the Spirit searches all things yea the deep things of God It follows because he cannot be sent as Servants are by their Masters or Ambassadors by their Lords since in that mission there is always some dependency there is a Superior and inferior there is one Major and one Minor which can never be found in God it follows I say by a necessary Consequence he being sent from the Father and the Son it is because he proceeds from both You may further urge the Holy Ghost is not truly and properly God therefore he doth not proceed from the Father and the Son according to the manner as it is believed in the Church of England The Antecedent appears by these words of St. John When the spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and will shew you things to come From whence I thus argue First He that doth not speak of himself supposes another distinct Person from whom he hath received Instruction but the Holy Ghost doth not speak of himself therefore he supposes another distinct Person from whom he hath received Instruction therefore he is not truly and properly God because he that is truly and properly God cannot suppose any other Person from whom he should receive Instruction Secondly He that speaks what he heareth supposes another Person speaking distinct from him that heareth but the Holy Ghost speaketh what he heareth therefore he supposes another Person speaking distinct from him therefore he is not truly and properly God because he that is truly and properly God cannot suppose any other Person speaking unto him from whom he could receive Instruction this being contrary to the Nature of the true God The Major Proposition of these two Arguments is clear and certain the Minor is from St. John therefore it follows that the Holy Ghost is not truly and properly God and consequently that he doth not proceed from the Father and the Son as the Church of England believes Answ I grant that the Holy Ghost doth not speak of himself but speaks what he heareth he being not of himself but of the Father and the Son however it doth not follow but that he is truly and properly God But before I make it appear it is necessary to observe that the Holy Ghost is sometimes taken for God himself sometimes for a divine Quality sometimes for a Person really distinct from the Father and the Son First He is taken for God himself God is a spirit John 4. 24. For God being Holy and a Spirit it is evident that he is holy Spirit and Reciprocally he that is called holy Spirit per Excellentiam and without dependency is God For these Terms God and holy Spirit are really one and the same thing as likewise these following Eternal Lord Creator Conservator They differ only in reference to the different effects which we apply them to God is named Eternal because he is without Beginning and Ending Is called Lord because of his Power over all things Creator because he made them of nothing and Conservator because he keeps them from returning into nothing And he is called Holy Ghost per Excellentiam because to speak properly none but he is truly Holy and because he receives his Holiness from no body all other Creatures whatsoever have their holiness by Communication and Dependency In that sence the Holy Ghost is not really distinguish'd from the Eternal Father but only per Intellectum or in as much as the Definition which is ascribed to the Eternal Father is different from that of the Holy Ghost as the Eternal is distinguish'd from the Creator For although it be really one and the same thing yet our Understandings conceive the Eternal otherwise than the Creator in as much as the Eternal is a Being without beginning and ending and the Creator is a first and Independent Cause who produced all things out of nothing Therefore in that sence the Holy Ghost being not really distinguish'd from the Eternal Father we cannot say that he proceeds from him because it would follow that one and the same thing should be supposed at the same time existing and not existing existing because we conceive it to be so and not existing because in that instance of Reason when we should conceive it proceeding from the Father it should not be existing which is contrary to Reason since there is no instance of Reason wherein we can conceive the true God not to be Therefore it follows that the Holy Ghost in the aforementioned sence doth not proceed from the Father Secondly He is taken for a divine Quality as when the Holy Ghost said unto those of Antioch Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them We must conceive it was God who spake these words but because God did all this by that Power within him which is his Spirit therefore these words and actions are attributed to the Holy Ghost in that sence likewise the Holy Ghost is not really distinguish'd from the Eternal Father and consequently is not proceeding from him Thirdly He is taken for a Person really distinct from the Eternal Father and that he is so is evidently proved by these Texts Grieve not the holy spirit of God whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption and by this to the Romans The spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered and by that of the first to the Corinthians The spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God For Grief is certainly a personal Affection of which a quality is not capable We can understand what is an interceding Person but we have no apprehension of interceding and groaning Qualities and we understand also that to search is a property belonging to a Person and not to a Quality You will urge that it is ordinary in the holy Scripture to find the like Expressions which are proper unto Persons given unto those things which are no Persons as when the Apostle saith Charity suffereth long and is kind charity envieth not vaunteth not it self c. All which personal Actions are attributed to Charity which is no Person but belonging to that Person which is charitable because that Person which is so qualified doth perform those Actions according to and by the vertue of that Charity which is in him In the same manner personal Actions are attributed to the Holy Ghost which is no Person but only the Virtue Power and Efficacy of God the Father who is a Person and doth perform those personal Actions attributed to the Holy Ghost by the Virtue Power and Efficacy in himself which is the Holy Ghost Answ This giveth no satisfaction for there are several personal Attributes given in the holy Scriptures expresly to the Holy Ghost which cannot be ascribed to God the Father as for Example to make Intercession is a
personal Action and this Action is attributed to the Spirit of God as it appears by these words of St. Paul Because he maketh intercession for the Saints according to the Will of God But to make Intercession is an Act which cannot be attributed to God the Father for it would follow that the Father should make Intercession to himself which is absurd because he that maketh Intercession is supposed to be distinct from him to whom he maketh Intercession Moreover To come unto men as being sent unto them is a personal Action but the Comforter or the Holy Ghost did come being sent as it is seen by these words of St. John When the Comforter is come whom I will send you from the Father and if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you but if I depart I will send him unto you ergo the Holy Ghost cannot be ascribed in this place to God the Father since God the Father sendeth but is never sent And to speak and hear are personal Actions and both together attributed to the Holy Ghost in such a manner as they cannot be attributed to God the Father as it appears by those words of John When the spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak Now to speak and not of himself cannot be attributed to God the Father since he doth all things of himself And to speak what he heareth cannot be also attributed to God the Father who can receive no Instruction from another Seeing then the Holy Ghost speaketh and not of himself and speaketh what he heareth it followeth evidently that he is not God the Father neither a divine Quality which cannot be said properly to speak and hear but that he is a Person distinct from the Father Now that the Holy Ghost as a Person really distinct from the Father is truly and properly God appears by these words of St. Peter for when Peter said Ananias Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Ghost He repeateth the same Question in reference to the same Offence Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart Thou hast not lied unto men but unto God He means there the true God as it appears by these words Thou hast not lied unto men but unto God For when he saith Thou hast not lied unto men but unto God it is as if he should say thou hast not lied unto Creatures since men are Creatures but thou hast lied unto him who is no Creature and consequently unto him who is true God And if the Holy Ghost could be taken sometimes for a Creature this Proposition of St. Peter To lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie unto God would not always be true therefore St. Peter speaking without distinction and without a limited sence 't is to prove that this word Holy Ghost is never taken in the holy Scripture but for the true God Moreover to whom the divine Attributes do belong as certainly as they belong unto God the Father he is truly and properly God because these are divine Attributes which are properties of the Divine Nature and none can be indued with to whom the Nature of God doth not belong But the divine Attributes as Omniscience the Sanctification of Souls and the like do belong as certainly unto the Holy Ghost as they do unto God the Father therefore it followeth that the Holy Ghost is truly and properly God and consequently that he proceedeth from the Father and the Son as it is declared in the Symbole of Nice Obj. The Church of England doth neither believe nor practice all that is contained in these words viz. Abstain from meats offered to Idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication therefore she is not the holy Catholick Church since the holy Catholick Church is that that believes and practises the whole Christian Doctrine as I have made it appear already Answ This Commandment was in the time of the Primitive Church but was abolished by the Apostles Because the Jews would not eat things strangled nor Blood the Apostles enjoyned that the Gentiles embracing the Christian Religion ought in Charity to Conform herein to the Jews and not give Offence where the thing was it self indifferent Wherefore St. Paul saith If meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the World standeth lest I make my brother to offend But now this Commandment is past and abolish'd by the Apostles and therefore it is not true that the Church of England doth believe and practise any thing contrary to the holy Scripture For the-better understanding of this Truth we must know that in these words enjoyned to the Gentiles embracing the Christian Religion to wit Abstain from pollution of Idols and from Fornication and from things strangled and from blood there is something bad in it self and something bad by Accident something bad for a time only something belonging to the Moral Law and something belonging to the Ceremonial The thing bad in it self for ever and belonging to the Moral Law is to abstain from Idolatry and from Fornication and the thing bad by accident for a time only and belonging to the Ceremonial Law is to abstain from things strangled and from Blood Now it is certain that to abstain from Idolatry and Fornication is a part of the Moral Law seeing it is written Thou shalt have no other Gods but me and thou shalt not commit Adultery It is also true that these things are bad of themselves and for ever because they were forbidden in time past are now unlawful and shall be for time to come which appears by these words of St. Paul to the Corinthians Neither Fornicators nor Adulterers shall inherit the Kingdom of God 'T is likewise certain that to Abstain from things strangled and from Blood belongs to the Ceremonial Law it is also without doubt that it was abolished as it is seen in these words of St. Paul Whatsoever is sold in the Shambles that eat asking no question for Conscience sake for the Earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof if any of them that believe not bid you to a Feast and ye be disposed to go whatsoever is set before you eat asking no question for Conscience sake And by these to Timothy where it is said that Every Creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving and forbidding to abstain from meats is a doctrine of Devils And by these to the Romans I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of it self but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean to him it is unclean And that ye may not say that these words of St. Paul were written before those of the Council held at Hierusalem or of the 15th of the Acts the
therefore she is not the holy Catholick for as you said before to give the denomination of holy Catholick to any Church it is requisite she should believe the whole Christian Faith as it was once delivered to the Saints without any addition to or diminution from the holy Scriptures Answ Though that word Trinity be not found in the holy Scriptures yet the thing signified thereby is found therein as it appears by the words of Matthew Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father ther and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And more evidently by those of the first of St. John There are three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one That Consequence therefore is not good which saith that the Church of England is not the holy Catholick because it believes in the Trinity that word not being express'd in the holy Scripture for provided the thing signified be found there in equivalent terms or may be deduced from thence by clear and necessary Consequences 't is sufficient and matters not if the word it self be not expressed But as I have just now made it appear by the Texts of Saints Matthew and John the Trinity is there very clearly expressed therefore c. But you may further urge that by the word Trinity we mean three eternal and infinite Persons really distinct one from another subsisting in one Nature numerically but this is contrary to Reason and is not found in the holy Scripture nor can be deduc'd from it by clear and necessary Consequences therefore it may be rightly inferr'd that the Church of England is not the holy Catholick Church it believing a point of Faith which is neither found distinctly nor in equivalent terms in the holy Scripture Probatur minor First That the Trinity is contrary to humane Reason which is proved thus For as it is contrary to humane Reason that Peter Paul and John who are three distinct Persons have but one Nature Numerically seeing that every Person hath its Nature different from th' other if not in Specie at least Numericè and it cannot be otherwise so it is centrary to Reason that the Father Son and Holy Ghost should be three really distinct Persons and notwithstanding have but one nature Numericè which can't be since from three Persons do naturally follow three substances or natures which is proved thus Person in God is either a being or nothing we can't say that it is nothing because the three divine Persons should then be nothing at all therefore it must be a Being If Being either it is real or mental we can't call it mental because sublato Intellectu the Persons should be no more therefore it remains that it is a real Being if real either it is a Substance or an Accident there being no Medium between Substance and Accident We can't say that it is an Accident because we do not admit any in the Godhead for the great Absurdities which follow from thence therefore it must be a Substance and if a Substance since there are three really distinct Persons it follows that there are also three really distinct Substances which is contrary to Reason Secondly That the Trinity is neither found distinctly nor in equivalent Terms in the holy Scripture is easily proved The former is without any contradiction for if ye read over the holy Scripture ye shall no where find the word Trinity And the latter is proved thus If the Trinity be there in equivalent terms it is either in this Text Go ye and teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost or else in this There are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one For though in the one and th' other mention be made of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and consequently of three Persons because the Father is a Person the Son a Person and the holy Ghost a Person yet we cannot infer that these three Persons have but one nature or substance Numericè for although some infer it from that word in the Name which is in the singular number yet that is not convincing since I may say such a thing is commanded in the Name of the King and his Chancelor and yet though that word be in the singular Number we can't infer that the King and his Chancelor have but one nature Numericè Neither can the Trinity be inferred from these words of St. John and these three are one because by that Unity we may very well understand a Unity of Will Agreement and Spirit and not of Nature or Substance so that when 't is said there are three that bear Record the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one It is the same thing as to say these three are one in Will do agree one with another what one Will 's the other willeth also And this is confirmed by the words of St. John wherein Jesus Christ prayeth his Father that we may be one as he is one with his Father that is that we may do what he will have us to do as he doth what his Father will have him to do Every body may see clearly that we are not nor can be one in nature Numericè with Jesus Christ it being contrary to Reason therefore we cannot infer by a clear and necessary Consequence that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost have but one nature or substance Numerice therefore the Trinity is neither found in the holy Scriptures distinctly nor can be deduced from them by evident and necessary Consequences First I answer thus I must confess with all learned men that the Mystery of the Trinity is above humane Reason that it can't be comprehended in this World by any Creature whatsoever We may sooner reckon the Sands of the Sea the Leaves of Trees than understand that glorious Mystery for how can we apprehend one and the same thing to be one and yet many How can we apprehend that one and the same Essence may be begotten and yet unbegotten that one and the same thing was from all Eternity and yet was truly and properly begotten This is above humane Reason Therefore the Angel in a form of a little Boy that brought a Spoonful of Water from the Sea and poured it in a little hole did answer Austin who was meditating upon the Mystery of the Trinity he asking him what was his intention that his design was to put all the Water of the Sea in that little hole But Austin replying that that was impossible the Sea being so vast and the hole so little the Child answered that he should do that sooner than he could comprehend the Mystery of the most holy Trinity Deum esse Trinitatem credimus potius quà m videmus That is we rather believe than see that God
if the Son be Consubstantial with the Father it follows that he is really and properly true God but he cannot be properly and really true God ergo he is not Consubstantial with his Father The Minor is proved out of the holy Scriptures There is none other God but one The Lord of Israel is that true God for there is none else besides him The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is that only true God This is Life eternal that they might know thee O Father the only true God For though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Lords many and Gods many but to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him For There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus But if according to what St. Paul saith though there be many that are called Gods and Lords nevertheless there is but one true God and one true Lord and if according to what Jesus Christ saith his Father be that only true God it follows that Christ or the Son of God is not really and properly true God and consequently that he is not Consubstantial with his Father Probatur 2o. If Jesus Christ were really and properly true God his Resurrection should be ascribed unto him as the true and principal Author but it is not ascribed to him as the true and principal Author but to his Father as we read in several places of the holy Scriptures God the Father who raised him from the dead God having raised up his Son Jesus c. Therefore he is not really and properly true God Probatur 3o. If the Son were really and properly true God he should have the knowledg of all things but he hath not the knowledg of all things since he doth not know the day of Judgment therefore c. The Minor is proved thus But of that day and hour saith Christ knows no man no not the Angels of Heaven but my Father only Mark that that word only is exclusive for if the Father only knows the day and hour of Judgment it follows that the Son doth not know it therefore having not the knowledg of all things he is not really and properly true God since to the true God nothing can be unknown Probatur 4o. Either the Son is of himself or by an other he is not of himself because he hath a Father therefore he is by another if by another he cannot be really and properly true God for he that is by an other is not independent but the true God is independent Probatur 5o. Christ or the Son is Mediator between God and men but if the Son was really and properly true God and Consubstantial with his Father he should be Mediator between men and himself which is absurd because no body is Mediator between himself and another Probatur 6o. The Son is begotten even according to divine Nature But that which is begotten was not always that which was not always is not eternal that which is not eternal is not really and properly true God therefore the Son is not really and properly true God and consequently he is not Consubstantial with his Father To the first Objection which contains these words of John This is Life eternal c. I answer that by the onl◠true God is mean◠God a se and in that sence the Father is the only true God because he only is God à se he only is the Origine of the Godhead But the Son is God of God and the Image of the invisible Father And to the words of St. Paul Though there be that are called Gods c. I say that as nothing can hinder the Father to be Lord though it be said There is but one Lord Jesus Christ so nothing can hinder Jesus Christ to be true God though it be written There is but one God the Father To the Second I answer that as a non esse ad non posse the Consequence is not good so because the Son did not raise up himself from the dead it doth not follow that he could not and the contrary appears by his own words I lay down my Life that I might take it again no man taketh it from me but I lay it down of my self I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again To the Third I say that the Son of God according to his humane Nature knew not the day and hour of Judgment as he knew not Lazarus's Sepulchre when he asked his Sisters where they had laid him And as he knew not what the two Disciples were talking of by the way when he said unto them What manner of Communications are these that ye have one to another as ye walk and are sad And as he knew not whether Peter loved him more than the rest of his Disciples when he said unto him the third time Lovest thou me But as he was God he knew all things for In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge and as saith Isaiah The spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him the spirit of wisdom and understanding the spirit of counsel and might the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord. And as it appears by these words of Peter Lord thou knowest all things Secondly I say because Christ emptied himself and took upon him the form of a Servant therefore for a little time he laid down his knowledge that he might be less than the Angels and that in all things he might be like unto us sin only excepted and that he were born like other Children who got their knowledge by degrees as it is written in Luke Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favour with God and men Or according to Austin he is said ignorant of the day of Judgment because he doth not make them know it that is he knew it not so that he would manifest it to his Disciples But he was to declare it in a convenient time of which time to come speaking as if it were past he said Henceforth I call you not Servants for the Servant knoweth not what his Lord doth but I have called you friends for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made them known into you Which things he had not yet declared but because he was to manifest them certainly he spake as if he had done it already for he tells them I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now amongst which is understood the day of Judgment and therefore he hid it from them and according to that kind of expression a man is said to be ignorant of that which he keeps from another To the Fourth I say though the Son be of the
Children were circumcised now since Baptism is in the place of Circumcision weare to baptize young Children since they were circumcised and seeing Circumcision which was a Ceremony and divine Institution did neither require Doctrine nor Repentance in young Children though it were necessary in adult Persons as it appears in Abraham and in all others who turned Jews even so Baptism which is a Ceremony and a divine Institution doth neither require Faith nor Repentance in young Children although it doth in adult Persons Which is confirmed by the words of St. Matthew where it is said that They brought unto Jesus Christ little Children that he should put his hands on them and pray and that the Disciples rebuking them Jesus said suffer little Children and forbid them not to come unto me for of such is the Kingdom of God From whence I argue thus To whom do belong the things signified unto them belong the Signs also as the Crown which is the Sign and Mark of Royalty belongs to him to whom the Kingdom belongs but unto little Children belongs the Kingdom of God as it is written in St. Matthew 19. 13. Therefore unto them belongs Baptism which is the Sign of the entring into that Kingdom For except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Therefore young Children born with original sin as it appears in several places of the holy Scripture but especially by these words of St. Paul to the Romans By the Offencof one Ju dgment came upon all men to Condemnation are not to be deprived of Baptism lest they should not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is the Reason that St. Cyprian and Austin have so often declared the Baptism of little Children to be necessary Moreover if they brought unto Jesus Christ young Children and he put his hands on them and prayed for them why shall they not bring unto him little Children in the Church Why shall not the Minister pray for them And why shall he not confer unto them the Ceremony or the Institution of Baptism as Jesus Christ gave unto little Children the Ceremony or Institution of Imposition of hands I ask this Question whether the Ceremony of Imposition of hands was in vain or whether they received by it some particular Grace from Christ Ye will not say that it was in vain because then Jesus Christ in whom were hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledg would not have used it if they received by it some special Grace notwithstanding their want of Repentance and Faith which they were not then capable of why shall not young Children now receive the Ceremony of Baptism and thereby all Graces annexed unto it though they be not capable of Faith and Repentance When a Father or Mother were baptized all those of the Houshold were baptized also as it appears in the Acts where it is said that Lydia a seller of Purple of the City of Thyatira was baptized and her Houshold and that the Keeper of the Prison was baptized he and all his And in the first Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians St. Paul saith that he hath baptized the Houshold of Stephanus but it is probable though not convincing that in so many Families there were Children And since our Fathers and their Children were baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea and they being the Figures of our Baptism as is evident by St. Paul that that which is by them figured may be accomplished the Children now ought to be baptized in the Baptism of Jesus Christ Object It is forbidden in several places of the holy Scriptures to Swear or to take an Oath Ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time thou shalt not forswear thy self but I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. But let your Communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh o evil and in the Epistle of St. James Above all things my Brethren swear not lest ye fall into Condemnation But the Church of England is not against swearing or taking an Oath yea she uses and maintains it lawful therefore she believes and practises an Article forbidden in the holy Scripture therefore she is not the holy Catholick Church Before I give an Answer it is necessary to know that an Oath is an Invocation to God or an Appeal to him as a Witness of the Truth of what we say so that in case that that we swear be not true we if not expresly at least virtually invoke God as a Judge and Avenger There are two sorts of Oaths one Assertory and the other Promissory an assertory Oath is when we promise by Oath something that is Future and if our promise be made directly and immediately to God 't is called a Vow if to men an Oath That being supposed I Answer That an Oath is not only lawful but also is sometimes necessary as when mens Estates are concern'd and no Evidence can be had to decide and clear the matter but what is assured by Oath Then it is necessary to make an end of and decide the Controversie as it appears by these words of St. Paul An Oath for Confirmations is to them an end of strife And its lawfulness appears by several Texts of the holy Scripture wherein God who is truth it self and cannot lie and consequently might be believed of men upon his bare word and without necessity of making an Oath yet to confirm his promises is willing to take it For when God made the Promise to Abraham because he could not swear by a greater he sware by himself And verse 17. God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his Counsel confirmed it by an Oath Therefore if God himself swears and takes an Oath why shall it not be lawful to men to take an Oath in dubious matters and of great Concern and when no Evidence can be had to decide and clear them Was not Mephibosheth spared because of the Lord's Oath that was between them between David and Jonathan the Son of Saul Did not the Law of Moses in many cases require them Doth not St. Paul use them oftentimes as when he saith God is my witness I call God for a Record upon my Soul Before God I lie not Which Oaths St. Paul who was to teach the Precepts of Christ to others should not have used if they had been unlawful and forbidden in the holy Scriptures And Christ himself as ye may read Mat. 26. 63 64. did not refuse it when the High-Priest asked him to answer upon his Oath whether he was the Son of God I adjure thee saith the High-Priest by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God and Jesus said unto him thou hast said Therefore seeing Jesus Christ himself doth answer when he is
Comparison between that Infinite Eternal and Independent Being and what is Finite Temporal and Dependent He therefore who did truly think himself equal with God as being in the form of God must be conceived to subsist in that one infinite eternal and independent Nature of God And therefore as here Christ was really and essentially man of the same Nature with us in whose similitude he was made so certainly was he also really and essentially God of the same Nature and Being with him in whose form he did subsist This truth is confirmed by these words of the 1st of John We know that the Son of man is come and hath given us an understanding that we may know him that is true and we are in him that is true even in his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and Eternal Life And by these of St. Paul to the Romans Out of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever From whence we may infer that he who was truly subsisting in the form of God and equal with him before he was in the Nature of man and who is called God and the true God the Almighty and that in all those ways by which the supreme Deity is expressed hath an eternal and indivisible Essence and Nature with God But Christ was so and is so called therefore c. Moreover is it not written in your Law saith Christ Ye are Gods Are not these the very words of the eighty second Psalm If God himself so spake or the Psalmist from him if this be the Language of the Scripture if Kings and Magistrates and they be called Gods unto whom the Word of God came may we not say with greater Reason of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the World and in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily that he is God We grant That the Father is the true God we grant that God only is to be worshipped and served Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Therefore we must grant that the Son also is the true God since we are commanded to worship him and the same honour is given to him as to the Father which is seen by these words Let all the Angels of God worship him and by these of John Who hath committed all Judgment unto the Son that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father If then we be obliged to worship the God of Israel only if we be also commanded to give the same worship to the Son which we give to the Father or to the God of Israel it is necessary that we should believe that the Son is the God of Israel and consequently truly and properly God Which is seen clearly by these words of Austin upon those of St. John All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made Neque enim dicit omnia nisi quae facta sunt id est omnem Creaturam Vnde liquido patet ipsum factum non esse per quem facta sunt omnia si factus non est Creatura non est si autem Creatura non est ejusdem cum Patre substantiae est Omnis enim substantia quae Deus non est Creatura est quae Creatura non est Deus est Et si non est Filius ejusdem substantiae cujus est Pater ergo fact a substantia est si facta substantia est non omnia per ipsum facta sunt at omnia per ipsum fact a sunt unius igitur ejusdemque cum Patre substantiae est ideo non tantum Deus sed verus Deus That is For he doth not say all things but the things which are made to wit all Creatures From whence it appears clearly that he by whom all things were made was not made And if he was not made he is not a Creature if he be not a Creature he is of the same substance with the Father for every substance which is not God is a Creature and that which is not a Creature is God And if the Son be not of the same Substance with the Father then he is a Substance made if a Substance made all things were not made by him but all things were made by him therefore he is of the same Substance with the Father and consequently he is not only God but true God Which is confirmed by these words wherein he is said to exist before all things for if he was not true God he should be a Creature if a Creature we could not say that he is before all things because he who should have created him should have his Existence before him for every Creature supposes a Being antecedent from whom it hath received its Existence Since therefore he is said to be before all things it is because he is the true God for none but the true God can be said properly to be before all things every Creature having its Being of him and he neither hath nor can have his Existence from any thing whatsoever having it of himself from all Eternity Object The Church of England believes as an Article of Faith that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son and though they can make it appear that he proceeds from the Father from the words of St. John 15. 26. yet they cannot prove that he proceeds from the Son I answer as before to wit that these words the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son are not found distinctly in the holy Scripture but yet are inferr'd from it by clear and necessary Consequences So these words of Jesus Christ All things that the Father hath are mine and those of the 17. Chapter All mine are thine and thine are mine prove this evidently for if it be true as it is granted by all Divines viz. That all things that the Father hath the Son hath likewise the Relation of Paternity only excepted the Father producing the Holy Ghost it follows that the Son doth produce him also and consequently that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son as he proceeds from the Father This is manifested by these words of St. John It is expedient for you that I go away for if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you but if I depart part I will send him unto you And by that of the 15. When the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father For if ye suppose what ye do already believe and as I will make appear in the sequel of my Discourse viz. That the Holy Ghost is God as it is declared by the words of the 5th of the Acts To lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie unto God and as it appears by the essential Attributes of the Godhead ascribed unto him as the Sanctification of Souls and Omniscience For