you from the Father even the Spirit of Truth which proceedeth from the Father He shall testifie of Me. Where it is manifest that in what sense the Father and Son are to be reputed Persons the Comforter or Holy Ghost is in the same sense so to be reputed So that I think I have clearly Vindicated not only the Notion That these Three Somewhats may be One God But the Name also That these Somewhats may fitly be called Persons Objection VI. I shall name but one Objection more which when I have satisfied I shall conclude for this time That 6 th Objection and 't is but a weak one is this The Trinitarians do not all agree but differ among themselves in expressing their Notions in this Matter Very well And do not the Antitrinitarians differ much more Doth not the Arian and the Socinian differ as much from one another as either of them do from us and declare that they so do And do not the Arians among themselves and the Socinians amongst themselves differ more than do the Trinitarians Certainly they do It must be confessed that different Men as well in the same as in different Ages have very differently expressed themselves according to their different Sentiments of Personality and of the particular Distinctions of the three Persons among themselves But so it is in all the most obvious things in the world As in Time Place Space Motion and the like We are all apt to think that we all know well enough what we mean by those Words till we be asked But if we be put to it to express our selves concerning any of them What it is whether a Thing or Nothing or not a Thing or somewhat of a Thing and what that somewhat is it would be long enough before we should all agree to express our selves just in the same manner and so clearly as that no man who hath a mind to cavil could find occasion so to do I might say the like of Heat and Cold of Light Sight and Colour of Smells and Tâ—sts and the different Sorts of them Can we never be sâ—id to agree in this That the Fire doth Burn and Consume the Wooâ— till we be all agreed what is the Figure of those Fiery Atoms and what their Motion and from what Impulse which enter the Pores of â—he Wood and separate its parts and convert some of them to Smoak some to Flame and â—â—me to Ashes and which to which and in what manner all this is done What a folly then is it to require that in the things of God we should all so agree as to express our thoughts just in the same manner as is not possible to do in the most obvious things we meet with And in such a case as wherein to express our Notions we have no Words but Figurative it is not to be thought strange that one man should make use of one Metaphor and another of another according as their several Fansies serve But thus far I think the Orthodox are all agreed That between these Three which the Scripture calls The Father the Son and the Holy Ghost or the Father the Word and the Spirit there is a Dâ—stinction greater than that of what we call the Divine Attributes but not so as to be Three Gods And this Distinction they have thought fit to denote by the Word Hypostasis or Person They are also all agreed that one of these Persons namely the Son or the Word was Incarnate or Made Flesh and did take to himself our Humane Nature But as to the particular Modes or Manner How either how these two Natures are United or how these three Persons are Distinguished each from other we may be content to be Ignorant farther than God hath been pleased to Reveal to us We know that our Immortal Soul is joined with an Humane Body so as to make One Man without ceasing that to be a Spirit and this to be a Body But 't is hard for us to say How And accordingly we say that the Man Christ Jesus without ceasing to be Man and God manifested in the Flesh without ceasing to be God are One Christ But what kind of Union this is which we call Hypostatical we do not throughly understand We know also that the Father is said to Beget the Son to be Begotten the Holy Ghost to Proceed But neither do we fully understand the import of these Words nor is it needful that we should But so far as was said before we do all agree and we may safely rest there Now to God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost three Persons but One God be Honour and Glory and Praise now and for ever The End of the Second Sermon A Third SERMON Concerning the TRINITY JOH xvij 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is life eternal that they might know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent I Have in a former Discourse from this Verse entered upon the Doctrine of the Trinity not so much as being contained in it as occasioned by it I have shewed that the word Onely is here restrictive not of the Subject Thee but of the Predicate True God Affirming the Father to be the Onely True God though not the Father Onely Nor is it exclusive of the Son who is also the same True God and is so expresly called by this same Writer 1 Joh. 5.20 where speaking of Jesus Christ he says This is the True God and Eternal Life as if it were spoken with a direct aspect to the words before us Now that Christ is often called God neither the Arians nor the Socinians do deny And it is so frequent and so evident as not to be denyed Not only in the place last cited but in many others Thy throne O God endureth for ever Heb. 1.8 The Word was with God and the Word was God Joh. 1.1 My Lord and my God Joh. 20.28 The Being over all God blessed for ever Amen Or the Supreme Being the ever blessed God Rom. 9.5 And elsewhere Objection VII But to this they Object That though he be sometime called God yet by God is not there meant the Supreme God But either a mere Titular God as the Socinians will have it as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 8.5 one who is called God but indeed is not but a mere Man however highly dignified Or as the Arians will have it that he is God indeed but not the Supreme God not the same God with the Father but an Inferiour God Deus factus a made-God a Creature-God who was indeed before the World but not from Eternity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there was a Time a Moment a Quando when he was not when he had not a Being In Answer to both which I shall endeavour to shew by the most signal Characters whereby the Supreme God the Onely true God is set forth to us in Scripture and by which he is therein Distinguished from
mind to be captious may cavil at these places as the Sadduces of old did at those passages in the Old Testament tending to prove a Resurrection And not those only but even some of our own who would have us think that the Fathers before Christ had only Promises of Temporal blessings not of Heavenly and Eternal Though St. Paul tells us when of the hope and resurrection of the dead he was called in question that he did so worship the God of his Fathers believing all things which were written in the Law and the Prophets and had hope towards God which they also allowed that there should be a Resurrection of the dead both of the Just and Vnjust and that it was a promise made of God to their Fathers to which their twelve Tribes instantly serving God day and night hoped to come which were no other things than what Moses and the Prophets had said should come to pass and which to King Agrippa who if not a Jew was at least well acquainted with their Doctrines should not seem strange Act. 23.6 Act. 24.14 15. Act. 26.2 3 6 7 8 22. And Heb. 11.13 that all these died in faith not having received the promises that is they died in the belief of better things than what they had yet received But saw them afar off and were perswaded of them and embraced them and confessed they were but strangers and Pilgrims upon Earth And our Saviour proves it out of the Old Testament Mat. 22.32 by such an Argument as if one of us should have urged it would perhaps have been ridiculed I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob Now God is not the God of the dead but of the living And the Apostle pursues the same Argument Heb. 11.9 10 14 15 16. They sojourned in the Land of promise as in a strange Land dwelling in Tabernacles movable from place to place for they looked for a City which hath foundations a fixed City not flitting as were those Tabernacles whose builder and maker of God Declaring plainly that they did seek a Country Not such as that from whence they came but a better Country that is a Heavenly wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God for he hath prepared for them a City where he directly argues that God's Promise to be their God was a Promise of Heaven And no doubt but the Prophets and Men of God had taught them all along to put a Spiritual Sense upon those seemingly Temporal Promises though the Sadduces would not believe it but cavilled at it in so much that not only the Pharisees and Doctors of the Law but even the Women embraced it even before Christ's Resurrection I know saith Martha of her dead Brother Lazarus that he shall Rise again in the Resurrection at the last day Joh. 11.24 And of such Spiritual Senses we have copious Instances in the Epistle to the Hebrews and elsewhere frequently And as they did without any reluctances readily embrace the Doctrine of the Resurrection when more clearly declared by the Apostles as a thing not wholly new to them so neither do we find in them any Reluctance to that of the Trinity for which in likelihood they had in like manner been before prepared but readily closed with the Form of Baptism in the Name not Names of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Mat. 28.19 And that Solemn Benediction 2 Cor. 13.14 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the Communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all Amen Where we have all the Three Persons reckoned together as they are also in that celebrated place 1 Joh. 5.7 The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost these Three are One. And as they had been before by Christ himself Joh. 14.26 The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in My Name He shall teach you all things And Joh. 15.26 The Comforter whom I will send unto you from the Father even the Spirit of truth which Proceedeth from the Father He shall testify of Me. And to name no more places Mat. 3.16 17. Jesus when he was baptized went straitway out of the Water And lo the heavâ—ns were opened unto him and he John the Baptist saw the Spirit of God descending like a Dove and lighting upon Him And lo a voice from heaven saying This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased 4. There is yet another Consideration which doth confirm this opinion that the Doctrine of the Trinity was not unknown to the Jewish Church before Christ From the footsteps thereof yet extant in Heathen Writers 'T is well known to those conversant in such Studies that much of the Heathen Learning their Philosophy Theology and Mythology was borrowed from the Jews though much Disguised and sometimes Ridiculed by them Which things though they be Fabulous as disguised in a Romantick dress yet they are good Evidence that there was a Truth in History which gave occasion to those Fables None doubts but Ovid's Fable of the Chaos of which all things were made took its rise from Moses's History of the Creation And Deucalion's Flood from that of Noah and the Titan's fighting against the Gods from the Builders of Babel's Tower And that of Two-faced Janus from Noah's looking backward forward to the World before and since the Flood And many the like of which we may see in Natalis Comes in Bochartus and others And of which we have a large Collection in Theophilus Gale's Court of the Gentiles And in Dr. Duport's Gnomologia Homerica wherein is a Collection of Homer's Sayings which look like Allusions to like Passages in Sacred Scripture and seem to be borrowed most of them from those Books of it which were written before Homer's time who yet is one of the most Ancient and most Famed of Heathen Writers Plato hath borrowed so much of his Philosophy History and Theology from the Jewish learning as that he hath obtained the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moses disguised in a Greek dress And may seem because the name of Jews was odious to cite them rather by the names of certain Barbarians Syrians Phoenicians Egyptians c. From that Title of God in Exodus I AM 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or from the Equivalent names of Jah and Jehovah he borrows his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Being or that which Is the very Being the true Being which are the Titles he gives to the Supreme God For his Immortality of the Soul he reckons the best Argument to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Divine Revelation which he had by Tradition from certain Ancients who lived as he speaks nearer to the Gods as if he had borrowed even this Phrase from Deut. 4.7 What nation is so great who hath God so Nigh unto them And much more as hath been noted by others And I am so far from thinking as the Socinians would have us
and united by the Heavenly Sacraments can be separated in the Church Where he argues for the Unity of the Church not to be divided by Schism by two Arguments from this place One from the firm Unity of God noted in ver 7. The Father Son and Holy Ghost are One from whom this Church proceeds de divina firmitate venientem The other from their being United by the same Sacraments sacramentis coelestibus cohaerentem which relates to ver 8. The Spirit the Water and the Bloud agree in One. Which double Argument from the two Verses shew that then they were both read And as to the former of them which is that in question He cites it again in his Epistola ad Jubaianum where disputing against Baptâ—sm by Hereticks he thus argues Si baptizari quis apud Haereticos potuit utique remissam peccatorum consequi potuit Si peccatorum remissam consecutus est sanctificaâ—us est templum Dei factus est Quaero Cujus Dei Si Creatoris non potuit qui in eum non credidit Si Christi nec hujus potuit fieri templum qui negat Deum Christum Si Spiritus Sancti cum tres Unum sint quomodo Spiritus Sanctus placatus esse ei potest qui aut Patris aut Fiâ—ii inimicus est That is If by Hereticks one could be baptized then he might obtain remission of sins If he obtain remission of sins then is he sanctified and become the Temple of God I ask then of What God Of the Creator that he cannot be who did not in Him believe Of Christ Neither can he be His Temple who denies Christ to be God Of the Holy Ghost No. Foâ— seeing these Three are One How can the Holy Ghost be at Peace with him who is at Enmity with either the Father or the Son 'T is manifest therefore that These Three are One was thus read in Cyprian's time as being by him twice cited before the Arian Controversie was on foot And before him it is cited by Tertullian in his Book adversus Praxeam cap. 25. Connexus Patris in Filio Filii in Paracleto tres efficit cohaerentes alterum ex altero qui Tres Unum sunt non Unus quomodo dictum est Ego Pater Unum sumus ad Substantiae Unitatem non ad Numeri Singularitatem Where he doth not only cite the place but doth likewise Parallel and Compare These Three are One in this place with I and the Father are One in the other place as being of a like import That is The Connexion of the Father with the Son and of the Son with the Paraclete or Holy Ghost makes these coherent one with the other Which Three are ONE Unum not Unus One Thing not One Person like as it is said I and the Father are One one Thing as to the Unity of Substance though not as to Singularity of Number They are One Being One Substance though otherwise they may be Three 'T is therefore no New Interpolation but was anciently so read by Cyprian and Tertullian the two most ancient of the Latin Fathers long before the Arian Controversie was on foot And hath been urged by others afterward against the Arians Nor is there any prejudice that I know of against its being so read as now we read it save that some of the Fathers it is said have omitted to Urge it against the Arians when there hath been occasion of so doing But this beside that it is onely a Negative Argument and I know not how well grounded might very well happen if it chanced to be wanting in that particular Copy which such Father used For we are not to suppose they had then such plenty of Bibles as are now in our hands but some one Manuscript Copy was to serve many And because that in St. John's Gospel I and the Father are One did fit their purpose as well or rather better than this in his Epistle These Three are One. For the Controversie then on foot was not so much that of the Trinity as that of the Divinity of Christ. To return therefore to the place which is before us From what hath been said it is manifest enough that St. John in calling the Father the Onely True God did not intend to exclude the Son from being the same True God whom himself doth elsewhere call the True God also 1 Joh. 5.20 No more I say than what is said by name of God the Redeemer Isa. 44.6 8. is to be thought exclusive of God the Creator or God the Father Thus saith the Lord the REDEEMER the Lord of Hosts I am the first and I am the last and beside ME there is no God Which is applied to Christ in particular Rev. 22 1â— 16. But is not exclusive of the Father because God the Creator or God the Father is the same God with God the Redeemer and therefore not another God beside him And therefore both of them or rather the same God under both Considerations indifferently called especially in the Old Testament God indefinitely the Lord of Hosts the Holy One of Israel Nor is that which is said of Christ 1 Tim. 6.14 15 16. Our Lord Jesus Christ who Onely hath Immortality intended to exclude the Father as if the Father were not also Immortal or were not what is there said of Christ the blessed and onely Potentate the King of kings and the Lord of lords But only that our Lord Jesus Christ is that God which God is the blessed and onely Potentate the King of kings and Lord of lords and who only hath Immortality And as was before noted by S. Austin The Father is not excluded from being Lord notwithstanding that of 1 Cor. 8.6 To us there is but One God the Father and One Lord Jesus Christ or that of Eph. 4.5 6. One Lord one Faith One Baptism one God and Father of all For the Father and the Son are the same God the same Lord. The same of whom it is said Isa. 45.5 I am the Lord and there is none else there is no God beside me And again ver 6. I am the Lord and there is none else Where note that the Word Father in that phrase God and Father of All is different from the sense of it in the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that relating to the common Nature this to the Person And as in these places what is saâ—d of the Son that he onely hath Immortality that he is the onely Potentate that he is the One Lord that beside him the Redeemer there is no God are not to be understood exclusive of the Father so what is here said of the Father that he is the Onely True God is not to be understood exclusive of the Son who is not another but the same True God I thought here to have inserted as in a proper place a Discourse of some other Points relating to the Trinity which I find it necessary here to omit or to defer
days and three nights in the Whale's belly when brought as an Argument to prove our Saviour ought so long to lie in the Grave But St. Paul tells us 1 Cor. 15.3 4. that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and that he rose again the Third day according to the Scriptures And Christ in like manner Luk. 24.46 Yet I know not any thing more clear to that purpose in the Scriptures of the Old Testament than either this of Jonah's being so long in the Whale's belly to which Christ himself alludes Mat. 12.40 or that of Hos. 6.2 After two days he will revive us and the third day he will raise us up Which seems not to be more express for the Resurrection of Christ on the Third day than this of Jonah But such covert Intimations there are in the Old Testament of things afterward more clearly discovered in the New Nor was this unknown to the ancient Jewish Doctors as appears by what Ainsworth in his Notes on Gen. 1. cites from thence out of R. Simeon Ben Jochai in Zoar Come see the Mystery of the word Elohim there are three Degrees and every Degree by it self Distinct and yet notwithstanding they are all one and joined together in One and are not divided one from another only there he calls Degrees what we now call Persons So that it was not unknown to the Jews of old whatever the present Jews think of it 3. What these Three are the Father the Word and the Spirit seems to be likewise intimated in the Story of the Creation Gen. 1. where they seem to be distinctly named In the beginning Elohim God created the Heaven and the Earth ver 1. where no man doubts but God the Father is implied though perhaps not He only And ver 2. The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters Where Ainsworth tells us from the ancient Rabbines whom he cites they call him The Spirit of Mercies from before the Lord The Spirit of Wisdom called the Spirit of the Living God And The Spirit of the Messias Of the same Spirit we have elsewhere mention My Spirit shall not always strive with Man Gen. 6.3 Take not thine Holy Spirit from me Psal. 51.11 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me Isai. 61.1 They vexed his Holy Spirit Isai. 63.10 and elsewhere And if it be said that by the Spirit of God is meant God himself we say so too for we do acknowledge that the Holy Ghost is God himself And of the Word there is a like intimation ver 3. God Said or spake the Word Let there be Light and there was Light And in like manner ver 6 9 11.14 20. God Said Let there be a Firmament c. So Psal. 33.6 7. By the Word of the Lord were the Heavens made c. He Spake and it was done He Commanded and it stood fast And Psal. 148.5 He Spake the Word and they were made He commanded and they were created Consonant to that of Heb. 11.3 By faith we understand that the Worlds were made by the Word of God And 1 Pet. 3.5 7. By the Word of God the Heavens were of old and the Earth c. And by the same Word they are kept in store or preserved In which places by the Word so often mentioned and with such Emphasis put upon it seems to be meant that Word mentioned Joh. 1.1 3 10. In the beginning was the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things were made by Him The World was made by Him just as in Heb. 11.3 the Worlds were made by the Word of God Nor was this notion of the Word Personally taken unknown to the Jewish Doctors For what we have Psal. 110.1 The Lord said unto my Lord Dixit Jehova Domino meo the Chaldee Paraphrase renders by Dixit Jehova Bemeimreh in Verbo suo meaning by His Word the Messias and of whom our Saviour himself expounds it Mat. 22.44 And it is frequent in that Paraphrase by the Word to design the Messias as S. Joh. doth Joh. 1.1 In the beginning was the Word And I put the more weight upon this because as here Gen. 1.2 3. so we have in several other places the Word and Spirit mentioned as concerned in the Creation Psal. 33.6 By the Word of the LORD Jehovah were the Heavens made and all the Hosts of them by the Spirit or breath of his mouth Berwach Where we have Jehovah his Word and Spirit Job 26.12 13. He divideth the Sea by his Power and by his Wisdom or Vnderstanding he smiteth through the proud By his Spirit he garnisheth the Heavens his Hand hath formed the crooked Serpent Where we have the Power of God the Wisdom of God and the Spirit of God And Job 33.4 â—he Spirit of God hath made me and the Breath of tâ—e Lord hath given me Life So Psal. 104.24 30. O LORD Jehovah how wonderful are thy Works in VVisdom thou hast made them all Thou sendest forth thy Spirit they are created and thou renewest the face of the Earth And it is not amiss here to take notice that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies as well ratio as oratio so Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Word of God and the Wisdom of God And as in Joh. 1.1 3 10. it is said of the Word that in the beginning was the Word all things were made by Him and the World was made by him And Heb. 11.3 The Worlds were framed by the Word of God So the same is said of Wisdom Prov. 3.19 The LORD by VVisdom hath formed the Earth by Vnderstanding hath he established the Heavens And Prov. 8.22 c. The LORD possessed me Wisdom in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting from the beginning ere ever the Earth was When he prepared the Heavens I was there When he established the Clouds above When he strengthened the Fountains of the deep When he appointed the Foundations of the Earth then was I by him c. And accordingly the Holy Ghost is called the Power of God Luk. 1.35 The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the Power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee And 1 Pet. 1.5 Who are kept by the Power of God through Faith unto Salvation which doubtless is not without the operation of the Holy Ghost working and preserving faith in us Suitably hereunto God's Power and Wisdom are oft conjoyned He is Wise in Heart and Mighty in Strength Job 9.4 c. He is excellent in Power and in Judgment Job 37.13 But without laying too great a stress on every particular there seems a foundation clear enough to consider the Word of God and the Spirit of God as clearly distinguishable even in the great Work of Creation and that the holy Writers even in the Old Testament have considered them as distinct and that even the Jewish Writers have owned them as such I know very well that those who have a
Creature And in imitation of them some others have since so used it But this is a New sense of later Ages since the time of those Fathers nor do the Schoolmen in this sense without a Metaphor apply it to the Sacred Trinity We cannot therefore conclude from hence What was the Fathers sense of it 4. To find out therefore the true sense of tâ—e word Person as applied to the Trinity we are not so much to consider what now-a-days the word doth sometime signifie with us in English nor what sense the Schoolmen have put upon it since the time of those Fathers As what was the true sense of the word Persona at or before their times in approved Latin Authours Which is quite another thing from either of these senses For what in English we sometimes mean by Three Persons taken indifferently for Men Women and Children the Latins would not have called tres Personas but tres Homines Though if considered in such Relations as Father Mother and Child they might so be called tres Personae Nor do I find that in approved Latin Authours the word Persona was wont to be attributed by them as by the Schoolmen it hath since been to Angels nor to their Genii or Heathen Gods But 5. It did signifie the State Quality or Condition of a Man as he stands Related to other Men. And so I find the Latin word Persona Englished in our Dictionaries Suppose as a King a Subject a Father a Son a Neighbour a Publick or Private Person a Person of Honour and the like And so as the Condition varied the Person varied also though the same Man remained As if an ordinary Person be first made a Knight and then a Lord the Person or Condition is varied but he is still the same Man that he was before And he that is this Year a Lord Mayor may be next Year but an Alderman or not so much Hence are those Latin Phrases frequent in approved Authours Personam imponere to put a Man into an Office or confer a Dignity upon him Induere personam to take upon him the Office Sustinere personam to Bear an Office or Execute an Office Deponere personam to Resign the Office or lay it down so Agere personam to Act a Person and many the like So that there is nothing of Contradiction nothing of Inconsistence nothing Absurd or Strange in it for the same Man to sustain divers Persons either successively or at the same Time or divers Persons to meet in the same Man according to the true and proper Notion of the word Person A Man may at the same time sustain the Person of a King and of a Father if invested with Regal and Paternal Authority and these Authorities may be Subordinate one to another and he may accordingly Act sometime as a King and sometime as a Father Thus Tully who well understood the Propriety of Latin words Sustineo Unus tres Personas meam Adversarii Judicis I being One and the same Man sustain Three Persons That of my Own that of my Adversary and that of the Judge And David was at the same time Son of Jesse Father of Solomon and King of Israel And this takes away the very Foundation of their Objection Which proceeds upon this Mistake as if Three Persons in a proper sense must needs imply Three Men. 6. Now if Three Persons in the proper sense of the word Person may be One Man what hinders but that Three Divine Persons in a sense Metaphorical may be One God What hinders but that the same God considered as the Maker and Sovereign of all the World may be God the Creator or God the Father and the same God considered as to his special Care of Mankind as the Ruthour of our Redemption be God the Redeemer or God the Son and the same God as working effectually on the Hearts of his Elect be God the Sanctifier or God the Holy-Ghost And what hinders but that the same God distinguished according to these three Considerations may fitly be said to be Three Persons Or if the word Person do not please Three Somewhats that are but One God And this seems to me a Full and Clear Solution of that Objection which they would have to be thought Insuperable Objection V. It may perhaps be Objected further Why must we needs make use of the word Person and call them Three Persons if Three Somewhats will serve as well I answer First We have no such need of the word Person but that we can spare it Hypostasis will serve our turn as well And if they think the Latin word Persona be not a good Translation of the Greek Hypostasis Let them retain the Greek word We mean the same by both And then perhaps they will find themselves at a loss to fasten some of their Objections upon the word Hypostasis which they would fasten upon Persona 2. But Secondly If the Thing be thus far agreed That these Three Somewhats thus considered may be One God I see not why they should contend with us about the Name Person For this is only to quarrel about a Word or Name when the Notion is agreed 3. If it were admitted which I see no reason for that the word Person doth not fitly express that Notion which it is intended to design the most that can be inferred from it is but That we have not given it so fit a Name And to cavil at that when the Notion intended by it is understood were just as if one should argue There never was such a Man as whom they called Pope Pius because the Man who was so called was not a Pious Man 4. But I see not why the word Person should not be thought a very fit word for this purpose For Two of these Three are represented to us in Scripture under the Names of Father and Son and this Son as Begotten of the Father and therefore these Names are not to be quarrelled with But all this in a Metaphorical sense For no Man can suppose that this Father doth so Beget this Son as these words do properly signifie amongst Men Now the Relations of Father and Son in a proper sense are such as are properly denoted by the word Persona in its proper Acceptation And consequently the Father and Son in a Metaphorical sense may by a Continuation of the same Metaphor be fitly called Persons in that Metaphorical sense And in what sense they be Father and Son in a like sense they be Persons according to the Propriety of the Latin word Persona For such Relatives the Latins called Personas And if the Father and Son may fitly be so called no doubt but the Holy Ghost may be so called also as One Proceeding or Coming forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from them As in Joh. 14.26 The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in My name he will teach you all things And Joh. 15.26 The Comforter whom I will send