AN Antidote against Poyson OR AN ANSWER TO THE Brief Notes upon the CREED OF St. Athanasius By an ANONIMOUS AUTHOR By J. SAVAGE Gent. Written for the Information of the Illiterate and Vulgar WHosoever will be saved before all things 't is Necessary that He hold the Catholick Faith A Good Life is of Absolute Necessity to Salvation but a Right Belief in these Points that have been always controverted in the Churches of God is in no degree Necessary much less Necessary before all things He that leads a Profane or Vicious Life sins against a plain acknowledg'd Rule and the express unquestion'd Words and Letter of the Divine Law and the Dictates of Natural Conscience He wilfully refuses to advert to these Monitors and therefore can no way palliate or excuse his Wickedness But he that errs in a Question of Faith after having used reasonable diligence to be rightly inform'd is in no fault at all his Error is pure Ignorance Not a culpable Ignorance for how can it be culpable not to know that of which a Man is Ignorant after a Diligent and Impartial Inquiry Which Faith except a Man keep Whole and Undefiled without doubt He shall perish Everlastingly By keeping this Faith Whole and Vndefiled must be meant if any thing be meant that a Man should believe and profess it without Adding to it or Taking from it If we take from it we do not keep it Whole if we add ought to it we do not keep it Vndefiled and either way we shall perish everlastingly First for Adding What if an Honest plain Man because He is a Christian and a Protestant shall think it Necessary to add this Article to the Athanasian Creed I believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be a Divine Infallible and Compleat Rule both for Faith and Manners I hope no Protestant would think a Man shall be damned for such Addition And if so then this Creed of Athanasius is at least an Vnnecessary Rule of Faith Then for â—aking ought from this Creed the whole Greek Church diffused through so many Provinces rejects as Heretical that Period of it The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Sonâ— contending that the Holy Spirit is from the Father only Which also they clearly and demonstratively prove as we shall see in its proper place And for the Menace here of Athanasius that they shall perish Everlastingly they laugh at it and say He was drunk when he made this Creed Gennad Schol. A. Bp. of Constantinople And the Catholick Faith is this Catholick Faith is as much as to say in plain English the Faith of the whole Church Now in what Age was this which here follows the Faith of the whole Church Not in the Age of Athanasius himself who for this Faith and for Seditious Practices was banish'd from Alexandria in Egypt where he was Bishop no less than Four times whereof the first was by Constantiâ—e the Great He was also condemned in his own Life-time by Six Councils as an Heretick and Seditious Person Of these Councils that at Milan consisted of 300 Bishops and that at Ariminum of 550 the greatest Convention of Bishops that ever was This Consent of the Churches of God against him and his Doctrin occasioned that Famous Proverb Athanasius against all the World and all the 〈…〉 Athanasius For the times Before and After the curious Reader may see Chr. Sandius his Ecclesiastical History in which the Learned Author gives a large Account by what and whose means the Athanasian and Trinitarian Faith did at length prevail against the Ancient belief of but One God or but One who is God Therefore quaâ—e With what Forehead the Author of this Creed calls this the Catholick Faith or Faith of the whole Church when 't is certain it has been so in no Age and least of all in the Author 's The Catholick Faith is this That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity He means here that we must so worship the one true God as to remember He is Three Persons and so worship the Three Persons as to bear in mind that they are but one Substance or Godhead or God So the Author explains himself in the three next Articles which are these Neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance for there is one Person of the Father another of the Son another of the Holy Ghost but the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all one Therefore all these Articles make indeed but one Article which is this The one true God is Three distinct Persons and three distinct Persons Father Son and Holy Spirit are the one true God Plainly as if a Man should say Peter James and John being Three Persons are one Man and one Man is these Three distinct Persons Peter James and John Is it not now a Ridiculous Attempt as well as a Barbarous Indignity to go about thus to make Asses of all Mankind under pretence of teaching them a Creed and things Divine to despoil them of their Reason the Image of God and the Character of our Nature But let us in two words examine the parts of this Monstrous Proposition as 't is laid down in the Creed it self Neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance But how can we not confound the Persons that have they say but one numerical Substance And how can we but divide the Substance which we find in three distinct divided Persons There is one Person of the Father another of the Son another of the H. Ghost Then the Son is not the Father nor is the Father the Son nor the Holy Ghost either of them I shall not need to prove this Consequence not only because 't is evident but because 't is acknowledged by the Trinitarians But if the Father is not the Son and yet is by confession of all the One true God then the Son is not the One true God because He is not the Father the reason is self-evident for How can the Son be the one true God if he is not He who is the One true God After the same manner it may be proved that on the Athanasian Princiciples neither the Father nor Holy Spirit are or can be God or the One true God for neither of them is the Son who is the One true God according to Athanasius and all Trinitarians for thy all say the Father is the One true God the Son is the One true God and the Holy Ghost is the One true God Which is a three-fold Contradiction because there is but One true God and One of these Persons is not the other But if it be a Contradiction 't is certainly false for every Contradiction being made up of Inconsistences destroys it self and is its own Confutation The Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One the Glory equal the Majesty coeternal The meaning of the last Clause is That
the Union is between two finite things but in the pretended Personal Vnion of God to Man and Man to God the Union is between Finite and Infinite which on the Principles of the Trinitarians is impossible For we must either suppose that Finite and Infinite are Commensurate that is equal which every one knows is false or that the Finite is united but to some part of the Infinite and is disjoyned from the rest which all Trinitarians deny and abhor You will say If they admit neither of these how do they shew the Possibility of the Incarnation or Union of God to Man They tell you God indeed is Infinite and every reasonable Soul and Body even that of Christ is Finite yet the whole God and whole Man are united because As the whole Eternity of God doth coexist to a moment of Time so the whole Immensity of God is in every Mathematical Point of Space The very Truth is they cannot otherways defend the Incarnation or Personal Vnion of an infinite God to a finite Man but withal it must be owned that then the Doctrins of the Trinity and Incarnation do infer imply and suppose all the Contradictions that Mr. Johnson has objected to the Doctrin of Transubstantiation in that little Golden Tract so deservedly esteemed by All. His whole Book and all his Demonstrations are founded on these two Suppositions that a longer time doth not all of it coexist to a shorter nor is a greater Extension constipated or contained in a less much less in a Mathematical Point Therefore all his Books and all that he hath so well said and argued in the Preface concerning the Authority and Judicature of Reason in Matters of Religion equally and effectually destroys the Ductrins of the Trinity and Transubstantiation If the Reader would have an excellent Book let him procure that But Oh! were the Press as free for the Unitarians as 't is for other Protestants how easily would they make it appear that the Follies and Contradictions so justly charged on the Transubstantiation are neither for Number Consequence nor Clearness any way comparable to those implied in the Athanasian Creed and that the Trinity hath the same and no other Foundation with the Transubstantiation so that we must of necessity admit both or neither If the Church is to interpret Scripture for us we must admit both but if Reason we can admit neither and this I think the Trinitarians will not deny But secondly In the pretended Incarnation or Union of God with Man the Union cannot be Personal as 't is between the Soul and Body it cannot I mean be such an Union as to make but one Person The Union of the Soul and Body may be properly Personal that is may constitute or make one Person because 't is not the Union of two Persons but only of one Person the Soul to a thing otherways without Life Reason Memory or Free-will The Body is but as it were the Garment of the Soul and is wholly acted by it and depending on it But in the pretended Union of God with a Man there are two distinct and very different Lives Memories Reasons and Free-Wills which utterly destroys a Personal Union for that supposes but one Life one Reason one Memory one Free-Will for if these things which constitute a Person are sound more than once there is no longer one Person but two and consequently no Personal Union in the sense of which we are speaking This is the Catholick Faith which except a Man believe faithfully he cannot be saved By believing Athanasius doth not mean bare believing but he includeth also therein Profession for He saith a little before The right Faith is that we Believe and Confess c. So that a Man cannot be saved unless he Believes and Professes as this Creed directs him First for Believing What if a Man cannot believe it Are we obliged under the Penalty of the loss of Salvation to believe it whether we can or no Doth God require of any Man an impossible Condition in order to Salvation Secondly As to professing under pain of Damnation What if it be against a Man's Conscience to profess it The Scripture saith Whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin if therefore a Man profess against his Conscience He sins and if notwithstanding this a Man must either Profess or be Damned then God requires some Meâ— to sin in order to their Salvation but this we are sure is false and therefore that the Menace in the Artide is vain And now I appear to all Men that have any freedom of Judgment remaining Whether this Creed is fit to be retained in any Christian much less Protestant and reformed Church Since it subverts the Foundations not only of Christianity but of all Religion that is to say Reason and Revelation there being no Principle in Reason and Scripture more evident than that God is One or that there is one Almighty only-Wise and Good Person or Father of all If we cannot be sure of this then Religion and Christianity are built upon Fancy only and have no solid Foundation This Creed may be profess'd by the Roman Political Church because it gives countenance to their Absurd Transubstantiation and Cunning Traditions added to Scripture as those Doctrins do to the gaining of Veneration and consequently Dominion and Riches to their Clergy But in a eformed Church where the Scripture is held to be a Compleat Rule of Faith and Manners and also to be Clear and Plain in all things necessary to Salvation even to the meanest Understanding that reads it or hears it with Sobriety and Attention such a Confession of Faith is I think intolerable as being utterly inconsistent with those Principles and reducing us back to the Roman Bondage Besides Nothing has been or is more scandalous to Jews and Mahometans than his Creed the chief Article of whose Religion is that there is one only God The evidence of which Principle is such in nature as well as Scripture that it has propagated Mahomatism among greater Numbers than at this day own Christianity for the sake of that one Truth so many Nations have swallowed all the Errors and Follies of the Alchoran or Book of Mahomet as on the other Hand Christianity has been rejected and detested among them on the account of the Christians Three Persons who are severally and each of them God But the Mischiefs of this Creed do not stay here it is levelled not only against the True Faith but is destructive of that Love and Charity Which is the Spirit and Life of Christianity and without which Faith is but a Life-less Body For as if it would effectually inspire all its Believers with a Spirit of Judging Damning and Uncharitableness it pronounces the Sentence of Eternal Damnation in the Beginning Middle and Conclusion upon all that do not both Believe and Profess this Faith and keep it whole and undefiled that is upon the whole Greek Church and other Churches in the East and upon
the Glory and Majesty of the Son and Holy Spirit is equal to the Glory and Majesty of the Father or the Son and Holy Spirit are equally Glorious and Majestical with God the Father Therefore I ask Whether the Glory and Majesty with which the Son and Spirit are Glorious and Majestical be the same in Number that is the very same with which the Father is Glorious and Majestical or only the same for Kind and Degree If it be not the same in Number then the Godhead of the Father and of the Son is not as this Creed teaches all One and they are not one and the same God for two Infinite and Distinct Glories and Majesties make two Gods and three make three Gods as every one sees and to say true the Trinitarians themselves confess It remains therefore that they say the Glory and Majesty of the Son and Spirit is the same in Number and not for Kind and Degree only with that of the Father but then it follows that the Glory and Majesty of these Persons is neither Equal nor Coeternal Not Equal for 't is the same which Equals never are nor Coeternal for this also plainly intimates that they are Distinct for how Coeternal if not Distinct Do we say a thing is Coeternal or Contemporary with it self Therefore this Article also doth impugn and destroy it self Besides if the Glory and Majesty of the Three Persons be numerically the same then so are all their other Attributes from whence it follows that there is not any real Difference between the Three Persons and they are only three several Names of God which is the Heresie of the Sabellians In the next place this Creed teaches that The Father is Incomprehensible Uncreate Eternal Almighty the Son is Incomprehensible Uncreate Eternal Almighty the Holy Spirit is Incomprehensible Uncreate Eternal Almighty Also that each of these Persons by himself is God and Lord so that the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God yet there are not Three Gods or Lords nor Three Incomprehensibles nor Three All mighties nor Three Eternals or Uncreated Now if in imitation of this a Man should have a mind to say The Father is a Person the Son is a Person and the Holy Ghost is a Person yet not three Persons but one Person I would know why this were not as good Grammar and Arithmetick as when Athanasius says the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God yet not three Gods but one God or when He says the Father Uncreated the Son Uncreated and the Holy Ghost Uncreated yet not three vncreated but one Uncreated and so of the reft Doth not a Man contradict himself when the Term or Terms in his Negation are the same with those in his Affirmation If not then it may be true that the Father is a Person the Son is a Person the Holy Ghost is a Person yet there are not Three Persons but One Person For all the fault here is only this that in the last Clause the term Person is denied to belong to more than One when in the first it had been Affirmed of no fewer than Three For the same Reason it must be a Contradiction to say The Father is God the Son is God and the H. Ghost is God yet there are not three Gods but one God For the Term God is at last denied to belong to more than One though in the first Clause it was affirmed of Three Will they say that in these words there are not three Gods but one God the Term God is not Denied to belong to more than One or is not appropriated to One If so then there are not three Persons but one Person and again There are not three Men but one Man Then I say these Propositions do not Deny the Terms Person and Men to belong to more than One or appropriate them to One only which yet every Body confesses they do But here is a Numerical or Arithmetical as well as Grammatical Contradiction For in saying God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost yet not Three Gods but One God A Man first distinctly numbers Three Gods and then in summing them up bruitishly says not Three Gods but One God To these things it will perhaps be answered that when we say God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost or thus The Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God the Term God is used Essentially and therefore comprehends the whole Three Persons so that there is neither a Grammatical nor Arithmetical Contradiction But this Remedy is worse if possible than the Disease for it owns that there are Three Personal Gods though there is but one Essential God and that otherways the Propositions of which we are speaking would imply all the aforesaid Contradictions This Remedy I say is worse than the Disease for 1. Three Personal Gods and one Essential God make Four Gods if the Essential God be not the same with the Personal Gods and though He is the same with them yet since they are not the same with one another but distinct it follows that there are Three Gods that is Three Personal Gods 2. It introduces two sorts of True Gods Three Personal and one Essential But the Christian Religion knows and owns but one True and most High God of any sort And I would know of the Trinitarians whether they dare say in express words There are two sorts of True Gods For like as we are compelled by the Christian Verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be Lord and God c. By the Christian Verity I suppose is meant the Sacred Books which contain the Christian Religion that is the Books of the Old and New Testament But do these Books and do's this Verity compel us to the acknowledgment of three Persons each of which is by Himself Supream God and Lord and yet all of them together but one God Doth I say the Holy Scripture compel us to this contradictory Acknowledgment Is there any Text alledged from Scripture which all the Unitarians and some or other of the most Learned Trinitarians do not easily interpret in such sense that the Unity of God is preserved and no more than one Person even the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ acknowledged to be God See the History of the Vnitarians But if there is no Text of Scripture but what is in the Opinion of some or other of their own Learned Men fairly capable of a sense contrary to the Faith deliver'd in this Creed then we are not compelled to acknowledg this Faith And the truth is the Contest between the Unitarians and Trinitarians is not as is commonly thought a Clash of Reason with Scripture but it layeth here Whether when the Holy Scriptures may be understood as teaching only one God or but One who is God which agrees with the rest of Scripture and with Natural
Reason we must notwithstanding prefer an Interpretation of it that is Absurd and contrary to it self to Reason and to the rest of Scripture such as the Trinitarian Interpretation exprest in this Creed appears to be In a word the Question only is whether we ought to interpret Holy Scripture when it speaks of God according to Reason or not that is like Fools or like Wise Men The Son is of the Father alone not Made nor Created but Begotten Here and in the next period Athanasius is got into his Altitudes or Profundities which you will Here 't is that the Ignorant think they are taught the Inmost Secrets of Theological Knowledge but High and Low are not more contrary than the things which are here affirmed as equal Truths If the Creed-maker had spoke here of the Generation of the Son by the Divine Power on the Virgin Mary it would have been true that the Son is neither Made nor Created but Begotten but then the first part of the Article would be false that the Son is of the Father alone for He that has a Father and a Mother is of Both. But since he speaks of the pretended Eternal Generation the latter part of the Article is false and inconsistent with the first part of it Every Novice in Grammar and proper speaking knows that Begotten when 't is distinguished from Made and Created always supposes two Parents a Mother as well as Father 't is therefore a Contradiction to say the Son is of the Father alone not Made nor Created but Begotten for if He is Begotten He cannot be of the Father alone and if He is of the Father alone He is not begotten but either Made or Created The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son neither Made nor Created nor Begotten but Proceeding The first Fault here is that the Holy spirit is said to proceed from the Father and from the Son To which Heresie the Greek Church have ever opposed those clear words John 15.26 When the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father even the Spirit of Truth which Proceeded from the Father He shall testify of me Secondly He saith here that the Holy Ghost is not Begotten but Proceeding He adds shortly after that He who will be saved must thus think of the Trinity Therefore surely Begotten and Proceeding differ very much and very clearly else t is an Harsh Sentence that we shall be damned if we do not Conceive besides all other unconceivable Mysteries of this Creed that the Holy Ghost is not Begotten but Proceeds Yet after all 't is now confessed by the most Learned Trinitarians that Begotten and Proceeding differ nothing at all and that it is rightly said The Son proceeds from the Father and that the Holy Ghost is generated of Both directly contrary to this Creed It follows that Athanasius has damned the whole World for not distinguishing where no Distinction can be made at least with any certainty And perhaps this Damning Humour of his has justly provoked some to write him not S. Athanasius but drawing the S. a little nearer Sathanasius So there is one Father not Three Fathers one Son not three Sons one Holy Ghost not three Holy Ghosts In consistence with what goes before He should have said Two Fathers Two Sons and Three Holy Ghosts or Spirits For the Second Person is the Son of the First and the Third proceeds which is nothing else but is Generated from the First and Second which makes Two Fathers and Two Sons and all Three of them are Holy Spirits for the Father is an Holy Spirit and so is the Son no less than the Third Person But this is not the first time in this Creed that Athanasius has discovered He could not count In this Trinity none is Afore or After other none is Greater or Less than another Yet the Son himself saith John 14.28 My Father is Greater than I. And for the other clause None is Afore or After other 't is just as true as that there is no difference at all between Afore and After I ask Whether the Son doth not as He is a Son derive both Life and Godhead from the Father All Trinitarians grant He do's grounding themselves on the Nicene Creed which expresly calls the Son God of God Light of Light very God of very God Begotten not Made But if the Father gave to the Son Life and Godhead He must have both before he could communicate or give either of them to the Son and consequently was afore the Son was No Effect is so early as its Cause for if it were it should not have needed or had that for its Cause No Proposition in Euclid is more certain or evident than this The right Faith is That we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God is both God and Man Then the Lord Christ is two Persons For as He is God He is the second Person of the pretended Trinity and as He is Man a perfect Man as this Creed afterwards speaks He is also a Person for a Rational Soul vitally united to an Human Body is a Person if there be any such thing as Person upon Earth nay 't is the only thing upon Earth that is a Person Let the Athanasians therefore either say that the Lord Christ is Two Persons which is the Heresie of Nestorius condemned in a General Council Or that He is not a Man contrary to 1 Tim. 2.5 There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Jesus Christ Or that He is not God which is the Truth Who altho' He be God and Man yet He is not two but one Christ One not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh but by taking of the Manhood into God One not by Confusion of Substance but by Unity of Person But because these words One by taking of the Manhood into God not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh And again One not by Confusion of Substance but Vnity of Person cannot readily be understood by themselves the Creed-Maker explains them in this following Article For as the reasonable Soul and Flesh is one Man so God and Man is one Christ That is as a Soul united vitally to a Body maketh one Person called Man without confounding the two Substances of the Soul and body for the Soul remains what it was and so also does the Body So God the Son being united to a reasonable Soul and Body doth together with them make one Person called Christ without confounding the Substances of the Divinity or Humanity for the Divinity remains without the least Change what it was and so doth the Humanity or reasonable Soul and Body This is the only Offer at Sense that is to be found in this whole Creed but so far from explicating that it farther perplexes the Difficulty of the pretended Incarnations as will appear by those two Considerations 1. In the Personal Vnion of a Soul with a Body