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
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
〈…〉 labour for our own True Good pursue that bestâ—…isht Food which connaturally nourishes our Soul in it's way and comply with the Best Intentions and End of our Creation CHAP. IV. Of the Essence of MAN 1. MAN is One Thing made up or Compounded of a Corporeal and a Spiritual Part which we call BODY and SOUL For were the Body and Soul iâ— MAN is One Thing made up of Soul and Body Man Two Distinct Things those Two Things they being of such Different Natures could not possibly have any Coalition nor any kind of Union 〈…〉 as to make up One Compound more than can 〈…〉 Angel and a Brute Nor could they be in 〈…〉 Manner or according to any Mode of which wâ— have a Notion cemented together Not according to that Mode or Accident call'd QUANTITY the Unity of which kind of Parts is Continuity because the Spiritual Part the Soul is not Quantitative nor can it be thus Continu'd or Joyn'd to the Body Nor consequently according to the Notion of Quality For first Quality supposes tâ—… Thing which it Qualifies already constituted and only superadds some Perfection or Imperfectiâ—… to it's Nature Secondly Because all the Qualities of One of those Parts are Corporeal ones aâ—… all the Qualities of the Other Part are Spiritual that is they are Quantitatiâ—s and Not-Quantitativâ— which can no more unite than a Body and a Spâ—… could Nor according to Relation or to speâ—… more properly according to the Things themselves as they are consider'd to be Relata or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this Notion is of the Thing it self as it gives us the Ground or Reason of our Relating or Comparing it to Another in such a Respect which presupposes the Things and is so far from giving us a Ground of conceiving them to be One that it obliges us to conceive them as some way or other Two and moreover Relatively Opposite to one another and Opposition cannot be the Formal Reason of Unity And if we take the word Relation not Fundamentally but Formally for the very Act of Referring 't is clearly a Spiritual Mode peculiarly belonging to One part of Man the Soul and therefore for the Reason lately given it cannot unite both those Parts together Nor can they be United according to any of the Four last Predicaments for These as is shown in my METHOD can only belong to Bodies Nor lastly can those Parts were they Two Things be United according to Action and Passion in which the Cartesians â—â—ce this Union for these besides their being Extrinsecal Considerations do most evidently presuppose the Whole Thing or Suppositum only which Acts oâ— Suffers constituted and therefore cannot be the Formal Cause or Reason of constituting that Whole or Compounding those Parts together but are the Exercise of that Essence and 〈…〉 Existence already Constituted such It is left â—â—en that those Two Parts can only be United 〈…〉 make One Compound according to the First Predicament or according to the Notion of Ens Thing or Substance But to be United or which â—…the same made One precisely under the Notion or Respect of Thing is out of the force of the very Words to be One Thing Therefore this Compound of SOUL and BODY call'd MAN is truly and necessarily One Thing 2. Therefore the Soul and Body in Man are only Potential Parts of that Compound Therefore the Soul and Body are here only Potential Parts and neither of them while in the Compound is Actual For it has been already Demonstrated Ch. 1. § 27. that there can be no Actual Parts in any Compound whatever Moreover were they Actual while in the Compound each of them would have it's oâ—â— Act there and consequently it 's own Essence and this not only Distinctly from the Other but Independently of it since every Act in the Line of Substance as both these Parts are determines the Substance to be This fits it for Existence and makes it capable to Subsist alone wherefore each of those Parts when separated would retain it's Act and Essence and exist or actually remain such as it was whereas 't is manifest that a Human Body does not exist or remain so much as a Sensitive or Vegetative Thing but becomes a meeâ— Dead Carkass 3. Therefore neither Part while in the Compound can Act or Operate Alâ—… Therefore Neither Part can Operate Alone For 't is Demonstrable that Whâ—… ever Acts must Be Actually Bâ—… in our case neither Part Is actuaâ—… but are both of them only Potential by § 2. Wheâ—… fore 't is manifest that Neither Part can work Alâ—… but concomitantly with the other that is in all 〈…〉 Operations of Man as he is Man 't is the Wâ—… Compound or that Ens Thing Substantia Priâ—… or Suppâ—sâ—â—um which only can Act or Operâ—… sâ—nce It only Is actually 4. Corollary I. Hence is seen on what Evident Ground that most Useful and Solid Maxim Actiones Which Groundâ— that Excellent Maxim Actiones Passiones sunt Suppositorum Passiones sunt Suppositorum which all seem to admit but Few I fear duly reflect on is built viz. on those most Evident Truths Nothing can Act but what is it self in Act or Is Actually or Nothing can Act in such a manner unless it Bee such and No Parts in any Compound singly consider'd Are Actually With which notwithstanding it well consists that The Whole may act more chiefly and Peculiarly according to This Part than to That as we also experience not only in Man but in every Compound whatever 5. Corollary II. How Useful this Doctrine is to explicate the Incarnation or the Subsistence of Two Natures Hence the Christian Tenet of the Incarnation is Agreeable to Right Reason in One Divine Person and the Different Operations of Christ our Saviour as he is GOD and MAN will easily appear to Reflecters and will more fully be seen when we shall have occasion to show the Conformity which that Fundamental Article of Christian Faith has to the Principles of True Philosophy 6. Tho' the Peculiar and Immediate Form or Act of that Part call'd The Seat of Knowledge be that Spiritual Of the Form or Act of Man as he is Man Part we call The Soul yet the Act or Form of Man as he is Man is the said Spiritual Part together with that Complexion of Accidents in his Body which contribute to fit him for his Primary Operation For since Man is One Thing which has in it both a Corporeal and a Spiritual Nature § 1. and every Thing acts as it is his Operation peculiar to him as he is Man must also be Corporeo-Spiritual and consequently his Total Form which constitutes him such an Individual Acter must likewise partake of both those Natures 7. Corollary III. Hence in every Operation of Man as he is Man the Operations peculiar to the Soul Both â—arts concurr to every Operation of Man as he is Man cannot be produced without the Immediate
very Notion of Succession is in the Soul Permanently or Unsuccessively which is directly contrary to it's Nature as it passes in the Material World 13. Demonstration XI The same may be said of Discrete Quantity or Number There is nothing in Nature but Dem. XI Because the Soul can tye together as many Singulars as she pleases in the Notion of One Number of which the Fancy has no Material Resemblance Individuals each of which is properly an Ens and consequently Unum and therefore if we put a Multitude the Unity they had in Nature is lost since One cannot be Many nor Many One and this is all the Unity we find among Individual Beings as they are in Matter or out of the Soul Now when the Soul takes Many or More of these together she bundles up even those Incommunicable Actual and perfectly Distinct Individuums at her pleasure and tho' they were never so many she pâ—â—ches upon what Quantity of them she lists to take notice of and gives even their Singularitâ—â—s a new sort of Unity in her Notion which Nature never gave them and calls this Notion which comprizes them all Three Ten or a Hundrâ—â— or what she pleasâ—s Which since it depends on her Choice how many she will take of them 't is Evident that this Union was not given them by the Being which they had in Material Nature Or out of the Soul where they were altogether Distinct and one of them has nothing to say to the other And let it be noted that this Union is not made as Universal Notions are by Abstraction or our leaving out the Particular Considerations belonging to the Species or Inferiour Notion and only taking in one Common Consideration found in them all there being a fair Ground in Nature to consider them on that fashion But this Colligation of many into One Number is a kind of Union of those whole Individuums in despite of the multitude of their Singularities and a Reducing those Things which are ultimately Determin'd Distinct and stand aloof from one another as they are in Material Nature to a Close Unity compacted so Indivisibly and Indissolubly that the least part added or detracted that Unity is specifically alter'd and presently becomes another kind of Number Lastly which makes this Point yet more Evident We can have a Material Resemblance in our Fancy of Four Five or some small number of Natural Things and have in our Heads a kind of Picture of them as it were standing all on a Row But 't is impossible for us to have such a Lively and exactly-Just Picture of a Hundred a Thousand a Million c. so as to see clearly there is not one more or less and yet we experience that we can have most Clear Distinct and Exact Notions of These as well as we can have of Two or Three Nor do we look upon those Great Numbers by the Eye of our Understanding as a Confused Heap or Multitude as it happens when we see a great Croud of Men standing together but with a clear and perfect Discernment that they are just so many not one more or less and this as easily as we can know Four or Five Since then in the way of Matter nothing can resemble a Thousand but a Thousand for the Resembler must be some sort of Number otherwise it is not at all Like it and neither One more nor less that it is must it self be a Thousand it follows that the Distinct and Exact Notions we have of very great Numbers is Immaterial and consequently the Soul their Subject is such also 14. Demonstration XII Come we now to these Notions which belong to the Head of Quality which because Dem. XII Because Sensible Qualities tho' Innumerable and contrary to one another are in the Soul without Disordering her in the least they are Innumerable we will instance in Two of them Sensible Qualities and Figure As for the First of these If when we have the Notion of a Sensible Quality v. g. Dry or Moist the Thing or Body thus affected be in our Mind and consequently the Nature of those Qualities we have gain'd our Point and prov'd it is in us Immaterially it being evidently impossible a thing should have two Material Manners of Existing Nor can these Qualities be there by some Material Representation or Resemblance For what can resemble Dryness or Moistness Whatever it be it must be some other Sensible Quality for otherwise it would be utterly Unlike it and the same would happen were it a Sensible Quality belonging to some other Sense than that of the Touch v. g. were it Whiteness or Fragrancy which belong to the Sight and Smell 'T is Evident then that nothing but Dryness it self can represent Dryness materially Wherefore it must either be said that Dryness it self is in the Soul Immaterially or not at all and yet that we have iâ— in us we are satisfi'd in regard we have it in our Notion and can discourse of Dryness it self Again if Dryness Moistness and all other Sensible Qualities be in the Soul materially when she knows them then as they did in Material Nature affect their other Material Subject according to the peculiar Genius of each by Ch. 6. § 6. so they must affect the Soul too after the same Manner and make her materially Dry and Moist And moreover since no Notions are ever blotted out of the Soul she would also be at once Moist and Dry Hot and Cold White Black Blue Green and of all Colours Rough and Smooth Fragrant and Stinking Diaphanous and Opacous and imbâ—'d with a thousand other Contrary Qualities which finee they could not be all of them Agreeable to any Material Nature each of them having a peculiar Constitution of it's own they must needs Disorder Distemper and Corrupt it the Effects of which the Man must necessarily experience if the most Frincipal Part of him the Soul were made of Matter and they would render the Compound affected with many Diseases whereas yet none ever found himself in the least Distemper'd Griev'd or Pain'd by having in his Mind the Notions of all these Opposite Qualities and ill-agreeing Dispositions 15. Demonstration XIII This is farther enforced because were the Soul which is confest to be our Knowing Dem. XIII Because those Sensible Qualities do not fight and expel one another as they must were their Subject made of Matter Power Material all these Opposite Qualities when they are in that Power or Known must be perpetually Fighting Contrasting and Expelling one another out of their Subject at least they would Refract one another's Nature and make it otherwise than it was to some Degree as they do in Material Things or Bodies Whereas we experience that they amiâ—ably cohabit in the Soul and are so far from â—â—pelling one another out of the Knowing Power that they draw their Contraries into it and each â—â—tters one another as an Object and makes it more distinctly Knowable according to that â—â—â—axim
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
them Finite is Infinitely short of His INFINITE Bounty or Goodness 5. Again Fecundity bears in it's Natural Notion a very High Perfection We may observe That all Living Creatures when grown up to a consummate pitch in their respective Natures are Fruitful or Prolifick that is are apt to produce another of their own Kind And Spiritual Natures when they come to know are said to Conceive and our Knowledges are call'd Conceptions tho' few reflect on the word or the Analogy it bears to the Verbum in the Divine Mind or to the Procession of the Son only our Conceptions of Natural Objects are Imperfeâ—â— and never arrive at their utmost Perfection till 〈…〉 see them in the First Cause Since then these arâ— some kind of Perfection in their several ways 〈…〉 most Consonant to Reason that we should Transfeâ— the Notion of Fecundity too to GOD to whom â—â— being Infinitely Perfect we ought to ascribe all sorts of Perfection after they are stript from the Imperfections and from their Limitedness which necessarily accompanies all Finite Beings as has been often said above 6. As for his Communicating his Whole Divine Essence whence in Discourse with no small Man among the Deists I have heard it inferr'd that if the Father Communicates His WHOLE Essence and all it's Attributes to the Son He can leave nothing at all for Himself it is Evident that this Objection proceeds from most profound and most Gross Ignorance of Spiritual Natures A Master may communicate all his Knowledge to His Scholler or to such a degree as to make Him as Learned as Himself Does it follow thence that he has Empty'd or Disfurnisht himself of his whole Stock of Learning and is become now an Ignorant Dunce But speaking of Objects which is more to the Point Even Material Objects lose nothing at all by being known Suppose I could penetrate so â—horowly the Individuating Complexion of Accidents of such a Body in Nature so that I comprehended every minute consideration that could possibly belong to it would that Body be ever the Worse or Diminisht in it self because it is Wholly Known or Understood I desire those weak Reasoners to consider that as Spiritual Natures are above Quantity so they do not follow the Rules of Material Beings nor in discoursing of them ought we to take our Measures â—…om such Predicates or Sayings as we use when â—e speak of Bodies Rather Divisible and Indiâ—…sible which are their Differences that constitute â—…em being Contradictories whatever Conceptions â—…e make of the One the quite Opposite must be made of the Other excepting only the Notion of the Common Genus Ens in which and which only they do boâ—h of them agree Nothing at all is Defalkt from Them by their Communicating themselves nor do they lose any thing even by Actiag upon Bodies The Nerves of an Angel are not over-strain'd nor their Spirits spent by Changing or Altering them Nor are Spiritual Objects impair'd by their being thus Communicated But 't is prodigiously weak to object this in our case where the Discourse is of GOD's Knowing Himself and where it is granted that He does so unless those Gentlemen think that the Word Himself in that speech does not signifie GOD or else they conceit that GOD is the Worse by Knowing Himself that is the Worse for being Infinitely Perfect for in such Nonsense as this all their Objections against the most B. Trinity when driven home to their Principles will be found to terminate 7. Tho' I cannot but judge that enough has been said both here and indeed in divers places of this Treatise to assert and manifest that notwithstanding this Distinction or Plurality of Persons there is not the least Show of prejudicing the Unity of the GODHEAD yet it were not amiss to add one Consideration more which will much surprise the Anti-Trinitarians and be lookt upon by them as a most strange Paradox which is that the Unity of the GODHEAD is so far from being violated by a Trinity of Persons that it is in divers regards better Strengthen'd by that Position To show which I premise this Lemma That That Unity is Best which is every manner of way such and not that which is not so Whence follows that such a Compleat Unity in all Regards ought to be ascrib'd to the GODHEAD Wherefore since it has been by so many Demonstrations quoted and related to above prov'd I hope beyond all possibility of Confute that Knowledge consists in this that the Nature Known even tho' it be of a Material or Corporeal thing which is of a contrary Nature to that of the Knower must out of the very Notion of being Knâ—wn be One and the Same in the Knower as it is in it self Likewise since our Natural Notions do assure us that Love is Spiritually Unitive of the Lover with the thing Loved and these ways of making the Divine Nature One with it self are clearly Different from that of being an Infinite Actuality of Being whence we deduced GOD's Metaphysical Unity in our Third Book of our Transnatural Philosophy it follows necessarily that the Deity had not been in so many Respects One had He not per impossible Known and Lov'd Himself that is had there not been a Trinity of Persons by which only He could be said to Know and Love Himself as has been abundantly Deduced Wherefore since it belongs to the Divine Unity to be Infinitely and consequently every way such even out of this very consideration secluding all others there ought to be admitted a Trinity of Persons SECT IX The Substance of the foregoing Explication Recapitulated 1. TO sum up the precedent Explication in short Since GOD Knows and Loves Himself there is in the Divine Nature what does Verifie both Knower and Known Lover and Loved Wherefore since each of these Pairs of Notions they being relatively Opposite have unavoidably some Distinction in them and being verify'd of GOD are in the Divine Nature there is necessarily some Distinction in the Divine Nature Again since these Notions which are Verify'd of GOD and therefore since they cannot be thought to be Extrinsecal Denominations are really in Him are Distinct and not Common Notions to Many but each of them singular in it's self they must be Particulars to which the word GOD is Common and in some manner or other predicated of them all There are therefore in GOD in some Sense or other Distinct Particulars As appears farther because this Predication is made by the Copula Est which Identifies those Particulars with the Common Predicate GOD that is signifies these Distinct Particulars are Intrinsecal to the Divine Nature and not Apply'd to it Outwardly by our false or untoward manner of Conceiving it but spring out of the very Nature of the Thing or Divine Nature truly Conceiv'd Also since what 's meant by the word GOD must be conceiv'd to have All Perfections in it in the Line of Being of which to be Subsistent or a Suppositum is One we must
be forced to say that what 's meant by the word GOD is not only Common in respect of those others but also that 't is a Common Suppositum and that it is the Common Suppositum which is Verify'd of all those Particulars And since it cannot be Verify'd or Predicated of them as a Genus or Species because These do necessarily include Indetermination and Potentiality which are Inconsistent with GOD's Purest Actuality therefore it must be Predicated of them after such a manner as is not Generical or Specifical but in such a way as a Notion which is in One Line is predicated of such Notions as are conceiv'd to be Formally in Another 2. These Particulars can be but Three tho' there seems to be two Conjugations as it were of mutually Opposite Relations Because Divine Love ought to proceed from the Greatest GOOD that can be conceiv'd to belong or be Connatural to GOD as He is of a Spiritual Nature viz. the Knowledge of Infinite Truth or which is the same from Infinite or Divine Truth Known in the Divine Knowledge which amounts to this that Divine Love proceeds from the Two other Particulars formally according to their Relations Whence no Correlation can be from those other Persons to Divine Love which thus proceeds from them because Relation is Grounded on that which it Refers or Relates It being then Evident that whatever is the Ground of Relation or Related must be some Absolute Notion and not such a one as is Relative it follows that there cannot be any Correlation where the Immediate Ground is a Relative it self 3. These Three Distinct Particulars Verify'd of GOD and therefore Truly in the Divine Nature are properly to be called PERSONS because â—here being no Accidents in GOD there is noâ—hing in the Divine Nature to be Distinguish'd or â—articulariz'd but his Substance and Particulars â—n an Intelligent Substance are properly called PERâ—ONS There are therefore Three Persons in GOD. Amongst which since Knowledge formally proceeds from an Object of the same Nature in both the Knower and thing Known and to communicate a Living Nature to another Living Particular is to GENERATE hence this Procession is truly call'd GENERATION and therefore the Divine Object Known from which Divine Knowledge thus proceeds is truly tho' in a Spiritual Sense call'd a FATHER and the Divine Knowledge a SON and the former of these is the First by way of Origin because Knowledge must be conceiv'd to proceed from the Object and not the Object or Thing to proceed from the Knowledge unless that Knowledge makes it to be or Creates it as the Divine Wisdom does Creatures The Third Person is properly call'd Divine Love because Love proceeds from that which is our Greatest and most Connatural Good perfectly and expresly Known or as we phrase it conceited or fully conceiv'd to be such Now the Greatest Good of GOD who is of a Spiritual Nature is Essential TRUTH which as was said consists in this that GOD knows Himself or which is the same that the Divine Object is in the Divine Knower By which is seen How and Why the Holy Ghost who is Divine Love proceeds from both the Father and the Son 4. Wherefore since as appears by those oftrecited Words on which we build our Explication the Common Suppositum exprest by the word GOD has in it All the Perfections that can be imagin'd and this Infinitely hence all the Three Persons having the common Suppositum or the GODHEAD in them are Coeternal Co-omnipotent c. and in every respect Co-equal as is exprest in ihe Creed of St. Athanasius Whence all Objections of their being before one another for some Time or some Instant as also of Dependence on one another and all Distinction in Nature or imagin'd Plurality of Gods are Diametrically opposite to the Doctrine of the Trinity Lastly hence all pretended Arguments taken from Fancy for from True Reason none at all can be drawn are by the respective parts of this Explication shewn to be frivolous and either Answer'd or else Forestall'd and Prevented 5. If the Anti-Trinitarians have any Objections in their Quiver I have set them here a fair Mark at which they may level them They may see here that I do not wrap my Discourse in Ambiguity of words but I distinguish my Notions as exactly as is possible and draw my Conclusions consequently Nor have I any Deductions which are nor grounded on Principles But I foresee that they will not be able to raise any Opposition which is not built on Faneies taken from Material Beings which are too grofs to be made use of when we are discoursing of GOD and altogether unfit to be Transferr'd in their rude sense to so sublime a Majesty or else that they are occasion'd by perfect Ignorance of Spiritual Natures and their Operations The main Distinction between which and Bodies is this that whereas Bodies being Divisible Entitites can have nothing in them Matter supposed but their own Accidents or Modes which Determine the Matter thus or thus and thence make it this or the other Individuum so that a Corporeal Suppositum or Thing can have nothing in it but its own Nature and its own Intrinsical Modes which have no Being but Its A Spiritual Being which is so far Superiour to it that it is constituted by its Difference Indivisible which is of a Contradictory Nature to it can therefore by its Proper Operation Knowing have all other Essences or Natures in it besides its own and engraft them as it were on its Stoek of Being and in such a different manner from the former that as they are in It they are no Part or proper Mode of the Spiritual Nature it self nor any Intrinsical Accidents of it but they are there formally as Others or as Distinct from it nor are they Dependent on the Spiritual Nature that Knows them for their Being as were the Corporeal Modes on their Subject but they have a Proper Being of their own out of the Understanding and Independently on it So likewise when they have an Act of Love they have a Propension Tendency or Panting after the Object of that Love and an endeavour to be Conjoyn'd and United to it by way of Attainment or Fruition of the Good they conceive to be in it Whence 't is plain that they are carry'd to it as it is Another or as 't is Distinct from themselves So that even when an Angel or a Soul Knows and Loves its self they must in some Respect or other be Distinct from themselves as they are the Object of that Knowledge and Love as the very word Object does Evidence and as manifestly appears from the Antithesis between Knower and Known Lover and Loved Only because as was shown above in Creatures which are not Self-Beings this Knowledge and consequently Love are Accidental to them in regard that even their Existence which this Knowledge and Love presupposes is Extrinsical and Accidental to their Essence therefore this Distinction
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
in some other Respect than that of Being and therefore must still remain the same Being Wherefore this Universal Thesis that The same Being can no ways be Distinct from its self is confutable by the dullest Sophister who ever heard of and understood the Ten Predicaments which are the common Heads that contain all the several Notions Respects or Considerations which we may make of the same Thing or the same Being But these Gentlemen Discourse as if there were but One Predicament viz. that of Substance or Being and they have either Cashier'd or else had for hast quite forgot the other Nine And is such a shallow Pamphlet a fit Present for the Learned Divines of the Universities 17. Let us put a Parallel to this Discourse Imagine then Peter were both a Father and a Son in respect of his Different Correlates these Gentlemen will undertake to prove plainly that he must therefore be Two Men thus If this Father be a Rational Creature and the Notion of Son be Distinct from that of Father then Peter if he be a Man must be a Distinct Rational Creature for the same Being can be no ways Distinct from it self and certainly two Distinct Rational Creatures are Two Men. The Parallel is his own Discourse put in the very Tenour he laid it Only we put the Notion or Respect of Son to be Distinct from that of Father because we speak of them as we ought precisely and formally according to such or such respects and not materially for so consider'd they are all Identify'd with the DEITY whence St. Austin in his Books De Trinitate when he names Deus adds immediately id est Trinitas and these men know well that 't is our constant Profession that the Trinity is no otherwise to be Worshipt than in the Unity of the Godhead 18. Thus these Gentlemen by their New No-Logick have prov'd Peter to be two Men and to have two Individual Natures in him because he has two different Relations which kind of Respect call'd Relations since if we take the whole Extent of that Notion and all the Particulars under it we acquire and lose a hundred times a day in one kind or other no one Being in Nature would be constantly the same but must be perpetually multiply'd into the Lord knows how many Beings or Things 19. But the main Point is That our Question is not whether the same thing can be any way Distinct from it's self â—ut whether the Same Thing may not and does not Ground and Verify many Conceptions or Respects of divers kinds as is shown in my First Preliminary and whether it does hence follow that if we affirm that it is One according to One of those Respects and yet Three according to Another of those Respects there can be in that case any show of a Contradiction which is the Affirming and Denying of it according to the Same Respect This is the true Point which these Objectors never touch nor heed but instead of Distinguishing those several Respects they jumble them all together confusedly and then when they have thus shuffled away the true Question they pretend to Decide that which they have not Toucht perhaps never Thought of it by an Untoward and Aukwaâ—d way of Arguing by Ifs of which we have here no less than Three in Four Lines 20. My last Advice to those Dissatisfy'd Gentlemen is Than they would be so True to their own Reason as not to fancy themselves competent Iudges of what they cannot but know they are not able to decide noâ— undertake to sound Depths which are beyond the Length of their short Line nor be inveigled to apprehend that those most sublime Points that concern what passes within the DEITY it self must when it comes to be Debated or Explicated be as plain and familiar to every Ordinary Understanding as a piece of a Romance 'T is the greatest Policy of those Men in gaining Proselytes to spread about their Pamphlets among the Vulgar and to persuade them that what 's True must needs be Easie as to which Flam every Man who has study'd the Mathematicks is able to undeceive them and so make them Iudges of the Controversie which is very gratifying to Original Sin and to our Innate Pride the Effect of it And if once they can bring them to swallow this bait and embrace this Erroneous Principle of over-weening they are sure they are caught For then they have no more to do but to propose to them some pretty superficial Triâ—â—es which if examin'd by True Principles have not a grain of Sense in them and yet being suteable to the pitch of weak Understandings are very Plausible and Taking and they presently hold themselves well appay'd By this means also they are brought to undervalue and contemn all Learned Discourses which go the bottom of the subject in hand because they are not at the first sight so easily intelligible to their Low Capacities Thus I have endeavour'd both to satisfie Learned Readers how this most Holy and Fundamental Article of Christian Faith is Explicable according to True Principles of Reason working upon our Natural Notions and also to Establish the Unlearned from the Delusions of those who while they oppose it renounce Faith and Reason both Which done I have no more to do but to recommend them to GOD the FATHER who Created and Preserves us to GOD the SON who Redeem'd and Enlightens us and to GOD the HOLY SPIRIT who Sanctifies and Comforts us To all whom as being One GOD Blessed for Evermore be ascrib'd all Honour and Glory FINIS ERRATA EP. Ded. P. 6. L. 2. these does p. 10. l. 5. only True Pref. p. 2. l. 27. if she p. 24. l. 11. by their p 26. l. 21. Judiciousness Book P. 8. l. 24. Alter'd p. 57. l. 4. Bodies l. 24. dele at p. 75. l. 21. Form or Act p. 81. l. 8. in the Margin thence p. 90. l. 32. is it p. 96. l. 20. eum p. 112. l. 33. can exist p. 116. l. 2. Individuums p. 123. l. 30. in the Margin such a Nature p. 218. l 15. being there p. 131. l. 22. tuo scribuntur p. 140. l. 23. is in a manner p. 204. l. 20. in the Margin Chap. 7. p. 257. l. 23. it in p. 310. l. 16. Encyclopaedia p. 318. l. 29. similes ei p. 323. l. 29. refunded into p. 331. l. 1. could be p. 347. l. 5. that Chance p. 405. l. 5. particular Supposita p. 407. l. 5 6. depute p. 427. l. 21. as does