BRIEF OBSERVATIONS UPON THE VINDICATION OF THE Trinity and Incarnation By the Learned Dr. W. Sherlock THE Notes upon the Creed of Athanasius have been already printed by themselves and were received and approved by several Learned Men both of London and in the Country Dr. Sherlock has thought fit to oppose to them a large Book in which at Pag. 142. he saith My Vndertaking is to vindicate the Athanasian Creed and the Doctrine of a Trinity in Vnity Yet in this Vindication he hath given up to his Adversary all the ancient Defences of this Creed and of the Trinity on which his Predecessors in this Controversy were wont to insist and has advanced in their room an Hypothesis or Explication never so much as named or heard of before He pretends to salve by these two words Self-consciousness and Mutual-consciousness all the Difficulties of this Great Mystery so sufficiently and evidently that the Notion of a Trinity in Unity is now He saith as clear and easy as that of but One God But this is too much for any Man to take on his bare word or without carefully examining what He has said 1. Concerning the Divine Substance Nature or Essence for in this Question these are Equivalent Terms both with the Vindicator and with the Author of the Notes 2. How doth he describe the Three Persons and how is each Person one with it self and how are they distinguished each from other 3. How are they united with one another and how do they All make one God First Concerning the Divine Substance or Essence or Nature In his Discourses concerning the Divine Substance or Essence the Vindicator seems sometimes to be a perfect Hobbist to deny all Spiritual and Immaterial Substance or that there is any other Substance but Matter or Body He saith for example at Pag. 69. We can frame no Idea of Substance but what we have from Matter When we conceive of God as a Substance he saith there We find it impossible to conceive how there should be Three Divine Persons without Three distinct Infinite Substances A Person and an Intelligent Substance are Reciprocal Terms and therefore Three distinct Persons are Three distinct Numerical Substances and one Numerical Substance is but one Numerical Person He says that these are all Carnal Reasonings which arise from our conceiving of God as a Substance of which we can have no Idea but what is Material He concludes in the same place and often elsewhere We must not seek for any other Substance in God but Infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness But as if he had been a little too liberal in that he says at P. 72. Wisdom and Truth are the true Nature and Essence or Substance of God He often exhorts his Reader particularly at P. 70. To set aside all these Material Images of Essence and Substance and to contemplate God as Eternal Truth and Wisdom and then the Notion of God is very plain and easy He adds at P. 138. That which has confounded this Mystery of the Trinity has been the vain Endeavour of reducing it to Terms of Art such as Nature Essence Substance Subsistence Person Hypostasis and the like He presumes to say at P. 139. The Fathers nicely distinguished between Hypostasis or Person and Nature or Essence or Substance saying that there are Three Persons and but one Nature or Essence or Substance But then when Men curiously examined the Signification of these words they found that upon some account or other they were unapplicable to this Mystery For what is the Substance and Nature of God How can Three distinct Persons have but one Numerical Substance What is the distinction between Essence and Personality Now I ask Is this to vindicate the Athanasian Creed as the Doctor undertook to do or to slight and overthrow it The chief business of the Athanasian Creed is to distinguish between the Substance and Persons in God to show that the Persons are Three and the Substance but One. The Vindicator could not have more effectually given up the Catholick Doctrine to the Note-maker than by thus frequently denying there is any real Divine Substance at all which is more than his Adversary required and than he will accept and by saying Men have unduly used these Terms by their applying them to God The pretence of the Brief Notes is no other but what the Vindicator we have seen often grants that there is no difference between Substance and Person in God and that therefore Three Divine Persons and One Divine Substance is a sensless Contradiction But then 't is as sensless to deny the Divine Substance and to reduce the whole Notion of God to Wisdom and Truth for these are Properties that cannot subsist but in some Substance Nor do I think that the Trinitarians will forgo their old Explications by Persons and Substance for the Doctor 's new Wind-mills of Self-consciousness and Mutual-consciousness They will certainly abide by the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds which suppose a Real Divine Substance in which do subsist Three Divine Persons It will be always Heresy with them to deny Homo-ousios or that Christ is of Like and Equal Substance with the Father I must not dismiss the Consideration of the Vindicator's Doctrine about the Divine Substance without noting that his Contradictions to himself are as frequent as his Heterodoxies For tho he has spoken so often so expresly and so much against Substance and Persons in God yet when the Metaphysical Humour is upon him he talks of these as of most Certain and Real Things He says at P. 47. The Three Persons are Three Real Substantial Beings And again The Three Persons are substantially distinct Now this is to say the Three Persons are Three distinct Substances for that is the only possible meaning of Three Real Substantial Beings substantially distinct Thus God at last is not only a Substance but he is Three Real distinct Substances This was the Heresy of Valentinus Gentilis that the Three Persons are Tres Spiritus substantiali numero differentes I wish the Vindicator better Success with his Doctrine than Valentinus met at Geneva and Berne But the most pleasant of all is that after the Vindicator had there said The Three Divine Persons are substantially distinct he immediately subjoyns tho in one Vndivided Substance Is it possible a Man should give so little heed to what he says in so Great and Nice a Question He has not a sensible Friend in the World that will not tell him that 't is as much as to say The Persons are Three distinct Substances and yet are but one Vndivided Substance The first alone is Heresy the other superadded to it makes a gross Contradiction But there are greater Matters about which I must speak with the Vindicator Secondly Of the Persons their Vnity and their Distinction As to the Divine Persons and the Unity or Oneness of each Person with it self and its Distinction from the other two Persons he says as follows Pag. 67.
God and them The Mutual-consciousness of the three Divine Persons is the Perichóresis and Circumincession mentioned by the Fathers and the Schools For Perichóresis or that the Father is in the Son and Spirit and the Son in the Father and Spirit and the Spirit in the Father and Son is nothing else but their universal Mutual-consciousness We ought not to entertain a gross material Idea of the Perichóresis as if the three distinct Divine Persons were in one another by a mutual Contract of Parts for they have no Parts the only Vnion and Perichóresis of Minds and Spirits is that they are conscious each to others Thoughts and Wills as perfectly and inwardly as to their own And thus also it is that the three Divine Persons are one God they are one God and in one another by perfect Mutual-consciousness The Vindicator often says that this Explication of the Trinity maketh a Trinity in Unity as easy and intelligible as the Notion of One God or but one who is God But being aware that 't is not enough that an Explication be intelligible if it be not also the true Explication therefore he pretends to prove this Mutual-consciousness of the Father Son and Spirit from Joh. 1.18 10.15 30 38. 16.14 15. 1 Cor. 2.10 11. Then for the Fathers tho they do not once name Mutual-consciousness yet he thinketh they meant it He alledges a few Passages out of Gregory Nyssen and St. Austin who are all the Fathers he quotes and his Citations are not only not to his purpose but some of them clearly overthrow it I shall shew him the respect to consider what he hath said 1. Whereas he saith that Mutual-consciousness maketh the three Divine Spirits to be as truly and properly numerically one and as much one as each Spirit and every Man is one with himself If this were indeed true it would as much over-do what the Vindicator expects from it as he thinketh all former Explications are short of their Design For the Unitarians desire no more than that it be owned God is as truly and properly numerically one as every Spirit and Man is one with himself for every Spirit and Man is so one with himself as to be but one Person Had the Vindicator no way to defend the Athanasian Creed but by running into Heresy could he make out the Unity of the Trinity no other way but as the Creed speaks by confounding the Persons or by making them but one Person I challenge him or any other for him to avoid this Consequence of his Doctrine He saith in above twenty places this Mutual-consciousness maketh the three Divine Spirits and Persons as much one with one another as any Spirit or Man is one with himself then say I they are but one Person for that is the Oneness or Unity the only Unity of every Spirit or Man with himself No Spirit or Man has any other but a Personal Unity with himself 2. Mutual-consciousness cannot be a good Explication of the pretended Trinity because it will equally salve the most absurd Doctrine of the Transubstantiation For as according to the Vindicator's Doctrine the Godhead or the One true God is numerically One tho there are three Infinite Persons each of which is God and a God because these three Persons are mutually conscious to or have an inward Sensation of one another So will a Papist say there is but one Body-head or but one Numerical Body of Christ but in the Unity of this Body-head or Body there is first the Original Body of Christ and then abundance of Sacred Hosts in divers places each of which is a true Body of Christ and is by Mutual Sensation and Consciousness for there is no Sensation without Consciousness numerically one Body with the Original Body in Heaven 'T is true the Body in Heaven is the Source and Fountain of the rest as the Father is of the other Divine Persons but they are all substantially and numerically one Body by Mutual-consciousness or Sensation And this mutual inward Sensation or Consciousness they must needs have because they are all of them Personally wâ—ited to one Infinite Spirit or Person who as all Trinitarians say is Whole and All every-where present Totus in toto totus in qualibet parte By this Explication or Hypothesis all Mr. Johnson's Demonstrations against the Transubstantiation are made to vanish into Smoke All his Objections from the nature of Time and Extension are nothing they are all salved by Mutual-consciousness of the Hosts with the Body in Heaven for Dr. Sherlock has assured us that Mutual-consciousness or Sensation doth make an Essential Substantial and Numerical Vnity or Oneness between any number of Persons or Things The Reason holds for Things as well as Persons and for a thousand as well as for three 3. If as the Vindicator often says Mutual-consciousness is the only Vnion of Spirits or Minds such a Mutual-consciousness by which they are universally or wholly or pefectly conscious to each other this would as much prejudice the Incarnation or Hypostatical Union as the Vindicator hopes it will help the Doctrine of the Trinity The Vindicator confesses at p. 269 and 270 that the Human Nature or Reasonable Soul of Christ is not universally or wholly conscious to the Divine Person of the Son yet he says in perhaps forty places that a Mutual-consciousness to all one anothers Thoughts and Wills and Actions is necessary to make an Union of Minds or Spirits I say it follows from these Premises that the Reasonable Soul or Spirit of the Lord Christ is not united to the Divine Person of the Son If universal Consciousness is the only possible Vnion of Spirits 't is impossible there should be an Incarnation or an Hypostatical or Personal Union of the Divine and Human Spirits in Christ The Vindicator seems to have been in some measure aware of this Objection For in the Conclusion of his Book when he comes to the Doctrine of the Incarnation or Hypostatical Union he says Where different Natures are united into one Person this universal Consciousness is seated only in the Superior Nature and in the Inferior only so far as the Nature is capable and as the Personal Union requires But I will forgive the Vindicator if he can so escape from me First If as he says a partial Consciousness in the Inferior Nature be sufficient to effect an Hypostatical or Personal Union it will follow that all pious Men are hypostatically or personally united to the Holy Ghost For the Holy Spirit is universally conscious to all their Thoughts and Actions and they are partially conscious to his Suggestions and Motions and that by such an Internal Sensation as they are to their own Thoughts and Inclinations They cannot discern one from the other Secondly If a Partial Consciousness between two or more Spirits where but one of them is universally conscious to the rest will make them numerically one Person or what is the same thing will effect
an Hypostatical or Personal Union then certainly where two or more Spirits are universally conscious to one another it must much more make them numerically one Person or effect an Hypostatical or Personal Union From whence it will follow that the three Divine Persons being universally conscious to one another are numerically one Person and are hypostatically and personally united But this every one knows is Heresy and contrary to the Athanasian Creed which forbids us to confound the Persons Thirdly But the truth is a Partial Mutual-consciousness in one of the Spirits tho the other be universally conscious is not sufficient to make a Personal Union or to make two or more Persons to be numerically one Person The Reason is this since universal Mutual-consciousness is therefore said by the Vindicator to make more Spirits to be numerically one because in every one of them it amounts to as much as and is equivalent to the Self-consciousness or Self-unity of each Spirit with it self for it makes more Spirits as conscious to one another and therefore as numerically one as every Spirit is to it self from hence it necessarily follows that a Mutual Consciousness which is not universal in both Spirits cannot effect a Personal Union or make them numerically one Person because 't is undeniable that one of these Spirits the inferior Nature or Spirit has not such a Mutual-consciousness with the other Spirit as is equal to its own Self-consciousness which makes it self-Self-unity Hitherto I have so argued as to suppose with the Vindicator that such a Mutual-consciousness as he has described when 't is universal may have the effect he supposeth that is may effect a Numerical Oneness or Unity and have only shewn that however it has several such Heretical Consequences that it must not be admitted by him or any other For we have seen it maketh the three Divine Persons to be but one Person because he saith it makes them as much one as each Spirit Person or Man is one with himself Also this Hypothesis will do as much Service to the Transubstantiation as to the Trinity for it will make as Substantial and Numerical an Unity between the Hosts and the Body in Heaven as between the three Divine Spirits Farther it destroys the Hypostatical Union for 't is plain that a Partial Consciousness between the Human and Divine Spirits in the Lord Christ cannot make a Personal Union or make them numerically one Person because in his Human Spirit 't is not equal to that Self-consciousness which the Vindicator affirms to be the Self-unity of every Intelligent Being But now I shall prove that 4. Mutual Consciousness notwithstanding the Vindicator's confident Affirmation and frequent Repetition of it doth not indeed make the three Divine Persons to be numerially one or so one as each Spirit and every Man is one with himself nay it neither is nor effecteth any real Unity at all For tho he is careful to suppose that the three Persons are mutually conscious by an internal Sensation and that they are conscious to all the Thoughts Wills and Actions of one another as each Person of them and as every Man is internally conscious to all his own Thoughts and Action all which he thinketh must make them numerically one Spirit and one God because in his Opinion it amounts to as much as and is equivalent to that Self-consciousness which is he saith the Self-unity of each Spirit and every Man with himself Tho I say he is careful to suppose thus much yet I shall mind him of a thing which will ruin his whole Hypothesis even this that the three Divine Spirits or Persons tho they are universally and internally conscious to one another yet because they are not in the same manner conscious to one anothers Thoughts and Actions as each Spirit of them and each Man is conscious to his own Thoughts and Actions therefore the Mutual-consciousness which he supposes they have cannot make them numerically one Spirit or one God None of them is conscious to the Thoughts and Actions of the other two as his own but as rising in and from the other Persons but each of these Spirits and every Man is conscious to his own Thoughts and Actions as arising in and from himself from his own Personal Understanding Will and Power of Action Let me hear the Vindicator say that the Son for Example knows and feels the Thoughts and Actions of the Father and Spirit not as the Thoughts and Actions of the Father and Spirit but as his own Personal Thoaghts and Actions or as originated in his own Person and I will allow that such Consciousness doth look somewhat like a numerical Oneness or Unity But I will demonstate to him that so to say is both Heresy and a Contradiction It is Heretical because then the Father 's Personal Action of Generation would be known and felt by the Son as the Action of the Son that is the Son would know and feel that he begets himself Also the mutual Love of the Father and of the Image or Son whereby as this Athanasian Doctor feigns the Holy Spirit proceeds from them would be known and felt by the Holy Spirit as his own Personal Action not as the Action of the Father and Son Both which are Heretical when affirmed by any But besides that 't is Heresy 't is also a Contradiction 'T is just as much a Contradiction as to say that the Person and Personal Understanding of the Son is the Person and Personal Understanding of the Father If we confound the Persons and Personal Thoughts and Actions of the Father Son and Spirit we confound also their Personal Understandings Wills and Powers of Action If each Person of them has his Personal Understanding Will and Power of Action he has also his Personal Thoughts and Actions and consequently the Son cannot feel the Thoughts and Actions of the Father as his own Personal Thoughts and Actions but as the Thoughts and Actions of the Father But if so all Men must grant that such Mutual-consciousness of the three Divine Persons neither is nor effecteth a Numerical Unity or any Unity at all It cannot I say make them one Spirit or One God but leaves them as much three as other separate Spirits or Beings are For 't is such a Consciousness as may be and actually is between the most opposite contrary and separate Natures and Spirits For all Men are after this manner conscious both to the Holy Spirit and to the Tempter We are conscious to the Suggestions and Motions of the first and to the Temptations of the other by an internal Consciousness nay by such a perfect intimate Consciousness that we do not always discern them from our own Personal Thoughts or the Motions and Actings of our own Spirits which is somewhat a closer Consciousness than the Vindicator has supposed or dares suppose between the three Divine Persons and yet it leaves us separate Beings and Spirits both from the Holy Spirit
and from the Tempter 5. If there were indeed such a thing as the Vindicator's mutual Consciousness I do affirm it would be so far from being or from effecting a numerical Unity or Oneness that it would be the very thing which would most of all prove the three pretended Divine Persons are numerically three Spirits and three Gods For since according to the Vindicator's Descriptions each of these Spirits or Persons has his own Personal Understanding Will and Power of Action and his own Personal absolutely perfect Wisdom Power and Goodness three such Persons are so far from being one Spirit or one God by Consciousness to each other Wisdom Power and Goodness that the more such Persons are mutually conscious so much the more their separate Existence and Divinity is proved For the more that any of these Spirits knows and feels of Thoughts and Actions arising in the other Spirits or Persons and to which he is only conscious but is not the Personal Fountain of them the more and more certainly he must needs know and feel that himself has a divers and separate Existence from them and therefore being an Infinite Person or Spirit is a divers and separate God I challenge the Vindicator to tell me any other possible way for three Divine Persons to be assured of their separate Existence and Divinity that is that they are three Gods but by Mutual-consciousness or by knowing and feeling as he speaks the Thoughts and Actions of one another not as their own but as the Thoughts and Actions of other Divine Spirits How should the Father for example know He is a separate Spirit and God from the Son but by knowing and feeling the Actions of the Son not as his the Fathers Actions but as the Actions and Thoughts of another Divine and Infinite Person It was therefore a great Incogitance in the Vindicator to urge the pretended Mutual-consciousness of the three pretended Divine Persons as their numerical Unity or Oneness when it demonstrates them to be numerically three separate and divers Beings Spirits and Gods Had the Vindicator said there are three Infinite Spirits who are mutually conscious THEREFORE there are three Gods all Mankind would have allowed his Consequence as certain and self-evident from that Proposition But to say there are three Infinite Spirits conscious to one another THEREFORE there is but one God this all Men of Sense will laugh at as a palpable Falshood 'T is a Contradiction in the Terms to tell us of One only God mutually conscious for in plainer English 't is to say One only God conscious to or with other Gods Or One only God conscious to more Gods 6. But the great Matter is still behind that after all our Blessed Saviour himself has declared that there is not this Mutual-consciousness between the supposed Divine Persons which the Vindicator has made to be the Substance of his Answer to the Brief Notes and the Brief History Of that day and hour the day and hour of the last Judgment none knoweth no not the Angels which are in Heaven nor the Son but the Father only Mark 13.32 Mat. 24.36 Here it is expresly denied that the Son knows the time of the last Judgment and as clearly intimated that the Father and the Father only therefore not the Holy Ghost if we take the Holy Ghost for a particular Person knows that time Therefore say I the Son and Holy Ghost are not conscious to all the Knowledg Will and Thoughts of the Father and consequently are not Gods or God To avoid this Argument the Vindicator and his Party answer that Christ in that Text speaks of himself only as he is a Man not as he is God or a God Well but how shall we salve the Honour of the Holy Ghost for 't is there also said that the Father only knoweth that day and hour Why for that the word Father here does not signify the Father only but includes the Father Son and Holy Ghost But when mention is made of the Father and the Son in the same Period and they are opposed to each other 't is much that neither the Son should signify the Son for the Human Nature or Christ as Man according to the Trinitarians is not the Son nor the Father signify the Father but the Father and two other Persons If this be not to form the Scriptures to our preconceived Opinions and not our Opinions by the Scriptures let the Vindicator himself tell me what is Should a Socinian distort the known sense and use of Words at this rate what Out-cries should we have against them Nor was it our Saviour's manner to answer after this equivocal delusory fashion But when the Disciples were more inquisitive than he liked of he was not wont to shift off the matter by an Equivocation but plainly to tell them They asked after what 't was not permitted to them to know Wilt thou at this time restore the Kingdom to Israel say the Disciples at Acts 1.6 7. 'T is not for you to know saith our Saviour How unlike is this direct sincere Answer to that which the Trinitarians have made for him about the Day of Judgment For their Answer runs thus As to the day and hour of Judgment of which you enquire none knoweth it not the Angels not the Son himself but my Father only But when I say the Son that is I my self know it not I mean saith he to himself according to my Human Nature which indeed is not the Son and when I say only my Father knoweth it I mean saith he again to himself only my Father and my self and the Holy Ghost This is such an over-grown Equivocation and Mental Reservation as in our Town would pass for a gross Lie but that the Vindicator and his Party have assured us that our Saviour himself spake thus But I do not think any sensible and honest Man will believe 'em if he considers it twice 'T is thus also that they have dealt with God himself speaking in the first Commandment Thou shalt have no other Gods but Me saith God in the words of the first Commandment And to render this his Soveraign Revelation and Will the more awful and regarded by us he delivered it in Thunders that shook the Heavens and the Earth Notwithstanding this and tho every one knows that the Stile of Laws is plain and simple and the words to be understood in a popular familiar Sense because they are delivered to the meanest as well as the highest Capacities yet have those who call themselves the Orthodox and the Catholick Party eluded this Revelation and Law to which all the rest refer and on which they depend and have made room for other Gods besides him Thou shalt have no other Gods besides Me that is say they Thou shalt have no other Gods but Vs no other Gods but God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost Thou shalt have no other Gods but three Infinite Almighty All-knowing Persons