should maintain such an Opinion and after having made such Concessions to the Nominals and to the Unitarians as the Realists do They grant it to be certain and incontestable not only in Reason but in Holy Scripture that there is but one God but one Creator they allow this to be so true and evident that the Scripture ought never to be so interpreted as in any degree to contradict this first Article of all revealed Religion because to interpret Holy Scripture at any Time or in any part of it inconsistently with that Article were to make it contradict it self and that too where it speaks most plainly and expresly I say this Foundation being laid and agreed on all Hands I have often wondred at the pretence of the Realists for their Doctrine being a manifest Tritheism as explained by them in saying 'tis what the Holy Scriptures teach they say that the Sacred Scriptures contradict themselves They would have it understood as a great deference on their Parts towards the Holy Scriptures that they imbrace and profess the Doctrine therein contained though such Doctrine very flatly contradicts all Reason and common Sense and withal other parts of the same Scriptures but it were far more becoming such as they are to express their Reverence for the Scripture by interpreting it consistently with it self and with Reason as the Nominals and Unitarians do than to expose it to the contempt and unbelief of all others by such a Reverence of it as this Book needs not that is to say by pretending to believe it indeed but believe it as manifestly inconsistent with it self as well as with that Reason which God has infused into the Human Nature for a Guide and Judg in all either obscure or doubtful Matters It is the Church and the Unitarians that truly reverence the Scriptures by rescuing them from senseless and contradictory which is to say impossible Senses But supposing it were true that the meer Words of some few suspected or ambiguous Texts did seem very much to favour the Doctrine of the Realists yet seeing those Texts as interpreted by the Realists too plainly contradict evident Reason and the Nature of things why will not these Gentlemen see that in such a Clash as this We must interpret the Scripture consistently with Reason and the nature of things because words will bear to be somewhat strained much rather than things The nature of Things and the dictates of Reason are Eternal and Immutable they will not admit or bear the least Stretch Strain or Violence done to them but Words are of a very desultory and vagrant Meaning they are sometimes to be taken Literally or as they Sound sometimes in a metaphorical or figurative Sense sometimes in an Hyperbolical that is excessive nay sometimes in an Ironical which is to say contrary Sense which being the Case of all Books and Writings whatsoever there can never be a real Necessity of so interpreting the Scripture that it should contradict the known Nature of things plain Reason or it self Whereas some say here and are willing always to repeat it that the current of Scripture is so much and so clearly for such a Trinity as the Realists profess that it would be manifest Violence done to the Divine Word to interpret it as the Socinians do I answer Cedò locum name me the Text or Context alledged for the Doctrine of the Trinity that is not interpreted by some of the most Learned Criticks and Interpreters of the Trinitarian Party in the same manner as 't is understood by the Unitarians Why do they pretend that they are constrained and by the clearness and the current of Scripture to profess a Trinity of Divine subsisting Persons when all Learned Men know that the Texts they have to alledg are so far from being the current of Scripture that they are few in Number and also of very suspected Authority that is they are justly doubted of whether they are genuine original Parts of Scripture or have been added to it and so far from being clear that they are extreamly Ambiguous and accordingly not only some but even the generality of Trinitarian Criticks interpret most of them as we do and not only most of them but the Principal of them more particularly the objected Texts that seem to impute the Creation of Things to our Saviour As I said but now Cedò locum I demand that Text or Context which I will not show is interpreted by the most sufficient of their own Party as we take it but if so as 't is not the first Time this Challenge has been made to them why do they so untruly pretend that they are carried away by the Current of Scripture and by the clearness of it both on their sides May they call a few single Texts or rather shreds of Texts the Current of Scripture or talk of the clearness of their Texts when they cannot alledg so much as one but is interpreted to an Unitarian Sense by some of their own best Writers on the Scriptures and of Controversy With how much more Reason and Sincerity may the Unitarians claim the current of Scripture and that 't is clear also on their Side For there is not a Page there but speaks of God in the singular Number there God is never called Persons but Person he is always spoken of and to by singular Pronouns such as I Thou Thee He Him Me which are never used in any Language but only of one single Person never of three subsisting Persons When the Realists say the Scriptures are clear of their side they mean it chiefly of those Texts wherein Christ is called God and of those in which the Creation of the World and of all things is or seems to be attributed to him But how often is the name God given in Holy Scripture to those that either represent God as Kings and Magistrates or that are like to him in some very distinguishing Respect or in whom he dwells after a peculiar manner as Prophets and Heroical Persons is not Moses for one Instance on all these accounts called God and by God himself And is it a Marvel then that the Mediator also of the New Testament as well as he of the Old is dignified with this Name And yet as I have said elsewhere I am well assured that the Realists will never prove against the Author of the Brief History of the Socinians that the name God is really given to the Lord Christ in any Text that is a genuine Part of Scripture that is to say that hath not been corrupted by the Zeal of Catholicks to make it more conformable to their Sentiments As to the Texts that impute the Creation of things to the Son that is to the Lord Christ do not all Learned Men know that the best of the Trinitarian Interpreters some of the zealousest Men of the Party understand all those Texts of the New Creation that is of the Renovation of things on Earth by the Ministry of
to the Papists themselves as to us of the Reformation their Memory is glorious and ought to be precious also among us But we say also that the Augéan Stable was too foul to be absolutely cleansed at once even by Hercules and his Companions Dr. Luther did a great deal the Labours of his Companions and Seconds were very laudable but much Filth is still left behind We desire to be fairly and candidly heard concerning some corruptions in the Faith and some abuses in the Morality still taught and particularly which is the Subject of these present Papers concerning the Object of our Faith and Worship Almighty GOD. We see we own that the Doctrine of the Church meaning by the Church the Nominal Trinitarians is sound as to the Sense and Intention of it but we humbly offer that the Terms in which 't is expressed are Vnscriptural and very Dangerous The words Trinity Incarnation Hypostatical Vnion are never used in Scripture nor is God ever there called Persons but Person And 't is evident that by occasion of these Terms the Vulgar have such a conception of the Trinity as is certain Tritheism When the People hear of God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost they know not that thereby are meant only so many Relations of God either internal Relations to himself or external Relations to the Creature but they conceive in their Minds such a Father Son and Spirit distinct from both as are so many several subsisting Spirits so many distinct All-perfect Beings in very Deed so many Living Gods and not one God under three several Conceptions For tho they are taught to say three Divine Persons and but one God and that God the Father God his Son and God the Holy Ghost tho each of them is God yet all of them are but one God this last all of them but one God because they know not how 't is to be conceived with the other namely that each of them is God and one of them is God the Father another God the Son they utterly lose the Conception of one God and retain only what is intelligible to them namely three Divine Persons each of them a God We think that the Church having gained her Point against the Fathers and Realists in the Lateran Council and having been in Possession of the Truth for near 500 Years together she may now fling off the Disguise hitherto used the dangerous Tritheistick terms Trinity Persons and the rest she may now begin to declare the Truth she owns in Terms and Words that are proper for it Why does she frown upon those nay persecute them that believe the Unity of God in the Sense that she holds it only because they would cast out the Terms that so plainly favour the Tritheists that is the Realists What has the Church to fear has not the Lateran Council and all Writers ever since declared the Realists to be Hereticks therefore what need is there to retain their Terms when we have discharged the Notions intended by them 'T is true we can say as the Church does three Divine Persons the Father is God the Son is God the Holy Ghost is God taking these words in the Church's Sense not for subsisting Persons that is to say Living Spirits but for Relations Properties Modes or such like We can say God was Incarnate meaning he did inhabit the Lord Christ after an ineffable manner and without Measure which is really as much as the Church intends by the word Incarnation We own the eternal Generation of the Son or Word and Procession of the Spirit by and from the Father explaining our selves with the School-Divines the Church and divers Fathers thus that God or the Father or original Wisdom conceived a most perfect Image of himself by understanding and considering his own Perfections and that he loveth or willeth as well as understandeth himself We can even say three Divine subsisting Persons intending with Dr. S th the Schools the Lateran Council and the Church Relative Subsistences whose Subsistence is nothing else but their Relation Which are Dr. S th's express words Tritheism charged p. 156. I cannot but ask it again why does the Church keep or impose on us such Words and Terms as in their present Signification destroy the Faith we both imbrace the Faith of the real Vnity of God We can say as the Church says we can use her Terms because we know her meaning but we cannot but say of them as Mr. Calvin did when ask'd his Opinion of the English Common-Prayers Tolerabiles Ineptiae For in very Deed 't is meer Trifling and something worse when the signification of these Terms and Words is wholly altered from what it antiently was yet still to retain them while the Church knows at the same Time that they give wrong Notions to the Vulgar making all our People Tritheists and serve also to animate and harden the Realists in their Heresy But I must do the Church this right to confess that most of her greatest Men particularly the first Reformers have publish'd to all the World their hearty desire that all these terms of the Realists were abolish'd and all were obliged to use the Scripture-Language and Words only which would heal all our Breaches and perfectly restore our Peace not only in this but in almost all other Questions and Strifes Let us hear of so many as might be alledged Dr. M. Luther and Mr. J. Calvin M. Luther complains The word Trinity sounds odly it were better to call Almighty God God than Trinity Postil major Dominic Mr. Calvin is yet less pleased with these kind of Terms he says I like not this Prayer O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity It savours of Barbarity the word Trinity is barbarous insipid profane an human Invention grounded on no Testimony of God's Word the Popish God unknown to the Prophets and Apostles Admon 1. ad Polon Decemb. 17. 1695. FINIS
A DISCOURSE Concerning the Nominal and Real Trinitarians Non Partûm Studiis agimur sed sumsimus arma Consiliis inimica tuis Discordia vecors Printed in the Year 1695. Of the Nominal and Real TRINITARIANS The Distinction of Trinitarians into Nominals and Realists and the Design of these Sheets IT will easily appear to all that have seen the late Prints between the Trinitarians and Unitarians That the Questions controverted between us are managed here on another Foot as they speak in another Method and by different Arguments than in Foreign parts or by the Latin Writers Among other remarks that we have made and urged the English Vnitarians show That their Opposers do indeed all go under the common name of Trinitarians but are in truth a great many several and contrary Sects They all cast up their Caps and cry Trinity Trinity But the Ideas they have of the Trinity and consequently their Faiths concerning this pretended Mystery are so many and so contrary that they are less one Party among themselves than the far more Learned and far greater Number of them I mean hereby the Nominal Trinitarians are one Party with Us. As much as the Socinians are clamour'd on for abominable intolerable Hereticks there is nothing more certain than that the Nominal Trinitarians who are truly and properly the Church and who are by much the Majority of Christians are altogether in the same Sentiments concerning Almighty GOD and the Person of our Saviour that we are This is one of the Points that I shall insist on and evince in these Sheets but I shall argue divers other Matters these two especially That the several Sects of Real Trinitarians are guilty of a manifest Tritheism their Doctrine necessarily and immediately infers three Gods and that the Nominal Trinitarians have causlesly innovated the Language of the Holy Scripture and of the Primitive Church concerning GOD and the Person of the Lord Christ I said in the Language of Scripture and of the antient Church for they have retained the Primitive and true Doctrine only they have not kept to the Form of sound Words I will speak first of our Brethren the Nominal Trinitarians then of the Tritheistick Tribes or Realists Of the Nominal Trinitarians that these are the Church THE first observation to be made on the Nominals is that these are the Church which I prove by two incontestable Arguments 1. Their Doctrine has been espoused by a General Council The Council assembled at the Lateran in the Year 1215 established in the most ample manner and most express Terms the Doctrine of the School-Divines or Nominal Trinitarians and condemns in the Person and Writings of Abbat Joachim the Doctrine of the Real Trinitarians as Heretical and Mad I use the very words of the 2d Canon of that Council To this Argument I must note two things First This Council was more truly General than almost any of the Councils that are so called Here were present 1200 Fathers the Ambassadours of the Emperour of Constantinople the King of the Romans the Kings of France England Arragon Hungary Jerusalem Cyprus and divers others Here also were the five Patriarchs partly in Person partly by their Legats the Roman Constantinopolitan he of Jerusalem the Antiochian and Alexandrian whose Presence by themselves or their Legats is supposed necessary towards constituting an Oecumenical or General Council Secondly Divines and Canonists do not give the name of Heresy to any Doctrine because 't is rejected by a great number of Learned Men or by a National Council but they reckon it Heresy if it has been censur'd by a General Council which represents the Vniversal Church Be the mistake never so great let it have been condemned by never so many Writers whether Fathers or Moderns or both 't is only Error 't is not Heresy unless it has been Anathematiz'd by the Catholick or Universal Church and the Catholick Church is never understood to speak but by a General Council which for that reason is called the Church Representative Briefly Heresy and the Faith can be declared but only by a General Council the General Council at the Lateran in Rome has avowed the Doctrine of the Nominal Trinitarians and Anathematiz'd the Hypothesis and Explication of the Real Trinitarians therefore say I the former are the Church the latter are Hereticks I am amazed when I hear some Real Trinitarians say in their Books That the Doctrine of the Nominals never had any other publick Authority but the Creed and 2d Canon of the Council of Lateran for what other equal Authority thereto can it have is not a General Council the highest Court of the Church Her Canons declare the Faith her Anathemas Heresy And what other Council ever was so General as this in which were assembled the Emperour and Kings of the East and West the Latin and Greek Churches 1200 Fathers and what especially makes a General Council the five Patriarchs of Christendom What will the Realists say here that this was a Popish Council First it would be News indeed that the Roman Catholicks are not Orthodox in the Questions concerning the Trinity and the Incarnation It has ever been granted to them both by the Lutherans Calvinists and Church of England that they are sound in Fundamentals in the Doctrines of the Trinity the Incarnation the Satisfaction and such like their Error consists in the Additions they have made to the Fundamentals and namely by their Doctrines of Indulgences Transubstantiation Worship and Invocation of Images and Saints and the rest And is the Greek Church also Heretical in the Doctrine of the Trinity for in this Council the Greek Emperour and Church were represented as well as the Latin Church nay of the five Patriarchs here present four of them belong to the Orient or Greek Church When the Realists have turned themselves all ways they will find themselves held and even bound by the Authority of this Council which is too Great and Venerable to be openly or directly disclaimed 'T is objected to this Council by Mr. Spanheim the present Learned Professor at Leyden that they assented to and published 70 Canons in 20 days Time and that the Canons were not framed by the Fathers but by the Pope These are frivolous Exceptions unworthy of so Learned an Historian for 't is not at all to the purpose who contrived these Canons seeing they were approved assented to and published by the Council Canons are oft-times composed by some particular Father in a Council sometimes by a Committee of the Council sometimes as in the present Case by the President but by whomsoever they are drawn up they are not the Canons of that Person or Persons but of the Council when the Council has examined approved and voted them But Mr. Spanheim doth not find Fault with this Council for their Explication of the Doctrine of the Trinity or the Canons that refer to any part of that Article but because it was convened under pretence indeed to carry on
after all probably the Reformers would have come off no better than the Socinians have done that is with all the clear Truth they have of their side and all their Dexterity and Wit in managing it being over-powered by the numbers of the contrary Herd they should have been answered with Penal Laws and Sanguinary Prosecutions of the those Laws They took therefore a Course that would do their Business unperceived by the most and when perceived by some few it would not be hard to convict them of Tritheism and explode them as Tritheists and so de facto they served Abbat Joachim And then getting their Explication of the Trinity confirmed by the Council of Lateran they happily restored the publick Profession and Faith of the Unity of God by an Authority which none dares to contradict for a General Council as was before noted is the highest Court of the Church that last Tribunal on Earth from which there lies no Appeal Of the Noetians and Sabellians THERE is yet another Branch of Nominal Trinitarians more antient far than those yet mentioned for about the Year of Christ 200 the Noetians and but a little after them the Sabellians arose both these said there is but one Divine Substance Essence or Nature and as the Substance of the Father Son and Spiirt is numerically One so consequently said they there is but one Person of God Father Son and Spirit are but only three Names of God given to him in Scripture by occasion of so many several Dispensations towards the Creature For in regard of the Creation God is called the Father he is named the Son as he wrought Miracles and accomplished the whole Work of Man's Redemption by the Lord Christ in whom he dwelt after a peculiar and extraordinary manner and who indeed was the Son of God by miraculous Conception in the Womb of Holy Mary He has the Name of the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit from his omnipotent Energy or Power by which he effecteth all things In a word the Noetians and Sabellians held that God is but one subsisting Person yet that with respect to things without Him he may be called as the Modern Nominals now speak three Relative Persons the one subsisting Person of God sustaineth the three Names of Father Son and Spirit which being the Relations of God towards things without him he is so many Relative Persons or Persons in a Classical critical Sense And this too is the Explication of the Trinity by that Party in the first Nicene Council who contrived the word Homo-usios or Consubstantial by which they meant that the three Divine Persons have all the same Substance and this is the Party which after the breaking up of that famous Council and upon the sudden Prevalence of the Arian Faction were persecuted by the Arians and were considered by all others as the true Nicene Party till about the Year of Christ 380 the Realists obtained that it should be said that God is tres Hypostases three subsisting Persons Indeed there are several Comma's in the Nicene Creed very hardly reconcilable to the Sabellian Doctrine but as there were three powerful and almost equal Parties in the Nicene Council the Arian Party the Realists and the Sabellians the latter thought it enough if they could procure Homo-usios consubstantial to be inserted into the Creed For that ambiguous Word may be interpreted in favour of all those Parties It may be interpreted the same Substance the very same or same in Number and so it establishes the Sabellian Doctrine or the same in Kind and all Properties and so it countenances the Realists or it may be understood of like Substance and so it pleases the Ariani molles the moderate Arians tho the rigid Arians in the Council would by no means admit of it they rather chose to lose their Bishopricks But when the Council was broke up it was perceived by the other Parties that the zealous Assertors of Homo-usios of the same Substance were all of them Sabellians believed that God is but one subsisting Person and therefore destroyed the real Existence of the Son whom the Arians as well as the Realists took to be a subsisting Person not a relative Person a Respect or a Name only And as the Arians discovered that the Homo-usians were indeed Sabellians so these latter charged the Arians and Realists as guilty of a manifest Tritheism because they so interpreted Homo-usios as to make Father Son and Spirit to be distinct intellectual Substances or subsisting Persons Let us hear their own Historian Socrates L. 1. c. 23. After the Council the Bishops wrangled about the word Homo-usios Those that were for it were censured by the contrary Party as Sabellians and were called Impious because they destroyed the real Existence of the Son Those that were against it were condemned by such as were for it as reviving Gentilism or the belief of more Gods And this Truth that Sabellianism was then taken to be the Nicene Doctrine or the same with the Doctrine of Consubstantiality is owned by the Learned Critick H. Valesius in his Notes on Sacrates L. 1. c. 24. For whereas the Historian saith That Cyrus Bishop of Berea was deposed for holding the Sabellian Doctrine Valesius notes hereupon in these words that is for the Doctrine of the Consubstantiality or the Doctrine of the Nicene Council which Council brought in the Homo-usiotes or Consubstantiality The Sum of what has been said concerning the Nominals THESE at length are the Divisions of the Nominals They all agree that the three Persons of God are not subsisting Persons they are not so many distinct Lives Understandings Wills or Energies which together with a particular Substance make a subsisting Person and if they are more than one they make so many physical real or subsisting Persons no they are Persons in a quite different Sense from that vulgar acceptation of the word Persons They are either three Attributes of God Goodness Wisdom and Power Or three external Acts Creation Redemption and Sanctification Or two internal Acts of the subsisting Person of the Father that is to say the Father Vnderstanding and Willing himself and his own Perfections Or three internal Relations that is three Relations of God to himself namely the Divine Substance or Godhead considered as Unbegotten and Proceeding Or three Names of God ascribed to him by the Holy Scriptures because he is the Father of all things by Creation and because he did Inhabit and Operate after an extraordinary and miraculous manner in the Person of the Man Christ Jesus who was verily the Son of God by his wonderful manner of Conception and last of all because he effecteth all things more especially our Sanctification by his Spirit which is to say his Energy or Power Every one sees these are very crude Conceits to be dignified with the Name of Mysteries but withal the Reader is to know that the Mystery is still behind For the Mystery lies not here that one subsisting Person is
or of any others But then say I the Realists would cover such flat Impossibilities such gross Contradictions to common Sense in a Word such Monstrosities under the cloak of Mystery that they have infinitely more need of that wretched Blind than the Nominals who only by explaining their Terms which Custom and Law have imposed on them go a great way in fairly satissying all Difficulties and when they cannot perfectly account for them they make some small use of Mystery To understand this we must take a short view of the polite happy Things said by them both The Nominals teach there is but one numerical God or one God in Number who yet is three Persons That the Father is God the Son is God the H. Ghost is God yet all three are but one God one God in Number one self-same God They are perfectly aware this were equally Impossible and Ridiculous if 't were not dextrously interpreted and explained it would not be Mystery or Mysterious Truth but notorious Falshood and Absurdity they well know if wholly left in these Terms without an Explication Therefore they declare that by the term Persons and the words Father Son and Spirit they mean not with the Vulgar several subsisting Persons that is to say So many intellectual Substances with each his own particular Life Understanding Will and power of Action for they confess there is in God but one Substance Life Understanding Will Energy in number but three Persons in God are so many States or Respects or Properties or Relations or something equivalent to these of the same ore Divine intellectual Substance or Nature And in this Sense also according to the Nominals the words Father Son and Spirit when used of God are to be understood namely as Relations or States all of them sustained by one and the same subsisting Person or intellectual Substance not as in so many Subjects or as denominating variously three distinct Beings They show that so the Classical Authors both Greek and Latin spoke and as their Language was adopted by the Church in speaking of God with great Propriety so in process of Time the use of Words being much altered occasion was given to introduce the Heresy of the Realists who unlearnedly understanding the old Words in a novel Sense have brought into the Church three Gods instead of one Again they the Nominals say the second Person of the Trinity or of God was Incarnate in the Man Christ Jesus in such manner that thereby the Lord Christ is God as well as Man This also is called by that Mystical Name the Hypostatical or personal Union But they mean no more by it than this that God was as much and truly united to the Humanity as the Human Nature is capable of that is to say in a most extraordinary marvellous and to us unaccountable Manner When they say O God the Father have Mercy on us O God the Son O God the Holy Ghost have Mercy on us they intend not hereby three Objects of Worship or so many several Patrons and Helpers but only as these are so many Relations and Respects of the Deity either to himself or to us so they invocate him by these Distinctions or in these several Properties and Relations In short the whole Mystery consists in the Terms they use and scarce at all if at all in the Sense or things intended by those Terms which things or sense are received and imbraced by us the Unitarians for we admit the whole Doctrine as here declared and explained But 't is quite otherwise with the Realists their Non-sense is in the thing meant not in the Words or Terms They say there are three Divine subsisting Persons three infinite Spirits three omniscient Minds three distinct Almighties as distinct as so many Angels or Men each of them as truly properly adequately and perfectly God as each Man is a Man and each Angel an Angel and yet all of them are but one God This we confess is Mystery with a Witness the Mystery every one sees lies not in the Words and Terms but the thing it self is absurd and impossible to cry Mystery here is to profess that by Mystery we mean Contradiction and Impossibilities The Excuses they make for this Mystery are as mysterious or more mysterious than the Mystery for which they would apologize For to say these three most perfect Gods become one God by their mutual Accord and Love is as if you should pretend that by Love and Accord three Men are one Man And when they say they are one God by likeness or sameness of Nature and Properties and by being in one another they might equally say that two or more Angels because they have the same Nature and Properties and being Spiritual do immeate or are in one another are thereby one Angel These Explications of their Mystery are assuredly as great Mysteries as direct Contradictions to Reason and common Experience as the Doctrine it self of one God and three Divine subsisting Persons But why do the Realists expect that Mankind will be perswaded to accept such palpable abnegations of all consistent Sense for Mystery words that are hardly Sense or of either ambiguous or obscure meaning may be put off with some or other who care not for the Trouble of considering for Mystery but gross Contradictions obvious and notorious Non-sense will never be mistaken for Mystery 'T is true People may be constrained to profess it or to subscribe to it but they never believe it no not when through a long habit of Submission to the Commands of others they seem to themselves to believe it I doubt not that the Doctors of the Church of Rome seem to themselves to believe the Transubstantiation because having accustom'd themselves to submit to the Declarations of the Church they have never suffered any reluctance to arise in their Minds against any of those Declarations notwithstanding I am perswaded not a Man of them truly believes that Mystery were all Fears and Hopes and other blassing Interests removed they would presently perceive that in very Deed they believe it not their Reasons never assented to an impossible Proportion nor could assent but only as I said through a long habit of Submission they did not discern that they assented not to the Church's Declarations And this I believe is true also of all who pretend or seem to believe any other inconsistent or impossible Doctrines The Tritheism of the Realists not grounded on the H. Scripture BUT this once more 't is not on a probable or prudent Ground that the Realists sometimes pretend that the Tritheism they impose has such a Foundation in Holy Scripture that as on the one side to believe the Trinity in their Notion of it is a violence done to Reason so not to own and profess it would oblige them to as great a Violence and Disobedience to Holy Scripture I confess I have often wondred that Men so Learned and Discerning as very many of the Realists are
Christ and in Heaven by his Exaltation above the Angels And secondly That neither is there any need of this for those Texts may be thus translated all things were made for him and without regard to him was nothing made that was made Were made for him that is to say they were originally made by God for the Messiah namely to subject them in fulness of Time to him and to his Law Which is the Interpretation of St. John Chrysostom a most Learned Trinitarian in the Opus Imperfectum on St. Matthew In short I would not have it said that the current of Scripture is much less is clearly on their side who contend for a Trinity of Divine subsisting Persons because 't is so well known that this senseless extravagant boast of some small Writers of Controversy is the Jest and Sport of their own Criticks and Interpreters of Note who have far more scorn for such Sciolists than they have Enmity to the Socinians Of the Unitarians their Agreement with the Church THE Unitarians called also Socinians are a Sect or Party or Denomination of Christians who have indeavoured to perfect that Reformation that was so happily begun by Dr. M. Luther Mr. J. Calvin and here in England by Archbishop Cranmer Dr. Luther subverted the Infallibility and Supremacy of the Pope the Worship and Invocation of Angels and Saints the superstitious monastick Vows the Merchandize of Indulgencies by which poor Sinners had been long cozen'd into a Belief that they could buy the Pardon of their Sins from the Pope and his Factors and this not only without Restitution Amendment or Repentance but without Confession for that also was sometimes a Clause in their Bulls of Indulgence that the Purchaser should be absolved of all his Sins whether Confessed or not Confessed The forms of Indulgences were so ample that is so General and Comprehensive that Men of any Wealth never cared what Sins they were guilty of because they knew they could at any time whether Dead or Alive purchase their Pardon if they had neglected it in their Life Time 't was but leaving so much Money by Will for Masses and Indulgences and they were sure all should be forgiven The Story of the French Gentleman is well known who being admonished by his Friend of his horrible Cursing and Blaspheming answered Man there is no fear cannot I buy my Pardon of the Friars Austins I would be forgiven for an Ounce of Gold though I had ravish'd the Mother of God and cut off both her Breasts This was the state of Things when Dr. Luther appeared and opposed himself so successfully to these Corruptions as I said he intirely ruin'd the Market of Indulgences Monastick Vows Invocation of Saints and Angels the Supremacy and Infallibility of the Chair of Rome Mr. J. Calvin besides that he greatly strengthned and confirmed what Dr. Luther had begun by his extraordinary Erudition fine Wit and indefatigable Diligence in all which Mr. Calvin excelled the very greatest of the first Reformers he carried the Reformation somewhat farther than Luther had done He took away the use of Images which can serve only for a snare to the Weak and for an Avocation and Amusement to the Discerning His Doctrine concerning the Sacraments has fewer Follies than not only that of Rome but than Luthers he rejected the Consubstantiation as well as the Transubstantiation and was not imposed on by the Doctrine of Ubiquity I need say nothing of Arch-bishop Cranmer because his Reformation is known to every Englishman his Doctrine and Discipline being expressed in the 39 Articles the Books of Homilies of Canons and the Common-Prayer All Protestants have a great Reverence for these famous and excellent Men even those of us who think that their Reformation is yet very incompleat I may add that as much as these Reformers are detested by the Papists the very Papists all Orders of them from the highest to the lowest from the Pope to the Begging and discalceate Friar are greatly in their Debt For now they have Learned Priests Holy Popes and the Kings and States of the Roman Communion are no longer the Slaves of the Pope all which was otherways when there were no Protestants of whom the Pope and Conclave and the rest of their Hierarchy might stand in some awe The Popes consider now that they must act Soberly live Exemplarily and inspect the Conduct and Sufficiency of the Clergy else the Princes and People now in their Communion will desert to the Protestants It was Dr. Luther as odious as his Name among them is who took off the Yoke and filed the Chains from the Necks and Hands of Emperours of Kings and Nations From laying prostrate under the Feet of the Pope from holding his Bridle and his Stirrup from expecting after their Election by the Princes of the Empire till the Pope should please to crown them and thereby give them the Name and Power of Emperours from Trembling every time that a crouching Friar was turned into a boisterous Pope I say from this miserable Vassalage the German Emperors and other Catholick Kings and States are delivered and care now just so much and no more for his Holiness's Love or Anger as the Example of his Life or the actual Assistance he can lend to 'em shall merit Since Luther the Clergy also of the Roman Communion are Learned and exemplary Men in their own Defence and for their own Security they must be so And they dare now withstand any new Incroachments on their Privileges or their Revenues by the Court of Rome Nay they have retrieved in some Degree their antient Rights and Authority for Rome dreads and ever will dread another Luther in case she should unjustly or rashly either oppress or offend the inferior Clergy Those of the Lay-Communion of that Church are now led with a Pastoral-Staff not hared with the Church's Thunder Excommunications and deliverings up to Satan They are sent of no more Errands to Syria and Asia in pretence to rescue the Holy Sepulchre in Deed to inlarge the Papal Bounds and Authority They are fed now with much sounder Doctrine and led by a better Example For now the necessity of Repentance and Amendment are taught Indulgences are now owned to be only Prudential and Charitable relaxations of Penance Images are now used only as Memorials of departed Saints and Incentives to imitate their Example the Sacrifice of the Mass is now only a commemorative Sacrifice which even Protestants believe it to be the Virgin Mary and the Saints are prayed to only to pray with us and for us and the like abatement is made in other Articles And whereas with reference to the Example of their Priests it has been a Proverb in some Places He that will give his Child to the Devil let him make him a Priest now and for almost two Ages last past their danger from the Protestants as was said before has reformed their Manners These are the Services done by the first Reformers as well