the Communion of the regular establish'd Church which yet he is far from contemning or censuring Suppose I say a Person to be of such Character and Circumstances shall we dare to say this Man's Faith is not sufficient to his Salvation because we our selves perhaps have more Faith and are justly perswaded more is necessary to our own Salvation In all Likelihood he endangers himself to be excluded from Heaven who takes upon him to exclude such I am far from denying that Men ought to grow up to Perfection in all Faith and Knowledg that is to endeavour to comprehend and believe as near as they are able all the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven or all revealed Truths built upon that one Foundation Jesus Christ and him crucified But we know how vastly the Superstructure is increased the Compass of Scripture even of the New Testament is large the Difficulty of understanding it at this Distance great the Lights which we have by Fathers and Doctors various and by their Variety many times dazling and confounding one another nay even whole Churches in Doctrinals very contrary to one another and at least one and that the greatest of them all for the maintaining her Grandeur has designedly with all the Arts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 4. 14. and Methods of Deceit new modell'd the whole Frame of Christian Doctrine and not stuck in a sort to corrupt even Scripture it self by imposing on the World her corrupt Translation and in many Points corrupter Sense of it for infallible Truth and the only sure way to Heaven in which Impositions of hers all Protestants agree many Points to be fallacious and destructive Now these being and having been the Circumstances of the present Age and indeed of many late Ages is it not the constant Doctrine of all Reformed Churches that every Person should with Prayer Humility and Study of the Truth proposing unto himself the Holy Scripture for his Rule judg for himself And must not every Man believe what is the Result of his Judgment or what in Conscience according to Scripture he judgeth Truth Now perhaps sundry Points which particular Doctors yea which Churches have differently determined and which some of them pretend to be of Faith an honest inquisitive Man cannot perceive the Holy Ghost to have determined at all nor does he find them in the Apostles Creed the old Standard or Leiger-Roll of Fundamentals Nay further examining them according to the Analogy or Proportion of Faith that is comparing them with undoubted Fundamentals he cannot resolve which Opinion bears most Proportion or is most certain In this Case what shall the Man do For my own part I can see nothing more proper and safe than to take the Matter in that Latitude wherein the Scripture delivered it Had not learned Men differently interpreted and imbroiled the Text perhaps I should never have perceived any more than one Sense of it even that in which I now take it But having seen their Glosses I am sensible the Text will admit several Interpretations and which of them was designed by the Holy Ghost I know not I disbelieve none of them nor will I as far as able in my Practice act contrary to what either or any of them enforces I submit intirely to the Authority of God in all Here 's my negative Belief I will not divide the Christian Church nor take Part with them that do divide it but hold the Vnity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace maintain Christian Charity with all Christian People and esteem all them to be Christians who are content to walk or who without the Contradiction of a disorderly Life profess to walk by that Rule which I own namely Holy Scripture This is the Latitude I plead for and from which I think I never shall be driven But there being but one Faith there can be no more Latitude in Faith §. 12. than there is in an Vnit This is a Subtilty indeed and no doubt a stabbing Argument against the People of the long Name as some are pleased to stile many conformable moderate Persons But are there not as many sorts of Vnits as there are of Vnities And did Mr. Dean never hear in Philosophy of an Vnity of Composition which is so far from excluding Parts that it supposes them Or in Arithmetick did he never hear of Integrals and what minute Parts thereof Artists can make No Latitude in an Unit Yes and in the one Faith too especially as by the one Faith we understand what Churches and Doctors have now made it Have we not whole Systems of Opinions now adays made up into Confessions of Faith Certainly all controverted Points in Christian Doctrine can no more be maturely determined and the stated Truth distinctly be believed by all Men than all Christian Perfection be by all equally attained There are those to whom it is given in an ampler and more peculiar measure to know the Mystery of the Kingdom Though all may have the same Scripture or Body of revealed Religion all have not the same natural Sagacity and Judgment the same Education and Advantages of Improvement the same Leisure and Opportunity for Search and Application of Mind Some and that far the greatest Numbers of Christians can only understand the common Christianity repent of their Sins and in Well-doing depend upon God's Mercy in Christ Jesus for Life everlasting Others leaving that is not stopping at those the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ the alone true Foundation go on unto Perfection So that there is a measure of Faith as well as of other Christian Perfections And God is doubly the Author of a Latitude in Faith 1 In revealing his Truth in such Terms as admit of a Latitude of Conception 2 In giving to Men as he sees fit such measures of Knowledg and Perswasion as leaves them in an higher or lower Degree of Faith and even of Holiness And accordingly in our Father's House there are many Mansions Nor can any Man with Reason gainsay these things Now though this be far from thinking it indifferent what Men believe Pag. 9. or whether they believe any thing or not yea faralso from believing what we please yet I confess it is believing as by Grace we are able I must conceive as I can and judg as I can and believe as I can too And neither I nor any Man alive who believes any thing can believe all that dictating Men will impose upon them The Authority of the Church it is true is of great Weight and will go very far to the determining any sober Man's Judgment in a case where Evidences on both sides are perfectly equal that is alike probable or alike uncertain But the Faith we owe to the Church and that we owe to God are very different All the Churches or Councils in the World can never make that an Article of Faith which God has not made so He who alone can bestow Salvation has alone
again what he endeavours to expose §. 14. my Desires to all to let this Controversy rest as it was above thirteen hundred Years ago determined by two general Councils And my Reason stands unshaken as far as I can see by the Dean or any else The Improvements which have since been attempted upon it have more embroil'd it than explain'd it and bring us down many times into grosser and more phantastical Conceptions of the Deity than become us As to what the Schools and Dr. Sherlock have done I have already spoke my Sense I could have shewn that Dr. Walls was only the English Author for three Somewhats and have cited a certain Father for tria quaedam but I had rather Mr. Dean should tell the World how ignorant I am of the Fathers than that their Esteem should be lessened by any thing produced by me that may seem to reflect on them Only because the World as if weary of metaphysical Improvements in this and like Subjects begins now to be fond of or expect even in Christian Mysteries some Wonders from Physicks or Mathematicks I shall give an Account of something more copious in this kind than what as far as I know our learned Professor here at home has as yet published There is a Book intituled Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres imprinted at Amsterdam 1685. wherein I find an Account of an Essay called a Memorial Memoire communicated by M. and writ to shew the Habitude or Resemblance Rapport of the three Dimensions of a Body to the three Persons of the Deity in which after a short Preface of the different Natures of a thinking and extense Substance there is drawn a Parallel between La Trinite in one Column and Laquantite in another amounting to no fewer than twenty three Particulars And after somewhat said of the Use of these Parallels wherein he utterly denies the false Idea's as he terms them of the School-men he adds seven more parallel Instances between the Objections Hereticks make against the Trinity and such as may be made against the triple Dimensions of Bodies Then follow ten Axioms out of the Religio rationalis Andreae Vissovatii an Author of whom I can find no Account amongst those Books which I have to consult placed also Column-wise the Trinity on one Side and extense Substance on the other He ends with a Promise if this Essay take of a Parallel between the Incarnation and the sensible World on all which I will only say Real and Physical Quantity exists only in Bodies Mathematical Quantity merely in the Mind or Thoughts of the Artist Now how highly Christianity is likely to be advanced by such Speculations as these what real and what rare spiritual Conceptions and Demonstrations at this rate we shall in some time come to have touching God I leave all considering Men to judg and in the mean while again desire all to stop at the afore-mentioned safe Boundaries of Faith and Peace I must now proceed with Mr. Dean rebuking me as surely intending §. 15. this for no more than a Jest that I would have the Doctrine of the Trinity left upon its old bottom of Authority And here he demands would I myself Pag. 12. believe such absurd Doctrines as some represent the Trinity in Vnity to be meerly upon Church-Authority for his Part he declares he would not And for my part I who adhere to Scripture and plead for such strict Adhesion am press'd with none of these Absurdities or absurd Doctrines but if he will not accept such Terms or Forms of speaking as Homoousion or Consubstantial Conglorified and the like from Councils and Fathers he must which would be a great Fault in me even let them alone I do not know whence else he can or must receive them nor who else coined them and desire him to inform me Perhaps he will say what the great Father in this Controversy did before him these syllabical Words are not indeed in Scripture but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Sense is I answer So I believe the Father-thought and so I believe thought the Generality of the Nicene Fathers for by Mr. Dean's Favour they pretended rather to determine this Point out of Scripture than to deliver any traditionary Sense thereof and agreeable to this Pretence was the placing the Holy Records in the midst of the Council yea admitting what we judg good Consequents out of Scripture to be of the same Truth with Scripture so think I but so do not others think nor will I pretend my self able nor do I see any notwithstanding their mighty Boasts able to convince them Demonstrate to the World this to be the Sense of Scripture and the Controversy is at an end Till that be done if we will be fair we must own this to be the State of our Evidence We have for the Orthodox Side Scripture interpreted by the Tradition of the Church this at length resolves it self mainly into Church-Authority For the traditionary Sense which determines Scripture to signify this not that is of such Authority and therefore is the Dogme thence concluded such also Wherefore I see no Reason to recal that honest Acknowledgment of mine conceived indeed in Terms a little larger After all Authority must define this Controversy Yet haply it might not be amiss to desire my Words may be strictly attended I said indefinitely Authority for I know not whether it can be said single Ecclesiastical Authority did ever effectually define it that is appease the Controversy nor will it I fear ever be able There was some other concurrent Power of which I forbear to speak interposed to temperate the Factious in a certain Council as well as to recommend its Decrees and so must there be amongst us for the ending this Controversy Let but the Forms of Worship which some Mens Consciences cannot bear be made easy that we may unite in the Service of God and 't is no matter how severe the Laws be against any who shall write or speak more in the Controversy I cannot tell but Mr. Dean may have private Reasons which induce him rather to abide by the Arguments or Sentiments of some Fathers than the Authority of the Councils by me insisted on I have not pretended to much Skill in Fathers and Councils and no where imperiously to justify my Pretences within the Space of two or three Pages rattle out over and over the same six or seven Fathers in a Breath without producing a Word out of any of them which some Men may interpret a Pretence to Skill in them but no good Mark whence to discover it However because the Judgment and Authority of Councils is so little in his Esteem and the learned and subtile Disputations of a certain Person in the Nicene Pag. 13. Council of so great Force with him I will take leave notwithstanding my being so little vers'd in these Authors to tell him that though I have â—â—â—ue and profound a Veneration for the
was Poison under the â—n Epistol ad Damas Tom. 2. Honey and boggled at it St. Austin acknowledges he understood not the Difference the Greeks designed between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in our present Language between Essence and Subsistence But because says he according to our Custom of Speech Essence and Substance are all one â—e Trinitat â—b 5. in fine â—apitis 8 cap. 9. therefore we dare not say one Essence three Substances but one Essence or Substance and three Persons So that when they laid aside Hypostasis they introduced a Term equivalent and perhaps more ambiguous namely Persona and then said there were three Persons in one Essence Yet at the same time St. Austin acknowledgeth the Use of this Term improper and that it was Necessity drove them to it they used this Word for â—agna prorsus â—opia humaâ—â— laborat â—â—quium Dictum est tamen tres personae non ut illud diceretur sed ne taceretur Non enim rei â—â—bilis eminentia hoc vocabulo explicare valet Cap. 9. want of a better The Father saith he and the Son and the Holy Ghost are truly three But when it is demanded three what humane Speech is defective notwithstanding we have said three Persons not that strictly we mean or intend to say this but lest we should be silent and say nothing for the Transcendency of the ineffable Matter cannot be express'd by this Word And again more fully in his seventh Book proving the Father Son and Holy Ghost to be one because the Father is Wisdom the Son Wisdom and the Holy Ghost Wisdom and in God to be wise is the same as to be and to be the same as to be God Therefore says he for expressing what is inexpressible that we may speak in some measure what we cannot speak out the Itaque loquendi causâ de ineffabilibus ut fari aliquo modo possemus quod effari nullo modo possumus dictum est à nostris Graecis una Essentia tres Substantiae a Latinis autem una Essentia tres Personae Et ut intelligatur in aenigmate quod dicitur placuit ita dici ut aliquid diceretur Ut quaereretur quid tria sunt quid tres conferimus nos ad inveniendum aliquid speciale vel generale nomen quo complectamus haec tria neque occurrit animo quia excedit supereminentia divinitatis usitati eloquii facultatem Cap. 3 4. Grecian Christians have said one Essence three Substances that is Subsistences and the Latins one Essence three Persons And that what we say may be understood at least in a Riddle we thought it good thus it should be said that something might be said When it is required what these three are we apply our selves to find out some special or general Name whereby we may comprize all the three nor does there any occur to our Thoughts because the Transcendency of the Divinity exceeds the Faculty of usual Speech He goes on to the Effect following If we take these three Abraham and Isaac and Jacob we can find somewhat common which they all have and say they are three Men but touching Father Son and Holy Ghost we cannot say they are three Fathers or three Sons nor indeed three Gods what therefore are the three Three Persons By all which it is plain they used this word Persons not because it was proper but because the Speculation was run so fine that they knew not what else or what less improper to say And let this suffice in my present Penury of Books as to the Fathers who of old either first introduced or by their Use first authorized in divinis this Term three Persons or a Trinity of Persons As to the Sense of the School-Doctors touching the word Persona in this Controversy I must speak chiefly out of my Memory having besides the Master of the Sentences and some imperfect pieces of others only St. Thomas's Sum at hand in which Work he is somewhat brief on this Term Yet even therein when he concludes it convenient that the Name Person be used touching God he does it with this Limitation that it be Conveniens est ut hoc nomen persona de Deo dicitur non tamen eodem modo quo dicitur de Creaturis not used or which is the same understood after the same manner as it is of the Creatures But I do avow it and will be bound to produce Testimonies enough as soon as I can come at Books that it is both his Doctrine and the common Doctrine of his Followers that the word Person when used touching God and the Creatures is not taken in the same equal or univocal Sense but only by way of Proportion and as to the manner Persona de Deo Creaturis non dici univoce sed analogice of signifying and Imposition of the Name it first and more properly agrees to the Creatures As to Protestant Divines also for the Reasons above touched I must be sparing in their Numbers but I am sure the Systematists ordinarily assign either four or five Differences in the Use of the Word when attributed to God and to the Creature And I find by me in my Notes this Passage which I long since transcribed out of Zanchy a judicious and learned Calvinist In the Creatures one Person is not only Una Persona creata ex contextu precedente supplenda ab altera non tam distincta quam etiam disjuncta est at proinde diversae sunt inter se substantiae licet unius naturae In Deo una Persona ab altera distincta quidem est sed disjuncta esse non porest c. De tribus Elohim Parte 2da lib. 1. c. 3. distinct from the other but disjoined and separate so that the Substances are divers though the Nature one But in God one Person is indeed distinct from the other but cannot be disjoined and therefore the Divine Persons are not only of the same Nature for so are humane Persons but of the same Essence Nay they so subsist in the same Essence that they are indeed nothing else but that Essence Somewhat very near this the Doctor to do him Justice more than once or twice expresly says in his Book I mean in his Vindication of the Holy Trinity viz. p. 47 67 104 c. that they are distinct not separate but then he in effect unsays all again much oftner and that both by his Definition of a Person in divinis and in those other Passages of his produced by me in my Paper p. 14. and by many other Passages which I might transcribe from him For my own part I am not able to excuse him from contradicting himself over and over most plainly in the Space of a dozen Lines in one of the Pages now cited viz. 67. of his Vindication for first he acknowledges These three Divine Persons are not separate Minds as created Spirits
are but only distinct each Person has a Self-consciousness of his own and knows and feels it self if I may so speak as distinct from the other Divine Persons The Father has a Self-consciousness of his own whereby he knows and feels himself to be the Father and not the Son nor Holy Ghost And the Son in like manner feels himself to be the Son and not the Father nor the Holy Ghost And the Holy Ghost feels himself to be the Holy Ghost and not the Father nor the Son as James feels himself to be James and not Peter nor John I say then if the Father hath a Self-consciousness of his own whereby he knows and feels himself to be the Father and not the Son nor the Holy Ghost as James feels himself to be James and not Peter c. then both is he separate from the Son and Holy Ghost and his Self-consciousness also separate from the Self-consciousness of each the other And again if the Father Son and Spirit feel himself to be himself and not the other as James feels himself to be James and not Peter nor John then must each feel himself separate from the other For 't is manifest to me that in knowing and feeling my self not to be Peter nor James I know and feel my self separate severed or several from them Nay it is by knowing and feeling my self separate that I know and feel my self distinct If therefore the Father knows and feels himself distinct from the Son and from the Holy Ghost as we Men know our selves distinct from one another he then must know and feel himself separate also unavoidably or else he does not know and feel himself distinct as we do He must therefore upon this Hypothesis be separate as well as distinct from the other Besides three infinite Minds as he there and p. 50. and so onwards most frequently and familiarly stiles the three Persons and one infinite Mind that is three sames and not three sames are to me an unavoidable Contradiction But it had been at least no Contradiction to have said one infinite Mind or a Substance may have three manners of Subsisting or three several Relations which was the old way of speaking and which if it had been kept to the melancholy Stander-by had forborn his Suit That ancient Notion of a Divine Person is more consistent and much less obnoxious though how far satisfactory it may be to all Men he disputes not however he does account it to be the common Orthodox Doctrine now many hundred Years received And here he would have our Divines to stop as a common Boundary for Peace and his Reason is because here our Articles which were as is said in the very Title of them agreed upon for the avoiding of Diversities of Opinions and for the establishing Consent touching Religion do stop expressing only or stating to us the Doctrine of three Persons in the Terms wherein from old Times it has been delivered down and therefore in all Likelihood designing only the old Sense This is but more clearly and explicitely what the Suit for Forbearance desired of Dr. Sherlock and other present Writers in this Controversy Wherefore upon the whole how just in this Case the Imputation of a disguised Heretick of a Man spiteful against the Cause and Persons who maintain it a Wolf in Sheeps clothing and like Characters fastned upon the Author of it are God will judg if the World do not Had I either disputed against the old Notion or assigned any new one or ventured at new and dangerous Explications as some have done Mr. Dean had had some Colour for thus treating me But sith I have not I must tax this Language also as downright Calumny But to come off from this querulous Parenthesis Dr. Sherlock would not or did not stop here as is apparent by what I have transcribed actually out of his Book however he tells the World I did not read it In which Imputation I will frankly acknowledg every tittle of Truth there is namely I had not when I writ read his Book all over for it was taken out of my Lodging without my Knowledg or Consent before I had done with it and perhaps the Doctor has no Reason to complain of that Mischance But I had looked over all and carefully read a great part taken Notes out of it as will appear by my Adversaria of that Month yea indeed transcribed much more than I alledged And I alledged not as the Dean to the end he might shuffle off a distinct Answer to me and the Vindication of his Novelties is pleased to stile them broken Passages out of Pag. 30. his Book but intire Definitions and Propositions which contained the Substance of this Hypothesis as he stiles it And I do affirm the Doctor in what I so cited p. 14 15. of my Paper has gone most plainly beyond and contrary to the Doctrine both of the Fathers Schools and Protestant Divines And in his Apology he seems to have gone beyond himself For he at least four times calls our Lord Jesus a God incarnate p. 4 26 27 31. Now if the Son be a God incarnate then the Father is a God not incarnate And the same ought to be said according to this way of speaking of the Holy Ghost Nay it is actually said by him in these Words This Confession proves the Holy Ghost a God Vind. p. 190. lin ult I say then if there be a God and a God and a God unavoidably there must be three Gods And this is the very Absurdity the Socinians would reduce their Adversaries to Therefore the Doctor so defends the Mystery of the Trinity or so confutes Heresy as to run into the very same Absurdity to which his Adversaries would reduce him which I hope we may say without Offence is most unreasonable most dangerous and at present most unseasonable the thing charged by the Melancholy Stander-by This the Doctor might have evaded had he been content to have taken up with the old Acceptation or Definition of a Person in divinis or to have spoken with Scripture Jesus Christ is God manifest in the Flesh or if that must not suffice as is usual God incarnate But the adding an individuating Particle a to the Name of that common Essence God and then predicating that Name so determined touching the three Persons as it reduces the Subjects touching which it is predicated into the Rank of common Individuals so it leaves the Essence when taken without that individuating Particle in the Rank of a common Species And so contrary to the constant Doctrine even of the Schools God shall be predicated of the Father Son and Holy Ghost as a Species of Individuals as Man is of Abraham Isaac and Jacob whom all acknowledg to have been three Men and as much must the Father Son and Holy Ghost be three Gods Which if it be not most grievous Heresy and particularly the Heresy of * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Fathers perhaps did dispute or opine to this or the like Effect but surely they never designed to impose such a Form of Belief under such damning Clauses as are contained herein This may the rather be concluded for that Gregory Nyssen penn'd the Constantinopolitan So Baronius Creed in that Council ten Years at least after Athanasius his Death And amongst other Fathers of that Council Gregory Nazianzen and Jerome cited here to little Purpose by Mr. Dean approved it as it is without the pretended Athanasian Criticisms and Severities nay without the very Filioque I had Reason therefore as to the Doctrine of the Trinity not to go beyond the Decisions of these Councils but to acquiesce in their Authorities What further Authority beyond that of the Church interposed in the Council of Nice I have no mind to speak I will also pass by here as small Faults some Blunders of Mr. Dean's which he is guilty of in his huddle of Fathers making St. Athanasius St. Hilary and St. Basil to write largely against these Heresies which former Councils had condemned whereas they all three died when there had but yet one Council sat and therein as far as with Certainty appears but one Heresy namely that of Arim condemned for I cannot allow the Quarto Decimani to have been Hereticks they could not therefore write against Heresies condemned by Councils But waving these and other Exceptions which I might justly make touching all these Fathers Writings on this Subject as being impertinently cited against me I say after all if the Worship of the Trinity might be left as these Fathers and particularly as St. Hilary in the End of his twelfth Book of the Trinity left it whose Words I produce not for a Reason any one may guess who pleases to consult them the Differences in this Controversy amongst Protestants would be nearer a Compromise And thus as to my Adhesion to the Authority of these Councils My next Charge is what I confess was great News to me that I am §. 16. Pag. 14. well vers'd in Mr. Hobbs's Divinity Truly though I neither have nor ever had any Esteem for Mr. Hobbs's Divinity yet I could wish my self better skilled in it for then I should better know it when I meet with it in other Mens Writings disguised now 't is said a certain great Person no Stranger to the Temple has lately espoused it under a very slighty Disguise and I should be able more perfectly to wipe off the Imputation of being a Disciple to it at present without any Consciousness to my self cast upon me I could here tell Mr. Dean a very true Secret that there were two Books which I was afraid to read when I was young lest they should corrupt me and Mr. Hobbs's Leviathan was one And having neglected it when my Curiosity was strongest I never read it since So that it would be very strange should I be well vers'd in a Man's Doctrine which I never read But the best of it is Mr. Dean shews here also his great Reading and cites Mr. Hobbs just as before he did the Fathers at random without giving us any Text out of him And I neither have by me nor in case I had have I leisure to search all Mr. Hobbs's Works to see whether he has any such Assertion as Mr. Dean alledges In answering Arguments from Testimony the Testimony it self ought first to be examined And this not appearing I must for that Reason wave any more particular Answer to this Charge Only as to what follows in the Apology I will renew my Request to Mr. Dean as being a Person of Learning for that small Favour that he will hereafter be consistent with and not contradict himself and particularly that he will no more affirm that Point made plain and easy which he confesses difficult and incomprehensible And to prevail with him for this Boon I will promise publickly to beg his Pardon for the Affront of making this my Request to him a second time if I do not immediately prove that in this Matter of the Trinity which here in his Apology he confesses to be an incomprehensible Mystery he does not say again and again in his Vindication thereof that he has made it plain and easy and so has contradicted himself in the Point objected First I say he confesses here the Divine Nature the Trinity of Divine Persons and the Unity of the Divine Essence to be incomprehensible Secondly He says in his Vindication of the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity p. 48. that he will not pretend to fathom such a Mystery as this Here he is for the Incomprehensibility of it Then in his Preface to his Vindication he tells us the writing that Book cost him many Thoughts and those who have a mind throughly to understand it must not think much if it cost them some notwithstanding all that he has done to explain the Mystery Here 's the Difficulty of it acknowledged still Yet a little before in the very self-same Preface he says he has given a very easy and intelligible Notion of a Trinity in Vnity And in his Vindication p. 66. that his Account thereof gives a plain and intelligible Solution of all the Difficulties and seeming Contradictions in the Doctrine of the Trinity And again p. 68. in a kind of an Epiphonema This is a very plain and intelligible Account of this great and venerable Mystery as plain and intelligible as the Notion of one God or of one Person in the Godhead Notions which are very easy and intelligible and whereof all the Difficulties and seeming Repugnancies or Contradictions have received a plain and easy Solution are certainly comprehensible and easy For what hinders them from being so Or what do we mean in our present State by comprehending any Notion or Doctrine but a clear understanding it without any Difficulty or Perplexity That which I said therefore of some Writers pretending to make this Controversy comprehensible and easy is verified in him though I did not name him and so is no spiteful and scandalous Imputation of mine to him as he in his good Nature and sweet Language is pleased to stile it but was justly and truly spoken with Humility and peaceable Design And he must one Day answer if he do not repent for this his second slandering me with Spite against him whom Pag. 11 15. God knows I both loved and honoured and at present wish him as well as my own Soul nor do I reprehend any thing in him which I would bear in my self But now I may set my Heart at Rest as to this Controversy if Mr. Dean will stand to the Profession he has made for he says all that any Man therefore that he pretends to in vindicating the Doctrine of the Trinity Pag. 16. is to prove that this Faith is taught in Scripture This is that which I would be at and have contended for that we may have nothing obtruded upon us for Faith in
this Point but what is taught in Scripture and then I am sure there will be no fear that any wise Man should reject Scripture for its sake or put strained and unnatural Senses on it to reconcile it to Reason But that three such Persons as he has defined are by Scripture asserted or can be thence concluded to be in the Deity I have denied I do and must ever deny and conceive I have proved contradictious In the next Place having repeated his old Prevarication touching my §. 17. stiling the Socinians the learned Writers of Controversy he is displeased with me for not taking them to task for denying the Divine Nature to be incomprehensible Truly I never heard or read any of the Socinians guilty of such Presumption or Blasphemy But this I take only to be a Consequence drawn by himself from a certain Opinion of theirs and then fastned upon them Of which kind of fair dealing I will say nothing for the present But I do know there are some who deny God's Prescience of future Contigents touching which I had no Occasion to speak no more had he here but that he would hedg in any thing pertinent or impertinent to inodiate an innocent Person which being he has done I will take the Occasion to profess before the Searcher of all Hearts who knows what is in Man that he knows I do believe and in my Soul adore his Prescience that I abhor any Suspicions of it as seeing scarce any of his Perfections more clearly express'd and by a World of Instances verified in Holy Scripture Nay I voluntarily profess I cannot conceive infinite Knowledg without Prescience and though I do confess I cannot comprehend infinite Knowledg because I am very finite yet I bless him who helps my Vnbelief and has as fully possess'd my Heart with the Perswasion thereof as with the Perswasion of his Existence But I cannot so easily believe Mr. Dean's Notions for facilitating I suppose the comprehending the next Divine Attribute which he lugs-in namely Eternity which though he truly says pag. 16. lin 28 29. to be without Beginning and without Succession yet with his usual Attention he explains lin 32. to be a Succession without a Beginning a Second or a Third without a First This Notion I will not accuse him to have taken from the School-Doctors Only I must ask him why he put those Words a God Adequate and Commensurate to our Vnderstandings a little finite comprehensible God in the same Character in which he ordinarily puts the Words he cites or wire-draws from my Paper If he did it with a Design to possess the Reader that I had any such Words or had said any thing from whence such an Inserence could be made I have another Kindness to thank him for of a like Nature to his others I now proceed to account for the last Reason I assigned for the present §. 18. Unreasonableness of some Mens agitating this Controversy which was Hereby that is as both the very Title and the Paper it self expresly assert by some learned Mens present Writings on this Controversy our Church at present and the common Christianity it may be feared will be daily Pag. 18. more and more exposed to atheistical Men they being not likely to overlook the Advantages thus daily given them This Mr. Dean according to his usual way first calumniously perverts to another Sense then for this bold Stroke as he calls it will scarce allow me to be either a Christian or a Divine And lastly falls on catechising me First He calumniously perverts my Sense for says he The Sum of this is that to vindicate the Doctrine of the Trinity against Socinians will make Men Atheists Not so fast good Mr. Dean This Sum agrees not either with your own reckoning or with mine Three times at least in your Paper you said these learned Writers of Controversies by me designed were the Socinians According to which your own Interpretation your Proposition or the Sum explicitely should have been this The Socinians present writing against the Trinity will make Men Atheists Do you then deny that Proposition No you 'l say I believe you thought not of it But you know very well on the other side that amongst the present learned Writers of Controversy your self were more immediately concerned they are your own Words pag. 2. And now the Sum if truly stated will be much different namely this Such Vindications of the Trinity as that writ by Dr. Sherlock tend rather to make Men Atheists than to convert Socinians This Sir was my meaning and this I re-assert For Atheists may confute Tritheism or Polytheism for my Part I see not how either is defensible and having proved such Doctrines in Religion to be false they will be ready to conclude all Religion is so too but they can never overthrow the Doctrine of one God the Father of all and one Saviour the Son of God our Lord Christ Jesus and of one Spirit sanctifying and uniting the whole Body of Christian People or of these three being one And this if you will call it a bold Stroke I stick to it and fear not being exposed though I double it The Substance of two of his Questions is answered already First Do I believe the Doctrine of the Trinity to be desensible or no I do as delivered in Scripture but not upon his novel Definitions and Hypotheses But why do I not defend it better I have partly answered it already and a further Answer to that and to his second Question will come in by and by In the mean time as to his third Whâ—â— are Atheists concerned in the Disputes of the Trinity Very much in such Vindications of it which give such a Notion of the true God as implicates or is inconsistent with it self viz. that the true God adored by all Christian People should be three infinite Minds and yet not three infinite Minds If it be as it is impossible that there should be more infinite Minds than one then will Atheists say it is impossible such a Being should exist as you describe your God to be that is there is no God After these Questions I am to be told a Secret which though in great §. 19. Pag. 19. Modesty I conceal yet possibly I may be privy to viz. that Atheists and Deists Men who are for no Religion are of late very zealous Socinians I easily believe and acknowledg Mr. Dean better acquainted with the Town than I am but if Atheists and Deists be zealous Socinians let him never again object to me my Socinian Friends for I protest I have not to my Knowledg any familiar Acquaintance much less Friendship with any Atheists or Theists in the World I pray as our Church teaches to pray FOR ALL INFIDELS AS WELL AS TVRKS AND JEWS that GOD WOVLD TVRN THEIR HEARTS And in my Sphere as God gives me Opportunity I desire to labour in his Church to that purpose but otherwise I