Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	body_n	soul_n	union_n	2,456	5	9.5499	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25440	Animadversions on a postscript to the defence of Dr. Sherlock, against the calm discourse of the sober enquirer as also on the letter to a friend concerning that postscript.		1695 (1695)	Wing A3192; ESTC R7291	26,902	22

nauseous Nonsensical Meraphysicks Mr. H w spares the Dean upon his Distinction between one individual Nature and one single Nature only throws him one Pun to confound him if the Divine Nature be not a single Nature it must be a double a triple c. and then concludes fairly that the Dean has asserted Three Divine Natures unless all ordinary forms of Speech must be abandon'd and forsaken and I will be bound to dispute this Cause with either of them ay and let them change the ordinary forms of Speech of which the one is as guilty as the other provided they will define their new Forms and in their Discourse keep to their own Definitions As Mr. H w tells the Dean if the Divine Nature is not a single then 't is a double c. so I tell him if the Divine Nature is not simple it is compound and so the Dean and he may shake Hands But Mr. H w desires it may be noted that there is this great Difference between him and the Dean The Dean speaks positively dogmatically and proudly whereas he Mr. H. does but suppose what he says as possible not certain the two last words had been better omitted and by the way for him to endeavour to prove his Hypothesis possible is to suppose it uncertain Well 't is granted there is such a sort of Difference between him and the Dean Mr. H w has a Passion for the Article Mr. Dean for his Exposition of it Mr. H w does what he can to make out the Matter he would give any thing it were made out ay though it were by his Adversary he hopes it will be made out though he is afraid not by himself but the Dean positively affirms that the Doctrine is plainly true after his particular Manner and he ridicules all his Brethren who being equally concern'd for it would take up with any lower sort of Trinity than a Trinity of Three distinct Minds P. 13. Mr. H w comes to examine whether the Dean has said as much for the salving the Unity of the Godhead as himself the Enquirer and he rightly notes all that the Dean has said is Mutual-consciousness but what he supposes against its Sufficiency to salve the Unity of the Godhead is as weak as the Dean could wish Three intelligent Persons as Mr. H. argues must be pre-united before they can have vital Perception of one another's Sensations But the Dean supposes the Three Persons in the Trinity eternally united and eternally Self-conscious that indeed is as wild a Supposal as a Visionair can make but the Dean is us'd to suppose impossible things and Mr. H. not us'd to argue well against them Mutual-consciousness will never come up to do service and credit the Trinitarians common Dream of Essential Union for should we suppose that Three distinct intelligent Spirits are conscious to one another's Thoughts yet they will still remain Three distinct intelligent Spirits and not one intelligent Spirit their Knowledg of one another and perfect Harmony will come to no more than a Socinian Unity an Unity of Agreement a knowing and willing the same things and so far as I see the Doctor 's Hypothesis is not pure from Heresy for all his Three Gods P. 16. Mr. H comes to consider over again his own way of maintaining the Unity of the Godhead and to defend it against the Dean but first he premises what I must reflect upon he says the Dean's Temper of Mind in what he writes p. 105 c. is such that no Man whose Mind is not in the same Disorder will apprehend any thing in it but such Heat as dwells in Darkness i. e. devilish Heat Mr. H w's Calmness is not so senslesly dull as to oblige him to die in the Dean's Debt This was a rude Stroke but in the next Line he stabs him with a clean and artificial Sarcasm The Dean had gracefully began his Letter thus True Divine Wisdom rests not on an ill-natur'd and perverse Spirit I understand it says H w while the ill Fit lasts So Joab hugg'd Abner when he smote him under the fifth Rib This was enough a Conscience Mr. H needed not have wonder'd that the Dean could write that excellent Saying without Self-reflection So Ovid spoil'd Omnia pontus erat with deerant quoque littora Ponto P. 17. Mr. H w speaks thus The thing to be reveng'd is that the Enquirer did freely speak his Thoughts wherein he judg'd the Dean's Hypothesis defective his not taking notice of what he reckon'd naturally Antecedent and fundamental to Mutual Consciousness a most intimate natural necessary eternal Union of the Sacred Three Now it is true that it is not safe to make too bold with the Dean or his Hypothesis nemo illum impunè But if a Man shall find fault with him who takes as little Care as the Dean to write nothing amiss he must expect to be ill us'd and to say the truth he deserves it But what is that which the Dean should have taken notice of and did not Why the intimate natural necessary eternal Vnion of the Sacred Three Now I am of the mind that the Dean looks upon his Mutual Consciousness as the intimate natural necessary eternal Union according to him the Sacred Three ever were and could not but be thus united and therefore they might again shake Hands if there were nothing but the Philosophy of the Mystery between them But since they will not be Friends I that am a stander by will see fair Play It seems the Dean had objected that the Enquirer represents the Unity of the Godhead by the Vnion of Soul and Body and by the Vnion of the Divine and Humane Nature c. Mr. H w confesses he partly does so but more fully by the supposed Union of Three created Spirits Now if ever Mer that pretended to Reason discours'd more senselesly than both the one and the other of these Disputants they shall burn me for an Heretic They both confess that there is no exact Representation no perfect Example of any such Union in Nature and yet they will be representing it over and over again sometimes by a Tree and its Branches sometimes by the Sun and its Light sometimes by a Mind and its Faculties sometimes by Body and Soul and that nothing may be wanting in them toward the representation of it they represent it at length by that which is not an Essential Union of a Divine and Humane Nature and by a supposed Union of Three distinct created Spirits The Dean as I have above noted has told us that the proper and natural Signification of Words will not reach the Mystery Then if he were not very much at leisure he would not make words about it for his Readers must judg of what he writes by the proper and natural signification of his words or be content to be ignorant of his meaning for he has not and I guess will not publish an English Glossary to settle his improper unnatural

vital Sensation Now Sensation will take in Seeing as well as Feeling and then Mutual Consciousness if he keeps to the letter will be Knowing each other in themselves In short Seeing Feeling Knowing each other in themselves are Forms of expressing which he uses promiscuously not very Orthodox indeed but there is no Heretical Sense under them no Sense at all that I know of but as he complements Dr. S th they are Gipsy-Cant Hold I cry him Mercy for Gipsies understand one another's Gibberish His not very Orthodox Expressions may perhaps be better call'd Rosy-crucian Cant for that mysterious Order of Philosophers are the only Persons that I know of besides our gross Tritheists who use Words without any intelligible meaning Mutual Consciousness is really nothing but a shamesul Instance of the Dean's Faculty in putting impossible Cases which it were not difficult to expose but his way is to ease his Adversary of that Labour and do it himself His Self-Consciousness refutes his Mutual Consciousness i.e. if he has desin'd them aright for how should he that by Self-Consciousness feels himself to be himself by Mutual-Consciousness feel himself to be some Body else It is true an intelligible Sense of these words may be given As thus I am conscious to my self of what I think say or do and what is known to me and my Friend of that we two are mutually conscious But the Dean never understands words in their proper and natural signification is never contented till he has made them signify what no Body can understand nor he declare without talking backward and forward so shamefully that were it not for fear of his Vindictive Spirit every Man would do as Dr. S th has done i. e. show him his Picture I had almost said his living and substantial Image But he is sure that Mr. H w can never form any Notion of the Union of Spiritual Essences without Mutual Consciousness It must be his Prejudice then that hinders him for Spiritual Essences may be united by Consent but that 's not the Union he intends he intends an Essential Union and that 's an Essential Contradiction and Substantial Nonsense The Dean fairly recounts that Mr. H w represents the Unity of the Godhead by the Union of Soul and Body which make one Man and by the Union of the Divine and Humane Nature which are said to make one Christ Now he criticises and affirms these to be Personal Unions meaning Unions of divers things which make one Person but cannot be the Unity of the Godhead in which there is a Trinity of distinct Persons I know no inconvenience of allowing according to common Acceptation that Soul and Body make up one thing call'd Man nor know I what Mr. H w can get by it for neither of the two singly is Man or if each of them singly is so together they must make up a double Man Which was the Fancy of the silly Indian in John Dreyden's Play I kill'd a double Man the one half lay Vpon the Ground the other ran away But the Dean rejects these Unions he says because they are not the Unions of distinct Persons But that is not fair for he himself has confess'd once and again that there is nothing in Nature like Three Persons in One Godhead And I must take leave to tell him that if there were Mr. H w is as like to find it as he But since there is not they must e'en both be content with such faint Resemblances as they can get As for the Union of two Natures I have a better Reason for rejecting than the Dean by much it is building Mystery upon Mystery and proving one Dream by the help of another Mr. H w's Unity of the Godhead is such and no other than the Dean speaks it such an Union of Three Spiritual Beings and Individual Natures as together which is fairly call'd by Composition constitute the Godhead Against this Notion he says some things weakly those the Letter takes notice of and perhaps I may also spend my Verdict on them there other things he says well and with sound Reason but in them he is most unlucky for instead of Three Spiritual Beings Three Individual Natures read Three Minds or Persons and his Arguments conclude equally against his own Hypothesis In short what he says well comes to this If all Three are but One God then not any One by himself is that One God and this he says Mr. H w has own'd p. 47. and I think his words come near it which are these When you predicate Godhead of any One of the Persons you express an inadequate Conception of God But to prove himself a sounder Trinitarian he says that he owns and that none are Orthodox Christians but they who own so too that the Father has the whole entire Divinity in himself that the same subsists in the Son the same in the Holy Ghost that each by himself in the most proper adequate Conception is true and perfect God tho all Three are but One and the same God which does plainly and undeniably prove that the Dean and all his Orthodox Christians do believe that the Father Son and Holy Ghost are One and Three in one and the same respect For that Godhead which by them is predicated of every of the Three separately that very Godhead is predicated of the whole Three conjunctly The Dean says that Mr. H w's Notion of the Unity of the Godhead is such that neither the Scriptures nor the Antient Church know any thing of it I am of the Mind that the Scriptures know as much of the Hypothesis of one of them as of that of the other and as for the Antient Church who can tell what he means by it the Fathers beyond the acknowledg'd Rules of good Life neither agree with one another nor any one with himself but I guess his Antient Church to be made up of those particular Doctors whom he judges to have talk'd his Way though I won't sware but they may have drop'd a word or two in favour of Mr. H w's Divine Composition Where any late Socinian Writers have declar'd themselves willing to compound this Dispute of a Trinity of Divine Persons for the Three Attributes of Power Wisdom and Goodness I know not I beg the Dean's pardon if I wrong him when I believe he wrongs them for I observe that they have noted that there are other as essential Attributes of God as the Three mention'd viz. Truth and Justice and so the Mystery will consist of five Parts and that is two more than it did when it had two too-many And then if any of the Trinitarians make but an Attribute of the H. Ghost yet they all do and must allow Jesus Christ to be a Person and they all do affirm him to be one and the same God with the Father which I am very sure the Socinians will by no means agree to Indeed when the Trinitarians explain the Trinity by calling God as