Imperfection or Dependence in Being and all the â—orts of other Priorities but that of Origin 't is impossible to conceive that either of them should be Imperfect or Dependent on the other Again since it is equally Essential to GOD to be Known as it is to Know and GOD cannot be Known without a Knower if this Method of Objecting were Allowable where both are Infinite we might with Equal Reason say That the First Person who is the Divine Object Known depends on the Second as that the Second who is Divine Knowledge depends on the First 'T is a Common Maxim That Relationes mutuo se ponunt auferunt and yet neither of them is said to be Dependent on the Other since Mutual Dependence as to the Same Common Notion is direct Nonsence But the main point is that this Principiation or Origination does not formally respect the DEITY it self or the Common Suppositum any more in One than in the Other but only the DEITY as Related that is the Divine Personalities wherefore the Relation by Prelim. X. XI not being really Distinguisht from but Identify'd with the Ground of Referring cannot out of their formal Notion add any New Perfection unto it especially since the Common Suppositum exprest by the Absolute word GOD which is the Ground of all the Divine Relations has in it the whole Perfection of them All. 8. From this Discourse we see how the Trinity is in the Unity because the Ground of all these Relations that is the Relations themselves and consequently all the Three Persons which are constituted by those Relations are in that One Deity or in the Unity of the Godhead and withall how the Unity of the GODHEAD is in the Trinity of Persons because one and the same Divine Nature is in them all as is evident from these very Terms GOD Knows and Loves Himself Which tho' Mysterious to the Rude and Unelevated Conceptions of Vulgar Discoursers is notwithstanding as has been shown if we take each single consideration of it asunder by our Abstractive or Natural way of conceiving and discourse upon each of them distinctly or as thus aparted is perfectly Consonant to Reason working upon our Natural Notions 9. We come next to consider by what Names this First and Second Person the Divine Nature Known and Knower are to be call'd In order to which we lay these Positions viz. That GOD who is in them both is Living or rather Essentially Life and consequently those two Persons in whom the Godhead is must be Living also Next Knowledge cannot be otherwise conceiv'd but to come or as we use to say prâ—ceed from the Object and therefore the Second Person must proceed from the First Thirdly The Divinity communicates it's own Nature to the Knower as appears by the words Knows himself and also by Reason for otherwise we could not say It is Known if It were not in the Knowledge or Câ—njoyn'd with it Spiritually or intellectually Now if we spell these necessary Truths together all which are imply'd in these words GOD Knows Himself we shall find they compound and not barely imply but fully express that the Definition of a SON is appropriated to the Second Person viz. That He is a Living Person Proceeding from a Living Person whose Nature is of the same Kind as the others and is Conjoyn'd with him or remains in him whence follows that His Correlate must properly and necessarily be call'd a FATHER and lastly that the Procession of Him from His Father can therefore have no other Notion or Word which we have that can â—it it but that of GENERATION 10. Hence it is that Knowledge is Appropriated to the Second Person the SON for which reason He particularly took our Flesh upon Him and came to be our Master and to instruct us in His Holy Law Hence He is call'd Sapientia Patris or Verbum because Knowing does intellectually speak or express the Divine Nature Known by Him as our Conception or Verbum Mentis does the Thing or Truth we conceive Hence He is truly said to be Deus de Deo Lumen de Lumine Deus verus de Deo vero Because the Common Suppositum the GODHEAD is in both and the Divine Nature as He is precisely a Knower is Originiz'd from it self as it 's own Object Hence lastly Because of the Common Nature in both and the Proceeding of One from the Other He is call'd Imago Patris Figura Substantiae ejus c. All which and many other such Expressions are exactly verify'd by the Principles here laid and our Consonant Deductions from them 11. Since then the Notion of Father and Son aâ—e truly attributed to the Common Suppositum exprest by the Absolute word GOD it is not only Fitting but Necessary that those Notions should be the most perfectly such as is Possible to be imagin'd Wherefore since Sons amongst us do proceed from their Fathers according to Specifical Likeness in Nature it is most becoming GOD's Infinite Perfection and His most ultimately Determih'd Essence that is indeed the most Perfect Unity of the GODHEAD it self that His Coeternal Son should proceed from His Eternal Father according to the most Perfect IDENTITY of Nature that can be conceiv'd that is according to the self-same Numerical Nature Wherefore this Divine Procession ought not to be explicated by Analogy to the Specifical Nature of Man and it 's being Common to more Individuals For the Species does necessarily imply some Potentiality tho' the Genus does more and is Determinable as was said by Differences which are Intrinâ—â—cal in the Line of Ens and therefore as was prov'd do constitute formally more Entia that is more Things which have diverse Essences all which is Inconsistent with the Divine Nature Nor ought any Composition of such Superiour or Potential Notions be Transferr'd to GOD. And much less since the Common Suppositum however it be predicated of more Particulars in the Manner explicated above has in it self by virtue of it's own Infinite Self-Existence the utmost Perfection in the Line of Substance and is by reason of it's Purest Actuality more perfectly One Singular Absolute Being than any Suppositum or Individuum is or can be amongst us Creatures 12. And the same partly for the same reason is Mutatis Mutandis to be said of the Third Particular verify'd of GOD or of the Third Person of the most B. Trinity For since it must be granted that GOD Loves Himself and the word Himself in the Predicate of that Proposition signifies the same as the word GOD which is the Subject of it 't is as Evident that the Divine Nature Loving is the same with the Divine Nature Loved as it is that GOD is GOD. But besides that this is Evident from the very Terms or the plain Sense of Words there is Another very Peculiar Reason springing out of the particular Nature of LOVE which according to our Natural and Vulgar Notions by which we are here to guide our selves signifies
to which that Common Notion is Apply'd Secondly Whether these Particulars are not Three and no more Thirdly Whether those Three Particulars are not most fitly call'd Persons Fourthly Whether those Three Persons be not most fitly to be call'd Father Son and H. Spirit Fifthly and Lastly Whether the Divine Nature notwithstanding this Plurality of Persons is not still Perfectly and Equally One in Nature or rather more that is under more Respects One in it's self than it would have been in case this Plurality of Persons had been secluded Now if it shall appear by our Explication that the Affirmative of all these is Consonant to Reason working upon our Natural Notions stript of their Imperfections and as such Transferr'd to GOD I hope it will satisfie Dissenters comfort the Faith of those who Believe already and convince every Intelligent Reader that nothing can with true Reason be objected against this Divine Mystery SECT III. The Terms or Words of which we make use in this Explication clear'd from Ambiguity 1. BY the word GOD is meant a most Actual and Self-Subsistent Being Infinite in His Nature and all it's Attributes 2. By the words Divine Nature we understand the same Infinitely Perfect Being But we are to mind the Reader once more of that which cannot be too often inculcated viz. That in all Creatures for Example in Man there is found what answers to diverse Notions in the Line of Substance of which one is more Perfect or Imperfect than Another For an Individual Man conceiv'd precisely under the Superiour Notions of Ens Corpus Mixtum Vivens Animal and Homo signifies only some Common and Inadequate Notion of Him whence nothing in Common being able to Exist but only Singulars as Peter Paul c. hence all those Former are Imperfect in the Line of Ens which signifies Capable of Existing Yet even these Singular or Individual Entities tho' we should allow them in some sort to Exist have not thence all the Completion or Perfection imaginable in that Line for a Thing may be Capable to Exist and yet not Capable to exist Alone or without the Support of Another which we call Subsisting To be Subsistent then which in Intelligent Things we call to be a PERSON being the most Perfect Notion of Ens must be attributed to the Divine Essence or Nature tho' the word Essence does not express it but rather signifies aâ—ter the manner of a kind of meer Form Otherwise the Divine Nature would be conceiv'd to want something which according to our Natural Notions is the utmost Perfection in the Line of Being which is impossible to be thought or said of GOD. who is Infinitely Perfect in Being 3. By the word Father I mean one Particular who communicates the Nature of which Himself is to Another Particular And by Son Him to whom that Nature is thus Communicated but that he does or does not Communicate the same Individual Nature or that he is Before his Son in Time and other Considerations arising from Matter spring from the Imperfection and Limitedness of Creatures and therefore they are not to be Transferr'd to GOD Nor are they Essential to the Notions of Father and Son as will be plain to any Man who reflects that if per impossible a Man did communicate his Individual Nature to Another and that Other had it thus Communicated from him and this Instantaneously he would not in that Supposition be therefore less a Father but more perfectly such because the Nature Communicated is more perfectly the Same Nor do Sooner or Later Instantaneous or Not-Instantaneous enter into the precise Notion of Father and Son as appears from the Definition of Generation which abstracts from all those Considerations Moreover 't is most Evident that in such a case the Person who Communicates his Individual Nature and He to whom 't is Communicated would have hence some very neer Relation to one another and what imaginable Relation could it be but that of Father and Son 4. I take the word Generation in the Sense of that Exact and Received Definition viz. Processio Viventis a Vivente tanquam a Principio Conjuncto in Similitudinem Naturae which I shall show is perfectly Verify'd in the Procession of the Eternal Word All other Considerations are Extrinsecal and Forrein to the Notion of Generation as may be gather'd from § 3. and therefore do not belong to it's precise Notion but spring from the Imperfection of Creatures nor consequently as such ought they be Transferr'd to GOD. 5. The word Person signifies Perseity as some Schoolmen explicate it or what 's so Subsistent of it self or by the merits of it's own Notion or Expression that it needs no other Formal Notion to compleat it nor Word to express it better The Etymology of that word if such a Consideration and not rather the Common Use of it only be much to be regarded seems to be this that as we say a Speech is Dissona when it varies from another in Sense and Consona when it agrees to it So a Thing is call'd Persona when it thorowly or perfectly sounds or speaks the Notion of Ens or expresses the utmost Completion of a Thing under the Notion of an Intelligent Being See § 2. 6. Subsistent and Suppositum signifie the same and are appliable to all Beings whatever whether they be Intelligent that is Persons or no and express their last Completion in the Line of Ens in their several Kinds The Notion of the former seems more to respect it's self or it 's own Absoluteness in the Line of Being The Notion of the Later regards the Nature or the Accidents â—hich it sustains in our Mind or as conceiv'd by â—… The Literal meaning of which kind of Sayâ—ng is That we making diverse Conceptions of â—he same Thing the Formal Conception of the â—â—ture or of it's Modes is not that Formal Conception of a Thing Existing Alone without needing any other farther Notion in our Mind or any other Word to mean or signifie it's standing thus Alone or without Dependency on any other Created Notiâ—â— to compleat or make out that Full Sense Notwithstanding that the Notions of Subsistent â—nd Suppositum do bear such a nice Distinction â—â—â— in regard that which sustains another must 〈…〉 supposed able to subsist of it self hence they â—… not without reason promiscuously used The Explication of the rest of those words of which we shall have occasion to make use will I conceive come in more seasonably in their â—roper Places SECT IV. That the Divine Nature does Verifie some One Notion that is some way Common and some Others that are Particulars 1. SInce all Explications as well as Arguments are to be taken from the Nature of the Thing 〈…〉 from the Subject to be Explicated as being in â—â—ality nothing else but the Unfolding that Nature and the laying open what with a Deep Inspection we discover to be included in it or to belong to it Intrinsecally and since the Nature
other way nor any other Notion according to which it can be conceiv'd to be Particulariz'd or Distinguisht but that of Relation the formal Notion of which is Ad Aliquid or some way or other Ad Aliud by which too we have seen GOD's Knowing and Loving Himself obliges us to distinguish Him whence follows that the Divine Nature is Distinguisht Relatiuely Nor does this Notion multiply the Common Nature Essentially as did the former way which distinguisht the Common Notion by Essential Differences Both because the Relation by Prelim. X. and XI is not Distinguisht from the Divine Essence it self which is the Reason and Ground of Referring it diversely as also because it springs from a most High Perfection in GOD as He is a Spirit I add and terminates also in a High Perfection under the Notion of Being viz. in that of Personality or Person In a word 't is the Divine Essence which is Distinguisht or Particulariz'd there being nothing else in GOD to be Distinguisht Yet it is not Distinguisht Essentially or according to the precise Notion of Essence or Being but Relatively because it is Infinite in Being and so can be in that Absolute Reâ—â—ct but One. 8. For the same Reason I avoid using the word â—â—dividuum tho' I do not blame others that do â—erhaps I am too scrupulous in it yet I cannot â—â—t think 't is something liable to exception at â—ast comparatively My Reasons are First 'T is â—â—o Logical and Artificial and consequently tho' it has got I know not how out of the Schools into the Language of some well-bred Men to say 't is the same Individual Man yet for all that it is not the Vulgar Speech nor so Natural Secondly Because it is made Particularly such by it's Difference too viz. by the Complexion of it's Accidents and subsuming under the Specifick Notion 't is only a Negation of the Superiour Notions and signifies the same as Ungenerical or Unspecifical Whereas the Word Person has a Positive Signification nor has any reference to the Genus and Species as is seen in Angels And moreover it directly imports the highest Perfection in the Line of Substance and therefore it is fitly Transferrible to GOD. Again the word Individuum being a Logical Term is more subject to wrangle For Artists being the Imposers and as it were Creators of the Words which themselves use and such Men seldom Agreeing in their Thoughts and Meanings nor consenting universally that such a word shall stand for such a Meaning or Notion it happens that some of them do take the Word in one Sense others in another and very frequently ampliate or restrain the Signification of it at pleasure Hence perpetual and if this Inconvenience be not remedy'd by Clear Definitions of such Words Eternal Dissentions must needs ensue And indeed most of the Liâ—igâ—â—â— Disputes and Controversies among Learned Mâ—â— in case the Contesters be Sincere and Disintereâ—â—ed do arise from this Defect now mention'd Froâ— which mischief the Words us'd by the Generalâ—â— to express our Natural Notions are Free for we find by Experience that the Vulgar understand one another very well and easily nor are subject to perpetual Word-skirmishes in their Common Conversation as the Others are 9. Nor can it be inferr'd from this Explication that by the same reason there would be a Trinity of Persons in Angels and Souls Separated when they Know and Love themselves For Self-Knowledge formally consisting in this that the Thing known does Inexist in it's own Knowing Power as an Object or after an Intellectual manner and the Existence and consequently Inexistence of all Creatures being Extrinsecal oâ— Acoidental to them as being given them by Another and not Essential to them or their very Essence as it is in GOD it being one of his Peculiar Attributes Hence iâ— follows that the Relation of Knower and Known is in them Accidental to them as being Grounded on what 's Accidental to their Essences and consequently by Prelim. X. is Identify'd with the Object accidentally only Whence it can make only an Accidental Distinction in them and not a Distinction in their Substance or a Distinction of that most perfect Substantial Notion Person as for the contrary reason it must make in GOD. Add that GOD's Self-Knowledge is properly and perfectly Essential to Him as He is an Infinite Spirit and as it were his Primary Operation by which according to our manner of Conceiving he is Constituted such or rather 〈…〉 Eâ—â—ence as He is a Spirit does consist in it â—â—ereas in Angels and Souls the Knowing the â—…le Extent of Entity and even GOD Himself 〈…〉 the Primary Operation for which Nature inâ—â—nded them and to Know themselves was only 〈◊〉 Means or First-Step to bring them to the â—nowledge of all other Things and thence of GOD And therefore Self-Knowledge is far from being their Primary Operation or that by respect â—o which their Essence was Constituted nor consequently can it distinguish their Substance as it does and must in GOD. 10. Nor lastly can it be thought that the Common Suppositum having all Perfections that can â—â— in the Line of Being and therefore amongst the rest Personality in it does constitute a Fourth Person for since GOD or the Common Suppositum as has been shown is Common to the three Relative Persons or in them all it carries along with it all the Perfections of the Divinity and among the rest the Personality too and communicates it to the Relative Persons as it does all the other Positive or Absolute Perfections in the Godhead Whence they have all of them to subsist or Absolutely to be Persons from the Godhead or the Common Suppositum and that they are Different Persons comes wholly and solely from their Distinct Relations as was prov'd above So that there is no show that the Common Suppositum can make a Fourth or Distinct Person since what 's Common to All or each cannot be Particular or Contradistinguisht to any Nor is there any Opposition of the Common Person to the Relative ones both because it has an Absolute and not a Relative Notion as also because it is so far from being Opposite that it is coincident with them all or with each of them SECT VII That this Distinction of Three Persons puts no Imperfection in the Divine Nature and that they are most-â—itly call'd the Father Son and Holy Spirit 1. GOD being the Author of Order and not of Confusion 't is most worthy His Divine Nature and most Consonant to True Reason that there should be some Order amongst those Threâ— Divine Persons and some Solid Ground for that Order And since all Order amongst More must begin from some One or some First it follows that there must be some One amongst them which is the First or Beginning of that Order and that therefore the Notion of the word Beginning must be Transferr'd to GOD or be Peculiar to some One of those Persons who is GOD provided it can be done
What Soul tho' never so Wicked and Senseless who with a full consideration lays this to Heart will not melt with Love at such a Transcendent Mercy to a Sinful World Who can chuse but be Astonisht even to an Extasie at such a Generous Goodness Who can be so Ungrateful as wilfully to offend and disoblige so kind a Benefactor Who will not tremble at the Iustice of so Pure a GOD and reflect on the Hatred he bears to Sin who punisht it so severely in his own Son who had taken upon Him to bear the Curse of it What heart would not break in the midst of all Temptations rather than Crucifie again so dear a Saviour Who would stick to pardon an Enemy for his sake who had not only pardon'd us while we were his Enemies but moreover heapt all the â—â—â—â—est Benefits of his Mercy upon us even while we were such tho' it cost him so dear Who would not Love and Hope in such an Indulgent Father who so tenderly lov'd us and a Suffering GOD who at the Infinite Expence of His most Precious Blood Redeem'd us and in Both of them who to Crown all their Favours sent the Holy Ghost GOD Coequal with themselves to Sanctifie with a thousand Blessed Effects the Hearts of the Faithful to strengthen them in Afflictions and Temptations to inspire them with Charity the Source of all heavenly Virtues to the end of the World and to dwell spiritually in our Hearts for ever 5. Here are Motives of another kind of size than either the Law of Nature or the Empty Elements of the Mosaick Law could afford us or even give us a glimpse of Here are Means of raising Souls effectually to Love of Heaven in comparison of which all the rest are Flat and Dull and in comparison Trifles or rather meer Nothing Yet these Men who would bereave the World of these by Denying the Mystery of the B. Trinity on which all these are grounded expect they should be kindly treated as Brethren while they for their Whimsies of Fancy bereave all the Faithful in GOD's Church of these highest Spiritual Advantages which every sensible Man cannot but see would both dispose them strongly for Heaven and bring to Salvation innumerably more Souls and advance those who do go thither to higher Degrees of Bliss and make them more Glorious Stars in the Firmament of the Heavenly Hierusalem What I wonder at is That these Gentlemen do not plant their Batteries against the Belief of the B. Trinity upon the Incredibility of such wonderful Condescensions and as they might pretend Debasements of thâ— DEITY than against the Speculative Truth of the Point it self None of those Prodigious Mercies but transcend our Fâ—ncy whence all their other Arguments are drawn for which reason the Greeks esteem'd Christianity Foolishness and therefore might afford them more plausible Arguments than any they have brought hitherto Had they employ'd their Talent in impugning the Trinity upon that score and ply'd that Topick I must confess I had been to seek for any other Answer than to alledge that GOD is INFINITE in all His Attributes which he had not been at least we could not so well have known it had not he given us such Testimonies of His Mercy Goodness Justice c. as are beyond all that we are able to conceive Wherefore since what 's beyond what we are able to conceive is justly held Mysterious to us all the Mysteries of our Faith if things be well consider'd and driven up to their First Root or Principle do spring from GOD's Infinity in this or some such Regard Even the Mystery of the B. Trinity which chiefly consists in this that the same Numerical Nature is in Three Distinct Persons is grounned on this that His Nature being Infinite is but One as is shown above B. 3. and the same may be said of all the rest of those Articles of our Faith which we account Mysteries Wherefore I would recommend it to the Author of Christianity not Mysterious that He would bless us wâ—th a Treatise to show us how to comprehend INFINITY how to Define it or give us it 's Full Dimensions for all we know of it hitherto is to distinguish it's Notion from Finite by a Negation but to make a true Conception of it's Entire Positive Perfection we fall infinitely short Let â—im then either do this or else as long as GOD â—e Author of our Faith is Unconceiveable by us or â—NFINITE so long that Faith it self the Product of His Infinite Being and His other Attributes especially those which concern His own Essence â—ill still be Impossible to be comprehended by us and so Christianity will still remain Mysterious let him scribâ—le his plausibe Conceits as long as he pleases But to proceed with showing the Demerit of those scarce-half-quarter Christians 6. Let us next consider what Powerful Authority and Majesty it must give to the whole Doctrine of Christianity and to every Particular of it What Veneration and Esteem to the Holy Sacraments instituted by Christ to every Sentence which is recorded in the Holy Scripture to have been spoken by our B. Saviour and to every Action said to have been done by Him to believe that it was GOD Himself who came down from Heaven to teach us that Doctrine institute those Sacraments from which Institution they have all their Efficacy who spoke those Words of Eternal Life and did those Actions in his own Person Infinite are the Particular Motives of this Nature and beyond any Man's Power to recount and lay open at large as he ought all of them â—ending to rectifie our Irregular Passions to arm us against Temptations and sanctifie our Souls by raising them to a Firm Faith a Stedfast Hope and Ardent Charity the only Dispositions which can fit Mankind for Eternal Happiness Were all these Particulars laid open and dilated upon to their full Energy in Affective Sermons as they are daily to a great measure in the Christian Church what Transports of Heavenly Love and Affectionate Devotion must they needs make in the hearts of the Hearers to thâ— End of the World what innumerable Pioâ— Thoughts must they excite how many Actions oâ— all sorts of Virtue must they produce Not to speak how vigorously it must move People of all sorts to the Imitation of those Heroick Virtues which the Life and Practice of a GOD made Man sets before their Eyes for Patterns by which they ought to frame their Christian Conversation the very Notions of which confronted with the contrary demeanour of frail Sinners is of force to shame them into Repentance and Amendment of their Lives 7. Now the main Efficacy and Powerfulness of all these Highest Motives to true Sanctity depends on the Belief of Three Divine Persons in the Unity of the GODHEAD Take this away GOD the Father could not send his Son who was also GOD nor could GOD in his own Person come amongst us to teach and instruct us by His Word and Example
a just Title and Appropriation to this Present of mine 'T is This that can best satisfy the World as it does mee that your Thoughts are Truly Great and not detain'd in Insignificant Trifles as too many of your Rank are nor consequently are your Affections plac'd on Low and Contemptible Objects 'T is This that double-guilds Your other Heroical Qualities and sets you on the Highest Pinnacle of Honour There is nothing which more shocks a true-bred Gentleman than a Ly tho' it be but in puntilio's of ordinary Conversation But how exceedingly does a Hearty Lover of Truth refine upon this Common Genius of a Man of Honour Such a Person bids Defiance to the whole Tribe of Errours which are Lies in their several wayes A Falshood in Natural Philosophy gives the Ly to Nature A Falshood or Paralogism in Logick gives the Ly to Human Reason which is the true Nature of all Mankind A Falshood in Metaphysicks gives the Ly to the whole Nature of Being that is to the whole Creation and to the First Being who by his Flat Establisht those Natures You have not yet my Ld. taken the Full Dimensions of the Grandeur to which this High Title A Lover of Truth has rais'd you You may please to reflect that this Mistress whom You affect and court is very neerly Ally'd to Heaven by the Father's side and if You espouse her for You may be sure of her chast Consent if You sincerely affect her You dignity and ennoble your Extraction by a Relation transcendently above what Sublunary Marriages could have given it 'T is then to one of those Greatest of Men or rather one of those Paragons of Mankind that is to a Sincere Lover of TRUTH I dedicate my Book I doubt not but I might have found diverse of those whom the Populace of Scribblers call Patrons or Mecoenasses who out of a vain Consideration â—f being Prais'd in Print would have gratefully accepted it had I been willing out of a Mercenary Humour to prostitute TRUTH to Unqualify'd Persons But how would it have sham'd my Choice and brought my Prudence and Sincerity into Question to make a Present of Pearls to those whose Thoughts are digging in the Dunghil of Worldly Riches and value the Barly-corns of their Opulent Estates above the best Ornament of their Mind Knowledge Such Gifts to those Little-Great Men had been as Improper as to present an Atheist with a Prayer-book who would out of Exteriour Civility or some other Respect seem to accept it kindly but afterward burn the Book and laugh at the Writer Yet all this while I do not pretend to lay any Obligation at all on your Lordship by this Dedication for had this Book been publish'd without it You would presently have made it your own by Perusing it To do which intelligently both your own Natural Genius and your running thorow the Course of your Studies in Learned Company with such Applause has more effectually enabled You than it would some of our old School term-Doctors Such Maturity of Judgment in such Youthful and Green Years would easily enable your Vigorous Understanding to take in and digest the most Elevated Conceptions You see then my Lord I only give you what I could not keep from you and Forced Kindnesses deserve no Thanks tho' I have some Title to your Pardon because it was Your own Worth that layd this Force upon me I had I say just reason to apprehend Your Lordship would have made this Book your own when you had once got it into your hands seeing how sedulously You made a strict Search for every Trifle I had written and never desisted till you had found them â—ll and Purchast them at a dear rate To do which nothing but the Love of Truth could move You since there was neither in them any Affectation of Rhetorick nor Melodious Gingle of Words nor the Diverting Conceits of Romances with which those Gentlemen who dwell in the Middle-story do so contentedly entertain and please their Fancies And if Your Lordship was so intently inquisitive after those Pieces of mine which were less Valuable I had all the reason in the World to think You would not let my Metaphysicks scape your Perusal Which if I may be allow'd to be a Competent Judge of my own Productions is worth them all But I do not altogether blame Your Lordship for your Over-value of my poor Labours because You have it partly Ex Traduce 'T is Hereditary to Your Lordship to have too good an Opinion of my Writings Your Lordship 's Noble Father who is justly accounted the most Universal Scholler of your Nation did formerly tho' perfectly unknown to me give so High and Undeserved a Character of them as would make a Man tho' but indifferently Modest Blush and tempt me to admit some thoughts of vain Self complaisance had I not been provided before hand with an Antidote which is a most clear Demonstration in the Cloze of my Metaphysicks that all the Good we have even to the least tittle does entirely spring from the Inexhausted Bounty of the World 's Great Governour who works every thing in us and by us And why may not this be a second Excuse to the World for making your Lordship this Present upon the Score of Gratitude since the Greatest Honour I can by this Address confer on your Lordship is but a poor Requital of what your Lordships Noble Father was pleas'd to bestow on me I shall add one word more which tho' it may be some Comfort and an especial Honour to Your Lordship yet it is a very great Trouble to me Which is that those High and most Due Encomiums I give Your Lordship as a Zealous Unprecedented Lover of Truth tho this be in reality one of the Highest Commendations Rational Nature is Capable of will not yet draw upon you the least Envy from any No my Lord never fear it let your Pretensions to that Title be never so High You will have but Few Rivals and Competitours This Darling of Heaven TRUTH tho' the most Generous Universal Benefactress to Mankind is in such Disreputâ— with the Generality of our Great Ones except some Few whom I do as highly Honour for their True Worth and Rarity as I contomn the rest that they fancy they should stoop themselves below their Dignity if they maliâ— Her the least part of their Concern And Knowledge tho' imploy'd in Defence of the most Fundamental Article of Christianity is so Unpalatable to their Depraved Tast that it becomes Nauseous To talk to such Men of Establishing any Truth or Explicating Faith by Rational Principles sounds to them like Gibberish They look upon Manly Reason as a kind of Madness as least as Foppish and so strangely are their Brains turn'd that they judge those Discourses which are Solid and go to the bottom to be Aiery Superficial Not considering how this slight Opinion they have taken of TRUTH leaves them wholly to the Conduct of Fancy makes
adds to it still more Indetermination and what 's Common to All and Indeterminate to Any Thing cannot particularize or constitute This or That Thing and only This or That Thing and not Thing in Common or what 's Indeterminate to every Thing can exist in Nature It follows that either there must be no Particular Bodies in Nature that is No One Body or which is the same No Body at all in the whole World or else it must be granted that there must be such an Act corresponding to this Sort of Power which so determines it as to constitute This or That Body in particular Which Second Sort of Act is call'd by the Schools the SUBSTANTIAL or ESSENTIAL FORM and this Second Sort of Power which answers to that Act and is Determin'd by it is call'd MAâ—TER 18. Hence those Things which include in their Natures this Second sort of In what Sence Bodies are said to be Compounded of this Power and its Act. Power and its correspondent Act which use to be call'd Matter and Form are said to be Compounded of them because such a kind of Thing involves in it self and consequently causes in us and verifies the Conceptions of somewhat according to which that Thing is Indeterminate and somewhat according to which it is Determinate under the Notion of Thing or Ens which two Considerations do comprehend all that can be conceiv'd belonging to the Nature of such a kind of Thing as to that Notion precisely which kind of Compound Thing we call a BODY 19. This Second sort of Power called Matter is the sole Ground of all Change and Mutability For since whatever This Second Power Matter is the sole Ground of all Mutability Thing is Determinate is Fixt by that which formally Determines it to be That Thing it is and no Other 't is manifest that from the nature of that Act or Form which by Determining the Matter makes that Thing be what it is no Change into another can proceed Wherefore since by § 17 18. there can be nothing else Conceivable belonging to such a particular Thing or Body but its Power to be such a Thing and its Act which Determines that Power and formally constitutes it such a Thing that is the Matter and the Form and from the Act or Form as far as is on it's part no Mutability or Change from what that Act made it â—…n proceed it follows necessarily that all Change and Mutability under the Notion of Thing must proceed from the Power or Matter Again since all Accidental Acts or Modes do no less in their way Determine and Constitute the Thing to be actually such as that Accident is apt to make it or to be after such a Manner as well as the Essential Act or Form did Determine and Constitute it to be This Thing and no other Thing and that their whole Notion or Nature is terminated in their making it Actually such it follows that from those Accidental Acts or those Modes precisely nothing can have any Ground to be Alter'd or to have Another Mode or Accident Wherefore all Change and Mutability whether Substantial or Accidental can be refunded into nothing but meerly into the Power or Matter as it 's only Ground 20. Corollary IX Hence is demonstrated that if there can be any Pure Acts which have no Power or Matter Hence Pure Acts are Immutable in them as will be shown hereafter there can such aâ— are Angels and Souls Separated they must be naturally Immutable both Substantially and Accidentally See Method to Science B. 3. L. 7. Thesis 6. and Raillery Defeated from § 49. to § 59. 21. The Third sort of Power is that which the Thingâ— consisting of Matter The Third sort of Power respects Accidental Acts. and Form and having over and above it 's Ultimate Act of Existing has to the Modes or Accidental Acts belonging to it as was mention'd § 2. and shown particularly in my Methodâ— B. 1. Less 2. 22. Tho' these Accidental Acts or Modes aâ— is shown above Coroll III. and in my METHOD B. 1. Less 4. § 1 2. Which tho' not properly Things have yet Analogical Essences are not Things in the First and Proper signification of the word Thing but only in a Secondary Improper and Analogical Sense yet they have notwithstanding their Improper and Analogieâ— Essences as has also every Abstract Notion of Conception we have of the Thing and consequently their Nature is sixt to be what it is and no other Whence they have also their Improper but yet Real Metaphysical Verity and First Principles peculiar to their Natures as well as Things properly so call'd or Substances have So that whoever in Discoursing of Quantity â— g. or Action makes Quantity by consequence 〈…〉 to be Quantity or Action not to be Action but destroys the nature of those Modes is as evidently convicted of Contradiction as if he had destroy'd the nature of a Man or an Animal or any other Substance and had made them by consequence not to be what they are as all False Discoursers do 23. Hence is clearly seen what is meant by Metaphysical Divisibility and Composition and that they are not What Metaphysical Divisibility and Composition are â—â—ch as are found between Thing â—â—d Thing in re for this kind of Composition and Division would destroy the Unity and Verity of the Thing beâ—…es that such a Composition is Proper to Artificial things and is contrary to the Constituâ—… of Natural Entities Natural Composition 〈…〉 was shown § 17 18. being made by the â—…eting of the Matter and Form in one such â—… or one Body That Composition and Divisibility then which we call Metaphysical is of the Parts as it were of the Thing as it is in â—our Understanding or of the Thing as concelv'd by us thus and the same Thing as concelv'd by us otherwise For out of our Conception or Understanding there is no Actual Distinction of Matter and Form of Substance and Accidents c. tho' there is Ground in the thing as it is the Object of our Imperfect pitch of Understanding not able to comprehend all that may be thought of it at once why we thus frame Abstract Partial and Inadequate Conceptions of it or which is the same why we thus Divide or Distinguish it And hence it comes that since there can be no Contradiction nor consequently Impossibility unless we Affirm and Deny in the same Respect therefore as there is no Contradiction in such a case in our Understanding because these Respects there are Diverse so there is no Impossibility in Nature but the Thing may be Chang'd Distinguisht Acted upon or Act according to some of those Respects or Conceptions and yet be not-Chang'd not-Act or Suffer according to others of them as will be seen by Instances hereafter 24. Corollary X. This Doctrine particularly this last Clause were the words Ens or Substance Nature Suppositum Person Existence and Subsistence exactly Distinguisht and
Quantity takes up some Space or Room of this Finite Container and so still lessens the Capacity of holding as much as it could before Therefore the Soul is of a quite Contrary or rather Contradictory Nature to the Capacities of Quantitative or Material Subjects and by consequence she is evidently Immaterial 3. Demonstration III. That which has innumerable other Natures in her without Altering or Destroying it's Demon. III. Because she has Other Natures in her without Altering her own own Natural Constitution is evidently Immaterial But the Soul has Innumerable other Natures in her by Preliminary 9. and 10. without Altering or Destroying her own Thereâ—â—â—â— the Soul is Immaterial The Major is evident â—ecause many new peculiar Natures or Complexâ—â—ns of Accidents advening to the constitution of the former Material Thing must needs affect it accordingly and give it as many New Modifications and Determinations as there are Accidents iâ— it Since these by Prelim. 5. must each of them impart to the Subject it 's Formal Effect and as much alter it's Nature as Water does Wine or Aloes does Honey much more when Multitudes of these Complexions of Accidents are jumbled together they would scarce leave to that Material Entity any Remnant or Show of it's former self but quite pervert efface and deâ—roy it's proper Temperament or Constitution Again those various Complications of Accidents must make the Soul were she Material to be of so many several Kinds and consequently to be many Corporeal Individuums which would make her the most Monstrous Chimera imaginable and destroy her Unity and Entity both Nay since all those Notions which are taking them objectively those Natures and Modes do â—s will be demonstrated hereafter remain still in the Soul many of which are Contrary and Inâ—â—nsistent and must impart to her were she Material their Formal Effect or make and denominate her such as their several Natures are Whence she would be at once Rare and Dense Hot and Cold and this too in the Highest and also in the Lowest Degree Long and Short and of all different Quantities Black and White and of all Different Colours Moist and Dry Round Square Triangular and of all Figures nay at once Virtuous and Vicious Knowing and Ignorant since she has the Notions or Natures of all these in her The Minor is prov'd by § 9 10 11 where it was demonstrated that by having Notions of the Things according to all these Modes she has these Modes themselves in her which how impossible it is they should be all at once in a Material Subject Common Sense shows every Man 4. Demonstration IV. Hence 't is clearly evinced that None of those Things Natures or Modes which the Soul Demon. IV. From her having Things and Modes in her as others or as not belonging to her own Nature has in her by Knowing them is an Intrinsecal Affection Mode or Determination of the Soul it self as are her Faculties Thoughts Judgments Discourses Affections and such like which do properly belong to her own Nature Whence follows that when they are in the Soul by her Knowing them they are there tanquam aliud As Another or as Distinct from her And therefore that Knowing is the becoming Another Thing as 't is Distinct from the Knower which tho' perhaps few reflect on it is no more in true Sense than what we familiarly say that 't is an Object of the Knowing Power or the Thing Known for the words Object and Thing Known do import a Relative Opposition and consequently Distinction from the Knower as such How this piece of Doctrine may in part conduce to the Explication of the most B. Trinity may appear in due Season by showiag that the Opposition and Distinction according to the Notion of Relation does not hinder but rather in our case induce the Unity of Nature in the Knower and thing Known 5. Demonstration V. That Tenet must necessarily be False which is contrary to the Natural Notions and Language of all Mankind Demon. V. Because the Contrary Thesis is opposite to the Natural Notions of all Mankind not excepting even Atheists themselves who deny Spiritual Beings But such is the Tenet of the Soul's Materiality Therefore that Tenet must necessarily be False The Major is prov'd Because all our Knowledge and all the Truths we have Naturally are built on our Natural Notions as on their Ground The Minor is thus manifested It is Nonsense according to the Natural Sentiments and Language of all Mankind to ask of any particular Knowledge for Example of our Knowledge that Two and Three make Five How Big or of what Quantity or Extension it is v. g. whether it be an Inch or a Yard Long whether it be thus Broad or Thick As also Whether it be Rare or Dense Whether it be as Hard as a Stone or as Soft as Butter What Figure it is of Whether Square Round Cylindrical or Octogone Whether it be White or Black or of some middle Colours Whether it be Diaphanous or Opacous Whether it sends out Effluviums or Particles of it's own Nature or no What kind of Place will fit it Whether the Parts it has do stand Erect or lean Sloping or lie Flat How we are to Act upon it by another Body's smart Impulse shattering it's Parts asunder or Pressing them Close or Tearing them off by little and little c. Now 't is such Nonsense to all Sober Mankind tho' never so Sceptical to ask such Questions that it looks like meer Gibberish or the playing at Cross-purposes and would make the Asker if he do it seriously be held a Mad-Man whereas yet it would not be thought at all Absurd to ask at least many of these concerning any Material Being whatever 'T is given us then and granted by the Free and Ingenuous Acknowledgement of all Mankind guiding themselves by their Nature-taught Notions that this Operation of our Soul call'd Knowledge which is most Natural to her and consequently that her Nature it self is vastly Different from that of Material or Quantitative Beings that is Immaterial 6. Thus far of Knowledge in Common What Light is afforded us to demonstrate the Immateriality of the Existence is the Absolute Notion and all the rest â—re Respective Soul from all her several sorts of Operations mention'd Ch. 6. § 4. will be seen hereafter We proceed now to examine the several Objects of the Soul's First Operation or her several sorts of Notions which are comprehended in those Ten General Heads call'd Ten Predicaments These Notions are adequately Divided into Two General Kinds viz. Absolute and Respective I say Adequately it being impossible for us to have any Conception which is not either the One or the Other Of these the Modes or Accidents which take up the Nine last Predicaments are all of them Respective to the Thing or Substance which they one way or other modifie because we cannot conceive a Mode or Manner which modifies Nothing which is the Literal Sense
when we apply them to the Divine Nature they must be in some sort Metaphorical or Transferr'd thence to GOD. This is equally Evident as the Former For since their Sense and Meaning which Men impos'd on them at first and in which they Us'd them all along was some Created Being or Perfection 't is manifest that That was their First or Proper Signification and consequently if they Apply'd them to GOD afterwards without which as was shown we could not speak of GOD at all nor know any thing of Him they must necessarily be Transferr'd from Creatures to GOD which is to be Metaphorical 7. Prel VII Yet when Divines apply such Words to GOD whom they hold to be Infinitely Perfect they cannot be thought to Intend to Transfer them to Him together with the Imperfection found in Creatures which is annext to their First Signification and consequently Intention and Meaning being the same Sense they cannot mean to apply them otherwise than as devested of their Imperfections So that the Meaning or Signification of those Words thus Apply'd debars all those Imperfections from being any â—art of our Notion when we thus apply them â—uch are the Imperfections of Corporeity and 〈…〉 Notions which arise from Matter or belong 〈…〉 it As also all Limitedness which tho' Essenâ—ial to Creatures is Repugnant to the Divine Nature 8. Prelim. VIII Hence all such Words thus understood notwithstanding their Metaphoricalness are Truly said of GOD. For since by § 7. we do not Intend to Transfer to GOD what is Imperfect in the Notion or Meaning of these Words but only what signifies some Perfection â—nd All Perfection must be Truly attributed to Him who is Infinitely Perfect it follows that all such words thus understood are Truely Apply'd to the Divine Nature Thus when our Saviour CHRIST â—â— call'd The Lamb of GOD or The Lyon of the Tribe of Iudah we do not take or understand those Words under any other Notion signify'd by Lamb or Lion than under those of Meekness and Fortitude Thus when Metaphysicians apply to GOD Mercy Justice Power Wisdom c. which as found in our Understanding are Distinct Formalities of which One is not the other they being well aware that the Divine Nature is One most Simple Formality which includes and verifâ—es all those Attributes do therefore strip them of that Limitation or Imperfection when they apply them to GOD and do not intend to signifie they are thus distinct in GOD as they are in our Understanding but they only mean that such Effects do proceed from GOD as do proceed from a Just Merâ—iful Powerful or Wise Man which is most cerâ—ainly True Which Rule and Reason obtains in all other Metaphorical Expressions or in all our Words whatever us'd by us when we speak of GOD. 9. Prel IX For the same Reason all Words which amongst us connoâ—ate Motion as all Active Verbs and Verbals do must be understood of the Action formally as Terminated or of the Terminus of an Action and must be explicated and understood to mean is For since GOD is a Pure Actuality of Being and his Essence is Self-Existence nothing can be more Opposite to His very Essence than is the Notion of Motion which essentially imports both Potentiality and Change as consequently does our Natural Notion of Action that goes along with it Wherefore all Notions that import that a Thing is in fieri must be remov'd from GOD as far as is possible and only those Notions that signifie it is in facto esse can with any Sense be apply'd to that Sovereign Being Now this Abstraction from Motion can mean nothing but Being one way or other or it cannot be transferr'd to GOD by Prelim. VII Wherefore when we say the Son proceeds from the Father it can only in rigour mean Est a Patre The properest meaning of which word is that GOD is in His Divine Knowledge as His own Object And for the same Reason all Verbs signifying the Time Past or Future are to be remov'd from GOD and only those which signifie the present Time can be apply'd to Him For since whatever is in Divinis or is Intrinsecal to GOD is Eternally such we shall put Past and Future which are Differences of Time in Eternity But above all those words that import or hiâ—t Efficiency are the most Unfit to be Transferr'd to GOD For since Efficiency is impossible to be conceiv'd without an Effect it puts something in GOD which is Effected or Caus'd nor can such a Word 〈…〉 Notion be depur'd from it's most Gross Imperfection as other Notions may Nor will that weak Distinction of Formal and Virtual Efficiency in Diâ—inis serve the turn for this is the same as to say GOD is virtually Imperfect or that some Notion we have of GOD and is verify'd by Him is virtually an Effect that is virtually Not Self Existent and consequently virtually not GOD but a Creature Indeed our homely Language and Low Notions do oblige us to use such words as amongst us do signifie Action but they are all to be understood cum grano salis as is here declar'd Nor ought it to be objected That these Active words cannot signifie a Terminus put or that the thing is done â—â—stantaneously which some may think is against the Notion of Action for Creation is granted to be an Action yet it is never for so much as for one Instant in fieri or a doing being in one Instant in fecto esse or done 10. Prel X. For which Reason that we may avoid all hint of Agency which since whatever Acts must act or do Something which is it's Effect does necessarily induce Efficiency a word or Notion directly Opposite to whatever is in GOD who is Self Existent we shall in our Explication make use of the Inexistency of the Divine Nature Known in it's self as a Knower of it after the manner of a Form as it were which is both peculiar to a Spiritual Nature and has nothing in it of that Gross Imperfection to which our Natural Notion of Action is liable which amongst us is always accompanied with Motion Whereas the Other implies no Imperfection at all either in the Knower or the Thing Known For even amongst us the Object v. g. an Animal loses nothing nor is less Perfect for being Known by us but is in it's self the same Unchang'd Being it was Or rather Intelligibility being one of the Properties of Ens by being Naturally Known or understood it becomes by this means in some Sense Actual whereas before it was only Intelligible that is Potential in that respect Nor are we the worse by Knowing it or having the Object thus in our Knowing Power but evidently Better in regard all Actual Knowledge is our Natural Perfection Add that this way of Inexisting does not necessarily induce any Passiveness in the Subject in which the Object thus Inexists For Angels and Souls Separate have as has been demonstrated all Created Being in them Intellectually and yet
of that Act. Whence the Act it self is no Part of the Relation but is Extrinsecal to the precise Notion of it As farther appears hence that Relation is one of those Notions which are call'd Accidental Modes or Accidents whose whole Being such as it is is to affect the Substance in their several ways and denominate them such as they do formally make them Since then Relation does not affect or denominate the Act of the Understanding but the Things which that Act compares and as has been often demonstrated the Accidents or Modes are Really the Same with the Thing which they modifie it follows that Relation is the Thing it self in our Minds conceiv'd consider'd as bearing in it a Respectiveness or â—ther as Referrible to Another To penetrate this betâ—… we will put a kind of Parrallel in the Predicaâ—…nt of Quality A Pint is the same Quantity whereever it is Yet put the same Pint of Water 〈…〉 a Round Glass it will be Round in a Square â—lass and it will be of a Square Figure Yet both these Figures are Identify'd with the same Quantity and the same Substance of the Water whose Modes they are and 't is only the Containers and their Difference which gives them this Different Denomination So Whiteness in those Subjects which are White is Apprehended and Denominated by an Absolute Name and they are both call'd White but put two such Subjects with Whiteness in them in our Mind which is a Comparing kind of Container or a Comparing Power and they come thence to be Apprehended by a Relative Notion and Denominated by a Relative Word Alike So that the Things themselves do give themselves this Relative Notion and Denomination of being Alike taking them as in such a Container as our Mind is which is apt to consider them in order to one another or refer them Actually These Things consider'd no Man of Reason can imagine that tho' we use the Common Word Relation because it passes amongst Learned Men as we do other Abstract Words therefore it means something hovering in the Air as it were without a Subject like a kind of Idea Platonica or that it can be any thing but the very Thing it self which is Related And hence it is that that most Solid and Acute Distinguisher of our Natural Notions Aristotle rather chuses to make use of the Concretes and as he call'd the foregoing Predicaments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so he names Relation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Thingâ— Related or as having in them the Ground of verifying a Respect to Another as I have noted in my Fifth Preliminary to Solid Philosophy Asserted 14. Prel XIV 'T is impossible to conceive a Real Relation without a Correlate answering to it in case it be grounded on Action and Passion or on the Unity of the Form nor to conceive such Correlates without conceiving some kind of Particularity or Difference between them There needs no more to evince this but only to reflect on the Word Ad which gives us the Notion of Relation and withall imports a Rapport or Respect to that which as is evident by it's Contraposition is in some Sense or other Distinct from it or Another 15. Prelim. XV. The Essence of GOD not only being Self-Existence but whatever is an Intrinsecal Attribute of Him being Eternally such it follows that the word is not only gives us the true Sense of what 's Predicated of GOD as is shown Prelim. IX but it must also signifie is Eternally there being no Temporary or Accidental Predications of any thing that is in the DEITY Wherefore we must in the truest Sense mean in all such Speeches that GOD Eternally that is from all Eternity and to all Eternity is Knowing and Loving Himself is Generating his Son is Generated is Proceeding from Father and Son c. So that the word is signifies here the most Absolute Necessity of His Being Eternally so as those Predicates import and not Contingently only as the same Word is does often signifie when we Predicate or speak of Creatures Which 〈…〉 at first amuse the Fancy but as I hope afâ—â—â—wards upon due Reflexion it will rectifie the â—…dgment of some Anti-Trinitarians who weakâ—… apprehending there can be no Pre-existence but 〈…〉 of Time imagine we put some Instant when 〈…〉 Son did not exist and that after he had got Existence the Father ceas'd afterwards to communicate it to Him any longer but left Him to stand done as Sons do here when their Fathers Die oâ— Disregard them and many other such Foolâ—â—ies with which they delude the Ignorant Which as will be shown are abhorr'd by us and most Absurd in a Discourse concerning the DEITY and therefore most ridiculously objected by them SECT II. The State of the Question 1 THE Divine Nature which is the Subject of our present Discourse may be consider'd two manner of Ways One is as to what GOD is in himself as the Mysticks treat of Him in which Sense He Abstracts from all our Natural Notions because He Transcends them and therefore He is altogether Unconceiveable and Unnameable by us in this State and only Intelligible by the Angels and Saints in Heaven to whose Intellectual Eye purify'd from all Sinful Affections and Dispos'd by Perfect Charity he reveals His Blissful and Glorious Face to be seen by a Clear and Simple Intuition The other way is to consider Him as He is the Object of our Natural Notions which having first as is said above Refin'd them from their Imperfection we transfer to Him and thence become Enabled in some sort to speak and discourse of Him Truly tho' with some Impropriety in our Low and Homely Language 2. Since then 't is manifest that we cannot Speak or Discourse of much less Explicate what we cannot conceive or of which we cannot have any Notion 't is Evident that the Divinity being the subject of our intended Discourse is to be consider'd and taken according to the Later manner and not according to the Former in our Discourses concerning it This premis'd since Faith by Prelim. V. is deliver'd to us in Words expressing our Natural Notions the True State of the Question is this Whether the Divine Nature Conceiv'd by us according to such Notions as we had from Creatures which being depur'd first from their ImPerfections we Apply to GOD does not oblige us as we affirm of Him that He is Just Merciful Wise c. So with Equal Reason and Truth to affirm that He is ONE according to His Nature and Essence and withal THREE according to Another Notion or Respect which we fitly call Person To set this Question and our ensuing Explication in a Clearer Light we will divide this Entire Question into Five Distinct or Particular ones viz. First Whether it be not Agreeable to Rational Principles taken from our Natural Notions to affirm that the Divine Nature does verify some One Notion that is Common and some Others that are Distinct or Particulars
to be Spiritually Unitive of the Lover to the Thing Loved Our Common Unstudy'd Thoughts and Language gives this to be True If two Friends Love one another dearly all Mankind uses to say They are all One and our B. Saviour prays to His Heavenly Father that He and His Disciples may be One as Himself and his Father are One that is by Mutual Love it being impossible those Words can there bear any other Signification 13. We have seen above That Divine Love which is the Third Person proceeds from the Goodness of the Divine Object or from the Divine Essence Known that is the Father in His own Divine Knowledge in which consists Essential Truth that this Truth is therefore GOD's Greatest Good because this Infinite Truth is the Best Perfection of His Nature as it is Intelligent or Spiritual That because it does thus proceed from the Divine Object in the Divine Knowledge this Third Person does therefore proceed from the Father and the Son immediately and formally according to their Distinct Personalities or Relations and that therefore because no Relation can be grounded on Another Relation but can only Refer what 's Absolute there can be no Reciprocal Opposite or Distinct Relation of the Divine Object-Known to the Lover nor consequently any occasion of conceiving a Fourth Person It remains now to show that since Love by § 12. imports a Spiritual Union or Conjunction of the Lover with that which it Loves therefore from the very Notion of the word Conjoyn'd there must be some Distinction between those which are thus Ioyn'd-together Since what 's in Every Respect One and the Same cannot without Injury to Common Sense be said to be Conjoyn'd with it self in Any Respect that is Conjoyn'd at all But in what manner does this Third Person proceed from the other Two Not according to Likeness or Identity of Nature as did the Son but it presupposes this Likeness Conformity Agreeableness or Identity of Nature in the Object as Known and in the Knower as Knowing it for in this consists that Greatest Good call'd Truth which is the Object of Love and 't is against all our Natural Notions to conceive Actual Love of a thing not Suppos'd to bee Wherefore this Similitude of Nature is not the Formal Motive nor the Manner by which Divine Love proceeds but only this that the other two Persons according to their Distinction of Knower and Known in which consists Divine Truth do integrate as it were that Bonum Dei or Good which is the Adequate Object of the Divine Will The Son therefore proceeds from His Father by having Communicated to Him the same Form as it were or the Divine Nature as an Object which formally constitutes Him a Knower of it and thence a Son The B. Spirit proceeds from the two other Persons as they are a Good to the Divine Nature which it Affects Spiritually clings to or embraces and so becomes or is Actually United or One with it The Former according to our weak manner of Conceiving proceeds as coming from the Object Communicating it self to it the Later by it's being drawn as it were by the Object and â—…oving it self forwards to or rather in reality haâ—ing actually an Union with it The Former by â—ay of Informing or being in the Divine Underâ—â—anding The Later by enamouring the Divine Will to pursue what is conceiv'd to be out of the Lover as such or rather in our case to enjoy it actually Which expression tho' most beseeming a Pure Actuality of Being yet it debars not the Distinction between the Good Enjoy'd and the Enjoyer of it but obliges us to conceive them as thus Distinct. 14. Having thus declar'd the Particularity or Distinction of the Three Divine Persons in order to one another it is seasonable to manifest in the â—ext place what Names and what Effects are peculiarly to be Attributed to each of them as they relate to us Whence it may appear that as our Explication is Agreeable to Right Reason so it is no less Consonant to Holy Scripture and to the Sense and Language of the Christian Church To mention a few Chief ones will hint to us the â—est 15. Since then Being is the First in Order of all our Natural Notions so that we cannot conceive any thing to be Communicated or to deserve Love unless it is Hence the Notion of the Divine Being is justly conceiv'd to be Appropriated to the First Person who is the Beginning and Origin of the rest and communicates it to the Son whence proceeds as was now said the B. Spirit who is Divine Love Hence also since Every thing Acts as it Is He is said to be Author and Cause of all Created Being or the Creatour of all things Hence also He is said to be the Father of all his Creatures in a Natural but less Proper Sense because He gives us our Being and in a more especial manner since His Only Son by taking our Nature upon Him made Himself in some sort our Brother As also in a Civil Sense because it belongs to Fathers to provide for their Children as His Heavenly Providence does for all His Creatures Not to speak how He is a Father in a Spiritual Sense as we are Re-generated by His Grace given us freely for the Merits and by the Means of His Eternal Son whom he sent amongst us to that end 16. What peculiar Attributes are appropriated to the Son is declard above § 10. I only remark here that when he is call'd Verbum the WORD by a Metaphor taken from our Verbum Mentis that is our Conception or Notion of an Object in our Knowing Power we must take heed we do not understand by those words that Imperfect Form of speaking Truth interiourly which is found in Mental Propositions which Affirm or Deny for even in Angels and Separated Souls as has been demonstrated Knowledge is above all Composition of several Notions of which Propositions are made but it must be meant that the Divine Object in which is Essentially all the Metaphysical Verity both of GOD and of all Creatures is most Expressly in Him as He is the Knower of it that is indeed in the very Divine Essence in which the most Actual that is the most Bright and most Universal Truth is Communicated to Him from the Father and is most exactly in Him We must take heed also that when He is call'd Imago Patris and such like some Cartesian or other Ideist catching at the word do not make â—im a meer Picture or Similitude of His Father â—…d that He has not therefore the very Divine created Essence or the Divine Nature in Him â—…t only some Created Similitude of it I must â—…nfess this sutes well enough with the Doctrine Ideas in our Mind which are Spiritual Pourâ—…itures or Resemblances of the Things we know â—…d not the Things themselves But that it sutes â—…ither with Reason or Faith they can never show â—…s for how can meer Fancies agree
them Finite is Infinitely short of His INFINITE Bounty or Goodness 5. Again Fecundity bears in it's Natural Notion a very High Perfection We may observe That all Living Creatures when grown up to a consummate pitch in their respective Natures are Fruitful or Prolifick that is are apt to produce another of their own Kind And Spiritual Natures when they come to know are said to Conceive and our Knowledges are call'd Conceptions tho' few reflect on the word or the Analogy it bears to the Verbum in the Divine Mind or to the Procession of the Son only our Conceptions of Natural Objects are Imperfeâ—â— and never arrive at their utmost Perfection till 〈…〉 see them in the First Cause Since then these arâ— some kind of Perfection in their several ways 〈…〉 most Consonant to Reason that we should Transfeâ— the Notion of Fecundity too to GOD to whom â—â— being Infinitely Perfect we ought to ascribe all sorts of Perfection after they are stript from the Imperfections and from their Limitedness which necessarily accompanies all Finite Beings as has been often said above 6. As for his Communicating his Whole Divine Essence whence in Discourse with no small Man among the Deists I have heard it inferr'd that if the Father Communicates His WHOLE Essence and all it's Attributes to the Son He can leave nothing at all for Himself it is Evident that this Objection proceeds from most profound and most Gross Ignorance of Spiritual Natures A Master may communicate all his Knowledge to His Scholler or to such a degree as to make Him as Learned as Himself Does it follow thence that he has Empty'd or Disfurnisht himself of his whole Stock of Learning and is become now an Ignorant Dunce But speaking of Objects which is more to the Point Even Material Objects lose nothing at all by being known Suppose I could penetrate so â—horowly the Individuating Complexion of Accidents of such a Body in Nature so that I comprehended every minute consideration that could possibly belong to it would that Body be ever the Worse or Diminisht in it self because it is Wholly Known or Understood I desire those weak Reasoners to consider that as Spiritual Natures are above Quantity so they do not follow the Rules of Material Beings nor in discoursing of them ought we to take our Measures â—…om such Predicates or Sayings as we use when â—e speak of Bodies Rather Divisible and Indiâ—…sible which are their Differences that constitute â—…em being Contradictories whatever Conceptions â—…e make of the One the quite Opposite must be made of the Other excepting only the Notion of the Common Genus Ens in which and which only they do boâ—h of them agree Nothing at all is Defalkt from Them by their Communicating themselves nor do they lose any thing even by Actiag upon Bodies The Nerves of an Angel are not over-strain'd nor their Spirits spent by Changing or Altering them Nor are Spiritual Objects impair'd by their being thus Communicated But 't is prodigiously weak to object this in our case where the Discourse is of GOD's Knowing Himself and where it is granted that He does so unless those Gentlemen think that the Word Himself in that speech does not signifie GOD or else they conceit that GOD is the Worse by Knowing Himself that is the Worse for being Infinitely Perfect for in such Nonsense as this all their Objections against the most B. Trinity when driven home to their Principles will be found to terminate 7. Tho' I cannot but judge that enough has been said both here and indeed in divers places of this Treatise to assert and manifest that notwithstanding this Distinction or Plurality of Persons there is not the least Show of prejudicing the Unity of the GODHEAD yet it were not amiss to add one Consideration more which will much surprise the Anti-Trinitarians and be lookt upon by them as a most strange Paradox which is that the Unity of the GODHEAD is so far from being violated by a Trinity of Persons that it is in divers regards better Strengthen'd by that Position To show which I premise this Lemma That That Unity is Best which is every manner of way such and not that which is not so Whence follows that such a Compleat Unity in all Regards ought to be ascrib'd to the GODHEAD Wherefore since it has been by so many Demonstrations quoted and related to above prov'd I hope beyond all possibility of Confute that Knowledge consists in this that the Nature Known even tho' it be of a Material or Corporeal thing which is of a contrary Nature to that of the Knower must out of the very Notion of being Knâ—wn be One and the Same in the Knower as it is in it self Likewise since our Natural Notions do assure us that Love is Spiritually Unitive of the Lover with the thing Loved and these ways of making the Divine Nature One with it self are clearly Different from that of being an Infinite Actuality of Being whence we deduced GOD's Metaphysical Unity in our Third Book of our Transnatural Philosophy it follows necessarily that the Deity had not been in so many Respects One had He not per impossible Known and Lov'd Himself that is had there not been a Trinity of Persons by which only He could be said to Know and Love Himself as has been abundantly Deduced Wherefore since it belongs to the Divine Unity to be Infinitely and consequently every way such even out of this very consideration secluding all others there ought to be admitted a Trinity of Persons SECT IX The Substance of the foregoing Explication Recapitulated 1. TO sum up the precedent Explication in short Since GOD Knows and Loves Himself there is in the Divine Nature what does Verifie both Knower and Known Lover and Loved Wherefore since each of these Pairs of Notions they being relatively Opposite have unavoidably some Distinction in them and being verify'd of GOD are in the Divine Nature there is necessarily some Distinction in the Divine Nature Again since these Notions which are Verify'd of GOD and therefore since they cannot be thought to be Extrinsecal Denominations are really in Him are Distinct and not Common Notions to Many but each of them singular in it's self they must be Particulars to which the word GOD is Common and in some manner or other predicated of them all There are therefore in GOD in some Sense or other Distinct Particulars As appears farther because this Predication is made by the Copula Est which Identifies those Particulars with the Common Predicate GOD that is signifies these Distinct Particulars are Intrinsecal to the Divine Nature and not Apply'd to it Outwardly by our false or untoward manner of Conceiving it but spring out of the very Nature of the Thing or Divine Nature truly Conceiv'd Also since what 's meant by the word GOD must be conceiv'd to have All Perfections in it in the Line of Being of which to be Subsistent or a Suppositum is One we must
be forced to say that what 's meant by the word GOD is not only Common in respect of those others but also that 't is a Common Suppositum and that it is the Common Suppositum which is Verify'd of all those Particulars And since it cannot be Verify'd or Predicated of them as a Genus or Species because These do necessarily include Indetermination and Potentiality which are Inconsistent with GOD's Purest Actuality therefore it must be Predicated of them after such a manner as is not Generical or Specifical but in such a way as a Notion which is in One Line is predicated of such Notions as are conceiv'd to be Formally in Another 2. These Particulars can be but Three tho' there seems to be two Conjugations as it were of mutually Opposite Relations Because Divine Love ought to proceed from the Greatest GOOD that can be conceiv'd to belong or be Connatural to GOD as He is of a Spiritual Nature viz. the Knowledge of Infinite Truth or which is the same from Infinite or Divine Truth Known in the Divine Knowledge which amounts to this that Divine Love proceeds from the Two other Particulars formally according to their Relations Whence no Correlation can be from those other Persons to Divine Love which thus proceeds from them because Relation is Grounded on that which it Refers or Relates It being then Evident that whatever is the Ground of Relation or Related must be some Absolute Notion and not such a one as is Relative it follows that there cannot be any Correlation where the Immediate Ground is a Relative it self 3. These Three Distinct Particulars Verify'd of GOD and therefore Truly in the Divine Nature are properly to be called PERSONS because â—here being no Accidents in GOD there is noâ—hing in the Divine Nature to be Distinguish'd or â—articulariz'd but his Substance and Particulars â—n an Intelligent Substance are properly called PERâ—ONS There are therefore Three Persons in GOD. Amongst which since Knowledge formally proceeds from an Object of the same Nature in both the Knower and thing Known and to communicate a Living Nature to another Living Particular is to GENERATE hence this Procession is truly call'd GENERATION and therefore the Divine Object Known from which Divine Knowledge thus proceeds is truly tho' in a Spiritual Sense call'd a FATHER and the Divine Knowledge a SON and the former of these is the First by way of Origin because Knowledge must be conceiv'd to proceed from the Object and not the Object or Thing to proceed from the Knowledge unless that Knowledge makes it to be or Creates it as the Divine Wisdom does Creatures The Third Person is properly call'd Divine Love because Love proceeds from that which is our Greatest and most Connatural Good perfectly and expresly Known or as we phrase it conceited or fully conceiv'd to be such Now the Greatest Good of GOD who is of a Spiritual Nature is Essential TRUTH which as was said consists in this that GOD knows Himself or which is the same that the Divine Object is in the Divine Knower By which is seen How and Why the Holy Ghost who is Divine Love proceeds from both the Father and the Son 4. Wherefore since as appears by those oftrecited Words on which we build our Explication the Common Suppositum exprest by the word GOD has in it All the Perfections that can be imagin'd and this Infinitely hence all the Three Persons having the common Suppositum or the GODHEAD in them are Coeternal Co-omnipotent c. and in every respect Co-equal as is exprest in ihe Creed of St. Athanasius Whence all Objections of their being before one another for some Time or some Instant as also of Dependence on one another and all Distinction in Nature or imagin'd Plurality of Gods are Diametrically opposite to the Doctrine of the Trinity Lastly hence all pretended Arguments taken from Fancy for from True Reason none at all can be drawn are by the respective parts of this Explication shewn to be frivolous and either Answer'd or else Forestall'd and Prevented 5. If the Anti-Trinitarians have any Objections in their Quiver I have set them here a fair Mark at which they may level them They may see here that I do not wrap my Discourse in Ambiguity of words but I distinguish my Notions as exactly as is possible and draw my Conclusions consequently Nor have I any Deductions which are nor grounded on Principles But I foresee that they will not be able to raise any Opposition which is not built on Faneies taken from Material Beings which are too grofs to be made use of when we are discoursing of GOD and altogether unfit to be Transferr'd in their rude sense to so sublime a Majesty or else that they are occasion'd by perfect Ignorance of Spiritual Natures and their Operations The main Distinction between which and Bodies is this that whereas Bodies being Divisible Entitites can have nothing in them Matter supposed but their own Accidents or Modes which Determine the Matter thus or thus and thence make it this or the other Individuum so that a Corporeal Suppositum or Thing can have nothing in it but its own Nature and its own Intrinsical Modes which have no Being but Its A Spiritual Being which is so far Superiour to it that it is constituted by its Difference Indivisible which is of a Contradictory Nature to it can therefore by its Proper Operation Knowing have all other Essences or Natures in it besides its own and engraft them as it were on its Stoek of Being and in such a different manner from the former that as they are in It they are no Part or proper Mode of the Spiritual Nature it self nor any Intrinsical Accidents of it but they are there formally as Others or as Distinct from it nor are they Dependent on the Spiritual Nature that Knows them for their Being as were the Corporeal Modes on their Subject but they have a Proper Being of their own out of the Understanding and Independently on it So likewise when they have an Act of Love they have a Propension Tendency or Panting after the Object of that Love and an endeavour to be Conjoyn'd and United to it by way of Attainment or Fruition of the Good they conceive to be in it Whence 't is plain that they are carry'd to it as it is Another or as 't is Distinct from themselves So that even when an Angel or a Soul Knows and Loves its self they must in some Respect or other be Distinct from themselves as they are the Object of that Knowledge and Love as the very word Object does Evidence and as manifestly appears from the Antithesis between Knower and Known Lover and Loved Only because as was shown above in Creatures which are not Self-Beings this Knowledge and consequently Love are Accidental to them in regard that even their Existence which this Knowledge and Love presupposes is Extrinsical and Accidental to their Essence therefore this Distinction
distinctly understood will be signally Useful to defeat almost all the Arguments drawn from Reason by the Deists and if well reflected on clears many Objectionâ— brought against the B. Trinity by the Sociâ—ians and other Anti-Trinitarians opposing the Christian Tenet of the Unity of the Divine Nature in Three Persons and to confute as far as it impugns that Tenet it self that Treatise Entituled A Letter to the Reverend the Clergy of both Universities concerning the Trinity and the Athanasian Creed Which tho' it seems to be the utmost Effort of those Parties and has a very plausible Appearance to those who either are not well skill'd in or do not well reflect on the Laws of Predication and the Use of Humane Language in parallel Cases yet it is easie to show that that piece of Wit and Fancy is utterly void of Art and good Sense and that the Christian Thesis it self if rightly represented is perfectly consonant to the Nature of the Subject the DEITY and to Right Reason and that there is no more show of Contradiction that that most Simple Being should verifie Sending and being Sent Generating and being Generated and such like tho' they be Opposites than it is that the same Infinite Being when GOD knows himself which themselves grant should notwithstanding it 's most perfect Simplicity verifie that he is the Knower and thing Known which are as much Relatively Opposite as are any of the Others Lastly it may be shown very evidently that all the while they oppose the Doctrine of the Trinity those witty Gentlemen do quite mistake the whole Question by confounding what the Deity is in it's self abstracting from any order to our Conceptions or rather as it is above our Conceptions according to which consideration we cannot think or speak of it at all with what GOD is as conceiv'd by us or what as He is the Object of our Understanding His Infinite Essence obliges us truly to conceive and affirm of Him All which may perhaps particularly and at large be shown hereafter 25. Corol. VI. The same Doctrine clears the Mystery of the Incarnation Which clears Objections against the B. Trinity and against the Mystery of the Incarnation also from the least semblance of Contradiction and shows how not only Possible but consonant to right Reason it is that the Humanity of our B. Saviour may be Assum'd by the Second Person of the B. Trinity and yet not be Assum'd by either of the other Persons As also how that Person may supply to it or be united to it immediately according to the Subsistence or Personality and yet not be thus United to it formally according to it's Nature or Essence And the same may be said of the same Doctrine in order to some other Revealed Mysteries of Christian Faith which I here forbear to mention 26. Corollary VI. Hence is clearly discern'd what is the Difference between Logical and Metaphysical ABSTRACTION The Difference between Logical and Metaphysical Abstraction and that Logical Abstraction is of the Generical or Specifical that is of more Common Notions from the Inferioâ—â— ones which is done by taking from these later that precise Consideration iu which they Agree leaving out those in which they Disagree that is by taking meerly what belongs to the Genus or Generical Notion and leaving out or Abstracting from the Differences Whereas Metaphysical Abstraction regards only this that the Notion Nature or Essence of the One is not the precise Notion Nature or Essence of the Other or that both the One and the Other are different Respects or Considerations of the Thing tho' they do both of them stand upon the same Level and neither of them be Higher or Lower in the way of Predication or in the Extent of their Notion than the other In which later Sense of the word Abstraction we use to say that our Soul works or knows things by Abstract or Inadequate Notions 27. From what is said above 't is manifest that there can be no Actual Parts in any Ens whatever whether we conceive That Excellent and Useful Maxim That There are no Actual Parts in any Compound whatever Defended and Explicated it under the Notion of Ens or of such an Ens call'd Body or as affected with such an Intrinsecal Mode or Accident v. g. Quantity or any of the rest For since to Distinguish cannot belong to the Power it being of it self or of it's own nature utterly Indistinct or Indetermiâ—â—te it follows that to Distinguish must properly and only belong to the Act. Wherefore in case those Parts were Distinct Actually they must have Distinct Acts and by consequence the Power or Subject must be made Distinct by having those Distinct Acts in it that is the Subjects must be More under that Notion Therefore Unum being the Property of Ens in what Sense soever the word Ens be taken as is shown § 22. there would in that case be no Unity nor consequently Entity under any Notion left in the World To explicate this more â—…y and show it particularly In case the First â—â—rt of Power call'd Ens and it's Act Existence â—â—d each of them it 's Proper Act which constitutes a Thing and so were Two Things nothing in the World that Exists would be One Thing â—or consequently Unum being the Property of Ens A Thing or Any Thing Also if the Second fort of Power Matter and it 's Act or Form that constitutes Body were Two Things there would be no One Thing of that Sort or no one Body and consequently there would be No Body in Nature And since as will be prov'd hereafter L. 2. § 16. the Complexion of Accidents is the Essential Form which constitutes Body were those Accidents Distinct Things from the Matter and the Matter from them or were they Distinct Things from one another and therefore each of them were Capable of Existing alone or properly Entia there would be no One or No Individual Body in the World but every such Thing would be a Multitude or Many and perhaps Innumerable Or were the Parts that compound Quantity or which is the same the Parts of Body as precisely having Quantity in them Actually Distinct as many Schoolmen hold then each of them as was lately prov'd must have a Distinct Act of that sort to make them Distinct Actually whence they would be in that case Diverse Quanta or Things having divers Quantities in them Wherefore it being Demonstrable that Quantitas est Divisibilis in semper Divisibilia there could be no Quantum or Thing of that Kind in the World but would contain many Lesser Quantums in it and therefore there could be no One or No Quantum and consequently No Thing that had Quantity in it found in Nature Add that those pretended Distinct Actual Parts must be distinguisht by § 17. from others by some Act and yet most of them could have no Act iâ— them to Distinguish them from their Comparts For the Second Power
nor Die and Suffer for our Sins nor Arise again for our Justification nor Ascend into Heaven to draw our Hearts and Affections after Him c. Let now the Deniers of a Trinity put a meer Man however endow'd instead of a GOD and Common Sense will tell themselves and every Considering Man how Feeble Languid and Ineffectual all these Motives to Holy Life had been in comparison of what they would be if all these most Endearing Obligations had been laid upon us immediately by GOD Himself And can they then expect the Christian Church Governours can do less than deny them the right hand of Fellowship and Communion who in matters of the Highest Concern do thus prejudice the Common Spiritual Good of that Community 8. If the Authors of the Letter concerning the â—inity and the Athanasian Creed be sincere in their Profession that they intend no more but to get Light and Information to promote their Eternal Hapâ—â—â—â—ss I desire they would please to ask themselves â—â—ese Questions and let their own Consciences answer them Did not GOD intend that the Law of Grace should put Souls in the Purest and Best State that can be next to that of Glory in Heaven which immediately succeeds it and consequently that it has the Best Means in it that can be to promote the Eternal Happiness of Mankind Next Is not the Belief that GOD sent His only Son to Die for our Sins that GOD the Son did die for us and in his proper Person taught us His Heavenly Doctrine and led such a most Perfect Life amongst us for our Example and the many other Tenets and Motives consequent from these I say Are not these Better Means of Eternal Salvation and more Effectual to raise our Thoughts to an Affectionate Love of Him to Trust in His Mercy to follow His Dectrine and imitate His Holy Life than if a meer Man a Creature and therefore infinitely short of His Divine Majesty had been sent for that purpose Now if they grant These then they must acknowledge that the Doctrine of the Trinity upon which all these Advantages are Grounded being the Best Means or rather the Principle on which these Best Means for Virtue are Built must be acknowledg'd to be True I am far from thinking that Ignorance is the Genuine Mother of Devotion much less that Errour especially so shameless an Errour as is nothing but Nonsense and Contradiction nay such an Idolatrous Errour as gives Divine Honour to a Creature should be so great a Friend to Piety and Devotion and so Effectual and Proper as we have seen this is to beget in Souls such Purity of Heart as is apt to cultivate them with all sorts of the Best Virtues and raise them so effectually to Heaven nay incomparably more Effectually than the Contrary Tenet if as they hold it be True could possibly Effect I have not time at present to pursue the Confutation of that Pamphlet But if any farther Reply shall be judg'd Needful than what Mr. Frankland has already given it my Endeavours shall be ready to Defend so Great a Fundamental of Christian Faith In the mean time I shall presume that whoever peruses attentively this present Explication shall find that all their Objections are either Defeated or Prevented I only remark that all their Opposition is built either upon their Ignorance of a Spiritual Nature or else on their not distinguishing exactly the Notions or Meanings of the words of which they make use which I have done as accurately as I could possibly in my Method to Science and in my Preliminaries here For 't is very easie to observe that they Confound the Notion of Substance or Being with that of Relation Positive with Relative Nature with Suppositum They quarrel with the word Person which is a plain Natural Notion and yet themselves do not tell us what it should mean as if they who oppose it were not also oblig'd to acquaint the Reader what it is or signifies as well as we since otherwise they must confess they oppose they know not what They build mainly on that weak Topick that some Divines have differ'd about their Explications of it â—s if every Thesis whatever did not Abstract from â—ll Explications The Tenet it self was Anteceâ—ent and the Explications Superven'd and therefore the Article it self is still but where it was and stands firm upon its proper Basis Divine Revelation though They I and all other Explicators in the World were never so Faulty But my Appendix grows too Bulky and 't is time to close it SECT Last That the Anti-Trinitarians cannot satisfie any Man of Common Sense 1. BUT what shall the Unlearned Vulgar do in the mean time On the one side they see the Opposers of the Trinity do bear themselves high in pretending Evidence against it and that they offer many plausible and seeming Reasons which they are not able to Solve and the Replies of Learned Men are perhaps too Speculative for those of their pitch How then and in what manner ought they to bear themselves Their Reason is startled and dissatisfied and consequently their Conscience when it is confidently Pretended and offer'd to be Prov'd that the embracing this Tenet obliges them to acknowledge more GODS than One which both sides grant to be Perfect Idolatry I Answer and offer to them these Considerations 2. And First I would ask them of what Religion or Profession they were when they first Read those Books or listen'd to those Discourses which startled them in the Belief of a Trinity Had they any Faith at all before or were they mere Infidels or Seekers If they had any Faith then they had some Ground for that Faith and held that Ground Certain as the Ground of Faith ought to be and then they stand oblig'd by Evident Reason either to see that Ground invalidated and overthrown or to continue where they are Now this Opposing the Point it self by way of Pretended Reason does not at all combat their Ground of Believing thus but brings Foreign Objections against the Particular Article which is a kind of Conclusion from that Ground that is it lets the Principle alone and attacques the Conclusion which is manifestly an Indirect way of Proceeding and withal Foolish For if the Principle stands what 's bulit on that Principle will stand too let Objections say what they please Besides Grounds and Principles have something of Solid in their Meen and Notion and ought always and generally do subsist upon Settled Iudgment and Right Reason whereas Objections are almost always the Product of Fancy which is a Volatil Roving and Unsettled Faculty ever Wayward Humoursâ—me and Unsatisfied and of so Unconstant a Nature it self that 't is incapable of settling any Principle at all 3. Again a very ordinary Experience in the World will teach them that Lawyers plead very plausible for contrary Causes and sometimes Preachers for contrary Opinions so that it is not every seeming Reason which we cannot readily Answer