be made a Priest And how it that most Sacred Office become amongst us Contemptible It is in Veneration to that High Character that I expose these Cursed Priests Latitudinarians and Socinians Enemies to the Cross of Christ the Ministers of Satan transform'd into His Ministers as Satan himself into an Angel of Light and then he is most a Devil It is a true saying That the Corruption of the best thing proves the worst A Corrupt Angel is a Devil and a Corrupt Priest the next in wickedness to him False-Christs and False-Prophets are much the greater Enemies â—o Christ that they come in His Name As False-Friends can do much more Mischief than Open-Enemies Vice is most dangerous when it is recommended under the Notion of Virtue Barefac'd Wickedness Atheism and Infidelity create a Horror in any Mind not thorowly debunch'd and hardened Therefore we are Caution'd against the Mystery of Iniquity And that is it which now worketh in these Men who Dispute against any Mystery in Religion where it is necessary and cannot be otherwise unless we were able clearly and fully to comprehend the whole Nature of God in which there is something which is and ever will be Mysterious that is Dark and Hidden not fully Vnderstood by all the Angels of Heaven to Eternity And yet where there is no necessity in the World so much as can be pretended except that of Knavery they write all Mystery and work under ground that they may not be discover'd They dwell all in Generals in which as the Proverb says Doluâ—â—later there is always Deceit at the bottom They will not tell plainly what they would beat But wound side-ways and by stealth as these Authors whom we have Examin'd And their admired Teacher Dr. Tillotson in his ad Sermon concerning Family Religion p. 61. gives special Caution not to have Children bred up in the JARGON of any Party But will not tell what Party or what JARGON he means You may apply it to all to Christianity it self as it was intended but so that you shall not fix it upon him he dwells in the Clouds and Mysterious Politicks more Subtile than any of which Aristotle was ever Master Whose Phylosophy the History of Religion takes pains from p. 74. to 80. to prove was brought into such esteemation by Priest-Craft on purpose to advance Mystery Great Wits make strange Discoverys It is the Bishop's Foot in the Pot which singes the Milk Among these Mysterious Arts of Priest-Craft there is none moves this Author's Spleen so much as Creeds and Rules of Faith Against which he vents his Indignation Hist Rel. p. 64. In very deed says he Creeds were the Spiritual Revenges of Dissenting Parties upon one another These Creeds are strange sort of things That a Man whatever he believes may not have Liberty openly to Profess and Preach what likes him best But must go about the Bush and take pains to Blaspheme And that Atheists Socinians and Latitudinarians cannot get in to the Preforments of the Church without Swearing Subscribing or Declaring I know not how many Lyes And all to no purpose For that will never keep them out He calls these Creeds p. 115. The Insolent value of Opinions Yet he values his own Opinion highly and would have others to value it above that of the Generality of the whole World in all Ages who have ever retain'd a great value for Religion and what he Blasphemes under the opprobrious New-made JARGON of Priest-Craft He calls Their valuing an Insolent Value This was to shew his Modesty and Good Breeding Insolent for any to be Pessitive but himself He has Prescription and would have the Monopoly he may have the Reward of it He shews great Respect to the Socinians because they retain nothing of Christianity but the Name Therefore in the same page he falls foul upon St. Athanasius his Creed knowing that most offensive to the Socinians And p. 85. He abuses the Homo-ousians that is the Christians and the whole Council of Nice which he says Shew'd a Spirit of Contention rather than of Peace and Charity This was for their Insolent Value of their Faith so as to Express it in a Creed And p. 116. He thinks to make great advantage to the Socinian Cause by the difference 'twixt Dr. Sherlock and Dr. South concerning the Trinity But this was only a difference in their Exposition of what both acknowledg'd The Holy and ever Blessed Trinity Whereas I can tell you Sir Possitive and ask your Priest-Craft at Lambeth if it be not true that the Socinians do differ not only in their Exposition of the Object of their Worship but in the thing it self and that not only two Doctors or so but whole Parties and Nations of them The Brief History of the Vnitarians upon Act. 9.14.21 tells us that the Polonian Vnitarians were so Zealous for Divine Worship to be paid to Christ that they Excommunicated and Depos'd from their Ministry such of their own Party as deny'd it Which I think they generally do in England Where likewise they are of most different Faiths tho' they call themselves Vnitarians and own one another in odium Tertij as Christian Brethren John Biddle's Confession of Faith touching the Holy Trinity Printed in the Devil's Reformation of 43. and now Reprinted with other Works of his among Volumes of Socinian Treatises which are with great Industry distributed Gratis since this Revolution owns Three Persons in the Holy Trinity But make the Second and Third Persons to be Creatures The rest of our Socinians as those that wrote The Brief History of the Vnitarians which is Printed in the same Volume with Biddle's Confession of Faith abovesaid do acknowledge a Trinity that is Three in Heaven but the Second and the Third i. e. The Word and the Spirit they would have to be the very same with the First that is the Father So that theirs is the only Contradiction in the Doctrine of the Trinity who would have Three to be Three and yet all the Three to be really but One. It is they who are out in Counting or Reckoning which the Hist of the Vnitarians calls Brutal in us The Christians and Biddelite-Socinians do confess Three in Heaven whom they acknowledge to be Three distinct Persons this is fair and plain Reckoning But then the Biddelites are guilty of very gross Idolatry in joyning two Creatures into the same Holy Trinity with God On the other Hand how is it that these Biddelites and the other Socinians do own one another to be of the same Faith and Print their Books together as setting forth the same Doctrine The Trinity of the one is Three who are One Person a most palpable Contradiction which no Distinction can solve the Trinity of the other is God and two Creatures which is rank Idolatry One Party of them say That the Word and Spirit are Persons the other say nâ—t One that they are God the other that they are not God one that they are Adorable
Scriptures others all of it but some Particular Books which pleas'd their Fancies Others own'd other Scriptures never Received by the Church and publickly allow'd and practised Altering the Holy Scriptures which they called Mending of them and some of them said that Christ was begot by Joseph like other Men Nay by their Latudinarian Principles Mahomet himself and his Alcoran must be admitted into their Confederacy who speak more honourably of Christ than the Socinians themselves and deserve the Name of Vnitarians even in their own Sense as much as they can pretend to In the Church of Rome if you will but own Expressly the Authority of their Church to the Height they Assert it you shall be own'd a good Catholick and excused by an Implicit Faith in all other Articles of the Creed tho you be never so ignorant or hold particular Opinions different from the Church So with the Socinians if you will but reject the Consulstantiality of Christ you shall have Liberty to make him a God or a Creature or what you will You may talk of his Eternity his True and Real God-Head His being God of God Light of Light c. They have distinctions for all these And tho they love not nor like the Expressions yet they can make a hard shift with them They can puzzle People's Understandings tho by very foolish and contradictory Arguments How God by his Infinit Power might have bestowed True and Real Divinity upon another and that even from Eternity for what he can do to day he might have done Yesterday and so backwards for ever But then this would have been only a voluntary Act of God and what he did he might not have done if he had so pleased and consequently that this Adopted God tho from Eternity was still a Precarious tho a True and Real God and yet not properly to be called a Creature that is like Finite Things produc'd in time But on the other hand to make another Person Consubstantial that is of the same Nature with God the Father this infers the necessity of a Plurality of Persons in the very Nature of the Godhead and so to be of the Essence of God as Faculties are of the Essence of the Soul so that it could not be a Soul without the Faculties nor a God without the Persons and tho one depends upon another and springs from another yet they are all equally Necessary Co-Eternal and Co-Equal as being all of the same Nature This grows too hard for a Distinction and our Vnitarians as they call themselves will compound for any thing so you keep off from this Consubstantiality And therefore the Christian Church could find no other Criterion to discover the subtle Heresie of these pretended Vnitarians of several Degrees and Classes who tho differing never so widely among themselves yet all join and reckon themselves as Brethren against the most Glorious and most ample Revelations of the ever Blessed Trinity Recorded in the Holy Scriptures of God And whoever refuse this Test cannot be accounted sound in the Christian Faith But where there is unwillingness it will one way or another shew it self and it is easie to distinguish betwixt those Expressions which proceed from a hearty Conviction and those which are taken up out of force and necessity to clear our selves from an Imputation which lies upon Us. This your Dr. discovers pretty plainly in the present Case for being necessitated in a Vindication of himself as to the Doctrin of the Trinity to use the Word Persons he does it as brought to it against his Will very grudgingly and slightly he does pass it over and cannot conceal his Inclination rather to the Distinction used by the Anti-Trinitarian Hereticks to elude those Texts which speak of the Trinity which is that there are three Differences in the Deity which are express'd in Scripture by the three Denominations of Father Son and Holy Ghost and which they allow are spoken of after the manner of Persons as Wisdom is said to build hee House c. But they will not allow them to be truly and properly Persons or different Subsistences but only three several acceptations of the same Person according to the different Manner of his Revealing himself upon several occasions And thus they may make as many Persons in this Sense of theirs as their Fancy pleases to suggest And in this Sense and no other the Dr. is pleased to let the word Persons pass since we must have it tho at the same time he gives it such a stab as shews that he is by no means reconciled to it But take his own words which he gives as his determination of the whole Matter and the utmost to which he will be brought Serm. 2. p. 120. 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 tho I remember that St Jerom does somewhere desire to be excused from it Thus the Dr. and according to this where he has occasion to name the Three Persons of God he adds to explain himself his own word Differences which he likes better thus p. 122. The Three Differences or Persons in the Divine Nature expressed in Scripture by the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost c. and so in other places And here He has fixt his foot you shall have no more of him if you be not pleased with this you must let it alone and trouble him no more about Socinianism Arianism or any of these like Matters But this somewhere of St Jerome's was a strange Quotation for so Grave a Dr. to bring into the Pulpit upon so serious a Subject if he thought it so For I fancy he spoke this with a Smile saying to himself I 'll make this poor Auditory believe that I have a place of St. Jerome under my Thumb to overthrow all this business of different Persons in God which word since they force me to use I 'll be revenged on it But I will not name the Place in St. Jerome for there are Rogues will be Examining of it and put me to a great deal of trouble It will do well enough for a Squib among the Crowd But these poor hopes are vanished for this Dr. has already been taken to task and stands Corrected for this by a much more Learned Person than himself The Author of the Animadversions upon Dr. Sherlock's Book Entituled A Vindication of the Holy and ever Blessed Trinity c. Printed 1693. There Chap. 8. p. 265. This Place of St. Jerome is quoted And it is shewn that St. Jerom did not Scruple to use the word Person or desired to be excused as our Author comically words it by way of wit but on the contrary that he did use
His great Proof is p. 10. The General Consent of Mankind concerning the Unity of God that the Vnity of the Divine Nature is a Notion wherein the Greatest and the Wisest part of Mankind did always agree p. 4. And yet speaking of the Heathen Idolatry which was all the rest of the World except the small Nation of the Jews he says plainly p. 9. that The generality were grosly guilty both of believing more Gods and of worshiping false Gods p. 10. And did terminate their worship there in the Idol as being the very Deity it self which was certainly says he the Case of the greatest part of the Heathen World And yet upon the Belief of this Greatest part he builds the Vnity of God when he confesses that this Greatest part did not believe the Vnity of God All the Salvo for this most palpable Contradiction is what he offers p. 9. viz. That the Vnity of the Divine Nature was the Primitive and General Belief of Mankind and that Polytheism and Idolatry were a Corruption and Degeneracy from the Original Notion which Mankind had concerning God I do not doubt but Adam worshiped the True God And it is as true that Idolatry came in very soon some say Cain introduc'd it And that there was a very great defection so quickly made that it is Recorded of the Birth of Enos That then began Men to call upon the Name of the Lord Gen. 4.29 as if they had never done it before And the Scripture tells of the General Corruption before the Flood After the Flood we know the whole World was swallow'd up in an Vniversal Idolatry except only the Family of Abraham and after him of the Jews who also were continually lapsing into it what then becomes of this Author's Greatest part of Mankind And his always That this Greatest part did always agree in the Notion of the Vnity of God Whereas he in the same place makes this Greatest part to have been always since the World was Peopled Believers and Worshipers of more Gods and false Gods in such gross Idolatry as I cannot believe ever befel one Man since Adam or that it is possible to besal any Man being so apparent a Contradiction viz. to terminate our Worship in the Image or Idol as being the very Deity it self For how can any Man believe such a thing to be the Image or Picture of another thing and yet to be that very thing of which it is the Image Or is it in any Man's power to believe that a thing can be the Image or Idol of its self Cou'd Solomon believe this Or was not he an Idolater We know whom this favours and there may be a time to Recant even our Nestrum against Transubstantion It won'd be no greater change than what has been already And there is no stop in Art nor are we ever too old to learn Thus much for his betraying the Unity of God by placing it upon a Foundation which he himself hath overthrown Next to shew that as to the Trinity of God he speak the very Socinian Language All that he says of it is in Sect. 3. p. 19 20. Because he must say something He is soon weary of it and first he gives a Broad-side against it in direct Opposition to what the Divines say of it He desires not or deserves not to be reckon'd one of the number for the Dispute is not about the words Trinity or Person but as to the Sense of these words in which they are used by Divines The Socinians own a Trinity and they have lately Re-printed and Published Bidle's Confession of Faith touching the Holy Trinity But all the matter is in what Sense the word Trinity is us'd by our Divines and by the Socinians and in this he peremptorily determines against the Sense of the Divines as Anti-Scriptural He says That neither the word Trinity nor perhaps Person in the Sense in which it is used by Divines when they treat of this Mystery are any where to â—e met with in Scripture This is directly opposing the Doctrine of the Trinity as taught by Divines Put he brings himself off thus Yet it cannot be deny'd says he but that Three are there spoken of by the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost this no Socinian in the World denies in whose Name every Christian is Baptized this is likewise granted by the Socinians and to each of whom the highest Titles and Properties of God are in Scripture Attributed Neither does this offend the Secinians who Plead the same in answer to Jâ—hn 1.3 as you have it in the Brief Hâ—â—â—ory of the Vnitarians which solves that Text All things were made by him i. e. by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or word thus The word says he begins here to be spoken of as a Person by the the same figure of Speech That Solomon saith Wisdom hath hath builded her House and heuen out her seven Pillars Prov. 9.1 And that David calls Gods Commandments Councellours Psal 119.24 And in conclusion this Author is willing to Compound for the word Person of which we have spoke before So long says he as we mean by it neither more nor less than what the Scripture says in other words But he has told you before that there is no such thing to be found in Scripture in the sense in which it is used by Divines And what other sense he means is easie to tell For the present Controversie is only betwixt the two senses of the Divines as he calls them and the Socinians unless he means something else by the word Divines and so makes the whole a Banter upon us For he does not explain himself nor say one word more in all that Sermon touching the Blessed Trinity of the difference ' twxit the Socinians and us concerning this great Fundamental of our Faith And whether this be or whether it be not a sufficient clearing of himself as to what side he inclines when he could find no more to say against the Socinians upon this point in a Discourse which he Entitles and so would make us believe to be A Vindication of the Christian Doctrines to the Blessed Trinity against that of the Socinians I leave to the Impartial Reader And now for a Conclusion upon the whole that has been said of all his Sermons they are all the Genuine effects of Hobbism which loosens the Notions of Religion takes from it all that is Spiritual Ridicules whatever is called Supernatural it reduces God to Matter and Religion to Nature In this School Dr. T. has these many years held the First Form and now diffuses his Poyson from a high Station It is many years ago since the E. of D. one Sunday that Dr. T. Preach'd at White-Hall told K. C. 2d that Mr Hâ—bbs was got into the Pulpit his Politicks are Leviathan and his Religion is Latitudinarian which is none that is nothing that is positive but against every thing that is positive in other Religions whereby to reduce
he may bid fair to Pervert the whole Nation he has deeply poysoned them already And if this be not a time to speak we may for ever after hold our Tongue He that would not in this Case expose his Life and all that he had would never do it for any Cause of Christ for the Ax was never laid more palpably at the very Root of all Christianity I hope what I have said will at least provoke abler Pens to Engage in Defence not only of Christianity but of the first Principles and Foundation of Religion in General which the Hobbiss have depress'd far below that of the Heathen who acknowledg'd Divine Revelation tho' they mistook it But these make it a perfect Tool and Engine of State hung at the Belt of the Civil Magistrate and disposeable by him at his pleasure These are yet more dangerous more affronting to God than the Socinians For the Socinians argue tho from a false Topick for the Honour of God as if more Persons were Dishonourable to the Divine Nature But these dare Blasphemously to make God an Ape to the Devil himself and to be beholding to his Imvention and the Capricio's of Foolish and Wicked Men for all the Institutions of his Holy Religion and to have sent our Lord Christ into the World and Sacrificed Him upon the Cross for no other End than to comply with the wickedness of Men and instead of destroying the works of the Devil infinitely to out-do them to put them out of Countenance and make them asham'd of their Littleness in Sacrificing Beasts and Men instead of which poor Butcheries and Murther and to make them no more regarded Here the Son of God shall be murthered to shew how little mischief the Devil could do in Comparison of God! And to frighten and amaze Mankind the most wicked of them and to stop their hand from the further pursuit of their little Insignificant Cruelties to one another by being struck with the horror of such Super-wickedness and unnatural Barbarity As the K. of Moab Sacrificed his Eldest Son to stop the pursuit of his Enemies 2 Kings 3.27 by over glutting their Revenge and out-doing their Cruelty These are not Tares Sown in the Night and by Stealth But it is Rooting up all Revealed Religion in the Noon-day and exposing of Christianity to the Contempt and Buffoonery of Atheistical Wits And if the Husbandmen take no no notice of it They are not Asleep but Dead God awaken them by a timely sense of their Duty and not by a Total Extirpation and Removeal of their Candlestick Amen Some REFLECTIONS upon the Second of Dr. BURNET's Four Discourses concerning the Divinity and Death of Christ Printed 1694. I Had ended the Reader 's Labour and my own but that I am call'd back by a Book now lately Published Licensed by this Great Dr. Himself Jo. Cant. to give it the greater Authority and wrote by his Collegue Dr. Burnst now called Bishop of Sarum It is Entituled Four Discourses delivered to the Clergy of the Diocess of Sarum c. Printed 1694. One of these Discourses is Concerning the Divinity and Death of Christ wherein there is such a Notion of Christ's Divinity set down as would make any Christian Ear to tingle He gives the very same account of it as the Brief History of the Vnitarians in Answer to John 1.14 The Word was made Flesh that is says that Socinian Author the Word dwelt in or did Inhabit the Person of Jesus Christ There is none that is unprejudiced but must see how very far this is from the full Import of that Text and what a force is done to the words of the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was made Flesh This is sure a degree beyond bare Inhabitation It is true our Soul may be said to dwell in our Body But there is something more It is Impersonated with our Body whence there arises what the Schools call Communicatio Idiomatum between the Soul and the Body That is that the Properties of each are attributed to the Person who partakes of Both. Thus Man is called Mortal because his Body is such and Immortal because his Soul is such And thus it is that Christ is called God in respect to his Divine Nature and Man in respect to his Human. Neither of these can be predicated of the other The Divine Nature is not the Human Nature nor the Human Nature the Divine The Soul is not the Body nor the Body the Soul But each of these is predicated of the Person who partakes of Both. All the Atiributes of the Divine and Properties of Human Nature are predicated of Christ as all Properties of Soul and Body are predicated tho' not of One another yet of Man who is made up of Both. This is the true Notion of Impersonation and without this Christ could never be made Flesh The Spirit of God did Inhabit or Inspire the Apostles Prophets and Holy Men of Old and will do every Saint or Holy Person to all Eternity But this does not make God to become Flesh If you answer that the Spirit of God or the Word as the Socinians say did inhabit or inspire that Man Jesus Christ in an Higher Degree than other Men That will make nothing as to the Word 's becoming Flesh God was no more Flesh in Abraham or St. Paul than in the Meanest Saint tho' he inspired one much more than another Nothing short of Impersonation could make him to become Flesh or make that Flesh Adorable without the highest Idolatry Dr. B. thinks to solve all this by comparing God's Indwelling in Jesus to the Indwelling of God in the Cloud of Glory in the Temple and he says p. 127. That the Jews worshipped the Cloud of Glory because of God's Resting upon it and therefore that they could make no Objection to the Christians Worshipping of Christ by vertus of the Indwelling of the Eternal word in Him Make no Objection Yes sure and Retort the Argument to the Confusion of such Christians For they did not worship the Cloud of Glory That had been Rank Idolatry Notwithstanding of any Inhabitation of God there and therefore from this Reasoning it must have been Idolatry to have worshipped Christ notwithstanding of any Inhabitation of God in him Nor will it solve this that the Dr. says p. 116. That there was a more perfest Indwelling of God in Christ than in the Cloud So there was in the Cloud more than in the Temple yet it had been as great Idolatry to have worshiped the Cloud as the Temple God's Presence was never more visibly exhibited in any Apparition under the Law than when he descended upon Mount Hereb in Fire Cloud c. He spoke out of that Fire with an Audible Vâ—ice which he did not out of the Cloud of Glory in the Temple And yet he strictly forbids the worshipping of any thing they there saw or the making any Resemblance or Similitude of any thing that there appeared lest it should
as strongly against themselves as to the Death of Christ For which upon their Principles of No-Satisfaction being due to the Justice of God for Sin there can no tolerable Account be given for a Prophet might have Taught and Preach'd and been a good Example and Intercessor too and Perform'd every one of the Conditions and Ends which they Assign for Christ's coming into the World and for the Sacrifice of his Death upon the Cross This of Denying the Satisfaction is the Heart of Socinianism and the Mill-stone which will sink it into the Sea for without this there was no Need or Necessity either for the Incarnation or Death of Christ But the Doctrine of Satisfaction being Established infers the Necessity of the Divinity of Christ without which an Adequate Satisfaction could not be â—ade and the Divinity of Christ does necessarily infes the Plurality of Persons in the Deity which is the whole of the Difficulty alledg'd against the Trinity So closely are these Divine Principles of the Christian Religion link'd and joyn a together The denial of any one of them breaks the whole Chain Dr. Burnet in the abovesaid Vindication of himself p. 101. Instead of Recanting his former Error proceeds expresly to Dispute yet farther against the Satisfaction and says that It is no part of the Doctrine of our Church our Articles say he are the only Standard to Judge of our Doctrine as far as they go but they have Determin'd nothing in this matter but rest in the General Notions of Expiation which the Dr Expounds not to mean SATISFACTION and of Reconciling us to God Thus this Learned Doctor But my last Topick with which I close my Observations upon his Discourse has sufficiently disprov'd this and shewn the Doctrine of the Satisfaction to be expresly taught in the Homilies and that they account not him who denies is to be a Christian-Man but an Adversary to Christ and his Gospel Now shall we suppose it possible that this Dr. never Read the Homilies which he has Subscrib'd No nor they very Articles which he Quotes Or that the Homilies are not contain'd and all expresly nam'd in the said Articles Or otherwise shall we think that he meant hereby to Impose upon unwary Readers and thus to Belye and Falsifie the Doctrine of our Church on purpose to conceal the more effectually his own Apostacy from it But tho' every Body is not well acquainted with the Homilies through an inexcusable neglect of reading them Publickly as it is enjoyn'd yet none can come to the Sacrament without taking notice that in the very Prayer of Confecration Christ is said to have made full Satisfaction for the Sins of the whole World The Dr. has forgot this too Lastly I will shew you the Advantage which the Socinians make of these seeming Defences of the Christian Religion which of all other Methods do most effectually undermine and betray it See how they Glory and Exult in this Performance of Dr. Burnets Furthermore say they Considerations p. 15. The Socinians and all other small and envied Parties of Christians are in his Debt for Owning and Espousing Publickly Divers such Truths as others perhaps see as well as he but have not Sincerity nor Generosity enough to avow them Here they detestably insinuate that all are Hypocrites who in good Earnest do oppose Socinianism And gather from the Account which Dr. T. and Dr. B. give of the Christian Faith that others are of the same Opinion while they see them not Oppos'd nor Censur'd for these their Blasphemous Heresie but on the contrary they are Vindicated Excus'd and their vile Sophistry Palliated and cover'd by the Divines in Fashion What the Consequences of this may be is dreadful to apprehend This Dr. B. has so Explain'd the Doctrine of the Church as that the Socinians may close with it It is say they Considerat p 31.32 the very Doctrine of the Socinians which they have own'd from the beginning in all their Books And speaking of the Satisfaction they truly say That his Lordship himself Professedly dislikes it and Argues against it Which they there prove from p. 135. of his Discourse In brief say they were the Questions about the Trinity and the Divinity of our Saviour adjusted there would be no longer Dispute about the Satisfaction as his Lordship has stated it Nor to say true have we Controversy with him about the two former Questions for he contents himself to say the Three and when he says most the Holy Three disclaiming expresly the word Persons in the Sense says he that is commonly taken To say all at once concludes that Socinian Author I have not made this Reply to oppose it to his Lordship's Discourse but to testifie our Respects to his Lordship and that we submit to his Doctrine His Lordship as this Socinian stiles him in his Vindication p. 99. calls this an Imputation upon him but yet does not clear himself from it for which I refer to what followes where it is Examined I conclude this Preface with giving the Reader a needful Caution against these Horrible Socinians that they are going about to Vndermine the Authority of the Holy Scriptures because they cannot Reconcile them to their Damnable Heresie They have now Considerat p. 50.51 Publickly assauted all the whole Works of St. John his Gospel Epistles and Revelation This was the shortest way of Answering them and at the same time of confessing that they were no otherwise Answerable by them I say nothing here to their Arguments because they are sufficiently Confuted in Dr. William's Vindication Only let me Observe that if their pretences against these parts of Scripture which make most against them and which therefore they Reject do hold the whole Canon of the Scripture is rendered precarious andour FAITH Uncertain Which must be the consequence if these most Execrable of Hereticks should prevail Which God of his Mercy preventâ— THE Charge of Socinianism AGAINST Dr. TILLOTSON CONSIDERED c. F. SInce our last Discourse upon the Famous Sermon of Hell preach'd before the Queen 7th of March 1690. upon Matth. 25.46 and Printed by Their Majesties Special Command The Author has this Year 93. publish'd 4 Sermons two of them preach'd An. 79. and two An. 80. upon John 1.14 This he has done to clear himself from Socinianism C. He says in his Advertisement to the Reader That he has Revis'd and Enlarg'd them so that we cannot tell what Part of them was preach'd at the time Specified or what added since to clear his Reputation now that he is got into an higher Station so as to make such a Vindication necessary For it is to be presum'd that he did not think it worth his while before otherwise he would not so long have lain under the Imputation of having been neither Christened nor a Christian in his Principles Both which have not only been loudly Clamour'd but objected in Print against him many years ago Wherein only he truly Exercis'd Non-Resistance For he
Reflections upon their Adversaries They generally argue matters with that Temper and Gravity with that Freedom from Passion and Transport which becomes a serious and weighty Argument And for the most part they Reason closely and clearly with extraordinary Guard and Caution with great Dexterity and Decency and yet with Smartness and Subtilty enough with a very gentle Heat and few hard words A Man could hardly describe his Mistress in a softer Air. The Socinians must be very ill natur'd if they take any thing amiss which this Gentleman has said against them It was meer necessity they see how unwillingly and artificially he has done it and when rightly understood no doubt they understand him what he has said is with a design to give a better account of them than has been done to take off that frightful Character with which some have painted them not allowing them the very name of Christians Whereas alas The Dr. has told us that there is nothing betwixt them and us but a meer Controversie about words which all mean the same thing And then that they are the best Temper'd the Goodest sort of People in all the World So that we need not be afraid of them nor stand upon our guard against them And then they are the most Ingenious and the Sweetest Men that we should love to Converse with them and Read their Writings all the Christian writers are but Scolds and Bunglers to them This is our Author's Method of opposing Socinanism nor are they behind him in their Civility and due Respect in the Answer they have Publish'd this year 1694. to his abovesaid four Sermons with other Discourses against them He say they that is Dr. Tid whom they call Arch Bishop of Cant. is the Common Father of the Nation Considerations on the Explications of the Doctrine of the Trinity Occasion'd by four Sermons Preached by his Crace the Lord Arch Bishop of Cant c. p. 43. and has Instructed the Socinians themselves with the Air and Language of a Father not of an Adversary or a Judge He is Respected and Lov'd by All but those that are also known to Hate their Country He hath no other Maligners but the Enemies of the Nation it self c. CLAW ME AND I 'LL CLAW YOU Here is Love and good Correspondence in abnudance These Gentlemen know their Friends And the Cause of Christianity is like to be well Defended when it is maintain'd by some of a Party on purpose that it may be soundly an-swer'd by others of them who play Booty to one anothers Hands And commend and recommend one another to all Mens Esteem and Veneration But that this may not be discover'd they Argree sometimes like Counsels at the Bar to fall foul upon one another even to Scold and call Names which to the wise Observers serves only to expose either their Contradictory Banter or otherwise their Hypocritical Malice and Deceit Thus notwithstanding of Dr. T 's Honey Words above told and all his Love-fits to the Socinians he sends them a Bit and a Blow Amantium Ira He plays with his Clog First I will give you his Character of Secinus himself the Head and Founder of that Order and then of the Socinians his followers 1st Serm. p. 17. 18. He tells the method of Socinus in Interpreting Scriptures which was meerly by Criticising upon words and searching into all the Senses they are possibly capable of till he can find one tho' never so forc'd and forreign that will save harmless the Opinion which he was before hand resâ—lved to maintain even against the most Natural and Obvious Sense of the Text which he undertakes to Interpret p. 44. That he puts quite another Sense upon the Scripture than the Dr. believes was thought of by any Christian Writer whatsoever before Socinus p 45. He accuses the Novelty great Violence and Vnreasonableness and utter Inconsistency of Socinus's Interpretations of Scripture And that it may not be forgot he repeats all this again 2 Serm. p. 57. and in p. 58. he calls Socinus's Interpretations Strain'd and Violent Pitiful and wretched shifts Precarious and Arbitrary without either Reason or Modesty p. 68. And as to the Novelty of it Socinus himself makes no difficulty to own it nay he seems rather to rejoyce and Applaud himself in it Vnhappy Man That was so wedded to his own Opinion that no Objection no Difficulty could divorce him from it p. 77. Socinus Imposing a new and very odd and violent Sense Contrary to the Sense of the Christian Church in all Ages down to this time And all this only to serve and support an Opinion which he had entertain'd before and therefore was resolv'd one way or other to bring the Scripture to comply with it And if he cou'd not have done it it is greatly to be fear'd that he wou'd at last have call'd in question the Divine Authority of S. John's Gospel rather than have quitted his Opinion And to speak freely I must needs say that it seems to me a much fairer way to reject the Divine Authority of a Book than to use it so Disingeniously and to wrest the plain Expressions of it with so wuch straining and violence from their most Natural and Obvious Sense for no Doctrine whatsoever can have any certain foundation in any Book if this Liberty be once admitted without regard to the plain Scope and Occasion of it to play upon the Words and Phrases p. 80. Socinus by a dangerous Liberty of imposing a forreign and forc'd Sense upon particular Texts has brought the whole H. Scriptures into uncertainty p. 82. Any one that reads him may see he was sufficiently conscious to himself of the Novelty and Boldness of his Interpretation p. 83. Socinus was the first Author of this Interpretation because it was impossible he could ever have been so fond of so ill favour'd a Child if it had not been his own p. 114 Of which Antiquity as Socinus had but little Knowledge so he seems to have made but little account This is our Author's Character of Socinus a Man of no Learning despising Antiquity because Ignorant of it Arrogant and Conceited past all Modesty Boasting that none in the World understood the true meaning of Scripture before himself Of which the Dr. gives several Quotations out of his own words 2 Serm. p. 69. Yet that his Shifts were Pitiful and Wretched Strain'd and Violent Precarious and Arbitrary without either Reason or Modesty That he was so positive an Opiniator that he wou'd rather have deny'd the Hâ—ly Scripture than been convinc'd of his Error that he dealt so Disingeniously with the Holy Scripture wresting the plain Expressions of it in such a manner that the Dr thought it preferrable to reject their Divine Authority rather than to abuse them as he has done Nay that no Writing whatsoever can have any certain meaning if Socinus's Liberty be allow'd of playing with the VVords and Phrases Thus much for Socinus himself Let us now
Salvo to secure his secret meaning So that upon these Reasons says he and not otherwise we may well and safely determine that Christ is truly God and man and that the God-head did as really dwell in his Human Nature and became Vnited to it as our Souls dwell in our Bodies and are Vnited to them This sounds very Orthedox But it is all to be understood only upon these Reasons That is which dwindle down Personality only to a Power to Command and Govern and by Christ is God and Man he means no more than that God dwelt in that Man Christ and so He was both God and Man but not that they were one Person any otherwise than as God did Command Govern or Enliven that Man as he does all Men. Christ was truly God That is as the Cloud was Jehovah which the Dr. asserts in this same page and is one of the Premises from whence he draws this Conclusion 2. The God-head dwelt in Christ and was Vnited to him as our Souls dwell in our Bodies and are Vnited to them that is as the Dr. has Explain'd it only to Command and Govern them Thus you see what true pains is taken by these two Great Doctors to Elude and totally to Enervat the whole Christian Doctrine and all the Terms wherein for suppression of Heresies it has been conceived and delivered down to us from Christ and his Apostles through all Ages of the Catholick Church If it be not so Why are not they content to set down their Faith in the plain Terms used by the Church Why all these New and Laborious Expositions Why do they thus Intangle and Perplex Why can they not say three Persons in the Trinity as well as three differences three somewhats Why do they confound us as this Dr. p. 96. with the difference betwixt distinct and distinction viz. That by Person in the Trinity we must not mean a compleat Intelligent Being distinct from every other Being But only that every one of that Blessed Three has a peculiar distinction in Himself by which he is truly different from the other Two Different but not distinct Not distinct but that has a Distinction What is the meaning of this What is the Quarrel at the word Person O that these Dr's would speak out That they would go fair over to the Socinian side Or do they stay that they may more Effectually undermine the Christian Doctrine by distinguishing and Accommodating all to the Socinian Hypothesis And by this means draw Men Insensibly into it Therefore we must deal plainly with them and tell because they will not what they would be at Which is to make the 3 Persons of God onely 3 Manifestations of God Or the same Person of God considered under 3 different Qualifications and Respects as our Creator Redeemer Sanctifier But we must Ask if it was only a Manifestation that was made Flesh If we are Baptized into the Faith and worship of a Manifestation why but 2. or 3 Manifestations of God are there not Hundreds is God or the first Person one of his own Manifestations Why then is He reckoned as one of the Three Are these three all one and the same Person Is this then the meaning of Mat. 12.32 That whosoever speaketh against one of these One shall be forgiven but whosoever speaketh against Another of the same One shall not be forgiven That we are Baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Son who is the Same person with the Father and of the Holy Ghost who is the same Person with them both or in the Name of the Father and of Himself and of Himself This is the plain Easie and Intelligible Socinian System of Divinity This is the Rational account of their Faith And this Doctors Both you must stick to or give us leave to use the word Person in the already known and Received Notion of that Term and as the Holy Catholick Church hath always understood it in Expressing the Glorious Trinity of God Dr. B. Concludes this point with referring to the four bove-said Sermons of Dr. T. and clawing him for the Grace of this Imprimatur by giving his Judgment of that work as perform'd with great Strength and clearness of Reason p. 128. Thus these two Pillars stand bound jointly and severally for one Anothers Ingenuity and Performances And that they may keep even pace Dr. B. now passes on to the other great point of Socinianism the Sacrifice and Death of Christ p. 134. Wherein he Copys after and comes up to the full of that Diabolical Heresie so bare-fac'd set up by Dr. T. against the Satisfaction of Christ which is the only Foundation for the Remission of sin He first p. 134. Endeavours to Remove the Great Ground-Work of any Satisfaction being due to Gods Justice for sin by Advancing that Notion of Justice which Dr. T. does in his Sermon of Hell He calls it onely a Right of punishing which is vested in Himself and therefore which he may either use or not use at his pleasure Upon this is grounded the precariousness of Hell that God not being Oblidg'd in his Justice to inflict Hell notwithstanding of his threatening it It is not certain whether he will do it or not Dr. B. Says that this Justice is a Right vested in God Himself and which therefore He argues God may dispense with at his pleasure So far he argues truely That God is not nor can be accountable to any other And therefore in this sense he may do in every thing as he pleases That is as to any Outward Compulsion or giving an Account of his Actions to any whatsoever But on the other hand God is as I may so say Ty'd up to his own Inherent Rectitude and all the Perfections of his Nature It is not being Ty'd up or any way Limited It is the Highest and most absolute Liberty that he can never be otherwise If he could lose his Liberty He would not be so free Thus God cannot Die cannot cease to be God Cannot make Himself not to be Eternal Infinite c. And that he cannot depart from any of his Attributes not withstanding the sound of the word Cannot is no Stinting of his Prerogative but the Height of it Now Justice is as much an Attribute of God as his Mercy He is not onely just that is has Justice or a Great deal of Justice in him but he is Justice it self Justice in the Abstract Justice is of the Nature of God And therefore He can no more depart from it than from Himself The Highest Notion of Justice as of Love or Goodness that is God it is the very Nature of God God is Love 1 John 4.8 God is likewise Justice And as all the Love or Goodness in us is but a participation of the Infinite and Eternal Goodness so all the justice all the Notion we have of Right or Wrong is but a Ray Sent down to us from the Eternal and Essential Restitude and
three pages together to their own No-Hypothesis Thus when they are angry with Kings the malice to Them and to Priests commonly go together then Idolatry and Sacrifices were the Invention of Kings and Priests came in but at second hand to keep it up and improve it This Blount Sect. 2. p. 7. endeavours to prove The Primitive Institution of Idolatry says he received its Birth from Princes at whose Charge it was afterwards Educated by Ecclesiasticks Again Sect. 3. p. 8. Idolatry and Sacrifices which were the Worship Instituted to the Idol being thus Instituted by the Civil Power the Ecclesiastick was left to build upon that Foundation But the History of Religion p. 6. makes Priests to be the first Inventers and that Kings seeing the Veneration and Authority they obtain'd by it became Priests themselves and joined that Title to the Imperial Dignity thus Casar and other Emperors of Rome were Priests and among the Egyptians their Kings were chosen from among the Priests Thus they preserve to themselves a double Handle tho' by this in true Reason â—hey lose both and make Religion to be Priest-Craft or State-Craft as it serves their purpose For these Latitudinarians in Religion are always the same in Government But this History if Religion being the latest Effort brings the matter closer Blount Ridicules Religion in the Person of the Heathen This in the same Form exposes it in the Church of Rome Whose Errors they have given too much occasion for it he makes use of not to Reform but undermine Christianity it self and makes all to be Nothing but Priest-Craft tho' he forgets not the Heathen Parallel and to spit his Venom at the Mosaical Institution when it comes in his way to shew that he Grafts upon the same Stock Page ' s 8 Speaking of the Religious Institutions before Christ he calls them Strange and Puziling Methods of Religious Ceremonies and Mysteries and of various Rites of Sacrificing good for nothing but to confound and distract the Minds of Men. Then coming down to Christianity he borrows the Socinian Arms against it And so exactly in their very words as points to us plainly out of whose Quiver this Arrow came He sets up Irreconcilable War against all Mystery And making Transubstantiation his Mark he levels directly at the Trinity Incarnation Divinity and Satisfaction of Christ and every thing that there is the least pretence of Mystery in And yet these Gentlement endeavour all they can at Mystery while they wound Christianity covertly as they think through the sides of the Heathens Jews and Roman Catholicks But the Clovâ—n-Foot does plain appear for their Wit is not so great as their Malice They confess God to be Incomprehensible and his ways past finding out yet they cry out upon Mystery in his Religion There are Mysteries Irreconsilable to them in their own Natures and in the Natures of every thing they see before them yet they would have every thing in a Supernatural Religion Revealed from Heaven to be so plain that their Reason should be able to dive to the very bottom of it which if it were it would be no Revelation or perfectly to no purpose for what needed Revelation in things which are Plain and Obvious without it Physick is an Art and a Mystery to those who know it not Which leads only to the preservation of Health in those Bodies whose Constitutions we know and their Original as much as of any thing that we see or touch And yet we will let nothing be Mysterious that is nothing but what every Man in the World perfectly understands with all the Reasons and hidden Causes of it in the saving of a Soul whose Substance Origination Constitution Operation and every thing of it but that we know it is and feel it by its Effects is altogether hidden from us Our coming into this World is totally a Mystery No Human Reason can attain unto it And must there be no Mystery at all in our Re-Generation and being Born into the never-ending World of Spirits Is not the other World is not Heaven a Mystery to us Do we understand it Perfectly Can we Describe it And is it not Reasonable is it not Necessary that the Methods of fitting us for it and of conveying us thither should be very Mysterious to us If we know not the End of out Journey how do we pretend to understand every step of the way But let us hear this Author's Reason against Mystery You find it p. 60. and 61. in the very words of the Defence of the History of the Vnitarians and other Socinian Books lately Printed for the Instruction of this Age viz. That no Revelation can be a Mystery more than a Secret when it is told can be a Secret still But these strong Reasoners should know that a Mystery is not that of which we know nothing at all But that of which we know some part but darkly and obscurely as in a Glass which is the Comparison the Apostle makes use of 1 Cor. 13.12 Thus it is we know Heaven Yet it is Revealed And thus we know the Trinity Incarnation and Divinity of Christ If they had not been Revealed we should have known nothing of them Yet we understand them not Perfectly nor can give the Reason for every Modus of them Why it is thus and thus and the manner How For that is not Revealed Nor are our Understandings capable of Comprehending the whole Nature of God for nothing but Infinit can Comprehend Infinit And to attempt it or go about it and reject every thing we do not understand in it is not only Wicked and Prophane but it argues the greatest Weakness and Folly in any Man who is capable of such a Thought of any other Instance that is possible to be given Christ says to his Apostles Joh. 16.12 He had many things to tell them which they were not able to bear If I have told you Earthly things says He to Nicodemus that is concerning the Re-generation by the Spirit of God in this life and ye Believe not that is cannot Comprehend it for the Difficulty and Mysteriousness of it How shall ye Believe if I tell you of Heavenly things Joh. â— 12 Will not these be much more Mysterious to you This Author would have called him a Mystery-Monger as he does his Disciples for Preaching what he Taught p. 62. He laughs at any thing that is called Sublime in Religion or above the reach of Servile Reason as he thinks he Rallies p. 43. And it is a Servile and Poor Reason indeed that can see nothing above it self that can find nothing Sublime in God or His Religion in those Infinit Promises of an Eternal Heaven and the wonderful Methods by which He has appointed to Conduct us thither in ways suitable to His Justice which is as much Himself and as Indispensible in Him as His Mercy The truth of the matter is These sort of Gentlemen do not love to Think Their Wet is Frothy