of those Three Particulars which the Divine Essence verisies ought not to be taken from the manner in which Things in the Line of Substance use to be Distinguisht that is by Intrinsecal Differences nor ought the Common Suppositum be apprehended to be Distinguisht or Particulariz'd by such a gross way yet as was shown Distinguisht it must be and there is no
other way nor any other Notion according to which it can be conceiv'd to be Particulariz'd or Distinguisht but that of Relation the formal Notion of which is Ad Aliquid or some way or other Ad Aliud by which too we have seen GOD's Knowing and Loving Himself obliges us to distinguish Him whence follows that the Divine Nature is Distinguisht Relatiuely Nor does this Notion multiply the Common Nature Essentially as did the former way which distinguisht the Common Notion by Essential Differences Both because the Relation by Prelim. X. and XI is not Distinguisht from the Divine Essence it self which is the Reason and Ground of Referring it diversely as also because it springs from a most High Perfection in GOD as He is a Spirit I add and terminates also in a High Perfection under the Notion of Being viz. in that of Personality or Person In a word 't is the Divine Essence which is Distinguisht or Particulariz'd there being nothing else in GOD to be Distinguisht Yet it is not Distinguisht Essentially or according to the precise Notion of Essence or Being but Relatively because it is Infinite in Being and so can be in that Absolute Reâ—â—ct but One. 8. For the same Reason I avoid using the word â—â—dividuum tho' I do not blame others that do â—erhaps I am too scrupulous in it yet I cannot â—â—t think 't is something liable to exception at â—ast comparatively My Reasons are First 'T is â—â—o Logical and Artificial and consequently tho' it has got I know not how out of the Schools into the Language of some well-bred Men to say 't is the same Individual Man yet for all that it is not the Vulgar Speech nor so Natural Secondly Because it is made Particularly such by it's Difference too viz. by the Complexion of it's Accidents and subsuming under the Specifick Notion 't is only a Negation of the Superiour Notions and signifies the same as Ungenerical or Unspecifical Whereas the Word Person has a Positive Signification nor has any reference to the Genus and Species as is seen in Angels And moreover it directly imports the highest Perfection in the Line of Substance and therefore it is fitly Transferrible to GOD. Again the word Individuum being a Logical Term is more subject to wrangle For Artists being the Imposers and as it were Creators of the Words which themselves use and such Men seldom Agreeing in their Thoughts and Meanings nor consenting universally that such a word shall stand for such a Meaning or Notion it happens that some of them do take the Word in one Sense others in another and very frequently ampliate or restrain the Signification of it at pleasure Hence perpetual and if this Inconvenience be not remedy'd by Clear Definitions of such Words Eternal Dissentions must needs ensue And indeed most of the Liâ—igâ—â—â— Disputes and Controversies among Learned Mâ—â— in case the Contesters be Sincere and Disintereâ—â—ed do arise from this Defect now mention'd Froâ— which mischief the Words us'd by the Generalâ—â— to express our Natural Notions are Free for we find by Experience that the Vulgar understand one another very well and easily nor are subject to perpetual Word-skirmishes in their Common Conversation as the Others are 9. Nor can it be inferr'd from this Explication that by the same reason there would be a Trinity of Persons in Angels and Souls Separated when they Know and Love themselves For Self-Knowledge formally consisting in this that the Thing known does Inexist in it's own Knowing Power as an Object or after an Intellectual manner and the Existence and consequently Inexistence of all Creatures being Extrinsecal oâ— Acoidental to them as being given them by Another and not Essential to them or their very Essence as it is in GOD it being one of his Peculiar Attributes Hence iâ— follows that the Relation of Knower and Known is in them Accidental to them as being Grounded on what 's Accidental to their Essences and consequently by Prelim. X. is Identify'd with the Object accidentally only Whence it can make only an Accidental Distinction in them and not a Distinction in their Substance or a Distinction of that most perfect Substantial Notion Person as for the contrary reason it must make in GOD. Add that GOD's Self-Knowledge is properly and perfectly Essential to Him as He is an Infinite Spirit and as it were his Primary Operation by which according to our manner of Conceiving he is Constituted such or rather 〈…〉 Eâ—â—ence as He is a Spirit does consist in it â—â—ereas in Angels and Souls the Knowing the â—…le Extent of Entity and even GOD Himself 〈…〉 the Primary Operation for which Nature inâ—â—nded them and to Know themselves was only 〈◊〉 Means or First-Step to bring them to the â—nowledge of all other Things and thence of GOD And therefore Self-Knowledge is far from being their Primary Operation or that by respect â—o which their Essence was Constituted nor consequently can it distinguish their Substance as it does and must in GOD. 10. Nor lastly can it be thought that the Common Suppositum having all Perfections that can â—â— in the Line of Being and therefore amongst the rest Personality in it does constitute a Fourth Person for since GOD or the Common Suppositum as has been shown is Common to the three Relative Persons or in them all it carries along with it all the Perfections of the Divinity and among the rest the Personality too and communicates it to the Relative Persons as it does all the other Positive or Absolute Perfections in the Godhead Whence they have all of them to subsist or Absolutely to be Persons from the Godhead or the Common Suppositum and that they are Different Persons comes wholly and solely from their Distinct Relations as was prov'd above So that there is no show that the Common Suppositum can make a Fourth or Distinct Person since what 's Common to All or each cannot be Particular or Contradistinguisht to any Nor is there any Opposition of the Common Person to the Relative ones both because it has an Absolute and not a Relative Notion as also because it is so far from being Opposite that it is coincident with them all or with each of them SECT VII That this Distinction of Three Persons puts no Imperfection in the Divine Nature and that they are most-â—itly call'd the Father Son and Holy Spirit 1. GOD being the Author of Order and not of Confusion 't is most worthy His Divine Nature and most Consonant to True Reason that there should be some Order amongst those Threâ— Divine Persons and some Solid Ground for that Order And since all Order amongst More must begin from some One or some First it follows that there must be some One amongst them which is the First or Beginning of that Order and that therefore the Notion of the word Beginning must be Transferr'd to GOD or be Peculiar to some One of those Persons who is GOD provided it can be done
without attributing to Him any Imperfection Which waving our Proofs brought hereafter to the contrary is even hence Incredible it should â—ince as was now shown and will farther appear it is Absolutely Necessary there should be some First or some Beginning amongst them and certainly there can be no Absolute Necessity to attribute any Imperfection to GOD. 2. And that it ought to be so this Plain Reason farther evinces because since we cannot name them all at once we must in recounting them forcibly name some One of them First Nor could we give any good reason why we did this unless there were some Consideration in that Person it self which oblig'd us to it otherwise we must be forced to say we did it without reason or nam'd them at random 3. It remains then to show which of the Three Persons is the First to give the reason why we put Him first and in what Sense He is a First or Principium in that Order 4. Reflecting then on those Relations of Known and Knowing we find that the Fâ—rmer of these the Divine Essence as Known has the Nature or Notion of an Object and the Later there being no Potentiality in GOD the Nature of Actual Knowledge and that our Natural Notions ascertain us that the Knowledge proceeds from the Object for this is that which determines the Indifferency of our Knowing Power by Informing it and produces the Act of Knowledge or as the Schools phrase it Specifies it Whence abstracting this way of producing Knowledge in us from all Potentiality and Causality as is most â—it and only Applying to GOD what 's Essential to the Notion of an Object in the being of which in our Understanding Knowledge does necessarily consist we must rationally conceive and affirm that the Divine Nature as Knowledge or as Knowing Himself does prâ—ceed from the Divine Nature as an Object or as Known and that therefore this Later is the Origin Principium or First of those Three Persons and Divine Knowledge the Second it being Evident that Love which proceeds from the Goodness of the Object in our Knowledge and therefore in this Order of our Natural Notions necessarily presupposes the other Two is with good Reason to be accounted the Third 5. For in regard there can be no Adequate or Proper Object of the Divine Understanding but the Divine Essence it self and that all Others do fall Infinitely short of being worthy of it hence it is equally argumentative to say that His Knowledge as it is Divine proceeds from the Divine Essence as an Object as it is that our Knowledge of Nature does proceed from Nasural Objects since according to our most Natural and Necessary Notions it as unavoidably follows that GOD's Knowledge is therefore Divine because the Object of it is GOD as it follows that our Knowledge is therefore Natural because the Object of it is of Natural Notions or Mathematical because it has for it's Object those Notions which are Mathematical nay it would be Perfect Nonsense to affirm the contrary or assign any other reason for it So evidently Consonant it is to True Reason and to our Natural Notions to affirm that the Knowledge even tho' Divine does proceed from the Divine Object or which is the same that the Divine Nature as an Object is the First that we can possibly conceive in the Order of those Notions which we use when we say GOD Knows and Loves Himself or is the Beginning and Origin of Divine Knowledge and consequently of Divine Love 6. To Explicate this yet more fully and to clear our Natural Notion of Knowing let us reflect on that passage of St. Austin at the end of his Confessions Nos ista quae fecisti videmus quia sunt Tu autem quia vides ea sunt We see or know the things which thou hast made because they are but when thou seest them thy Seeing them makes them bee These last words show that when any Created Being proceeds from GOD His Understanding does begin that aâ—fair and by Knowing it makes them bee or Creates them but in all other cases our Knowledge comes from the Being of the Object 'T is then this Nature of Knowledge thus Explicated which is our Natural Notion of it and which is Proper to our Soul as it is Spiritual Wherefore we must either Transfer This to GOD and say that His Knowledge comes from the Object or else having no Other Notion of it we can never Understand the Meaning of those Words GOD Knows Himself nor consequently Affirm that He does so Certainly nothing can be plainer than 't is that we cannot conceive this Knowledge to be of GOD but because the Object of it is GOD. Wherefore 't is even hence most Evident that the Procession of the Knowledge begins from the Object or is originiz'd by it So that the Knower as such has nothing but what he has from that which is Known Whence follows That this Priority of Order spoken of above must be a Priority of Origin and has the Notion of Principiation to what 's principiated or proceeds from it Nor does this kind of Priority put any Imperfection or less Perfection in the Divine Nature as Knowing more than it does in the same Nature as Known because it is equally Essential to the Divine Nature to be Knowing as 't is to be Known and consequently 't is impossible to conceive that one of the Correlates considering them purely as Related as is our case should more depend on the Other than that the Other should depend on It. Lastly since as appears by the words GOD Knows Himself both the Correlates are GOD in whom is all Perfection imaginable 't is impossible that either GOD as Known or as Knower should be in any sort Imperfect notwithstanding the Priority of Origin between them since this Priority arises out of that most Perfect Notion of Knowing which necessitates that the Knowledge must proceed or be originiz'd from the Object Known as has been shown § 5. 7. But to put it past contest that notwithstanding we must be forced to allow that Knowledge is thus Originiz'd from the Object yet there is not less Perfection in one than in the other we lay this Position viz. That the DEITY being Infinitely Perfect where ever the Deity is there must also be all the Perfections imaginable Since then when we say GOD Knows Himself both the Knower and Thing Known are GOD there is found in each of them all the Absolute Attributes which belong to the DEITY with the Connotate of Infinite annext to them that is all Imaginable Perfections are both in the One and the Other Moreover amongst those Attributes Self-Existence is one if indeed it may be call'd an Attribute and not rather as Metaphysicks demonstrate according to our manner of conceiving the very Essence of GOD whence all His Divine Attributes according to our way of Discoursing spring Since then Self-Existence is found in both and the Notion of Self-existence bars all
Imperfection or Dependence in Being and all the â—orts of other Priorities but that of Origin 't is impossible to conceive that either of them should be Imperfect or Dependent on the other Again since it is equally Essential to GOD to be Known as it is to Know and GOD cannot be Known without a Knower if this Method of Objecting were Allowable where both are Infinite we might with Equal Reason say That the First Person who is the Divine Object Known depends on the Second as that the Second who is Divine Knowledge depends on the First 'T is a Common Maxim That Relationes mutuo se ponunt auferunt and yet neither of them is said to be Dependent on the Other since Mutual Dependence as to the Same Common Notion is direct Nonsence But the main point is that this Principiation or Origination does not formally respect the DEITY it self or the Common Suppositum any more in One than in the Other but only the DEITY as Related that is the Divine Personalities wherefore the Relation by Prelim. X. XI not being really Distinguisht from but Identify'd with the Ground of Referring cannot out of their formal Notion add any New Perfection unto it especially since the Common Suppositum exprest by the Absolute word GOD which is the Ground of all the Divine Relations has in it the whole Perfection of them All. 8. From this Discourse we see how the Trinity is in the Unity because the Ground of all these Relations that is the Relations themselves and consequently all the Three Persons which are constituted by those Relations are in that One Deity or in the Unity of the Godhead and withall how the Unity of the GODHEAD is in the Trinity of Persons because one and the same Divine Nature is in them all as is evident from these very Terms GOD Knows and Loves Himself Which tho' Mysterious to the Rude and Unelevated Conceptions of Vulgar Discoursers is notwithstanding as has been shown if we take each single consideration of it asunder by our Abstractive or Natural way of conceiving and discourse upon each of them distinctly or as thus aparted is perfectly Consonant to Reason working upon our Natural Notions 9. We come next to consider by what Names this First and Second Person the Divine Nature Known and Knower are to be call'd In order to which we lay these Positions viz. That GOD who is in them both is Living or rather Essentially Life and consequently those two Persons in whom the Godhead is must be Living also Next Knowledge cannot be otherwise conceiv'd but to come or as we use to say prâ—ceed from the Object and therefore the Second Person must proceed from the First Thirdly The Divinity communicates it's own Nature to the Knower as appears by the words Knows himself and also by Reason for otherwise we could not say It is Known if It were not in the Knowledge or Câ—njoyn'd with it Spiritually or intellectually Now if we spell these necessary Truths together all which are imply'd in these words GOD Knows Himself we shall find they compound and not barely imply but fully express that the Definition of a SON is appropriated to the Second Person viz. That He is a Living Person Proceeding from a Living Person whose Nature is of the same Kind as the others and is Conjoyn'd with him or remains in him whence follows that His Correlate must properly and necessarily be call'd a FATHER and lastly that the Procession of Him from His Father can therefore have no other Notion or Word which we have that can â—it it but that of GENERATION 10. Hence it is that Knowledge is Appropriated to the Second Person the SON for which reason He particularly took our Flesh upon Him and came to be our Master and to instruct us in His Holy Law Hence He is call'd Sapientia Patris or Verbum because Knowing does intellectually speak or express the Divine Nature Known by Him as our Conception or Verbum Mentis does the Thing or Truth we conceive Hence He is truly said to be Deus de Deo Lumen de Lumine Deus verus de Deo vero Because the Common Suppositum the GODHEAD is in both and the Divine Nature as He is precisely a Knower is Originiz'd from it self as it 's own Object Hence lastly Because of the Common Nature in both and the Proceeding of One from the Other He is call'd Imago Patris Figura Substantiae ejus c. All which and many other such Expressions are exactly verify'd by the Principles here laid and our Consonant Deductions from them 11. Since then the Notion of Father and Son aâ—e truly attributed to the Common Suppositum exprest by the Absolute word GOD it is not only Fitting but Necessary that those Notions should be the most perfectly such as is Possible to be imagin'd Wherefore since Sons amongst us do proceed from their Fathers according to Specifical Likeness in Nature it is most becoming GOD's Infinite Perfection and His most ultimately Determih'd Essence that is indeed the most Perfect Unity of the GODHEAD it self that His Coeternal Son should proceed from His Eternal Father according to the most Perfect IDENTITY of Nature that can be conceiv'd that is according to the self-same Numerical Nature Wherefore this Divine Procession ought not to be explicated by Analogy to the Specifical Nature of Man and it 's being Common to more Individuals For the Species does necessarily imply some Potentiality tho' the Genus does more and is Determinable as was said by Differences which are Intrinâ—â—cal in the Line of Ens and therefore as was prov'd do constitute formally more Entia that is more Things which have diverse Essences all which is Inconsistent with the Divine Nature Nor ought any Composition of such Superiour or Potential Notions be Transferr'd to GOD. And much less since the Common Suppositum however it be predicated of more Particulars in the Manner explicated above has in it self by virtue of it's own Infinite Self-Existence the utmost Perfection in the Line of Substance and is by reason of it's Purest Actuality more perfectly One Singular Absolute Being than any Suppositum or Individuum is or can be amongst us Creatures 12. And the same partly for the same reason is Mutatis Mutandis to be said of the Third Particular verify'd of GOD or of the Third Person of the most B. Trinity For since it must be granted that GOD Loves Himself and the word Himself in the Predicate of that Proposition signifies the same as the word GOD which is the Subject of it 't is as Evident that the Divine Nature Loving is the same with the Divine Nature Loved as it is that GOD is GOD. But besides that this is Evident from the very Terms or the plain Sense of Words there is Another very Peculiar Reason springing out of the particular Nature of LOVE which according to our Natural and Vulgar Notions by which we are here to guide our selves signifies
to be Spiritually Unitive of the Lover to the Thing Loved Our Common Unstudy'd Thoughts and Language gives this to be True If two Friends Love one another dearly all Mankind uses to say They are all One and our B. Saviour prays to His Heavenly Father that He and His Disciples may be One as Himself and his Father are One that is by Mutual Love it being impossible those Words can there bear any other Signification 13. We have seen above That Divine Love which is the Third Person proceeds from the Goodness of the Divine Object or from the Divine Essence Known that is the Father in His own Divine Knowledge in which consists Essential Truth that this Truth is therefore GOD's Greatest Good because this Infinite Truth is the Best Perfection of His Nature as it is Intelligent or Spiritual That because it does thus proceed from the Divine Object in the Divine Knowledge this Third Person does therefore proceed from the Father and the Son immediately and formally according to their Distinct Personalities or Relations and that therefore because no Relation can be grounded on Another Relation but can only Refer what 's Absolute there can be no Reciprocal Opposite or Distinct Relation of the Divine Object-Known to the Lover nor consequently any occasion of conceiving a Fourth Person It remains now to show that since Love by § 12. imports a Spiritual Union or Conjunction of the Lover with that which it Loves therefore from the very Notion of the word Conjoyn'd there must be some Distinction between those which are thus Ioyn'd-together Since what 's in Every Respect One and the Same cannot without Injury to Common Sense be said to be Conjoyn'd with it self in Any Respect that is Conjoyn'd at all But in what manner does this Third Person proceed from the other Two Not according to Likeness or Identity of Nature as did the Son but it presupposes this Likeness Conformity Agreeableness or Identity of Nature in the Object as Known and in the Knower as Knowing it for in this consists that Greatest Good call'd Truth which is the Object of Love and 't is against all our Natural Notions to conceive Actual Love of a thing not Suppos'd to bee Wherefore this Similitude of Nature is not the Formal Motive nor the Manner by which Divine Love proceeds but only this that the other two Persons according to their Distinction of Knower and Known in which consists Divine Truth do integrate as it were that Bonum Dei or Good which is the Adequate Object of the Divine Will The Son therefore proceeds from His Father by having Communicated to Him the same Form as it were or the Divine Nature as an Object which formally constitutes Him a Knower of it and thence a Son The B. Spirit proceeds from the two other Persons as they are a Good to the Divine Nature which it Affects Spiritually clings to or embraces and so becomes or is Actually United or One with it The Former according to our weak manner of Conceiving proceeds as coming from the Object Communicating it self to it the Later by it's being drawn as it were by the Object and â—…oving it self forwards to or rather in reality haâ—ing actually an Union with it The Former by â—ay of Informing or being in the Divine Underâ—â—anding The Later by enamouring the Divine Will to pursue what is conceiv'd to be out of the Lover as such or rather in our case to enjoy it actually Which expression tho' most beseeming a Pure Actuality of Being yet it debars not the Distinction between the Good Enjoy'd and the Enjoyer of it but obliges us to conceive them as thus Distinct. 14. Having thus declar'd the Particularity or Distinction of the Three Divine Persons in order to one another it is seasonable to manifest in the â—ext place what Names and what Effects are peculiarly to be Attributed to each of them as they relate to us Whence it may appear that as our Explication is Agreeable to Right Reason so it is no less Consonant to Holy Scripture and to the Sense and Language of the Christian Church To mention a few Chief ones will hint to us the â—est 15. Since then Being is the First in Order of all our Natural Notions so that we cannot conceive any thing to be Communicated or to deserve Love unless it is Hence the Notion of the Divine Being is justly conceiv'd to be Appropriated to the First Person who is the Beginning and Origin of the rest and communicates it to the Son whence proceeds as was now said the B. Spirit who is Divine Love Hence also since Every thing Acts as it Is He is said to be Author and Cause of all Created Being or the Creatour of all things Hence also He is said to be the Father of all his Creatures in a Natural but less Proper Sense because He gives us our Being and in a more especial manner since His Only Son by taking our Nature upon Him made Himself in some sort our Brother As also in a Civil Sense because it belongs to Fathers to provide for their Children as His Heavenly Providence does for all His Creatures Not to speak how He is a Father in a Spiritual Sense as we are Re-generated by His Grace given us freely for the Merits and by the Means of His Eternal Son whom he sent amongst us to that end 16. What peculiar Attributes are appropriated to the Son is declard above § 10. I only remark here that when he is call'd Verbum the WORD by a Metaphor taken from our Verbum Mentis that is our Conception or Notion of an Object in our Knowing Power we must take heed we do not understand by those words that Imperfect Form of speaking Truth interiourly which is found in Mental Propositions which Affirm or Deny for even in Angels and Separated Souls as has been demonstrated Knowledge is above all Composition of several Notions of which Propositions are made but it must be meant that the Divine Object in which is Essentially all the Metaphysical Verity both of GOD and of all Creatures is most Expressly in Him as He is the Knower of it that is indeed in the very Divine Essence in which the most Actual that is the most Bright and most Universal Truth is Communicated to Him from the Father and is most exactly in Him We must take heed also that when He is call'd Imago Patris and such like some Cartesian or other Ideist catching at the word do not make â—im a meer Picture or Similitude of His Father â—…d that He has not therefore the very Divine created Essence or the Divine Nature in Him â—…t only some Created Similitude of it I must â—…nfess this sutes well enough with the Doctrine Ideas in our Mind which are Spiritual Pourâ—…itures or Resemblances of the Things we know â—…d not the Things themselves But that it sutes â—…ither with Reason or Faith they can never show â—…s for how can meer Fancies agree
with such Sublime Realities or Erroneous Foundations support the Truth of Faith in the Opinion of Doubâ—…ers by giving Consonant and Genuine Explications of it 17. The Third Person Divine Love is call'd 〈…〉 Comforter or Strengthener because nothing more gives our Souls such Strength to resist the Assaults of our Spiritual Enemies break thorow â—ll Difficulties and press forwards vigorously to atâ—ain our True End Eternal Happiness which is â—he Sight of GOD than does an Ardent Love of â—im which Every thing acting as it is is the â—â—culiar Gift of the Holy Ghost who is not only by His Common Essence as are also the rest but also by the Particularity of his Person DIVINE LOVE For the same reason He is call'd a Spiâ—itual Unction because it was customary to Anoint â—hose with Oil who were to exert their Strength 〈…〉 any Encounter or Exercise to give their Limbs greater Force and Agility For the same reason He is call'd Fire which in an Ordinary Metaphor is apply'd to an Ardent Love and thence he came down in Tongues of Fire because Fire is the most Active and Purest Body we have and in regard Love does enflame the Spirits to pursue the Good we affectionately long for For this reason also He is call'd our Spiritual Life because Life consists in Self-moving and nothing moves us so efficaciously as Love which is the proper Act of the Will that Faculty that sets all our Inferiour Powers on work And for the same reason He is called particularly the Spirit because as the Animal Spirits in the Body give us all our Natural Motion so Divine Love his peculiar Name and Nature gives us all our Supernatural Tendency to Heaven so that no External or Interiour Actions we perform do avail us or bring us the least Step nearer our True End Eternal Happiness unless either out of an Immediate or Remote Intention it be done out of that Regard or Intuitus Another reason why He is call'd Spirit which properly signifies Breath is Because Breath and Life are in common speech Equivalent While I breath and while I live having the same signification as have also to Expire and to Die Lastly since Heavenly Love which Divines call Sanctifying Grace is our Supernatural Life which as was said the Peculiar Influence of the Third Person does as it were inspire or breath into our Souls hence He is from this Effect by a Specifical Appellation call'd the HOLY GHOST or Holy Spirit For none can think He is call'd Spirit meerly because He is of a Spiritual Nature since this is an Attribute of the GODHEAD and therefore Common to all the Three Persons nor because He proceeds from the Father and the Son by a kind of Imaginary Action call'd Spiration of which I must for my part confess I can make no Conception nor how it comes to be Transferr'd to GOD. 18. I may perhaps incurr some Censure for denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost is to be explicated by Spiration of which Word many Great Men have made use The best way to clear my self from affecting Singularity is to give my Reasons why I dislike it and submit them to the Judgment of our Peers First Faith as was shewn Preliminary V. must have been deliver'd in such Language as is apt to signify our Natural Notions Secondly Hence tho' it may be allowed to Learned Men in Explicating this Mystery to make use upon occasion of some Term of Art which is current in Schools yet is it utterly Disallowable to use any which has not for its Sense some Natural Notion of Mankind otherwise it will Blunder the Explication instead of Clearing it Thirdly It is agreed and most Consonant to Reason that no Notion taken from Material Beings ought to be Transferr'd to GOD but by the Intervention of Spiritual ones to which they are Metaphosically apply'd in regard He is of a Spiritual and not of a Corporeal Nature Fourthly There can be no Spiritual Notion that respects the Internal Nature of a Spirit but Being Knowledge Will and the Objects of these too last which determin their Internal Operations Fifthly There is none of all these that seems Proper to signify the Procession of Divine Love by Spiration Not Being for That if Compleat Stayes in its self as being the most Absolute Notion nor can it respect any other Notion conceivable in GOD otherwise than as an Object Not Knowledge for that is an Immanent Act and is compleated in this that the Object be such in the Knower as it is in its self whereas Spiration has a Notion of something Transitive to Another Sixthly It has too much of Action in it's Formal Notion which may hazard to breed a Conceit of Efficiency and Effect And lastly Because as apply'd here to signifie a Procession from Father and Son it can have no one Notion in it and therefore it has None For since the Holy Ghost does proceed from them according to their Personalities that is from the Divine Essence as Known and as the Knower of it and there can be no one Notion Common to Thing Known and Knower which are so widely Different being toto genere Disparate and Contradistinct but Being my Dulness cannot comprehend what one Notion the word Spiration can signifie since it cannot be Univocally Apply'd to both nor how it sutes with our Natural Notions we have of Spiritual Natures nor in what manner or for what reason it is Transferr'd to GOD which makes me doubt that meerly the word Spiritus apply'd particularly to the Holy Ghost was the best Ground of this recourse to Spiration and not the Notion of any Virtue or Operation which Nature has given us of a Spiritual Being Notwithstanding I doubt not but these Great Divines had some good meaning in it tho' it colours not with my Thoughts Nay that they meant the same in substance which I do tho' perhaps I do more nicely â—ift the Propriety of Words in handling such a Delicate Point than they did And the same I doubt not may be said of all those Learned Writers who have of late Explicated this Mystery variously of which the Anti-Trinitarians do very frivolously make great Brags and hope to get some Advantage by it I say very frivolously For the Article of Faith it self Abstracts from all Explications and stands Firm on it's own Grounds Divine Revelation tho' both They I and Others should all of us fall short in Explicating it right in every particular Thus much concerning the Names and peculiar Attributes of the Three Persons and the Congruous Reasons why we apply such Attributes to each 19. Notwithstanding all that is said above concerning these Appropriations in the performing Different Effects belonging to the Particular Notion and as it were Genius of each Person as such whenever GOD does any thing ad extra or produces any Effect in His Creatures the Whole Trinity concurs to that Action For since nothing can work but it must have the Being or Essence
proper to it's self nor Act unless it have a Will the Notion of which is to be the Principle of Acting nor can an Infinitely perfect Being act without Knowing What and How to Act both the Eternal Father Son and Spirit must all concur to every such Action But 't is otherwise in that which passes ad intra or within the Deity it self because of their Relative Distinction and Opposition to one another For if I may be allow'd to repeat so oft what is of most Importance GOD precisely as the Divine Object or as Known begets Divine Knowledge and the Divine Essence in the Divine Knowledge which is Essential Truth and the most Proper and Best Perfection or Good of a Spiritual Nature is that Adequate Object from which Divine Love proceeds Hence it is that since God's Essence is Self-Existence which is Infinitely Actual and Infinitely Intelligible or rather Infinitely Known it is Proper to say that the GODHEAD Self-Exists by the Father Knows it Self by the Son who is Divine Knowledge and Loves it Self by the Holy Ghost who is Divine Love Nor can any thing be more Agreeable to Reason than that it should be so in case as we ought we will exalt GOD Infinitely above His Creatures For since Creatures do Exist by an Existence which is Accidental to them whence it comes that their Powers by which they operate are in the Line of Quality or are Accidents It is therefore most Fitting that GOD in whom there is nothing that is Accidental but the most refined or sublim'd Notion of Substance should exercise his own Essence upon Himself and therefore should have a Substantial Notion that is a Person by and in which that Particular to which is specially appropriated Divine Essence should Exist and instead of Powers which are Accidents should have particular Substances or Persons by which He Knows and Loves Himself And therefore as is said above GOD Self-exists or is by the Person of the Father Knows Himself by the Person of the Son and Loves Himself by the Person of the Holy Ghost SECT VIII That notwithstanding this Plurality of Persons the Divine Essence is not less perfectly Simple in it's self or rather 't is more or in more Respects ONE than it would have been had there not been this Plurality of Persons 1. WHat the Opposers of the B. Trinity most pretend to fear is That this Tenet does prejudice the UNITY of the GODHEAD Now tho' it has been already sufficiently prov'd that this has not the least show of Difficulty to a Considering Man yet it were not amiss for their farther Satisfaction to give this Point a farther Clearing tho' it wrong the Method of Discoursing by making Repetitions in which I sometimes indulge my self to inculcate it better to my Readers by their seeing the Coherence of this Doctrine in divers and several occasions For 't is not every Man's Talent to carry along with him every Link in the Chain of a Connected Discourse without needing to be re-minded of it 2. But first I complain that these Objecters confound themselves by not Distinguishing clearly their own Conceptions and therefore neither We nor Themselves know well what it is they would be at Let us try then if we can unravel their Thoughts which they have taken such pains to perplex Can they deny that GOD Knows and Loves Himself 'T is certain they will not for this makes GOD less Perfect than a Creature Tho' as far as I see they never think of it or what Consequences follow from it notwithstanding as was shown this is the Ground-work on which all true Explication of this Mystery is built Can they deny that this granted as it must be we are forced to affirm that GOD is the Knower and Object Known as also the Lover and Thing Loved The very words fly in their Faces and tell them they deny that which is perfectly Equivalent to what they have granted Will they deny that the GODHEAD is One and the Same under all the Notions whatever they are which is signifi'd by all those Relative and Contradistinct Names or Words 'T is equally against Common Sense unless they will say that by the word Himself is not meant GOD which is Self-evident Can they say that Knower and Known Lover and Loved are not Distinct and in some sort Opposite Notions All Mankind will laugh at them and every Junior Sophister who ever heard of the Predicament of Relation will hiss them Can they say that the Deity does not Verifie those Distinct Notions or that we say False when we attribute them to GOD Themselves will not affirm it Can they say That tho' GOD Verifies them yet there is no Distinction at all in GOD This is pure Nonsense For First These Distinct Notions or Attributes are not Extrinsecal Denominations but most Intrinsecal and even Essential to GOD to Know and Love Himself being the Perfection of His Spiritual Nature and one of His Chiefest Attributes Next If those Notions do most formally import Distinction and there be in GOD that which verifies them there is what verifies Distinction in GOD. May they not then with equal reason say that Gold verifies the Notions of Yellow and Heavy yet there is no Yellowness or Weightiness in Gold Can they say That tho' there be Distinction in GOD yet it does not any way or under any Respect make GOD Distinct This were to call Self Evidence in question and arraign First Principles For is it not Self-Known that a Form or Abstract Notion cannot be in any thing but it must make and denominate it such as it self is and may they not as well say that Whiteness may be in a Wall and yet not make it White or Humanity in a thing and not make it a Man as that Distinction is in a thing and yet not make it Distinct Can they find any thing in GOD besides Substance to Distinguish that is will they put any thing in GOD that â—s an Accident or which is the same that is Not-Self-Existent 'T is impâ—â—â—ble to pretend it Can they say That Distinction of the Substance does not Particularize it or â—ake Distinct Substances How can they Distinction whereever it is must make something or other Distinct and this according to the Nature of the Thing it distinguishes And therefore if there be only Substance for it to affect it must put Distinct or Particular Substances and this as evidently as if a Quantitative Thing be Distinguisht it must make Distinct or more Quanta Will they say these Distinct Substances they being Spiritual or Intelligent are not to be â—all'd PERSONS They would do well to let us know their Reason and withal to assign us some Other Name by which Three such Substances ought more properly be called I wish then we knew where their Difficulty pinches For otherwise it would half persuade an uncharitable Man that their Reason ails nothing when it knows not whereabouts it is hurt whence would follow that
them Finite is Infinitely short of His INFINITE Bounty or Goodness 5. Again Fecundity bears in it's Natural Notion a very High Perfection We may observe That all Living Creatures when grown up to a consummate pitch in their respective Natures are Fruitful or Prolifick that is are apt to produce another of their own Kind And Spiritual Natures when they come to know are said to Conceive and our Knowledges are call'd Conceptions tho' few reflect on the word or the Analogy it bears to the Verbum in the Divine Mind or to the Procession of the Son only our Conceptions of Natural Objects are Imperfeâ—â— and never arrive at their utmost Perfection till 〈…〉 see them in the First Cause Since then these arâ— some kind of Perfection in their several ways 〈…〉 most Consonant to Reason that we should Transfeâ— the Notion of Fecundity too to GOD to whom â—â— being Infinitely Perfect we ought to ascribe all sorts of Perfection after they are stript from the Imperfections and from their Limitedness which necessarily accompanies all Finite Beings as has been often said above 6. As for his Communicating his Whole Divine Essence whence in Discourse with no small Man among the Deists I have heard it inferr'd that if the Father Communicates His WHOLE Essence and all it's Attributes to the Son He can leave nothing at all for Himself it is Evident that this Objection proceeds from most profound and most Gross Ignorance of Spiritual Natures A Master may communicate all his Knowledge to His Scholler or to such a degree as to make Him as Learned as Himself Does it follow thence that he has Empty'd or Disfurnisht himself of his whole Stock of Learning and is become now an Ignorant Dunce But speaking of Objects which is more to the Point Even Material Objects lose nothing at all by being known Suppose I could penetrate so â—horowly the Individuating Complexion of Accidents of such a Body in Nature so that I comprehended every minute consideration that could possibly belong to it would that Body be ever the Worse or Diminisht in it self because it is Wholly Known or Understood I desire those weak Reasoners to consider that as Spiritual Natures are above Quantity so they do not follow the Rules of Material Beings nor in discoursing of them ought we to take our Measures â—…om such Predicates or Sayings as we use when â—e speak of Bodies Rather Divisible and Indiâ—…sible which are their Differences that constitute â—…em being Contradictories whatever Conceptions â—…e make of the One the quite Opposite must be made of the Other excepting only the Notion of the Common Genus Ens in which and which only they do boâ—h of them agree Nothing at all is Defalkt from Them by their Communicating themselves nor do they lose any thing even by Actiag upon Bodies The Nerves of an Angel are not over-strain'd nor their Spirits spent by Changing or Altering them Nor are Spiritual Objects impair'd by their being thus Communicated But 't is prodigiously weak to object this in our case where the Discourse is of GOD's Knowing Himself and where it is granted that He does so unless those Gentlemen think that the Word Himself in that speech does not signifie GOD or else they conceit that GOD is the Worse by Knowing Himself that is the Worse for being Infinitely Perfect for in such Nonsense as this all their Objections against the most B. Trinity when driven home to their Principles will be found to terminate 7. Tho' I cannot but judge that enough has been said both here and indeed in divers places of this Treatise to assert and manifest that notwithstanding this Distinction or Plurality of Persons there is not the least Show of prejudicing the Unity of the GODHEAD yet it were not amiss to add one Consideration more which will much surprise the Anti-Trinitarians and be lookt upon by them as a most strange Paradox which is that the Unity of the GODHEAD is so far from being violated by a Trinity of Persons that it is in divers regards better Strengthen'd by that Position To show which I premise this Lemma That That Unity is Best which is every manner of way such and not that which is not so Whence follows that such a Compleat Unity in all Regards ought to be ascrib'd to the GODHEAD Wherefore since it has been by so many Demonstrations quoted and related to above prov'd I hope beyond all possibility of Confute that Knowledge consists in this that the Nature Known even tho' it be of a Material or Corporeal thing which is of a contrary Nature to that of the Knower must out of the very Notion of being Knâ—wn be One and the Same in the Knower as it is in it self Likewise since our Natural Notions do assure us that Love is Spiritually Unitive of the Lover with the thing Loved and these ways of making the Divine Nature One with it self are clearly Different from that of being an Infinite Actuality of Being whence we deduced GOD's Metaphysical Unity in our Third Book of our Transnatural Philosophy it follows necessarily that the Deity had not been in so many Respects One had He not per impossible Known and Lov'd Himself that is had there not been a Trinity of Persons by which only He could be said to Know and Love Himself as has been abundantly Deduced Wherefore since it belongs to the Divine Unity to be Infinitely and consequently every way such even out of this very consideration secluding all others there ought to be admitted a Trinity of Persons SECT IX The Substance of the foregoing Explication Recapitulated 1. TO sum up the precedent Explication in short Since GOD Knows and Loves Himself there is in the Divine Nature what does Verifie both Knower and Known Lover and Loved Wherefore since each of these Pairs of Notions they being relatively Opposite have unavoidably some Distinction in them and being verify'd of GOD are in the Divine Nature there is necessarily some Distinction in the Divine Nature Again since these Notions which are Verify'd of GOD and therefore since they cannot be thought to be Extrinsecal Denominations are really in Him are Distinct and not Common Notions to Many but each of them singular in it's self they must be Particulars to which the word GOD is Common and in some manner or other predicated of them all There are therefore in GOD in some Sense or other Distinct Particulars As appears farther because this Predication is made by the Copula Est which Identifies those Particulars with the Common Predicate GOD that is signifies these Distinct Particulars are Intrinsecal to the Divine Nature and not Apply'd to it Outwardly by our false or untoward manner of Conceiving it but spring out of the very Nature of the Thing or Divine Nature truly Conceiv'd Also since what 's meant by the word GOD must be conceiv'd to have All Perfections in it in the Line of Being of which to be Subsistent or a Suppositum is One we must
be forced to say that what 's meant by the word GOD is not only Common in respect of those others but also that 't is a Common Suppositum and that it is the Common Suppositum which is Verify'd of all those Particulars And since it cannot be Verify'd or Predicated of them as a Genus or Species because These do necessarily include Indetermination and Potentiality which are Inconsistent with GOD's Purest Actuality therefore it must be Predicated of them after such a manner as is not Generical or Specifical but in such a way as a Notion which is in One Line is predicated of such Notions as are conceiv'd to be Formally in Another 2. These Particulars can be but Three tho' there seems to be two Conjugations as it were of mutually Opposite Relations Because Divine Love ought to proceed from the Greatest GOOD that can be conceiv'd to belong or be Connatural to GOD as He is of a Spiritual Nature viz. the Knowledge of Infinite Truth or which is the same from Infinite or Divine Truth Known in the Divine Knowledge which amounts to this that Divine Love proceeds from the Two other Particulars formally according to their Relations Whence no Correlation can be from those other Persons to Divine Love which thus proceeds from them because Relation is Grounded on that which it Refers or Relates It being then Evident that whatever is the Ground of Relation or Related must be some Absolute Notion and not such a one as is Relative it follows that there cannot be any Correlation where the Immediate Ground is a Relative it self 3. These Three Distinct Particulars Verify'd of GOD and therefore Truly in the Divine Nature are properly to be called PERSONS because â—here being no Accidents in GOD there is noâ—hing in the Divine Nature to be Distinguish'd or â—articulariz'd but his Substance and Particulars â—n an Intelligent Substance are properly called PERâ—ONS There are therefore Three Persons in GOD. Amongst which since Knowledge formally proceeds from an Object of the same Nature in both the Knower and thing Known and to communicate a Living Nature to another Living Particular is to GENERATE hence this Procession is truly call'd GENERATION and therefore the Divine Object Known from which Divine Knowledge thus proceeds is truly tho' in a Spiritual Sense call'd a FATHER and the Divine Knowledge a SON and the former of these is the First by way of Origin because Knowledge must be conceiv'd to proceed from the Object and not the Object or Thing to proceed from the Knowledge unless that Knowledge makes it to be or Creates it as the Divine Wisdom does Creatures The Third Person is properly call'd Divine Love because Love proceeds from that which is our Greatest and most Connatural Good perfectly and expresly Known or as we phrase it conceited or fully conceiv'd to be such Now the Greatest Good of GOD who is of a Spiritual Nature is Essential TRUTH which as was said consists in this that GOD knows Himself or which is the same that the Divine Object is in the Divine Knower By which is seen How and Why the Holy Ghost who is Divine Love proceeds from both the Father and the Son 4. Wherefore since as appears by those oftrecited Words on which we build our Explication the Common Suppositum exprest by the word GOD has in it All the Perfections that can be imagin'd and this Infinitely hence all the Three Persons having the common Suppositum or the GODHEAD in them are Coeternal Co-omnipotent c. and in every respect Co-equal as is exprest in ihe Creed of St. Athanasius Whence all Objections of their being before one another for some Time or some Instant as also of Dependence on one another and all Distinction in Nature or imagin'd Plurality of Gods are Diametrically opposite to the Doctrine of the Trinity Lastly hence all pretended Arguments taken from Fancy for from True Reason none at all can be drawn are by the respective parts of this Explication shewn to be frivolous and either Answer'd or else Forestall'd and Prevented 5. If the Anti-Trinitarians have any Objections in their Quiver I have set them here a fair Mark at which they may level them They may see here that I do not wrap my Discourse in Ambiguity of words but I distinguish my Notions as exactly as is possible and draw my Conclusions consequently Nor have I any Deductions which are nor grounded on Principles But I foresee that they will not be able to raise any Opposition which is not built on Faneies taken from Material Beings which are too grofs to be made use of when we are discoursing of GOD and altogether unfit to be Transferr'd in their rude sense to so sublime a Majesty or else that they are occasion'd by perfect Ignorance of Spiritual Natures and their Operations The main Distinction between which and Bodies is this that whereas Bodies being Divisible Entitites can have nothing in them Matter supposed but their own Accidents or Modes which Determine the Matter thus or thus and thence make it this or the other Individuum so that a Corporeal Suppositum or Thing can have nothing in it but its own Nature and its own Intrinsical Modes which have no Being but Its A Spiritual Being which is so far Superiour to it that it is constituted by its Difference Indivisible which is of a Contradictory Nature to it can therefore by its Proper Operation Knowing have all other Essences or Natures in it besides its own and engraft them as it were on its Stoek of Being and in such a different manner from the former that as they are in It they are no Part or proper Mode of the Spiritual Nature it self nor any Intrinsical Accidents of it but they are there formally as Others or as Distinct from it nor are they Dependent on the Spiritual Nature that Knows them for their Being as were the Corporeal Modes on their Subject but they have a Proper Being of their own out of the Understanding and Independently on it So likewise when they have an Act of Love they have a Propension Tendency or Panting after the Object of that Love and an endeavour to be Conjoyn'd and United to it by way of Attainment or Fruition of the Good they conceive to be in it Whence 't is plain that they are carry'd to it as it is Another or as 't is Distinct from themselves So that even when an Angel or a Soul Knows and Loves its self they must in some Respect or other be Distinct from themselves as they are the Object of that Knowledge and Love as the very word Object does Evidence and as manifestly appears from the Antithesis between Knower and Known Lover and Loved Only because as was shown above in Creatures which are not Self-Beings this Knowledge and consequently Love are Accidental to them in regard that even their Existence which this Knowledge and Love presupposes is Extrinsical and Accidental to their Essence therefore this Distinction
which Self-Knowledge and Self-Love makes in them and which is the Immediate Ground of those Relations cannot make Distinction in their Substance Whereas in GOD in whose Essence there can be no Accidents nor any thing Accidental but purely Substance Self-Knowledge and Self-Love must necessarily Distinguish and consequently Particularize the Substance and hence Particulars of a Substance which is Intelligent being in proper Speech call'd Persons it obliges us to put a TRINITY of PERSONS in the same Divine Nature or in the UNITY of the GODHEAD 6. Perhaps it may be Objected That I am inconsistent with my self while I say that there are no Accidents in GOD and therefore only His Substance is Particulariz'd whence we infer Plurality of Persons and yet we put Relation in GOD which is an Accident I answer that as appears by our State of the Question we do not put Relations in GOD as He is in Himself but only as He is Conceiv'd by us and that as we conceive Him according to our Natural Notions it is impossible to conceive or speak of Him otherwise To the Objection 't is Reply'd that we do not Transfer the Notion of Relation to GOD without stripping it first of its Imperfection which is to inhere in GOD as in its Subject or as a Mode of it which implies Potentiality in the Subject and Dependence on it in the Form We have already shown that Relation meerly as Relation does add no Perfection or Imperfection to that on which 't is Grounded and which has an Absolute Notion As Likeness between two Things that are White adds in neither of them the least Perfection or Imperfection to their Absolute Notion that is it makes neither of them more or less White Wherefore the Relations in GOD are as Essential to Him as is the Knowing and Loving Himself which Grounds these Relations Nor is this Peculiar in the Relative Notions we apply to GOD for Mercy Justice Goodness c. and the rest of such Attributes are Qualities in us and exprest as such and yet they are Essential to the DEITY and have their Natures which they had as Accidents Dignify'd to be several Inadequate Conceptions of the Divine Essence it self SECT X. Of what vast Importance and most Efficacious Influence the Belief of the Blessed TRINITY is to Christian Life and to the raising our Thoughts and Affections towards Heaven 1. I Doubt not but the Anti-Trinitarians will complain sadly of the Christian Church as barbarously Uncharitable for cutting off from the Body of their Society Excommunicating and delivering over to Satan so many well-meaning Persons who embrace their Sentiment They will ask why the Denying a Tenet which is meerly Speculative should be so hainously taken and severely resented They will be apt to liken Church-Governours to those hot-headed School-Divines who all-to-be-Heretick those who will not allow their Opinion They will pretend that as long as Men do sincerely Worship the only True GOD and keep His Commandments which they will profess they do from their Hearts hold and intend no more can in reason be requir'd Is not this enough will they say for Salvation Must the Seamless Coat of Christ be torn and shatter'd to pieces Charity and Church-Communion be violated in the height for the sake of a Speculative Tenet which however it may please some can sute with the Fancies of very Few perhaps None if they would but lay aside their Customary Belief which Education and not Judgment has given them and set themselves seriously to reflect how Uncouth it is to their Reason and how utterly Unuseful Ineffectual and of no Influence at all it is to Good Life Piety and Virtuous Action Thus they will plead for their Impious Doctrine and Schismatical Fact and their Apology will be receiv'd with Applause by all the Latitudinarian Party For nothing is so Cheap and Costs so little and withal is so Necessary for those who are destitute of Solid Reasons as 't is to Affect and have Recourse to Godly Cant 2. In Answer First we will speak to the Persons and their Guilt or Innocence then to the Point it self We ask then those Rabbies of the Anti-Trinitarians Who taught them that piece of Doctrine which they proceed upon as if it were a a Self-evident Principle that the way to determine what we are to Believe what not is to begin our Enquiry by scanning the Articles of Faith themselves by our Common and Obvious Reason and to make This the Test of what we are to Accept what to Reject For First they cannot but see â—hat this takes away the very Notion of Faith out â—f the Hearts of Mankind I suppose by Reason â—hey mean Evident Reason for otherwise they â—ust grant that this Rule of theirs is Uncertain â—nd therefore can be no Rule at all And if they will not believe but upon Evident Reason then 't is Science and so farwell all Faith Secondly If they say they intend only to Evidence the Opposite Tenet to be False and not any Point of Faith to be True we are but where we were For where the Tenets in Question are Contradictories as 't is here he that Evidences the Trinity of Persons in the GODHEAD to be False does with the same Labour and at the same time Evidence the Unity of Person in the same GODHEAD to be True Since then this later is a Point of Faith with them they must still grant that by Evidencing this they turn Faith into Science Thirdly This Tenet amongst others was held by themselves e're they renounc'd it to have come to them by Divine Revelation wherefore they are convinced by recurring to this New Rule of Humane Reason to bid adieu to all Divine Revelation and so they fall in with the Deists For why should one Point of Faith be received upon their Rule of Humane Reason and not All. Fourthly They are False to their own Rule and their own Pretence and therefore are not to be Credited nor without some straining of Charity to be excus'd as to their having Sincere Intentions An Evident Proof can be no other but a clear Demonstration and to this I have not observ'd they ever so much as pretended 'T is easie to call any pretty probable Proof an Evidence so it be but sutable to Fancy But Demonstration carries something that is Manly Decisive and Victorious in its Notion to which therefore 't is dangerous for Plausible and Probable Discoursers to pretend A True Demonstration must be built on Principles that are Evident and finally reducible to Self-Evidence So must the Consequence of it too and the Medium must be such as is most necessarily Connected with the two Extremes What I affirm then is that they have not Produc'd so much as One Demonstration however they would have it â—hought they have though they cautiously mince it in the Expression If they have any such let us see it let us hear of it I will grant them that any One which is truly such will
conclude the Point and carry the Cause They have seen my Explication what Grounds I proceed upon and what Principles I build on Wherefore to make short work of it I send them a flat Challenge to produce this one Demonstration of theirs against this Mystery Half a Sheet of Paper will conclude the whole Controversie as far as it depends on the way of Humane Reason to which they have appeal'd from Divine Revelation and from the Iudgment and Doctrine of the Christian Church If they be Sincere they will put it to the Tryal if they refuse they give themselves to be Guilty of persisting voluntarily in an Errour and manifest that they took up this Pretence of Evident Reason for a Stale to draw after them the Ignorant and Unstable but that they do not think it their Interest to stand to the Rule themselves have espoused Fifthly By renouncing this Fundamental of Christian Faith they have by Consequence invalidated all Christian Faith by denying the Certainty of the Ground of All Faith For this was held by the Christian Church upon some Ground which by their Recession as to this Point they have Renounc'd and by consequence have brought all Christian Faith into a Groundless Uncertainty Lastly By their Denial of this Article they accuse the Christian Church of being Idolatrous in the most Fundamental Article of her Faith and in the greatest part of her Worship in Adoring so constantly heartily and devoutly a Man for GOD and a Creature for the Dread Creatour 3. To summe up then this whole Discourse If the taking away the Notion of all Faith and turning it into Science If to renounce by Consesequence Divine Revelation which none but Deists professedly Oppose If the Injury done to Humane Reason besides the misapplying it and the Fourbe put upon weak Souls in setting up for Evident Reasoners without offering so much as One Argument which is in true Speech Evident or Conclusive If the undermining the Ground on which all Faith is built as to our Knowledge of it Lastly If the accusing their former Superiours the Church-Governours so many Venerable Learned and Holy Fathers of the Câ—urch and even so many General and Provincial Councils nay the Christian Church it self of most Gross Idolatry Blasphemy and Prophaneness may be thought sufficient Provocation and Plea for the Governours of the Christian Church to Excommunicate and Declare That they who were by their Office the Depositaries to whom the Preserving of Christ's Faith was committed would have no more to do with such Men who had voluntarily gone out from the Church and who should they be permitted still to remain in her would hazard to infect with their Contagious Doctrine and Practice the Sounder Faithful If these things I say be manifestly so then the Church and her Governours are Acquitted and the Blame and Guilt lie evidently at their Doors This is the true Point to be Decided Which I believe every Man of Common Sense were they of the Jury would quickly determin without needing to go from the Bar to debate it or consider of it 4. But this is not all that may be alledg'd against them There seems moreover to be imply'd in their Discourses that the most perfect Law and most Elevating Principles of Christianity are no better than that most Imperfect State of the Law of Nature which rais'd Men to no higher a pitch than that of meer Moral Honesty in which divers of the Antient Heathens excell'd many Christians What Necessity was there in such a case that Christ our Saviour should come amongst us take such pains in Preaching and working Miracles Suffering a most Cruel Death on the Cross Rising again from the Dead Ascending into Heaven and Sending His H. Spirit c Certainly it had been very Preposterous to have laid so many Supernatural Extraordinary and Prodigious Means to compass such an End as was within the Power of Nature without Miraculous or Supernatural Assistance to atchieve 5. This shews their sleight Opinion of the Christian Law the Nature of it's Principles and the Efficacy of the Motives it proposes which was intended by God's Wisdom to purifie in the best manner the hearts of the Faithful and to raise them to the Love of Heaven by the most Powerful Means Infinite Goodness and Mercy could contrive To apprehend better how highly GOD's Revelation of â—â—e B. Trinity conduces to Mankind's Salvation and â—o cultivate our Minds with Theological Virtues which are the only Dispositions to attain it let us consider how GOD's Revealing Himself to us as to those Attributes of Mercy Justice Goodness Omnipotence Holiness c. did and does promote Virtue in the Church and thence estimate what large Accessions the Belief of the B. Trinity does superadd to them If GOD had not been represented to us and believ'd by us to be Iust what Sinner would not have run on in Sin presuming He was Unconcern'd in Sublunary Actions and would never call him to account for his Sins Or if he held him severely Iust and not Merciful what poor Creature conscious to himself how often he had grievously Offended Him would not Despair of Pardon think all was irrecoverably lost and thence run forwards headlong in Sinning wanting Encouragement or Hope of any Favour in case he should return and repent Who would at all Love Him if he did not think Him Good Believe in Him if He were not Veracious or Trust in Him if He were not Faithful and Powerful Or lastly Who would care to lead a Holy Life if He deem'd that GOD was not Holy Himself So that all sorts of the Best Virtues Faith Hope and Charity would be banisht out of the Thoughts of all Mankind if GOD had not Reveal'd Himself to them under the Notions of these several â—ivine Attributes 4. Let us now consider what incomparably Higher Advances in Virtue the Doctrine of the B. Trinity and all the Train of Innumerable and most Powerful Motives which depend on it as on their Principle do superadd to the Former now mention'd all tending of their own Nature to purâ— our Souls and to raise them to the highest pitch oâ— Perfection They are so many and each of them so pregnant that I must content my self to Select only a Few and leave them to be meditated on at leasure What Man who believes that GOD the Father sent his Only Son Coequal and Coeternal with Himself to take our Nature upon Him to teach us the True Way to Heaven to suffer Hardships Persecutions blasphemous Revilings nay to be Buffetted Scourg'd Crown'd with Thorns and suffer such a cruel and ignominious Death on the Cross and all this to pay the ransom for our Sins and rescue poor Wretched Mankind out of the Jaws of Hell and Eternal Death and by this means to court our Love that by Loving Him we might be Happy What Man I say can seriously and thorowly reflect on this and not to be Transported with Admiration and Love of so Infinite a Goodness
though it may look very Plausible that ought to shock us or make us entertain an ill Opinion of our Principle it self But it must be such a Solid Reason as may be held more Evident than the Principle was on which they and the Body or Community they were in had built their former Faith otherwise it cannot with any Sense be held able to cope or contrast with it much less to overthrow it 4. They ought I say in such a Case to consider that they were formerly in a Christian Community or in some Church and were Actually Members of that Body from which they must separate and so be guilty of a very Criminal Schism if they divide themselves by Apostacy from it which makes it plain to the meanest Capacity that the Reasons which are oppos'd ought to be most Evident and most Cogent This ought to make them cautious and wary in admitting such Objections for true Reasons lest if they hap to be prov'd False they run themselves desperately into such a dangerouâ— Precipice Wherefore they must be Certain those Reasons were indeed most Evident which we call Demonstrative and not only Probable by Resting on which they hazard such a Miâ—chief to their Souls Plainest Reason tells them that no Truth in the World could remain long settled nor any Government continue long on Foot if the Subjects or Inferiours may be allowed upon every Probable Reason to break from the whole Body and Rebel against Superiours and Governours Now not to mention that they can never bring any such Proof as can in the Esteem of a Vulgar Understanding be held Conclusive or Demonstrative it is Evident by the Carriage of the Rabbiâ—s of those Dissenters that they never did even pretend to bring any Demonstrative Proof against the Trinity For did they ever lay any Self-Evident Principles or build on them as those to which those Proofs are finally reducible 'T is unheard of and yet without these 't is impossible there can be any True Evidence or Demonstration For whatever pretends to be Evident must either be Evident of it self or be made Evident by something that is moro Evident than it self is which must either run on Endlesly or terminate at length in something that is Self-Evident A Demonstration if truly such and clearly propos'd obliges all Humane Nature to assent to it if they be Unprejudic'd If they can pretend they have any such Demonstrative Argument that the Doctrine of the Trinity is such Nonsense and so Impious why do they not produce it stand to it show the Principle it is grounded on and the Connexion it has with that Principle One such Argument would decide the Cause and put an end to the Whole Controversie But alas they dare not so much as say I am sure they never did that they have any such kind of Argument They never concern themselves with examining the Qualification of Arguments or what Proofs Conclude what not but content themselves to talk rawly prettily and plausibly 'T is not their Design to convince Men of Learning but to Over-reach and work upon the Weakness of the Ignorant Whence follows that since no Proof can be even pretended competent to break Church-Communion but such as is evidenty Conclusive or Demonstrative and they neither produce nor profess to bring any sueâ— their Reasons ought not to weigh with any Man of Sense so as to make him for their sake hazard the Guilt of Schism 5. They ought to consider next when they have left the Particular Church in which they were and in which there are Church-Governours and a great Body of Christians with whom they do joyn in Faith Prayer Sacraments Discipline and other Spiritual Duties with what Church-Governours and what Body of Men they will joyn in Prayer and such Devout Offices Can a few Men scatter'd here and there who sculk in Corners do not own themselves openly nor barefacedly protest and preach against this Doctrine which if False is so manifestly Idolatrous can I say such a Rope of Sand such an Unconnected Multitude who thus let GOD's Honour go to wrack have the Face or the least show of a Church With whom then will these New Proselytes joyn hemselves in Prayet Sacraments Church-Government and other such Concerns This is so shameful to their pretended Church that though 't is against all Conscience and Sense they are content to joyn in Prayer and other Religious Duties with our Churches though themselves must hold them most abominably Idolatrous rather than make a ridiculous show of their own Party alone Perhaps too Interest and Indemnity are two powerful Motives to induce them to this Brotherly Compliance and Correspondence For such Men do not use to be guilty of such a Zeal for GOD's Honour or for their own Persuasion as to hazard Martyrdom no not the less of any Temporal Advantages for GOD's or Truth 's sake They are cast in a new Mold from that of other good Christians and approach to the Deists as in other Prudent Methods so in this 6. If those Unstable and Dissatisfy'd Men say they are not able to Judge whether the Reasons they bring are Conclusive or no they plainly confess they hanker after them out of the bewitching Humour of Singularity and Novelty since they consent to alter their Former Faith upon such Reasons as they know not whether they be Good or Bad Solid or Aiery fit to be yeilded to or no That is in plain Terms they have an Inclination to that Party but yet they do not well know why If they alledge that their Reasons seem more easie to them than those brought by others I Answer First That Easiness is not a sign of Truth The Highest Truths especially those belonging to Spiritual Natures are the Hardest to conceive and yet not a jot the less True 'T is easier to conceive GOD to be a Body and perform all his Actions by Motion as we do ours and yet it is so far from True that it is a damnable Errour and destroys the Nature of the DEITY Or rather it is a vast Prejudice against all their Arguments and their very Way of Arguing For tho' each single word in which Faith was deliver'd was easie so that the then Believers could have a right Apprehension or Notion of what was taught them yet when the Point comes to be canvast by Disputation and Reasons produc'd Pro and Con and that the Point is of what passes in the Divine Nature which is not only Spiritual but Infinite 't is a certain sign that if the Reasons either Party produces be Easie to Vulgar Fancies 't is I say a most certain sign that they are merely Superficial and do not reach the Nature of so abstruse a Mystery or so High a Subject 7. They may also be made sensible how impossible it is that 318 Bishops of the Eastern and Western Churches should meet together in the First Council of Nice who by their Station must needs know the Sentiment of the then
Monster of Learning in comparison of this Innumerable multitude of Christian Bishops Fathers and Profest Doctors that they are all to be held Dunces in comparison of Him What are the Productions where are the Books that Prodigious Man has Writ which have rais'd him to that Transcendent Reputation in the World that all our Doctors who have been by Indifferent men to say no more held to be Men very Eminent for their Learning ought all of them to be accounted Block beads if compar'd with his Peerless Parts None such was ever heard of and I believe themselves will not think it for the Interest of their Credit to name any such Wherefore it is obvious for any man of Ordinary Prudence to discern that the Weight of the Authority of their Learned Men is far from being considerable and thence conclude that the Vast Number of our Learned Bishops Professors and Doctors ought in their Esteem to outweigh beyond any comparison the Adverse Party 10. If they have or ever had any such Paragon of Learning to produce let them approve him to be such by bringing some one Demonstration of his against our Doctrine of the B. Trinity One Single Demonstration as I told them above deduc't from Undeniable Principles stood to and maintain'd by Reducing it to Evident Grounds would do the whole Business and save much Proâ—fusion of Ink-shed But alas they are anâ— have been so far from bringing any that I could never discern they ever aym'd at it or so much as knew what a Demonstration meant Their utmost Ambition is to give their sleight Discourses a Glossy Outward Appearance for Superficial Talk best takes with weak People and if they can but make it look Probable by alluding Texts or Sprucing it up with a little smooth Rhetorick and such Baubles as Nonsense needs to adorn and recommend it they think their work is done and they have perform'd Wonders 11. This leads us to their pretence That Scripture is clearly for them that is that they brag they hit on the right Sense of it better than the Christian Party And it must be allow'd that they have a peculiar Dexterity in giving a Plausible Turn to the Plainest Texts by study'd Allusions of one Place to another which especially if it be New and not observ'd formerly is able to delude the Ignorant But an easie Antidote will secure any Man of an Ordinary size of Wit from being infected with this quaint Stratagem It were easie to show that he must be a Man of Universal Learning who is qualify'd to be a consummate Interpreter of the several places of Scripture as they profess themselves to be He must be well verst in the Oriental Languages an Excellent Critick a great Chronologist well acquainted with the Sense of Antiquity and even of their Customs their Proverbs Phrases or Manners of speaking He must be a good Logician to observe the Tenour or Connexion of the Context and thence able to discern whether the Alluded places â—… taken in the same precise Sense without which â—he Allusion of them to one another is ridiculous â—mproper and insignificant He must be a good Natural Philosopher and Metaphysician otherwise those Passages which speak of Spiritual Natures â—f understood Literally will lead them into most Dangerous Mistakes Lastly He must be a good Speculative Divine to consider the Drift and Nature of Reveal'd Faith and the End why it was told us and thence the Proportion those Means have to compass that End a Point particularly Useful for Pastors who are to guide Souls in the Paths that lead to Heaven and breed them up so as to attain Eternal Happiness c. Now it is manifest that those Vulgar Understandings to whom we address this Discourse are not capable of any of these nor consequently can they determine who has these Qualifications or follows these Rules exactly Yet there is none of them so Ignorant but he knows very certainly that No Man can compass an End without the Means to it nor can be able to compass it better without having Better Means Let then the Right Interpretation of Scripture be the End aym'd at The Means to perform this or atchieve this End must either be Supernatural or Natural and unless they can show their Advantage in one of these Means they cannot pretend to persuade any man of Common Sense to believe them To the former of these Means they do not pretend and if they did they must show some Supernatural outward Sign to justifie their Claim For otherwise since no man can see what passes within their Souls none can have any reason to believe they have any such If they say they have Better Natural Means it will lie upon them to proâ—… it and how will they evince it or make it 〈…〉 that they are so singularly furnisht with thoâ—â— Natural or Human Means as to out strip so clearly and surpass the Innumerable Multitudes of Christian Doctors and Professors in many Learnâ—â— Universities and for so many Ages Our Men have been Professors of the Sacred Languages they have spent many years in Perusing the Fathers and Ancient Commentators they are most Exact Criticks nay so far as to have writ divers Volumes on that Subject They have been held Eminent in Logick and in all sorts of Philosophy and Divinity c. and the same may be said of whatever other Humane Skill Art or Science the Others can pretend to How then will the Anti-Trinitarians make it appear that they have better Natural Means of Interpreting Scripture than the Christian Church and her Members have had and still have And if they cannot make out they have better Means for interpreting Scripture What man will be so sottish as to believe them they better Interpret it meerly because they say they do For 't is here supposed those unlearned Persons are not qualify'd to judge of the Allegations on both sides which are made pro and con 12. Lest it should be pretended as some Deists do That the Apostles out of over-respect to their Master would needs make him a GOD and to make that Tenet current Sense invented a Trinity of Persons of which each should be GOD or as the Arians and Socinians say that the Christian Church introduced it sinee To beat down this Calumny those Unlearned and Credulous Men may ask them how this could be since both many Learned Jews and even some Wiser Heathens acknowledg'd a Trinity in GOD As to â—he Jews it is shown at large from their own Authors in that Excellent Treatise Entituled A Short and Easie Method with the DEISTS with a Second Part to the IEWS from Pag. 209. to 224. And as for the Heathens I hapt to reside some time at Amsterdam in the year 1678. where I converst very frequently with Christophorus Sandii Sandius the famous Modern Writer for the Arians Of whom by the way to give the Reader some account He was a Man of a quick Conceit and nimble Wit his Talent lay in
catching at little Expressions snatcht out of Authors here and here and improving them dexterously to his Advantage but otherwise he seem'd quite destitute of Logick or any other Philosophical Science Hence he was a very Weak Reasoner a Rash Concluder and incapable of Arguing from any Principles which he quite disregarded and sleighted What concerns my purpose is that he show'd me divers Citations which he had pickt up out of Heathen Authors in which they own'd a Trinity and would needs pretend that the Christian Church had borrow'd forsooth that Tenet among other Superstitions from the Heathens I told him that this made against himself and rather arguâ—d that all Mankind who reflected deeply upon the Essence of a Spiritual Nature especially if they held it to be Infinite had some rude Sentiments of a Trinity or perhaps that some few Iews might have it from some Persons that were Englighten'd after a special manner and that the Heathens had it â—â—om Them I wish my Recommendation might prevail with some Learned Man of our Universities where they have plentiful Libraries to confute that Book of his in compiling which I could discern by his Discourse he had been assisted by his whole Party inspecting Libraries in divers Countries and picking out what they could find to their Advantage I believe they will find it wants no Insincerity a judicious Friend of mine whom I intreated to peruse it having as he told me discover'd much foul Play in divers Places 13. The same Unlearned Readers may also be admonisht that they ought not to read or at least heed such Books lest wading too rashly out of their Depth they come to Sink For since such Books pretend to show that the Tenet of the Trinity is full of Contradictions and such Readers are not skill'd nor are able to know how many Requisites do go to a Contradiction it is manifest they wrong their Reason by over-weening or taking upon them to judge of a Point of which they are Ignorant what the very Terms mean 14. Yet if they have good Mother-Wits they may be made to a great degree capable of Discerning the Folly and False Reasoning of such sleight Discoursers It will not be hard to make such Men see there can be no Contradiction unless we Affirm and Deny in the same Respect V. g. That there is no Contradiction to say that a Table is Three according to the Notion or Respect of such a Figure call'd a Corner or Three-corner'd and yet is but One according to that Respect call'd a Table or but One Table Or that a Man who is a Father a Son and a Husband may be Three according to that Respect or Notion call'd Relation or have Three Relations in him and yet be but One according to the Notion of Thing or but One Man Which done let but the several Notions or Respects that belong to this Mystery be Distinguish'd by Confounding which those Men do pretend to show it Contradictious and a little Instruction will let them see plainly that at least many of their Objections if not all are merely Frivolous and Insignificant 15. To make this sink better into their Apprehension it were not amiss to Instance in some one Paragraph of the aforesaid Letter concerning the Trinity and Athanasian Creed Wee 'll take one of the shortest but withall the Pithiest and Shrewdest in their way of Arguing 'T is found p. 7. Col. 2. in these Words If the Father is an Infinite All-perfect Being and if the Son is Distinct from the Father he must if he be a GOD be a Distinct Infinite All-perfect Being for the same Being can be no way Distinct from its self And certainly two Distinct All-perfect Beings are two Distinct GODS How currently and smoothly this glides over the Fancy Yet when examin'd and brought to the Test it will appear by and by that 't is so incomparably Weak and Silly that 't is scarce possible to croud more Nonsence into so narrow a Room Which I show thus 16. 'T is acknowledg'd the Father is an Infinite All-perfect Being for he has the Divine Nature in Him which is Infinitely Perfect or truly GOD. He Proceeds and if the Son is Distinct from the Father In what Sense I beseech him or according to what Notion or Respect do we hold He is Distinct In that of Being Not one Man in GOD's Church ever said it What we hold and maintain is that He is only Distinct from Him according to that Notion or Respect calld Relation And what Man so stupid as not to see that what differs only in Relation may be the same Many or the same Being still A Man is Marry'd and has never a Child and then he is a Man but is not a Father Afterwards he has a Son and then he is a Father and yet he is the same Man or the same Being he was though to be a Father and not to be a Father abstractedly conceiv'd be Contradictories It follows and therefore he must if he be a GOD be a Distinct All perfect Being And why must this follow when the Distinction affects the GODHEAD only according to that Respect called Relation and not according to that Respect called Essence or according to the GODHEAD it self or the Divine Nature 'T is strange that these Men cannot Reflect that when we say God knows Himself or which is the same GOD â—i known by Himself what 's mean't by Knower and Known do formally signifie the Relation and the word GOD and which is the same Himself do signifie the GODHEAD or the same Infinite All-perfect Being in Both. But the Reason he gives for this Consequence exprest in the words For the same Being can be no ways Distinct from it self is such a most Profound piece of Ignorance that 't is Unparallell'd Indeed a being can be no ways Distinct from it self under the Notion of Being for this were to be the same Being and not to be the same Being but that it can be no ways as he says Distinct from it self but it must have a Different Being is against our Common Notions the Common Language and the Common Sense of all Mankind A Child is the same THING or the same BEING when it is grown up to be a Man wherefore this same Being which is now a Perfect or â—ipe Man is now Distinct from its self according to its Quantity which is One Way of being Distinct from its former self The same Man was yesterday in Health and now is Sick and therefore he is Distinct or Different from himself according to those Qualities which is Another Way He was before no Father and now is a Father therefore he is Distnct from his former self according to the Notion or Respect of RELATION which is a Third Way and yet all this while he is the self-same in respect of his Beâ—ng Innumerable are the particular Ways Endless are the Instances that might be given how the same Thing or Being might differ from its self