this to be wonder'd at that we should have confused Notions of things which no particular Idea's our Minds are furnish'd with can render clearer to us For if we consider the Degrees and Limits of our Knowledge and take a strict Survey of our whole stock of Thoughts we shall find there are very few things that we know fully and distinctly Most of our Notions differ only as more or less confused more or less general There is a certain Scale of Knowledge wherein every thing is so fitted and proportioned to our Faculties that we cannot descend below such a determinate pitch in our Conceptions or Explications of any Object proposed to us As for instance suppose a Blind-Man has a desire to know what Colour is 't is certain he can never form a true distinct Idea of it but yet he is capable of a general confused Knowledge which wants but one degree of Particularity to be clear and perfect Conception He may know that Colour is not any Substance but some Mode or Determination which owes its Existence and Support to some other Being that it is not Extension or any other Accident or Quality perceivable by any of the Senses he enjoys He may further be made to understand that it is some kind of Sensation produced by the impression of other Bodies upon that part of a Man's which is called the Eye which other Men perceive though he does not Now 't is plain that such a Man knows a great deal of the Nature of Colour more by far than another Blind-Man who has not made the same Enquiries and Reflections about it and so much as will secure him from having any other Idea imposed upon him for that of Colour which is so distinguished and circumstantiated to him that should he now receive his sight he would presently acknowledge the marks before described to him And yet after all it may be truly said while he continues blind he has no manner of Idea of Colour because he has no distinct Idea of that particular kind of Sensation to which his general Idea's are applyed And therefore he can go no lower in his Explications of the Notion he has of Colour For if he explains it by any Sensation which he receives from his other Senses the Idea's he has then in his Mind are indeed more particular and distinct but the Judgment he makes upon them must be utterly false whereas before his Knowledge was only general and confused but yet true I have made choice of this plain familiar Instance of Sense to shew the unreasonableness of those who in higher Speculations complain that the terms brought to explain them are too general and abstracted and demand a further Explication of what we cannot possibly know beyond such a degree of Particularity which the Terms already made use of do express In vain therefore and unjustly are we urged to explain the Doctrine of the Trinity more particularly when we have brought it down to the utmost Particularity we are capable of conceiving and at the same time freely acknowledge we don't know it so distinctly as 't is capable of being known For then only is the Use of general abstracted Terms to be condemned either when the subject we are upon will admit of a more particular and sensible Explication or if it will not when by too much Refining and Abstracting we deceive our selves and think some Terms we have found out make the Thing clear to us tho' we have not really more distinct Conceptions of it than we had before and at the same time these very Terms make it more obscure and difficult to others And this is what I remarked before as a Prejudice to be avoided in an impartial Search after Truth But so long as we acknowledge we have only a general confused Notion of the Trinity or such a Three-fold Distinction in the Godhead as is consistent with the unity of the Divine Nature we may be allowed to explain this Notion in general abstracted Terms because we lay no greater a Stress upon the Terms than they will truly bear and require only a Faith proportionate to our Knowledge that is a general confused Faith which we expect a clearer and more distinct Revelation of hereafter And thus I have dispatched the first Branch of my Discourse wherein I proposed to consider how far 't was possible for us to believe a Trinity II. I come now to my Second General Enquiry viz. What it is the Scripture requires us to believe in this Matter For a distinct Resolution of which Question I shall observe the following Method First I shall barely and positively lay down the Doctrine of the Trinity so far as I judge it expresly contained in Scripture Secondly I shall endeavour to prove the Truth of what I assert Thirdly I shall consider the particular Additional Explications that have or may be given of the Scripture-Account of this Article 1. In speaking to the First it must be allowed that there is no such Proposition as this That One and the same God is Three different Persons formally and in Terms to be found in the Sacred Writings either of the Old or New Testament Neither is it pretended that there is any Word of the same Signification or Importance with the Word Trinity used in Scripture with relation to God There is one Text which plainly enough affirms without the help of Inference or Deduction that God is Three and One But this being a disputed Passage and no where else repeated in the same or the like Terms I shall not insist upon it Nor do I think such a Trinity as we profess to believe stands much in need of the Support of this Text the Matter and subject of our Faith in this Point being frequently largely and circumstantially mentioned and as it appears to me interwoven into the very Design of the Scriptures Now the Summ of all that the Scriptures plainly and expresly teach concerning a Trinity is this That there is but One only God the Author and Maker of All Things but that One God ought to be acknowledged and adored by us under those Three different Titles or Characters of Father Son and Holy Ghost Which Terms whatever they signifie according to my Judgment upon a fair and impartial Consideration of all Circumstances that can determine their Sense are evidently applied to God in many Places of Holy Writ and consequently are truly and properly applicable to him 2. The Proof of which Assertion is the Second Thing I undertook But here I find my self forestalled by the successful Endeavours of a great many Learned Men who have carefully and nicely examined every Text that can be brought either for the Establishment or Confutation of the Doctrine of the Trinity I shall not therefore trouble my Reader with a particular detail of all their Arguments but only acquaint him truly and fairly what were the chief Motives which influenced and disposed me to make such a Judgment as I have
themselves sufficient to shew what the Faith of the first Christians was For who but one that believed that Christ was God could say with St. Paul I can do all things through Christ that strengthneth me or with St. Stephen at the instant of Death cry out Lord Jesus receive my Spirit From these and many other Texts it seems plain to me that Christ was worshipped and acknowledged as God and that therefore he ought so to be worshipped and acknowledged we have all the same Reasons to believe as we have that the Scriptures are True the Establishment of a False Worship being a thorough Disproof of the Authority that Commands it Supposing therefore the Truth of the Scriptures there 's no way of eluding this Argument but by giving another Interpretation to all those Places which seem to ascribe divine Honour to Christ which can no otherwise be done than by framing a particular Dialect for this Purpose and giving new Significations to Words when applied to our Saviour which they never had before when used upon other Occasions I shall not enter upon a particular Proof of this but pass on to Another Argument I observ'd from Scripture which gave me further Assurance of the Divinity of the Son and consequently of the Truth of the whole Proposition before advanced and that is The Character of Jesus Christ considered meerly as a Man Now 't is certain that the Man Christ Jesus the Son of David according to the Flesh is represented by all the Evangelists as having his Conversation in this World with all Lowliness and Humility and with perfect Holiness and Unblameableness of Life And it is not imaginable that a Person of this Character should have suffered any Titles to have been given him any Honour or Respect to have been pay'd him which were not strictly and indispensably due to him much less have taken the Honour and Worship peculiar to God only to himself if he had not been infallibly conscious that of a Truth God dwelt in him I cannot possibly conceive that one who declined all Appearance of Grandeur Dominion and Authority should have allowed of any thing that look'd like Worship or Adoration or might have been mistaken for it or that he who knew he was believed to be the Son of God in such a Sense which some thought Blasphemy would not have undeceived his Followers and justified himself to his Enemies had he not really been what 't was Blasphemy to have pretended to be if he were not I might easily pursue these Reflections a great deal further and bring more Arguments to confirm the truth of what I have asserted that these Names or Titles of Father Son and Holy Ghost are applyed in Scripture to the One True God but I judge it altogether unnecessary not only because it has been fully made out already in several set Discourses upon this Subject but because it is so plainly and expresly revealed that I am verily perswaded every Man that reads would believe were it not for the additional Explications such a Belief is charged with 3. Which is the next thing to be considered And indeed here lyes the whole difficulty of the matter the main stress of the Controversie For that God should be called Father Son and Holy Ghost is as easily to be believed as that he should be called Adonai Elohim and Jehovah That the same thing should be signified and expressed by several names is no such incredible Mystery But if we allow that these Terms Father Son and Holy Ghost are all applyed to God in Scripture 't is not thought sufficient to say that these are three several Names which signifie God but we are further required to believe that God is One and Three the same God but three different Hypostases or Persons And that one of these three Hypostases or Persons is both God and Man These are the hard sayings which puzzles some Mens Understandings and make them chuse rather to wrest and pervert the plainest Texts than admit such seemingly inconsistent Consequences Here therefore I shall Examine what grounds there are in Scripture for such an Exposition And what we are obliged from thence to believe when we express our Faith in this particular manner First then as to these forms of Expression That God is One and Three c. It is to be observed that these Names Father Son and Holy Ghost are applyed to God in Scripture in a different way from what any of his other Names are For the other Names of God signifie only Partial Conceptions of the Divine Nature such as Self-Existence Power c. and are all contained within the same Idea of God and so are indifferently used upon any occasion to express the whole Idea of God to which they belong which is the same under every denomination These therefore cannot be the Foundation of any distinction in the Godhead But Father Son and Holy Ghost according to our way of conceiving things signifie something Extrinsecal and Accessory to the Divine Nature as much as we know of the Divine Nature by reason the whole Idea of God being conceived as full and compleat before the application of these terms And though all of them are separately and together affirmed of God yet each of them in so peculiar a manner that there are several occasions where when one of these terms is used with relation to God 't would be improper to use either of the other From whence it follows that these three Names of God Father Son and Holy Ghost must denote a three-fold difference or distinction belonging to God but such as is consistent with the Vnity and Simplicity of the Divine Nature For each of these Names includes the whole Idea we have of God and something more so far as they express the Nature of God they all adequately and exactly signifie the same 't is the additional signification which makes all the distinction betwixt them What particular kind or manner of distinction this is is not expressed in Scripture but since the Church has thought fit to assign a Name for it that of Person seems to me as proper and agreeable to the whole Tenor and Design of the Holy Writings as any other that could have been chosen for that purpose For Father Son and Holy Ghost whether we consider the Primitive sense and intention of the words the general and constant use of them or the particular Connexion and Circumstances in which they are mentioned in Scripture have plainly a Personal Signification each of them without any figure of Speech being determined to signifie some intelligent Being Acting in such a manner as is there related There needs no Proof of this the plain distinction of Persons imported by those Terms being the chief Argument made use of to shew that they cannot all be applied to God but must necessarily signifie Three distinct Beings But that they are all applyed to God in Scripture has been proved already And therefore Father Son and
Actions to proceed I have not the least conception of for all that I conceive is only several Idea's of different particular Actions which no more express the Idea of that Principle from whence they spring than the Idea's of several particular Lines express the Idea of that Point they are drawn from All that we can perceive or imagine of corporeal Vnity is nothing else but a Connexion or joint Position of several Bodies which according as it is more or less perceivable according to the simplicity or multiformity of the Figure resulting from it and the easiness or difficulty of Separation makes several degrees of Vnion which all receive the common Denomination of Vnity Now as Extension by reason of its perpetual divisibility cannot give us a true Notion of simple Vnity so neither can I have any distinct knowledge of Vnion or Composition abstracted from all Considerations of Extension I do not understand how a Mind and Body are united any otherwise than that I perceive such and such spiritual Actions produced within the Compass of such a Body which I call One Neither am I able to comprehend the Union or Separation of Two spiritual Beings without considering them as in the same or different Localites for I have not distinct Idea's of several spiritual Natures nor if I should perceive the several Operations of different Spirits could I distinguish the several individual Beings or Principles they proceeded from For who is there that if all the Thoughts and Motions of the Souls of several Men were communicated to him could tell which proceeded from which Nay we cannot tell what difference of Actions is sufficient to determine the different kinds of Principles they proceeded from neither can any Co-operation or Consent of Actions make us conceive a spiritual Vnion without conceiving the same Term of Action too For suppose two Souls were so exactly framed alike that they always thought and will'd the same Things at the same times and were conscious of each other's Thoughts and Actions if they were put into different Bodies 't is plain we could not properly say they were united or made one And again supposing they were in the same Body we could not possibly conceive them to be two any otherwise than we knew them capable of a separate Existence that is if we examine our Thoughts honestly of a separate Vhi in different Bodies or elsewhere Not that I think local Presence or Determination is any way contained within the Idea of a spiritual Being but it helps us to conceive it better and discourse more distinctly about it And if we observe it there are several cases where our Conceptions and Judgments must necessarily differ These then are all the kinds of Vnity and Distinction I can possibly imagine namely in Idea Principle and Position Whatever else is called Unity is more properly termed Agreement the very Notion of which implies a distinction in some of the fore-mentioned kinds Identity is nothing else but a repetition of Vnity as Number is of Difference with the Judgment of the Understanding upon it What Personal Vnity and Distinction are will be easily understood by explaining the word Person which signifies one of these two things either a Particular Intelligent Being or an Office Character or some such complex Notion applicable to such a Being In the first sense one Man or Angel is one Person and several Men or Angels are several Persons In the second sense of the word there may be so many Persons as there are different Combinations of the Actions Relations and Circumstances of Intelligent Beings And thus having given an Account of the meaning and signification of the Terms in which we are required to express our Faith we are next to Examine how far and in what sense we can believe this Proposition That One and the same God is Three different Persons Now 't is certain that if those before-specified are all the Notions we are able to frame of Vnity and Distinction then God must be One and Three in some way or manner there laid down or else in some other way or manner not conceivable by Human Understanding First then let us see how and in what manner God can be One and Three according to those Notions our Souls have framed of Vnity and Distinction And here 't is granted on all hands that nothing can be One and Three in the same manner and respect We cannot conceive a thing to be in One determinate Position or Vbi and in Three separate Vbi's all at once We cannot conceive that One Principle or Nature should be but One and yet Three different Principles or Natures too or that any Object should be truly and adequately represented to any Mind or Understanding under One Idea and truly and adequately represented under Three different Idea's 'T is impossible to believe any thing of this kind because it implies a plain Contradiction to the clearest and most certain knowledge we can have of Unity and Distinction so that if One may be Three in the same respect 't is One then One and Three must stand for other Idea's than we conceive when we pronounce these words and if so they ought to have other Names and not be called One and Three Since therefore we cannot say that God is One and Three in the same respect in the next place let us Enquire In what different respects this may be affirmed of him Now as to the Vnity of God this is easily believed and acknowledged as being very agreeable to all our other Notions of the Deity The chief difficulty lyes in assigning the Distinction In attempting which the best and clearest way of proceeding will be by going over the several kinds of Distinction before-mentioned I will begin with that of Position And here 't is plain at first sight that we cannot possibly conceive God under any difference of Position we cannot exclude Omnipotence from any imaginable point of space 'T is the limited Powers and Faculties of created Beings which are the Foundation of all Local Distinctions And therefore when we endeavour to represent God to our thoughts in this manner we consider him as Omnipresent and I can no more conceive Three Omnipresents than I can conceive Three straight Lines drawn between the same Points But though there can be but One undivided Omnipresence may there not be Three Infinite Beings Co-equal to one another and Commensurate to One Infinite Space This is far above my Conception too Infinite swallows up all my thoughts Whatever Idea we apply this Term Infinite to I think it impossible to apply it to another of the same Denomination As for Example If I apply it to Power I cannot consider it as applicable to more than One Infinite Power For Infinite Power includes all the Possibilities of Action so that to conceive more than One Infinite Power would be to conceive more Power than is possible which is a gross and palpable Absurdity And therefore we cannot conceive
Three Infinite Beings distinct from one another any more than Three Infinite Powers or Three Infinite Spaces because all Distinction implies some Limitation and Limitation is a Contradiction to Infinity We can indeed conceive Infinite Power as in some manner bounded by Infinite Wisdom Justice Mercy or the like but in no wise as limited by any other Power We cannot therefore conceive one Infinite Being as bounded by another Infinite Being for then we should conceive Infinite Power limited by another Power and the like of all other Attributes which are the same in both For the Notion of an Infinite Being includes in it all the imaginable kinds of Infinite Perfection But if we say there are Three Infinite Beings and all the Perfections of each are coincident what ground can we have for such a Distinction Not so much to use the former Instance as for that of three straight Lines between the same Points for there the different times of describing the same Line may in some manner help us to form a confused Conception of different Lines But 't is not in the Power of the Soul to represent to its self Three Eternal Beings of Coincident Perfections Here 's nothing for the Imagination to lay hold of no manner of ground to deceive our selves into a confused belief of such a Distinction And therefore I do not see how 't is possible for us to believe there are Three distinct Principles or Natures all of the same Infinite Perfections which together we call God And if there be but One Omnipresent Infinitely Perfect Being how can he be truly and fully represented to any Mind under Three different Idea's The truth of an Idea consists in its Agreement and Conformity to the Original it represents And if so how is 't possible there should be Three Idea's exactly and adequately conformable to the same Original and yet different from one another Either these Differences found in the Idea's are not in the real Pattern and then the Representation is false or they are and then the Unity of the Object is destroyed 'T is true indeed we do often apply different Idea's to the same individual Object but these are either Partial and Inadequate Conceptions of the Nature and Essence of it or Expressive of something Accessory and Extrinsecal to the Nature of the thing such as Modes Circumstances and Relations Those Partial Conceptions we frame of the Divine Nature are what we call the Attributes of God Which how different soever from one another in our thoughts are all necessarily included in the simple Idea of God and therefore cannot be the ground of such a Distinction as we are now enquiring after For when I say that God is Holy Wise or Powerful I only say that explicitly and in part which I said implicitly and in full when I pronounced the Name of God and the meaning of such Propositions is no more but this That a Holy Wise Powerful Being of all other Infinite Perfections is Holy Wise Powerful c. All which Perfections though considered separately under different Appearances by our imperfect Faculties being really but one simple Idea can be applyed to but one Single Person in the first sense of the word Person as it signifies a particular Intelligent Being Nature or Principle and that for the Reasons just now mentioned concerning the Conformity of Idea's with their Patterns From whence it follows that according to the Notions we are capable of framing of Vnity and Distinction which I have particularly examined with Reference to the Holy Trinity all the Personal Distinction we can conceive in the Deity must be founded upon some Accessory Idea's Extrinsecal to the Divine Nature a certain Combination of which Idea's makes up the Second Notion signified by the word Person And if we fairly and impartially Examine our own Thoughts upon this Subject we shall find that when we name God the Father we conceive the Idea of God so far as we are capable of conceiving it as Acting so and so under such Respects and Relations and when we name God the Son we conceive nothing else but the same Idea of God over again under different Relations and so likewise of the Holy-Ghost But if this be all that is meant by Trinity in Vnity Three Persons and One God where is that stupendious Mystery so much reverenced and adored by some What becomes of the great Difficulty and Obscurity complained of by others What is it that has puzled the Understandings and staggered the Faith of so many Learned and Inquisitive Men in all Ages since this Doctrine was first delivered This is an invincible Prejudice against the Account now given and indeed against any other Explication whatsoever that has nothing in it hard to be understood or believed For how can it be imagined that what has passed for a Mystery these Sixteen Hundred Years should now at last be comprehended as plainly as a common ordinary Notion But if this Account of the Trinity be too easie and falls far short of those High Expressions of Distinction found in Scripture as I think it does and no other grounded upon any Notions our Souls have framed of Vnity and Distinction can be true or consistent as I have before particularly proved then it necessarily follows that God must be One and Three in some way or manner not conceivable by Humane Understanding And what we are to believe in this case is the Subject of my next Enquiry which I am perswaded may very easily and quickly be resolved For if we are fully satisfied from Revelation that these Terms One and Three may and ought to be affirmed of God but not in any sense of the words we are here in this present state capable of conceiving And moreover if it be true as I have already shewn it is that we can believe a thing no farther than we understand the Terms in which it is proposed to us 't is plain from hence that all we can possibly believe in the matter of the Trinity is That One and the same God is Three in some way or manner we are not able to comprehend And if we are sure we cannot comprehend what this Distinction is whereby God is Three in vain do we look out for Terms to express something which we have no manner of Conception of Whatever words we use whether Person Hypostasis or any other we can invent or Languages furnish us with they all signifie the same thing that is some kind of Distinction we do not understand And we may rack our Thoughts tire our Imaginations and break all the Fibres of our Brain and yet never be able to deliver our selves clearer All therefore that we can know of the Trinity by Reason can amount to no more than an Obscure confused Knowledge which we are forced to express in general and abstracted Terms because we are sure no other reach our thoughts though these are not sufficient to explain all we mean by them Nor is
Holy Ghost may be considered as Persons or Personal Characters which do not imply any distinction of Being or Nature The Greeks are supposed to have meant the same by Hypostases as we do by Person this word being sometimes the very Translation of the other And if so there 's the same ground for the use of both But if they meant any thing else they could hardly have so good Warrant for it from Revelation Now that one of these Persons or Hypostases should be both God and Man there is this Foundation in the Scriptures for He who is there called the Son of God did certainly appear in the likeness of Men being in all respects Sin only excepted truly and properly Man as his Birth Necessities Sufferings and Death sufficiently testifie 'T is certain also that the same Jesus Christ who was called the Son of God and was made in the likeness of Man is affirmed by St. Paul Phil. 3. 7 8. to have been in the form of God when he took the Nature of Man upon him But besides this and many other Texts to the same effect 't is plain from what before has been proved that God did suffer himself to be worshipped and adored in and by the Man Christ Jesus The least that can be inferred from which is that God was more immediately and peculiarly present in Christ than ever he is said to have been any where else As in the Heavens Jewish Temple between the Cherubims in Prophets and Holy Men who spake as they were moved by the Spirit of God What created Object was ever allowed to intercept the Worship paid to God or share with him in it Were the Heavens the Temple the Cherubim or Prophets to be adored Nay has not God taken a particular care to preserve Men from Idolatry by forbidding them to Worship him in or by any sensible Representation Did not the Apostles who worship'd Christ forbid others to Worship Men of like Passions with themselves commanding them to direct all their Devotion to the Living God who made Heaven and Earth How then can we suppose that Christ was only a meer Man or some other Creature and not rather believe that he had the Fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him bodily But here it is Objected How can God and Man be united And to this I must fairly Answer that I cannot tell I have confessed already in the Account I have given of those Notions of Vnity and Distinction that I have not any just or distinct Conceptions of the Vnion of Spiritual Beings either with Bodies or with one another But this I will venture to say that I can as well conceive God and Man together under one Idea at one view as I can conceive a Soul and Body so united All that I know of the Vnion of Soul and Body is that there is some Intelligent Power that makes use of the Organs of my Body and Acts in conjunction with the Motions there produced And I may as well consider God united to Man when he so Acts by the Ministry and Operation of Man that the Actions of God seem conveyed to us the same way as the Actions of one Man are to another Had those who upon some occasions spake by the extraordinary Assistance of a Divine Power been constantly so directed and assisted how would they have distinguished the Motions of their Souls from the Impressions of God And why then should not we think such an Extraordinary Power as this as much united to such Men as that Common ordinary Power we call the Soul is to those Bodies in which it acts and exerts it self Some have been of Opinion that what we call the Soul is nothing else but a constant regular Inspiration or a determinate Concurrence of God Almighty with such and such Motions and Capacities of Matter But whether this be so or no as most probably it is not it seems to me very plain from Scripture that such a Power which we ascribe to God did as Constantly and Regularly Act in and through Christ as the Human Soul is perceived to do in any other Man As appears from his absolute security from all manner of Sin and Error from his constant knowledge of the Thoughts and Designs of Men and the Will and Decrees of God and from his Readiness and Ability to work Miracles at any time and upon any occasion All which are manifest Tokens of an uninterrupted Presence and Concurrence of the Deity Especially if we consider the Calmness and Evenness of Spirit observable in our Saviour entirely free from all the transports of over-ruling Impressions 't is a further Argument that he did not receive the Spirit of God at times or by measure but was as conscious of all the Divine Perfections in himself as a Man is conscious of his own Thoughts Such are the Grounds we find in Scripture for those particular Explications of the Trinity before-mentioned In the next place we are to Enquire what the Scriptures necessarily oblige us to believe in this Point But before this Question can be resolved there are two things to be premised 1. That whatever Articles of Faith are absolutely necessary to Salvation all Persons of every Rank and Condition are equally obliged to believe them There is not one Religion for the Peasant and another for the Scholar We have the same general Rule to walk by though particular Obligations may be greater or lesser fewer or more according to different Circumstances and Relations And whatever Principles and Duties are of general Necessity ought to be so plainly revealed as to be easily understood by ordinary Capacities upon a fair and careful Examination 2. That in order to this end it seems to have been the Design of the Scriptures to represent God in a sensible manner though at the same time they take care to assure us that God is in his own Nature a Being of different Perfections not conceivable by Human Understanding And is thus represented only in condescention to our weakness for the help and assistance of our Devotion So that all Expressions of this kind where God is the Subject are to be understood in a higher and more Spiritual sense but still with some Analogy to what they properly and usually signifie Thus to use a common Instance when 't is said that God looks down and beholds what 's done among the Children of Men that he hears the Cries of the Righteous and the Blasphemies of the Wicked 't is not to be imagined that he sees as Man sees that he makes use of any Organs of Sense but 't is thus expressed to give us more lively Notions and Impressions of the certainty of God's Vniversal Knowledge to assure us that God more plainly fully and infallibly knows whatever is done in all the Earth than we are capable of knowing those things which fall within the reach of our Senses This being premised it seems very plain to me that the Doctrine of the Trinity is
not to be look'd upon as a nice abstracted Speculation designed for the Exercise of our Understandings but as a plainer Revelation of God's Love and Good Will towards Men and a greater Motive and Incitement to Piety than any we had before this Doctrine was delivered Had man stood confirmed in his Original Righteousness and there had been no need of Redemption 't is highly probable God had never been considered by Man in his state of Probation under any such Distinction as is now revealed to us And therefore I should think those different Titles and Relations by which God has been pleased to express that Eternal Distinction in the Godhead to us should be chiefly considered by us with reference to the great Work of Man's Salvation Thus far then the Scriptures require us to believe That the One only Supream God upon his fore-knowledge of Man's Fall did from all Eternity Purpose and Decree to Redeem Mankind into a capacity of Salvation by the Death and constant Mediation of a Man chosen and enabled for this Work by the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him And in consideration of his Passion and Intercession to impart such Gifts Graces and Spiritual Assistances as would be sufficient to render this Redemption effectual to the Saving of much People And moreover we are to believe that God has accordingly executed this his Gracious Design towards us By sending into the World Christ Jesus the Man who before he had ordained should in the Fulness of Time be born and suffer for our Sins in and by whom as has already been shewn God acted in a wonderful manner was worshipped and adored and acknowledged in all his Attributes and with whom he abideth in the Fulness of Power and Glory for ever And since his Death and Reception into Heaven by a plentiful Effusion of Spiritual Graces and Influences by which means a great many have embraced the Gospel of Christ and become Heirs of Salvation and more from henceforth to the end of all things shall daily be added to the Church of God be supported in the Faith and be made Partakers of the purchased Inheritance reserved in Heaven for those that are Sanctified by the Spirit of God Now with respect to this great Design of Saving Mankind and the Order and Method of the Divine Wisdom in the Execution of it To give us as full and distinct Apprehensions as our Souls are able to conceive of the Misery of our sinful Condition the difficulty of Deliverance and the unspeakable Mercy of God in restoring us to the Happiness we had justly forfeited and to raise our Souls to the highest pitch of Veneration Love and Gratitude we are capable of expressing for such an inestimable Blessing God has been pleased to reveal himself to us under several Personal Characters and Relations Such as Father Son and Holy Ghost Saviour Mediator and Comforter By which Names and all other Expressions consequent thereupon we are directed to consider some such kind of Distinction and Subordination of Offices and Relations in God as the Terms made use of do commonly import Thus when God is pleased to represent his Love to Mankind in the highest Image of Nature that of a Father sacrificing an only well-beloved Son the exact Transcript and Resemblance of himself perfectly Innocent and Obedient to his Will in all Things we are to believe that by the Sufferings and Death of Christ God has given greater Proofs of his Love towards us than any Man is capable of doing to another and that such an Action of an Earthly Parent suggests the nearest and likest Conception we can possibly frame of what our Heavenly Father has done for us tho' at the same time we must acknowledge it comes infinitely short of expressing the Riches and Fulness of his Mercy and Loving-kindness And the same Use and Spiritual Improvement is to be made of all other Revelations of this nature And thus we have seen how far we are capable of conceiving a Trinity and what the Scriptures expresly oblige us to believe concerning this Point All that is beyond lies far out of our Reach and Comprehension and no particular Explications can add any thing to our Faith for the Terms made use of for that End being in use before this Doctrine was taught must either signifie the same they did before or not If the same where 's the Mystery If not what do they signifie Something that we cannot explain but in Words used already and then the Question will return again The same Difficulty would attend new Terms invented on purpose for either they would have no meaning at all affixed to them or else they would be understood in the sense of some other in use before And therefore had the very same Terms and Forms of Expression been found in the Scriptures as are now in our Creeds the Revelation of the Trinity had been no plainer nor we obliged to believe any farther than the present Language does import For upon a fair and distinct Examination both of Scripture and Reason it plainly appears that what 's already revealed amounts to as much as we are capable of conceiving and does besides imply something more which we can not comprehend and 't is not in the Power of Language to make us understand any thing better For 't is utterly impossible to frame any Notions above our own Level And should God be pleased to stamp some new Idea's upon the Minds of Men they could not be conveyed to others by the help of Words or any other Signs but only by the same Divine Impressions so that whatever Idea's the Apostles and Inspired Writers might have of a Trinity by immediate Infusion the Terms they have made use of can give us but this imperfect Discovery of them that they were such as we are not able to comprehend without the like Assistance This then is the utmost we are required to believe or are capable of believing concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity viz. That these Three different Terms Father Son and Holy Ghost are all applied in Scripture to the One only supreme God That all the Actions Offices and Relations which are in Scripture ascribed to any of these Names excepting those proper to the Humane Nature of Christ are there plainly attributed and do truly belong to one and the same Divine Nature That there are such frequent and evident Assertions of the Vnity of God in Scripture and yet such plain Expressions of distinction signified by these Terms Father Son and Holy Ghost as imply a consistency of unity and distinction in the Godhead That this Distinction whatever it be is not the same with that we conceive betwixt the Attributes of God which are partial Conceptions of his Essence nor a meer difference of Name Office or Relation such as is signified by the like Terms when applied to Men tho' these are all the Differences we can expresly conceive as applicable to the Divine Nature but some other
Distinction which we have but a confused perception of and cannot comprehend or explain by any particular Idea's which unknown inexplicable Distinction is the Foundation of all these Differences expresly conceived by us And since the Church has thought fit for the Sake of Unity and Peace and for the Suppressing all Private Disputes and Interpretations to appoint set Forms to express this our Faith in I think the Athanasian Creed as rational an Explication of the Trinity as can well be made The Worst that the Enemies of this Doctrine can say of it is That it is an unnecessary Multiplication of Terms and too nice an Endeavour to Explain what cannot be Explained but not that 't is False or Absurd nothing being there asserted in any sense inconsistent with the Vnity of God or the Principles of Right Reason All such Meanings and Significations of any Terms or Expressions in that Creed being very improper as they are there applied and utterly disclaimed by the Church that enjoins the Use of it Nor can it be esteemed an unreasonable Imposition That we should be obliged to profess our Faith of something which cannot be conceived but confusedly and indistinctly nor expressed but in general and obscure Terms For where 's the Hardship of being required to believe as far as we can believe God is Incomprehensible in his Nature and Perfections but are we not obliged to believe there is a God who is Incomprehensible Are we not obliged to believe there are Joys in Heaven which it has not enter'd into the Heart of Man to conceive And to repeat a former Instance may not a Blind Man be obliged to believe what a Friend of unsuspected Integrity tells him of the general nature of Colour tho' he is not able to form a particular Idea of it And if these Things cannot be denied What difference can be assigned why we should not be under as great an Obligation of believing the Trinity tho' we are not able to conceive it distinctly A Threefold Distinction in the Godhead consistent with the Unity of God is as plainly revealed in Scripture as any other Article of Faith Nor are those general Abstracted Terms we find in our Creeds to be condemn'd as meer useless and perplexing Niceties for tho' they are not sufficient to make us understand the Trinity fully and distinctly yet they are proper Limitations to exclude all the False and Unworthy Apprehensions of this Doctrine which Pretenders to a more particular Explication might introduce III. And now what dangerous Consequences can possibly attend such a Faith as this 'T is true indeed the Adversaries of the Trinity have drawn up a heavy Charge against this Doctrine and taken a great deal of Liberty in their Discourses about it But the principal Objections that have been made by any of them are but Three to which all the rest may be reduced And these I shall endeavour to shew by the Account before given are very Frivolous and Unjust 1. The first Pernicious Consequence the Doctrine of the Trinity stands charged with is the Introduction of a Plurality of Gods But 't is very plain from what we have said in the former part of this Discourse that 't is utterly impossible to believe a Trinity in any such sense as implies a Plurality of Gods For according to the Notions I have there shewed we have of the Nature and Attributes of God 't is undeniably certain to every Man's Experience that we cannot conceive more than One God All our Endeavours to comprehend more are only repetitions of the same Idea Let Those therefore take care to Answer this Accusation who under pretence of giving a more Rational Account of what we are to believe in this Point set up created subordinate Gods to be Partners with their Maker in the Glory and Worship due to him Besides we do explicitly declare that there is but One God at the same time we make Profession of our Faith in a Trinity or Three Persons 2. In the next place therefore we are accused of believing Contradictions and consequently of destroying all the certainty of Natural Knowledge Which Fence being down there 's no Error so gross or absurd but may be obtruded upon us and Transubstantiation has as good a Pretence to be an Article of our Faith as the Trinity But I need not make any particular Answer to this Objection having proved at large already that we neither do nor can believe a Trinity in any sense that contradicts the plain and evident Principles of Natural Reason We do not believe there can be more Gods than One that One can be Three in the same respect 't is One or that One God can be Three Persons in the same sense three Men are three Persons or any other Proposition that 's inconsistent with those Natural Notions which are the Foundation of all our other Knowledge But the Patrons of Transubstantiation cannot make this Plea who in this one Particular deny those very Principles which upon all other occasions they rely upon with the greatest Assurance Did they only affirm that Christ was present in that Sacrament in some way or manner they could not comprehend but in no way repugnant to the plain and necessary Dictates of well-informed Sense and right Reason there might be then some Resemblance found betwixt this Doctrine and that of the Trinity but at present the Comparison is palpably and notoriously unjust 3. But Thirdly 't is further Objected That though the Doctrine of the Trinity as we explain it could not be proved to contain down-right Contradictions yet at least it must be counted and esteemed as a Mystery and the Imposition of Mysteries for Articles of Faith is a thing of very ill Consequence In Answer to which Charge it is to be observed that as in the Doctrine of the Trinity so in most other Objects of Faith and Knowledge there 's something that we plainly and certainly understand and something that we cannot possibly comprehend Thus a Man by inward Reflection is Infallibly conscious of his own Thoughts and he judges whatever he perceives within himself to proceed from one Common Principle which he calls his Soul and which from the Nature of its Operations he is fully perswaded is something of a different kind from his Body tho' it always Acts in consent with it But what this Soul is or in what manner united to his Body he is not able to conceive and therefore the Doctrine of the Human Soul taken all together may as justly be stiled a Mystery as the Trinity We ought not then to be offended at the word Mystery since if we strictly examine our thoughts we shall find that almost every thing we pretend to know comes under that name even those things we have the greatest Assurance of our very Souls and Beings This being observed we may consider the Trinity either with respect to what may be understood of it or what cannot So far as we are capable of