fortieri to all Manner of Existence Corporeal or Spiritual in re or in intellectu and therefore it is Capable of either The first Part is Evident from the very Sense of the Word For in the Signification of the Word which expresses any Created Being as Peter Michael a Stone a Man c. we find nothing at all of Being or Not-Being either exprest or imply'd Again we can truly say of any Individuum which is properly a Thing v. g. of Peter that he is newly dead or of Wood that 't is turn'd into Fire which signifies that those Things call'd Peter and Wood were before and now are not which could not with truth be said unless those Things were Indifferent to Being and not-Being or Capable of either 6. Preliminary V. The Form cannot be in the Subject but it must make it Formally of his own Nature V. g. Every Form that is in any Subject must denominate it to be formally such as it self is Rotundity cannot be in any Subject but it must make it Round Nor can any Quantity or Quality v. g. the Quantity of a Yard or Whiteness be in a Thing but they must make it a Yard long and White as the Nature of that Quantity and Colour is This is Self-evident for to be a Yard long or White is to have such a Length or such a Colour in it Nor for the same reason can any particular Nature be in any Thing but it must make that Thing be of such a Nature 7. Preliminary VI. A Notion or Conception may either be consider'd Subjectively as it is an Operation of the Mind A Notion may either be consider'd Subjectively or Objectively Affecting It and Receiv'd in It as in it's Subject or Objectively as that about which the Mind when it has that Notion is employ'd as it 's Object or the thing Known This is a manner Self-evident For an Operation of a Knowing Power cannot be but there must be something Known nor can a Thing be known without an Actual Knowledge of it 8. Preliminary VII Whatever is Known by the Soul or is the Object of our Knowledge must either it self Every Object of our Knowledge must either be the Thing it self aÌ„s in the Mind or something that is like it be in the Soul or else some Similitude or Representation of it This also is in a manner Self-evident For in case neither It self nor any thing Like it be there when we know it 't is Impossible to imagine any reason why our Knowledge should be of It rather than of Another thing Distinct from iâ— which must necessarily confound all our Knowledges whatever Again since the Power of Knowing is of it self Indifferent to the Knowing This or Another 't is Impossible to conceive how this Indifferent Power should be Determin'd to Know This rather than Another unless either This Object be it self in that Knowing Power that is in the Mind or something that Resembles or Represents it 9. Preliminary VIII Notions taken Objectively are the Things themselves existing in our Mind intellectually and That Notions undrrstood Objectively are the Things themselves as in the Mind and not meer Similitudes of them Prov'd unanswerably not the Similitude or Representation of them only This may be presum'd to be an Establisht Maxim having been prov'd by so many Demonstrations in my Second Preliminary in Solid Philosophy Asserted none of which have been hitherto Answer'd by the modern Ideists tho' nothing more nearly concern'd them Notwithstanding I shall add this farther Proof of it Words are meant to express that which is in our Mind that is to express our Conceptions or Notions taken Objectively which therefore thus taken are the Thing meant But that which is meant by the Words is the Thing it self therefore that which is in our Notion or the Object of it is the Thing it self To prove the Minor let us put this Proposition There is a Similitude of the Thing it self in our Mind and then reflect that since we understand what 's meant by all thâ—se words we have a Notion of each of those Words in our Minds Hence I argue Therefore there is in our Notion not only what 's meant by the word Similitude but also what 's meant by the words the thing it self for those words are Parts of the Proposition But what is meant by the words the Thing it self cannot be any other but the very Thing conceived by us therefore the very Thing is in our Notion or Conception when we intelligently speak that Proposition This is farther enforced because in this Proposition what 's meant by the words the Thing it self is Relatively Oppos'd to the Similitude or Representation of the Thing as is evident to every Reflecter Therefore what 's meant by the words the Thing it self cannot possibly be the same that is meant by the word Similitude which is formally Opposite to it Whence those who deny the Thing is in our Minds do at the same time unawares confess it is there since they put what 's meant by Thing it self over and above what 's meant by the word Similitude to be there Nor were these words The Thing it self ever us'd by Mankind especially when they speak Dogmatically to signifie A Similitude of the Thing Lastly If we have only Similitudes of what 's meant by our Words then since as they will have it the Words Thing it self signifie only a Similitude of the Thing by the same reason the Word Similitude which is found also in that Proposition must mean a Similitude of a Similitude of which who can make any Sense 10. But to put this out of all Doubt by Arguâ—… unanswerably from their own Concession Let us abstract any Prov'd Unanswerably by the Concession of the Ideists themselves that the Thing it self must be in thâ— Mind particular Notion of the Thing from the rest and we shall see clearly that every Similitude consists in the Unity or Identity of some Form or Act whether Essential oâ— Accidental which is found in the Things said to be Alike For Example If two Things be Alike in Quantity or Length v. g. each of them a Yard all Mankind will say that the Same Length or the Same Quantity is â—…nd in each of them If two Walls be Alike 〈…〉 Colour or both of them White we truly say they are of the Same Colour If two Sons be Alike â—â— their Relation to one Common Father they â—â— truly said to have the Same Relation or to be 〈…〉 of them Sons If two Things be perfectly 〈…〉 in Figure v. g. both of them Triangular we truly affirm they are of the Same Figure If Alike in Nature v. g. Manhood they are truly said to be of the Same Nature For since we consider them under such a precise Notion and no other and they do not at all differ under that Notion this Discourse is as Self-evident as 't is that a â—â—rd is a Yard that Whiteness is Whiteness 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
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
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
't is only their Will which is ill at ease But I rather think they are blunder'd by not Distinguishing their Notions Exactly and not Proceeding upon them Orderly Or perhaps as Men led by Imagination use they fancy there must be a just parallel between Corporeal and Spiritual Natures and which is worse between a Finite and an Infinite Being and that they must fit one another exactly as Two Tallies do and if they find they do not sute in every regard their Phantastick Guide has lost his way and complains sadly of the Perplexity in which nothing but his own Rashness or Unskillfulness has plung'd him 3. To breed a Conceit in their Easie and Weak Proselytes that the Doctrine of the Trinity is injurious to the Unity and Pâ—â—â—ection of the GODHEAD they amuze them with several Objections which nothing but the Dotaâ—â—â— of Fancy could suggest V. G. They 'll alledge That if the Son has the Divine Essence from the Father then the Father Pre-exists and therefore the Son cannot be Eternal By which 't is manifest That those Men apprehend there is no Prae-istence but that of Time nay they conceit that Eternity it self is a long Flux of Time or something Like it whereas 't is a Duration of a quite Contradictory Nature to it whereupon the Grossness of their Fancy is presently startled and stunn'd and their Ignorance of such Preliminary Truths does presently furnish them with this as it may with a thousand other such wild Objections To meet with them I desire them to reflect that as there could not be any Instant in which GOD was not so neither could any Instant be Conceiv'd in which He had not all His Perfections and amongst them that of Knowing and Loving Himself and consequently in which his Divine Essence as an Object Known did not communicate it self to the Divine Knower of it They may please to reflect too that there are even amongst us many things before one another nay even as Causes and Effects which are not so much as for one Instant before one another in Time For Example Bodies are therefore Passive because they have Matter in them they are Passive thus or Divisible because they have Quantity in them and Corruptible because they are Divisible nay 't is also in proper Speech True that the following ones proceed from those that are foregoing as their Causes and yet they have Passiveness Quantity Divisibility Corruptibility nay Extension Measurability Proportionability c. in them all at one Time nay they are all so perfectly Contemporaries that there is not so much as one Instant in which Body has one of these and not all of them Whence for much better Reason may the Son proceed from the Father tho' they be both Coeternal They will reply That all these Effects proceed from Formal Causes which may be conceiv'd not to pre-exist before one another And I reply That in this present Explication all the Divine Processions are put to be by the manner of Form and not of Action or Efficiency and I much fear that their Transferring Action to GOD in their Thoughts which implies Motion drew them into this Misconceit of Priority after the manner of a kind of Imaginary Time According to the way of discoursing which I take the Divine Object Inexists in the Divine Knowledge which according to our Natural Notions is call'd Informing it I have produced many Demonstrations both in the Second Preliminary to Solid Philosophy Asserted and others B. I. Ch. 6. in my Metaphysicks to show that our Knowledge can be only made by this that the Object it self is in our Understanding or informs it when we Know and that every Particular Knowledge we have is Specify'd nay Individually Determin'd to be This by the Object and must proceed from it both as to its being at all and also as to it 's Being This. And I dare affirm That let Witty Men beat their Brains till they are weary they will never make any other Sense of what it is to Know than this That the Object Inexists in the Knowiag Power as Another Thing or as some way Distinct from the Knower Moreover this Notion of Knowing abstracts from sooner or later Eternal or Not-Eternal and therefore may in this regard be sitly Apply'd to GOD who Knows Himself Eternally and because as has been often said this Knowledge comes from the Divine Object from all Eternity hence it is and must be also said to Proceed or be Originiz'd from it from all Eternity since he Formally becomes a Knower by means of that Object-Known This is all the Priority Christian Divines acknowledge This abstracts even in us Creatures I mean in Souls Separated and Angels who in the First Instant Know Themselves from all other kinds of Priority Whence 't is very weak to infer hence that the Father is Prae-existent as if there were any imaginable Instant in Eternity in which the Father was and the Son was not or that the Son for that reason is not Self existent since besides the want of such a Priority as they fancy and build their Objection upon it all the Absolute Attributes of the Deity and amongst them Self-Existence and Eternity too are Communicated to Him by and in the Divine Essence Known or from the Father S. Another Bugbear to their Fancy for 't is That and not True Reason that gives the Ground to all their Objections is this That by our Discourse God the Father must communicate his Essence and his whole Essence to the Son which they think is sufficiently overthrown by meerly asking How should both have the same thing especially How should He have it still who has already Communicated it or Parted with it all And this looks very plausibly to those poor Ignorant Souls who never reflected on Spiritual Natures but think we must discourse of them in the same manner as we do of Bodies whereas they being of Contradistinct Naâ—ures the quite Contrary follows For the First â—iz That the Divine Essence is Communicated or that as Known that is as it is by a Relative Name call'd the Father it communicates it self let us see how it agrees with other Divine Attributes and with such acknowledg'd Perfections as we find in Creatures GOODNESS bears in it's Notion and Experience teaches us the same that it is Naturally Communicative of what it has Since then we ascribe INFINITE Goodness to GOD and make it to be Essential to Him it follows that He is INFINITELY Communicative of the Nature or Essence which he has or rather he is Actually and Eternally for he was Eternally Good Communicating it and this INFINITELY Which how it can be Verify'd or how his Exuberant Goodness could have an Adequate Object unless he did Communicate Himself Infinitely in the manner abovesaid is past the Wit of Man to imagine since all Communication of Being to Created Things or Suppositums tho' they were never so Excellent or so Many their Natures and their Number being both of
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
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
of the Actions and Sufferings of one another By which means Impressions made by Outward Objects scattering about their minutest particles upon some very sensible Part of thy Body with which Part thou wast immediately united as the Form with it's proper Matter might at the same time affâ—… thee also according to thy peculiar Nature that iâ— Knowingly and imbue thy yet-Ignorant-Understanding Power with Tinctures of their several Nâ—tures These First Rough-Draughts of Knowledge werâ— indeed very Rude Scanty and Lâ—mited And ripen'd our Knowledge afterwards being as it were an Imperfect View of the Things on one side only and rather Glances thâ—â— a Full Sight of them for they gave thee no more Light at one time than of some one of those mâ—ny Respects or Notions the Thing was able to iâ—-part to thee and withall being the Immediatâ— Effects of Objects made of Matter the Parent oâ— all Undistinctness or Confusion they were far froâ— Exact To supply which Defect and make amenâ— for this Disadvantage thy Creatour endow'd thâ—â— with a Faculty of Reflecting which enabled thâ—â— to refine separate and range into Distinction and Order those Raw and Tumultuary Impressions and moreover furâ—isht thee with a Comparing Power which by Iudging and Discoursing could Connect and Compound those Narrow Abstracted Notions with one another and by Degrees give thee a Broader Prospect of the Thing and in time improve thy Knowledge to that pitch which is suteable to thy condition here The Entire Comprehension of all things being reserv'd to thy Future State when thou shalt be got out of thy Non-Age and thy Eagle-sight be no longer blinded with the Screen of thy Body Do not repine that thou canst not at first readily and fully comprehend any thing but arâ— forced to gain a Distant and Shy Acquaintancâ— with them by those Conceptions of them in part only which our Dull Senses afforded thee Not â—he least of them but if well husbanded and imâ—â—â—v'd will lead thee to far-distant Truths and veâ—y Large and Strange Discoveries Thy Reasoning Power had been Useless and in vain and thou hadst wanted all the while thou livest here that Employâ—â—nt which most properly belongs to a Man thy Reasoning or Discoursing had not the World's Governour thus parcell'd out to thy Low Understanding the Book of Creatures He gives thee at thy Entrance into Nature's School the First Rudiments â—â— Elements thy Ordinary Notions which are â—s it were the Letters or Alphabet of all our Knowledge with which like little Children of the Lowest Form we are first to get Acquaintance Apply thy self to these at first Endeavour to learn their Distinct Characters and what their Force is erâ— tâ—â—â— comest to Spell them into Syllables by Comâ—â—â—nding them into Judgments or to put those Syllables together to make up Entire Words by â—â—â—ming Discourses concerning them Not doubting but that by this Methodical and Industrious Applicâ—tion of thy Faculties thou wilt come at length to read this Book of Creatures currently at least as â—uch of it as can concern thee to know in thy Condition here Think not that even the least of those Elements of Knowledge thy Vulgar and What Encouragement our present Acquests have given us Nature-taught Notions is Barren â—â—d Fruitless Consider how by â—â—â—eriencing that Bodies work on â—â—â— Compound or Suppositum thou â—â—â—est to know that they actually are and therefore that they had a POWER to be as likewise that they had a Power to be Chang'd into others and to be affected after various Modes or Manners and then reflect how much Light thou hast gain'â— hitherto by Viewing Attentively and Discoursing consequently of those most Ordinary and most Obvious Notions POWER and ACT which seem'd at first Sight so Steril Insipid and Insignificant These Two joyn'd with a few others already known without Speculation and fully as Evidâ—â—â— as themselves have demonstrated to thee How and What and Where our Essence was ere it haâ— Existence given it What are the Essential Partâ— of all Bodies in Common Which are the First Principles that fix and rivet all Inferiour Truthâ— in thy Understanding and how theâ— Descend from the Father of Lights GOD's Essential Wisdom They instruct thee by looking into their Natures â—â— Notions from whence it is that all Change aâ—â— Mutability proceeds a Principle which draws mâ—ny Great and Important Truths after it They shâ—â— thee clearly what and how many several sorts of Things could possibly have been Created They inform thee what kind of Division is made by thy Acute Understanding which the Subtillest Agents in Nature tho' assisted by the most Exact Chymical Art could never have reacht and how thou compoundest again those thus-Divided Parts to framâ— Iudgments and Discourses They have given thâ—â— Evident Knowledge that There are no Actual Parts in any Ens whatever A Truth most Useful to the Attainment of very many of thy Future Knowledges They have preserv'd thee from falling into the Precipices of divers Fâ—ndamental Errors by embracing which Great Wits have miscarry'd They have moreover taught thee how Absolutely Pure that Act call'd EXISTENCE is and that it is above the Power of any Created Cause to confer that Soveraign Gift on Themselves or Others Which leads thee a fair Step towards the Knowledge of the FIRST BEING to know whom perfectly is thy Eternal Happiness And are all these Acquisitions worth nothing Add that thou know'st not yet what Multitudes of High and most Important Truths do hitherto lie hid involv'd in these Few now mention'd and in some others here omitted All which spring originally from the bare Notions of POWER and ACT joyn'd with some others Ally'd to them and Connected with them Awake then my Soul from thy Desponding Lethâ—rgy and exert thy Industry by What assured Hopes we have of Success in our Quest of Science if we ground our Discourse on the Natures of the Things made by the First Being the well-assured Hopes of gaining â—â—mense Degrees of Knowledge by Studying and Improving the Vast â—â—ock of thy other Notions that is indeed the Things diversly Conceiv'd by thee and therefore in thee It will comfort thy Labour to find so much Good and to have reapt such Benefit by Two of them only and those two as it may seem none of the Fruitfullest Such Beginnings are Hopeful and give thee Earnest of a Successful Progress Only be sure thou â—â—st not relinquish the Works made by the Hand of thy All-wise Creatour in which he has stampt all Natural and Acquir'd Truths nor strivest foolishly to Create to thy Self New Things and New Worlds by thy own Shallow Wit and to ground Truth on the Mock-Creatures made by thy own Fantastick â—magination That Faculty was intended to be a Servant to thee to reach thee the Materials thou â—â—st need of Take heed then that her Brisk and Gay Genius do not make her presume to domineer over her Mistress or inveigle her to follow her desultory Vagaries Expect Substantial and Real Truth
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
singly as if they were so many Distinct Essences or â—â—stinct Things tho' in re they be but One Thing variously conceiv'd And thence we can consider what or how great a Complexion of Aâ—â—dents is requisite to constitute the Essences of â—â—â— of those Superiour or Inadequate Notions anâ— what is requir'd to constitute Another as is seâ—â— Ch. 2 3 4. Hence also we can truly say that One of them is not Another viz. Formally or Distinctly taken tho' Materially or as in â—â— they are but One and the Same Thing in the same manner as we can say The Hand is not the Foot which are Integral parts of a Man and not â—â—stinct Things from the Man materially but â—…fy'd with him in re Seventhly Hence â—… we can say with Truth that the Thing â—â—y be Chang'd according to One of these Conâ—…tions or Respects and not-Chang'd according â—â— another That the Determination to be This â—…de immediately by Second Causes the â—istence not but given by GOD That a Thing â—â—â—ording to the precise Notion of Essence or â—â—ture may be Two and yet not-Two but One â—â—â—ording to the Notion of Suppositum or may â—â— Three as to it's Suppofitality or Personality and â—â— but One according to it's Essence or Nature â—â— which sayings are properly Verify'd because â—â—â—â—â—â—â—mation and Negation are only made in â—â— Mind where One of those Notions is not the 〈◊〉 or which is the same where the Thing â—â— â—â—â—ceiv'd THUS is not the Thing as conceiv'd â—â—HERWISE And the same is of the Things 〈◊〉 United or Assum'd according to the Noâ—â—â—â— of Person and yet not-United according to â—â—â— Notion of Essence Lastly 't is to be noted â—â—â— as Conception Apprehension Proposition Disâ—â—â—â— c. are Metaphorical Expressions tranâ—… from Corporeal to Spiritual Natures by 〈…〉 of some Analogy Proportion or Resemâ—… to those other so likewise are those â—…ds Substratum Suppositum Subjectum Inheâ—… Accident and such like And the Literal meaning of those words is this that As those things which cannot subsist or stand by themselves or by virtue of any Firmness of their own â—â— re or in Nature must and use to be underâ—â—â—â— and sustain'd by Another which is more Substantial as we use to say or more strong than they so neither in our Mind can the Notion of Mode Manner or Accident stand alone unless we conceive Some Thing of which it is a Mode or speaks the Manner HOW it is or Some Thing to which it advenes or is superadded whereas on the other side we have the Notion of Being or Thing without apprehending such a Transcendental Relation to the Mode or Manner how it is Whence the Notion of Thing has a kind of Priority in our Minds to the Accidents or Modes under the consideration of Standing in our Intellect without them and the Notions of the Modes or Accidents has a kind of posteriorily in our Mind and a Dependence on them for their Being these because the former has Being one way or other in it's Notion the others as Length Whiteness Roundness â— have in their Notion no express signification of Being at all Whence I cannot but think Mr. Locke should not have apply'd his Ingenioâ—â— Raillery of Supporting and Underpropping and of an Elephant supporting the Earth and a Tortoise the Elephant to those Authors who were forced to use those words in case they did not take those Expressions in that Gross and too-Literal Sense And I conceive he might with equal Justice have apply'd them against Grammarians who tell us that a Noun Substantive can stand by it's self aâ—â— a Noun Adjective cannot without it's Elephant and Tortoise the Substantive to support it MEDITATION WE have seen formerly in what consisted our Essence as we are of that Species call'd Mankind This was a fair Step towards the Knowing our Individual How impossible it is to know perfectly all that belongs to our Individuality Self which we have here to â—â—r power attempted But alas How lamely and imperfectly have â—e reacht it We experienc'd no great difficulty to find our way amongst so many Common Kinds of Things tho' in a manner Strangers to us but we have lost our selves at home A Few Abstracted Modes twisted together â—…y by Nature did oft times satisfie our Enquiry â—â—ile we discours'd of the former but when we came to consider that numerous Complexion of them only which can serve to constitute our Individual Body â—â—d to distinguish our single Self from every other Particular Thing whether of our own or of any other Kind we are at an utter loss and seem bewilder'd â—â—â— pathless Wood Such a Concourse of various Acâ—â—ents and as it were Thrums-ends of Being are requisite to weave our Particular Texture so to make up This Thing which we are that to endeavour to comprehend them all seems the same as to go about to fathom at once a great part of Nature and in stead of enlightning us stuns our Understanding Our Primigenial Composition in the last minute of our Embryo-state which was the first Instant of our being This Man is so admirably Deliâ—ate and the Stamina of it so finely spun by the most wise Contrivance of the Author of Nature that we may break our Eye-balls by bending our Sight â—re we can gain a Glimpse of it Nor can the help of Microscopes which as Modern Virtuoso's tell us can show tho Outward Shape of the Tree in it's Seed discover to us those imperceptible Particles their Natures Mixture Order Proportion Situation c. that make up the Individual Composition of our Body which gave the Particular Degree of Excellency and Nobleness to our Soul Dull Artificers must see all the parts of the Matter they are to work upon that so they may measure proportion and place them but the Architect of the World needs no reflected Rays of his own Sun to discern them but sees them by the Creative Light of his own Wisdom or rather by seeing them makes them tho' they be meer Darkness to us Non est occultatum os meum a te quod fecisti in occulto substantia mea in inferioribus terrae Imperfectum meum viderunt oculi tui and every part of all thy Creature in libro duo scribuntur Ps. 138. But alas Who can read so abstruse a Manuscript much less the Original from which 't is Copy'd Let us then vail our over-weoning Pride bewail our Ignorance and lament with the Eagle-sighted Evangelist that No Man is found worthy or able to open the folded and Sealed Book even of Created Nature nor read the Contents of it wrapt up in the shady leaves of an incomprehensible Providence But how large a Field of Contemplation is open'd to us when we come to consider the Infinite number of Causes which By what wonderful and Untraceable Ways GOD's Providence has brought about our Individuation were order'd to make this Complexion of Accidents that constituted This Body of ours and Distinguisht
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
down and breaks his Neck Now all these are said to be done by Chance But does any of these who say so hold that there was no Cause at all which made the Glass the Tyle or the Man fall No certainly for every Man of Common Sense holds that no Effect can be without a Cause and will deny that a Tyle or a Glass did move themselves Their meaning then is and they tell you they did not fore-see or fore-know that any of these would fall being Attentive to some other Object or Business CHANCE then is an UNADVERTED or Unforeseen Cause for had they foreseen that such Causes taking them all together would have brought those Disasters it had been Willfulness and Design in them to have come in the way of such Misohievous Causes and Design is Opposite to the Notion of Chance In this Sense then Christianity allows us to say the Chance or an Unforeseen Cause wrought these Effect â—â— But since nothing is Unforeseen to GOD who laid and order'd all those Causes What is Chance to Us is Providence if we regard Him nor is there any Thing Distinct from Him call'd Chance which has the least hâ—nd in administring the World but He is the only Adequate Governor of it 'T is not without some loathness I am forced to take notice that some of our Modern Ideists tho' I hope with a good How groundlessly some Christian Philosophers the Ideists do in part violate this Best Method of GOD's Ordinary Providence now Demonstrated Intention do violate this connected course of Causes and Effects in which GOD's Ordinary Providence consists Whoever as do the Cartesians make all Second Causes which have Powers or Faculties given them to work such Effects to be Useless as to those Effects even as Instruments Whoever puts on the Creature 's side only OCCASIONS which they say are No Causes for every Act of Knowledge Mankind has and perhaps for every Effect in Nature Whoever puts Determinate Ideas to be produced by Indeterminate and therefore Improper Causes as the Soul was before she did elicit them as they pretend of her self Whoever puts such Idea's Annext voluntarily to such Motions which were not at all Like them or No Causes of them alledging gratis that GOD Wills it Whoever maintains the Annexing of one Thing or Mode of Thing to another otherwise than by being the Proper Cause of it does fall into the same ill-grounded Errour of interrupting the Course of GOD's Ordinary Providence by Second Causes and destroys the Laws of Causality As has been over and over Demonstrated in my Ideae Cartesianae Indicatio Tertia from § 30. to § 50. and in my Solid Philosophy Asserted Reflexion 4. § 3. and 5. It will run in the Fancies of some less Intelligent Intelligent Readers who take things at the first rebound and pass a The Folly of the Stoical FATALITY confuted and exploded peremptory Iudgment on what they understand but by halves that this Settled Order of Providence I here assert does introduce a kind of Fatality into the World Now if by the word FATUM they mean what is Spoken or Decreed by GOD I must own the Position and stand to it as clearly demonstrated above Which leads me to the Other sort of the Opposers of Providenoe I mean those who maintain a Stoical FATALITY a Tenet widely Different from our Thesis or rather perfectly Contradictory to it For ours proceeds upon a Continued Connexion of Natural Causes with Consequent Effects which are Suteable and Agreeable to their Natures Theirs regards no Influence of any Causes at all but is built on the force of this Contradiction Either such a thing will be or will not be Wherefore say they since it inevitably follows that both of these cannot be True and yet one of them must be True 't is a Folly to endeavour to avoid any Harm or to pursue any Good since out of the force of not-admitting Contradiction what will be will be But this tho' the Wittier of the two is a Pure Folly since as Common Experience tells us and Common Sense assures us nothing is done but by Means of Causes nor not-done but because there wanted Causes able to do it But they fancy to themselves by the Words will be and will not be there is a certain kind of Self-Existence or Non-Self-Existenee in the Futurity of Events Whereas none of them has or can have any Existence or Non-Existence at all but as they stand under Determinate Natural Causes â—r no Causes Whence we who know this to be so are bound in Prudence to endeavour as much as lies in us to put those Causes if we would have the Effect follow They forget too that We our selves are part of the Rank of Causes and that the using our own Reason in chusing and applying those other Causes is the Supreme Superintendent Cause and the very Best of all the rest They reflect not also that since Future Effects are not neither of those Propositions they put and rely on has any Truth in it at all nor has the Futurity of it any Certainty but as it stands under Determinate or Proper Causes which will produce that Effect from which only it has Title to the name of Future So that the Proposition Such a thing will be or is future is an imprudent saying and not be spoke by any Man of Sense unless he sees the Causes will certainly make it be These Discoursers do therefore argue from a Logical Impossibility found only in our Mind considering the Nature of Ens and that it excludes Non-Ens out of it's Notion to a Physical one which is wholly grounded on the Nature of Causes Lastly This Thesis is manifestly convicted of Folly by the Consent of all Mankind and even of themselves too who do all of them lay means for the Effects they aim at Nor could the World continue or subsist if this whimsical Doctrine stands as by applying it to a Harvest next year the using ways for Trade and Traffick or for defending our Country and a thousand such particulars does manifestly appear For either Success will follow or not follow whither we endeavour or not endeavour to lay Means for such Effects which consideration will also help to cure those weak Discoursers who so perplex their thought about Predestination All which depend on the same Principles and can disrellish no Man unless he be offended that GOD is the First Cause and that Good comes to us from Him by Second Causes laid in the Best Order imaginable But in how different a manner does our way of Philosophy discourse of GOD's Ordinary Providence from that of those other Philosophers and particularly from that of the Ideists It puts no blind Suppositions nor Conceits taken from Fancy but is entirely built on Principles and such Principles as are either Self-Evident or so neerely remov'd from them that they are easily reducible thither viz. Every Thing acts as it is and therefore is a Proper Cause
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
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