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 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
a good Answer in the Fathers and shall the same be ill meerly because at another time in another Case it came from an Heretick The Hereticks proposing it you say renders it suspect St. Athanasius and St. Ambrose using it say I and relying upon it too gives it Authority The Hereticks used it not first but only retorted it on the Fathers Wherefore at least admit the Authority of the one to take off the Disadvantage it may sustain from the other and let the Project as you call it stand or fall according to its own naked Merit Only by the way give me leave to add that if what is just and reasonable must be rejected because it has been sometimes used by Hereticks we must oftentimes give over pleading from Scripture and quit a World of Texts therein I must acknowledg I am not able to see why Men should be so averse from the Language of the Holy Ghost either in their Prayers or Creeds The Sum of the Reason alledged is that it is the Sense of Scripture which Pag. 7. is the true Faith and not merely the Words And must we saith Mr. Dean very admirably believe the Words or Sense of the Scripture I may desire him if he can to believe this or that Sense as revealed by God for he cannot know this or that Sense or Proposition as revealed by God without the Words in which it was revealed I demand Do those Words express contain and convey to us this Sense of such or such Point of Faith or do they not If they do not then the Sense insisted on is not the Sense of the Scripture and consequently not Faith If they do why should we not keep those Words by which God hath thought fit to express this Sense Why should we separate what he has joined Are we wiser than he or can we express the Mind of God better than himself But when Hereticks have used their utmost Art to make the Words of Scripture signify what they please is it not necessary to fix their true Sense and to express that in such other Words as Hereticks cannot pervert Yes in the Name of God let us use our utmost Art to vindicate if possible all and every Scripture from Heretical Glosses or Distortions and with all the Light and Evidence we can discover and assert its genuine Sense The natural Explication of Scripture is our immediate Scope in most or in all the Arts and Sciences which as Divines we take in But what do all our Explications effect save a Proof or Discovery that this or that is the Sense contained under such Words of Scripture When therefore we have plainly proved that these Words of Scripture contain this Sense why should we change the Words If they were not plain the Explication supposing it to have done any thing to the purpose has made them plain When they are plain then why may they not be kept They may be undetermined said Mr. Dean and 't is necessary to fix their §. 10. true Sense But this is the Difficulty They may rationally at least probably admit more Senses than one and when you say you have fixed your own true Sense another shall deny the Sense you have fixed to be the true Sense at least assign another equally probable Sense And a third Person it may be a third For Instance the Apostle tells us 1 Cor. 2. 10 12. God hath revealed the Joys and Glories which he has prepared for those that love him unto us by his Spirit for the Spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God For what Man knoweth the things of Man save the Spirit of Man which is in him even so the things of God knoweth no Man but the Spirit of God Now we have received not the Spirit of the World but the Spirit which is of God that we might know the things which are freely given us of God This Text the learned Dr. Sherlock as well as others even Athanasius himself interpret not without Probability of the essential Spirit of God and the Doctor both in his Vindication and Apology endeavours thence to prove the Personality of the Holy Ghost and his mutual Consciousness with the Father and the Son Now I sacredly protest I remember not my self ever to have read any Socinian Author on this Text But I find some others by the word Spirit here understand the spiritual Illumination and inward Perswasion of Mind wrought in the Apostles and other faithful People And this we seem enforced from ver 12. to admit where we read the Apostles to have received the Spirit which cannot be well understood of the Person but of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost This agrees too with the Close of ver 10. The Spirit searcheth all things that is scrutari nos facit This Illumination in their Search leads all such who are endowed therewith into the knowledg and belief of all things necessary to their Salvation even the deepest Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven Further this spiritual Gift may be said to know i. e. we by this Illumination know and relish the things of God as feelingly as the Spirit of Man knows the things of a Man because this Gift is so true a Communication from God and as it were somewhat of the Divine Nature 2 Pet. 1. 4. imparted to us But that the Spirit of God here spoken of as knowing the things of God should be a Person distinct from God any more than the Spirit of a Man knowing the things of a Man is a Person distinct from the Man seems unreasonable And it is considerable that amongst others even Calvin and Beza allow by the Spirit here may be understood such Gift of Illumination as spoken of But Grotius referring us to what he had said on Mark 2. 8 c. with great Learning and Probability interprets the Spirit here of the Divine Nature of Christ and tells us it was by Christ as coming from the Bosom of his Father and knowing all his Secrets that these things were revealed to the Apostles and that the Sense here is the same as in John 1. 18. and ch 6. 46 c. and he produces many Authorities both from Scripture and Fathers touching the Divine Nature of our Lord being stiled the Spirit Now who shall determine which is the true and genuine Sense and if any of the two latter should be genuine then has not the Dean evinced hence what he conceived and particularly not the mutual Consciousness of the Holy Ghost with the Father and the Son for that the Person of the Holy Ghost is not here spoken of It were easy but that it would be tedious to give like Instances in many other Texts of Holy Scripture What shall we do then It were an admirable Expedient indeed could we determine infallibly this or that to be the true Sense of each controverted Text and then express that Sense in such Words as Hereticks cannot pervert But where shall we find
the Sentences the Master's Piece by me challenged and especially Prolegom V. will find both there and more fully in the Book the Master distinctly convicted to be 1 A false Witness 2 A pernicious Writer And 3 A ridiculous one He will find also an explicit Collection of his Frauds and Falsifications to which the Author subjoins he has not pick'd out Passages to cavil at but rather challenges any to produce what is faultless I might say much more but let this suffice as to my Defence in whatsoever Reflections I made on the Master of the Sentences in this Point I hope it appears I gave not that Touch upon him which I did without Reason and knowledg of his Accomplishments But for all this the more general Cause of my being so angry with the §. 7. Pag. 5. School-Doctors is because I have not Industry enough to read or understand them I thank Mr. Dean for this Ornament and will take hence only an Occasion of a little publick Penance before God and the World confessing with hearty Sorrow and Shame that I have not been so industrious as I ought to have been I cannot before an all-seeing Eye acquit my self of some kind of Idleness but beseech my good God to pardon what cannot be recalled and to quicken me for the future to double Diligence Yet I may adventure to plead that amongst them who have known the Variety of my Labours since I came out into the World and I believe also amongst all those now alive who either had the Tuition of me or were Associates of my Studies in my Education there is none will say I was in any measure ever noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a scandalous Ideler Then as to my reading and understanding the School-men in particular I will only add that many Years ago as soon as Master of Arts I set my self to read and study those of best Note amongst them and spent no inconsiderable Time and Pains therein as much at least as a Life otherwise laborious would permit that about ten or eleven Years ago having some Leisure and Opportunity I resumed those Studies with particular Purpose to refresh my Memory and rectify if I could my Judgment both in and by them that I think when I read them I generally do understand them I said generally for I am of Opinion that sometimes they understood not themselves that is they disputed themselves into uncertain obscure and confused Notions but I confess I never read these Doctors with such Relish Savour and Delight with such Warmth good Affection and Holy Advantage as I did and daily do read the sacred Scriptures O the infinite Disproportion of them Even in moral Notions in which notwithstanding divers of the School-Doctors excel themselves comparatively to their other Writings How much more Force is there sometimes in one Word or Glance of the Holy Ghost than in the acutest Definitions of the Doctors How far sharper and more piercing are the Divine Oracles even dividing asunder the Soul and Spirit and discerning of the Thoughts and Intents of the Heart Further I acknowledg my Memory has not such a retentive Faculty of the nice Distinctions and Divisions which these Wits run nor after all do I see the Vse of them as to promoting Peace Holiness or in divers Cases sound Judgment in the Church of God How many School-Notions were not yet two Ages ago made Points of Faith as far as the usurping Power of what stiled it self an Oecumenical Council could make them And has Christianity received so much Improvement by those Sanctions as that we should be fond of the Fountains whence they derived those Waters of Meribah or at this Day pretend that these spinose and crabbed Doctors have only guarded Christianity with a Hedg of Thorns c. I pity those who for a shist betake themselves to such Assertions and I list not to pursue this thence only for a final Trial of my Insight into those Authors I appeal to every judicious Reader whether I did not deliver in my Paper p. 13. the Doctrine of the Trinity and Unity more conformably to the Doctrine of the Schools than Dr. Sherlock did in his Vindication notwithstanding his pretended greater Conversation in them I transcribed it not indeed either out of the School-men or Canonists de summâ Trinit from whom Mr. Hooker seems to have almost translated in this Point nor yet from St. Austin from whom they all have taken it though I was ignorant of none of those but from a Master of the Temple because I took that to the Master of the Temple to be more an Argument ad Hominem Now if I faithfully reported the Doctrine of the Schools 't is very probable I was not so unacquainted with them as Mr. Dean's Candour would represent me My next Accusation is that I have said The first Reformers complained §. 8. Pag. 5. of this namely the corrupt Divinity of the Schools and desired a purer and more scriptural he instead thereof puts spiritual sort of Divinity I did indeed say this but not without due Authority My Words were very nearly as nearly as I could remember the English of a Passage of the great Melancthon which having not then my Note-books at hand I could not perfectly Tantum Labyrinthorum falsarum opinionum est in Thomâ Scoto similibus qui dediti Aristotelis Doctrinae transformare Ecclesiae Doctrinam in Philosophiam coeperunt ut semper saniores Theologi desideraverint aliud genus Doctrinae plenius purius And a little before Haec aetas non tantum coenum sed insuper venena id est opiniones probantes manifesta idola in fontes evangelicos invexit Philip. Melancthon in Praefat. ad Luther Tom. 2. report but will now in the Margin transcribe the Text by which it may appear I was favourable in my Censure and spoke not the full of what my Author would have warranted And if this which is said in the Margin satisfy not that the Doctrine of the School-men is full of Labyrinths and Falsities of Dirt and Poison so as to have infected the very Fountains of the Gospel-Doctrine which yet is more than I said let Persons of Leisure and Advantages consult the second Tome of Melancthon's own Works where they may find some little Tracts designed to make good this Charge particularly Oratio Thomae Didymi a personated Name no doubt pro M. Luther And Philippi Melancthonis pro Luth. Apologia adversus furiosorum Parisiensium Decretum c. I could have said much to the same Effect out of Luther himself in divers Places but I feared it might have been said he was too fiery Nor are like Passages at all infrequent in Calvin but perhaps by some Men as much might have been said of him as of me that he had not read or understood whom he censured Melancthon's Authority I thought I might more safely speak upon he being a Person whose Learning and Moderation might