Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	father_n	person_n	trinity_n	5,937	5	9.9723	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62586	A seasonable vindication of the B. Trinity being an answer to this question, why do you believe the doctrine of the Trinity? : collected from the works of the most Reverend, Dr. John Tillotson, late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and the right Reverend Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, now Lord Bishop of Worcester.	Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.; Assheton, William, 1641-1711.	1697 (1697)	Wing T1221; ESTC R10019	21,341	116

suppose it as being granted by the Socinians themselves The only thing therefore for us to prove and which they deny is this viz. That the Doctrine of the Trinity is Revealed by Almighty God For if we can make it appear that an infinitely Wise and Faithful God hath Revealed it we shall then easily convince them That there is the highest Reason to believe it Q. How then do you prove that God hath Revealed it Where hath God told us That there are Three distinct Persons in the same undivided Divine Essence and Nature A. Were I to Discourse an Atheist or a Deist then since all Conviction must be ex concessis I ought to prove these Two Things 1. The Possibility and Necessity of Divine Revelation 2. That the Books of the Old and New Testament which by way of Eminency we call the Scriptures do contain this Divine Revelation And that in these Books God hath Revealed so much of his own Nature as is necessary for us to know in order to our Salvation But since these Unitarians do profess themselves Christians and consequently to believe the Holy Scriptures I shall have so much Charity for them at present as to suppose it And shall treat them as such And then the only thing I am to prove is this viz. That the Doctrine of the Trinity is Revealed in the Scriptures Q. But neither the word Trinity nor the word Person are to be found in Scripture How then can you pretend to prove a Trinity of Persons from the Scriptures A. Though neither the word Trinity nor perhaps Person in the Sense in which it is used by Divines when they treat of this Mystery be any where to be met with in Scripture yet it cannot be denied but that Three are there spoken of by the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost in whose Name every Christian is Baptized and to each of whom the highest Titles and Properties of God are in Scripture attributed And these Three are spoken of with as much distinction from one another as we use to speak of Three several Persons So that though the word Trinity be not found in Scripture yet these Three are there expresly and frequently mentioned And Trinity is nothing but Three of any Thing And so likewise though the word Person be not there expresly applied to Father Son and Holy Ghost yet it will be very hard to find a more convenient word whereby to express the distinction of these Three For which reason I could never yet see any just Cause to quarrel at this Term. For since the Holy Spirit of God in Scripture hath thought fit in speaking of these Three to distinguish them from one another as we use in common Speech to distinguish Three several Persons I cannot see any reason why in the Explication of this Mystery which purely depends upon Divine Revelation we should not speak of it in the same manner as the Scripture doth And though the word Person is now become a Term of Art I see no cause why we should decline it so long as we mean by it neither more nor less than what the Scripture says in other words V. Archbishop Tillotson's Sermon on 1 Tim. 2. 5. p. 19. Here then I fix my foot That there are Three Differences in the Deity which the Scripture speaks of by the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost and every where speaks of them as we use to do of Three distinct Persons And therefore I see no reason why in this Argument we should nicely abstain from using the word Person Id. Sermon II. on John 1. 14. p. 120. Q. You confess then that the word Trinity is not to be found in Scripture However may these Unitarians reply Have you not found it in the Athanasian Creed And because the Church of England hath owned this Creed by taking it into her Liturgy that you may approve your Selves true Sons of the Church therefore say they you are resolved to Defend it V. Pref. to Mr. Milb p. 7. A. We assert Three Persons in the Godhead Not because we find them in the Athanasian Creed but because the Scripture hath Revealed that there are Three Father Son and Holy Ghost to whom the Divine Nature and Attributes are given This we verily Believe that the Scripture hath Revealed and that there are a great many Places of which we think no tolerable Sense can be given without it and therefore we assert this Doctrine on the same Grounds on which we believe the Scriptures And if there are Three Persons which have the Divine Nature attributed to them what must we do in this Case Must we cast off the Unity of the Divine Essence No that is too frequently and plainly asserted for us to call it into Question Must we reject those Scriptures which attribute Divinity to the Son and Holy Ghost as well as to the Father That we cannot do unless we cast off those Books of Scripture wherein those things are contained V. Bishop Stillingfleet's Vind. of the Trinity p. 112. Q. But is it not trifling to prove a Doctrine by Scripture which as the Socinians pretend is contrary to Reason It being a known Rule which I shall express in the words of Bishop Stillingfleet That Whatever speaks a direct Repugnancy to any of the Fundamental Dictates of Nature cannot be of Divine Revelation V. Orig. Sacr. p. 172. For the Law of Nature and of Right Reason imprinted in our hearts is as truly the Law and Word of God as is that which is printed in our Bibles V. Bishop Sanderson's Ser. 4. ad Cl. p. 78. And therefore since Truth is never contrary to it self is it not impertinent to prove this Doctrine of the Trinity by the Scriptures which is not only above Reason but plainly contrary to it A. As to its being above Reason which they are loth to admit any thing to be this I think will bear no great Dispute Because if they would be pleased to speak out they can mean no more by this but that our Reason is not able fully to comprehend it But what then Are there no Mysteries in Religion That I am sure they will not say because God whose Infinite Nature and Perfections are the very foundation of all Religion is certainly the greatest Mystery of all other and the most incomprehensible But we must not nay they will not for this reason deny that there is such a Being as God And therefore if there be Mysteries in Religion it is no reasonable Objection against them that we cannot fully comprehend them Because all Mysteries in what kind soever whether in Religion or in Nature so long and so far as they are Mysteries are for that very reason incomprehensible Vid. Archbishop Tillotson Serm. II. on Joh. 1. 14. p. 117. I desire it may be considered That it is not repugnant to Reason to believe some things which are incomprehensible by our Reason provided that we have sufficient ground and reason for the belief of

of God and the Communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all Amen 2 Cor. 12. 14. From whence the Christian Church hath always believed a Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Divine Nature V. Two Dial. Part II. p. 31. THE CLOSE THE Unitarians themselves cannot deny that many Things certainly are the particular manner of whose Existence we can neither Comprehend nor Explain Therefore though the particular Manner of the Existence of these Three Differences or Persons in the Divine Nature expressed in Scripture by the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost is incomprehensible by our finite Understandings and inexplicable by us that is though the manner of the Union and Distinction between them is above our Reach and Comprehension yet considering the infinite Perfections of the Divine Nature which are so far above our reach God may justly oblige us to believe those Things concerning Himself which we are not able to Comprehend And of this I hope I have given a sufficient Account in the foregoing Discourse FINIS THE CONTENTS THE Doctrine of the Trinity is a very Rational Doctrine P. 1 What is meant by this Word Trinity and what Doctrines concerning it are proposed to our Belief 2 What is Faith or Belief in General 5 Why we believe the Doctrine of the Trinity 10 How it can be proved that God hath Revealed it 12 Object Neither the word Trinity nor the word Person are to be found in Scripture Answer'd 14 Object 'T is the Doctrine of the Athanasian Creed Therefore the Clergy of the Church of England are resolved to Defend it Answer'd 19 Object 'T is above Reason Answ. 22 'T is not repugnant to Reason to believe some Things which are incomprehensible by our Reason 24 Object 'T is contrary to Reason Answ. 44 Object Three Divine Persons are Three Divine Substances Therefore Three Gods Answ. 59 The Parallel between the Trinity and Transubstantiation largely considered 75 The Close 104 Catalogue of some Books Printed for B. Aylmer A Conference with an Anabaptist Being a Defence of Infant-Baptism In 8vo Price 12 d. A Theological Discourse of Last Wills and Testaments In 8vo Price 12 d. A Discourse concerning a Death-Bed Repentance Price 6 d. A Seasonable Vindication of the B. Trinity Being an Answer to this Question Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity Collected from the Works of the Most Reverend Dr. John Tillotson Late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury And the Right Reverend Dr. Edward Stillingsteet now Lord Bishop of Worcester Price 12 d A Short Exposition of the Preliminary Questions and Answers of the Church Catechism Being an Introduction to a Defence of Infant-Baptism Price 2 d. Directions in order to the Suppressing of Debauchery and Prophaneneness 2 d. A Discourse against Blasphemy Being a Conference with M. S. Concerning 1. The Rudeness of Atheistical Discourse 2. The Certainty and Eternity of Hell-Torments 3. The Truth and Authority of the Holy Scripture 2 d. A Discourse against 1. Drunkenness 2. Swearing and Cursing 2 d. The Plain Man's Devotion Part 1. Being a Method of Daily Devotion fitted to the meanest Capacities 2 d. The Plain Man's Devotion Part 2. Being a Method of Devotion for the Lord's-Day 2 d. These are the price of each of these small Books single but for the encouragement of those that are so charitably inclined to give away some quantities of them they may have them at Ten shillings a hundred At Brab Aylmer ' s in Cornhill These above all Writ by the Reverend William Assheton D. D. Six Sermons concerning the Divinity and Incarnation of Our Blessed Saviour His Sacrifice and Satisfaction And of the Unity of the Divine Nature in the B. Trinity By his Grace John late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury In 8vo Certain Propositions by which the Doctrine of the H. Trinity is so explained according to the Ancient Fathers as to speak it not contradictory to Reason A Second Defence of the Propositions Both by Edward Lord Bishop of Glocester A Brief Exposition on the Creed the Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments To which is added the Doctrine of the Sacraments By Isaac Barrow D. D. And late Master of Trinity College Cambridge This on the Creed never before Published Being very different from the Volume of Sermons on it In 8vo Now in the Press A Defence of the Blessed Trinity By Isaac Barrow D. D. Never before Printed Price 1 s. Interrogant enim nos aliquando Infideles dicunt Patrem quem dicitis Deum dicitis Respondemus Deum Filium quem dicitis Deum dicitis Respondemus Deum Spiritum Sanctum quem dicitis Deum dicitis Respondemus Deum Ergo inquiunt Pater Filius Spiritus Sanctus tres sunt Dii Respondemus Non. Turbantur quia non illuminantur cor clausum habent quia clavem fidel non habent Aug. in Job Tr. 39. Ubi cogitare coeperis incipis numerare Ubi numeraveris quid numeraveris non potes respondere Pater Pater est Filius Filius Spiritus Sanctus Spiritus Sanctus est Quid sunt isti Tres non tres Dii Non. Non tres Omnipotentes Non sed Unus Omnipotens Hoc solo numerum insinuant quod ad invicem sunt non quod ad se sunt Id. Ib.

A Seasonable VINDICATION OF THE B. Trinity Being an Answer to this Question Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity Collected from the Works of the Most Reverend Dr. John Tillotson Late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury And the Right Reverend Dr. Edward Stillingfleet Now Lord Bishop of Worcester LONDON Printed for B. Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill MDCXCVII THE PREFACE OUR Modern Socinians who are pleased to call themselves Unitarians having not only Disputed but most Blasphemously Ridiculed the Doctrine of the B. Trinity for the Conviction of such Gainsayers and the Confirmation of Others it is thought fit to Publish the following Discourse faithfully Collected from the Learned Works of Archbishop TILLOTSON and Bishop STILLINGFLEET Concerning Bishop STILLINGFLEET I shall say nothing because he is alive to Answer for himself But as to Archbishop TILLOTSON I hope it will appear even from this Collection That his Grace was very far from being a Socinian however his Memory hath been very unworthily Reproached in that as well as other Respects since his Death A VINDICATION OF THE B. TRINITY Q. WHY do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity A. Because it is a very Rational Doctrine that is there is the highest Reason to believe it Q. What do you mean by this word Trinity And What Doctrines concerning it are proposed to our Belief A. I shall Answer this Question in the very words of the Church of England Whose Doctrine I am fully perswaded is Orthodox and Catholick There is but one living and true God everlasting without Body Parts or Passions of infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness the Maker and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible And in Unity of this Godhead there be Three Persons of One Substance Power and Eternity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Art 1. The Catholick Faith is this That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance For there is one Person of the Father another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost But the Godhead of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all one the Glory equal the Majesty coeternal The Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God And yet they are not Three Gods but One God Athan. Creed It is very meet right and our bounden Duty that we should at all times and in all places give thanks unto thee O Lord Almighty Everlasting God Who art One God one Lord not one only Person but three Persons in one Substance For that which we believe of the Glory of the Father the same we believe of the Son and of the Holy Ghost without any difference or inequality Pref. on the Feast of Trinity O holy blessed and glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God have mercy upon us miserable Sinners Lit. This is what we believe concerning the Trinity And that this is very Rational Doctrine and that we have the highest Reason thus to believe I shall endeavour to evince when I have first explained the Nature of Faith in General by shewing What it is to Believe and what this act Believe doth denote when applied to any Object Q. What is Faith or Belief in General A. Belief in general I define to be an Assent to that which is Credible as Credible V. Bishop Pearson on the Creed p. 2. Q. What is meant by this word Assent A. By the word Assent is expressed that Act or Habit of the Understanding by which it receiveth acknowledgeth and embraceth any thing as a Truth Id. Ib. Q. But are there not several other kinds of Assent besides Faith by which the Soul doth receive and embrace whatsoever appeareth to be true A. This Assent or Judgment of any thing to be true being a general Act of the Understanding is applicable to other Habits thereof as well as to Faith Id. Ib. Q. How then is this Assent which we call Faith specified and distinguished from those other kinds of Assent A. It must be specified as all other Acts are by its proper Object Id. Ib. Q. What is this Object of Faith A. This Object of Faith is that which is Credible as Credible Q. Why do you repeat the word Credible and say Credible as Credible A. To denote the twofold Object of Faith viz. Material and Formal Q. What is the Material Object of Faith A. The Material Object of Faith is the thing to be believed or something which is credible Q. What is the Formal Object of Faith A. That whereby it is believed or the Reason why it is believed Q. What is it to be Credible A. That is properly Credible which is not apparent of it self either in respect of our Senses or Understanding nor certainly to be collected either antecedently by its Cause or reversely by its Effect and yet though by none of these ways hath the Attestation of a Truth V. Bishop Pearson p. 3. Q. What then is that kind of Assent which is called Faith A. When any thing propounded to us is neither apparent to our Sense nor evident to our Understanding in and of it self neither certainly to be collected from any clear and necessary Connexion with the Cause from which it proceedeth or the Effects which it naturally produceth nor is taken up upon any real Arguments or Relations to other acknowledged Truths and yet notwithstanding appeareth to us true not by a Manifestation but Attestation of the Truth and so moveth us to assent not of it self but by virtue of the Testimony given to it In plain terms When we therefore acknowledge a thing to be true for this only reason because we are told that it is so Then and in such a Case we do properly believe it And the Assent that we give to such a Truth thus attested is neither Science nor Opinion but Faith Id. Ib. Q. The nature of Faith in general being thus explained I am now prepared to be instructed by you in this important Question Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity A. Though this Doctrine of the Trinity viz. That there are Three distinct Persons in One and the same undivided Divine Essence is neither apparent to my Sense nor evident to my Understanding for being a great Mystery I could never have known it unless it had been Revealed and now it is Revealed I am not able to comprehend it yet since it is testified and declared by an All-knowing and most just and faithful God who can neither deceive nor be deceived I do therefore give my Assent unto it as a most credible Truth and as such I do firmly believe it Now that God who is infinite in Wisdom and Knowledge doth fully know himself and perfectly understand his own Nature And also that He who is infinitely Good and Faithful cannot deceive us for it is impossible for God to Lye this I shall not pretend to prove but can fairly

of his own proper and peculiar to his own Person But he owns that although there are three distinct Persons or Minds each of whom is distinctly and by himself God yet there are not three Gods but One God or one Divinity Which he saith is intirely and indivisibly and inseparably in three distinct Persons or Minds That the same one Divine Nature is wholly and intirely communicated by the Eternal Father to the Eternal Son and by the Father and Son to the Eternal Spirit without any Division or Separation and so it remains one still V. Modest Exam. p. 15 17 29 30. This is the substance of this new Explication which hath raised such Flames that Injunctions from Authority were thought necessary to suppress them V. Pref. p. 25. Q. Pray tell me your Thoughts with freedom Is this Explication of the Trinity by Three distinct Infinite Minds and Substances Orthodox or not A. Now to deal as impartially in this matter as may be I do not think our Understandings one jot helped in the Notion of the Trinity by this Hypothesis but that it is liable to as great Difficulties as any other Q. You begin then to suspect his Explication A. None ought to be fond of it Or to set it against the general Sense of others and the currant Expressions of Divines about these Mysteries Nor to call the different Opinions of others Heresy or Nonsense which are provoking Words and tend very much to inflame Mens Passions because their Faith and Understanding are both call'd in question which are very tender Things V. Pref. p. 41. Q. Is it then your Opinion that this Hypothesis of Three distinct Substances in the Trinity can scarce be Defended A. I fear it will be impossible to clear this Hypothesis as to the reconciling Three Individual Essences with One individual Divine Essence which looks too like asserting That there are Three Gods and yet but One. Id. p. 31. Q. Will you please to explain this more fully that I may better understand it A. Can One whole entire indivisible Substance be actually divided into Three Substances For if every Person must have a peculiar Substance of his own and there be Three Persons there must be Three peculiar Substances And how can there be Three peculiar Substances and yet but One entire and indivisible Substance I do not say there must be Three divided Substances in Place or separate Substances but they must be divided as three Individuals of the same kind which must introduce a Specifick Divine Nature which I think very inconsistent with the Divine Perfections Ib. p. 29. Q. But every Person must have his own proper Substance and so the Substance must be divided if there be Three Persons A. That every Person must have a Substance to support his Subsistence is not denied But the Question is Whether that Substance must be divided or not We say where the Substance will bear it as in Created Beings a Person hath a separate Substance that is the same Nature diversified by Accidents Qualities and a separate Existence But where these things cannot be there the same Essence must remain undivided but with such Relative Properties as cannot be confounded V. Vind. p. 105. When we speak of Finite Substances and Persons we are certain that distinct Persons do imply distinct Substances because they have a distinct and separate Existence But this will not hold in an Infinite Substance where necessary Existence doth belong to the Idea of it Id. p. 261. Q. But say our Unitarians A Person is an Intelligent Being and therefore Three Persons must needs be three Intelligent Beings So true it is that whosoever acknowledges Three Persons in the Godhead if he takes the word in its proper sense must admit Three Gods Which the Learned Doctor cannot avoid who says they are Three distinct Minds Three Substantial Beings Three Intelligent Beings Therefore unavoidably Three Gods V. Defence of Hist. of Unit. p. 5. A. The full and adequate Definition of a Person from which the Learned Doctor doth draw his Argument and the Unitarians their Objection is not this as they suppose viz. A Person is an Intelligent Substance For this is but part of the Definition But the full and adequate Definition of a Person is this A Person is a compleat Intelligent Substance with a peculiar manner of Subsistence So that An Individual Intelligent Substance is rather supposed to the making of a Person than the proper Definition of it For a Person relates to something which doth distinguish it from another Intelligent Substance in the same Nature and therefore the Foundation of it lies in the peculiar manner of Subsistence which agrees to One and to none else of the kind and this is it which is called Personality Which doth not consist I say in a meer Intelligent Being but in that peculiar manner of Subsistence in that Being which can be in no other So that the proper Reason of Personality whereby one Person is constituted and distinguished from another it is the peculiar manner of Subsistence whereby one Person hath such Properties as are incommunicable to any other V. Vind. p. 260 72. From these Premises we are instructed Why in the Blessed Trinity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are Three Persons and yet but One God The Reason is this God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost are but One God because the Divine Essence Nature and Substance which alone makes God is intirely One and is not capable of any Separation Multiplication or Division Therefore there can be no more Gods than One. But since these Three Father Son and Holy Ghost have each of them a peculiar manner of Subsistence That is each of these Three hath a peculiar Property incommunicable to any other Therefore as to their mutual Relations and Personalities they are Three but as to the Divine Essence and Godhead they are but One. And this is so far from being contrary to Reason as the Socinians pretend that it is highly Rational to Believe a Trinity in Unity That is Three distinct Persons and yet but One God As I hope hath been fully proved and that to your Satisfaction Q. Before you talk too much of Satisfaction you must Answer me a Question A. What is it Q. Do you believe Transubstantiation A. No I do not But what 's this to the purpose Will you not allow me to believe the Trinity unless I will believe Transubstantiation And must I renounce the Trinity because I reject Transubstantiation Q. The Unitarians pretend that the Case is parallel A. Pray give me their Objection in their own words and then I shall instruct you what Answer to return to these Men of Sense and Reason Q. I find that the Belief of a Trinity does Contradict Reason as much as Transubstantiation Now who should not scruple an Opinion perfectly parallel with Transubstantiation and equally fruitful in Incongruities and Contradictions Well then if the Trinity implies