and the Wâ—man whom thou gavest me c. Next Abraham Gen. 15.2 And â—â—raham â—â—â—d Lord God what wilt thou give me Chap. 17.18 O that Ismael might live before Thee And when he would make his Servant swear by the True God Chap. 24.3 he did not distinguish him as one in three but says he I will make thee swear by the Lord the God of Heaven and the God of the Earth Also when the Servant several times in this Chapter directs his Prayer to this God he doth not distinguish him personally in three but says O Lord God of my Master Abraham I pray thee send me good speed Then for Jacob when he tells his Father Laban how his Substance came to be increased Gen. 31.42 he doth not say the God subsisting in three Persons but says he the God of my Father the God of Abraham c. and Chap. 32.10 I am not worthy of the Mercies and all the Truth which Thou hast shewed me Ver. 11. Deliver me I pray thee And thou saidst I will surely do thee good In short in several places he distinguishes him verbatim as God discovered himself to Abraham viz. God Almighty but not one word of God in three Persons Next Moses Exodus 5.23 For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Thy Name he hath done evil to this People Neither hast Thou delivered thy People at all Chap. 15.1 Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel this Song unto the Lord He hath triumphed gloriously the Horse and his Rider hath He thrown into the Sea And in this Song you have the Terms he thee thy thou thine him repeated no less than 35 times and yet neither you yours they or them once mentioned respecting the most High Thus have I briefly run over the sum of the most remarkable Instances of persons paying their Devotions to the most High in the Old Testament and I might have instanced David Solomon Daniel and many others yea down to Zechariah's days and it appears as if they were all agreed to conceive of and acknowledg an undivided single Essence and its Properties But no Footsteps do appear of their distinguishing the Essence in three persons in their Conceptions And if the Israelites ever had any such conception of God methinks it should not be lost and if not lost it is strange Josephus should not mention it since he gives an account of things as far back as Moses even from the beginning and often speaks of God and his essential Properties describing the true Object of the Jews Worship and yet always speaks of him as one in Vnity of Essence but hints not a word of divers Persons And as Josephus then so the Jews now acknowledg no such thing as Mr. Monk says page 70. he says the Doctrine of the Trinity is contrary to the Blindness of the Jews who do affirm an Essence altogether without distinction Now I say 't is strange if this were understood amongst them especially as so material a thing as is now supposed that then both the Jews now who yet profess the true God and are zealous of the Mosaical Law and Josephus so long ago should yet be ignorant of so remarkable a matter In the next place I come to the New Testament to see whether we may judg it the Will of God that we should worship and adore his Essence as subsisting in one Person or in three And first I will consider the Apostle Stephen what he says of the most High Acts 7.2 he calls him the God of Glory and ver 32. he cites and describes the antient Description without enlarging viz. I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. And ver 48. The most High dwells not in Temples made with Hands Herein is a discovery of God's Greatness but no distinguishing his Persons And remarkable it is that Paul about to instruct the ignorant Athenians in the knowledg of the true God as the Object of their Worship Acts 17.23 24 25. first lets them know that they ignorantly worshipped the unknown God and that him he would declare unto them And accordingly says God that made the World and all things therein seeing that he is Lord of Heaven and Earth dwells not in Temples made with mens hands as though he needed any thing seeing he giveth to all Life and Breath and all things Herein the Apostle very notably sets forth his most glorious Attributes and invisible Being by his creating and preserving of all things But says not one word of the distinction of Persons Now if tâ—e Knowledg of this were so necessary to be known in order to Salvation as is imagined Paul had no less need to instruct these ignorant Athenians therein as much as in the Knowledg of the Essential Properties and Power Next we will consider Eph. 4.6 There is One God and Father of all who is above all Here you see a plain discovery of the Vnity of the Godhead and his Supremacy but the Description of Persons is still wanting To this I will add 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but One God the Father of all things Here again the Object of Worship is described as the first Cause and Foundation of all things of whom are all things 2. The Inseparableness and Oneness of his Being is asserted but One God 3. He is so far from directing us to fix our Conceptions on him as distinguished into three Persons that he solely centers him in One even as subsisting in the Father Now what rational Man can conclude from hence but that we are to conceive of the Object of Worship as intirely subsisting in and to be called by the Appellation of the Father and so to be worshipped That is in plainness that we are to conceive that all that we believe to be God most High whether Essence Attributes or Persons whatever we may think of its various subsisting in our selves yet it is to be adored and distinguished by the Person of the Father where we all say that 't is all and whole But further I shall add the Authority of him who cannot err John 4.22 23 24. Ye worship ye know not what We know what we worship for Salvation is of the Jews But the hour cometh and now is when the true Worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth for the Father seeketh such to worship him God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth From this pertinent place I note as follows First That it contains a Discourse of our Saviour directly concerning Worship 1. Blaming and describing the ignorant false Worshippers Ye the Samaritans worship ye know not what 2. Describing the true Worshippers 1. By the manner how in Spirit and in Truth 2. The Matter or Object what and that described two ways 1st His Essence a Spirit 2dly The Person who viz. the Father the true Worshippers shall worship the Father Further from this Text
I observe 1. They cannot be true Worshippers that worship they know not what 2. They that worship the Father as the proper Object of Divine Worship are not such as worship they know not what but such as know what they worship 3. They that worship the Father conceiving of him as containing the glorious inseparable Essence or Spirit being worthy above all things to be worshipped these I say are not the false but the true Worshippers of God and provided they perform their Worship spiritually shall be accepted by him because he seeks such to worship him 4. That it is the Will of God and Direction of Christ that of all the Persons believed to be in the Deity God the Father is to be conceived as the most proper Person for us to direct our highest Adoration to 5. That he that conceives that the Godhead and all its essential Properties subsist in the Father as the proper Object of Divine Worship conceives not amiss because according to Christ's Rule he is a true Worshipper 6. That we may lawfully have Communion with any such Persons if that be all their fault because they are true Worshippers and with better we cannot well join 7. I observe that when Christ describes the Object of our Worship he is so far from distinguishing or teaching us to distinguish the Persons in that Object that he contains all under the denomination of one only Person even the Father Next I shall cite the Instruction of our Lord expresly injoining us to pay Adoration to God the Father and acknowledg all to be his Mat. 6.9 After this manner therefore pray ye Our Father who art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name thy Kingdom come thy Will be done in Earth as 't is in Heaven c. for thine is the Power and the Glory for ever Amen From this I observe 1. That it is the Will of God as declared by Christ that the order we should observe in our Conceptions of God Almighty and in pouring out our Desires to him is positively and directly to pray to God the Father as the proper Appellation and Object of our Prayers 2. That he that prays to God the Father prays in that respect aright and to the true God 3. That it appears not that in our Prayers we are injoined to distinguish the Persons if we regard and eye by Faith the Being or Essence we worship 1. Because if such a thing as distinguishing the Persons in Prayer were a Duty or material our Saviour would have inserted it in his Directory since he here gives an account of all the material Points of Prayer 2. Because on the contrary he expresly injoins us to direct our Desires not to three but to one Person even the Father withal teaching us to use such Expressions as are most proper to a single Person viz. three times thy and once thine 4. I observe that our Lord directs us to render and ascribe such Excellency full Power Soveraignty Protection Sacredness Bounty Clemency Glory to the Father as are only proper to be given to the whole and only Godhead which still shews that the proper glorious Object of Divine Worship is the whole Godhead as truly subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father and under that Appellation to be worship'd And as I have hitherto treated of positive Directions in this case I shall briefly cite some Examples of Christ and his Apostles as our Pattern to follow whereby it may further appear most agreeable to Scripture to worship one Person First Christ's Example Mat. 11.25 I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth Here he pays the duty of Thankfulness to the Father and owns him as supreme Soveraign Mark 14.36 And he said Abba Father all things are possible to thee take away this Cup from me nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt Next I shall cite the Apostles Rom. 8.15 Ye have received the Spirit of Adoption whereby ye cry Abba Father Rom. 15.6 That ye may with one Mind glorify God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Gal. 4.6 God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your Hearts crying Abba Father The next Instance shall be the Adoration of Paul to this single Person Eph. 3.14 For this cause I bow my Knee to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Jam. 3.9 Therewith bless we God even the Father 1 Pet. 1.17 And if ye call on the Father c. And indeed it were tedious to cite all those Texts that give Testimony to this thing These Gleanings are set down that ye might believe that the proper Object of Divine Worship is the one most High God as truly subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father And believing it that ye might direct your Adoration to him accordingly and also have Charity towards all those who have no other material fault but worshipping the Father as the proper Object Nay methinks there is no Point of Divinity in the Holy Scriptures more clear than this thing as any indifferent Eye may see 't is not a thing drawn from doubtful Consequences but plainly revealed often repeated and never contradicted but confirmed by the universal Practice of the Prophets and Primitive Saints and also by Christ and the Apostles namely That the most High is to be worshipped as a single impartible Essence in one single Person without the Worshippers being obliged at the same time to distinguish three distinct Subsistings and Denominations And on the other side there is not one Instance to be given where any Man is recorded in the word of God our only Rule and Guide to adore the most High God under the apprehension of one Essence in three Persons that is I mean did direct his Prayers or Thanks to three Persons And here I must take occasion moderately to check some of my worthy and beloved Brethren useful in the Ministry who a little heated with an inordinate Zeal for the Doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead fearing they may prejudice the Doctrine it self by yielding too much to its opposite do on the other side as much overshoot the Mark and form their Petitions quite beyond all Scripture-Injunction and Example And tho no Examples nor any thing like them can be given yet they must conclude their Prayers To thee O Lord Father Son and holy Spirit three Persons one eternal God be Honour Glory Praise c. What shall one think of this but that those Men think if they should not direct and form their Prayers to the Almighty better than Abraham Jacob Moses the Prophets of old and Christ and his Apostles did their Prayers would be very defective and not accomplished as they ought Truly to be zealous in a good thing is commendable and that 's a good thing for which we have Precept or Pattern but for this there is neither Now when we take the liberty to add to Divine Worship however agreeable to our Opinions and however well-meaning
his Exaltation ver 33. and v. 36. concludes Know assuredly that God hath made the same Jesus whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ Here you see Peter omits no material thing he speaks of his Merits They that call on him shall be saved his Death Resurrection Exaltation receiving Empire and Honour God hath made him Lord but not one word of his being essentially God and so on that account the Object of Divine Worship which yet had it been so material a Point as is now thought did deserve as much to be preached as any of the other Likewise in his second Sermon Acts 3. he preaches Christ from Vers 13. to the end yet not one word of his being essentially the most High The like iâ— to be observed in the fourth Chapter Manâ— places I might run over but for brevity sake I shall only take notice of two more one is where Peter iâ— sent to tell Cornelius what he ought to believe and do Acts 10. vâ—rs 36. he lets Cornelius know that Jesus waâ— Lord as before he told the Jews God had â—ade him both Lord and Christ He tâ—â—ls him that God had sent the Message of Peace by him he tells him he was the Anointed of God he tells him he was a Miracle-Worker which shewed that God was with him he tells him of his Death and Resurrection he testifies him to be the same the Prophets prophesied of to come he preaches Remission of Sins through Faith in his Name he declares him to be ordained Judg of Quick and Dead but not one word that he is to be worshipped as essentially God Most High which had it been a point of Faith would surely have been told Cornelius and the Gentiles Likewise when Paul informs the ignorant Athenians Acts 17.31 after he had described the true God he describes Christ distinct from God as the ordained Judg of the World but speaks not of his Godhead My second Reason is Because as he is Christ he is distinguished from God and an Officer under him and therefore so as he is Christ to be believed in saying of himself his Father is greater than he and than all the Scriptures that direct us in our Faith in Christ direct us to understand his Office but seem to be silent concerning his Essence Neither doth Christ any where require us to worship him as the most High but we are to pray to give thanks and perform our Homage to the most High through Jesus Christ as the new and living way consecrated for us But thirdly nothing is Christ but what is anointed for Christ in plain English signifies anointed Now the Divine Essence was not anointed nor incarnate for who should anoint it unless we will say the Divine Essence anointed the Divine Essence with the Divine Essence Some will say that that is absurd and verily except we have a mind to fall into the contradictory ridiculous Opinion of the Quakers I think we can plead at most for no more than this viz. that the second Person of the Trinity was incarnate and anointed and not the Divine Essence it self And if ye will not believe me believe Mr. Tho. Monck in his Cure for the cankering Error pag. 98. where he tells you we always distinguish betwixt the Essence of the Son and the Person saying the Essence is one with the Father but not his Person Therefore we say his Person was begotten not his Essence and we also say his Person took Flesh of the Virgin Mary not his Essence and therefore it was the Person of the Son that was born of her not the Father nor the Spirit for tho the Essence of the three be one yet the Persons be distinct and pag. 114. he reckons up the Absurdities will else follow viz. that the Father was he that took Man's Nature upon him was tempted of the Devil suffered Hunger and Thirst was buffeted and scourged of the Jews and put to death by wicked hands is greater than himself sent himself into the World he gave himself a Seat at his own Right Hand he is the express Image of himself c. and many other Absurdities he reckons up these may suffice Now I humbly conceive Divine Homage and Adoration is to be given to the Essence of the most High and not to a particular manner of its subsisting to wit to a Person which yet is all which is or was anointed according to Mr. Monck's Opinion But then I know it will be said that each Person and so the second Person contains in it all the Essence Let it be so I will allow that in the Person of Christ dwelt all the Fulness of the Godhead bodily according to Col. 2.9 But then it must also be allowed that the Essence dwelt there as something distinct from the Anointed and not as the Anointed it self It must also be allowed that the most High dwelt in Christ incognito as some great Princes appear in foreign Courts and Places incognito that is tho they are personally present yet they decline to receive those Royal and Princely Honours due to their Character receiving them only or chiefly in their Palace Royal. So tho the Almighty dwell in the Person of Christ yet we are not taught to say our Father who art in the Person of Christ but our Father who art in Heaven which Expression he desires we should use while the Person of Christ was on Earth And we have before shewn that we are to worship the Divine Essence as subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father neither are we any where commanded or directed to say our Son who art in Heaven or our Spirit who art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name but only our Father And since the Divine Essence seems not to desire us to worship him under the Denomination or in the Person of the Son I think it safest for us to worship him as truly and wholly subsisting in the Person of the Father and under that Denomination Besides the Names of Son and Spirit howsoever with respect of Essence they are believed to be God yet I say these Names seem to distinguish them from God and do denote them as Officers under God Therefore it is said the Father is greater than I and than all the Son knows not the Day and Hour of Judgment but the Father only Likewise the Spirit when he comes he shall not speak of himself but what he hears that shall he speak From the whole I conclude that the Christ of God ought in our Faith concerning him to be distinguished from God himself and that whatever may be said of the Divine Essence dwelling in Christ yet nothing was Christ but what was anointed and that only the Person was anointed or was incarnate according to Mr. Monck's Opinion And further that whatever Divine Essence dwelt in Christ or was Christ yet the proper place to pay Adoration to it is in the Person of the Father and that he that worships the Father
worships all the Divine Essence under the proper Name and Appellation under which it should be worshipped to wit that of the Father These things considered I see no reason why we should so stigmatize our Brethren because they worship the most High under the proper Name and Person that they ought and do not use improper Names to do it by as our Son who art in Heaven or our Christ who art in Heaven or our Spirit who art in Heaven since those Names or Persons whatsoever their Essence be do not require us to worship the most High in them but to understand and improve the Knowledg of their Office and remember that that Person who was nailed to the Cross who cried out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me was the Mediator betwixt God and us the very Christ the anointed who did never require his Disciples to worship him as the most High SECT IV. Treating particularly of his Human Nature AS touching the Contention about the human Nature of Christ strange it is to me and would have been stranger had I not once dipped my Fingers in the same folly that Men so well agreeing in the main substantial Points of the Faith of Christ should yet notwithstanding so teaze one another about a Circumstance so dark as this is They all believe that his Body was the true Son and sent of God that he was a real Man that he was a sufficient Sacrifice and Saviour But all this will not satisfy them except they know what he was made of yet the Scripture leaves it so that if we make any determination we must bring the plain Words to our meaning for as it is said he was made of the Seed of David according to the Flesh it is also as expresly said the Word was made Flesh John 1.14 And Solomon the wisest of Men and the greatest Searcher into Nature's Secrets that ever was says Who do know how the Bones do grow in the Womb of her that is with Child speaking of an ordinary Conception If an ordinary Conception be so dark then much more this Conception of our Lord which was beyond and contrary to the Course of Nature Therefore to make the Ignorance thereof so damning and the certain Knowledg of it the Test of Communion seems to savour of Presumption and it is something pleasant to see old grave men discoursing so seriously and learnedly how far any Woman contributes towards any Child conceived in her a thing so intricate that the most famous Philosophers have been at Daggers Draw about it and when any man hath thought his Thought about it he may be right and he may be wrong because we are all left without light to travel in those Paths For my part I intend not to follow them in this Discourse or Controversy the whole appearing to me and to many others to be needless since tho it must be granted that somebody is and must needs be mistaken and under Misapprehensions in the case yet the Mistakes are not so pernicious to lead the mistaken to question whether this be the true Messias promised to Adam and all along prophesied of by the Prophets but they whoever they be are very confident as well as the other that this is the true Christ therefore pray why all this stir this Jehu-like driving seems not to savour much of a true Christian Spirit But I shall conclude this Section with a Comparison for illustration of my meaning which I have heretofore frequently made use of sometimes with good success in Discourses of this kind We will imagine two Persons A and B Servants to C do grow refractory and run away from C and deservedly in their rambles are taken by the Enemy and made Slaves of in a foreign Land help themselves they cannot but C hearing and well understanding their Misfortune and Misery notwithstanding their former Ingratitude yet pities them and sends by a trusty hand a sufficient Ransom to redeem them and obtain their Liberty The Ransom arrives and they are accordingly redeemed and presently embark to go home to C as they sail homeward they being as well they may be much affected with their Liberty they are often discoursing concerning their Ransom they both agree and question not that it was none of their Deserts but the free Love and Bounty of C was the cause of the Ransom 's being sent neither do they question in the least whether or no it be come or being come whether it be sufficient for in all this they are satisfied But in their Discourse it happens this Question is dropt that is Whether the Ransom was Gold or Silver A thinks he hath sufficient Reasons to believe it was Silver and B thinks he hath as sound Reasons to believe it was Gold they terribly inforce their Arguments on both sides and possibly neither of them both certainly know the truth of the matter or have any infallible or certain Rule to know yet they are both very confident one says he is sure he is in the right and he is sure the other is in the wrong And so after they have vexed and teaz'd one another more than enough the Contention at last arises so high that A will stay no longer in the same Ship with B but will leave him and sail in some other Ship nay stay says B do not leave me since I love you and we are agreed in the main things and do find thanks be to C that the Ransom was sufficient and why should we part about this Circumstance especially since we were both Partners in Slavery and Misery and were both made happy and set at liberty by this one Ransom and since we are both Strangers in this Country neither is there any in the Ship speak the same Language that we do let us enjoy the Comfort of each others Society and be helpful one to another in Advice and Discourse who knows being amongst Strangers and Enemies how we may need each others help and consider how comfortable it will be for us that have been loving Friends and Companions and Fellow-Country-men to talk together in our own Language while those Barbarians gabble in an unknown Tongue and barbarous Language Therefore pray do not leave me but tarry with me Ay says A if you 'l say as I say and think as I think that the Ransom was Silver I 'll tarry with you then and all shall be well but if you will not say so I am resolved I 'll be gone I 'll keep you company no longer nor I 'll regard nor take no more account of you than of one of those Strangers and Infidels from whence you come nay you are full out as bad as they or rather the worst of the two you deserve if you had your Desert to be cursed out of my Company Says B these are hard Words and so much the harder coming from one I so much esteem and for so small an occasion Howbeit I am not by any of your
of God be good yea a necessary thing in its place yet it is not saving except sanctified and joined with the internal Knowledg of God Which is the second thing or kind of Knowledg I am to speak to and that is that mentioned and intended Mat. 11.27 All things are delivered to me of my Father and no man knoweth the Son but the Father neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him This Knowledg properly dwells in the Heart and is attained by the Exercise of saving Faith wrought by the Spirit of Christ it flows from an inward spiritual Communion the Soul hath with God through the Mediator by which the humble Soul sees the Almighty passing by blotting out and pardoning its Sins and ready and willing to pour into its Bosom all necessary good things of all kinds from whence are nourished Hope Peace Joy and Love This Knowledg is saving and it is as soon attained by Persons of weak and mean Judgment that sincerely seek it as by any whatsoever as appears in Mat. 11.25 where Christ thanks his Father in that he had hid those things from the Wise and Prudent and had revealed them unto Babes SECT II. Concerning God most High what he is IN this Section you have a Description of God most High respecting his Essence Being or Substance and his Essential Properties and first in the Negative Secondly in the Affirmative and that first according to plain Texes of Scripture secondly according to several Authors In which Discourse are included these following useful Particulars viz. First How far the contending Parties are agreed Secondly wherein they differ the Case and the Controversy betwixt them fairly propounded examined opened and explained In which are these things following observable 1. That those things concerning the Knowledg of the most High wherein they are agreed are very plain from Scripture and Reason but the controversal paâ—t very obscure not only to Reason and the Unlearned but also to the Understandings of the most Profound and Learned 2. That the things wherein they are agreed are plainly in words at length declared both in the Old and New Testament as matters to be owned and believed and therefore absolutely necessary to Salvation But the controversal part is not pressed as a thing to be understood or necessary to be believed by the Worshippers of this God In the Old Testament hardly any Footsteps of it appear and 't is asserted only by and from consequences from the new Testament 3. That both Orthodox and Hereticks so called are agreed in all the Essentials and necessary parts of Truth respecting the Knowledg of the most High God harmoniously and unanimously owning and teaching the same things of his Essence and essential Properties The Hereticks so esteemed owning and worshipping the same God and no other that made Heaven and Earth and appeared to Abraham Gen. 17.1 not denying but firmly owning all and whole and every part of the same Essence and all and every essential Property thereof according as the above-named Orthodox do 4. That the great Controversy and Difference concerning God betwixt the above-mentioned Parties is not essential but only circumstantial viz. about the manner or Mode of its subsisting and not about the Divine Essence it self As touching the Knowledg of God I shall treat first negatively He is not any graven Image or Device of Man's Hands Acts 17.29 nor no Man because Man is mortal but God cedureth for ever Psal 136.13 nor no Angel first because they are made secondly are Messengers Heb. 1.7 14. But he is without beginning and above all therefore not created nor sent But Secondly In the affirmative God is a Spirit or Spiritual Substance John 4.24 Not a created Spirit as the Angels but an infinite independent intire invisible Essence the first Cause of and soveraign highest Power over all things Infinite incomprehensible unsearchable in Glory in Power in Strength in Wisdom in Knowledg in Justice in Love in Mercy in Bounty in Goodness in Purity in Compassion in Eternity in Truth and Perfection These are the essential and inseparable Properties of the Divine Essence or Being of God most High the immediate Object of Divine Worship There may be and Scripture shews there are some who in a subordinate manner bear the name of God because he allows it them as ruling from and under him and therefore as Viceroys or chief Magistrates under God in their places they bear tho less properly the name of God to give an instance or two in the room of many of this kind or sort are Angels of whom Paul speaks 1 Cor. 8.15 where he saith There he that are called Gods in Heaven who surely could not be false Gods for they could not get to Heaven therefore Angels through the Excellency of their work obtain that honourable Name and so do men John 10.35 But to pass this only he that hath thâ—se essential Properties is God most High on which Properties I 'll inlarge a little If he be invisible then it is not safe for me to form any shape of him in my Apprehensions any otherwise than a Glorious unwordable Being If he be independent then he stays only on himself and all things stay on him If he be infinite in Power and Perfection then he is a single uncompounded Essence only one in Number and Being For it is morally impossible that there should be two infinite Beings for if one be infinite the other cannot and it is alike impossible that there should be two most Highs for if they are equal neither of them both can say that he is the most High because there is another as high as he Also it alike argues Imperfection for if one Most High be sufficient then another is needless and where there is more than needs it is Imperfection Again if one most High of himself be not sufficient without another that argues Imperfection Therefore they that worship the true and most High God must and ought to conceive of him as a single impartible Being or Essence one in Power in Will in Thought in Knowledg and in all things belonging to his Essence And so hath God directed us to conceive of him in his Word Deut. 6.4 Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is one Lord. Isa 44.6 Besides me there is no God Mark 12.32 There is one God and there is none other but he 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but One God There is none other God but one Ephes 4.6 There is One God and Father of all who is above all Thus far am I come safely no body having any thing to contradict or gainsay that is no body that owns the true God But on all hands we are agreed about the Eternal Essence and Divine Properties These things as undeniable all Christian Men believe the Scripture proves and God's Works manifest This Description is necessary for me to understand in order to direct me how to
place and exercise my Faith in God aright how to pay my Duties and Worship to him and consequently to my Salvation But now I am arrived at the Borders of the Controversy betwixt the Trinitarians and the Vnitarians the Athanasians and nick-nam'd Arians But to pass my Task 't is requisite to give yet a further Description of this One most High God which following Description is said to be drawn from Scripture consequences but is much more plainly set down in words at length in other Authors 1. I shall first cite the Athanasian Creed on this Subject The Catholick Faith is this That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance 2. The Nicene Creed says thus I believe in One God the Father Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible and in one Lord Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God begotten of the Father before all Worlds God of God Light of Light very God of very God begotten not made of one Substance with the Father by whom all things were made And in the Holy Spirit the quickening Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son and in like manner is adored and glorified with the Father and the Son and who spake by the Prophets 3. Next I shall cite the first of the 39 Articles of the Church of England There is but One living and true God c. and in Unity of this Godhead there be three Persons of one Substance Power and Eternity 4. Next I shall cite Mr. Joseph Wright in his Book intitul'd Brief Animadversions on five Articles pag. 2. So that we did then and do hold that there is One only true and living God the Father Son and Holy Spirit all three of the very same Divine Nature and Being And in the same Book pag. 3. lin 28. When we say these three are one we did and now believe that the Father Word or Son and Holy Spirit are all three of the same Divine Nature and Being from everlasting to everlasting the Creator and Governor of all things One only true and living God in three distinct and undivided Divine Persons Thus far Mr. Wright 5. Next I shall cite Dr. Owen in his Book intituled The Doctrine of the Trinity vindicated printed An. 1669 pag. 29. In the Declaration of this Doctrine unto the edification of the Church there is contained a further explanation of the things before asserted as proposed directed and in themselves the Object of our Faith namely how God is one in respect of Nature Substance Essence Godhead or Divine Being How being Father Son and Holy Ghost he subsisteth in these three distinct Persons And Pag. 112. The distinction which the Scripture reveals between Father Son and Holy Spirit is that whereby they are three Persons distinctly subsisting in the same Divine Essence or Being Now a Divine Person is nothing else but a Divine Person upon the account of an especial Property subsisting in an especial manner as in the Person of the Father there is the Divine Essence or Being with its Property of begetting the Son subsisting in an especial manner in the Father and because this Person hath the whole Divine Nature all the essential Properties of that Nature are in that Person Page 122. Seeing here that the name of God supplies the place of a Species tho it be singular absolutely as it respects the Divine Nature which is absolutely singular and One and cannot be multiplied yet in respect of communication it is otherwise it is communicated unto more 6. I shall cite next Mr. John Preston in his Book intitul'd Life eternal or a Treatise of the Knowledg of the Divine Essence fourth Edition printed 1034 page 48 49. If there be two things in God then there is Multiplication now all Multiplication ariseth from some Imperfection from some want and defect for if one would serve two would be needless if one Medicine would cure two would be unnecessary so in all things else So that the reasâ—n of Multiplication is because one will not serve the turn Therefore God being all-sufficient it is not needful yea it cannot be that a breaking in two should be admitted in him and consequently he must be most simple without all composition a pure and entire Essence full of himself and nothing besides And a little further thus Wheresoever there is any composition there must be two or three things so that there may be a Division they are separable tho not separated But where Division is there may be a Dissolution and so Destruction though it never be But of God we cannot say that this may be and consequently there cannot be two things in him but what he is he is One most simple most pure and most entire Being without all Composition and Multiplication If God be not simple there must be parts of which he is compounded but in God blessed for ever there are no parts because then there should be Imperfection for every part is imperfect I shall cite one Author more and then make some use of the whole 7. Mr. Thomas Monk in his notable Book of the Trinity intituled A Cure for the cankering Error Pag. 55. has these words Not to the end it should make a Multitude of Gods or divide the Essence but to distinguish the Persons because tho there be one Person of the Father another Person of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost yet the Father is not another thing or another God distinct from the Son and the Holy Ghost neither is the Son another thing or another God distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost neither is the Holy Ghost another thing or another God distinct from the Father and the Son because the Nature of God is but one and indivisible although the Father be one the Son another and the Holy Ghost another and therefore they are not of divers natures of another and divers Substance not conjoined or knit together in one Substance as Men which have one common Essence not only of the like Substance but of one and the same Substance have the same Essence the same Eternity the same Will the same Operation c. And page 57. ' Qu. Be there any parts or kinds in God Answ None at all because he is a most simple Essence which doth admit no Composition or Division and simply and in every respect of Unity one Having given you this Description of the Most High God both from the Holy Scriptures and those Authors I shall now come to make that use of it which at first I promised and intended and that is to shew that there is no essential but only a circumstantial difference in the Apprehensions of the Parties before named concerning the Most High God and the Description here given of Him Only note that that which concerns the difference about the Son and Holy Ghost will be here spoken unto but occasionally and in short
finding none Why where is it What is become of it that great difference that hath troubled the World and Church so many hundred years and set good men together by the ears Toâ—th and Nail occasion'd a great Volume of hard bitter sharp biting Words against each other and yet you see we are all agreed about the main Matter Substance or Essence of the most High nay and in all the essential Properties of him too And yet can there be any material difference about him notwithstanding that 's strange how can this thing be Why yes yet there is a difference but whether a material one or no must be left to my considering Reader to judg It is not whether this Divine undivided Essence about which and all its essential Properties we are fully agreed whether I say it subsist in one Divine Person For this is also jointly agreed on all hands as I shall presently shew But it is this Whether it subsist only in One Divine Person or both in One and also in like manner in Three The Orthodox is for the latter the Heretick affirms the former Thus near are we come and I doubt not anon to shew you that we are yet nearer than all this But first I 'll demonstrate this tho first of all we must treat of the word Person what in this Controversy is understood by it And because I am a little at a loss to explain the thing I will therefore give you Dr. Owen and Mr. Monk's Description First Dr. Owen if you look back to the first Quotations of him Now says he a Divine Person is nothing else but a Divine Person upon the account of an especial Property of subsisting in an especial manner Secondly Dr. Hall as I find him quoted by Mr. Monk Page 46. of his Cure for the cankering Error hath these Words We may think here of one Substance in three Subsistences one Essence in three Relations one Jehovah begetting begotten proceeding Father Son Spirit yet so as the Son is no other thing from the Father but another Person or the Spirit from the Son Also Mr. Monk in his 63 page propounds this Question How doth the word Essence differ from the word Person in God his answer is Essence is the Nature which is not more belonging to one and less to another of the three Persons but common to them all yea one and the same and cannot be divided and is all in each one of them not without them subsisting by it self to wit the very Deity it self And therefore the essential Properties which be in them are one in number of one nature Now Person is the subsisting in the Divine Nature or the nature of God which having relation to others is distinguished by some incommunicable Properties for indeed the Persons are only distinguished not severed as indeed three men are indeed separated tho they be one in kind The Reason is because the Essence of God is infinite and impartible and therefore it is all in every Person which are not severed one from another but only distinguished amongst themselves But as for the Essence of Angels and Men it is finite and partible so that it is not all in every single Person but part in one and part in another One Passage he hath in page 39. Fourthly All the Attributes whether relative negative or positive or if any other in that they proceed from the Essence are true of every Person because the whole Essence is in every Person The Father is eternal the Son is eternal the Holy Spirit is eternal because the whole Essence is in every one of them I need not cite any more because so far as I am able to distinguish Dr. Owen Dr. Hall and Mr. Monk have spoken the general sense of all that have writ on this Subject And now having shewed you the Description that these men give if I can tread right in this narrow Path I will try to give you according to the best of my judgment the sense of what they mean by the word Person or Persons in the Divine Essence First then I do suppose by Person here is not intended a distinct separate Being from the Essence or from one another nor yet a distinct spiritual Substance for this were to divide the Substance into three distinct divided Persons Neither must it be supposed that Person hath a distinct Mind or Will from the Essence or the other Persons for that will necessâ—rily imply three or four Minds and Wills in the Most High which would be absurd Neither must the Person have any one part of the Divine Essence peculiar to it self for that would divide the Essence into parts and the Divine Properties also and so bring all into confusion as hath been shewn therefore Person must be supposed to be something not at all separated from any part of the Essence or of the other Persons Therefore says Mr. Monk Essence is the nature which is not more belonging to one and less to another of the three Persons but common to them all yea one and the same and cannot be divided and is all in each one of them and therefore concludes that the essential Properties which be in them are one in number that is that the essential Property of Love and the essential Property of Mercy and the essential Property of Justice and all the rest are all and whole in one Person and all and whole in another And therefore elsewhere says That all the Attributes both relative negative and positive or any other of the Divine Essence are true of every Person because the whole Essence is in every Person So that in short the thing is this that a Person separate from Essence is nothing but is only the whole undivided Essence subsisting in a certain manner or mode that is in one manner in the Father in another manner or mode in the Son and in another manner in the Holy Ghost that is not three distinct intelligent Beings but only one infinite intire distinct intelligent Being subsisting in three undivided inseparable Manners or Modes And this is the general sense so far as I was ever able to discern of all the Authors that ever I read on this Subject But if this be the Knot of the Controversy about the most High God perhaps some will say it is dark I say perhaps so too very like it may be so else what 's the matter think you that so many Men who have long been loving Friends and good Men yet by this Controversy have had their Eyes so blinded that they could not see one another with an Eye of Charity And what else should be the reason that in the Churches where it hath been controverted there hath oftentimes arose such a Mist and thick Darkness that many could not see their Seats at the Lord's Table And if any shall ask me the meaning of the matter I must answer with Mr. Monk page 43. That the perfect manner how one person is in
our Intentions may be yet if our Device want Authority from sacred Record we mar instead of mending for as there is a time for every Purpose so is there a Rule for every Practice God is the God of Order and the supreme Giver of a Rule in all Institutions and Worship and when beyond the express Rule we shall foist in any Formality in Duty we cast Dishonour on them of old to wit the Prophets and Apostles yea Christ and God himself as if he had been short in giving sufficient Rules or Christ and his Followers short in understanding him And thus indeavouring to mend Formality beyond Rule or express Precept or Example has as I hinted before occasioned all or most of the Innovations in Institutions and Forms of Divine Worship As for example because Christ saith Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of God and drink his Blood ye have no Life in you therefore as if persons were bound to take more care for their Children than God himself directed for many Ages they gave them the Lord's Supper tho they had no express Scripture for it Likewise because the Apostle says Make melody to the Lord and rejoice and again I say rejoice and the like therefore without rule some have invented Organs as proper to heighten Rejoycings Likewise because the Scripture saith Confess your Faults one to another therefore the Roman Church hath invented Auricular Confession And truly tho I would be sparing in comparisons yet I would have all my Brethren see that it is dangerous to add Devices of our own and that it is hardly sufficient because the Scripture says There are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one that therefore we must say in our Prayers Father Son and Holy Spirit three Persons and one eternal God when we have no precedent that ever any did so who yet knew how to pray as well as we having the first Fruits of the Spirit And as I said before were the distinction of Persons in that one Essence as plainly discovered by Scripture and Reason as the Oneness of that Godhead is which yet I must confess it hardly is yet the manner of our Conceptions and our Expressions to and Appellations of the Object of Worship in the Act of Worship must depend upon God's Will and Christ's Direction and not our own Device And now according to my promise concerning the Knowledg of the most High and paying Worship to him I hope I have convincingly shewn the joint Agreement on all hands among the Parties above-mentioned and that at most there is but a circumstantial difference between them and no material one seems to be in their thoughts either concerning God or Worship unto him both believing in the very same God that created the Heavens and Earth the very same Essence all and whole the very same that was and is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob the same God and no other that is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus the very same God that Christ directs us to call Father owning all his essential Properties Power and Prerogatives each believing him to subsist all and whole in the person of the Father and under that Appellation most proper to be worshipped only there is a little difference about this threefold manner of subsisting a thing as has bin shewn that God and Christ have at least been sparing in declaring at any time when he made discovery of himself in all Ages And therefore I hope the Belief of it not to be look'd upon so binding or the ignorance of it so damning as to be the Test of Communion And now according to my promise I shall come to speak of the second Person of the Trinity viz. the Christ of God CHAP. II. Concerning the Christ of God THIS Chapter containeth four Sections First shewing that we are all agreed about the Person of Christ who he is The second treateth of his Offices therein also shewing that we are agreed The third answers this Question Whether or no it be required that in order to our right believing in and worshipping of the Person of Jesus of Nazareth we must worship him as the most High God The fourth treateth particularly of his human Nature Sect. I. Shewing that we are all agreed about the Person of Christ who he is GReat have been the Mistakes of many about the Person of the Messias There seem to be in all Nations such Sparks of Light as inform them they have need of some one to be their Friend to appease Divine Wrath and speak to the most High for them to which purpose the Jews adhered to one Benchochab in the Reign of Adrian who pretended to be the Messias but came to nothing Likewise in 1666 they followed one Sebastius Sevi And after that one More pretending to be Christ who both came to nothing And they now look for a Messias to come tho not Jesus of Nazareth The Persians rely on Haly the Turks on Mahomet and the Quakers say it is something within viz. a Spirit or spiritual Substance And there shall yet come especially in the last times many Pretenders calling themselves Christs which shall be found Liars But our Brethren and we all agree that he and no other that was born of Mary called Jesus of Nazareth nailed to the Cross by the order of Pontius Pilat in the days of Tiberius Cesar that he I say was and is the Christ of God the Saviour of the World And why we should cry out upon one another that such a one denies the true Christ and believes in another Christ I see no Reason since we all agree that that one Person born of Mary was and is the true Christ 'T is true their Sentiments and ours may not be alike about his Substance in his preexisting before his Incarnation but as that is a Mystery hard for the Ignorant to understand and Men of the greatest Parts commonly lose themselves in it so I do not find the Apostles press it as material to be believed in and understood their main design seemed to be to prove that he was the same Person the Prophets spake of and to open the Power and Efficacy of his Death and Sufferings but were very sparing in talking of his preexisting which yet if it had been necessary to Salvation it seems to me they would have opened it as well as other Points But supposing our Brethren mistaken in their Conceptions concerning Christ what he was before his Incarnation yet have they the same Respect and Love for his Person as we have believe him to be the very Christ of God as much as we believe his Death to be available and look upon him to be as sufficient a Saviour as we do and since they pitch on the very same Person that we do I cannot think that they believe in a false or another Christ Sect. II. Concerning the Offices of Christ shewing also
Mr. Taylor 's fourth Reason is in page 11. Because they that deny Christ to be the Essence of God deny the Lord that bought them This Reason standing on the same bottom with the former the same Answer may suffice His sixth Reason for he hath no fifth that I can find is This Principle of Christ's being the Essence of God is the Rock upon which Christ hath built his Church For proof of which he cites Mat. 16.15 where Peter confesseth Thou art Christ the Son of the living God And our Lord saith Vpon this Rock will I build my Church But the necessary Consequence of Mr. Taylor 's Reason or Proof is so far off that my dull Genius will not reach it I will put it into the form of an Argument To be a Son of God is to be the Essence of God But Christ owns that he is the Son of God Ergo He owns he is the Essence of God But then perhaps some unhappy Brain or other will say At that rate of Reasoning one may prove Adam Angels and Saints to be all the very Essence of God for they are all called Sons of God I speak not this as supposing that Christ is the Son of God in no other Sense than Adam Angels and Saints are but to shew how short Mr. Taylor 's Arguing comes of what he intends it for But Mr. Taylor saith page 13. Except by the word Son of God we understand one and the same thing it is impossible we should have one and the same Faith If this be true setting the Unitarians aside there are not many of us Trinitarians have one and the same Faith for some by Son of God intend a distinct intelligent Being and Mind from Father and Spirit as Dr. Sherlock Some say it is only a Mode of the divine Essence but not the divine Essence it self as Mr. Monk Some in effect say it is called a Person but indeed in a proper Sense is not and that therefore it is a Somewhat as Dr. Wallis Some say it is a Quality and Property of the divine Essence Some say it is the Essence it self The School-men say it is God knowing himself by a reflex Act. Thus you see we are all to pieces amongst our selves and when we are united and understand by the Son of God one and the same thing 't is like the Unitarians will fall in with us But alas alas now am I come to the killing Reason of all Reasons to wit the seventh page 13. if I can but dispatch it I shall think my Work near done it is this The Doctrine of Christ his being the Essence of God is a Principle of that Consequence that the Christian Religion stands or falls with it To demonstrate this Mr. Taylor lays down these two fearful and monstrous Positions namely That if Jesus Christ be not true God of the same Essence with his Father it follows first that the Mahometan Religion is preferable to the Christian and Mahomet was a greater Prophet than Christ Secondly That Christ was an Impostor and Deceiver the Jews did justly in sentencing him to Death for Blasphemy That the Christian Religion is Idolatry and Superstition and the Messias is not yet come This roaring Reason makes a terrible Noise in Country Churches If this be true 't were enough to make a Man afraid to come near a Unitarian as long as one lives Unitarians did I say nay Mercy Mercy for as to several of our leading Trinitarians what will become of them for Mr. Monk plainly denies that Christ is the Essence of God but only a Person or Mode Dr. Wallis is of the same Mind and I am almost afraid Mr. Taylor is leaning that way and if he should what a lamentable thing would that be But now by way of Reply First observe that this Expression Christ of the Essence of his Father is not directly in express terms taught us by our Lord or the holy Scripture Secondly That our Proofs are only Consequences a long time ago and still much controverted by very learned Men and yet Mr. Taylor adventures to be so confident as to say in effect that supposing his Opinion be not true that is if he be mistaken then Christ must needs be beneath Mahomet nay an Impostor and the Jews did well to put him to Death for Blasphemy These are very high Words and look too bold and presumptuous I confess if the Pope and Church of Rome had said so it had been no very surprising thing because they believing themselves infallible might therefore look upon their Interpretation of Scripture even in the most nice and dubious Points to be certainly and infallibly true for infallible Persons cannot err But for Mr. Taylor who I doubt not thinks himself a fallible Man for him I say to hug and magnify his own Opinion in so intricate and curious a Question wherein as hath been hinted the most learned Trinitarians are greatly divided in their Apprehensions and to value it at such a rate as to think and proclaim that either his Notion must be true or Christ must be false this is very amazing And I cannot forbear thinking that Mr. Taylor had Monsieur Lamoth's Book by him when he penn'd this Reason Lamoth in his Discourse of the Trinity p. 15. hath these Expressions That in case the Doctrine of the Trinity as now held be not true then the Apostle Paul had not common Sense nor any tolerable degree of Understanding nay was a Mad-man and the rest of the Apostles were Blasphemers And page 33. I make no difficulty saith he to say they have deceived us most shamefully and their Writings are no better than continual Blasphemy if Christ be not God But Secondly I shall endeavour to demonstrate that in case Mr. Taylor should be mistaken and Christ be supposed not to be of the Essence of God yet it doth not thence follow notwithstanding all Mr. Taylor says that he was worse than Mahomet or that the Christian Religion is worse than Mahometism To which purpose I will consider what he says His chief if not only Reason for this is in page 15. Because the Christian Religion brings in Idolatry but Mahomet abolishes it I answer I shall not concern my self with Mahometism nor magnify it for expelling Idolatry But for the Christian Religion that it brings in Idolatry in the case supposed I deny for if the Christian Religion necessarily brings in Idolatry it must be either in the Unitarians or the Trinitarians But it doth not necessarily bring in Idolatry in the Unitarians nor yet in the Trinitarians therefore the Christian Religion doth not necessarily bring in Idolatry To make short for proof of the minor I refer you to the close of my Answer to his first Reason I come now to his second monstrous Assertion namely If Christ be not the Essence of God then he is an Impostor Now the consequence of this I deny and on the contrary affirm that tho Christ were not of the