Skip to main content

Full text of "Some considerations concerning the Trinity : and the ways of managing that controversie"

See other formats 


'%r^: 


i 

'wimlbt 

Pi 

^z^ 

^' 

^ 

^W-'^''^^tw^ 


-^'  -  A- 


^||L)^; 


LIBRARY 

FR1.^€ET<>IV,  an.  J. 

U(lNATIi)\    or 

a  A  M  L'  K  1.    A  a  N  K  W  , 

^        .  u  r     H  H  M.  \  11  t  1.  J'  H  1  1  .    H  1  - 

Letter 


No. 


COLLECTION  OF  PURITAN  AND 
ENGLISH  THEOLOGICAL  LITERATURE 

$ 

LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 
PRINCETON,  NEW  JERSEY 


1   i  I  •[   -  "  " 


tmt  ConfiDetatiottS 


Concerning  the 


f 


TY 


AND' 


The  W  A  Y  S  of  Managing  that 

CONTROVERSIE. 


£2,  c^t'T^  w-M^iZr. 


«*»  ife  ^ii>  s^s^ 

<9*    cfpT  *Jh»    •**   *** 


L  O  N  DO  N, 

Printed 5  and  Sold  by  E.Whitlock,^  neitSmmers'Hall. 

MDCXC\rL 


I 


1  I 


THE 

PREFACE 

TO  THF 

READER- 


TH  IS  DIfcourle  was  Written 
jfome  time  ago  for  the  Pri- 
vate Satisfaftion  of  the  Au- 
thor, who  thought  that  a  pro- 
per Seafon  for  an  Impartial  Enquiry  into 
the  Dodirine  of  the  Trinity,  when  feveral 
Perfons  of  different  Opinions  in  tliat  Point 
had  juft  before  appeared  in  the  Contro- 
verfie  about  it,  and  their  Printed  Papers 
being  canvas'd  over  again  in  Convcrfation, 

a  had 


The  Prefacel 

had  produced  many  New  Remarks  upon 
the  fame  Subjecft.     Which  Advantages^^ 
together  with  what  he  had  formerly  read,, 
having,  as  he  ji^dged-j  giveahira  a  pret- 
ty full  comprehenfion  of    the  Matters  in; 
Difpute,  ^he  took  the  following  Method, 
of  Re*examining  th^  |)art;  of   his  Faith  ^ 
and  Juftifying  what  -fee  believed  to  his 
own  Reafon  and  Confcience.    Some  Per- 
fons  to  whom  he  communicated  what  he 
had  writ,  advifed  him  to  Print:  Which  he- 
had  done  before  now>  upon  the  Judgment 
of  a  Great   and  Learned   Man  of  the 
Church,  licely  deady  who  was  pleafed 
to  approve  the  Papers ,  without  knowing 
to  whom  they  belonged  :    But  Occafion 
being  given,  him  to  fore-fee  fome  little 
Objcdions,  which  might,   probably,    at 
that  particular  time,  have  in  fome  mea- 
fur^  obftru(3:ed  his  Good    Intentions   in* 
Printing  them  ,    he  thought  fit   to  de- 
fer the  Publication  of  them  till  a  more 
convenient  Opportunity,  fuch  as  he  judges 
this  to  be,  wtieq  the  -Controverfie  of  the 
V  Trinity 


yhe  Frefdce^ 

Trinity  is  managed  in  fuch  a  manner  as 
to  offend  a  great  many,  antf  fatlsfie  very 
few^§  and  the  Church' -is  like  to' fufFer 
Very  much  by  the  rob  Adventumus  M- 
tempts  made  by  fome  to  Vindicate  her 
DoArines. 


^M  i. 


irhi^  W^' ^en^^  to  Explain  the 
DiftiniSion  in  the  Godhead  by  Modes  ,  Of 
fices^  Relations^  and  the  like,  are  cenfured 
as  laying  too  little^  and  coming  much 
below  the  Charaders  of  Diftindion  to 
be  found  in  Scripture;  though,. at  the 
fame  time  they  ufe  thefe  Terms,  they 
acquaint  us  that  they  ufe  them  in  z  dif- 
ferent Senfe  from  any  they  ^rt  takett  in, 
when  applied  to  Crf^f«/ex,  and  in  '^  lfe& 
importing  greater  DifFerence,  but  fticH'^ai 
is  not  conceivable  by  Human  Underftarld^ 
ing. 

' '^=Aha  fomfeb^  thofe-ivho  calP  theTftfe^ 
Dhine  Perfons  Three  Infinite  Minds  ^  Spi~ 
fitSy  or  Subfiances^  would  not  be  thought 

a  2  to 


The  Pre  face: 

to  mean  by  chefe  Expreflions,  That  the' 

Three  Perfons  in  the  Godhead  are  as  mucb 

diftinguiflied  from  one.  another   as  Three 

Merjj  or  Three  JngeJs  zit ;  but  that  the 

Diftindtion  betwixt,  them  is  fo  great^  that 

no  other  Terms  can  reach  it,  though  chefe 

do  fomewhat  exceed  what  they  would  fig^ 

nifie  by  them.:   Which- DiftirvSion,;  lefs 

than  thefe  Expreflions,    in-  the  common 

ufc  of  them,  do  import,  and  higher  than 

any  other  can  come  up  to^  is  acknowledg'di 

like  wife  to  he  inconceivable. 

Which  being  obferved.  by  the  Author 
of  t;his  Difcourfe,  he  thought  it  more  Ad- 
vilable  to  ufe  no  New  Terms  with  a  De- 
fign  of  Explaining  what,  by  the  Confefr 
fion  of  Perfons  of  different  fides  in.  the 
Difpute,  is  not  to  be  rendredmore  con-^ 
eeivable.  And,  to  Juftifie  his  Opinion  in 
this  Matter,  he  has  endeavoured  to  prove 
that  no  New  Terms  can  be  ufed  to  any 
fiich  purpofe.  And  this,  he  thinks,,  he 
has  made  very  Evident  by  the  Account  he 

has 


^e  Frefdce. 

has  given  of  whac  we  czn^di^inSily  conceive^ 
and  what  wc  cznconfufediy  helieve  of  the 
X)o<a:rine  of  thfe  Trinity;  which  ought 
carefully  to  be  diftinguiihU  in  all  Difqui^ 
fitions  upon  Subjects  of.  this  Nature. 

As  for  thofc  who  will  allow  only  a  pure 
Nomina fDi{\:m£tlon  in  the  Godhead;  or 
that  apply  the  Terms  vT^s  and  Ho/y  Ghoji 
to  meet  Created  Beings  ^^  he  has  only  the 
Lan^age  and  Dejign  of  Scripture  to  oppofe 
to  them ;  which  fcem  to  him  utterly  irre^ 
concileable  to  fuch  Notions,  and  he  hopes 
thofe  general  Reflexions  he  has  drawn  from 
thence  will  make  this  appear  fo  to  others. 
But  the  Gpink)n  of  thole  who  make  the 
Eerfons  in  the  Godhead  ^  diJH?2&  as  Three 
Men^  or  three  Angels^  he  is  fure,  both  from 
'Rt'^eUtion  ^nd  Reafon J  is  falfe:'  And  that 
advancing  zny  fuch  Rxplications  of  the 
JFrinityy  as  will:  fairly  hear  this  Conftru^ 
(ftion,  is  of  fuch  dangerous  Confequence, 
that  he  hopes  he  has  done  Ibme  Service  to 
Religionary  .proving,,  That  77jr^'e  Perfins 


in^' 


The  Preface. 

in  the  Godhead  as  diJiinB  as  Three  Men^  or 
Three  Angels^  is  not  only  an  Incomfnhenfihle 
Notion^  but ,  an  Impojjtble  Thing ;  which  irah 
plies  a  manifeft  Concradidiion  to  the  plains- 
eft  and  fureft  Principles  of  Knowledge. 

Having  given  this  fliort'  Account  of  the 
Author^  and  his  Performance  in  this  Difcourfe, 
I  have  only  this  further  to  acquaint  his 
Readers  with,  That  he  defires  they  would 
believe  him  to  be  a  fincere  Man,  that;  has 
a  ferious  Regard  for  Religion  and  no  other 
aims  behind  what  he  profeiles :  For,  what- 
ever his  Arguments  are,  he  is  fure  his  De^ 
fign  is  good :  And,  that  his  Reafoning  may 
appear  fo  too,  he  would  be  glad  that  They 
who  take  up  thefe  Papers  would  give  them 
the  Reading  over ,  before  they  pafs  any 
Judgment  upon  what  is  advanced  in  them; 
For ,  the  Difcouffe  being  written  in  the 
Demonfirative  way  ^  where  the  Main  Conclu-^ 
fions  are  eftabliih'd  by  a  longlrain  ofPre- 
faratory  Proofs^  no  true  Judgment  can  be 
made  but  upon  the  whole  together. 

May 


/ 
/ 


The  Preface. 

May  ic  pleafe  God  to  make  thefc  Endea-^. 
vours  of  the  Author  fuccefsful  to  Satlsfie 
and  Unite  the  Minds  of  Men  in  their  Be- 
lief of  the  Dodirine  of  the  Trinity  ;  or 
may  He  direft  fome  abler  Perfons  to  find 
out  more  EfFeftual  Methods  of  Eftablilh- 
ing  the  Prmime  Faith  ^  and  fettling  tha 
Srefent  Peace  of  the  Church< 


SOME^ 


%  JK 


,u  1 


'1L> 


'i     .,    T,    r.   <sr->.  »>       T' 


ill 


SOME 

CONSIDERATIONS 

CONCERNING   THE 

TRINITY.  &<^ 

T Here's  no  part  of  the  Chriftian  -Faith  has 
produced  fo  many  Difputes  and  Controver- 
fies,  fuch  a  numerous  Variety  of  Opinions 
and  Seas,  as  the  Doarine  of  the  BlefTed 
Trinity.  If  we  eonfult  the  large  Catalogues  of  Pri- 
mitive  Herefies,  we  (hall  find  the  far  greateft  Number 
of  them  nothing  elfe  but  fo  many  feveral  Modes  and 
Ways  of  Explaining  the  Common  Undivided  Nature 
and  Effenee  of  the  Trinity,  and  the  different  Oftices 
and  Operations  of  each  Perfon.  .   r  d  ° 

How  far  the  uncertainty  of  our  Faith  in  theie  1  omts, 
the  many  Abfurd  and  Blafphemous  Expofitions  that 
have  been  made  of  them,  and  the  warm  and  mdilcreet 
Management  of  contrary  Parties,  have  contributed  to 
the  Prejudice  of  Religion,  and  the  Scandal  of  ^itsPro- 
fefTors,  has  been  a  common  Obfervation  and  Com- 
plaint  in  all  Chriftian  Ages.  And  feveral  Expedienrs 
have  been  propofed  for  the  RedrelTmg  of  this  Milchie^, 
hut  all  Attempts  of  this  kijid  have  hitherto  mikarr^d 


2       Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

The  pi  incipal  Reafon  of  which  I  humbly  conceive  to 
be  this :  That  thofe  who  have  laboured  in  this  good 
Defign,  have  for  the  moft  part  proceeded  upon  wrong 
Meafures. 

Now,  the  Methods  that  have  been  generally  and  ^ 
chiefly  infifted  upon,  are  Three,  which  are  all  impro- 
per, or  infufficient,  and  have  therefore  proved  ineffe- 
£lual,  as  will  plainly  appear  upon  a  particular  Exami- 
nation of  each. 

I.  Firft  then.  There  are  fome  who  are  for  Reveren- 
cing the  Myftery  of  the  Trinity  without  ever  looking 
into  it  at  all,  who  think  it  not  to  be  the  Subjed  either 
of  Difpute  or  Enquiry  ;  imagining  every  thing  of  this 
high  and  tranfcendent  Nature  is  propofed  to  us  only  as 
a  Tryal  and  Exercile  of  our  Faith ;  and  the  more  im- 
plicit that  is,  the  fuller  do  we  exprefs  our  truft  and 
relyance  upon  God. 

Nay,  farther.  There  are  thofe  who  do  not  Icruple  to 
fay,  the  more  Contradi6lions  the  better ;  the  greater 
the  Struggle  and  Oppolition  of  Realbn,  the  greater  is 
the  Triumph  and  Merit  of  our  Faith. 

But  there's  no  likelihood  of  fupprefling  any  of  our 
Doubts  orDifputes  in  Religion  this  way  :  For  befides 
the  Natural  Propenfion  of  the  Soul  to  the  fearch  of 
Truth,  and  the  ftrong  and  impatient  defire  we  have  to 
know  as  much  as  ever  we  can  of  what  immediately 
concerns  us,  'tis  generally  and  very  juftly  look'd  upon 
both  as  the  Priviledge  and  Duty  of  Man  to  Enquire 
and  Examine  before  he  believes  or  judges ;  and  never 
give  up  his  affenr  to  any  thing  but  upon  Good  and  Ra- 
tional Grounds :  And  therefore  'twould  be  a  very  hard 
thing  to  perlwade  the  World  to  ftifle  and  reftrain  fb 
many  Powerful  Motives  of  Aftion ;  But  fhould  they 
be  farther  prevailed  upon  to  go  dire6lly  contrary  to 

their 


Some  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,        3 

their  Reafon,  'twould  be  much  more  difficult  to  Con- 
quer the  uneafmefs  of  the  ReluOiance. 

And  indeed  'tis  well  the  difficulties  of  fubduing  the 
Underftanding  are  too  great  to  be  mafter'd ;  hor  a 
flight  R  eflefliion  will  ferve  to  convince  us,  that  the  ne- 
ceffary  Confequences  of  a  blind  Refignation  of  Judg- 
ment  would  be  far  more  Fatal  to  Chrifl:ianity  than  all 
our  prelent  Divifions* 

What  Blafphemies  and  Contradidions  may  and  have 
been  impofed  upon  mens  belief,  under  the  Venerable 
Name  of  Myfteries  ?  And  how  eafie  are  Villainous  Pra- 
aices  derived  from  an  abfurd  Faith  ?  This  is  matter  ol 
common  Obfervation,  and  has  brought  a  juft  Scandal 
upon  a  large  Party  of  Chriflrians,  and  given  occafion 
to  Men  of  light,  undiftinguifhing  Capacities,  to  deny 
and  feoff  at  the  Saving  Truths  of  theGofpel,  becaule 
they  were  accompanyed  with  a  ridiculous  mixture  of 
Errors. 

No  doubt  therefore  we  may,  and  ought  carefully  to 
Examine  the  Faith  and  Principles  we  defign  for  the 
Rule  of  our  Lives,  and  endeavour  to  underftand  all  our 
Religion  fo  far,  as  to  be  able  to  Juftifie  it,  both  to  our 
Selves  and  Unbelievers. 

We  ought  indeed  to  proceed  with  all  the  Caution 
and  Humility  imaginable,  and  take  a  juft  Eftimate  of 
our  Ta^k  and  Jhilitits :  But  to  deny  us  the  Liberty  ei. 
ther  of  ufing  or  obeying  our  Realbn,  is  a  fufpicious  as 
well  as  an  unjuft  Reftraint. 

2.  There  are  others,  who  call  the  DoQrineof  the 
Trinity  an  Incomprehenfible  Myftery,  and  yet  are  at 
a  great  deal  of  pains  to  bring  it  down  to  a  Level  with 
Humane  Underftanding ;  and  are  all  very  earneft  to 
have  their  own  particular  Explications  acknowledged 
as  neceflary  Articles  of  Faith :   But  the  number  and 

B  2  diC 


A       Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

difagreement  of  the  Expofitors  plainly  difcover  the  va^ 
nity  of  fuch  Pretences. 

This  has  proved  fo  unfuccefsful  a  way,  that  inftead 
of  uniting  the  different  Judgments  of  Chriftians  ia 
ooe  Point,  it  has  broke  the  Controverfie  into  a  Thou- 
fand  more  :  For  Zeal  and  Oppofition  raifmg  up  a  great 
many  Allertors  of  the  Common  Belief,  and  every  one 
looking  out  for  fbme  new  Terms  and  Modes  of  Speech, 
which  fhould  be  fuller  and  more  expreflive  than  thofe 
in  Queftion,  tlie  Differences  and  Difputes  were  by  con- 
fequence  proporticnably  multiplyed.  For  the  Terms 
and  Forms  of  Speech  made  ufe  of  being  capable  of  le- 
vera I  fences,  and  each  of  them  attended  with  other 
AccelTory  Idea's,  Miftakes  mufl:  necefTarily  arife,  and 
divers  new  Thoughts  be  fuggefted  to  fuch  whofe 
Heads  were  employed  upon  the  fame  Subject :  And 
thus  it  came  to  pals,  that  Defences  and  Vindications 
of  the  Orthodox  Faith  produced  more  Herefi^.  . 

Wherefore  in  all  fuch  Matters  as  thefe,  wljich  are 
top  big  to  be  grafp'd,  we  had  better  fit  down  contented 
with  what  we  have  firm  hold  of,  than  tire  our  felves 
with  vain  Endeavours  to  take  in  more.  'Twonld  cer- 
tainly be  tl.c  trueft,  and  the  fafeft  way,  ftridlyto  con* 
line  our  felves  to  Scripture  Expr  fflonsy  and  never  fpeak 
of  Simper  natural  Thhgs,  but  in  the  Language  of  Revela* 
iion ; .  which  being  tlie  proper  Standard  of  all  other 
Words  that  fbali  be  ufed  on  thefe  Occafions^  'tis  in  vain 
to  (Lift  the  Meafurc,  when  there's  never  another  to  be 
found  which  can  or  ought  to  reach  farther. 

It  may,  however,  fometimes  be  neceffary  to  change 
tliis  Method,  and  introduce  Nerv  Terms  to  fecure  the 
TruePaith  againft  the  Falle  Interpretations  of  fuch  as 
pei^ve.t  Scripture,  For  if  Hereticks  will  make  ule  of 
New  ExpreiHons  to  ccatradia  the  received  Do£i:rine,we 

muft 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,        e 

,mu^  have  New  Terms  to  exprefs  the  fame  Truth  in, 
in  Oppofition  to  their  Herefie.  And  in  this  cafe  the 
Church  may  very  reafonably  require  her  Members  to 
fliew  their  iteady  continuance  in  the  Ancknt  Faith,  by 
the  ufe  of  fuch  Terms  as  plainly  infer  their  denyalof 
any  later  erroneous  Inventions  fet  up  againfl:  it. 

^,  There  are  a  Third  fort  of  Men  in  the  World , 
who  pretend.  That  there  is  no  Myftery  propofed  to 
us  as  an  Objed  of  Faith ;  and  in  order  to  make  this  of 
the  Trinity  appear  to  be  none,  they  bring  a  Cloud  over 
the  whole  Bible,  and  with  ilrange  forc'd  Criticifms 
and  Allegories  give  the  very  plaineft  Texts  fuch  an 
unufual  Myfterious  turn,  as  neither  the  Language  wilji 
bear,  nor  is  any  ways  confident  v/ith  the  Defign  or 
CharaQer  of  the  Holy  Writers. 

But  this  is  a  very  odd  prepofterous  Method  of  Ex- 
plaining Scripture,  by  darkening  a  great  part  of  it  to 
illutete  the  reft,  and  as  ridiculous  a  Projed  of  heal-^ 
ing  Divifions,  as  pulling  down  a  whole  fide  of  ftand= 
ing  Wall  to  mend  a  Breach o 

And  after  all,  the  SocmUn  Hypthefts  feems  to  me 
to  have  more  of  My  fiery  ^  and  QontradiBion  to  Natu- 
ral Reafbn  in  it,  than  what  is  objeded  to  the  Cafholkk 
DoBrine, 

I  am  not  for  clogging  the  Faith,  nor  multiplying 
Myfteries ;  yet  we  ought  not  prefently  to  deny  what 
we  do  not  underftand,  but  foberly,  and  impartially  con- 
ifider  how  much  we  are  able  to  Comprehend^  and  how 
far  we  are  obliged  to  Believe^  what  we  do  not. 

The  Method  therefore  I  defign  to  obferve  in  the  folo 
lowing.  Difcourfe,  fhall  be  different  from  any  of  thof^ 
now  mentioned.  I  fball  not  go  about  to  preis  Men  to 
a  Blind  Veneration  J  or  Prefnmptuoi^  Belief  of  any  thing 
mthofit  Examhaffo^y  or  in  Defimce  to  Re^off-  I  iiiaiU 


^       Some  ConfiJierations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

not  offer  to  impofe  any  New  Jrhitr^ry  Explicatior/s  of 
my  own  upon  other  mens  Confciences,  but  confine  my 
felf  wholly  to  the  ufual  warranted  Forms  of  Expreflion. 
I  will  not  wrcft  and  llrain  Scripture  to  help  out  a  Pri- 
vate Notion,  nor  do  any  thing  to  betray  the  Juft  Rights 
and  Priviledges  of  our  Common  Reafun ;  but  care- 
fully endeavour  to  diftinguifli  How  far  the  DoBrme  of 
the  Trinity  is  a  My  fiery  ^  and  how  far  a  Myftery  may  be- 
come an  Object  of  Eaith.  From  whence  I  hope  to  make 
it  appear,  that  nothing  hard  or  unreafonable  is  requi- 
red of  us  by  our  Church  for  the  belief  of  this  Article. 

In  order  to  which,  I  fhall  rank  all  my  Reflections 
upon  this  Subjed,  under  thefe  Three  Heads  of  En- 
quiry. 

I.  What  it  is  that  perplexes  and  obfcures  our  Faith 
in  the  Trinity. 

II.  What  is  fufficient  for  Chriftians  to  believe  con- 
cerning this  Point*. 

III.  What  ill  Confequences  can  attend  fuch  a  Faith. 

Firft  then,  I  am  to  Enquire,  Wh^t  it  is  that  per- 
plexes and  obfcures  our  Faith  in  the  Holy  Trinity.  For 
before  I  enter  upon  a  diflinO:  and  particular  Confidera- 
tion  of  the  DoQrine  it  felf,  'tis  necelTary  to  point  out 
fbmeof  fhe  Principal  Caufes  which  have  occafioned 
fb  many  Falfe,  Abfurd,  and  Ineffedual  Expofitions  of 
it.    And  they  are  thefe  four : 

The  Prejudice  and  Bigottry  of  Men  indifcreetly  Pious. 
The  Vanity  and  Defign  of  fuch  as  value  themfelves 

upon  inventing  New  Notions,  or  laughing  at  the 

Old  ones. 
The  not  difccrning  or  confidering  the  Bounds  and  Li« 

mits  of  our  Knowledge.  And 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity       7 

And  laftly,  An  imprudent  Choice  of  improper  ways  of 
Expreftion. 

The  two  firft  of  thefe  have  a  general  Influence  upon 
all  Religious  Controverfies,  but  are  more  efpecially 
concerned  in  this :  For  there's  never  more  room  for 
Superflitions  and  Rigorous  Impofitions,  nor  fairer  Ad- 
vantages for  Cavilling,  and  drawing  abfurd  Confe- 
quences,  than  where  a  Myftery  is  the  Subjeft  of  De- 
bate, i^ 

There  are  fome  who  are  apt  to  be  concerned,  and 
cry  out,  as  if  the  very  Foundations  of  all  Religion 
were  overturning,  when  any  particular  Scheme  or 
Notion  they  are  fond  of,  is  called  in  Queflion.  On 
the  other  fide,  I  have  no  fmall  Reafbn  to  believe  there 
are  feveral  who  ftrike  at  Chriftianity  it  felf,  under  the 
Pretence  of  bringing  down  the  value  of  Myfteries. 

And  indeed  if  we  confider  the  general  Temper  of 
Mankind,  'tis  no  wonder  that  there's  more  Superfiition 
and  Ififiddky  in  the  World  than  True  Religion :  For  be- 
Jieving  every  thing,  and  believing  nothing,  a  fiidden 
Veneration  or  Contempt  of  whatfoever  is  propoled  to 
us,  equally  gratifie  the  lazy  Inclinations  of  the  Soul , 
which  loves  an  cafie  undifturbed  courfe  of  Thoughts, 
and  is  very  difficultly  brought  to  endure  the  Labour  of 
Attention  and  Enquiry.  Nay,  of  thofe  who  feem  to 
have  conquer'd  this  Trouble,  there  are  few  who  lay 
themfelves  out  in  a  free  and  impartial  fearch  of  Truth, 
but  are  wholly  employed  in  the  purfuit  of  fome  Notion 
they  have  before-hand  taken  up,  and  are  refblved  to 
maintain:  They  are  already  determined  what  to  be- 
lieve, and  only  feek  out  Arguments  to  Juftiiie  or  Re- 
commend their  Opinions  toothers. 

'  HoW' 


S"     Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

How  far  thefe  ; general  RefleQions  are  applicable  to 
the  prefent  Cafe,  has  been  hinted  already  in  the  begin- 
ning of  this  Difcourfe,  where  'tis  very  difcernible  from 
the  Ways  and  Methods  made  ufe  of  for  fettling  the  Do- 
ctrine of  the  Trinity,  that  Prejudice  and  Vanity,  a  falfe 
Zeal,  and  an  ill*grounded  Contempt  have  had  a  large 
fliare  in  the  Management  of  this  Controverfic. 
-  Another  Reafbn  why  our  Endeavours  of  Expound- 
ing this  Point  have  been  vain  and  unfuccefsful,  is  the 
want  of  difcerning  or  coffering  the  Bounds  and  Li- 
mits of  our  Knowledge  -,    from  whence  it  comes  to 
paf^,  that  oftentimes  we  drive  to  fbar  above  our  pitch, 
and  imagine  we  underftand  fbme  things  better  than  re- 
ally we  do.    Rut  efpecially  Men  of  abftraded  Think- 
ing are  very  apt  to  deceive  themlelves  with  falfe  Idea's, 
and  are  firmly  perfwadcd  they  conceive  things  difi:in£l:- 
ly,  which  they  have  but  a  confufed  Notion  of.    As  for 
inftance ;  It  has  been  delivered  down,  as  the  conftant 
Faith  of  a  long  Succeffion  of  Eminent  Philolbphers  > 
that  the  whole  Suhftance^  Nature,  and  EJfeme  of  the 
SohI  is  rvhol/jf  and  tntmly  in  all  the  Body  confidered  to- 
gether, and  wholly  and  entirely  in  every  fmgk  Particle  of 
it.  And  this  is  a  Notion  which  at  firft  view  has  a  great 
appearance  of  truth  and  clearnefs,  and  is  fuch  as  the 
Underfianding  readily  clofes  with  :  But  if  we  would 
ftriftly  and  diftinQly  Examine  our  felves,   what  we 
mean  by  thofe  Terms,  I  believe  we  fhould  be  able  to 
give  but  a  very  obfcure  Account  of  our  Opinion ;  and 
at  laft,  be  forced  to  confefs  we  underftand  no  more 
than  this  by  them,  That  the  Soul  is  the  Principle  of  all 
the  Operations  performed  in  the  Body.     But  fo  it  fbme- 
times  happens,  that  we  are  tranfported  too  far  in  our 
Enquiries  after  hidden  Truths,  till  we  arc  loflin  Specu- 
:  lation,  and  vainly  think  to  Fathom  the  depths  of  Know- 
ledge 


Some  Confiderations  cmcerning  the  Trinity.        ^ 

'ledge  and  Wifdom,  without  confidering  the  ihortncfs 
of  our  time.  Whereas  we  ought  rather  to  examine « 
and  find  out  the  Bounds  of  our  Thoughts,  know  the 
iuft  extent  and  compafs  of  our  Underftanding,  and 
then  reft  latisfied  with  what  we  are  Cupabk  of,  without 
4kjiring  to  know  more  thm  wt  cxn^  or  fnte^fdmg  to  knorv 
wore  than  we  do. 

But  further,'  the  Dodrine  of  the  Trinity  has  fuffered 
very  much  by  theDifcourles  made  about  it  upon  another 
Account ;  And  that  is,  that  fome  of  the  Authors  of 
fuch  Dilcourfes  have  imprudently  made  choice  of  im- 
proper ways  of  Expreflion :  Either  perplexing  plain 
Revelation  too  much  with  Philofophicai  Terms  and 
Niceties,  or  expofing  the  Faith  to  contempt,  by  homely 
indecent  Similies,  and  difproportionate  Comparifbns. 

Now,  to  keep  clear  of  all  thofe  Rocks  I  have  dif^ 
covered  others  to  have  fplit  upon,  I  have  endeavoured, 
what  I  could,  to  deliver  my  felf  from  Prejudice  and 
confufion  of  Terms,and  to  fpeakjuftly  and  Intelligibly : 
And  not  being  yet  prepoffeft  in  favour  of  any  particu- 
lar Explication,  the  better  to  preferve  my  freedom  of 
Examining  the  Subjefl:  in  hand,  I  have  purpofely  for- 
born  to  fearch  the  Fathers^  Schoolmen,  or  Fratres  Po^ 
lorn,  or  read  over  any  Uter  Treatifes  concerning  thi* 
Controverfie  while  I  was  compofing  the  prefent  Effay, 
refblving  to  confult  nothing  but  Scripture  and  my  own 
Natttral  Sentiments,  and  draw  all  my  Reflexions  from 
thence,  taking  only  fuch  which  eafily,  and  without 
conftraint  offered  themfelves. 

2.  And  thus  having  cleared  the  way,  and  removed 
every  thing  which  I  thought  might  obftru£l  or  mi(^ 
guide  my  Enquiries,  I  come,  in  the  fecond  place,  to 
confider  the  Doctrine  it  felf;  and  Faithfully  and  Im- 
partially to  Examine  what  is  fujficient  forChriftians  to 

C  believe 


I  o      Some  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

helitve  corner fiing  tht  Trinity^  or,  which  is  all  one  in 
this  cafe,  rvhdt  is  ^eceffary  to  be  kHeved  :  For  certainly 
he  believes  enough,  and  cannot  in  realbn  be  taxed  for 
a  narrow  defe£^ive  Faith,  who  believes  as  much  as  is 
required  of  him. 

For  the  better  proceeding  in  which  Enquiry,  I  fliall 
lay  down  this  as  an  evident  Truth,  which  every  Man 
will  grant  me,  that  nothing  is  mceffary  to  be  helievedy 
but  I .  rvhais  foffihle  to  be  believed  ;  and  2.  whafs  flainly 
revealed. 

But  here  I  would  be  underftood,  as  to  the  laft  part 
of  the  AlTertion,  only  of  fuch  matters  which  are  known 
to  us  no  other  way  than  by  Revelation.  For  in  feve- 
ral  other  cafes,  I  confefs,  we  may  be  obliged  to  believe 
meerly  upon  HumAnt  Tejiimony :  Nay,  even  Revelation 
it  felf,  as  it  is  a  matter  of  Fadt,  claims  our  AfTent  upon 
no  higher  a  ground. 

But  further,  I  fhall  take  this  for  granted  too  in  a 
Proteftant  Country,  that  Scrifture  is  the  only  Standard 
of  all  NecelTary  Revealed  Truths :  Neither  in  the 
prefent  Inftance  is  there  any  room  for  a  Traditionary 
Faith.  For  befides  that,  all  the  Fathers  and  Ancient 
Writers  ground  their  Expofitions  of  the  Trinity  wholly 
upon  Scripture,  I  cannot  conceive  that  the  Sabjeft  is 
capable  of  a  plainer  Revelation,  as  I  fhall  endeavour 
to  fhew  more  fully  in  the  following  Difcourfe. 

We  are  therefore,  in  the  firft  place,  to  confider  how 
far  'tis  pojjihle  to  believe  a  Trinity  ;  and  next,  to  examine 
what  the  Scripture  requires  m  to  believe  in  this  matter. 

Now,  there  are  two  Conditions  requifite  to  make 
it  poflible  for  us  to  believe  a  thing,  i.  That  we  know 
the  Terms  of  what  we  are  to  aflent  to.  2.  That  it  im- 
ply no  contradidion  to  our  former  Knowledge ;  fuch 
Knowledge  I  mean  which  is  accompanied  with  Cer- 
tainty and  Ev  idence.  Firft 


Some  Confide  rations  concerning  the  Trinity^       1 1- 

Firft  then,  we  can  believe  a  thing  no  further  than 
we  underftand  the  Terms  in  which  it  is  propofed  to  us  ^ 
For  Faith  concerns  only  the  trttth  ani  falfljood  of  Propo-. 
fitms;  and  the  Terms  of  which  a  Propofition  confifts 
mufl  be  firft  underftood  before  we  can  pronounce  any 
thing  concerning  the  Truth  or  Fallhood  of  it ;  which 
is  nothing  elle  but  the  agreement  or  dif agreement  of  its 
Terms,  or  the  Ik^s  exprelfed  by  them.  If  I  have  no 
Kjiowledge  at  all  of  the  meaning  of  the  terms  ufed  in  a 
Propofition,  I  cannot  exerciie  any  Ad  of  my  Under- 
ftanding  about  it,  I  cannot  lay,  /  believe  or  Mtlievt 
any  thing,  my  Soul  is  perfectly  in  the  fame  ftate  it  was 
before,  without  receiving  any  new  Determination.  If  I 
have  but  a  general  confufed  Notion  of  the  Terms,l  can  give 
only  a  general  confufed  Jjfent  ta  the  Propofition.  So  my 
Faith  will  always  bear  the  lame  Proportion  to  my  KpotV" 
ledge  of  the  Sub je6i- matter  to  be  believed. 

To  make  this  plainer  by  an  Inftance,  fuppofe  I  am 
required  to  believe  that  A.  is  equal  to  B,  If  I  don't 
know  either  what  A,  or  B,  ftands  for ;  or  have  no 
Notion  of  Equality,  I  believe  nothing  more  than  I  did 
before  this  was  propofed  to  me ;  I  am  not  capable  of 
any  new  determinate  Ad:  of  Faith.  All  that  I  can  be- 
lieve in  this  cafe  can  amount  to  no  more  than  this,  That 
Something  h/ts  fome  refpeU  to  fomething  elfe  \  that  the 
Matter  I  am  required  to  believe,  is  aiSirmed  by  a  Per- 
Ion  of  great  Knowledge  and  Integrity,  who  ought  to 
be  credited  in  what  he  fays,  and  therefore  the  Propofi- 
tion here  laid  down  is  probably  true  in  that  fenfe  the 
Author  means.  And  what  am  I  the  wifer  for  all  this  ? 
What  addition  is  there  made  to  my  Faith  or  Knowledge 
by  fuch  a  Propofition?  But  farther,  fuppofe  I  know 
that  A  and  B.  ftand  for  tnoLints^  and  that  by  Eqital 
Lifjes  is  meant  Lines  of  the  fame  length ;  fuch  Know- 

C  2  ledge 


I  z^     Seme  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity^ 

ledge  can  produce  only  a  general  eenfufei  belief,  that^ 
there  is  feme  certain  Line  imAgifjabk  juft  of  the  fame 
length  rvi'h  fome  ether  Line  :  But  if  by  A*  and  B.  ai*e 
meant  rvo  right  Lines,  which  are  thQ  fides  oi  d.  givem 
Triangle,  and  I  take  a  Mathematician's  Word  for  it, 
without  demonftration  that  they  are  equaiy  or.  of  the^ 
fame  length,  this  is  a  particular  diftjn£l  A6^  of  Faith  ;  by. 
which  1  am  fatisfied  of  the  Trutli  of  (braethiag  which 
I  did  not  believe  or  knoiv  before. 

From  whence  it  follows,  that  Terms  2Lndfiwple  Idea'^s 
muft  be  clearly  and  ^//?/»^i^  underftood  fir  ft,  before  we 
can  believe  any  thing  particular  of  the  refpe^s. ^nd  rela- 
tions they  bear  to  one  another,  wJiich  is  the  only  proper 
Obj(0  of  Faith. 

Another  Condition  neceffary  to  render  a  thing  capa- 
ble of  being  believed  is,  that  it  implies  no  Contradi- 
ction to  our  former  KnowJedge.  I  cannot,  conceive 
how  'tis^  poffible  to  give  our  alfent  to  any.  thing  that 
contradicts  the  plain  Di dates  of  our  Reafbn,  and  thofe 
evident  Principles. from  whence  we  derive  all  our  other 
Knowledge. 

As  for  Example:  I  do  not  fee  how  any  Authoritjr 
ef  Revelation  can  overthrow  tlie  Truth  of  this  Propo?- 
fition,  That  the  Whole  is  biggir  $hm  any  of  its  Farts. 
For 

Firft^  I  cannot  more  clearly  and  diftinC^ly  perceive 
any  external  ImprelTions  made  upon  my  Soul,  nor  be 
more  certain  that  fiich  impreflions  proceed  from  God, 
than  I  can  perceive  and  be  allured  rliat  the  Idtas  I  have 
of  n>h/e  and  part  bear  this  relation  to  one, another. 

S'condly,  The  nature  and  conftitution  of  things  makes 
it  inapoifible  that  this  Pro pofition  Ihould  be.talle  ;  foi' 
fuchand  futh  'I  hing^  or  NotiOns  being  fuppofed,  fuch 
and  liiclV Habiiiidesand  Relpettsuiuft  ncctilariiy  lofuk 

from 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,      \  r 

ftom  them.  So  long  therefore  as  I  have  the  fame  leiec^i 
of  whole  2ind  part  J  and  the  fame  Faculties  of  Perception, 
Lfhall  always  perceive  the  fame  relation  betwixs  them  : 
And  if  my  Ideas  of  whole  a,adpart  were  changed,  or  a 
new  Texture  and  Frame  of  Soul  given  me,  I  lliould 
indeed  perceive  different  relations  betwixt  thefe  new 
Uea^s ;  but  this  would  by  no  means  deflroy  the  Truth 
of  my  former  Conceptions,  'twould  flill  be  certain,  ac^ 
cording  to  the  I^iea^s  I  had  before  of  whole  and  party 
that  the  rvkii?  was  bigger  than  any  ol  its  parts  : 
Whicli  Idea's  will  always  unalterably  have  the  fame  re- 
lation to  one  another.     But 

Thirdly r  Was  it  pofRble  this  Fi'opofition  could  be 
falfe,  confidering.only  the  nature  of  the  things  them- 
felvcs,  the  Nature  of  God  furnifhes  us  with  other  Ar?* 
guments  of  the  Truth,  and  Certainty  of  it.    And: 

ij?.  It  is  not  confillent  with  thejuflice,  Wifdom, 
or  Goodnefs  of  God,  to  require  us  to  believe  that, 
which,  according  to  the  Frame  and  Make  he  has  given 
us,  'tis  impoflible  for  us  to  believe  :  For  however  fbme 
Men  have  advanced.this  abfurd.Paradox,  that  God  caa 
make  Conrradi^bions  true^  I  am  very  certain,  that  upon 
an  impartial  Trial  of  their  Faculties,  they  would  find 
'twere  pcrfeftlyoutof  their  power  to  believe  explicitly, 
and  in  the  common  Senlc  of  the  Terms,  that  a  Par.C 
can  be  bigger  than  the  Whole  it  is  a  Part  of     But 

2^/y,  Admitting  it  poflible  for  us  to  be  deceived  in 
fuch  Propcfidons  which  have  aeon flant,  uniform,  and 
univerfaL  appearance  of  Truth  and  Evidence,  this  would 
deftroy  all  manner. of  Certainty  and  Knowledge,  and 
leave  us  wholly  in  Darknefs,  Ignorance^  and  Defpair^; 
0/,  which  is  more  Injurious  to  rhe  Divine  Goodnefe  to 
imagine,  under  an  abfo'ute  neceility  of  being  deceived : 
For 'tis  not  only  i  mpoHib'c  fir  me  to  believe,  thatfucji 

a.Pro^ 


14      Some  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

aPrcp^  fition  as  this,  That  the  FFhole  is  digger  than  an) 
of  tts  P  rts  is  falfe  ;  but  I  cannot  deny  my  pofttive  ex- 
^refs  r.jftnt  to  it  as  true :  The  Light  and  Evidence  in 
this  Cafe  is fo clear  and  ftrong,  that  I  amnot  at  Liber- 
ty fo  much  as  xo  fufpend  my  Judgment. 

:^dly,  Tis  Blafphemy  to  think,  that  God  can  contra- 
di8:  himfelf ;  and  therefore  right  Reafotj  being  the  Voice 
of  God,  as  well  as  Revelatioff,  they  can  never  be  dire- 
dly  contrary  to  one  another.  r'  ^'"* 

Now  to  apply  all  this  to  the  prefent  Cafe  ;  fuppofe  I 
am  required  to  beliej^e.  That  0;fe  and  tbe  fame  God  is 
Three  difcrent  Ferfom :  I  only  fuppofe  it  here,  becaufe 
I  have  not  yet  proved  how  far,  and  in  what  fenf^^  we 
are  obliged  to  believe  a  Trinity.  If  this,  I  fay,  be  the 
Propofition  I  am  required  to  give  my  affent  to,  'tis  plain, 
by  what  has  been  proved  before,  that  I  can  believe  it  no 
farther  than  the  Terms^  of  which  it  is  made  up,  are  known 
and  u^derfioody  and  the  Idea's  fignificd  by  them  confi- 
fient. 

In  order  therefore  to  form  a  dettrminate  Ati  of  Faith 
in  this  Point,  I  muft  carefully  examine  my  felf  what 
Tactions  I  have  of  God^  of  Unity  and  Identity^  Difiin. 
Blon  and  Number^  and  Perfon. 

As  to  the  Notion  of  a  Deity,  'tis  true  indeed  I  have 
not  a  full  and  adcfiate  Idea  of  God,  neither  is  my  Soul 
capable  of  it ;  but  what  Conceptions  I  have  of  his  Na- 
ture and  Perfections,  are,  according  ro  my  Apprehen- 
fion,  fo  far  clear,  as  to  enable  me  truly  and  juftly  to  de* 
termine  which  of  thofe  diftin6l  M^V,  I  have  in  my 
Mind,  are  applicable  to  him,  and  which  are  not.  And 
fuch  a  Knowledge  of  the  Divine  Nature  as  this,  is  a 
fufficient  dire^ion  of  my  Faith  in  any  Propofition  con- 
cerning Gcd,  where  I  clearly  underlland  all  tholdea's 
attributed  to  him. 

In 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinityl       i  e? 

In  the  next  place  therefore,  I  am  to  confidcr  what 
Notions  I  have  of  Vmty  and  Identity^  Difiin£iion  and 
Number. 

Atid  here  I  confefs  I  am  at  a  Lofs  how  to  deUver  my- 
felf^  thefe  being  fome  of  our  flrfi  md  moft  fmpk  Idtd's 
which  are  fo  clear  of  themfelves,  that  I  cannot  find 
clearer  to  explain  them  by. 

For  this  is  certain,  that  every  Man  is  confcious  to 
himlelf,  that  he  has  a  power  of  ftrcdving  and  compA'^ 
ring  his  Perceptions,  and  confequently  muft  know  when 
any  thing  is  prefented  to  his  Mind,  whether  it  be  per- 
ceivable at  one  entire  view j  and  whether  the  Obje6t  have 
one  uniform  appearance  or  not :  He  muft  be  alfo  fenlible 
in  a  fucceflion  of  Ideals,  when  thQ  fAme  Appearances  are 
repeated  ^g2im^  and  how  often  the  Reprefentation  is -z/^- 
ried. 

However,  notwithftanding  the  Clearnefs  of  thefe 
Notions,  with  refpeft  to  what  pafles  in  our  own  Minds, 
we  are  not  able  to  make  true  and  diftinct  Judgments 
of  the  unity  or  multiplicity  of  things  without  us  :  For 
it  does  not  fbllour,  that  what  is  reprefented  to  the  Soul 
at  once,  under  one  Idea  or  Appearance,  fhould,  accor- 
ding to  the  reality  of  thi?fgSy  be  one  undivided  nature^ 
neither  can  it  be  inferred,  that  what  is  reprefented  to 
the  Soul  under  different  Ide^s  are  fb  many  diftinSi  real 
Beings :  For  there  are  fome  Ideals  purely  of  the  Soul's 
own  making,  and  not  copied  from  any  external  Pat- 
terns, where  there  are  a  great  many  particular  real  Be- 
ings, of  different  kinds  and  natures,  comprehended  un- 
der one  Reprefentation  ;  Thus^  all  the  Hills,  Plains, 
Rivers,  Trees,  and  Towns,  &c.  which  the  Eye  can 
reach  from  fuch  or  fuch  a  Point,  we  put  into  one  Pi- 
fture,  and  call  it  a  Landskip  or  Profped.    Thus  does 
theSoul  enlarge  its  View  to  all  the  Works  of  God  and 

Nature  5 


l5      Some  Covfiierations  concernwg  the  Trinity. 

Nature  ;  it  takes  ia  the  whole  Creation  at  a  Thought, 
and  calls  it  World.     On  the  oth^r  fide,  the   real  Na- 
tures, znd  Ejfe^ces  of  Things,  which^re  allowed  to  con- 
fift  imfiwple  undivided  Vnity,  are  not  conceivable  by 
us  at  once,  but  ^i  different  Vitm^  by  differ tnt  f  Art iaI 
Conceptions^  which  the  Soul  afterwards  compounds  and 
calls  by  one  Name.    Thus  when  we  endeavour  to  com- 
prehend the  Natui-e  and  EfTence  of  what  we  call  Man, 
we  form,  at  different  times,  feveral  confufed  Notions  of 
Subftance^  Body,  Life,  Senfe,  and  Reafon  \  every  one 
of  which  is  a  complicated  Idea,  and  to  be  refolved  into 
a  orreat  many  others  more  fimple  and  diftinO; :  As  for 
inftance,  I  miaft  form  a  great  many  Ide^s  of  particular 
Actions,  and  the  Modes,  Differences,  and  Relations  of 
them,  before  I  can  have  any  tolerable  knowledge  of 
what  Reafcn  is ;  and  fo  for  the  reft. 

All  therefore  that  we  underftand  of  the  unity  of 
things  without  us,  is  this :  When  we  perceive  any  Ob- 
je£l  in  a  continued  Pofuion,  bounded  and  fenced  out  from 
other  things  round  about  it,  all  within  fuch  Terms  and 
Limits  we  call  One :  And  then  again,  oblerving  a  great 
many  different  Aftions,  produced  in  and  by  fuch  an 
Objed:,  we  judge  all  thefe  Actions  and  Operations  to 
proceed  from  one  common  Principle,  in  fome  fuch  man- 
ner as  Streams  from  a  Fountain,  or  feveral  Lines  from 
the  fame  Centre.     And  whatever  we  thus  judge  to  be 
One,  tho*  a  great  many  Thoughts  and  Conceptions  go 
to  the  forming  of  fuch  a  Judgment,  we  endeavour,  as 
well  as  we  can,  to  reprefent  to  our  felves  under  one  Idea 
or  Apparance,  iho'  the  Reprefentation  be  often  very 
confufed  and  indiflinft.    And  this  we  do,  as  fuppoling 
it  wholly  and  uniformly  conceivable  at  one  fingle  View, 
were  it  not  for  the  Imperfeftion  of  our  Faculties  ; 
Which  Suppofition  is  not  without  good  Ground ;  for 

this 


Some  Conjtderations  concerning  the  Trinity,        i  j 

%\n.s  we  have  plain  Experience  for,  that  when  any  vifi* 
bIeObje£t  is  of  fuch  a  magnitude,  or  in  fach  a  fitua- 
tion  that  the  Eye  cannot  receive  the  whole  Image  of  it 
at  once,  we  take  it  in  at  different  times,  from  different 
points  of  Sight ;  and  yet  for  all  this,  we  find  no  more 
Reafon  to  doubt  of  the  real  Unity  of  fuch  an  Obje8:,than 
of  any  other,  whole  Image  came  into  the  Soul  entire 
atone  A£l  of  Vifion  ;  for  we  eafily  conceive  there  may 
be  other  Organs  of  Sight ,  which  would  refle£]:  the 
whole  Obj eft  together:  And  from  thence  we  conclude 
further,  that  there  may  be  alfo  fome  other  Mind  more 
perfeft  than  6urs,  which  perceives  that  as  one  fimple 
Idea  which  we  cannot  apprehend,  but  by  a  union  of 
feveral  different  Conceptions  :  From  whence  it  fol* 
lows,  that  the  moft  perfeft:  Mind,  which  is  God,  is 
the  only  true  and  proper  Standard  of  all  Unity  and 
Diftinftion. 

The  Summe  of  all  my  Thoughts  is  this  :  What  is 
meant  by  of7e  or  more^  the  fame  or  different  Ideals  is  bet- 
ter to  be  conceived  by  iriward  Reflexion,  than  can  pof- 
fibly  be  explained  by  Words.      ^ 

Such  2inldea,  which  is  not  diftinguifhable  into  dif- 
ferent Appearances,  f  call  a  fimple  Idea, 

When  I  have  any  Thought  or  Perception,  which  is 
refblvable  into  feverai  Uea^s^  1  call  this  a  complex  or  com- 
founded  Notion,  And  hence  I  term  any  Being y?;^?/?/^  or 
compounded^  accordinrg  as  it  is  perceivable  by  fome  Mind, 
\xwAtXQv\e  ftmplt  ApptArance^  oi' a  complex  Idea. 

Wb€ther7»7  Ideals  are  agreeable  to  the  real  Natures 
of  Things.,  otxho^QorigimL'Fatierns'm  the  Mind  of 
God,  I  cannot  certainly  rknow^  but  when  they  are  the 
fame  J  aiid  when  chey'difeft!oip.'onc  another,  I  plainly 
perceive,  tho'  I  cannjotalways^jiadgeof  the  Ident/ty  or 
Dijiin^ion  of  Things,  according  as  they  are  repre^n*. 

D  ted 


1 8      Some  Considerations  concerning  the  Trinity, 

ted  to  my  iinderftanding,  under  the  fame  or  Mffere/jt 
Appearances :  For  here  I  fliould  be  fomedmes  mifta- 
ken  too,  as  'tis  plain  I  often  muft,  if  I  judged  of 
the  real  unity  or  mitltiplici4y  of  Things   by  my  own 

Tlie  Notions  we  have  of  the  unity  of  Things  with- 
out us,  come  the  neareft  that  can  be  imagined  to  our 
Ide^is  of  Pointy  and  continmd  Extenfton  ;  one  of  which 
reprefents  [im^lt  unity,  the  other  compounded  ^  the  one 
we  apply  to  what  we  call  fpiritualBdngSy  the  other  to 
mattrid:.  For  'tis  certain  the  Conception  we  have 
of  Body,  can  never  furnifh  us  with  any  Idea  of  fimple 
Unity. 

By  a  Spirit  then  we  mean  fomething  without  exten- 
fion,  and  confequently  indivifible,  capable  of  perfor- 
ming fom.e  fuch  kind  of  Actions,  which  do,  in  fome 
manner  or  degree,  refemble  thofe  we  are  confcious  of : 
But  what  that  is,  from  whence  Ifuppofe  fuch  Anions 
to  proceed,  I  have  not  the  leaft  conception  of ;  for  all 
that  I  conceive,  is  only  feveral  7^e/j  of  different  parti- 
cular Anions,  which  no  more  exprefs  the  Idea  of  that 
Principle  from  whence  they  fpring,  than  thQUea^soi 
feveral  particular  Lines  exprefs  the  Idea  of  that  Point 
they  are  drawn  from. 

All  that  we  can  perceive  or  imagine  of  corporeal  V- 
nity^  is  nothing  elle  but  a  Connexion  or  joint  Pofition 
of  feveral  Bodies,  which,  according  as  it  is  more  or  lefs 
perceivable^  according  to  the  fiwpiicit/  or  multiformity  of 
the  Figure  refulting  frona  it,  atod  the  eafimfs  or  difficulty 
of  Separation^  makes  feveral  degrees  of  X^^/'c?;*,  which 
all  receive  the  confnnon  Denomuiation  of  Unity. 

NjOw  as  ExteKfion^  -by.  reafon  of  its  perpetual  divi fib i- 
lity^  cannot  give  us  a  true  Notion  of  ftmple  Unity^  fb 
fteither  can  1  have  any  diftind  knowledge  of  Vmon  or 

Qgmpofition^ 


Some  Conjiderations'  concerning  the  Trinity]      tp 

Compofition,  abflra^ted  from  all  Confiderations  of  Ex- 
tenfiofj.  I  do  not  underftand  how  a  Mind  and  Body  are 
united,  any  other  wife  than  that  I  perceive  fuch  and 
fuch  fpiritual  Actions  produced  within  the  Compafs  of 
fuch  a  Body  which!  call  One :  Neither  am  I  able  to 
comprehend  the  Union  or  Separation  of  Two  Jpirtfual 
Beings^  without confidering  them  as  in  the  fame  or  dif- 
ferent Localites ;  for  I  have  not  didinO'  Idea's  of  feve- 
X2\  ffiritual  Natures,  nor,  if  I  (hould  perceive  thefeve- 
ral  Operations  of  different  Spirits^  Could  I  dilfinguifh 
the  feveral  individual  Beings^  or  Principles^  they  pro* 
ceeded  from  :  For  who  is  there  that,  if  all  the  Thoughts 
and  Motions  of  the  Souls  of  feveral  Men  were  commu- 
^jiicated  to  him,  could  tell  which  proceeded  from  which? 
Nay,  we  cannot  tell  what  difftrence  of  Aciions  is  fuffi- 
cient  to  determine  the  different  kinds  of  Principles  they 
proceeded  from ;  neither  can  any  Co-operation,  or  Con^ 
fent  of  JBions,  make  us  conceive  a  fpiritual  Union  ^ 
without  conceiving  the  fame  Term  ofAciion  too.  For 
fuppofe  two  Souls  were  fo  exa611y  framed  alike,  that 
they  always  thought  and  will'd  the  fame  Things  at  the 
fame  times,  and  were  confcious  of  eachother'sThoughts 
and  Aftions,  if  they  were  put  into  different  Bodies ,  'tis 
plain  we  could  not  properly  lay  they  were  umted  or 
made  one  :  And  again,  fuppofing  they  were  in  thefawe 
Body,  we  could  not  pofTibly  conceive  them  to  be  ttvo^ 
any  otherwife  than  we  knew  them  capable  of  ^ifeparate  ^ 
Exifience\  that  is,  if  we  examine  our  Thoughts  ho- 
neftly,  of  a  feparate  Vhi,  in  different  Bodies,  orelfe- 
where  :  Not  that  I  think  local  Prefence,  or  Determina^ 
tion,  is  any  way  contained  within  the  Idea  of  a  fpiritu- 
al Being,  but  it  helps  us  to  conceive  it  better,  and  dif- 
courfe  more  difl:inQ:ly  about  it.     And,  if  we  obferve 

D  2  it, 


SjO      Sdme  Conjideratms  concerning  the  Trimty. 

it,  there  are  feveral   cafes  where  our  Coftceftions  and 
Judgme/Jts  muft  necefTarily  differ. 

Thefe  then  are  all  the  kinds  of  Vffity  and  Diftim^iion 
I  can  poffibiy  imagine;  namely,  in  Idea,  Principle ^ 
and  Pofition,  Whatever  elfe  is  called  Unity,  is  more 
properly  termed  Agreement^  the  very  Notion  of  which 
implies  a  difiincfion  in  fome  of  the  fore-mentioned 
kinds. 

7^e;?//V7  is  nothing  elfe  but  a  repetition  of  Vmty,  as 
Number  is  of  Dijfenf2ce,\vkh  the  Judgment  of  the  Un- 
derllanding  upon  it. 

What  Perfo?9aI  Vmty  and  DtfiifJ&wfj  2Lrc,  will  be 
eafily  underftood  by  explaining  the  word  Per-/off,whidi 
fignifiCS  one  of  thefe  two  things ;  either  a  Particular 
Intelligent  Beh:g^  or  an  Offia;^  Chara6ter^  or  fbme  fuch 
complex  A'' ot ion  apfl/ cable  to  fuch  a  Being.  In-  the  firft 
lenie  om  Marty  or  Am  el,  is  one  Perfon^  and  feveral  Men 
OS  Angels  are  jtvtral  Perfons,  In  the  fecond  (enfe.of 
the  word  there  may  be  lb  many  Perfons  as  there  are 
different  Combinations  of  the  Actions,  Relations,  and 
Circumftances  of  Intelligent J3eings. , 

And  thus  having  given  an  Account  of  the  meaning 
and  fignification  of  the  Terms  in  which  we  are^required 
to  exprefs  our  Faith,  we  are  next  to  Examine,  how  far, 
and  in  what  (eafe  we  can  believe  this  Propofition,  That 
One  and  the  fame  God  is  Thee  different  Perfons. 

Now  'tis  certain,  that  if  thofe  before-fpeciiied  are 
all  the  Notions  we  are  able  to  frame  of  Unity  and  Di^ 
fihciion,  then  God  mull  be  Om  and  Three  in  Ibme  way 
or  manner  there,  laid  down,  or  elfe  in  fbme  other  way 
or  manner  not  conceivable  by  Human  Underftanding. 

Firft  then,  let  us  fee  how  and  in  what  manner  God 
car?  be.  One  and  Three,  according  to  thofe  Notions  our; 
Souls  have  framed  o^JV^ity  and  Diflin^im., 

And 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,      2  1 

And  here  'tis  granted  on  all  hands,  that  nothing  can 
be  Orje  and  Three  in  the  fame  manner  2ind  refpec^.-V/Qc^n- 
not  conceive  a  thing  to  be  in  One  determinate  Pofition 
or  X?^/,  and  in  Three  feparate  Vi^fs  all  at  once  ;  We 
cannot  conceive  that  One  Principle  or  Nature  lliould  bs 
but  One,  and  yet  Three  different  Principles  or  Natures 
too ;  or  that  any  Objed  ilhould  be  truly  and  adequately 
reprefented  to  any  Mind  or  Underftanding,  under  One 
Idea,  and  truly  and  adequately  reprefented  under  Three 
different  Idea's.  'Tis  impoflible  to  believe  anything 
of  this  kind,  becaufe  it  implies  a  plain  ContradiQion 
to  the  cleareft  and  mofl  certain  knowledge  we  can  have 
of  Unity  and  Diftindion  ;  fo  that  if  0»e  may  be  Thrte 
in  the  fame  refpeft  'tis  Ofte,  then  Of^e  and  Three  mufl 
ftand  for  other  Idea's  than  we  conceive  when  we  pro^ 
nounce  thefe  words;  and  if  fb,  they  ought  to  have 
other  Names,  and  not  be  called  One  and  I'hree. 

Since  therefore  we  cannot  fay,  that  God  is  One  and 
Three  in  the  fame  refpe6i',  in  the  next  place  let  us  En- 
quire, In  what  diftrent  refpeBs  this  may  be  affirm.ed  of 
him.  Now,  as  to  ths  Vmy  of  God,  this  is  eafily  be- 
lieved and  acknowledged,  as  being  very  agreeable  to 
all  our  other  Notions  of  the  Deity.  The  chief  diffi- 
cuhy  lyes  in  afligning  the  Di(tin^ion  :  In  attempt- 
ing which,  the  bell:  and  clearefl:  way  of  proceeding 
will  be  by  going  over  the  feveral  kinds  of  Diftin^lion 
before-mentioned. 

I  will  begin  with  that  of  Pafition  :  And  here- 'cis 
plain  at  firft  fight  that  we  cannot  poiTibly  conceive 
God  under  any  difference  of  Pofi^io^ ;  we  cannot  ex^ 
elude  Omnipotence  from  any  imaginable  point  of  fpace : 
'Tis  the  limited  Powers  and  Faculties  of  created  Beings 
which  are  the  Foundation  of  all  Locd  DifihBiom :  And 
therefore  wheu  we. endeavour  tojepreientGod  to  our 

thoughts 


'%2,      Some  Conjideratiofjs  concerning  the  Trinity, 

thoughts  in  this  manner,  we  confider  him  as  Ow^rc- 
fe»t ;  and  I  can  no  more  conceive  Three  Omnifrefmts , 
than  I  can  conceive  Three  ftraight  Lines  drawn  be- 
tween the  fame  Points. 

But  though  there  can  be  but  One  undivided  Omnipre- 
fence^  may  there  not  be  Three  Infinite  Befn^s  Coe^jual 
to  one  another,  and  Commenfurate  to  Om  hfinite  Space  ? 
This  is  far  above  my  Conception  too :  Infimtt  fwallows 
up  all  my  thoughts.  Whatever  Idea  we  apply  this 
Term  Infime  to,  I  think  it  impoflible  to  apply  it  to 
another  of  the  fame  Denomination  :  As  for  Example  ; 
If  I  apply  it  to  Power,  I  cannot  confider  it  as  applicable 
to  more  than  One  Infinite  Power :  For  Infinite  Power 
includes  all  the  Poflibilities  of  Adion  ;  fb  that  to  con- 
ceive more  than  One  Infinite  Power,  would  be  to  con- 
ceive more  Power  than  is  pofTible ;  which  is  a  grofs  and 
palpable  Abfurdity.  And  therefore  we  cannot  conceive 
Three  Infinite  Beings  dtftinB  from  one  another,  any 
more  than  Three  Infinite  Powers,  or  Three  h/finite  Spaces j 
becaufe  all  Difiin^ion  implies  fome  Limitation,  and  L/- 
mitation  is  a  Contradiction  to  Infinity,  We  can  indeed 
conceive  Infinite  Power,  as  in  fome  manner  bounded 
by  Infinite  Wifdom,  Juflice,  Mercy,  or  the  like ;  but 
in  no  wife  as  limited  by  arry  other  Power.  We  cannot 
therefore  conceive  one  Infinite  Being  as  bounded  by 
another  Infinite  Being ;  for  then  we  fhould  conceive 
Infinite  Power  limited  by  another  Power,  and  the  like 
of  all  other  Attributes,  which  are  the  fame  in  both  : 
For  the  Notion  of  an  Infinite  Being  includes  in  it  all 
the  imaginable  kinds  of  Infinite  Perfection, 

But  if  we  fay,  there  ztb  Three  Infinite  Beings  ^ 
and  all  the  Perfections  of  each  are  coincident,  wliat 
ground  can  we  have  for  fich  a  DifiinClion?  Not  {b 
much,  to  ufe  the  former  Inftance,  as  for  -that  of  three 

ftraight 


Some  Coiijtderations  concerning  the  Trinity,-       22: 

flraight  Lines  between  the  fame  Points;  for  there  tlie 
different  times  of  defcribing  the  fame  Line  may  in  fome 
manner  help  us  to  form  a  confufed  Conception  of  dif- 
ferent Lines  :  But  *tis  not  in  the  Power  of  the  Soul 
to  reprefent  to  its  felf  Three  Eternal  Beings  of  QoincU 
dent  P6rfe£it&ns,  Here's  nothing  for  the  Imagination 
to  lay  hold  of,  no  manner  of  ground  to  deceive  our 
felves  into  a  confufed  belief  of  fuch  a  Diflindion.  And 
therefore  I  do  not  fee  how  'tis^  pofTibie  for  us  to  believe 
there  are  Three  difiin^i  'Principles  or  Natures  all  of  the 
fume  Infinite  Perfe^ions^  which  together  we  call  God. 

And  if  there  be  but  One  Omniprefenty  Infinitely  Per-^ 
fe^  Being,  how  can  he  be  truly  and  fully  reprefented 
to  any  Mind  under  Three  different  Idea's  ?  The  truth  of 
an  Idea  confifts  in  its  Agreement  and  Conformity  to 
the  Original  it  reprefents;  And  if  fo,  how  is't  poflTible 
there  fhould  be  Three  Idea's  exadtly  and  adequately 
conformable  to  the  fame  Original,  and  yet  different 
from  one  another  ?  Either  thefe  Differences  found  in 
the  Idea's  are  not  in  the  real  Pattern,  and  then  the  Re- 
prefentation  is  falfe;  or  they  are,  and  then  the  Unity 
of  the  Objedl  is  deftroyed. 

'Tis  true,  indeed  we  do  often  apply  different  Idea's 
to  the  fame  individual  Obje^l ;  but  thefe  are  either 
Partial  and  Inadequate  Conceptions  of  the  Nature  and  Ef- 
feme  of  it ;  or  Hxprellive  of  fbmething  Acceffory  and 
Extrinfecal  to  the  Nature  of  the  thing,  fuch  as  Mocks^ 
Circttmjlances^  and  Relations. 

Thofe  Partial  Conceptions  we  frame  of  the  Divine 
Nature  are  what  we  call  the  Attributes  of  God  :  Which^ 
how  different  fbever  from  one  another  in  our  thoughts, 
are  all  neceffarily  included  in  the  fimple  Idea  of  God  ; 
and  therefore  cannot  be  the  ground  of  fuch  a  DiflinQ:ioa, 
as  we  are  now  enquiring  after.  For  when  I  fayjthat  God 
•■  •        '  is 


24  ^^(^^^  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 
is  Holy,  Wife,  or  Powerful,  I  only  fay  that  explicitly 
avd  in  part^  which  I  fa  id  imf  lie  illy  and  in  fall,  when  I 
pronounced  the  Name  of  God ;  and  the  meaning  of 
fiich  Piopofitions  is  no  more  but  this,  That  a  Holy , 
Wife,  Powerful  Being,  of  all  other  Infinite  Perfedions 
is  Holy,  Wife,  Powerful,  d-r.  All  v/hich  Perfedions, 
though  confidered  feparately  under  different  Appear- 
ances by  our  imperfed:  Faculties,  being  really  but  one 
fimple  Idea,  can  be  applyed  to  but  one  Single  Ferfon 
in  the  firfl:  fenfe  of  the  word  Ferfon^  as  it  fignifies  a 
particular  Intelligent  Being,  Nature,  or  Principle  ;  and 
that  for  the  Reafons  juft  now  mentioned  concerning 
the  Conformity  of  Idea's  with  their  Patterns. 

From  whence  it  follows,  that  acco^-ding  to  the  No- 
tions we  are  capable  of  framing  of  Unity  and  Difiin- 
cfion,  which  I  have  particularly  examined,  with  Re- 
ference to  the  Holy  Trinity,  all  the  Per  fond  Difiiniiion 
we  can  conceive  in  the  Deiry  muft  be  founded  upon 
Ibme  AccefTory  Idea's  Extriniecal  to  the  Divine  Nature ; 
a  certain  Combination  of  which  Idea's  makes  up  tlie 
Second  Notion  fignified  by  the  word  Perfon, 

And  if  we  fairly  and  limpartialiy  Examine  our  own 
Thoughts  upon  this  SubjeQ,  we  fbail  find,  that,  when 
we  name  God  the  Father,  we  conceive  the  Idea  of  God 
fb  far  as  we  are  capable  of  conceiving  it,  as  A£ling  fb 
and  lb,  under  fuch  KtJpeUs  and  Relations ;  and  when 
we  name  God  the  Son,  we  conceive  nothing  elfe  but 
the  fame  Idea  of  God  over  again  under  different  Rela- 
tions'; and  fo  likewife  of  th^Holy-Ghcift 

But  if  this  be  all  that  is  meant  by  Trinity  in  Vnity^ 
Three  Ftrfons,  and  One  God,  where  is  that  ftupendious 
Myftery  fo  much  reverenced  and  adored  by  fome? 
What  becomes  of  the  great  Difficulty  and  Obfcurity 
complained  of  by  others  ?  What  is  it  that  has  puzled 

the 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,       2  j 

the  Underftandings,  and  ftaggered  the  Faith  of  [o  many 
Learned  and  Inquifitive  Men  in  all  Ages  fince  this 
Do6i:rine  was  firft  delivered  ?  This  is  an  invincible  Pre- 
judice againft  the  Account  now  given,  and  indeed  a- 
gainft  any  other  Explication  whatfoever  that  has  no- 
thing' in  it  hard  to  be  iinderftood,  or  believed :  For 
how  can  it  be  imagined  that  what  has  paffed  for  a 
Myftery  thefe  Sixteen  Hundred  Years,  (liould  now  at 
laft  be  comprehended  as  plainly  as  a  common  ordinary 
Notion  ? 

But  if  this  Account  of  the  Trinity  be  too  eafie,  and 
falls  far  fhort  of  thofe  High  Expreffions  of  Diftindion 
found  in  Scripture  (as  I  think  it  does)  and  no  other 
grounded  upon  any  Notions  our  Souls  have  framed 
of  Vmty  and  Dijlinciion  can  be  true  or  confident  (as  I 
have  before  particularly  proved)  then  it  necelTarily  fol- 
lows, that  God  muft  be  Om  and  Three  in  fome  way  or 
manner  not  conceivable  by  Humane  Under ftanding. 

And  what  we  are  to  believe  in  this  cafe  is  the  Sub- 
je6l:  of  my  next  Enquiry  ;  which  I  am  peifwaded  may 
very  eafily  and  quickly  be  refblved  :  For  if  we  are 
fully  fatisfied  from  Revelation,  that  thefe  Terms,  One 
and  ThreCy  may,  and  ought  to  be  affirmed  of  God,  but- 
not  in  any  (enle  of  the  words  we  are  here  in  this  fre- 
fent  ftate  capable  of  conceiving.  And  moreover,  if  it 
be  true,  as  I  have  already  fhewn  it  is,  that  we  can  be- 
lieve a  thing  no  farther  than  we  underftand  the  Terms 
in  which  it  is  propoled  to  us ;  'tis  plain  flom  hence 
that  all  we  can  poflibly  believe  in  the  matter  of  the 
Trinity  is.  That  Onemd  the  fame  God  is  Three  in  ferae 
way  or  manner  we  are  not  able  to  comprehend.  And 
if  we  are  fure  we  cannot  comprehend  what  this  Di- 
ftin£tion  is  whereby  God  is  T/^ref?,  in. vain  do  v/e  look 
<)ut  for  Terms  to  expr^fs  fbmething  which  wc  have  no 

E  m.inner 


26      Some  Conficterattons  concerning  the  Trinity, 

manner  of  Conception  of.  Whatever  words  we  ufe, 
whether  Perfon^  Hypoftafis^  or  any  other  we  can  in« 
f  ent,  or  Languages  furnilh  us  wirii,  they  all  ilgnifie 
the  fame  thing ',  that  is,  fome  kind  of  Diftinftion  we 
do  not  underfland.  And  we  may  rack  our  Tlioughts, 
tire  our  Imaginations,  and  break  all  tlie  Fibres  oT  our 
Brain,  and  yet  never  be  able  to  deliver  our  fcives  . 
clearer. 

All  therefore  that  we  can  kmw  of  the  Trinity  by 
Kexfon^  can  amount  to  no  more  than  an  Ohfcure  corifu' 
fed  KjionkdgCy  w^iieh  we  are  forced  to  exprtfs  in  ge- 
mrd  and  abjira^ed  T^rms,  becaufe  we  are  fuie  no 
other  reach  our  thoughts,  though  tbefe  are  not  fuffiw 
cient  to  explain  all  we  mean  by  them. 

Nor  is  this  tobewonder'd  at,  that  we  fhould  have 
confufed  Notions  of  things  which  no  particular  Idea's 
our  Minds  are  furniOi'd  with  can  render  clearer  to  us :  : 
For  if  we  confider  the  Degrees  and  Limits  of  our  Know- 
ledge, and  take  a  ftrid  Survey  of  our  whole  ftock  of 
Thoughts,  we  fliall  find  there  are  very  few  things  that 
we. know  fully  and  diftin£lly.  Moll  of  our  Notions 
differ  only  as  wore  or  /eff  confufed^  more  or  k(s  gemreiL 
There  is  a  certain  Scale  of  Knowledge,  wherein  every 
thing  is  fo  fitted  and  proportioned  to  our  Faculties,  that 
we  cannot  defcend  below  fuch  a  determinate  pitch  in 
our  Conceptions  or  Explications  of  any  Objeft  propo- 
led  to  us. 

As  for  inftance;  fuppofe  a  Blind-Man  has  a  defire  to 
know  what  Colour  is ;  'tis  certain  he  can  never  form  a 
true  diftinQ:  Idea  of  it ;  but  yet  he  is  capable  of  a  ge- 
neral confuted  Knowledge,  which  wants  but  one  de- 
gree of  Part  cularity  to  be  clear  and  perfedl:  Conception. 
He  may  ki  .^w  that  Colour  is  not  any  Suhfianct^  but 
fome  Mek  or  Determination  which  owes  its  Exiftence 

and 


Some  Conjtderations  concerning  the  Trinity,      ^7 

and  Support  to  fbme  other  Being ;  that  it  is  not  Extcn- 
Hon,  or  any  other  Accident  or  Quality  perceivable  by 
any  of  the  Senfes  he  enjoys ;  He  may  further  be  made 
to  underftand,  that  it  is  feme  kind  of  Stnfation^  pro- 
duced by  the  impreflion  of  other  Bodies  upon  that  part 
-of  a  Man's  which  is  called  the  Eye^  which  other  Men 
perceive  though  he  does  not.   Now  'tis  plain  that  fuch 
a  Man  knows  a  great  deal  of  the  Nature  of  Colour, 
more  by  far  than   another  Blind-Man  who  has  not 
jnade  the  fame  Enquiries  and  Refledlions  about  it ;  and 
fo  much  as  will  fecure  him  from  having  any  other  Idea 
impofed  upon  him  for  that  of  Colour,  which  is  fo  di- 
ftinguiftied  and  circumftantiated  to  him,  that,  fhould 
he  now  receive  his  fight,  he  would  prefently  acknow- 
ledge the  marks  before  defcribed  to  him.     And  yet  af- 
ter all,  it  may  be  truly  faid,  while  he  continues  blind, 
he  has  no  manner  of  Idea  of  Colour,  becaufe  he  has  no 
diftinO:  Idea  of  that  particular  kind  of  Senlation  to 
which  his  general  Idea's  are  applyed.    And  therefore 
lie  can  go  no  lower  in  his  Explications  of  the  Notion 
hrhas  of  Colour :  For  if  he  explains  it  by  any  Senfa- 
tion  which  he  receives  from  his  other  Senfes,  the  Idea's 
he  has  then  in  his  Mind  are  indeed  more  particular  and 
diftind,  but  the  Judgment:  he  makes  upon  th:ra  mu^ 
be  utterly  falfe,  whereas  before,  his  Knowledge  was 
only  general  and  confuted,  but  yet  true. 

I  have  made  choice  of  this  plain,  familiar  laftance 
of  Senle,  to  fhew  the  unreafbnableaefs  of  thofe  who 
in  higher  Speculations  complain  that  the  terms  brought 
to  explain  them  are  too  gef?erAl  af?d  ahfira'^td ;  and  de- 
mand a  further  Explication  of  what  we  cannot  pofTibly 
know  beyond  fuch  a  degree  of  Particularity,  which  the 
Terms  already  made  ufe  of,  do  exprefs.^ 

^E    2  f  n 


^  8      Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

In  vain  therefore,  and  unjuftly,  are  we  urged  to  ex- 
plain the  Do5irim  of  the  Trimty  more  particularly, 
when  we  have  brought  it  down  to  the  utmoft  Particu- 
larity we  are  capable  of  conceiving,  and  at  the  fame 
time  freely  acknowledge,  we  don't  know  it  fo  diftin- 
di\y  as  'tis  capable  of  being  known. 

For  then  only  is  the  Uie  of  general  abftraSted  Terms 
to  be  condemned,  either  when  the  fubjed  we  are  upon 
will  admit  of  a  more  particular  and  fenfible  Explica- 
tion ;  or,  if  it  will  not ,  when  by  too  much  Refi*! 
ning  and  Abftrading ,  we  deceive  our  felves ,  and 
think  fome  Terms  we  have  found  out  make  theThing 
clear  to  us,  tlio'  we  have  not  really  more  diftinQ;  Con- 
ceptions of  it  than  we  had  before,  and  at  the  fame  time 
thefe  very  Terms  make  it  more  obfcure  and  difficult  to 
others.  And  this  is  what  I  remarked  before  as  a 
Prejudice  to  be  avoided  in  an  impartial  Search  after 
Truth. 

But  fo  long  as  we  acknowledge  we  have  only  ^.gem- 
rd  cor^fufed  NotioffO^  tht  Trinity ^  or  fuch  a  Three-fold 
Diftin5fiotf  in  the  Godhead^  as  is  confiftcnt  with  the  t^ni" 
ty  rf  the  Divine  Nature^  we  may  be  allowed  to  explain 
this  Notion  in  general  abftraBed  Terms ;  becaufe  we  lay 
no  greater  a  Strefs  upon  the  Terms  than  they  will  truly 
bear,  and  require  only  a  Faith  proportionate  to  our 
Kjjorvledge  ;  that  is,  a  general  confufed  Faith,  which  we 
exped  a  clearer  and  more  diftind  Revelation  of  here- 
after. 

And  thus  I  have  difpatched  the  firft  Branch  of  my 
Difcourfe,  wherein  I  propofedto  confider  how  far 'twas 
pjfTible  for  us  to  believe  a  Trinity. 

II.  I  come  now  to  my  Second  General  Enquiry, 
^i«.  What  it  is  the  Scripture  requires  us  to  believe  in 

this 


So  me  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity.      2p 

this  Matter  ?      For   a  diftind  Refblution  of  which 
Queftion,  I  fhall  obferve  the  following  Method  ; 

Firjiy  I  fball  barely  and  pofitively  lay  down  the 
DoQrrine  of  the  Trinity,  fb  far  as  I  judge  it  exprefly 
contained  in  Scripture. 

Secondly^  I  fhall  endeavour  to  prove  the  Truth  of 
what  I  affert. 

Thirdly^  I  fliall  confider  the  particular  Additional 
Explications  that  have  or  may  bs  given  of  the  Scripture* 
Account  of  this  Article. 

I.  In  fpeaking  to  the  Firft,  it  mufbbe  allowed,  that 
there  is  no  fuch  Propofition  as  this,  That  Orie  and  the 
fame  God  is  Three  different  P erf ons  formally^  and  in  Terms y 
to  be  found^in  the  Sacred  Writings  either  of  the  Old  or 
Nerv  Tefiametit :  Neither  is  it  pretended  that  there  is 
any  Word  of  the  fame  Signification  or  Importance 
with  the  Word  Trinity,  ufed  in  Scripture,  with  rela- 
tion to  God.  There  is  one  Text  which  plainly  enough 
affirms,  without  the  help  of  Inference  or  Dedusftion, 
that  God  is  Three  and  One :  But  this  being  a  difputed 
Paffage,  and  no  where  elfe  repeated  in  the  fame  or  the 
like  Terms,  I  Ihall  not  infift  upon  it.  Nor  do  I  think 
fuch  a  Trinity  as  we  profefs  to  believe,  (lands  much  in 
need  of  .the  Support  of  this  Text ;  the  Matter  and  fub- 
jed  of  our  Faith  in  this  Point  being  frequently,  largely, 
and  circumftantially  mentioned ;  and,  as  it  appeirs  to 
me,  interwoven  into  the  very  Defign  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

Now  the  Summ  of  all  that  the  Scriptures  plainly 
and  exprejly  teach  concerning  a  Trinity^  is  this :  That 
there  is  but  One  only  God,  the  Author  and  Maker  of 
All  Things ;  but  that  Om  God  ought  to  be  acknow- 

,  ledged 


:  3  ©      Some  Conjtderations  concerning  the  Trinity, 

icclged  and  adored  by  us,  under  thofe  Three  diferent  Ti^ 
tks  or  C^.AmBtrs  of  Father^  Son^  and  Holy  Ghofi.  Which 
Terms,  whatever  they  iignifie,  according  to  myjudg' 
ment,  upon  a  i"  L^  and  impartial  Confideration  of  all 
Circumftances  t'l^v.  can  determine  their  Senfe,  arc  evi- 
dently applied  to  God  in  many  Places  of  Holy  Writ; 
and  confequently  are  truly  and  properly  applicable  to 
him. 

2.  The  Proof  of  which  AfTertion  is  the  Second  Thing 
I  undertook. 

But  here  I  find  my  feli  foreftalled  by  the  fuccefsful 
Endeavours  of  a  great  many  Learned  Men,  who  have 
carefully  and  nicely  examined  every  Text  that  can  be 
brought,  either  for  the  Eftablifliment,  or  Confutation 
of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  I  ihall  not  iherefore 
trouble  my  Reader  with  a  particular  dfetail  of  all 
their  Arguments;  but  only  acquaint  him  truly  and  fairly 
what  were  the  chief  Motives  which  influenced  and 
difpofed  me  to  make  fuch  a  Judgment  as  I  have,  juft 
before,  declared. 

Now  the  Reafons  which  determined  my  Opinion  in 
this  Matter,  were  fuch  as  freely  offered  thcmfelves  up- 
on an  unprejudiced  reading  of  Scripture,  and  confide- 
ring  the  Defign,  Connexion,  and  Analogy  of  thofe 
Writings :  And  I  am  apt  to  believe,  if  any  Man  elfe 
took  the  fame  Method,  and  confidered  Things  toge- 
gether,  and  not  only  in  loofe  Texts  and  PafTages,  the 
firft  Refiilt  of  his  Thoughts  would  be  the  fame,  viz. 
Thefe  Terms,  Father^  Son^  and  Holy  Ghoji^  muft  all 
be  (b  underftood,  as  to  include  the  fame  God  in  their 
Signification  ;  and  that  any  other  Senfe  or  Explication 
of  the  Words,  would  be  attended  with  greater  Diffi- 
^  calties. 

But 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity •       3 1  ■• 

But  this  being  a  Reflexion  which  is  founded  upon 
the  Agreement  and  Coherence  of  all  the  Parts  of  Scrip- 
ture, 'twould  be  a  very  improper  and  ineffe£lual  De- 
fign  to  go  about  to  confirm  the  Truth  of  it  from  feme 
particular  PaiTages.  Omitting  therefor  e  all  thofe  Texts, 
which  are  a  great  many,  where  any  of  thefe  Terms, 
Father y  Son^  or  Hdy  Ghofl^  appear  to  be  dire6lly  affir- 
med of  God,  according  to  a  fair  Conftru£lion  of  the 
Words,  I  fhdlJ  only  obferve  Two  or  Three  Paflages 
from  the  Hiffory  of  our  Saviour  and  his  Gofpel , 
whicli,  to  my  Appreheafion,  do  as  ftrongly  prove  what 
I  havj  advanced  as  the  mod:  formal  Expreffions,  and 
are  lefs  liable  to  be  perverted  by  the  Criticifms  of  Lan- 
guage. 

The  fir^  Obfervation  I  have  to  make,  concerns  the 
common  Forms  of  Baptifm,  SaltUation^  and  BlefftMg, 
ufed  in  feveral  Places  of  the  New  Teftament, 

Now  thefe  are  Matters  no  way  controverted  :  That 
our  Saviour  commanded  his  Difciples  to  go  Andtuch  mU 
N At  ions  ^  b.i'p'izin^  thtm  in  the  Name  of  the  Father^  Son^ 
And,  H'Ay  Ghoj}.  That  St.  Pml  makes  ufe  of  fuch  Salu- 
tations as  the^  :  The  Lo^d  be  mthyo-t ;  The  Grace  of  our 
Lord  Jefus  Chrifi  he  with  you  all',  Grace  he  toyou^  avd 
Peace  from  God  the  Father^  and  from  onr  Lord  'Jefus 
Chrifi  :  Ai;d  pai  dcularly  clofes  his  Second  Epiftle  to 
the  Corinthta/i^  with  this  Charge^  and  fuller  BlelRng  ; 
The  G  ace  of  th"  Lord  Jefus  Chrifl,  andihe  L^ve  of  God, 
and  Tpje  Comm  nlon  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  be  with  you,  all. 
From  whefice  I  inftr,  that  all  thofe  lerms,  Fa'h  r, 
Son.  and  Holy  Ghofi,  ligUifie  God ;  becaufe  I  cannot 
pofl^  Ay  conceive  'tis  agreeable  to  the  Nature  of  the 
Cb  "-ian  Religion,  that  the  Miniflers  of  it  fnould 
Teach,  B'aptiz>e,  or  JB'efs  the  People  in  any  other  Name 
hut  Go£s» 


3-2      Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

It  cannot  be  imagined  but  the  People  muft  equallj 
believe  in  thofe,  in  whofe  Names  they  are  Baptiz,ed  or 
Bkfs'd:  They  muft  believe  that  thole,  vvhoarecaird 
upon  to  beftow  Graces  and  Riedings  upon  them,  are 
able  to  give   what  they  are  called  upon  for.     And 
whatever  is  meant   by  BaptUing  in  the  Name  of  the 
Father y  5^/?,  and  HolyGhoft^  it  feems  very  plain  that 
thefe  Three  are  all  equally  concerned  in  what's  done  in 
that  Sacrament.     Whether  by  this  Form  of  Baptifm 
be  fignified  on  the  Minifter's  Part,   the  Authority  or 
Commtfficn  by  which  he  a6rs  in  his  Adminiftration  ;  or 
whether  on  the  Piirt  of  the  Perfon  baptized,  be  meant 
any  Acknot^ltdgment  or  QonfelJion^    Snbmifflon  or  Dedi- 
cation of  himfelf;  or  whether  this  Phrafe  if»  the  Name, 
or,  as  in  the  Greek,  into  the  Name^  does  imply  all  this; 
and  more,  the  whole  Force  and  Importance  of  the  Ex- 
prelTion,  does  in  the  fame  E}f,tent  belong  to  Father y  Son^ 
and  Holy  GhoH.    The  Foivtr  and  Anthority  here  recei- 
ved, is  derived  from  all  Three  :  1  hey  are  all  to  be  ac^ 
k^/ovlidged  as  Authors  of  our  Salvation ;  all  infallible,  and 
to  bQ  k/itvcd  in  what  they  Teach;  have  all  the  fame 
Title  to  our  Submiffion  and  Obedience^  and  are  Joint- 
Parties  in  that  Covenant  we  make  in  Baptifin. 

The  Inference  from  hence  is  very  Plain  and  Eafie : 
That  if  ar.y  one  of  thefe  Terms  fignifie  God,  they  mull 
all  Thre  fignifie  God ;  and  if  all  Three  fignifie  God, 
they  muft>ail  Three  fignifie  one  aiid  the  fame  God',  for 
God  is  but  One,  Now  that  the  One  Supreme  God,  the 
Lord  and  Maker  of  All  Things,  is  here  meant  by  the 
Word  F^^W,  is  a  Thing  not  queftioned;  and  there- 
fore Son,  and  Holy  Gho[l,  are  Terms  exprelTive  of  the 
lame  Divine  Nature. 

Should  wc  but  fuppofe  the  contrary.  That  by  Son 
was  meant  only  a  me(;r  Man^  or  fome  Beavenly  Being, 

of 


Some  Conjtderations  concerning  the  Trinity,       ^  ^ 

of  highefi  Rafjk  tmder  God  ',  and  by  Holy  Ghofi  was  fig- 
nified  only  fbme  created  Spirit^  inferior  to  the  So?!,  or 
the  Potver^  Efficacy,  Love^  Favour^  or  Vertue  of  God 
how  ftrange  would  Rich  a  Form  of  Baptifiii  appear  ? 
/  Baptize  thte  in  the  Name  of  God,  Peter  the  Apftky 
and  the  Power  or  Love  of  God  ;  or,  /  Baptize  thee  in  the 
ISJame  of  God,  Michiel  the  Jr  change  I ^  and  Raphael  a 
Mintftnng  Spirit.  There  needs  no  more  but  a  bare 
Mention  of  fuch  an  Expofition  to  fhew  the  Fal- 
ihood  of  it :  What  abfurd  Confequences  may  be 
drawn  from  it,  I  fhall  leave  to  every  Man's  particular 
Reflexion. 

Another  Thing  which  mightily  confirmed  me  in  this 
Belief,  that  the  Father^  Son^  and  Holy  GhofJ;^  fo  often 
named  in  Scripture,  are  O^e  and  the  fame  God,  under 
thofe  Three  different  Appellations,  was  this,  That  the 
Son,  who  is  the  fame  with  him  that  is  in  other  Places 
called  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  ^efus  Chrif,  and  fbme- 
times  only  Jefffs^  or  Chri fly  was  tvorfhip^d  with  a.  Reli- 
gious Worjhip  by  thofe  that  followed  him  and  embraced 
his  Gofpel :  For  if  he  that  was  called  the  Son  of  God^ 
or  Chrifi,  was  thus  to  be  worfhip'd,  it  plainly  and  evi- 
dently follows  from  hence,  according  to  all  the  Notions 
we  have  of  God  and  Religion,  either  from  Nature  or 
Revelation,  that  the  Son  was  alfo  God,  the  fame  true  and 
only  God  with  the  Father, 

And  if  the  Son  be  allowed  to  be  God  as  well  as 
the  Father,  it  will  be  eafily  admitted  that  the  Holy 
Ghojl  is  fb  too,  who  appears  in  Scripture  iiivefted  with  all 
the  fame  Charafters  of  Divinity  :  For  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghofi,  are  as  confiftent  with  the  Vnity  of  the 
Godhead,  as  Father  and  Son  only  ;  and  befides,  there  s 
greater  difficulty  in  conceiving  the  Son  to  be  God,  than 
the  Holy  Ghofi ,  becaufe  of  his  Hnmme  Nature,     But 

F  that 


5  4      ^ome  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity* 

that  he  was  God  mamfeft  in  the  Fkfh^  is,  I  fay,  appa- 
rent from  the  divine  Worfhip  that  was  pay'd  to  him : 
For  that  God  only  is  to  be  worfhip'd.,  is  an  evident 
Principle,  as  well  as  an  indifpenfable  Duty;  and  I  can 
as  fooii  believe  a  thing  to  be^  and  Piot  to  be^  as  that 
any  thing  that  is  mt  God  fhould  be  worfliipped  as 
God. 

Now  that  Chrift  received  the  Honour  and  Worfhip 
due  to  God  only,  is  plain  from  abundance  of  Places  of 
Scripture,  where  we  find  he  was  not  only  adored 
with  all  the  outward  Expnjjiom  ef  Reverence  and 
Devotion^  but  confefs'd  and  acknowledged  to  be  God 
by  an  Application  of  the  Divine  Attributes  to  him, 
fuch  as  agree  only  to  God,  and  are  incommunicable  to 
any  other,  as  might  be  proved  at  large  if  it  had  not 
been  done  already :  But  this  being  tuily  infifted  upon 
by  others,  I  fliall  only  name  Two  Paffages  to  this  Pur- 
pofe  ;  the  one,  PhiL  4.  ij.  the  other,  A^.  7.  /^g, 
which,  if  there  were  no  other,  are  of  themfelves  fuffi- 
cient  to  fhew  what  the  Faith  of  the  firfl  Chriftians  was : 
For  who,  but  one  that  believed  that  Chrifi  was  God^ 
could  fay  with  St.  Paul,  I  can  do  all  things  through 
Chrifi  that  firength  net  h  me;  or,  with  St.  Stephen,  at 
the  iniiant  of  Death,  cry  out,  Lord  Jefus  receive  my 
Spirit, 

From  thefe,  and  many  other  Texts,  it  feems  plain 
to  me,  that  Chrift  was  worfhipped,  and  acknowledged 
as  God  ;  and  that  therefore  he  ought  fo  to  be  worfhip- 
ped, and  acknowledged,  vi^e  have  all  the  fame  Reafbns 
fo  believe,  as  we  have  that  the  Scriptures  are  True  ; 
the  Eftablifhment  of  a  Falfe  Worfhip  being  a  thorough 
Difproof  of  the  Authority  that  Commands  it. 

Suppofmg   therefore  the  Truth  of  the  Scriptures , 
tliert's  no  way  of  eluding  this  Argument,  but  by  gi- 
ving 


Seme  Conjiderations  fGncerning  the  Trinity.       ;  j- 

ving  another  Interpretation  to  all  thofe  Places  which 
feem  to  afcribe  divine  Honour  to  Ciirin: ;  \v\v.z\\  can  wo 
othcrwifc  be  done,  than  by  framing  a  particnlar  Dia- 
led for  this  Purpofe,  and  giving  new  Significations 
to  Words,  when  applied  to  o\xv  Sm-iour,  which  they 
never  had  before,  when  ultd  upon  other  Occafions. 

i  fbali  not  enter  upon  a  particular  Proof  of  this, 
but  pafs  on  to 

Another  Argument  I  oblerv'd  from  Script  ure,  which 
gave  me  further  AlTurance  of  the  Divinity  of  tlie  So»y 
and  confequently  of  the  Truth  of  the  whole  Propofi- 
tion  before  advanced  ;  and  that  is,  The  Chara£ler  of 
Jefus  Chrift  confidered  metrly  as  a  Mm.  Now  'tis  cer- 
tain, that  the  Man  Chrifi  Jefus.  the  Son  of  Dawd^  ac- 
cordifjg  to  the  Flefh,  is  reprefented  by  all  the  Evange- 
lifts,  as  having  his  Coiiverfation  in  this  World  with  all 
Lowlinefs,  and  Humility,  and  with  perfed  Holinefs, 
and  Unblameablenefs  of  Life.  And  it  is  not  imagina- 
ble, that  a  Perfbn  of  this  Character  fliould  have  fuf- 
fered  any  Titles  to  have  been  given  him,  any  Honour 
or  Refped  to  have  been  pay'd  him,  which  were  not 
ftridly  and  indifpenfably  due  to  him  ;  much  lefs  have 
taken  the  Honour  and  Worlhip,  peculiar  to  God  only, 
to  himfelf,  if  he  had  not  been  infaUibly  confcious  that 
of  a  Truth  God  dwelt  in  him.  I  cannot  polfibly  con- 
ceive that  one,  who  declined  all  Appearance  of  Gran- 
deur, Dominion,  and  Authority,  fliould  have  allowed 
of  any  thing  that  look'd  like  Worfhip,  or  Adoration, 
or  might  have  been  miftaken  for  it ;  or  that  he,  who 
knew  he  was  believed  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  in  fuch  a 
Senfe  which  fome  thought  Blafphemy,  would  not  have 
undeceived  his  Followers,  and  juftified  himfelf  to  his 
Enemies,  had  he  not  really  been  what  'twas  Blafphe- 
my to  have  pretended  to  be,  if  he  were  not. 

F  2  I  might 


rd      ^ome  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity, 

I  might  eafiiy  puifiie  thefe  Refleclions  a  great  deal 
further,  and  bring  more  Arguments  to  confirm  the 
truth  of  what  I  have  afferted,  that  thefe  Names  or 
Titles  of  Father^  Soff,  and  Hcfy  GhoH  are  applyed  ia 
Scripture  to  the  One  True  God ;  but  I  judge  it  altoge- 
ther unncceiTary,  not  only  becaufe  it  has  been  fully 
made  out  already  in  feveral  fet  Difcourfes  upon  this 
Subje£l,  but  becaufe  it  is  fo  plainly  and  exprefly  re- 
vealed, that  I  am  verily  perfwaded  every  Man  that 
reads  w5uld  believe,  were  it  not  for  the  additional  Ex- 
plications fuch  a  Belief  is  charged  with. 

5.  Which  is  the  next  thing  to  be  confidered  :  And 
indeed  here  lyes  the  whole  difficulty  of  the  matter,  the 
main  ftrefs  of  the  Controverfie.  For  that  God  fhould 
be  called  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  GhoH^  is  as  eafily  to 
be  believed,  as  that  he  fhould  be  called  Adomi,  Elohim, 
and  Jehovah ;  That  the  fame  thing  fhould  be  fignified 
and  expreffed  by  feveral  names,  is  no  fuch  incredible 
Myftery  :  But  if  we  allow  that  thefe  Terms,  Father^ 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghofi^  are  all  applyed  to  God  in  Scrip- 
ture, 'tis  not  thought  fufficient  to  fay,  that  thefe  are 
three  feveral  Names  which  fignilie  God  ;  but  we  are 
further  required  to  believe  that  God  U  One  and  Three  y 
the  fame  God,  but  three  different  Hypoftafes  or  Perfons ; 
And  that  one  of  thefe  three  Hypofiafes  or  Perfons,  is  both 
God  and  Man,  Thefe  are  the  hard  fayings  which  puz- 
zles fbme  Mens  Underf^andings,  and  make  them  chufe 
rather  to  wreft  and  pervert  the  plaineft  Texts,  than 
admit  fuch  feemingly  inconfiftent  Conlequences. 

Here  therefore  I  fhall  Examine,  what  grounds  there 
are  in  Scripture  for  fuch  an  Expofition  : 

And  what  we  are  obliged  from  thence  to  believe 
when  we  exprefs  our  Faith  in  this  particular  man- 
ner. 

Firfl 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,      5  7 

Firfl:  then,  as  to  thefe  forms  of  Expreflion,  That 
God  is  One  and  Three,  8rc.    It  is  to  be  obferved,  that 
thefe  Names,  Father,  Son,  and  Hofy  Ghofty  are  applyed 
to  God  in  Scripture  in  a  different  way  from  what  any 
of  his  other  Names  are  :  For  the  other  Names  of  God 
fignifie  only  Partial  Conceptions  of  the  Divine  Nature, 
fuch  as  Self-Exiftence,  Power,  &c,  and  are  all  contained 
within  the  f ime  Idea  of  God  ;  and  fb  are  indifferently 
ufed  upon  any  occafion  to  exprefs  the  whole  Idea  of 
God  to  which  they  belong,  which  is  the  fame  under 
every  denomination.     Thefe  therefore  cannot  be  the 
Foundation  of  any  di{l:in6lion  in  the  Godhead  :  But 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghojl,  according  to  our  way  of 
conceiving  things,  fignifie  ibmething  ExtrinfeeAl  and^ 
Jccejfory  to  the  Divine  Nature,  as  much  as  we  know 
of  the  Divine  Nature  by  reafon,  the  whole  Idea  of  God 
being  conceived  as  full  and  compleat  before  the  appli- 
cation of  thefe  terms ',  And  though  all  of  them  are  fe» 
parately  and  together  affirmed  of  God,  yet  each  of 
them  in  fb  peculiar  a  manner,  that  there  are  feverai 
occations  where  when  one  of  thefe  terms  is  ufed  with 
relation  to  God,  'twould  be  improper  to  ufe  either  of 
the  other.     From  whence  it  follows,  that  thefe  three. 
Names  of  God,  Father,  Son,  a.nd  Hofy  GhoB,  muft  de- 
note a  ^We-/^//i  Ji/^re;;re   or  di/liff^ion  belonging  to  • 
God;  but  fuch' as  isconGftent  v/ith  the  Vnitji. Mid  Sim- 
flicHy  of  the  Divine  Nature,    For  each  of  thefe  Names 
includes  the  whole  Idea  we  have  ef  God  and  fomething,- 
more  ;  f^  far  as  they  exprefs  the^ Nature  of  God,-  they 
all  adequately  and  exadly  figaifie  the  fame;  'tis  the 
additional  fignilication  wlVtch  makes  all'the  difiindion, 
betwixt  iheni.    ,.  i-      .  -      '-       :, 

What  partit^'ilarlkind  qi'  ptifine.r  .cf^)f^ifiin^ionth.\s  is, 
is  not  exptefTed  in  Scripture,  j  but.  fmce  the  Church  has^ 

thought: 


I'g      Some  Conjtcieratidns  concerning  the  Trinity, 

thought  fit  to  aflign  a  Name  for  it,  that  of  Per/on 
feems  to  me  as  proper  and  agreeable  to  the  whole  f  e-* 
nor  and  Defign  of  the  Holy  Writings,  as  any  other 
that  could  have  been  chofen  for  tliat  purpofe.  For  Fu^ 
tiitr^  Son,  2L'Ad  Holy  GhoH^  whether  we  confider  the 
Frimltive  lenfe  and  intention  of  the  words,  the  gene- 
ral and  conftant  ufeof  them,  or  the  particular  Connex- 
ion andCircumftances  in  which  they  are  mentioned  in 
Scripturev  iiave  plainly  a  Per  fond  Signification-,  each 
of  them,  without  any  figure  of  Speech,  being  deter- 
mined to  fignifie  fome  inttlUgent  Beif7g  Adingin  fuch  a. 
manner  as  is  there  related. 

There  needs  no  Proof  of  this,  the  plain  difiinBion  of 
Perfofis  imported  by  thofe  Terms  being  the  chief  Ar- 
gument made  ufe  of  to  fiiew  that  they  cannot  all  be 
applied  to  God,  but  muft  neceffarily  fignifie  Three  di- 
jiwci  Beings :  But  that  they  are  all  applyed  to  God  in 
Scripture,  has  been  proved  already  \  And  therefore  Fa- 
ther^ Son^  and  Holy  GhoB  may  be  confidered  as  Perfons 
or  Person d  Chxra^&rs,  which  do  not  imply  any  dijUn- 
clion  of  Being  or  Nature. 

The  Greeks  are  fuppofed  to  have  meant  the  lame  by 
Hyfofides  as  we  do  by  Perfon ;  this  word  being  fbme- 
times  the  very  Tranflation  of  the  other ;  And  if  fo , 
there's  the  fame  ground  for  the  ufe  of  both  :  But  if 
they  meant  any  thing  elfe,  they  could  hardly  have  fo 
good  Warrant  for  it  from  Revelation. 

No\v%  that  one  of  thefe  Perfons  or  Hypojlafes  fhould 
be  ifoth  God  md  Maff,  there  is  this  Foundation  in  the 
Scriptures  for.  He  who  is  there  called  the  Son  of  God^ 
did  certainly  appear  in  the  liktnefs  of  Men^  being  in  all 
re(pe6f  s.  Sin  only  excepted,  truly  and  properly  Man ; 
as  his  Birth^  Necejjities^  Sufferings^  and  Death  liifficiently 
teftifie.    'Tis  certain  alio  that  the  fame  'Jefus  ChriB , 

who 


Some  Conltderations  concerning  the  Trinity,       so 

who  was  called  the  So;z  of  God^  and  was  made  in  the 
Ukemfs  of  Man^  is  affirmed  by  St.  PW,  fhil.  ^.7^%. 
to  have  been  in  the  form  of  God^  when  he  took  the  AV- 
ture  of  Man  upon  him. 

But  befides  this  and  many  other  Texts  to  the  fame 
effect,  'tis  plain,  from  what  before  has  been  proved , 
that  God  did  fuflPer  himlelf  to  be  worfhipped  and  ado- 
red in  and  by  the  Man  Chrift  Jefus :  The  leaft  that  can 
be  inferred  from  v^^hich  is,  that  God  was  more  imme- 
diately and  peculiarly  prefent  in  ChriU,  than  ever  he  is 
faid  to  have  been  any  where  elfe  :  As  in  xh't  Heavens  ^ 
Jervifb  Temple^  between  theCherubims,  in  Prophets  and 
Holy  Men^  who  fpake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Spi-  ' 
fit  of  God.  What  created  Obje6t  was  ever  allowed  to 
intercept  the  Worfhip  paid  to  God,  or  fharc  with  him 
in  it  ?  Were  the  HeavenSj  the  Temp/e,  the  Cherubim  or 
Prophets  to  be  adored  ?  Nay,  has  not  God  taken  a  par- 
ticular care  to  prefer ve  Men  from  Idolatry,  by  forbid- 
ding them  to  Worfhip  him  in  or  by  any  fenfible  Repre- 
ientation  ?  Did  not  the  Apoflles,  who  worfhip'd  Chrifi", 
forbid  others  to  Worfhip  Men  of  like  Paflions  with  ^as  14, 
themfelves,  commanding  them  to  direO:  all  their  Devo-  ^'^^'  ^^' 
tion  to  the  Living  God,  who  made  Heaven  and  Earth?  ^ 
How  then  can  we  fiippofe  that  Chrift  was  only  a  meer 
Man,  or  fbme  other  CreaUfre,  and  not  rather  believe 
that  he  had  the  Fuinefs  of  theGodhend^'^tWxKig  in  him 
bodily  Y 

But  here  it  is  Objeded  ;  How  can  God  and  Man  be 
united?  And  to  this  I  mull  fairly  Anfwer,  that  I  can- 
not tell.  I  have  confeiTed  already  in  the  Account  I  have 
given  of  thofe  Notions  of  Unity  and  Diflin^Hcn,  that  I 
have  not  any  juft  or  diftind  Conceptions  of  the  Vnicn 
of  Spiritual  Bei^^s^  either  rvith  Bodies,  or  with  o»e  ano- 
ther ;  But  this  I  will  venture  to  fay,  that  1  can  as  well 

conceive 


'^o      ^^ome  Confideratms  concerning  the  Trinity, 
conceive  God  i^nd  M^n  together  under  one  Idea^^  at  one 
view,  as  I  can  conceive  a  Soul  and  Body  fo  united.  ^ 

All  that  I  know  of  the  Vm0f^  of  Soul  and  Body  is; 
that  there  isfome  Intelligent  Power  that  makes  ufe  of 
the  Or<^ans  of  my  Body,  and  A£ls  in  conjunction  with 
the  Motions  there  produced.     And  I  may  as  well  con- 
fider  God  united  to  Man,  when  he  fo  Ads  by  the 
Miniftry  and  Operation  of  Man,  that  the  Adlions  of 
God  feem  conveyed  to  us  the  fame  way  as  the  Actions 
of  one  Man  are  to  another.    Had  thofe  who  upon  fome 
occafions  fpake  by  the  extraordinary  Afliftance  of  a  Di- 
vine Power  been  conftantly  fo  direded,  and  aflifted , 
how  would. they  have  diftinguiflied  the  Motions  of  their 
Souls  from  the  Imprefliom  of  God  ?  And  why  then  fhould 
not  we  think  fuch  an  Extraordinary  Power  as  this  as 
much  united  to  fuch  Men ,  as  that  Common  ordinary 
Power  we  call  the  Sot^l  is  to  thofe  Bodies  in  which  it 
ads  and  exerts  it  felf  ? 

Some  have  been  of  Opinion,  that  what  we  call  the 
Soul,  is  nothing  elfe  but  a  confiant  regular  Infpratioj$j  or 
a  determinate  Concurrence  of  God  Almighty  with  fuch 
and  fuch  Motions  and  Capacities  of  Matter :  But  whe- 
ther this  be  fo  or  no,  as  moft  probably  it  is  not,  it  feems 
to  me  very  plain  from  Scripture,  that  fuch  a  Power 
which  we  afcribe  to  God,  did  as  Qonflantly  and  Regu- 
hrly  Ad  in  and  through  QhriB^  as  the  Human  Soul  is 
perceived  to  do  in  any  other  Man :  As  appears  from 
his  abfolute  fecurity  from  all  manner  of  Sin  and  Error , 
from  his  conftant  knowledge  of  the  Thoughts  and  De- 
figns  of  Men,and  theWill  and  Decrees  of  God;  and  from 
his  Readinefs  and  Ability  to  work  Miracles  at  any  time, 
3.nd  upon  any  occafion.    All  which  are  manifeft  Tokens 
of  an  uninterrupted  Prefence  and  Concurrence  of  the 
.Peity ;   Efpecially  if  we  confider  the  Calmnefs  and 

Evennefs 


Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,       4  f 

Evennefs  of  Spirit  obfervable  in  our  Saviour,  entirely 
free  from  all  the  tranfports  of  over-ruling  Impreffions, 
'tis  a  further  Argument  that  he  did  not  receive  the  Spi- 
rit of  God  at  timef,  or  Ify  meafure ;  but  vi^as  as  conici- 
ous  of  all  the  Divine  Perfeftions  in  himfelf  as  a  Man  is 
confcious  of  his  own  Thoughts. 

Such  are  the  Grounds  we  find  in  Scripture  for  thofe 
particular  Explications  of  the  Trinity  before-men- 
tioned. 

In  the  next  place,  we  are  to  Enquire  what  the  Scrip- 
tures necefTarily  oblige  us  to  believe  in  this  Point. 

But  before  this  Queftion  can  be  relblved,  there  are 
two  things  to  be  premifed  : 

1.  That  whatever  Articles  of  Faith  are '»bfblutely 
neceflary  to  Salvation,  all  Perfbns  of  every  Rank  and 
Condition  are  equally  obliged  to  believe  them.  There 
is  not  one  Religion  for  the  Peaftnt,  and  another  for  the 
Scholar :  We  have  the  fame  general  Rule  to  walk  by, 
though  particular  Obligations  may  be  greater  or  lefler, 
fewer  or  more,  according  to  different  Circumftances 
and  Relations.  And  whatever  Principles  and  Duties 
are  of  general  Neceffity,  ought  to  be  fb  plainly  re- 
vealed, as  to  be  eafily  underftood  by  ordinary  Capa- 
cities upon  a  fair  and  careful  Examination. 

2.  That  in  order  to  this  end  it  feems  to  have  been 
the  Defign  of  the  Scriptures  to  reprelent  God  in  a  fen- 
filfk  mamer ',  though  at  the  fame  time  they  take  care 
to  aflfure  us  that  God  is  in  his  own  Nature  a  Being  of 
different  Perfections  not  conceivable  by  Human  Under- 
ftanding :  And  is  thus  reprelented  only  in  condefcen- 
tion  to  our  weaknefs,  for  the  help  and  afiiffance  of  our 
Devotion.  So  that  all  Expreflions  of  this  kind,  where 
God  is  the  Subje^l,  are  to  be  underftood  in  a  h/gh:r  and 
wore  Spirit  ml  fenfe ,  but  ft  ill  with  fome  Analogy  to 

G  what 


42      Svtne  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trmity. 

what  they  fro^erly  and  v^fually  fignifie.  Thus,  to  ufe 
a  common  Inftance,  when*tis  faid,  that  God  looks  down 
and  beholds  what's  done  among  the  Children  of  Men,; 
that  he  hears  the  Cries  of  the  Righteous^  and  the  Bla^ 
rphemies  of  the  Wicked,  'cis  not  to  be  imagined  that 
he  fees  as  Man  fees,  that  he  makes  ufe  of  any  Organs 
of  Senfe ;  but  'tis  thus  exprefled  to  give  us  more  Hvely 
Notions  and  ImprejGTions  of  thi^  certainty  of  God^sVm- 
verfal  Kj^orvledge ;  to  aflure  us  that  God  more  flainlyy 
fully  J  and  infallibly  knows  whatever  is  .done  in  all  the 
Earth,  than  we.  are  capable  of  knowing  thofe  things- 
which  fall  within  the  reach  of  our  Senfes. 

This  being  premifed,  it  feems  very  plain  to  me  that 
the  Dodiine  of  the  Trinity  is  not  to  be  look'd  upon  as 
a  nice  abftradled  Speculation  defigned  for  the  Exerciie 
of  our  Underftandings ;  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  be- 
fore this  Do£lrine  was  delivered. 

Had  man  flood  confirmed  in  InsOrigimlRighteoufnefsy 
and  there  had  been  no  need  of  Redemption,  'tis  highly 
probable  God  had  never  been  confidered  by  Man  in  his 
ftateof  Probation  under  any  fuchDillinQion  as  is  now. 
revealed  to  us ;  And  therefore  I  fhould  think  thofe. 
different. Titles  and  Relations  by  which  Gcd  has  been 
pleafed  to  c^pr^k  thd.t  Eternal  Dijlin5f ion  in  theGo^- 
head  to  us,  fhould  be  chiefly  confidered  by  us  with  refe-. 
rence  to  the  great  Work  of  Man's  Salvation. 

Thus  far  then  the  Scriptures  require  us  to  believe ; 
That  the  One  only  Si^pream  God  upon  his  fore- know  ledge 
of  Man'^s  Fall,  did  from  all  Eternity  Purpofe  and  De- 
cree to  Redeem yidinkind  into  a  capacity  of  Salvation, 
by  th^  Death  d.nd  coni^Sint  Mediition  of  a  Mi/!?  choien 
and  enabled  for  this  Work  by  the  ftdnefs  of  the  Godhead, 

dwelling 


^ome  CoTiJtderations  concernifig  the  Trinity,      j.V 

dwelling  m  him  :  And  in  confideration  of  his  'Baffion  and 
Inter ceffion^  to  impart  fuch  Gifts^  Graces^  and  spiritual 
Jffijlances^  as  would  be  fufficient  to  render  this  Redem- 
pion  effe^iual  to  the  Saving  of  much  People. 
<-'■  And  moreover  we  are  to  believe  that  God  has  accord- 
ingly executed  this  his  Gracious  Defign  towards  us : 
By  fending  into  the  World  QhriH  ^efus^  the  Man  who 
before  he  had  ordained,  fhould  in  the  Fulnefs  of  Time 
be  born,  and  fufer  for  our  Sins;  in  and  by  whom,  as 
has  already  been  fhewn,  God  aUed  m  a  wonderful  man- 
ner, was  worfhippeci  and  adored,  and  acknowledged  in  all 
his  Attributes ;  and  with  whom  he  abideth  in  the  Ful- 
nefs of  Power  and  Glory  for  ever :  And,  fince  his  Death 
and  Reception  into  Heaven,  by  a  plentiful  Efujion  of 
Spiritual  Graces  and  hjlueces  ;  by  which  means  a  great 
tna.nyha.ve  embraced  the  Go/pel  of  ChriB,  and  become 
Heirs  of  Salvation,  and  more  from  henceforth  to  the 
end  of  all  things  fliall  daily  be  added  to  the  Church  of 
Gody  be  fupported  in  the  faith,  and  be  made  Partakers 
of  the  purchafed  Inheritance  refei'vcd  in  Heaven  for  thofe 
that  are  Sanhified  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
,  Now,  with  refped  to  this  great  Defign  of  Saving 
Mankind,  and  the  Order  and  Method  of  the  Divine 
Wifdom  in  the  Execution  of  it ;  To  give  us  as  full  and 
diftindl  Apprehenfions  as  our  Souls  are  able  to  con- 
ceive of  the  Mifery  of  our  finful  Condition,:  the  difR- 
culty  of  Deliverance,  and  the  unfpeakable  Mercy  of 
God  inreftoringustotheHappinefswehad  juftly  for- 
feited; and  to  raife  our  Souls  to  the  higheft  pitch  of 
Veneration,  Love,  and  Gratitude  we  are  capable  of 
expreilingfor  fuch  in  ineftimableBleHing'j  God  has  been 
pleafed  to  reveal  himfelf  to  us  under  feveral  Fer/«?;?<?/ 
'Chara^ers  knd  Relations  i  Such  as  Father,  Son^  and  Holy 
(^'vH^yvjSsruioHr^  M&liktor<^iaind  Comforter, ^  i  By  which 
bluoii  G  2  Names, 


44      ^<^*^^  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

Names,  and  all  other  Expreflions  confequent  thereup- 
on, we  are  direded  to  confider  feme  fuch  kind  of  Dt^ 
fiMiorty  and  Subordination  of  OJfices  and  Relations  in 
<jod,  as  the  Terms  made  ufe  of  do  commonly  import. 

Thus  when  God  is  pleafed  to  reprefent  his  Love  to 
Mankind,  in  the  higheii  Image  of  Nature ;  that  of  a 
Father  facrificing  an  only  weli^beloved  Son,  the  exaO: 
Tranfcript  and  Refemblance  of  himfelf,  perfeftly  In- 
nocent, and  Obedient  to  his  Will  in  all  Things,  we  are 
to  believe  that,  by  the  Sufferings  and  Death  of  Chrift^ 
God  has  given  greater  Proofs  of  his  Love  towards  us 
than  any  Man  is  capable  of  doing  to  another ;  and  that 
liich  an'Adlion  of  an  Earthly  Parent  fuggefts  the  near- 
eft  and  likeft  Conception  we  can  poflibly  frame,  of 
what  our  Heavenly  Father  has  done  for  us ;  tho'  kt  the 
fame  time  we  muft  acknowledge  it  comes  infinitely 
fliort  of  expreffing  the  Riches  and  Fulnefs  of  his  Mer- 
cy and  Loving- kindnefs. 

And  the  fame  Ufe  and  Spiritual  Improvement  is  to  be 
made  of  all  other  Revelations  of  this  nature. 

And  chus  we  have  feen  how  far  we  are  capable  of 
conceiving  a  Trinity,  and  what  the  Seripturts.expr^Jty 
oblige  us  to  believe  concerning  this  Point.  »q    bn^'  ' ' '  '^ 

All  that  is  beyond,  lies  far  out  of  our  Reach  and 
Comprehenfion,  and  no  partisuUr  Exflications  can  add 
any  thing  to  our  Faith  ;  for  the  Terms  made  ufe  of  for 
that  End,  being  in  ufe  before  this  Do6lrine  was  taught, 
muft  cither  fignifie  the  lame  they  did  before,  or  not : 
If  the  fame,  where's  the  Myftery  ?  If  not,  what  do 
they  fignifie  ?  Something  that  we  cannot  explain  but 
in  Words  ufed  already,  and  then  the  Queftion  will  re* 
turn  again.  The  lame  Difficulty  would  attend  new 
Terms  invented  on  purpofe ;  for  either  they  would 
have  no  meaning  at  all  affixed  to  them,  or  elfethey 

would 


Some  Confideratms  concerning  the  Trinity,     Af 

would  be  underftood  in  the  fenfe  of  Ibme  other  in  u(e 
before.  And  therefore,  had  the  very  ^me  Terms  and 
Forms  of  Expreffion  been  found  in  the  Scripiures^  as  are 
now  in  our  Creeh^  the  Revelation  of  the  Trinity  had 
hQQa  no  plainer,  nor  we  obliged  to  believe  any  farther 
than  the  prefent  Language  does  import :  For  upon  a 
fair  and  diftind  Examination  both  of  ScrrfUre  and 
Reafon,  it  plainly  appears,  that  what's  already  revealed 
amounts  to  as  much  as  we  are  capable  of  conceiving, 
and  does  befides  imply  (bmething  more  which  we  can^ 
not  comprehend  ;  and  'tis  not  in  the  Power  of  Lan- 
guage to  make  us  underftand  any  thing  better  :  For 
'tis  utterly  impoflible  to  frame  any  Notions  above  our 
own  Level.  And  fhould  God  be  plealed  to  ftamp  fbme 
'  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  fame  Divine  Impreflions :  fo 
that  whatever  Idea's  the  Apoftles,  and  Infpired  Writers, 
might  have  of  a  Trinity  by  immediate  Infufior^^  the 
Terms  they  have  made  uie  of  can  give  us  but  this  inr- 
perfe£lDifcovery  of  thera,that  they  were  fuch  as  we  are 
pot  able  to  comprehend  without  the  like  Afliftance. 

This  then  is  the  utmoft  we  are  required  to  believe^. 
or  are  capable  of  believing,  concerning  the  Doftrine  of 
the  Trinity,  viz.  That  thele  Three  differe/^i  Terms,  Fa- 
ther, Son,  and  Holy  Gho/l,  are  all  applied  in  Scripture 
to  the  One  only  Jupreme  G$d  ;  That  all  the  JBions,  Of'- 
fices,  2LndRehtions,  which  are  in  Scripture  afcribed  to 
any  of  thefe  Names ,  fexcepting  thole  proper  to  the 
Huffisne  Nature  of  Chrift)  are  there  plainly  attributed, 
and  do  truly  belong  to  one,  and  the  fame  Divine  Nature ; 
That  there,  are  fuch  frequent  and  evident  AiTertions  of 
$he  Vnityof  Qad  in  Scripture,  and  yet  fuch  plain  Ex- 
^vQ^iOmiQ^  diftifj^ ion,  Rgniilcd  by  thefe  Terms,  F4- 


At$      Some  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trinity, 

ther,  Sorty  and  Holy  Ghoft,  as  imply  a  confijle'/fcy  of  uni* 
ty  And.  dtjiin^tion  in  the  Godhead. 

That  this  Diftin6lion,  whatever  it  be,  is  not  the  fame 
with  that  we  conceive  betwixt  the  Attributes  of  God, 
which  are  partial  Conceptions  of  his  Effence,  nor  a  mtei 
difference  of  Name,  Office,  or  Relation,  fuch  as  is  fig- 
nified  by  the UkeTeFms,when  applied  toMen,(tho'  thefe 
are  all  the  Differences  we  can  exprejly  conceive^  asappli- 
cable  to  the  Divine  Nature)  but  fome  other  DiflinBion^ 
which  wc  have  but  a  confufed  ■perception  of  and  cannot 
comprehend  or  explain  by  any  particular  Idea's ;  which 
unkmtvn  inexplicable  Diltin6f ion  is  the  T^oundation  of  all 
thefe  Differences  exprejly  conceived  by  us. 

And  fmce  the  Ci?ffrch  has  thought  fit,  for  the  Sake  of 
Unity  and  Peace,  and  for  the  Supprefling  all  Private 
Difputes  and  Interpretations,  to  appoint  fet  Forms  to 
exprefs  this  our  Faith  in,  I  thh'^  the  Jthanafinn  Creed  as 
rational  an  Explication  of  the  Tr/W/y  as  can  well  be 
made.  The  Worft  that  the  Enemies  of  this  DoG:rine 
can  fay  of  it,  is,  That  it  is  an  unneceffary  Multiplication 
of  Terms,  and  too  nice  an  Endeavour  to  Explain  what 
cannot  be  Explained  ;  but  not  that  'tis  Falfe,  or  Abfurd  ; 
nothing  being  there  afferted  in  any  fenfe  inconfiffent 
with  the  Vnity  of  God,  or  the  Principles  of  Right  Rea- 
fon  :  All  fuch  Meanings  and  Significations  of  any 
Terms  or  Exprellions  in  that  Creed  being  very  impro- 
per, as  they  are  there  applied,  and  utterly  difclaimcd 
by  the  Church  that  enjoins  the  Ufe  of  it.  ■  ;»^^  bliji  ^n^^i^. 
Nor  can  it  beefteemed  an  unreafbnable  Tmpofition, 
That  we  fhould  be  obliged  to  profefs  our  Faith  of  fome- 
thing  which  cannot  be  conceived^  but  conftifedly  and  in- 
dijiin^ly  •  nor  expreffed^  but  in  general  and  obfcure  Terms. 
For  Where's  the  Hardihip  of  being  required  to  believe 
as  far  as  we  can  believe  ?    God  is  Incortipr-ehenfible  ia 

his 


Some  Conjtderations  concerning  the  Trinity,       aj 

his  Nature  and  Perfe6:ions,  but  are  we  not  obliged  to 
believe  there  is  a  God  who  is  IncomprehenfibJe  ?  Are 
we  not  obliged  to  believe  there  are  Joys  in  Heaven, 
which  it  has  not  enter'd  into  the  Heart  of  Man  to  con- 
ceive ?  And,  to  repeat  a  former  Inftance,  may  not  a 
Blind  Man  be  obliged  to  believe  what  a  Friend  of  un- 
fufpe£l:ed  Integrity  tells  him  of  the  general  mtnre  of  Co- 
lour,  tho'  he  is  not  able  to  form  2i  particular  Idea  of  it  ? 
And,  if  thefe  Things  cannot  be  denied,  What  diffe- 
rence can  be  afligned  why  we  (hould  not  be  under  as 
great  an  Obligation  of  believing  the  Trinity,  tho'  we 
are  not  able  to  conceive  it  diftinSly  ? 

A  Threefold  Diftindion  in  the  Godhead,  confident 
with  the  Unity  of  God,  is  as  plainly  revealed  in  Scrip- 
ture as  any  other  Article  of  Faith :  Nor  are  iho^hgem- 
Y&l  Ahfira^d  Terms  we  find  in  our  Greeds,  to  be  con-  • 
demn'd  as  meer  ufelefs  and  perplexing  Niceties;  for 
tho'  they  are  not  fufficient  to  make  us  und€rftandi[\Q 
Tnmty  fully  and  difiinSily^  yet  they  are  proper  Limit  a- 
tims  to  exclude  all  the  Falfe  and  Unworthy  Apprehen- 
fions  of  this  Doctrine,  which  Pretenders  to  a  more  par- 
ticular Explication  might  introduce, 

III.  And  now  what  dangerous  Confequences  caa* 
poffibly  attend  fuch  a  Faith  as  this  ?  'Tis  true  indeed 
the  Adverfaries  of  the  Trinity  have  drawn  up  a  heavy 
Charge  againft  this  DoQrine,  and  taken  a  great  deal  of 
Liberty  in  their  Difcouries  about  it :  But  the  principaF 
Obje6:ions  that  have  been  made  by  any  of  them  are  but 
Three  ;  to  which  all  the  reft  may  be  reduced  :  And 
thefe  I  fhall  endeavour  to  fliew,  by  the  Account  before 
given,  are  very  Frivolous  and  Unjuft. 

I.  The  firft  Pernicious  Confequence  the  Doclrine  of 
tlie. Trinity  Hands  charged  with,  is,  the  Introduaion 

of. 


4S      Some  Confiderations  concerning  the  Trinity. 

of  a  Flurdity  of  Gods:  But  'tis  very  plain  from  what 
we  have  faid  in  the  former  part  of  this  Difcourfe,  that 
'tis  utterly  impoflible  to  believe  a  Trinity  in  any  fuch 
fenfe  as  imphes  a  Plurality  of  Gods :  For  according  to 
the  Notions  I  have  there  fhewed  we  have  of  the  Na* 
ture  and  Attributes  of  God,  'tis  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  fame  Idea. 

Let  Thofe  therefore  take  care  to  Anfwer  this  Accufa- 
tion,  who,  under  pretence  of  giving  a  more  Rational 
Account  of  what  we  are  to  believe  in  this  Point,  fet 
up  created  fubordinate  Gods  to  be  Partners  with  their 
Maker  in  the  Glory  and  Worfhip  due  to  him. 

Befides,  we  do  explicitly  declare,  that  there  is  but 
OneGodzt  the  fame  time  we  make  Profeffiion  of  our 
Faith  in  a  Trinity ^  or  Three  Perfofis, 

2.  In  the  next  place,  therefore  we  are  accufed  of 
believing  Contradiiiions ;  and  confequently  of  deftroy- 
ing  all  the  certainty  of  Natural  Knowledge :  Which 
Fence  being  down,  there's  no  Error  fo  grolsor  abfiird 
but  may  be  obtruded  upon  us ;  and  Tranfuhfiantiation 
has  as  good  a  Pretence  to  be  an  Article  of  our  Faith  as 
the  Trinity.  But  I  need  not  make  any  particular  An- 
fwer to  this  Objedion,  having  proved  at  large  already, 
that  we  neither  do  nor  can  believe  a  Trinity  in  any 
lenfe  that  contradids  the  plain  and  evident  Principles 
of  Natural  Reafon.  We  do  not  believe  there  can  be 
more  Gods  than  One,  that  One  can  be  Three  in  the  fame 
refpeB  '*tis  One  ;  or  that  One  God  can  he  Three  Perfons  in 
the  fame  fenfe  three  Men  are  three  Perfons ;  or  any  other 
Propofition  that's  inconfiftent  with  thofe  Natural  No- 
tions which  are  the  Foundation  of  all  our  other  Know- 
ledge.    But  the  Patrons  of  Trnnfubjtantiation  cannot 

make 


Some  ConfideratiGns  concerning  tJye  Trinity,^      4P 

make  this  Plea,  who  in  this  one  Particular  deny  thofe 
very  Principles  which  upon  all  other  occafions  they 
rely  upon  with  the  greatefl:  AfTurance.  Did  they  only 
affirm,  that  Chrift  was  frejent  in  that  Sacrament  in 
fbme  way  or  manner  they  could  not  comprehend,  but 
in  noway  repugnant  to  the  plain  and  neceffary  Didates 
of  well-informed  Senle,  and  right  Reafon,  there  might 
be  then  fome  Refemblance  found  betwixt  this  Doftrine 
and  that  of  the  Trinity ;  but  at  prefent  the  Comparifon 
is  palpably  and  notorioufly  unjuft. 

3.  But  Thirdly,  'tis  further  Objected,  That  though 
the  Doftrine  of  the  Trinity,  as  we  explain  it,  could 
not  be  proved  to  contain  down-right  Contradidions ; 
yet  at  leaft  it  muft  be  counted  and  efteemed  as  a  My. 
fiery  J  and  the  Impofition  of  Myfieries  for  Articles  of 
Faith,  is  a  thing  of  very  ill  Conlequence. 

In  Anfwer  to  which  Charge,  it  is  to  be  obferved, 
that  as  in  the  Do£lrine  of  the  Trinity,  fb  in  moft  other 
Objects  of  Faith  and  Knowledge,  there's  fbmething 
that  we  plainly  and  certainly  underftand,  and  fbme- 
thing that  we  cannot  poflibly  comprehend  :  Thus  a 
Man  by  inward  Refledion  is  Infallibly  confcious  of  his 
own  Thoughts,  and  he  judges,  whatever  he  perceives 
within  himfelf,  to  proceed  from  one  Common  Principle^ 
which  he  calls  his  Soul\  and  which,from  the  Nature  of 
its  Operations,  he  is  fully  perfwaded  is  fomtthlng  of 
A  different  kind  from  his  Body,tho'  it  always  Adis  in  con- 
lent  with  it :  But  what  thi^  Soul  is^  or  in  what  manner 
united  to  his  Body,  he  is  not  able  to  conceive ;  and  there- 
fore the  Do5irme  of  the  Human  Soul^  taken  all  together^ 
may  as  juftly  be  ftiled  a  Myfttry^  as  the  Trinity.  We 
ought  not  then  to  be  oflPended  at  the  word  Myftery^i^cQ^ 
if  we  ftridly  examine  our  thoughts,  we  fhall  find  that 
almoft  every  thing  we  pretend  to  know,  comes  under 

H  that 


fO      Some  Confiderations  concermng  the  Trinity. 

that  name,  even  thofe  things  we  have  the  greateft  Af^ 
furance  of,  our  very  So^ls  and  Beings, 

This  being  obferved,  we  ma)^  confider  tk^  Trinity 
either  with  refpeO:  to  what  may  be  underftood  of  it,  or 
what  cannot :  So  far  as  we  are  e^pahk  of  conceiving  ^ 
Trinity^  'tis  no  My  fiery  y  and  confequently  no  Opprefliott 
of  our  Faith  ;  And  fo  far  as  it  camot  be  comprehended,  it 
does  not  bind  us  to  an}^  Explicit  AB  of  Faith  :  As  is  plain 
from  what  has  been  laid  before  concerning  the  Nature^ 
of  Faith,  and  tlioPerfom  obliged  to  believe  this  Article  : 
For  all  things  ceccflTary  to  Salvation  are  to  be  believed 
by  all  forts  of  Men ;  and  nothing  can  be  believed  any 
ferther  than  the  terms  in  which  it  is  propofed  are  under- 
ftood  :  But  a  Myftery  cannot  be  brought  down  to  the 
loweft  Capacities,  and  be  dehvered  in  Terms  that 
are  plainly  and  diftinQly  underftood,  for  then  it  would 
be  no  longer  a  Myftery  :  So  far  therefore  as  we  are  ob*. 
ligsd  to  btlitve,  is  no  Myftery ;  For  whatever  Terms  I 
am  bid  to  beUeve  a  thing  in  I  cannot  comprehend,  I 
can  mean  no  more  but  that  I  believe  it  to  be  in  fome 
manner  I  cannot  comprehend :  And  I  am  fure  there^s 
nodiflBculty  or  danger  in  believing  that  there  are  fbme 
things  which  we  are  not  able  to  find  out,or  comprehend. 

Thefe  are  the  Refle£lions  which  offered  themfelves 
upon  a  careful  and  impartial  Gonfideration  of  this 
Subject. 

But  here  1  fore-fee  it  may  be  asked.  What  do  wc 
underftand  more  of  the  Trinity  now  than  wc  did  be- 
fore? What  new  Hypothefis  is  here  advanced  to  folve 
all  the  Difficulties  of  that  Do8:rine  by?  In  Anfvver  to 
which  Objeft ion,  I  have  this  further  to  add  for  the  Ju- 
fiifieation  of  the  foregoing  Difcourfe. 

Firft,  That  the  Principal  Defign  of  my  Enquiries 
waSj,  to  know,  what  God  required  us  all  to  believe  in 


Some  Conjiderations  concerning  the  Trinity,      j  g^ 

order  to  our  Salvation,  not  how  far  the  Soul  of  Man 
was  capable  of  difcovering  the  deep  things  of  God:  For 
I  am  fully  perfwadedjthat  there  may  be  things  neceffary 
to  be  believed,  and  yet  we  not  obliged  to  believe  them 
m  xhdit  diftin5t  fdrtieuUr  ftnft  in  which  fome  Learned. 
Men  have  explamed  them ;  Though  their  Hypothefis 
fhould  be  very  Rational  and  Conliftent,  and  perhaps 
really  true.  And  therefore  could  there  be  any  new  way 
found  out  of  making  the  TV/W// conceivable  by  Human 
Underfl-anding,  I  do  not  think  we  fhould  be  under  any 
Gbhgation  of  believing  that  particular  Expofition  of 
it :  For  befides  the  difficulty  of  fuch  abfl:ra6lcd  Notions, 
even  in  their  plaineft  drefs,  with  refped  to  mean  Ca- 
pacities, which  are  all  equally  concerned  in  neceffary 
Articles  of  Faith,  it  cannot  be  imagined  that  we  fhould 
be  obliged  to  believe  more  than  the  Chriftians  who  li- 
ved before  us  were ;  that  more  fhould  be  neceffary  to 
our  Salvation  than  was  to  theirs :  And  'tis  certain  their 
Faith  was  fufficient  and  effectual  for  obtaining  Eternal 
Life,  who  could  not  poffibly  believe  what  we  fuppofe 
to  be  but  lately  difcovercd. 

But  idly  J  Confidering  that  we  were  permitted  with 
Humility  and  Reverence  to  Exercile  our  Souls  in  the 
feareh  of  Divine  Knowledge ;  And  moreover  that  we 
ought  as  Chriftians,  as  well  as  Men,  to  give  a  Reafon 
of  the  Faith  wc  profefs,  and  defend  it  againft  all  falfe 
and  unjufb  Imputations;  I  havealfb  made  it  my  bufinefs 
to  enquire,how  far  we  were  capable  of  forming  diliind 
Conceptions  of  a  Trwity;  And  upon  Enquiry  found  that 
after  a  Faithful  Tryal  of  our  Faculties ,  and  a  ftrid 
Examination  of  all  the  y?w/>/e  Notions  which  make  up 
the  Propofition  to  believed,  we  cannot  arrive  at  greater 
Knowledge  in  thisPoint  than  our  fore-fathers  have  done;^ 
And. that  fo  much  of  the  Dodrine  of  the  Trinity  as 

H .  2 .  was- 


cjz      Some  Conjiderations  concernini  ti)e  Trinity, 

was  a  Myfifry  to  them,  is  like  tq  be  fo  to  the  end  of  the 
Woild.  \ 

Which  if  I  have  as  fully  and  fufficlently  proved  to 
others  as  Lam  convinced  of  it  my  felf,  I  fhall  not  think 
my  Time  or  Labour  loft  upon  this  Subje^l.  For  next 
<;  to  underftaiiding  a  thing  throughly  is  to  knovi^  we  can- 
^not  underdand  it ;  next  to  refblving  a  Problem  in  Ma- 
thema  ticks,  is  to  demonftrate  it  cannot  be  done.  Our 
Souls  are  as  much  at  reft,  our  Defires  as  quiet,  and  all 
our  Defigns  and  Purfuits  as  much  at  an  end  v^hen  we 
defpairof  Vidory,  as  when  we  actually  Conquer. 

And  therefore  if  thefe  be  the  trp.e  md,  proper  Limits 
of  our  Faith  and  Kjnowkdge  \^hich  I  have  affigned ;  Tf  I 
have  given  a  Juft  Account  of  what  we  are  required  to 
believe  concerning  the  Trinity  ;  How  much  'tis  pofflbk 
for  us  to  believe  of  it,  and  how  far  we  are  capable  of 
having  diftin^  Conceptions  about  it  ;"'tis  in  vain  to  fearch 
for  new  Notions  and  Hypothefes,  which  may  probably 
puzzle  or  deceive  our  Underftandings,  but  can  never 
lead  us  farther  into  the  Knowledge  of  the  Trinity. 

But  I  will  not  pretend  to  meafure  the  Abilities  of 
other  Men  by  my  own:  I  fhall  only  fay  this  more, 
%vhich  I  am  fure  I  can  truly  affirm,  that  I  have  taken  all 
the  care  imaginable  to  deliver  my  judgment  impartidy 
and  fmcerely,  and  have  not  dared  to  impofe  any  thing 
upon  others,  which  I  do  not  believe  my  felf,  or  is  any 
ways  inconfiftent  with  the  Principles  of  right  Reafon. 

POST-SCRIPT. 

Thefe  Taper s  ivere  in  the  Vrefs^  and  every  Word  in  the  Book^  and 
Vreface,  as  they  fiand  now,  was  Written  before  His  Majeffs  In- 
jundions  came  forth:  The  Author  is  glad  to  find  that  he  has  not 
tranfgrefs'^d  'em  ^  the  Authority  and  ReafonabUnefs  of  which  he  fays 
fuch  a  Submifion  to,  that  if  he  had  not  prefcribed  to  himfelf  the 
fame  Rules  in  Writings  that  he  now  fees  enjoyned  by  his  Superiours, 
he  wou^d  have  Jhewed  his  Obedience  to  ^em^  by  Supprejjing  what  he 
had  written* 

F    I  ^    /    S. 


:9-m 


"^ 


M^^/  :v4l 


m. 


**i