Reason we must notwithstanding prefer an Interpretation of it that is Absurd and contrary to it self to Reason and to the rest of Scripture such as the Trinitarian Interpretation exprest in this Creed appears to be In a word the Question only is whether we ought to interpret Holy Scripture when it speaks of God according to Reason or not that is like Fools or like Wise Men The Son is of the Father alone not Made nor Created but Begotten Here and in the next period Athanasius is got into his Altitudes or Profundities which you will Here 't is that the Ignorant think they are taught the Inmost Secrets of Theological Knowledge but High and Low are not more contrary than the things which are here affirmed as equal Truths If the Creed-maker had spoke here of the Generation of the Son by the Divine Power on the Virgin Mary it would have been true that the Son is neither Made nor Created but Begotten but then the first part of the Article would be false that the Son is of the Father alone for He that has a Father and a Mother is of Both. But since he speaks of the pretended Eternal Generation the latter part of the Article is false and inconsistent with the first part of it Every Novice in Grammar and proper speaking knows that Begotten when 't is distinguished from Made and Created always supposes two Parents a Mother as well as Father 't is therefore a Contradiction to say the Son is of the Father alone not Made nor Created but Begotten for if He is Begotten He cannot be of the Father alone and if He is of the Father alone He is not begotten but either Made or Created The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son neither Made nor Created nor Begotten but Proceeding The first Fault here is that the Holy spirit is said to proceed from the Father and from the Son To which Heresie the Greek Church have ever opposed those clear words John 15.26 When the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father even the Spirit of Truth which Proceeded from the Father He shall testify of me Secondly He saith here that the Holy Ghost is not Begotten but Proceeding He adds shortly after that He who will be saved must thus think of the Trinity Therefore surely Begotten and Proceeding differ very much and very clearly else t is an Harsh Sentence that we shall be damned if we do not Conceive besides all other unconceivable Mysteries of this Creed that the Holy Ghost is not Begotten but Proceeds Yet after all 't is now confessed by the most Learned Trinitarians that Begotten and Proceeding differ nothing at all and that it is rightly said The Son proceeds from the Father and that the Holy Ghost is generated of Both directly contrary to this Creed It follows that Athanasius has damned the whole World for not distinguishing where no Distinction can be made at least with any certainty And perhaps this Damning Humour of his has justly provoked some to write him not S. Athanasius but drawing the S. a little nearer Sathanasius So there is one Father not Three Fathers one Son not three Sons one Holy Ghost not three Holy Ghosts In consistence with what goes before He should have said Two Fathers Two Sons and Three Holy Ghosts or Spirits For the Second Person is the Son of the First and the Third proceeds which is nothing else but is Generated from the First and Second which makes Two Fathers and Two Sons and all Three of them are Holy Spirits for the Father is an Holy Spirit and so is the Son no less than the Third Person But this is not the first time in this Creed that Athanasius has discovered He could not count In this Trinity none is Afore or After other none is Greater or Less than another Yet the Son himself saith John 14.28 My Father is Greater than I. And for the other clause None is Afore or After other 't is just as true as that there is no difference at all between Afore and After I ask Whether the Son doth not as He is a Son derive both Life and Godhead from the Father All Trinitarians grant He do's grounding themselves on the Nicene Creed which expresly calls the Son God of God Light of Light very God of very God Begotten not Made But if the Father gave to the Son Life and Godhead He must have both before he could communicate or give either of them to the Son and consequently was afore the Son was No Effect is so early as its Cause for if it were it should not have needed or had that for its Cause No Proposition in Euclid is more certain or evident than this The right Faith is That we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God is both God and Man Then the Lord Christ is two Persons For as He is God He is the second Person of the pretended Trinity and as He is Man a perfect Man as this Creed afterwards speaks He is also a Person for a Rational Soul vitally united to an Human Body is a Person if there be any such thing as Person upon Earth nay 't is the only thing upon Earth that is a Person Let the Athanasians therefore either say that the Lord Christ is Two Persons which is the Heresie of Nestorius condemned in a General Council Or that He is not a Man contrary to 1 Tim. 2.5 There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Jesus Christ Or that He is not God which is the Truth Who altho' He be God and Man yet He is not two but one Christ One not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh but by taking of the Manhood into God One not by Confusion of Substance but by Unity of Person But because these words One by taking of the Manhood into God not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh And again One not by Confusion of Substance but Vnity of Person cannot readily be understood by themselves the Creed-Maker explains them in this following Article For as the reasonable Soul and Flesh is one Man so God and Man is one Christ That is as a Soul united vitally to a Body maketh one Person called Man without confounding the two Substances of the Soul and body for the Soul remains what it was and so also does the Body So God the Son being united to a reasonable Soul and Body doth together with them make one Person called Christ without confounding the Substances of the Divinity or Humanity for the Divinity remains without the least Change what it was and so doth the Humanity or reasonable Soul and Body This is the only Offer at Sense that is to be found in this whole Creed but so far from explicating that it farther perplexes the Difficulty of the pretended Incarnations as will appear by those two Considerations 1. In the Personal Vnion of a Soul with a Body
the Father was not the Cause and the Son the Effect for all Causes produce their Effects by the Mediation of an Action whereof the Cause is the Origine and the Effects is the term whâ—ch receives the action and subjects it in it self as the Philosophers teach Now the Eternal Son of God was produced by an act of the Divine Understanding which doth not operate by acts distinct from it self as Men and Angels do but all acts of the Divine Intellect and Will have a real identity with the Divine Nature and Essence of God as the Divines teach for else if God should understand by distinct acts those acts must inform the Divine Understanding which would make a change in God and so destroy his Immutability as is apparent The same with proportion is to be said of the Holy Ghost who proceeds by an act of Love from the Divine Will no less than that act of the Divine Intellect produces the Divine Word or its Hypostasis With what reason now can this Author still go on in his wilful ignorance He often saith that this Creed contains many Contradictions and as many Impossibilities as Trabsubstantiation and yet in all his Discourse he hath not alledged two Propositions with a contradictory opposition which follows out of the Doctrin of this Creed nay I confidently assert that neither he nor any of his Sect can alledge any one contradiction issuing from the same Doctrin Let the pretended contradiction be assigned and we are ready to answer it and to discover its fallacy but to blunder and vaper as this Author does that there are Two Fathers Two Sons and Three Holy Ghosts and yet prove nothing of all this is not to proceed like a Scholar much less like a Divine but is wholly loss of time How often must I inculcate this Orthodox Truth That in the ineffable Mistery of the Divine Trinity the characteristical notion of the Father is his innascibility together with his paternity and fecundity of active spiration of the Son is his filiation and fecundity of active spiration of the Holy Ghost is his passive Spiration alone These Three Persons as they mutually are correlatives to each other so they are really distinct from each other they are capable of Multiplication and constitute a number The Father hath in himself besides the relative Predicates all the absolute Predicates and Perfections that are contained in the Divine Nature and Essence all the Attributes of the Divinity The Father hath Communicated to the Son all the absolute Perfections of the Divine Nature and the notional Predicate of active Spiration To the Holy Ghost the Father and the Son have communicated all the Divinity with all the absolute Attributes and Perfections thereunto belonging So that although these three Persons are three in number yet the Divinity of them all is the self-same individual and singular Deity for the same Divine Nature that is in the Father is also in the Son and Holy Ghost Now this Author would have us to multiply the Divinity as the Persons are multiplied thereby to lead his Reader into a Labyrinth of Errors by acknowledging more Gods than one which in effect is no better than rank Paganism Must we follow the conduct of his wild Genius because he pretends to Demonstrations which in effect are meer Improbabilities or adhere to those Sacred Truths which are delivered to us by holy Writ and are backt by Divine Authority But let us proceed with him to the Incarnation of the Divine Word The Athanasian Creed from hence proceeds to the Incarnation of the Divine Word thus The right Faith is that we believe and confess that our â—ord Jesus Christ the Son of God is both God and Man To which words this Author replies That then the Lord Christ is two Persons for as he is God he is the second Person of the Trinity and as he is man a perfect man he is also a Person for a Rational Soul vitally united to a Humane Body is a Person I answer that a Rational Soul vitally united to a Humane Body is the compleat Nature of a Man compleat I say ratione naturae but to be compleat also ratione Personae you must add to this compleat Nature a subsistentia which makes up the compleat Suppositum or Hypostasis of a man ratione personae But in Christ there was no need of this Humane subsistentia for the Divine Word assumed the compleat Humane Nature not the Human Person as Nestorius said for the Humanity of Christ subsists by the Personality of the Divine Word which supplies abundantly all defects and functions which the Humane Personality would exercise were it present so that the Humane Personality would be superfluous in Christ and of no use at all To what he adds viz. Let the Athanasians then Confess that Christ was not God which is the truth Here he plainly professeth his Error and flatly denies the Divinity of Christ It is not my design to prove at large in this short Treatise the Divinity of Christ which the Divines have effectually prov'd in the matter of Incarnation I shall therefore only hint at some Particulars As the fulfilling of the Prophecies of the Old Prophets the Testimony of the Eternal Father in a Voice from Heaven This is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased the often asseveration of Christ himself confirmed by many strange and prodigious Miracles and sealed by his Death the Reluctancy of Nature at his Crucifixion his Resurrection after Death which none could effect but by the mighty hand of the Omnipotent the Universal attestation of all the Apostles in Confirmation whereof they all sacrificed their Lives with other pregnant motives contained in the Sacred Word of God which are too prolix for this short Treatise all which being duly prondered and considered are able to convince not only an indifferent judgment but also the most obstinate and perversest judgment that can be if it be swayed by Reason and work them into a stedfast belief of the Divinity of Christ wherefore I shall wave in this place any further dilatation of my Discourse upon this Subject Now we proceed to examine the Hypostatical Union between the Divinity and Humanity of Christ how we can make it out that any Union can be of that Nature as to unite two Natures whereof the one is Infinite and the other Finite for the Athanasian Creed asserts that though Christ be God and Man yet he is not two but one Christ one not by Conversion of the Godhead into flesh but by taking the Manhood into God one not by confusion of substance but by Vnity of Person for as the reasonable Soul and flesh is one Man so God and Man is one Christ Against this the Deist argues that in the Personal Vnion is between Finite and Infinite which is impossible For we must either suppose that Finite and Infinite are commensurate that is equal which every one knows is false or that the Finite is
at least Five Parts of Six of all that profess Christianity in the World whose Understanding cannot possibly reach to the Sense and Coherence which some pretend to find in this Creed Thus the Christian Religion is destroyed in both the Essential Parts of it Faith and Love Hence have proceeded many and endless Controversies bitter Animosities cruel Persecutions Wars among Christians and at length the more Fierce and Violent the more Deceitful and Sophistical Parts have attained their Tyrannical Domination over their Opposers and have Introduced and setled a Christianity shall I call it or a Superstition or a Polity quite contrary to the Doctrin and Practice of our Blessed Lord and of his Apostles An Answer to an Anonimous Pamphleteer c. A Paper fell lately into my hands which upon perusual I found to be and Invective against the Person of St. Athanasius and the Author of it a professed Enemy to those Mysteries contain'd in his Creed which he impugns and fearing left this should prove a stumbling-block to some of the Illiterate Vulgar to see the chief Mysteries of Christianity to be so openly attack'd by one who denies the Trinity the Incarnation of the Divine Word and the Divinity of Christ and yet asserts the Scriptures the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God I resolved to answer the Arguments of this Deift which I here undertake And because this Author hath involved himself in obscurity and confusion I shall endeavour by some previous Observations to clear the way to this Discourse in a Matter so difficult and nice and so remote from Sense by this means not to confound the Reader but to render the Discourse so clear and conspicuous as the Nature of these Sublime Mysteries are capable of where I shall wave those Indignities and Aspersions which this Author casts upon the Person of St. Athanasius leaving this to the Learned Historians and confine my self wholly to the Scope of such Dogmatical Principles as he endeavours to subvert My first Observation is the nature of the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity 1 Observation wherein all Orthodox Christians hold as an Article of Faith one only God and Three Divine Persons viz. the Father Son and Holy Ghost by a real Identity between the Divine Nature and the Personality of these Three Persons so that the Divinity or God-head is singular and indivisible but the Personalities are really distinct from each other and yet really identified with the Divine Essence so that all together make unum summum Ens as the Council of Lateran terms it A second Observation is 2 Observation that there are three manners of speaking in this Sacred Mystery which ought strictly to be observ'd 1. Some expressions are absolute as the God-head the Divine Essence or Divinity with its concomitant Attributes where no mention is made of the Divine Revelations nor of number II. There is another manner of speaking by notional terms as the Divines call them such are the Paternity the Filiation the Passion Spiration all in abstracto which are always to be understood with relation to each other and constitute number III. A third way of speaking is when such words are used as signifie the Divine Nature contracted with the Personalities or notional Predicates as the Father the Son the Holy Ghost where Relations and Number are to be admitted A third Observation is drawn from the two former 3 Observation That all the absolute Perfections which are in the Father are also in the Son and in the Holy Ghost not in equality for where there is equality there is also a relation between the perfections that are equal but the self same numerical and individual perfections which are absolute Predicates of the Divinity are in all and every one of the Persons per communicationem idiomatum The reason is because all the three Personalities are identifi'd with the Divine Nature which is the root of all the absolute Perfections of the Divinity so these absolute Perfections are also really identifi'd with all and every one of the Divine Persons according to that receiv'd Axiom of the Divines Omnia dedit Pater Filio praeter esse Patrem so that the Father gave the Son even the fecundity of active Spiration whatsoever the Greeks in vain object against it as I shall make it more largely appear in a Treatise of the Trinity which I intend shortly to put forth And so I proceed to answer the ill-grounded allegations of this Deist or Atheist against the Orthodox Doctrin of the Church His first attempt is against that saying of Athanasius Neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance for there is one Person of the Father another of the Son another of the Holy Ghost but the God-head of the Father and of the Son and Holy Ghost is all one On these words he thus passeth his Censure Plain as if a man should say Peter James and John being three Persons are one Man and one Man is these three distinct Persons Peter James and John A very Learned Observation he compares three distinct human Persons having three distinct human Natures with the three Divine Persons of the Sacred Trinity where the same individual Divine Nature is in all three this is singular that is numerical this is indivisible that is divisible this can constitute no more Gods but one that must constitute three distinct men The Reason is obvious because the denomination of God being a term absolute is taken from the Divine Nature so that if the Divine Nature be singular the God-head must also be singular As the denomination of Man is taken from the Human Nature so because the Human Nature is multiplied the denomination of Man must also be multiplied How obvious is this to any vulgar Capacity How little Reason had this Author to call this Doctrin of Athanasias and of the Church of God a ridiculous attempt a barbarous indignity a monstrous proposition He might more prudently have wav'd the discovery of his illiterate Genius herein Yet he goes on in the same strain of confounding the absolute Perfections of the Divine Essence with the notional Expressions of the Persons for on these Words of Athanasius Neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance he adds But how can we not confound the Persons that have but one numerical Substance And how can we not but divide the Substance which we find in three distinct divided Persons There is one Person of the Father another of the Son another of the Holy Ghost To which he subjoyns Then the Son is not the Father nor is the Father the Son nor the Holy Ghost either of them 'T is confest What then Why says he If the Father is not the Son and yet is the one true God then the Son is not the one true God because he is not the Father I deny this illation as false and nugatory on this present subject Now to the proof for how can the Son be the
one true God if he is not be who is the one true God I answer sub distinctione if the Son be not he who has the compleat and adequate essential constitution of the one true God then he cannot be God I grant it if the Son be not another Person namely the Father and yet hath the compleat and adequate essential constitution of the one true God he cannot be God I deny it The fallacy of the Author consists in this that he grosly confounds the notional and relative Predicates with the absolute and essential Predicates for consider the sublime Mystery that we are upon and what hath been said above in the third Observation upon it and you will find the Errour for this Deist insists upon two Persons the Father and the Son and supposing the Father to be the one true God he infers that therefore the Son which is a distinct Person is not the one true God and yet the same though a different Person yet hath all the absolute and essential perfections with the Father he hath the same numerical Essence Nature and Divinity with the Father Now I demand whether it be possible that he should have the compleat and adequate essential Constitution of the God-head and yet not be the one true God For the God-head is singular wherein a number is Chimerical you had as good tell me that one may have the adequate Constitution of a Man which is animal rationale and yet not be a man which is impossible for where there is the compleat essence of a thing there is the thing it self which is nothing elfe but its compleat essence Then he proceeds In the Creed the God-head of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all one the Glory equal the Majesty co-eternal Therefore I ask says this Author whether the Glory and Majesty with which the Son and Spirit are Glorious and Majestical be the same in number with which the Father is Glorious and Majestical I answer Affirmatively Then it follows says this Author that the Glory and Majesty of these Persons is neither equal nor co-eternal which he attempts to prove because equality and co-eternity import a distinction between the things equal and co-eternal therefore I distinguish the sense of this Illation the Glory and Majesty of these Persons if taken absolutely and essentially is neither equal nor co-eternal I grant it if taken notionally and personally I deny it The meaning of this distinction is cleared by the former Observations for if you take them personally they constitute number and ground relations and cor-relations to each other but if understood essentially and absolutely they do neither in plain terms the Father Son and Holy Ghost which are three distinct Persons are equally Glorious by the same numerical and individual Glory which is singular and essential to the Divinity But he replies That in case the Glory of the three Persons be numerically the same then so are also all the other Attributes whence it ensues that there is no real distinction between the Father Son and Holy Ghost but are only three Names of the same thing without any distinction as the Sebellians hold I am sorry that I have to deal with a Person so meanly vers'd in Divinity as not to distinguish the Attributes of the Divinity from the notional and relative Predicates the Attributes are singular and are all communicated to every one of the Persons because they are absolute Predicates but the Relations are peculiar to each Person so the Father hath communicated to the Son all the Divine Attributes and what else is peculiar to the Divine Essence but hath not given him his Paternity as is noted above for Paternity is a relative Predicate peculiar to one Person alone and not communicable the same with proportion is to be said of the Filiation and passive Spiration In the next place says this Prophane Libeller This Creed teaches that the Father is Incomprehensible Vncreated Eternal Almighty the Son is Vncreated Eternal Almighty c. Also that each of these Persons by himself is God and Lord yet there are not three Gods nor Lords nor three Incomprehensibles c. Now if in imitation of this a Man should have a mind to say the Father is a Person the Son is a Person the Holy Ghost is a Person yet not three Persons but one Person I would know why this were not as good Grammar and Arithmetick as when Athanasius says the Father is God the Son is God the Holy Ghost is God yet not three Gods but one God I answer that whatever Grammar or Arithmetick there is in it I am sure there is no true Divinity in it for this Deistical Author insists here still upon the same errour for the word Person is a relative and notional expression whereof there are three in God but the word God is an absolute and essential term which is singular and cannot be multiplied as hath been often reiterated in this Discourse but he demands Doth not a man contradict himself when the terms of his negation are the same with thâ—se in his affirmation Now for Logick I answer That two contradictory Propositions ought to be ejusdem de eodem that is ejusdem praedicati de eodem subjecto as Angelus est Spiritus Angelus non est Spiritus There are three Gods there are not three Gods there are three Persons there are not three Persons c. But where is the least appearance of any Contradiction in all this Yet to make this the more conspicuous I must take each Proposition in pieces and scan the several parts thereof according to the rates of Logick For in these three Propositions the Father is God the Son is God the Holy Ghost is God the Subject of the first is the Father the Subject of the second is the Son the Subject of the third is the Holy Ghost these three Subjects are three distinct Person Really different from each other The Predicate of the first is God this is an absolute and essential Term not capable of being multiplied for it is the Deity it self which is singular and therefore the Predicate of the second Proposition which is also God must be the same Deity with the first not another distinct Deity for a second God would be a meer Chimera so likewise the Predicate of the third Proposition is also God which still imports the same Deity this term God not being capable of any multiplicity so that the Subject of these three Propositions are three different Persons Really distinct from each other the Predicate of the same three Propositions which is God hath for its Object the singular Essence of the Divine Natur and the Propositions being all affirmative do intentionally identifie the Deity with the subject of the same Propositions which are the Father Son and Holy Ghost as they are identifi'd a parte rei wherein consists the verity of the same Propositions As concerning the three last Propositions