Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A62587
|
A sermon concerning the unity of the divine nature and the B. Trinity by John, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.
|
Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.
|
1693
(1693)
|
Wing T1222; ESTC R6941
|
17,786
|
42
|
reasonably presume that they who talk of them did themselves never thoroughly understand and least of all is it necessary to believe them The modesty of Christians is contented in Divine Mysteries to know what God hath thought fit to reveal concerning them and hath no curiosity to be wise above that which is written It is enough to believe what God says concerning these matters and if any man will venture to say more every other man surely is at his liberty to believe as he sees reason II. I desire it may in the next place be considered that the Doctrine of the Trinity even as it is asserted in Scripture is acknowledged by us to be still a great Mystery and so imperfectly revealed as to be in a great measure incomprehensible by Human Reason And therefore though some learned and judicious Men may have very commendably attempted a more particular explication of this great Mystery by the strength of Reason yet I dare not pretend to that knowing both the difficulty and danger of such an Attempt and mine own insufficiency for it All that I ever designed upon this Argument was to make out the credibility of the thing from the Authority of the H. Scriptures without descending to a more particular explication of it than the Scripture hath given us lest by endeavouring to lay the Difficulties which are already started about it new ones should be raised and such as may perhaps be much harder to be removed than those which we have now to grapple withal And this I hope I have in some measure done in one of the former Discourses Nor indeed do I see that it is any ways necessary to do more it being sufficient that God hath declared what he thought fit in this matter and that we do firmly believe what he says concerning it to be true though we do not perfectly comprehend the meaning of all that he hath said about it For in this and the like Cases I take an implicite Faith to be very commendable that is to believe whatever we are sufficiently assured God hath revealed though we do not fully understand his meaning in such a Revelation And thus every man who believes the H. Scriptures to be a truly Divine Revelation does implicitely believe a great part of the Prophetical Books of Scripture and several obscure expressions in those Books though he do not particularly understand the meaning of all the Predictions and expressions contained in them In like manner there are certainly a great many very good Christians who do not believe and comprehend the Mysteries of Faith nicely enough to approve themselves to a Scholastical and Magisterial Judge of Controversies who yet if they do heartily embrace the Doctrines which are clearly revealed in Scripture and live up to the plain Precepts of the Christian Religion will I doubt not be very well approved by the Great and Just and by the infallibly Infallible Judge of the World III. Let it be further considered That though neither the word Trinity nor perhaps Person in the sense in which it is used by Divines when they treat of this Mystery be any where to be met with in Scripture yet it cannot be denied but that Three are there spoken of by the Names of Father Son and H. Ghost in whose Name every Christian is baptized and to each of whom the highest Titles and Properties of God are in Scripture attributed And these Three are spoken of with as much distinction from one another as we use to speak of three several Persons So that though the word Trinity be not found in Scripture yet these Three are there expresly and frequently mentioned and Trinity is nothing but three of any thing And so likewise though the word Person be not there expresly applied to Father Son and H. Ghost yet it will be very hard to find a more convenient word whereby to express the distinction of these Three For which reason I could never yet see any just cause to quarrel at this term For since the H. Spirit of God in Scripture hath thought fit in speaking of these Three to distinguish them from one another as we use in common speech to distinguish three several Persons I cannot see any reason why in the explication of this Mystery which purely depends upon Divine Revelation we should not speak of it in the same manner as the Scripture doth And though the word Person is now become a Term of Art I see no cause why we should decline it so long as we mean by it neither more nor less than what the Scripture says in other words IV. It deserves further to be considered That there hath been a very ancient Tradition concerning three real Differences or Distinctions in the Divine Nature and these as I said before very nearly resembling the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity Whence this Tradition had its original is not easie upon good and certain grounds to say but certain it is that the Jews anciently had this Notion And that they did distinguish the Word of God and the H. Spirit of God from Him who was absolutely called God and whom they looked upon as the First Principle of all things as is plain from Philo Judaeus and Moses Nachmanides and others cited by the Learned Grotius in his incomparable Book of the Truth of the Christian Religion And among the Heathen Plato who probably enough might have this Notion from the Jews did make three Distinctions in the Deity by the Names of essential Goodness and Mind and Spirit So that whatever Objections this matter may be liable to it is not so peculiar a Doctrine of the Christian Religion as many have imagined though it is revealed by it with much more clearness and certainty And consequently neither the Jews nor Plato have any reason to object it to us Christians especially since they pretend no other ground for it but either their own Reason or an ancient Tradition from their Fathers whereas we Christians do appeal to express Divine Revelation for what we believe in this matter and do believe it singly upon that account V. It is besides very considerable That the Scriptures do deliver this Doctrine of the Trinity without any manner of doubt or question concerning the Unity of the Divine Nature And not only so but do most stedfastly and constantly assert that there is but One God And in those very Texts in which these three Differences are mentioned the Unity of the Divine Nature is expresly asserted and where St. John makes mention of the Father the Word and the Spirit the Unity of these Three is likewise affirmed There are Three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these Three are One. VI. It is yet further considerable That from this Mystery as delivered in Scripture a Plurality of Gods cannot be inferred without making the Scripture grosly to contradict it self which I charitably suppose the Socinians would be as loth
from this that the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in the Scriptures and hath already been explained hath no Absurdity or Contradiction either involved in it or necessarily consequent upon it But the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is big with all imaginable Absurdity and Contradiction And their own Schoolmen have sufficiently exposed it especially Scotus and he designed to do so as any man that attentively reads him may plainly discover For in his Disputation about it he treats this Doctrine with the greatest contempt as a new Invention of the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent III. To the Decree of which Council concerning it he seems to pay a formal submission but really derides it as contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind and not at all supported by Scripture as any one may easily discern that will carefully consider his manner of handling it and the result of his whole Disputation about it And now Suppose there were some appearance of Absurdity and Contradiction in the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is delivered in Scripture must we therefore believe a Doctrine which is not at all revealed in Scripture and which hath certainly in it all the absurdities in the World and all the Contradictions to Sense and Reason and which once admitted doth at once destroy all Certainty Yes say they why not since we of the Church of Rome are satisfied that this Doctrine is revealed in Scripture or if it be not is defined by the Church which is every whit as good But is this equal to demand of us the belief of a thing which hath always been controverted not only between us and them but even among themselves at least till the Council of Trent And this upon such unreasonable terms that we must either yield this Point to them or else renounce a Doctrine agreed on both Sides to be revealed in Scripture To shew the unreasonableness of this proceeding Let us suppose a Priest of the Church of Rome pressing a Jew or Turk to the belief of Transubstantiation and because one kindness deserves another the Jew or Turk should demand of him the belief of all the Fables in the Talmud or in the Alchoran since none of these nor indeed all of them together are near so absurd as Transubstantiation Would not this be much more reasonable and equal than what they demand of us Since no Absurdity how monstrous and big soever can be thought of which may not enter into an Understanding in which a Breach hath been already made wide enough to admit Transubstantiation The Priests of Baal did not half so much deserve to be exposed by the Prophet for their Superstition and folly as the Priests of the Church of Rome do for this sensless and stupid Doctrine of theirs with a hard Name I shall only add this one thing more That if this Doctrine were possible to be true and clearly prov'd to be so yet it would be evidently useless and to no purpose For it pretends to change the substance of one thing into the substance of another thing that is already and before this change is pretended to be made But to what purpose Not to make the Body of Christ for that was already in Being and the Substance of the Bread is lost nothing of it remaineth but the Accidents which are good for nothing and indeed are nothing when the Substance is destroy'd and gone All that now remains is to make some practical Inferences from this Doctrine of the Unity of the Divine Nature And they shall be the same which God himself makes by Moses which Text also is cited by our Saviour Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is one Lord and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind and with all thy strength And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self So that according to our Saviour the whole Duty of Man the love of God and of our neighbour is founded in the Unity of the Divine Nature I. The love of God The Lord thy God is One Lord therefore thou shalt love Him with all thy heart c. this is the first and great Commandment And it comprehends in it all the Duties of the first Table as naturally flowing from it As that we should serve Him only and pay no Religious Worship to any but to Him For to pay Religious Worship to any thing is to make it a God and to acknowledge it for such And therefore God being but One we can give Religious Worship to none but to Him only And among all the parts of Religious Worship none is more peculiarly appropriated to the Deity than solemn Invocation and Prayer For he to whom men address their Requests at all times and in all places must be supposed to be always every where present to understand all our desires and wants and to be able to supply them and this God only is and can do So likewise from the Unity of the Divine Nature may be inferr'd that we should not worship God by any sensible Image or Representation Because God being a singular Being there is nothing like Him or that can without injuring and debasing his most spiritual and perfect and immense Being be compared to Him As He himself speaks in the Prophet To whom will ye liken me saith the Lord and make me equal And therefore with no Distinction whatsoever can it be lawful to give Religious Worship or any part of it to any but God We can pray to none but to Him because He only is every where present and only knows the Hearts of all the children of men which Solomon gives as the reason why we should address our Supplications to God only who dwelleth in the Heavens So that the Reason of these two Precepts is founded in the Unity and Singularity of the Divine Nature and unless there be more Gods than One we must worship Him only and pray to none but Him Because we can give Invocation to none but to Him only whom we believe to be God as St. Paul reasons How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed II. The love likewise of our Neighbour is founded in the Unity of the Divine Nature and may be inferr'd from it Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is One Lord therefore thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy self And the Apostle gives this reason why Christians should be at unity among themselves There is One God and Father of all and therefore we should keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace that is live in mutual love and peace The Prophet likewise assigns this reason why all Mankind should be upon good terms with one another and not be injurious one to another Have we not all One Father hath not One God created us Why do we then deal treacherously every man against his brother And therefore when we see such hatred and enmity among Men such divisions and animosities among Christians we may not only ask St. Paul's question Is Christ divided that we cannot agree about serving him either all to serve him in one way or to bear with one another in our differences I say we may not only ask St. Paul's question Is Christ divided but may ask further Is God divided Is there not One God and are we not all his Offspring Are we not all the Sons of Adam who was the Son of God So that if we trace our selves to our Original we shall find a great nearness and equality among men And this equality that we are all Gods creatures and Image and that the One only God is the Father of us all is a more real ground of mutual love and peace and equity in our dealings one with another than any of those petty differences and distinctions of strong and weak of rich and poor of wise and foolish of base and honourable can be to encourage men to any thing of insolence injustice and inequality of dealing one towards another Because that wherein we all agree that we are the Creatures and Children of God and have all One common Father is essential and constant but those things wherein we differ are accidental and mutable and happen to one another by turns Thus much may suffice to have spoken concerning the first Proposition in the Text There is one God To Him Father Son and H. Ghost be all Honour and Glory Dominion and Power now and for ever Amen FINIS 1 Cor. 8. 4. Deut. 4. 35. Isai. 44. 6. v. 8. Adversus Marcionem l. 1. c. 10. 1 Cor. 8. 6. Serm. II. L. 5. Joh. 15. 1. Eph. 1. 23. Deut. 6. 4. Mark 12. 29 30 31. Isai. 46. 5. 1 Kings 8. 39. Rom. 10. 14. Eph. 4. 6. Mal. 2. 10.