Solomon in his Prayer of Dedication might well say But will God indeed dwell on the Earth Behold the Heaven and Heaven of Heavens cannot contain Thee how much less this House that I have built The Temple then was a Figure and we must enquire what it was a Figure of Now a typical Presence can be a Figure of nothing but a real Presence and God's Personal dwelling among Men for Presence and Habitation can signifie nothing but Presence and a Figure must be a Figure of something that is real and nothing can answer to a figurative visible Presence of God but a personal visible Presence Now our Saviour calls his Body the Temple Destroy this Temple and in three days I will raise it up which St. Iohn tells us He spake of the Temple of his Body The Temple then which was God's House where he dwelt was but a Figure of Christ's Body Christ's Body then was that in truth and reality which the Temple was but a Figure of that is God's visible Presence on Earth But God was not visibly present on Earth unless he were personally united to Human Nature that the Body of Christ was the Body of God or of the Divine Word by as true and real an Union as any man's Body is his Thus God may be personally and visibly present among men as a man though his Soul be as invisible as the Deity is yet visibly present by his Union to a visible Body But if Christ be not God incarnate if the Divine Word be not personally united to Human Nature the Body of Christ is but as figurative a Temple as the Temple at Ierusalem was and then one Figure is made a Type of another which is as great an Absurdity in Types as a Metaphor of a Metaphor is in Speech God was as really present in the Temple as he was in Christ without a personal Union for God fills all places and is really present every where but yet was peculiarly present in the Temple to peculiar ends and purposes to hear Prayers to accept their Sacrifices and Oblations to give forth his Oracles and Responses and if Christ be but a meer Man he dwells no otherwise in him but by Inspiration and though Christ was more perfectly inspired than the Jewish Oracle this does not alter the Nature of God's Presence does not make one a typical and figurative the other a real Presence for God is really present in both but not personally united to either The typical Presence of God in the Tabernacle and Temple is not opposed to a real Presence by real and sensible Effects but to a visible Presence God is present every where but he is invisibly present but as he had chosen Israel for his peculiar People and Inheritance so he would dwell visibly among them but this could be done no other way but either by taking a visible Body or by some instituted signs of his visible Presence the first he would not do yet but intended to do in the fulness of time which his own infinite wisdom had appointed for it and in the mean time did praefigure this visible appearance of God on Earth in Human Nature by some visible Symbols of his Presence by a visible House wherein he dwelt by a visible Throne or Mercy-Seat and by placing a visible Oracle among them So that the Temple as a Type was a Type and Figure of God's visible Appearance and dwelling upon Earth and therefore if it was a Type of Christ's Body as Christ himself tells us it was God did visibly dwell in Christ by a Personal Union for nothing else can make God visible but a Personal Union to a visible Nature To this St. Iohn plainly alludes when he tells us The Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his Glory the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabernacled among us fulfilled that Type of God's dwelling in the Tabernacle and Temple at Ierusalem by his dwelling personally in Human Nature and we beheld his Glory that is says our Historian the glory of the man on whom the Word did abide and inhabit in him But St. Iohn says it is the glory of the Word made Flesh the glory of the Word as of the only begotten of the Father did shine in Human Nature there were visible signs of the Glory of the Incarnate Word This glory he says was beheld in his Miracles and in his Transfiguration and on many other occasions very many indeed in his Life and Doctrine especially for how would they have the glory of the Incarnate Word seen but by the visible Operations of it in Human Nature How does a Human Soul discover its glory but by visible Actions Thus our Saviour tells us that he is greater than the Temple I say unto you in this place is one greater than the Temple Now the Temple was God's House and figurative Presence and if he were greater than the Temple God dwelt in a more perfect manner in him that is he was not a symbolical visible Presence of God which was all he could be had he been no more than a man but a visible God even the Lord of the Temple as the Prophet Malachi assures us Behold I will send my Messenger and he shall prepare the way before me and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come into his Temple even the Messenger of the Covenant whom ye delight in behold he shall come saith the Lord of Hosts This Messenger all men own was Iohn the Baptist The voice of one crying in the wilderness prepare ye the way of the Lord make his paths straight Now our Historian confesses he prepared the way for Christ and God says he shall prepare the way before Me which proves that Christ is this Lord of Hosts for whom Iohn was to prepare the way but that I at present intend is that he for whom Iohn was to prepare the way is the Lord of the Temple for it is called his Temple Now we know the Lord Jehovah was the Lord of the Temple for the Temple was God's House dedicated to his Name and Worship he dwelt in his Temple before by Types and Figures but now he was to come visibly and personally into his Temple and therefore he might well say he was greater than the Temple since he was the Lord of it that Incarnate God of whom God's dwelling in the Temple was a Figure and which had been a very empty and insignificant Figure unworthy of the Wisdom and Majesty of God had it not praefigured the mysterious Incarnation of the Son of God Thus as God had a Typical House so he had a typical High Priest and typical Sacrifices That the High Priest who once a year entred into the typical Holy of Holies was a Type of Christ who entred into Heaven The Apostle teaches us 9 Hebr. that the Jewish Sacrifices were typical of
And adds The very truth is they cannot otherwise defend the Incarnation or Personal Vnion of an infinite God to a finite Man This is Gibberish which I do not understand but this I do understand which I suppose is the meaning of it if it have any meaning That an Eternal Being who has no beginning and no succession of Being may Coexist with time and that an infinite Mind who has no parts or extension is present every where without extension This I have sufficiently discoursed already and refer my Reader to it But he has a thundring Argument against this But withal it must be owned that then the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation do infer imply and suppose all the Contradictions that Mr. Johnson has objected to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation I hope not all for that is a very good Discourse and I only wish for the Author's sake si sic omnia but pray what is the matter His whole Book and all his Demonstrations are founded upon these two Suppositions That a longer time doth not all of it coexist in a shorter nor is a greater extension constipated or contained in a less Suppose this for I have forgot what his Demonstrations are and have not the Book now by me what is this to the Trinity and Incarnation though a longer time cannot all of it coexist in a shorter which I hope is not so loosly expressed by Mr. Iohnson because it is not sense for time is in a perpetual flux and nothing of it exists but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but what is this to an Eternal Being's coexisting with time without time or succession Though a greater Extension cannot be contained in a less what is this to an infinite Mind's being present every where without Extension for here is no Comparison between a longer and shorter time but between Time and Eternity which is not Time nor Succession nor between a greater and less Extension but between a finite and infinite Mind neither of which have any Extension But suppose the worst how does this concern the Doctrine of the Incarnation If he could tell how to apply all the Demonstrations of Mr. Iohnson which he tells us in Print he forbears to do because the Press is not open to them these Absurdities and Contradictions would not fall upon the Doctrine of the Incarnation but upon the Notion of an Omnipresent God who has no Parts nor Extension which was not invented to salve the Difficulties of the Incarnation but is the true Notion of God and his Omnipresence who is not Omnipresent by Parts but is every where a perfect and infinite Mind and if he can ridicule God out of the World we will quarrel no more about the Incarnation I do not at all wonder that he boasts so much what Follies and Contradictions he could discover in the Athanasian Creed for a man who cannot understand common Sense can never fail of finding Follies and Contradictions 2. He proves That the Vnion between God and Man cannot make one Person as the Vnion of Body and Soul does because the Vnion of Soul and Body is not the Vnion of Two Persons but only of One Person the Soul to a thing otherways without Life Reason Memory or Free-will But in the pretended Vnion of God with Man there are Two distinct and very different Lives Memories Reasons and Free-wills which utterly destroys a Personal Vnion for that supposes but One Life One Reason One Memory One Free-will Now this is false as to matter of Fact for though we will allow the Soul to be the Person yet by its Union to the Body it has two sorts of different Lives Wills Affections Appetites Reasons the Animal and Sensual and the Rational Life Will Appetites a Carnal and a Spiritual Reason that is two different Principles of Flesh and Spirit as much as if every Man had two Souls So that there may be two Lives two Wills c. in the same Person and it makes no difference in this Case whether these two Wills be seated in two different Subjects or the same Soul by its vital Union to Matter have two distinct Wills and Reasons and therefore we must find out some other Notion of a Personal Union than this that one Person can have but one Will one Reason c. for it is plain one Person may have two Wills and Reasons and if he may have two he may have three according to the number and diversity of Natures which are united into One Person Now when I inquire what it is that unites different Natures into One Person I do not mean what it is that naturally unites them neither what the natural Union is between Soul and Body in the Person of Man nor of God and Man in the Person of Christ for this we know nothing of and therefore no pretended Contradictions and Impossibilities in this shall hinder my belief of it as I discoursed in the first Section But how two different Natures may be so united as to make but One Agent for One Agent is One Person Now there are but two things necessary to this 1. That these different Natures be so united that the superior Nature have the Government of the whole Person unless there be One governing Principle there cannot be One Agent and therefore not One Person and the superior Nature must be the Governour and the Person as this Author tells us the Soul is the Person in man as being the superior governing Principle and in the Soul Reason has the natural government of Sense as being the superior Faculty proper to a Spirit whereas Sense results from its Union to Matter And thus in Christ the Divine Word is the Person and in this Personal Union of God and Man has such a government of Humane Nature as Reason has over Sense in Man and therefore St. Iohn tells us That the Word was made Flesh or was Incarnate for the Person of the Word took Humane Nature into a Personal Union with himself And this is the Reason why all the Actions and Passions of Humane Nature are attributed to Christ as the Son of God because the Word is the Person to whom Humane Nature is united and who has the sole government of it as all the Sufferings and Actions of the Body are attributed to the Man though the Soul is the Person because it is the superior and governing Power and constitutes the Person 2. To compleat a Personal Union it is necessary there be One Consciousness in the whole As a Man has a conscious Sensation of every thing which is done or suffered either by Body or Soul feels its own Reasonings and Passions and all the Pains and Pleasures of the Body and in this Sense there must be but one Life in one Person and this own Consciousness to the whole is the One Life But then we must observe That where different Natures are united into One Person this universal Consciousness to the whole Person is seated
the Orphicks by Heraclitus and Zeno as Tertullian and Lactantius affirm Nay that the Stoicks and Platonists and especially Philo Iudaeus uses it in the same sense who attributes the making of the World to the Word which he calls the Name the Image the Son of God To which purpose he before cited Rabbi Eliezel that God and his Name were before the World was made and explains this by the sayings of some Fathers as all meaning the same thing and we know they meant by it a Divine Person The Wor d was with God Grotius does say that this is opposed to the Words being made Flesh and appearing in the world but he was far enough from thinking that these words have only a negative sense that to be with God signifies only not to be in the world for he tells us what the positive sense is that with God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Father the very sense which our Historian before rejected as absurd and explains it by what Wisdom says 8 Prov. 30. Then I was by him as one brought up with him and I was daily his delight rejoycing alway before him which he does not think a Prosopopoea but spoken of a subsisting Person The Word was God Here Grotius produces numerous Testimonies to prove that that Divine Person who is called the Word not the Faculty of Wisdom and Power in God is God He says indeed that the ancient Hebrews and Primitive Christians teach that when an Angel is in Scripture called Iehovah it is not a meer Angel sed cui adfuerit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an Angel to whom the Word is joyned or united not as the Historian says to whom the Divine Wisdom has been in an extraordinary degree communicated that is an extraordinary wise Angel for there is no other sense in it but I know not what Grotius meant by the Union or Presence of the Word with the Angel but I know the Primitive Christians asserted That the Angel called Iehovah was the Word Grotius assigns this Reason of the Repetition that because the Evangelist had called the Word God he would have us understand that he is so God that he is also with God that is that the Word is not all that God is but only One Person in the Godhead which he observes that Origen and others after him called the Distinction of Hipostasis tho' the Primitive Christians and Athanasius himself used that word Hipostases in a different sense and the Christians seemed to take up this sense of it from the Platonists But whatever becomes of the Phrase this is plainly what Grotius meant by the Word 's not being all that is God that is that he is but One Person in the Godhead not that he is but One communicable Attribute in God This is sufficient to show how our Historian has abus'd this Great Man when he represents him as making the Word only the Divine Wisdom and Power not a Divine Person and all his other mis-representations depend on this and need not be particularly examined But I perceive our Socinian Historian is ashamed of that Exposition which Socinus and his genuine Disciples give of this Chapter which had been a sign of some Understanding and Modesty had he not invented as foolish and sensless an Interpretation himself for it is not Grotius's but his own Socinus was sensible that the Word must signifie a Person but would allow it to be no more than a Man called the Word not with respect to his Nature but Office as the greatest and most excellent Prophet who reveals God's will to the world Our Historian was convinced that the Word must be something Divine which was with God from the beginning of the world and was not different from God but is God and did create all things at first and was in a sense Incarnate was made Flesh did abide on and inhabit an human Person the Person of Iesus So far is very well But then he will not allow the Word to be a Person but a Divine Quality or Accident the Wisdom or Power of God and the fault of this is that it is unintelligible Nonsense to describe the Word so pompously as distinct from God but with God in the beginning and himself God and to ascribe the making of the world to him and tell us that he was made Flesh and all this while the world is only a communicable Attribute in God what we call the Faculty of Reason in Men This is a new way of making a God of a Prosopopoea and incarnating a Prosopopoea which must be a very figurative God and Incarnation But I observed before that when any Vertue or Power or Faculty is spoken of as a Person what is said of the Vertue or Power belongs to the Person in whom that Vertue and Power is and what that is said to do is done by the Person or else it is not a figurative but a false and absurd form of speech As when Charity is said to suffer long and is kind the meaning is a charitable man is so a Prosopopoea is easily understood and conveys its sense clearly and elegantly to our minds but where there is nothing but Nonsense at the bottom it must not be made a figure for a figurative Speech is good sense Let us then examine his Prosopopoea by this Rule In the beginning was the Word that is the Wisdom and Power of God and this Wisdom and Power of God was with God that is God was with himself and this Wisdom and Power of God was God that is God was God what sense I beseech you is there in this That the Wisdom and Power of God made the world I grant is sense because God did make the world but if there be any sense in the words being made Flesh it is certain that God is Incarnate For the Wisdom and Power of God which is with God and is God cannot be Incarnate unless God be Incarnate Unless we can divide God from his Wisdom and separate the Wisdom of God which was with him from the beginning from God to be Incarnate in Man The Wisdom of God can no more be Incarnate unless God can be Incarnate then the Wisdom of an Angel can be Incarnate without the Incarnation of the Angel and thus this Socinian is turned Sabellian and Patropassian However I confess we are beholden to this Historian for he has given up this place to us which is one of the most express places for the Divinity of our Saviour He allows that the beginning is the beginning of all things that Word signifies something Divine even the Wisdom and Power of God that to be with God is to be intimately present with him that to be God is to be God himself That all things were made by him is meant of the first Creation of the world that this Divine Word was made Flesh and did abide on the human Person of Christ Jesus the only difference between us is whether
only in the superior and governing Nature as it ought to be because in that the Natures are united into One Person and that must govern and take care of the whole Thus the Mind in man is conscious to the whole man and to all that is in man to all the motions of Reason and Sense but Sense is not conscious to all the Actings of Reason which is the superior Faculty though it is conscious as far as is necessary to receive the Commands and Directions of Reason for the Body moves at the command of the Will and it is so far conscious to its Commands Thus in the Person of Christ who is God-man the Divine Word is conscious to his whole Person not only to himself as the Divine Word but to his whole Humane Nature not by such Knowledge as God knows all men and all things but by such a Consciousness as every Person has of himself But it does not hence follow that the Humane Nature is conscious to all that is in the Word for that destroys Humane Nature by making it Omniscient which Humane Nature cannot be and its being united to the Person of the Word does not require it should be for an inferior Nature is not conscious to all that is in the superior Nature in the same Person This Union of Natures does require that the inferior Nature be conscious to the superior as far as its Nature is capable and as far as the Personal Union requires for so Sense is in some degree conscious to Reason and it cannot be one Person without it And therefore the Human Nature in Christ is in some measure in such a degree as Human Nature can be conscious to the Word feels its Union to God and knows the Mind of the Word not by External Revelations as Prophets do but by an Inward Sensation as every man feels his own Thoughts and Reason but yet the Human Nature of Christ may be ignorant of some things notwithstanding its Personal Union to the Divine Word because it is an inferior and subject Nature And this I take to be the true account of what our Saviour speaks about the Day of Judgment Of that day and hour knoweth no man no not the Angels in Heaven but my Father only where our Saviour speaks of himself as a man and as a man he did not at that time know the Day of Judgment though personally united to the Divine Word who did know it for as he is the Divine Word so our Saviour tells us That he seeth all that the Father doth and therefore what the Father knows the Eternal Word and Wisdom of the Father must know also But yet the Human Nature of Christ was conscious to all the actings of the Divine Word in it as we may see in the Story of the Woman having an Issue of Blood twelve years who in the midst of a great Crowd of People came behind him and touched his Garment and was immediately healed our Saviour presently asked who touched him and when all denied it and Peter wondered he should ask that Question when the Multitude thronged him and pressed him Iesus said some body hath touched me for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me he felt the miraculous Power of the Divine Word working in him as a man feels what is done in himself This I think gives some account how God and Man may be united into One Person which though it be a great Mystery which we cannot fully comprehend yet is not wholly unintelligible much less so absurd and contradictious as this Author pretends As for what he adds about believing and professing this Faith let him apply it to Christ's being the Messias or any other Article of the Creed and see what Answer he will give to it for what if men can't believe it are we obliged under the penalty of the loss of Salvation to believe it whether we can or no doth God require of any man an impossible Condition in order to Salvation No! but if it be credible and what a wise man may believe and what he has sufficient Evidence to believe he shall be damned not because he can't but won't believe it But what if it be against a mans Conscience to profess it if he profess against his Conscience he sins and if notwithstanding this a man must either profess or be damned then God requires some men to sin in order to their Salvation God requires no man to profess against his Conscience but he shall be damned for not believing it not for not professing what he does not believe it looks like a Judgment upon these men that while they can talk of nothing less than the severest Reason they impose upon themselves or hope to impose upon the World by the most Childish Sophistry and Nonsense And now I shall leave our Note-maker to harangue by himself and perswade Fools if he can that the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation is nothing but Popery or must be parted with for the sake of Iews or be made a Complement to the Morocco Ambassador and his admired Mahomet or must be sacrificed to Peace and Unity and to secure men from damnation who will not believe I will not envy him the satisfaction of such Harangues it being all the Comfort he has for I am pretty confident he will never be able to Reason to any purpose in this Cause again Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be World without end Amen THE END ADVERTISEMENT A Preservative against Popery in two Parts with a Vindication in Answer to the Cavils of Lewis Sabran a Jesuit 4 o. A Discourse concerning the Nature Unity and Communion of the Catholick Church 4 o. A Sermon Preached before the Lord Mayor Novemb. 4. 1688. 4 o. A Practical Discourse concerning Death The Fifth Edition 8 o. The Case of the Allegiance due to Soveraign Powers stated and resolved according Scripture and Reason and the Principles of the Church of England with a more particular Respect to the Oath lately enjoyned of Allegiance to Their Present Majesties K. William and Q. Mary The Fifth Edition 4 o. By William Sherlock D. D. Master of the Temple Printed for W. Rogers The Creed Brief Notes Answer Notes Answer Notes Answer Notes Answer Vossius de tribus Symbel dissert 3 Cap. 29 30. Cap. 31. Ibid. Cap. 48. Ibid. Ibid. Cap. 44. Dissert 2. c. 1. Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Answer Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Aug. lib. contra Serm. Arrian c. 16. Creed Notes Answer Notes Answer Creed Notes Answer Creed Notes Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas. Cont. Arium Disput. Tom. 1. p. 116. Paris 1627. Quae ratiocinatio ad id cogit ut dicamus Deum Patrem non esse sapientem nisi habendo sapientiam quam genuit non existendo per se pater sapientia Deinde si ita est filius quoque ipse
therefore St. Austin represents this much better by that Self-consciousness which is between those distinct Faculties in us of Memory Understanding and Will which know and feel whatever is in each other We remember what we understand and will we understand what we remember and will and what we will we remember and understand and therefore these Three Faculties which are thus intimate to each other make one Man and if we can suppose Three Infinite Minds and Persons thus conscious of whatever is in each other as they are of themselves they can be but One numerical God But that this may not be thought a meer arbitrary and groundless conjecture I shall shew you that this is the true Scripture Notion of the Unity of the Godhead or of Three Persons and One God That the Three Divine Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost are Three Infinite Minds really distinct from each other that the Father is not the Son nor the Holy Ghost either the Father or the Son is so very plain in Scripture that I shall not spend time to prove it especially since it is supposed in this Controversie for when we enquire how these Three Infinite Minds or Persons are One God it supposes that they are distinct and if there were any Dispute about it what I shall say in explaining their Unity will prove their Distinction that they are Three distinct infinite minds 1. Let us then consider what the Unity is between the Father and the Son for so our Saviour tells us I and the Father are One 10 Iohn 30. And how they are One we learn from several places in this Gospel which as the Ancients tell us was wrote on purpose in opposition to the Heresie of Carinthus to prove that Christ was not meer Man but the Eternal Son of God and One with his Father Now 1 Iohn 1. the Evangelists call him the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Word of God the Eternal Wisdom and Reason of God and therefore as intimate to God as his own Eternal Word and Wisdom as intimate as a Man 's own Wisdom and Reason is to him and therefore he adds that this Word which was in the beginning was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with God as we translate it which cannot signifie a local presence but an essential union or a being in God as Christ tells us The Father is in me and I in him 10 Iohn 38. for before place was made or any thing to fill it to be with God could signifie nothing else but to subsist in him and therefore v. 18. the Apostle expounds this being with God by being in the bosome of the Father which cannot signifie an External Union because God has no External Bosom but Bosom signifies the very Essence of God and if we could distinguish Parts in God the most inward and secret Recesses of the Divine Nature Now this intimate Union and In-being when we speak of an essential Union of pure and infinite Minds is a mutual consciousness and if I may so speak an inward sensation of each other to know and feel each other as they know and feel themselves To represent this plainly and intelligibly if it be possible to the meanest understanding I shall consider wherein the most perfect Union of created Spirits consist which are distinct and seperate Beings from each other wherein the Union of the Divine Persons in the Ever Blessed Trinity answers this and wherein it excels it Now created Spirits as Angels and Humane Souls are then most perfectly united to each other when they most perfectly know one another and know all that each other knows and perfectly agree in all they know which is an Union in Knowledge when they perfectly love one another have the same will the same affections the same interests and designs when they are a kind of Unisons which move and act a like as if one Soul animated them both This is that perfect Unity which is so frequently and earnestly recommended to Christians both by Christ and his Apostles as we may see every-where in Scripture And the very same Union with this there is between the Persons of the Ever Blessed Trinity an Union in knowledge in love in will in works The Son perfectly knows the Father and therefore knows all that the Father knows this St. Iohn means when he tells us That he is in the Bosom of the Father 1 Iohn 18. No man hath seen God at any time that is no Man ever had a perfect knowledge of God which is here called seeing because sight gives us the most distinct and perfect knowledge of things The only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father he hath declared him Where it is plain to be in the bosom of the Father is put to signifie the most perfect and intimate knowledge of him as in ordinary speech to take any Man into our bosom signifies to impart all our Secrets to him but our Saviour tells us this in plain words that the Father perfectly knows the Son and the Son the Father 10 Iohn 15. As the Father knoweth me so know I the Father Thus the Father loveth the Son 3 Joh. 25.5 Joh. 20. And the Son loveth the Father 14 Iohn 31. Thus the Son has no will but his Fathers 5 Iohn 20. I can of my own self do nothing as I hear I judge and my judgment is just because I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which hath sent me 6 John 38. For I came not to do my own will but the will of him that sent me 4 John 34. My meat is to do the will of him that sent me and to finish his work Thus whatever Christ did or spake it was in conformity to his Father what he saw and heard and learnt of him 5 John 19. The Son can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do for whatsoever things he doth these also doth the Son likewise 12 John 49. I have not spoken of my self but the Father that sent me he gave me a commandment what I should say and what I should speak This is as perfect an Union as Union signifies agreement and concord as can possibly be between two minds and spirits The like may be said of the Holy Ghost He perfectly knows the Father and his most secret Councels For the spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God 1 Cor. 2.10 He is the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation who inspired the Prophets and Apostles to declare God and his will to the World and therefore is most intimately acquainted with it himself Thus our Saviour comforts his Apostles when he was to leave them himself with the Promise of the Spirit who should guide them into all truth 16 Ioh. 13 14 15. Howbeit when he the spirit of truth is come he shall guide you into all truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will
shew you things to come He shall glorifie me for he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you All things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I that he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you Of which words more hereafter at present I only observe how intimately the Holy Spirit is acquainted with all the Secrets both of Father and Son whatever things the Father knows that the Son knows and what the Son knows that the Holy Spirit knows that is whatever the Father knows which is first said to be the Father's then the Son 's and then the Holy Spirit 's according to the Order of Persons in the adorable Trinity Thus the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Love which inspires us with the love of God and gives us the reciprocal Testimonies of God's love to us For the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us 5 Rom. 5. And as some of the Ancients represent it he is that love wherewith the Father and the Son love each other and therefore there is no question but that he who unites Father and Son and unites God to us and us to God by love is united to Father and Son by love himself He is that Holy Spirit who renews and sanctifies us and subdues our wills into a conformity and subjection to the will of God and therefore no doubt but he has the same will with Father and Son Thus Father Son and Holy Ghost are most intimately united in knowledge will and affection but after all this is no more than what we call a Moral Union such as may be between created Spirits which remain separate Beings still and though they are morally are not essentially One and therefore such an Union as this cannot make Father Son and Holy Ghost One God but Three agreeing and consenting Gods as Peter Iames and Iohn though they should in the most perfect manner be united in the same Faith and mutual love and affection c. yet would be Three Men still And therefore I must now shew that what is merely a Moral Union between Creatures is an essential Union between the Persons of the Ever Blessed Trinity And this I have already shewn in part The Three Divine Persons of the Ever Blessed Trinity are united in knowledge in will in love but are not united as Creatures are by an external likeness conformity agreement consent in knowledge will and affection but are so united to each other as every Man is to himself not as one Man is to another As for instance Every Man by an inward sensation feeels his own knowledge will and affections but he does not know any other Man's thoughts or will or passions by feeling them in himself as he does his own but by an external communication of thoughts and therefore though they may be morally One by an exact agreement and harmony of thoughts and passions as far as by external communication they can know what each others thoughts and passions are yet they are essentially distinct and separate But Father Son and Holy Ghost are One not by an external agreement or consent but by an internal consciousness as every Man is One with himself If I may so speak because we want proper words to express it they feel each other in themselves know the same thing by feeling each others knowledge and will and love a-like by feeling what each other wills and loves just as every Man feels his own thoughts knowledge will and passions that is are as intimate to each other and as essentially One by a mutual Self-consciousness as every Man is One with himself And the phrases and expressions of Scripture whereby the Unity or Oneness of Father Son and Holy Ghost are expressed require this sense Thus I observed before that the Son is the eternal word and wisdom of the Father and therefore as intimate to him as every Man's Reason is to himself and knows the Father not by external Revelation but as every Man knows himself But the most frequent expression whereby Christ represents this close and intimate and essential Union between his Father and him is I am in the Father and the Father in me which he repeats several times in St. Iohn's Gospel Now if we will allow this to be a proper not a metaphorical expression it can signifie no other Union than what I have now described That it is a proper and not a metaphorical expression appears from this that there is no such Union in Nature between any two other Beings as this to be in One another and a Metaphor is translated from something that is real and natural upon account of some likeness and similitude and therefore that which is like to nothing else which has no pattern and example can be no Metaphor because it alludes to nothing Now if we speak of a substantial Union or a Union of Substances what two Substances can there be in the World which can mutually be in each other or can mutually comprehend each other which is indeed a palpable contradiction as signifying at the same time to be greater and to be less than each other for in substantial Unions that which comprehends is greater than that which is comprehended that which is within any thing else is less than that which contains it and therefore for two Beings mutually to comprehend and to be comprehended by each other is to be greater and less than each other greater as they comprehend each other and less as they are comprehended So that this Oneness between the Father and the Son is such an Union as there is nothing in Nature like it and we cannot long doubt what kind of Union this is if we consider that there is but one possible way to be thus united and that is by this mutual Consciousness which I have now described If the Son be conscious in himself of all that the Father is as conscious to the knowledge to the will to the love of the Father as he is to his own by an internal sensation then the whole Father is in the Son if the Father be thus conscious to all that the Son is then the whole Son is in the Father if the Holy Ghost be thus conscious to all that is in the Father and in the Son then the Father and the Son are in the Holy Ghost and the Holy Ghost in the Father and the Son by this mutual Consciousness to each other This is very plain and intelligible and makes them as much One as every Man is One with himself by Self-consciousness And this is a plain demonstration that all Three Divine Persons are coessential and coequal with each other We know nothing of God but that he is an infinite Mind that is infinite Knowledge Wisdom Power Goodness And if these Three Divine Persons are all internally conscious of all these Perfections which are in each other they must all have the
same Perfections the same Knowledge Wisdom Power Goodness that is the same Nature unless that Knowledge Wisdom Goodness which we are internally conscious of and feel within ourselves be not the Perfections of our Nature whereas we may externally know those Perfections which are not ours but what we feel in ourselves is our own and therefore this mutual Consciousness makes all that is the Father 's the Son 's and all that is the Son 's the Holy Spirit 's as our Saviour speaks All things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I that he the Spirit shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you 16 Iohn 15. And if these Three Persons be thus mutually in each other as you have already heard they must be all equal for if the Father be in the Son how can the Son be less than the Father if he comprehends the Father and all his infinite perfections If Son and Holy Ghost are in the Father and Father and Holy Ghost in the Son and Father and Son in the Holy Ghost imagine what inequality you can between them if Son and Holy Ghost are conscious to all the infinite Perfections which are in the Father and have all the Perfections they are conscious to how can Son and Holy Ghost be less perfect than the Father or then each other I am sure our Saviour attributes all his Wisdom and Knowledge and Power to his intimate conscious Knowledge of his Father which he calls seeing him which is such a knowledge as Creatures cannot have of God 5 Iohn 19.20 Verily verily I say unto you the Son can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do for whatsoever things he doth those also doth the Son likewise For the Father loveth the Son and sheweth him all things that himself doeth and he will shew him greater works than these that ye may marvel By this perfect conscious Knowledge which the Son has of the Father he has all those Perfections in himself which are in the Father he can do whatever he sees the Father do and he sees whatever the Father does but can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do He has all the Perfections which are in the Father and therefore can do whatever he sees the Father do but there is no knowledge no perfection no power in the Son which is not in the Father and which he does not receive from the Father and therefore he can do nothing of himself but what he sees the Father do which signifies the most perfect equality between the Father and the Son founded on the Son's seeing the Father and whatever he doth or his intimate Consciousness of all that the Father is And this is the true Notion of the Son 's being the Image of his Father The brightness of his Father's glory and the express Image of his person 1 Heb. 2. For as a dead Image and Picture represents the external Lineaments and Features of the Person whose Picture or Image it is that we can see the Person in his Picture so a living essential Image is the living essential perfections of the Father and with a conscious knowledge sees the Father in himself For this reason the Son is said to hear of his Father to see what his Father doth and to do the same to receive commandement from his Fatber to do the will of his Father and the works of his Father to finish the works which his Father gave him to do to glorifie his Father c. Which must not be expounded after the manner of Men as the Socinians expound such expressions and thence conclude the great inferiority inequality subjection of the Son to the Father such as there is between a Prince and the Ministers he employs and that therefore the Son cannot be the Supream God for the Supream God cann't be commanded taught sent on Messages to fulfil the will and pleasure of another and do nothing but what he sees done and receives Commission to do I say we must not put such a mean and servile sense on these expressions but we must expound them only to signifie that the Son receives all from the Father Life Knowledge Will Power by Eternal Generation and whatever he does he does with a Consciousness of his Father's Will and Wisdom as it were feeling the Will and Wisdom and Power of his Father in himself and this he calls hearing and seeing the works of the Father receiving Commands and doing the Works of the Father because his Nature is that to him which external Teachings ' and verbal Commands are to Men he hears he sees he does the Works and Will and Commands of his Father by being the perfect living self-conscious image of his Father's Will and Knowledge and infinite Perfections But there is one place more I must take notice of by which the Socinians think to overthrow all that I have now said that the Union between the Father and Son is not such an essential Unity as we speak of but a meer moral Union or a perfect agreement and consent in knowledge will and affection such as is or ought to be among Christians and that our Saviour himself has thus expounded it 17 Iohn 20 21. Neither pray I for these alone but for them also which shall believe on me through their word That they all may be One as thou Father art in me and I in thee that they also may be One in us Which is the very expression I have so much insisted on to prove this essential Union and Self-consciousness between the Father and the Son As thou Father art in me and I in thee which it seems signifies no other kind of Union than what our Saviour prays for among Christians That they also may be One as thou Father art in me and I in thee Now the Union of Christians is only an Union in Faith and Love and One Communion and therefore thus the Father and the Son are One also by a consent and agreement in Knowledge Will and Love Now this I readily grant as I observed before that Father and Son are One by a most perfect agreement in Knowledge Will and Love which we call a Moral Union between Men and it is this Unity or Oneness for which our-Saviour prays that his Disciples may be One as the Father and he are One that they may perfectly agree in the same Faith and Love that they may speak the same things and mind the same things But then this perfect harmony and consent between the Father and the Son results from an essential Unity from their being in one another which is such an Union as it is impossible there should be between Christians but this Moral Union in the same Faith and mutual love is called being One as the Father and Son are One because it is the nearest resemblance of this essential Unity that can be between Creatures and that is the only meaning of As That they may be One
whence all Influences of Grace are derived into the Body and though this be not a personal Union it is next degree to it for we are Flesh of his Flesh and Bone of his Bone and a Personal Union makes no difference in the manner of Operation though it does in the Measures and Degrees the Divine Word acts by and in conjunction with the Holy Spirit and therefore sanctifies his own Human Nature as he does his mystical Body the Church by the Operations and Influenences of the Holy Ghost 10. And this Answers his next Argument That the Miracles of Christ are attributed to the Holy Ghost or to the Father dwelling in him for Father Son and Holy Ghost act together as Christ tells us My Father worketh hitherto and I work 11. His next Argument is Had our Lord been more than a Man the Prophesies of the Old Testament in which he is promised would not describe him barely as the Seed of the Woman the Seed of Abraham a Prophet like unto Moses the Servant and Missionary of God on whom God's Spirit should rest That our Saviour ought to have been thus described though he had been more than a Man is plain enough because he was to be all this the Seed of the Woman the Seed of Abraham a Prophet like unto Moses but a much greater Prophet for Moses was faithful in all his House as a Servant but Christ as a Son over his own House But what he insinuates that he is barely thus described shews That this Author will never loose a Cause by over-much Modesty for we with all the Christian Church and we have the Authority of Christ and his Apostles for it too say That he is described in the Old Testament also not only as the Seed of Abraham but as the Son of God Of which more presently His next Attempt is against the Divinity of the Holy Ghost but here is little that requires a distinct Answer it being only the Repetion of his old Fallacies 1. That the Holy Ghost or Spirit and the Power of God are spoken of as one and the same thing And what then His intended Conclusion I suppose is that the Holy Ghost is not a Person which is the Intention of his second Argument but this is so novel and ridiculous a Conceit too sensless for any of the ancient Hereticks that it ought not to be seriously confuted but despised for it is as easie to prove the Father and the Son to be no Persons as the Holy Spirit He is the Spirit of God which searcheth the deep things of God and he who knows all that is in God is a knowing Mind but to dream of Power and Inspiration in God distinct as he confesses from God and no Person is to attribute such Powers and Faculties to an infinite Mind as there are in created Minds to compound God of Mind and Intellectual Powers and Faculties which all Men of sense have scorned the thoughts of what are Faculties in us are Persons in God or else God is not a pure and simple Act as I showed above Which shows the vanity of his Pretence That the Holy Spirit is spoken of as a Person by the same figure of Speech that Charity is described as a Person 1 Cor. 13.4 5. and Wisdom 9 Prov. 11. For these natural or acquired Powers and Habits are said to do that which the Person who has them and acts by them does as Charity suffereth long and is kind because a charitable man does so c. And if we will allow such Habits and Powers in God the Case may be somewhat parallel for when we have compounded God of Substance or Essence or Faculties or Powers we may then find figurative Persons in God as there are in Men. This is certain all Personal Acts belong to a Person and therefore whatever has any Personal Acts ascribed to it we must conclude is a Person unless we know by some other means that it is no Person and then that proves the Expression to be figurative Thus we know Charity is no Person but a Grace or Vertue and therefore when Personal Acts are attributed to Charity as to suffer long and be kind c. we know this is a figure but it is ridiculous hence to conclude That the Holy Ghost who has Personal Acts ascribed to him to work Miracles to raise the Dead to comfort to convince to sanctifie the Church to dwell in the Church as in his Temple c. is yet no Person because Charity which we know to be no Person has Personal Acts ascribed to it which is as much as to say That because Personal Acts are sometimes used figuratively therefore they must never be properly expounded whereas on the other hand we must never expound any thing figuratively but where the subject will not admit of a proper sense If it were as known and certain that the Holy Ghost is no Person as that Charity is none then there would be reason to allow a figure but to prove that the Holy Ghost is no Person only because Personal Acts are sometimes figuratively attributed to that which is no Person is a maxim only in the Socinian Logick which is nothing else but a System of absurd and ridiculous Fallacies 2. His second Argument against the Spirit 's being God is this A manifest distinction is made as between God and Christ so also between God and the Holy Spirit or Power and Inspiration of God so that 't is impossible the Spirit should be God himself This has been answered already as to the distinction between God and Christ and the same Answer will serve for the Holy Spirit But this Confession of the Socinian confutes his whole Hypothesis and proves the Holy Spirit to be a Person and a God He says the Holy Spirit is distinct from God so distinct that 't is impossible he should be God himself then say I this Holy Spirit is either a Divine subsisting Person or nothing but a Name If this Spirit were a Divine Vertue and Power as he would have it then it is not distinct from God but is God himself as the Powers and Faculties of the Mind though they may be distinguished from each other yet they can't be any thing distinct from the Mind but are the Mind it self and therefore if the Spirit as he says be represented in Scripture as so distinct from God that 't is impossible he should be God himself then he must be a distinct Divine Person and not the meer Power of God which is not distinct from God himself If the Spirit be distinct from God and not God himself and yet have Personal Acts ascribed to him then he must be a distinct Person for Faculties Vertues and Powers have Personal Acts and Offices ascribed to them only upon account of their unity and sameness with the Mind in which they are which is a Person and acts by these Powers but a Power which is distinct from
things not so as to Exclude God from making the World and God made all things but not so as to exclude the Word for without him was not any thing made that was made which is exactly what we teach that Father Son and Holy Ghost as they are One God so they are One Creator who made the World by One individual Act and Operation God the Father made the World and the Creation of all things may eminently be attributed to him as the Fountain of the Deity and of all Energy and Power but he did not make the World without his Word and Spirit All things were made by the Word and without him was not any thing made that was made This Account is very far from containing any thing absurd or contradictious but to have as little dispute as may be with this Author let us take it in that sense he would have us take it in instead of Word put the Son and instead of God put God the Father and I can find none of the Contradictions he talks of for then the words run thus In the beginning of all things was the Word the Son of God and this Son of God was inseparably united to God the Father and the Son was One God with the Father this same Son was in the beginning with the Father for the Father made all things by him and without him was not any thing made that was made But let us consider what Account our Socinian Historian gives of this Chapter He appeals to Grotius's Interpretation of it but has misrepresented Grotius that did an Action of Forgery lie in these Cases many men have lost their Ears for less matters The Account he gives of it in short is this Briefly the Word according to Grotius is not an Eternal Son of God but is here the Power and Wisdom of God which Word abiding without measure on the Lord Christ 't is therefore spoken of as a Person and as one Person with Christ and he with that Whoever will be at the pains to consult Grotius will soon see what credit is to be given to this Socinian but it is no wonder that those Men pervert Human Writings who having nothing else to value themselves upon but perverting the Scriptures But what Agreement there is between this Socinian and Grotius I shall show in some few particulars by comparing their Expositions with each other by comparing Grotius as he is represented by this Historian with Grotius himself Brief History In the beginning That is when God created the Heavens and the Earth Was the Word The Hebrews call that Power and Wisdom of God by which he made the World and does all other his extraordinary works the Word 33 Psal. 6. 11 Hebr. 2. 2 Pet. 3.5 They borrowed this Expression from Moses God said let their be light 1 Gen. 3. undoubtedly Moses is not to be understood of a Word orally spoken for God is a Spirit but his meaning is God put forth his Power Wisdom and thereby created Light and the Firmament c. This is a direct opposition to Grotius whom he pretends to follow and his Reason is as silly as his Authority is counterfeit for why could not an infinite Mind beget a substantial Word the substantial Image of his own Power and Wisdom and by this Word make the World and why may not this be represented by his saying Let there be Light for since he confesses this was not an oral word why should it be represented by speaking or saying if God have not an eternal substantial Word by which he made the World there must be some foundation for such forms of speech and since it is evident God did not create all things by an oral Word or Command there is no pretence for this expression God said Let there be Light unless there be a Divine Person who is the Word and Wisdom of God by whom he made the world especially since this Phrase of Moses is thus expounded both in the Old and New Testament that God made the world by his Word which is every where represented as a Divine subsisting Person The Word was with God i. e. It was not yet in the World or not yet made Flesh but with God So that to be with God signifies nothing but not to be in the world The Word was God i. e. The Word or Divine Wisdom and Power that is not a substantial personal Wisdom and Power but such a Faculty as Reason and Wisdom is in man is not something different from God but being his Wisdom and Power is God as the wisdom of man is man 't is the common maxim of Divines that the Attributes and Properties of God are God which is in some sense true The meaning of that Maxim is that there are no Powers or Faculties in God as there are in created Minds but God is a pure and simple Act and therefore what are and must be distinct Powers and Faculties in created Minds must be distinct Persons in the Godhead And thus whatever is in God is God as each Divine Person is But if there be distinct Powers and Faculties in God as there are in men then the Wisdom of God is not God nor the Power of God God no more than the Understanding is the Man or the Will the Man or the Memory the Man He adds That those Persons whether Angels or Men to whom the Divine Word hath been in an extraordinary degreeCommunicated have also had the Names of Iehovah and God communicated to them Vers. 2. The same was in the beginning with God This is here repeated by the Evangelist to teach us that the Word is so God that it is not all that God is there being other Properties and Attributes communicable as well as the Word So that the Word is but an Attribute of God and a communicable Attribute and but one of God's communicable Attributes So that there may be many Words for the Word as he just now said may be communicated to Angels and Men in such a degree that the Name Iehovah may belong to them and then why does St. Iohn call the Word the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the only begotten of the Father Grotius So also Grotius But adds was jam tum erat was when all things began and shows that among the Hebrews this was a popular Description of Eternity to be before the World 17 Iohn 5. And to this purpose Applies the words of Iustin Martyr concerning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was before the Worlds The Word He owns it is called the Word in allusion to what Moses says That God said let there be Light But he calls this Word vim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Power Efflux Emanation in the same sense as the ancient Christians used them to signifie a Substantial Word Power Emanation In this sense he shows that it is used in the ancient Books of the Chaldoeans and by the Writer of
this Word of whom all these things are said be a Divine Person or only the communicable attribute of Wisdom and Power in God and this after what I have said I leave to any man of common understanding to determine But what becomes of his beloved Socinus all this while when the very Master-piece of his Wit and Invention is rejected by his own Disciples for if this Socinian be in the right his Master was greatly in the wrong By the Word he understands a Person but One who is the Word not by Nature but Office by the beginning he understands the beginning of Iohn the Baptist's Preaching in this beginning the Word was that is Christ was in being was in the world when Iohn the Baptist began to preach a great discovery But he was with God known to God only at that time which is very hardly true and was God by Dignity and Office not by Nature All things were made by him not created the world was not made by him but all things are new made by him that is all who believe in him are made new Creatures and after a great many great things said of this Word at last the Evangelist discovers this great Mystery the Word was made Flesh that is the Word was a Man If this be not ridiculing Scripture nothing is I am sure it represents the Evangelist very ridiculously to tell the World that Christ who was half a year younger than Iohn was in the world when Iohn began to preach but how great a Person he was and what his Office was was then known only to God Which if it were true is no great Mystery and to say this in such a mysterious pomp of words as there is nothing like it in all the Scripture is such a vain affectation as no School master but an arrant Fop would endure in a School-boy I shall not go about industriously to confute that which they themselves begin to be ashamed of but shall only lay down one rule of expounding Scripture and all other Writings which is a very reasonable one and will easily answer all the Art and Fallacy which is used in this Cause and that is this to expound all words and phrases to a proper and literal sense and to the utmost extent of their signification where the Circumstances of the place do not require a figurative and limited sense if we do not allow this there is no certain rule of expounding but men may interpret according to their own Fancies and Imaginations to any sense that the word was ever used in and then we may make any thing of any thing even a good Catholick of Socinus himself Now according to this Rule in the beginning must signifie the first beginning of all things for that is beginning in its utmost Latitude and that is the proper signification of beginning when there is nothing to limit it and there is nothing here Was the Word must signifie the Word did subsist and therefore is a Person God must signifie God by Nature which is the first and proper signification of the Word not a Metaphorical God by Dignity and Office for there is nothing to incline it to that sense All things were made by him and without him was nothing made that was made must signifie the first Creation of all things when God made the world by his word for that is the proper Notion of making all things to give being to them and as there is nothing in the Text to require any other sense so its relation to in the beginning when God made all things by his word determines it to this sense This is all true and certain if it be a good Rule to expound words in a proper sense when there is nothing that requires an improper and metaphorical sense And then it is nothing to the purpose to show that in the beginning sometimes signifies the beginning of the Gospel that God sometimes signifies a metaphorical God that making all things sometimes signifies new making all things for all this I allow when the Circumstances of the place require it when there is any thing added to determine these words to this sense but will never allow it where there is not and therefore cannot allow it here and if we must expound these words properly in this place there is an end of this Controversie But I must hasten to a Conclusion and therefore this shall serve at present as a Specimen how these men pervert Scripture and impose forced and ridiculous senses on it and by the help of what I have now discoursed it will be easie to detect all their other Fallacies and rescue the Scriptures from their perverse Comments as I shall be ready at any time to shew when I find a just occasion for it Secondly Socinianism as reasonable and accountable a Doctrine as our Historian says it is makes the Jewish oeconomy very unreasonable and unaccountable The Jewish Worship was External and Ritual but very pompous and mysterious and had there not been something very Divine and Mysterious praefigured by it it had been no better than a Childish piece of Pageantry unworthy of the Wisdom of God unworthy of the Nature of Man But the New Testament assures us that all these mysterious Ceremonies were Types of Christ and were accomplished in him in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge or in whom are all the hidden Treasures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of wisdom and knowledge that is all those Treasures of wisdom and knowledge which were formerly hid and concealed under the Types of the Jewish Law for they were but a shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ. And yet if Christ were no more than a meer Man the Antitype falls very short of the Types I shall instance at present only in the Temple and its Worship and Ministers The Tabernacle and Temple was God's House where he chose to dwell by the visible Symbols of his Presence and was so contrived as to be a Figure both of Heaven and Earth for so the Apostle to the Hebrews expresly tells us that the Holy of Holies was a Figure of Heaven into which the High Priest only entred and that but once a year to make Expiation and therefore the other Courts of the Temple which were for their daily worship did represent the Earth on which men worship God for God being the Maker and Soveraign Lord of the world who has Heaven for his Throne and Earth for his Footstool it was fitting the House where he dwelt should be an Emblem and Figure of the whole world But we must all confess that this was a very unaccountable and insignificant Ceremony for God who fills Heaven and Earth with his Presence to dwell in a House made with hands to appoint this the peculiar place of his worship ordinarily to accept no Sacrifices but what were offered there c. Had it not praefigured something more Divine and Mysterious