AN ACCOUNT OF THE Blessed Trinity, Argued from the Nature and Perfection of the Supreme Spirit, Coincident with the Scripture Doctrine, in all the Articles of the Catholic Creeds; Together with its 

1 Mystical Uses  
2 Foederal Uses  
3 Practical Uses    
In the Christian RELIGION,  
By William Burrough Rector of Chines in Bucks.  
LONDON, Printed for Richard Baldwin at the Oxford Arms in Warwick-lane, near the Oxford-Arms-Inn. 1694.   

THE PREFACE.  
IT passes at this day without any hesitancy amongst the Socinians, that the Trinity is contrary to reason; and it is likely it did so at the very first, and so past them too hastily, and before they had sufficiently examined the differences of things. For up●n a more distinct observance of the Scale of Being's, I suppose it may appear, that though a Trinity of Real Hypostasies either in a single corporeal substance, or even in any nature not absolutely perfect, be contradictory to the reason of the thing; yet it is evident by all our natural notices from internal sense, that a Spirit besides its first subsistence, hath also two other, answerable to the utmost ability of its own Ingeny: and therefore in reason we must grant, that in the Spirit, whose ability is All-sufficiency, these its two other subsistencies are really equal in perfection with its first: and consequently according to our humane conceptions of a Spirit, and its perfections, the denial of the Trinity includes in it the denial of the Spirituality, or of the absolute perfection of the Deity, both of which appear to be contradictory as well to Reason as the Scripture. The Three therefore in Scripture, and the Trinity in the Catholic Church, is of the same significancy with a Spirit of absolute perfection in the Schools of Philosophy, but in a stile of more adorable Majesty, presenting to us the absoluteness of the perfection to be in a substantial subsistence. To this purpose it is observable, that our Saviour, who came to require from all Men the service of the Supreme Being, under the express notion of a Spirit without respect to place (the peculiar property of Bodies) does not only represent him under the Title of the Father in spirit and in truth (which in the reason of the thing) are our prime notices of the One in Three; but likewise appoints to all Nations a solemn recognition of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which in Nature are the proper formal Characters of the Three Persons in that Holy One; and without this recognition first made, no one is to be admitted into the service of that Sovereign Lord. If these things may appear (as I here suppose) it will also appear, that we are to confess a Trinity in Unity, both as Men, and as Christians: and consequently they are extremely injurious, who reproach the Being of the God which the Christian Church does Worship, as contradictions and absurd (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) as if that most Blessed of all Being's, was not to be endured either in men's Hearts, or in the World, and that for no other reason, but because the Church (conform to our Lord's institution) confesses God to be, what he could not be, unless he be the most absolutely Blessed.  
1. The Natural Evidence of the Trinity (as well as of the Creation) being grounded upon Gods being a Spirit, I have showed that God is known to be so, by the same Evidence by which we have the Natural Knowledge of his Existence. I confess this would have deserved a larger account than I have bestowed upon it; but all Christians confessing God to be a Spirit, and my Circumstances not allowing a large account of the Spiritual Nature, I hope by this contracted one, the intelligent Reader will perceive from a joint Evidence in Nature and Scripture, that the Supreme Spirit is one God, Infinitely One, and Three Persons Infinitely Three, no whit the less one God, for being Three Persons, no whit the less Three Persons, for being only one God. Now in this Doctrine, not only the Faith of the Church is exactly delivered, and the pretensions of the most rigorous Trinitarians satisfied, but even what the several opposite parties are concerned for, is as fully secured to them as in their own divided ways. The Scripture plainly teaches there is one God, and yet as expressly attributes Titles and Prerogatives Divine to more Persons than one. Hereupon, some to preserve the unity of the Deity entire, and others to assert the Persons really distinct, by misapprehension of the one, have been necessitated to deny or evacuate the other. Now these denials and elusions were not their choice ●ut of affection to them, but unwelcome consequents which they would have avoided, had they seen how, without rejecting that truth on the other side, which they were concerned for; for can any one think, that the Sabellians had any kindness for the synonimousness of three Names, which the Scripture speaks of as so distinct, farther than they thought it needful to the complete unity of the Deity? Can we believe the Tritheists (if any such there ever were) would please themselves with the notion of three numerical, and one only specifical God? Or the Arians have pleaded there were Gods of several sorts, one of a Nature of Supreme Divinity, and another or two of a Nature of inferior Divinity? Or the Socinians have imagined there was one God only in Nature, and two in the Christian Religion; but that they found a necessity from the Scripture to acknowledge more persons Divine than one? and so they invented these divers conceits to salve the Doctrine of the Divine Unity. For I understand not, that any Christian Professor can be delighted in the Worship of more Gods than one, whether they be of the same, or of a different Nature. From which hard Say the present Doctrine delivers them, and yet entirely secures the Truth, for which they contend in their several Hypothesies. Showing how the one God is no less one God, for being three Persons; and the three Persons no less three Persons, for being but one God.  
It may seem indeed the Arians did first resolve upon the different natural excellencies of the Father, and the Son, and thereby were forced to deny the Being of one God in three Persons; but that they asserted both these to be of a Divine Nature, was by a manifest force upon them. Which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Socinianism is more uncertain▪ whether they denied our Saviour's Divine Nature, that they might deny the Trinity; or denied the Trinity for the maintaining their denial of our Saviour's Divinity. That is to say, whether they first thought that God had no Son by Nature, and thence concluded he made another the Heir of his House, or else that he had made another the Heir of his Family; therefore surely he had no Son of his own by Nature: For it would not agree with the Scripture or the reason they pretend to, to think he set aside his own Son, and gave the Honour to another to be Lord of Heaven and Earth. But whether they hold these Doctrines with an equal or different concern; yet it seems plain enough, they hold both the one and the other in Subordination to their Grand Principle, That the reason of things, is the Rule of interpreting Scripture. So that all the concern they express for either, being their supposed consonancy with reason; if it may appear, (as I hope it will) by the reason of the thing, that the Deity is the Supreme Spirit, 
Aliusque & idem nascitur. Hor. Carm. 2?  and that the reason of the Supreme Spirit speaks it to be of such absolute perfections, that it Conceives or Begets itself in a second Personal Subsistence, as real as the first: Then have they in this Doctrine (as well as the other parties) what they sought for (in vain) in their own way, and find the reason for their Faith, which there they miss. Wherefore all the Theoretical interests of the several Contenders being thus fully and entirely secured, remove the Spirit of opposition (which all disclaim;) and we have an unity in these points without any use of a Syncritism; which is but a Politic Engine to tie men's Tongues together, when their Hearts are removed as far as before from one another: Whose use is to work like death, which so far as it takes away the power of doing evil, mortifies likewise the power of doing good. I would I loved moderation and gentleness better than I do; but I would still retain my present sentiments so far, as rather to be angered than killed. Concord in these things is most desirable; but if that cannot be had▪ men aught to contend so much as is needful to preserve the Faith, but no more; and not stifle their Religion for fear there should be quarrels about it.  
2. But though all the Conscientious interests for which any are concerned, as seekers of Truth, be here provided for; yet possibly some Pious Persons may fear, that such an attempt as this suits not with some other things, for which we ought to have a Religious regard: Such are the incomprehensibleness of God, the Modest and Humble Opinion of our own Understandings, the Mysticalness of the Christian Religion, and the Practice of the Ancient Fathers; which all by enquiring into this Mystery by the Light of Nature, seem to be treated with too much neglect. Though much might be said to satisfy these indefinite fears; yet my leisure permits me to say but little, which yet I hope may be enough.  
3. For the Infinity or Incomprehensibleness of the Deity, that signifies not that we can know nothing of him by the Light of Nature; for than we were not to say he Subsists in an Incomprehensible Being, but that if he be, he is in utter darkness. But it signifies that whatever Men or Angels can know of him, (though they knew it in fallibly;) yet not one knows all, or the all of any Divine Perfection; or hath an adequate Conception of any thing that is in the Divine Nature. But we may for all this, know many things of him, and that certainly. Though we can say he is a Good and not a Bad Being, and he is Wise and not Foolish; and so far determine of the condition of the Divine Being; yet this argues not that God is ever the more comprehensible by us, in that sense wherein incomprehensibleness is a Divine Perfection, and to be revered by us. We can discover that God has an Eternal Subsistence, if the Subsistence of the Deity be one Personal Subsistence, this one Personal Subsistence is as Incomprehensible as three Personal Subsistences are, unless we comprehend not the difference betwixt an Unite and the Number three, which we are sure we do. And if we can discover from the Divine Perfections that the Deity Subsists in three Persons, & not in one only; we may be said to know something more of God, but nothing with a comprehensive knowledge: And therefore the more we know of the Divine Nature, the more distinctly we perceive that God is incomprehensible. Let us then use the same measures here, that we are certain be right in like cases. When we say that God knows, and withal, that knowledge in God is not the same, that knowledge is in created minds; yet we do not therefore say that God's knowledge is no knowledge, or less really knowledge; but infinitely more really knowledge, or has infinitely more the true nature of knowledge in it than we can conceive by the knowledge in the Creatures. Thus we think of his Goodness, Existence, Power, and the rest of the Divine attributes: Proportionably we are to affirm of the Incomprehensibleness of the Trinity. When we say the Deity is one in all, and every one of the three Persons Incomprehensibly, We mean not thereby that it is not one, or less one; but infinitely more one, than we can conceive by any Unity in a Creature. And when we say the Subsistences of the Divine Nature are incomprehensibly three, we mean not that they are not really three, or less distinctly three; but infinitely more than we can conceive by any diversity in the Creatures. Tho' as the Unity of the Deity is not a Unity of the same kind; so neither is the diversity of the Persons a diversity of the same kind with that of the Creatures, nor from the same reason, nor manifest by the same evidence. Thus the Infinity of God makes not our knowledge of God no knowledge, nor deceives us in what we know of him; but convinces us that we know but in part. The Incomprehensibleness of God than hinders not our knowledge of the Trinity, no more than it hinders the knowledge of his Wisdom, Power, Goodness, which are all incomprehensible as well as the Trinity; and yet are known by the things that are made.  
4. Modesty and Humility teach us not to think our Intellectual Capacities less than they are, 'tis enough in all reason to think them so very little as they are. Scepticism is neither Modesty therefore nor Humility, but an affected Wildness, that violates all the measures of these and all other virtues, which require not a a man to deny his own perceptions, and doubt everlastingly; but only that he vouch not such perceptions more clear and certain than really they are. If then by a wary process of thoughts, we may perceive that the most absolute perfection of a Spirit, argues three distinct Subsistences of whatsoever is in the Nature of that Spirit; we may then without breach of modesty believe that the most rational conception of the Supreme Spirit, is the Being of one God and three Persons. And if we have any suspicion remaining about the due conduct of our thoughts, yet we must still confess that the best reason we have persuades and prompts to this conception. For since we evidently perceive that the Deity cannot Subsist in three distinct real Subsistences, unless it be of most absolute perfections; and on the contrary, we cannot conceive how such a most absolutely perfect Being can subsist otherwise than in three; if we will venture to follow our own reason, we must conclude there is a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, or else he is not absolutely perfect: but if we find the plain expressions of the Scripture agree to this Conception in all the branches of it; (as friends and foes confess they do,) we cannot then without unreasonableness, unbelief and immodesty continue our doubtfulness any longer. Now this Coincidence of the Light of Nature with the Scripture in all points, gives us the complete evidence of this Doctrine.  
5. The Mystery of this Doctrine I have satisfied in the Book, by dividing the Question of the Trinity into its two parts, and shown what belongs to the Natural Inquiry, and what belongs to the Christian Mystery. And therefore need say no more here, than that no one can more acknowledge the Mystery of the Christian Faith in this point than is here taught, which as, such is wholly and solely of Scripture revelation. But it is manifest that the other part belongs to the condition of the Divine Nature, and so is of Natural Divinity, and is a branch of the Theory of a Spirit. If it may then appear by Nature, that the Subsistence of a thing in the World▪ is not more really its very self, than it is the very Subsistence, which the same thing has in the Divine Conception; than it will also appear, that the Divine Conception in this particular is of absolutely perfect truth, and the Divine Mind thus Conceiving is a Being of absolute perfection. This being evident, it will follow from the condition of the Spiritual Nature, that the Supreme Spirit himself Subsists in three equally perfect, and really distinct Hypostasies. And is one God therefore and three Persons; and whether all this be so or not, is of Natural disquisition.  
6. And by this we may see why the Ancients argued the Trinity only from Scripture Authority, and made use but sparingly of the reason of the thing: Because their Controversy was, whether it was of Faith or no, not whether it was of Natural Light, or of Reason. They therefore (as Ministers of Religion) taught this to be a part of the Gospel Doctrine; which they could not otherwise prove it to be, but only by the Scripture and the Tradition of the Church. But for all that, since there certainly is a Natural Enquiry about it, that may be considered by a Natural Divine. For if it be discovered by Natural Theory, no one can doubt but it is required in Scripture; and yet if it be not of Natural, that does not hinder but it may be of Supernatural Revelation; as many other things are, which are unknown by the Light of Nature.  
7. Lest the Reader should surmise from any thing that has been said, that he shall here meet with some new Doctrine of the Trinity; to prevent any such prejudice at his entrance into this Discourse, I must advertise him, that he will meet with no conclusion touching the Trinity, but the very Articles of the Three Creeds. And the Propositions from whence those Conclusions are immediately deduced, are acknowledged by all Christians, and the Antitrinitarians themselves. And the more remote principles which yield the evidence to those propositions, are notorious dictates of Reason and Natural Sense. So that here is nothing that can be new, except the order in which the things are said: And so new the Doctrine of every Book is, which is neither Transcript nor Translation; which indeed this pretends not to be. And this I hope is enough to obviate the suspicion of Novelty, which I much dislike in important Doctrines of the Christian Religion. I have briefly pointed out the uses of it; likewise, that Faith and Charity may go together. In doing this, I was unwilling to beg my principles, and thereby was forced to begin at some distance from the main point, by which I presumed I should gain several advantages; and the notions I had of several things become familiar to the Reader, before he came to the pinch of the Question. For being to contemplate the Supreme Nature, I thought it needful to begin the lower. After I have told the Reader that the Nature of this Argument and Method will require some intentness of thoughts in the perusal, that he may serve himself of it; and assured him, I know of no Objection but what I have anticipated or removed; and therefore desire it may be read with the same candour wherewith it is offered. I shall trouble him no further, but commmend him to God, and the Word of his Grace, which is able to build us up in Truth and Holiness; and so give us an Inheritance amongst all them which are sanctified. Amen.   

The ERRATA.  
PAge 1. line 3. read remain; p. 2. l. 3. r. being; r. Substances; p. 2. l. 4. r. Originate; l. 6. r. Originate; l. 19 r. valid; l. 33. for Tradition, r. Trinity; l. ult. r. condition; p. 3. l. 15. r. restively; p. 8. l. 9 r. operate; p. 9 l. 34. r. do; p. 10 l. 12. r. in infinitum; l. 38. r. extension; p. 11. l. 9 for pores, r. parts; p. 13. l. 35. for is the thought, r. is in the thought; p. 14. l. 6. r. depreciate; p. 15. l 16. r. and; p. 16. l. ult. r. only one; r. real; p. 18. l. 43. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; p. 19 l. ult. r. eternal too; p. 21. margin, for one, r. our; p. 22. l. 3. r. Subsistence; p. 25. l. 12. r. being, so conceiving; p. 25. l. 17. r. Subsistences; p. 26. r. fecundity; for moods, r. modes; for Souls, r. Soul; for effected, r effects; for factors, r. fautors; p. 32. r. facing; p. 33. l. 14. r. itself; p. 34. for expediently, r. expeditely; p. 38. l. 43. for turned, r. termed; p. 40. l. 8. for cr, r. nor; l. 39 for Nature is one, in as such r. Nature in one, is as such; l. 42. for same the, r. the same; p. 57 l. 20. de●e as: p. 57 l. ult. for since this, r. since to this; p. 59 for intruded, r. obtruded; p. 59 for Epicurians, r. Epicureans; literal slips are not here collected.   

AN ACCOUNT OF THE Blessed Trinity, Argued from the Nature and Perfection of the Supreme Spirit.  

CHAP. I. The Question Stated and Discussed.  
BY the Blessing of God on the endeavours of his Church, the Old-Heresies (which denied the Unity of the Godhead) are long ago extinct, and there remains only some few of such as deny the Trinity; together with others of a later rise, which are yet to be reduced. But these all seeming to confess there is but one true God, and so far, fully to acquiesce in the Catholic Doctrine. The Question about which these are to be dealt with, is in short, Whether the True God (in the Unity of whose Godhead they consent with us) does really subsist in three distinct personal subsistences, (Hypostases) or only in one? Or whether there being one God, there be also but one Divine Person, or else, three really distinct.  
II. If the Case really be, that God does indeed subsist in Three Persons, than he can no more subsist in one only▪ than he can cease to Subsist at all. For then the Condition of the Divine Nature is such, that it comports not with it, to Subsist in fewer than three real Subsistences: but if on the contrary, it really doth Subsist in one only, than the Nature is such, as admits no more. This therefore is a natural Question, and touches the Reason of the Divine Nature.  
III. But which of these two is really the Case, cannot be concluded from our absolute certainty, of the single Subsistence of every and all other things; for they bring all dependent Substences, and ●od Self Originte. The Trine-subsistence which is repugnant, and contradictious to the Nature of such dependent Being's, may be the only way of Subsistence, compatible to a self original Being. Now all the Arguments of the Opposers of the Trinity, do plainly rest upon a supposed Parity or Identity of reason in this Case; for they turning off their Eye from the Reason of the very thing itself (which they were reasoning about, and looking round the World, to pick up reasons, as they could spy them lying scattered up and down elsewhere) imagined those reasons (which they were certain suited exactly with the Subsistence of all other things) could not but be fit measures of their Judgement about the Subsistence of the Deity in this Inquiry. Now this way of Arguing being manifestly Fallacious; they are plainly unreasonable, in charging the Church's Faith, with contradictions and absurdities.  
iv Since the single Subsistence of all dependant Substences, is no valued Argument of the single Subsistence of the independent Being; the only Question in reason that remains is, whether we knowing many things of God, are thereby able to discover from the Conditions and Perfections of the Divine Nature itself, that it subsists in three Persons, or on the other hand, in one only. For if we can do neither of these, we cannot at all use reason in this Question; for then all reasonings about it are Sophistical: But we must quit all pretence to reason from the Nature of things, and follow wholly the reason of speech in the Scripture.  
V But whatever can be thus discovered, this is certain, that the reason of the Divine Nature itself, does not show that one of the three Divine Persons (if three there be) is become Man in the Person of Jesus Christ; therefore the Christian Tradition as such, is a mystery, and is wholly of Scripture Revelation; which according to the Reason of Speech (even by the Confession of the Adversaries) does deliver the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith. The Proceed therefore, which Christians have ever used in its defence, have been exactly conform to the Quality of this Question; for they never pretended to build their Belief of this Mystery, upon the Reason of the Divine Nature, or any other, but on the Testimony of the Divine Word.  
VI As the Christian Faith of this Mystery is not built upon Natural Reason, so it also appears, that it cannot be impugned from any Reasons, unless they be such as are deducible from the peculiar Conditions and Perfections of the Deity itself.  
Now all these I shall endeavour to show, are so far from opposing the Christian Mystery, that they Argue, that the Godhead according to the Reason of that Blessed Nature, does Subsist in three Natural Persons; so far therefore as Reason hath any Vote, it gives it for the Church's Faith.  
VII. This would not have been needful to us Christians, but that the importunity of the Antitrinitarians without Reason's suffrage, will not be satisfied with the fullness of Scripture Evidence, nor yield our Saviour his due Honour. For though by Christ's appointment they are Devoted to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; yet after this Vow, they will make Inquiry, as if they were still in a state of deliberation, and were to consult ex integro, whether they should stand to their Vow or not. It being certainly much better, joyfully to bear, than resistively to cast off a Yoke of Christ's Imposing. I confess, I know no better Service could be done to these Men, than to bring them back into the Bond of their Violated Covenant. But I shall not undertake such an Office, because I foresee, that I cannot on this Subject, speak to them for the just Honour of our Blessed Lord and Master, but they will take it for an Obloquy cast upon them. For if I say (and mean as I say) that all Men are to honour the Son, 
John 5.  even as they honour the Father, they presently feel, I am rubbing on their sore place; and I know the Opinion of a Party is a sore, which brooks well enough to be clawed, but will not endure to be rubbed.  
VIII. To spare them therefore, and comply somewhat with my own Genius, which little likes to deal with the extreme touchiness of a darling Doctrine, I shall apply myself to this Work directly, as a Service of Christ and his Church, from whom I hope for better acceptance, leaving them to their beloved liberty, of taking what they like for their own use. Being nevertheless persuaded, that if whilst they refuse to captivate their understandings to the Obebedience of the Faith, they have not at the same time enslaved them to the Tenants of Arius, Socinus, and such other confident, but unwary Re●s●●ers; they will find whilst I laboured to serve the Interesses of the Heavenly Kingdom, I have done (and that not unawares) what may be useful, and even satisfactory to the more moderate amongst them.  
IX. That I may make then this Discourse the more Serviceable, I shall first show that the reason of ●●e Divine Nature itself doth sufficiently 〈◊〉 the Being of one G●d and three Persons. Secondly, That the Holy Scripture does T●ach the very same Doctrine with the Nature of the thing. Thirdly, Because we Believe from the Gospel Institution, that Jesus Christ is one of the Three Persons; I shall give an Account, how Congruous that Revelation is, to what we infer from the Reason of the Divine Nature. Lastly, since Christ does enter our belief of the Trinity into the Stipulation made in our Covenant of Life and Peace with God. I shall explain that its Faederal use; and if upon the whole, we find that the Reasons of the thing, in its self, and in its accord with the Scripture, and in what befell it by Christ's Incarnation, and in its Baptismal use, do all concur to assure us of the Truth of the Blessed Trinity, I hope it will no longer remain amongst us in the state of a Question, but all sober men will agree in the Faith and Worship of one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity.  
X. I am sensible, that by my having ventured to blame other men's Reasonings, I have imposed a Law upon myself, which I shall think in the Rational Inquiry, we sufficiently comply with, if we transgress not by irreverence, unwariness, or excess of confidence; taking care first, we say nothing of God, but what is truly great, and worthy of his blessed Majesty. Secondly, That we use only certain and allowed Principles, inferring nothing from them but with clear consequence. Thirdly, That we compare all Conclusions with the holy Scriptures, moderately suspecting we may have misreckoned ourselves, and believing God's Word is the proof, whereby we must know, whether we have drawn up our whole Account aright or not.   

CHAP. II. Of the Spiritual Nature and its Existence.  
1. BEing to consider the Nature of the Deity; first, w● are assured, that if it be matter, we then understand that nature so well, that we can presently thence infer, it is a substance extended in length, breadth, and thickness; hath parts, quantity, etc. and by all these we perceive, that it is something, but not that it does any thing; from whence it is evident, that matter, how far soever it lies extended, is such a substance, that may exist, and yet not act at all.  
2. If the Divine Nature be not material, than some Atheistically say, it is no nature at all. Others, that it is a nature, not conceivable by us. Yet others affirm, that there is a nature not corporeal, that may be more certainly and distinctly conceived by us, than is the material Nature itself. 
Cap. 1.10.  We are by the foregoing Laws of arguing precluded the use of Learned men's Authority, and therefore are left to the genuine Conduct of Nature itself; which in this Inquiry proves so officious to us, that by a few Documents of indubitable certainty, it instructs us sufficiently for our present purpose, by ourselves ascertaining us.  
3. There is a Nature (whatsoever, or whencesoever it is) which does most clearly discern, that there is infallibly a difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, and consequently betwixt something and nothing, and in speech between contradictories; but how great soever the assurance is which we have of the difference betwixt these opposites, it can be no greater, than is our certainty, that we have a conception of the one opposite, as well as of the other, at the same time whilst we conceive the difference betwixt them; for, were we then destitute in our mind, either of the notion of Existence, or of Nonexistence, we could have no conception of the difference betwixt them, and consequently perceive no difference betwixt being and not being; but we are sure there is a difference betwixt being and not being, therefore we most certainly have not only a conception of what we mean by being, but likewise of what we mean by not-being; and in speech, we have as well a certain perception of what we mean, when we say a thing is not, or there is nothing; as when we say, a thing is, or there is something. Now since it is requisite for our understanding the difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, that our mind should form in its self the conception of Nonexistence, it is to be observed, that such conception of Nonexistence, as we then find in ourselves, cannot be form in our mind, by any thing but only the pure Agency of the minds own Nature: For Nonexistence itself (or nothing) hath no Agency of its own, and all existent Objects tend not to form in the mind the conception of Nonexistence, but of Existence; therefore the mind alone does merely by its own Agency, elicit in its self the conception which it has of Nonexistence, and so it commences an act in itself by its own pure Agency. There is then, we are sure, in the World an Agent, that is no body; for no matter can commence an action in itself, but whensoever it moves, it is moved either by the impulse or agency of another thing.  
4. Now because the shifting of a place▪ is not the conceiving of Nonexistence, therefore this immaterial Agent commences this action by a pure Energy in itself. Now a pure Energy acting imminently in itself by its own Agency alone, without locally moving itself, is a vital Energy; therefore every such immaterial Agent, thus acting, is a Life: We are therefore sure there is a Life in being, and that it is an Immaterial Nature, having an Agency in itself.  
5. Whensoever we do with Actual Advertence conceive Existence and Nonexistence, we so conceive the one of them, as actually to perceive it is not the other; and when we do not actually advert to the difference of the one from the other, the very conception of either is such, that in it we understand, it is not the other; therefore we never conceive Existence, but we have a conception of Nonexistence implied or understood in our minds; but a conception of Nonexistence is a vital, not loco-motive act; 
Cap. 2.4.  therefore all understanding, since it includes in it the conception of Nonexistence, is the act of a Vital Agent, which is immaterial. And universally all conceptions of Negatives, are a demonstration of the Agency of an Immaterial Being.  
6. Some men's confident Ignorance makes it needful here to digress and observe, that according to these measures that are certain in ourselves, we must confess, that Brutes have either no understanding, or else they perceive some difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, betwixt something and nothing; for if (as these men think) their sense be nothing but an Elastical Reaction and Renitency caused by a pressure from some parts of matter, then because nothing, or a non-existent Being, can cause no such pressure, they have no apprehension at all of Negatives, and consequently have no understanding: and therefore what we call sense, 
Cap. 2.5.  and is sense in Brutes, is quite another thing, from what we feel in ourselves, and we can have no more any notion of what the Brutus' sense is, than a blind man hath of Colours; but it imports not us to know, which of these is really their case: For it is most absurd, because we know not how things pass in Brutes, for their sakes to deny, what we are infallibly assured to be in ourselves; for, be it, as it hath happened to the Brutes, nothing can be more certain, than that men understand there is a difference between being and no being, with such assurance, that nothing can constrain them to think otherwise. So that they who object the condition of the Brutus' Souls against the Immateriality of the Souls of Men, offer us an improbable conjecture, which though it had been true, would have had no argumentative force; and yet by this pitiful Subterfuge, they hope to elude the evidence of a plain demonstration from the Agency of our own minds, which proves them to be Immaterial Natures.  
7. That an Intellectual Life must be conscious of its own acts, seems to me no less necessary, than that a thing which exists actually extended in length, must needs have breadth too. But this is certain however, that we are not without such consciousness; for as we perceive the difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence; so we are fully assured, that we do perceive it; and without this consciousness there could be no Reasoning. But it is true, this consciousness admits of no Argument for its Truth, but is self-evident to us: For as we are sure, that we feel pain, by no other means but by our feeling itself; so we are assured of this consciousness, by no other evidence, but the Conscience itself. Now every intelligent conscious Life is a Mind.  
8. Let Foreign objects be represented to the Sensorium by an intentional Species, or by Effluviums, or by Vibration, Jog or Tumult, as the Philosophers can agree, it comes all to one, in our present Inquiry; for it is plain, no one of these can import more than what is done by the Laws of matter, from my Face to the Looking-Glass, which yet is no cause of Intelligence in the Glass; for that no wise doth thereby perceive the difference between the Existence and Nonexistence of the Object; this Perception therefore is the pure Agency of the Mind. For though to judge aright of the Existence of things in the World, we need such objective Notices, by Species or Motion, yet to perceive that the things either are or are not, we need no objective Notice at all. For the Mind in its Self perceives the diffirence betwixt Existence and Nonexistence is such, that they are immediately opposite, so that if the one be not the Case, than the other is; wherefore since our Mind in itself doth thus conceive a diffirence betwixt being, & no being, it is (even in the Body) such a conscious life, that by its own Energetical Agency, does Elicit Acts so purely Intellectual, that they depend not on the Existence of any other thing in the World. From hence it follows, that though there was no other being Existent in the World besides the Mind itself (only God by whom it is what it is) yet the Mind would Live and Understand: therefore according to the Condition of its Nature, it will survive the Dissolution of any, or every part of this visible World that shall be dissolved, and consequently the frame of its own Body: Every Mind therefore is naturally Immortal, and Immortally Intelligent.  
9 That we have resentments, whereby we are pleased or displeased, do like or dislike, is most certain to us by our own Conscience, and need no farther proof: Now a Mind endowed with such resentments is Spiritual: But a Spiritual Mind perceiving a difference betwixt Desires and no Desires, betwixt Aversions and no Aversions, as also betwixt Existence and Nonexistence of things, clearly perceives that here is a variety of Objects to be liked or not liked, to be disliked or not disliked. Now since here is anoption propounded to an Intelligent Life, that in its Conscious Acts does Act without a dependence on any thing in this World, it is left to its self to determine such an Option either way, by its own vital Agency as it pleases; which ever therefore the Mind pitches upon, it chooses with an entire freedom; but a free choice is the Agency of a free will, therefore every Spiritual Mind (animus) is a voluntary Agent.  
A Spirit therefore (that we may define it) is a Nature which by the Energetical Agency of its own Life, doth Consciously understand, and will.  
10. As therefore the Mind by virtue of its Essential Life survives immortal; so by its Spirituality, it is capable of being Pleased or Displeased in its separate State: Therefore it will be Happy or Miserable as it is Pleased or Displeased with that Holy Will of God, according to which all things are done in the Spiritual World; which being an Eternal State, and consequently immutable, is not susceptive of Repentance.  
11. According to this account we may collect, that such a Nature as hath no Life, whereby it can commence an Action purely by its own Energy, but does in all its acts depend upon the foreign Agency of other things; I say, such a Nature hath no Appetites, but Acts upon other things by an Extrinsic force or pulsion: If there be a Life, but no Intellect, discerning the difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, there may be an Appetite, but no Liberty; because in the Sphere of its Activity, there lies but one course open for the Agency of its natural Power to Operates in, but if there be an Appetite and an Intellect too, then there will be a free choice, so that every Conscious Appetite is a free Will, and there is no free Will but in a Conscious Life: In our Perception of the Coherence or In-coherence of these choices with one another, is seated the Power of Reasoning in Theory, and of Counsel in the Affairs of Life.  
12. I am here to advise, that we shall not be concerned to inquire on this occasion, whether there be Existent any proper Energy that is not Vital, or any Life that is not Sensitive, or any Sensitive Life that is not Intelligent, or any Intellectal Life not endowed with Spirit: No nor yet, whether the Faculties of a Spirit do really, or only nominally differ amongst themselves; for as such things have been debated in the Schools, so we may leave them there to be decided, it being sufficient for my design, that it is absolutely certain to us by the Dictates of Nature, that there is Existent a Spirit which lives, understands, and wills; for than it is certain, whatever is Essential to any one of these Three is included in that Spiritual Nature, and it is not any other Nature, but this precisely that I am to account for.  
13. As than we are so well acquainted with the condition of matter, that if the Divine Nature be material, we can from thence infer, that it hath length, breadth, and thickness: so it appears, we are so well acquainted with the Condition of a Spirit, that if the Deity be Spiritual, we can from thence infer, God is a Being that lives, understands, and wills; but whether the Divine Nature be either, or neither of the two is yet to be inquired; and in the mean time, this however is certain; That,   

CHAP. III. The most high Being is Spiritual.  
1. GOD is the most high Being, in the most ample significancy of the word Supreme; whereby we intent, not only that he is so the most High, that there is nothing above him, for this is consistent with another Being as high as he is; not barely that he is Superior to all Existent Being's; for then there might have been (though there is not) another Being equal with him; but first, that his Being is such, that it is above the possibility of any others being equal with him; and that Secondly, Not because it happened that there wanted something powerful enough to yield itself a Being equal with his, but because the Supreme Being is so the most High, that it is a flat contradiction to the nature of substance, that any other Being should be so high as he is, or that even he himself might have happened to have been higher than he is. We can conceive of a Being higher than ourselves, yea, and higher than any Being that is Finite; but God never conceives of any Being Existent or Possible so high as himself; nor yet that his own Being might have been higher than it is; either of these being not to be conceived, even by that Mind, that adequately and positively conceives Infinity itself, for this is the condition of a Being, that is absolutely the most high.  
2. In perfect agreement with this dictate of Nature, the Scripture makes the Title of the most High, to be the usual, incommunicable, 
Psal. 83.18. Deut. 4.17. Esay. 40.25 44.6, 8.  and most august Characteristick of Majesty truly Divine. This is signified by God's calling himself the Holy One, and ask to whom we would liken him, or should he be equal; I am the first, I am the last, and besides Me there is no God, is there a God besides Me? Yea, there is no God, I know not any. The like reason does teach of all those perfections which are included in his being the most High, for they are all absolute and infinite. If then there be no such most high Being, there is no God either of a material, spiritual, or any other nature.  
3. Let us then proceed to inquire, of what nature the most High Being is; now because matter (how far soever it lies extended) is such a substance, as may exist, and yet not act at all, therefore such a Nature may exist and lie exposed to the Agency of another Being; now a Nature that may be obnoxious to the Agency of another, is certainly not the most high Being that is possible; therefore God is not matter, and if matter itself in its utmost extent be not God, much less can any part or modification of such a bulky substance, be the supreme Being; therefore the material World, which is nothing else but such stuff in different modifications of its parts, cannot be the most high Being.  
4. Because local motion is nothing else but a passage, whereby the parts of matter being divided does shift their position amongst themselves; therefore local motion is not force; for as much as shifting of place or position is not force, though force may be required to make the change of place; we find when we carry a stone forward in our hand, that the passage of the stone hath no more force than our hand puts into it, and our hand puts no more force into that passage of the stone, than we will, or than our will puts into our hands; and yet we feel a force present in all moved matter. Now since the whole mass of m●tter is of such a nature, that it may exist, and yet not Act at all, therefore this force is not the substance of matter, nor Essential, nor Natural, nor an inseparable Property, but is contingent to it, yea, even to those parts of matter which have ever been in motion, if any such there be.  
5. This force is contingent to matter, whether it moves the matter by mere chance, or by counsel; for though there be an Essential difference betwixt chance and counsel, yet that an Agent by counsel did choose to move the matter, is manifestly contingent to the material Nature.  
6. And because some have weakly imagined that matter may have been Eternally, I observe, that this force will no less be contingent to matter, whether it happened to it in time, or from Eternity; for the bare difference of a Finite and Infinite duration, makes no difference in the natural reason of things. If two parallel lines were drawn out infinitum, this would not alter their parallism, but the same distance they have, where I stand, they keep, though they reached through an infinite space; so the same contingency, which is between matter and the force that moves matter now, must have been between them from all Eternity, if matter had been moved from Eternity. Matter is therefore such an un-active nature in itself, that it could never have commenced any Action in its self, had not such force happened to it either in time or Eternity; therefore all the motion of matter which is now in the World, is the effect of that adventitious force, whencesoever that force happened to it.  
7. Because all motion is the effect of the adventitious force, therefore neither the parts of matter nor their motion, is the cause of the motion of other parts, which a removed by their pressure; but that contingent force, which moved the first parts, does move the others afterwards, as this appears by experience; so it is the foundation of all the Laws of local motion, which are delivered to us by modern Naturalists.  
8. Since therefore this force is the cause of all the motion, and the system of matter is framed into its fashion by motion, whatever is the cause of the frame of the World, is the Author of this force; this force therefore is active in causing the motion of matter, but is itself the efficacy of the agency of that active Being, which is the Framer of the World, if such a one there be.  
9 Let us then here suppose (and afterwards prove) what we do Believe, that it is God the Supreme Being, whose agency by its efficacy did frame the World; then this agency does not only act upon the surface or outsides of Bodies, because then the efficacy of this agency upon the interior parts of such Bodies, depends upon the impenetrability, extrusion, and other modes of the exterior parts of such moved Bodies: Now no agency whose efficacy depends upon the condition of other Being's, can be the agency of the Supreme Being, whose agency is, and acts without dependence.  
The divine agency acts therefore not as an effort by external pulsion, but acting imminently in its self, doth move matter locally.  
10. The mutual resistance in the internal parts of a Body (as in the case of a bent-bow or spring) though the inward parts should be all affected with it, is yet nevertheless no Agency at all, but is the stopage of the passage of some subtle moved matter, caused by the Obstructive configuration of the Parts, in a rigid or solid Body: Therefore the divine efficacy that moves matter, Acting imminently in itself, and intimately in all the Pores of moved matter, is the cause of all reaction and Elastic renitency from the internal pressure in Bodies; but seeing it does cause this by imminent Agency in itself, therefore it is a pure Energy. Now a pure Energy acting imminently in itself, which though it moveth matter, yet doth not locally move itself, 
Chap. 2.4.  is a vital Energy, and such Agency is the Agency of Life; and if we mark it, we have in ourselves experience of such an Agency in the motions, whereby we execute those Actions, which we call properly humane.  
Therefore the force of the Supreme Being, moving all moved matter, is the Efficacy of a vital Agency; and consequently there is Life in the Supreme Being, if he be the Maker of the World.  
11. Yet is not this the Agency of a Life void of all Sense and Perception▪ for though its Efficacy should be so great, that it is sufficient to move the mass of matter Locally, yet for want of contrivance, it can only make an impetuous jostle, a confused jumble, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  or promiscuous medley of Matter, but not a World. It is therefore the Agency of a conscious Life, that can take cognizance of its own do in itself, and move Matter with design, to produce a regular structure of stupendious Mechanism (as is that of this visible World) in a due proportion, order, and subserviency of all its parts; 
Cap 2.7.  now such a conscious Life is a Mind.  
12. Yet neither is this the Agency of a Mind, that is indeed sagacious enough (if it happens to advert) to frame such a stately Edifice, but yet in its self, is wholly indifferent and unconcerned whether there be any beauty or usefulness in the whole, or any part of it; for though such a Mind may chance to make some very few, or very small parts with some proportionableness, yet it is absolutely incredible that many, or the considerable parts, should have any comely order, or good serviceableness at all; but that the whole material System should be Erected, by such utterly heedless Agency, into such a goodly Fabric, as is this which we behold with our Eyes, is altogether impossible, and is perfectly contradictious to the very Nature and Reason of Fortuitousness: It is therefore the Agency of such a Mind as hath resentments; is Pleased or Displeased, Approves, or Disapproves its own do: But a Mind endued with such resentments is a Spirit: 
Cap 2.9.  That being then to whose Agency the whole material World does owe its present frame; is nothing else but a Spirit, which worketh all in all by the counsel of his own Will: If therefore the Supreme Being is the maker of this World, he is not of a material, or any other nature but Spiritual.  
13. This is the Conclusion that we were directly to deduce; That no other Being but a Spirit is the Maker of the World. But I did not prove, but suppose, that the World had a Maker, yet that follows likewise as a Corollary. Thus;  
The force which we feel causes all Local motion, is not natural to matter, but contingent, whencesoever this force happened to matter, it is the cause of the World's frame. It is certain, no force whencesoever it is, that moves not by counsel, could cause such motions as are in the World's frame; but all force that moves by counsel▪ is the efficacy of a vital, mental, spiritual agency; therefore the World that was framed by such force, 
Chap. 2.9.  was made by the Agency of a Spirit. These two documents of Nature, are both confirmed by Scripture; which teaches expressly that God is a Spirit; and in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth.  
14. Now since God the Maker of the World is a Spirit, and the supreme Being, the Perfections that are included in his being the Most High, do speak no other than a Spiritual nature in God; for be they never so high, as they are Most High, they argue him to be no other Most High Being, but the Most High Spirit; hence than we can infer from the nature of the thing, that God is therefore the Most High Life, the Most High Understanding, the Most High Will, but not the Most High Being of any other sort; and whatsoever is not the Most High Spirit, is not by Nature God. The Scripture teaches God is Life, God is Light, God is Love, to confirm us in this.  
15. Mr. Rich. Baxter following St. Austin, hath spoke a great deal of those three, and has observed that a Trinity in Unity is imprinted upon the whole frame of Nature, but then confesses, whether we call those three, Life, Light, and Love: or Life, Intellect, and Will; They are not the Trinity of Persons, and that they are not, is manifest from these Principles; for since these three express the Essential Nature of a Spirit, they cannot be the Three Persons in the Divinity; because if we should take every one of these three by itself, for one of the Three Persons, we shall then divide the one Nature into three, instead of giving the same entire Nature in three Personal Subsistences.  
16. If there be no other Supreme Spirit Subsisting at all, but only this one single Supreme Spirit, it is manifest then in the Reason of the thing, there is no more three Gods, though this One Supreme Spirit, subsists entirely in Three distinct personal Subsistences, than there is, if it subsists only in One personal Subsistence. This I note in the first place, to secure our Conception of God as One, whether there be One Person of the Godhead, or Three; and it is not amiss to observe, that because the most high Being is the Supreme Spirit, all other Natures (such matter is) are in their condition obnoxious to the Spiritual Nature.  
17. But it can hardly be worth while to note, that though Nature, Form, Frame, Fashion, and such like Words, do in their derivation seem to connote the first rise of things, yet Use hath frequently applied them, to signify only the things as they are in their several kinds, without our thinking how they came to be what they are; and so it must needs do, when we speak of the Divine Nature which is Eternal. In like manner Existence seems to insinuate the first coming of things into Being; but in use it hath obtained most commonly to import no more, than that a thing is in being, and Subsistence signifies the same with Existence, only connotes some permanency of Existence.   

CHAP. IU. Of the Spiritual Agency and Subsistence.  
1. WE are now more distinctly to remark the sufficiency of the Spiritual Nature, and the rather because our business in this World of Bodies is such, as may deceive us. Our Work, as parts of this corporeal System, is only moving the parts of matter from place to place, staying or altering such Local motion, and this we do not without straining and contention; hereupon we are apt to over-value this Power, which is but an appendage, and that accidental, to the most eminent Functions of a conscious Life, as being no more than a consequent of the Minds superiority over that base Nature. Now seeing the most radicalagency of the Spiritual Life, and that which discriminates it from other Natures, is, as we see (Chap. 2, 3. 4.) that whereby it discerns betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, or betwixt something and nothing. This would tempt us to suspect, that a Minds Essential Agency, is to give, or annul this being of things which it conceives in itself, and that in proportion to its sufficiency; but should this be true, yet it would be too great an ascent to make at one step, and would but amuse, should it be so abruptly expressed; the easier way (though somewhat farther about) I like best, which will be by considering first Life's Agency as Intellectual, and then as Voluntary, and in this way enough may be said with sufficient Evidence.  
2. The Agency of Intellectual Life is thinking; now every one knows, that he hath that thing in his mind, which he is thinking of; The thing therefore that is the Thought, does thereby some way subsist in the Mind. I know Men in their different moods, are wont to make this Subsistence which things have in their Minds, some times more, and some times less than indeed it is: For when they observe (what is most certainly true) that all their concerns in the World, all their enjoyment of their Riches, all their Pain and Pleasure, all their Misery and Felicity in Life, are supported wholly by the strength of this very Subsistence which things have in their own minds; they are apt to over-value it, and to think this Subsistence must needs be very substantial, that can sustain such a mighty weight as they believe those things to have: On the other hand, when their Eye is turned from their own interest, and they compare this Subsistence, with that which things have in the World, they frequently too much deprecate and extenuate it; but however they think of it, this is certain, that this Subsist Sense which things have in our Minds, is not just nothing at all, for were it so, the Sun would be no more in my Mind, when I am thinking of it, than when I am not; and when I think of the Sun, and not of a Mountain, I shall yet have a Mountain as much in my Mind, as I have the Sun; for if this Subsistence which we are now considering, be none at all, there could be no difference, for nothing differs not from nothing. But why should I Argue this? when every Man hath the most certain of all demonstrations to prove it, even his own inward Sense and Conscience, so that if he contradicts it, his Heart will give his Tongue the Lie: Yet I must add, as the Man is, even so is his Strength; the greater sufficiency any Mind hath, the more complete is this Subsistence of things by their being conceived in it; and be the rate of it higher or lower, it is all the Subsistence which the Mind can give to things; and whatsoever it is, it owes its being wholly to the Intellectual Energy of the Mind. The Soul therefore by its Essential Perspicacity discerns this Existence of things, and its opposite Nonexistence so intimately, that it admits of no doubt; for whether or no the Sun be in the Heavens, I cannot doubt, whether it be in my Mind or not, whilst I am thinking of it; and therefore I can certainly know always, whether things have this Subsistence or not.  
3. We are not to think that a matter so naturally and necessarily known to us all, is to be taught us in the Scriptures, unless upon the by, where they are teaching us other more proper Documents; and so we meet with it frequently as a thing supposed to be known already: For example, St. Paul tells us, he hath the Philippians in his Heart, therefore they had this Subsistence in his Mind, and the Corinthians were in his Heart. The Deciples reason many things in their Hearts: Things come into the Mind of him that thinks evil Thoughts; Serving Wood and Stone like Heathens, came into the Jews Minds: They set up Idols in their Hearts; building God a Temple was in David's Mind and Heart. Jerusalem comes into good men's Minds. I know the things, says God that come into their Hearts; detaining part of the money and denying it, was the thing that Ananias and Saphira conceived in their Hearts. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  It is no other Subsistence but this we speak of, that St. Paul's boasting had; it is this very substance or Subsistence which Faith gives to things hoped for.  
And it is the same Subsistence, the begininng of which we are to hold fast to the end. This likewise yields the whole suppositum to all things merely supposed; but this is over much proving, were it not that importunate opposition may make something of importunity decent in the defence.  
4. Wherefore since the Divine Nature is intellectual Life, 
Chap. 4.2.  and the Natural Agency of such Life is thinking, therefore in the Nature of the thing it is certain, that God hath Thoughts; 
Nehe. 5.19. Jer. 29.11. Psal. 92.5.  to which evidence of Reason, the Scripture gives its attestation, Think of me, O my God for good. I know the Thoughts that I have towards you, Thoughts of Peace and not of Evil. Many are thy Thoughts to us ward, etc.  
5. Because the Natural Agency of an Intellectual Life, 
Chap. 4.2.  gives a Subsistence to things in the Mind, by conceiving them in the Thoughts: Therefore according to the Reason of the Divine Nature, the things thought of by God, have by his thinking of them a Subsistence in the Divine Mind, and this their subsistence is proportionable, to the sufficiency of the Divine Intellect; accordingly the Scripture Teaches us, that things are in God's Mind by his thinking of them. 
Job. 10.23.  These things (says Job) has God laid up in his Mind. 
1 Sam. 2.35. Jer. 23.20.  That which the Faithful Priest succeeding Eli's House did do, was all according to what was in God's Mind; and the Lord performeth the Thoughts of his Heart, in a grievous Whirlwind sent down upon the Wicked, etc.  
6. But of the Subsistence which things have, that is not by our conceiving them in our Minds; we are to observe, 1st. That when we have no ascertaining Evidence, that such or such a thing Subsists in the World, yet the Essential Agency of Conscious Life, perceiving the absolute immediate opposition betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, assures us that one of these two is really the Case; for though my sight may not certainly discern there are spots in the Face of the Sun, yet without the help of my Eyes, my Mind assures me, there either are such spots, or there are not. And 2d. When we have sufficient Notice of the Subsistence of such things in the World, yet is it the Minds same radical Perception betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, which is its assurance that so they do indeed Subsist. For example, Cogito, ergo sum, hath been thought a first Principle in Physiological Inquiries, and of prime evidence in itself: But were it not for this prime intellectal Agency of the Mind, discerning the difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, it would be perfectly indifferent to the Mind to conclude, cogito, ergo non sum, or, cogito, ergo sum; and this being so in every instance, it is plain all our knowledge which we have of the Subsistence of things in the World, depends on the force of this radical Energy of the Soul. Now these two, (viz) The opposition betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, and the Subsistence of things in our Thoughts, are so infallibly evident to us, that the most extravagant imaginations of Phyrrhonisme itself, could never touch, or in the least affect them.  
So that in despite of all the Wickedness and Folly that can enter into Mortals, God will have this Testimony for himself inviolably Sacred and fixed in their Hearts, by the help whereof they may (when they like to think soberly) come to the knowledge of the Truth.  
7. When we perceive that things Subsist in the World, we do not only perceive that such their subsistence does differ from Nonexistence, but likewise from that Subsistence which they have by being conceived in our Mind: For we are assured, that they Subsist in the World, when they are not in our Thoughts, as well as when they are; and we can think of things that Subsist not at all in the World, as well as of those that do.  
Since then these two Subsistences do thus differ, we may term the Subsistence, which things have in the World, their real Subsistence; and that which they have in our Mind, their notional Subsistence; which is not therefore really no Subsistence of the thing at all, but is not that real Subsistence, whereby the thing is what it is in the World.  
Our Conception therefore of things Subsistent in the World, gives them another distinct Subsistence (such as it is) in our Minds.  
But we must observe farther, that because in this case it is the very thing, and its Subsistence in the World, that the Mind conceives; therefore that thing and its Subsistence which is real in the World, do both notionally subsist in one Conception. I say the thing, and its real Subsistence in the World, do both subsist notionally in our Mind: Here then are two distinct Subsistences of the same thing which do differ, not only in number, but in their condition or kind: Hence it follows;  
8. Because matter (and its qualities) hath no power to conceive its own Subsistence, therefore it can have in itself only one of these Subsistences, which is the real. When I actually conceive in my Mind the visible World, or any part of it, I perceive that it hath a Subsistence in Nature, which is its real Subsistence, and a second in the conception of my Mind, which is its notional Subsistence; so that the visible World, and every piece of it, hath only one real Subsistence; but then the World, and its real subsistence, hath as many notitional subsistences, as there are Souls actually thinking of it.  
9 When my Mind does actually form a Conception of its own being, then does my Mind actually subsist in its self, in two distinct subsistences, the one real, and the other notional; but when my Mind does not actually conceive its own being (as we know the Mind does not, when it is wholly taken up with the Thoughts of other things) it has for that time one, one subsistence in itself, the really but not the notional.  
10. Supposing then a Mind that without any diversion, does always actually conceive its own real subsistence, it is evident, that such a Mind hath perpetually two subsistences in itself; the first in order, is its real subsistence, and the second, that in the Conception. Now since we suppose the Supreme Spirit, is such a Mind as is not ignorant of its own real subsistence; and hath no dorment Powers that it should ever be diverted from the actual conception of itself, therefore this Mind subsists perpetually in two different subsistences. God therefore the Supreme Spirit, does in himself, subsist in no less than two distinct subsistences, whereof the one is a real subsistence: But whether the second be a real and substantial subsistence of the Godhead, or only notional, I confess cannot be inferred barely from God's being of a mental Nature; but on the contrary, if he be a Mind of the very best of that sort of Minds whereof our Souls are, or of any other besides the most High, or if the Supereminency of the Supreme Mind above all others, be only its uninterrupted actual conception of its own being, and of all others which it knows, it might be demonstrated, that there is but one real subsistence of the Deity. We must therefore inquire, wherein is the Supereminence of this most high Being, that we may examine, whether there be in it discernably such peculiar Characters, as yield us a sufficient Evidence, that it has naturally more real subsistences than one; for if there be not, the nature of the Deity will not evince this point of the Church's Faith: But the Church is left wholly to its own proper province, and to prove it by Scripture; and that proof however will retain its own full strength, tho' this natural Evidence should not be superadded.   

CHAP. V Of the Trinity.  
1. WE have seen that no one can rationally deny, that the Divine Nature being mental, does subsist at least in two distinct subsistences; the first whereof is real, and for the condition of the second, we are to consider the peculiar Characters of the Supreme Spirit, which we know to be such attributes as these. An independent self-subsistence, being (as some call it) self Originate, self Sufficiency, even All-sufficiency; Omnipotence, Omniscience, Ubiquity, Immutability, Unity, Eternity, most perfect Truth, Goodness Blessedness, Holiness, etc. These may be proved both from the reason of the thing, and Revelation, to be perfections of the Divine Nature; but I need not undertake here, what hath been done by many others, and is universally acknowledged.  
2. This being the condition of God the Supreme Mind, we are fully assured by the Omniscience, etc. of this Divine Mind. 1st. That whatever God does not conceive, that really is nothing; and we are no less assured by the absolute perfection of the Divine Truth, etc. 2d. That whatever God does conceive not to be, that hath no Being, and is nothing. And 3d. On the other hand, whatever God does positively conceive to be, that really is or doth subsist. And 4th. The independent All-sufficiency of God, etc. Assures us, that without the concurrence or assistence of any other thing whatever, this Divine Mind can positively conceive a thing to be. And from hence we can Argue, as from certain Principles.  
3. That since God can positively conceive a thing to be, without the Presence or Antecedent Being of any other thing besides himself, he can, when there was nothing else besides himself, conceive a World to be, and if he does so, then according to the reason of the Mental Divine Nature (chap. 4.) the World hath a subsistence in the Divine Mind, by such a positive conception of it.  
And because God never positively conceives a thing to be, but it doth really subsist in itself; therefore the World having a positive subsistence in the Divine Conception, hath a real subsistence in itself.  
4. Now since the real subsistence of the World in itself was made, and yet not made with hands, but by the Agency of an Almighty Mind, we must observe, that this Almighty Mind causeth all things, which it does cause in a way, whereby the mental Agency does effect. Now the mental Agency being conceptive, and every positive Conception giving a subsistence to the thing conceived in the Mind, that positively conceives it, (as is showed, Chap, 4.2.) the very subsistence of the World in itself (being it is the effect of the Divine positive Conception of it) is nothing else, but the subsistence of the World in the Divine Mind caused by this positive Conception of it: So that all the real subsistence which the World has in itself, is its positive subsistence in the Divine Conception, as being positively conceived in the Divine Mind.  
And the absolute perfection of the Divine Truth, does fully assure us of this; for the Truth of the Conception of a thing, is nothing else but its agreement with the real Nature of the thing conceived. Since then the Truth of the Divine Conception is absolutely perfect; when the World subsists in the Divine Mind, by the positive Conception of it, there is a most absolute perfect agreement betwixt its positive subsistence in the Divine Conception, and its real Subsistence in itself; but no kind of agreement is absolutely perfect, but a real identity: for so long as one is not the other, whatever the Similitude is, there remains some disagreement. Therefore there is a real identity betwixt the World's subsistence in itself, and its subsistence in the Divine Mind in the positive Conception of it: that is to say, they are really the very same, as then the subsistence of a thing, in the positive notion of it, conceived in our own Minds, is the vital 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (the vital representation of a thing) so in the positive Conception of it in the Divine Mind, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the thing itself  
5. This gives us the ground and rate of the distinction betwixt the notional and real Subsistence of things (mentioned chap. 4.) For seeing seeing the real Being of things in the World, is the same with their being positively conceived in the Divine Mind; therefore as our thoughts are to God's thoughts, 
Isa. 55.9.  so is the notional subsistence of things in our positive conception of them, to their subsistence in the positive Divine Conception, that is (as appears) to their real subsistence in the World. And as our Thoughts are not nothing, so the notional subsistence of things in our positive Conception of them, is not nothing neither.  
Since the real Being of all things in the World, is their substantial subsistence and presence in the Divine Mind, the Deity itself is present (and more) to the very subsistence of every one of them, and therefore the World and every part of it, is really & substantially present in the Heart of God: and God is not placed in the heart of the World, or in any of its upper stories, from whence, either by an unaccountabse Virtue, or the Ministry of some Creature, he executes his Will upon things at a distance from him: Even as the notional subsistence which things have in our Minds, by our positive conceiving them, is nothing else but their Being and Presence in our Minds. If we conceive a Circle or Quadrangle, no part of the one, or Angle of the other hath any notional subsistence, but what is its very Presence in our Mind.  
Therefore we Live, Move, and have our Being in God, 
Acts.  because we are his Offspring, as being Conceived by him.  
6. Because the World antecedently to this positive Conception of it, in the Divine Mind was nothing, and this Divine positive Conception of it gave to the World's substance its real Subsistence in its self; this Divine positive Conception is therefore the Creating of the World; For Creation is giving a real subsistence to a substance, which hath otherwise no real subsistence, and indeed is nothing  
7. And seeing God is self-sufficient, he can subsist whether he does positively conceive a World to be or not: therefore the Being of the World results not necessarily, from the Being of the Deity, but is freely Created and Established. The World therefore is, or is not, as it pleases God to conceive it.  
8. Thus it is with all temporary Being's, which as such have no subsistence, and are nothing antecedently, to the positive Conception of them, in the Divine Mind. But because the Deity itself, as has been showed (chap. 4. 10) has another subsistence, antecedently to that subsistence of it, which is in its positive Conception, by the Divine Mind; not only this other subsistence (which is the first in order, and which the Deity hath otherwise then by Conception) is Eternal, but likewise the subsistence of the Deity by Conception in the Divine Mind, is Eternally so; for since nothing really is, but what is, but what is positively conceived by the Divine Mind, and the Being of the Deity in its first Subsistence is eternal; therefore the Being of the Deity in its first Subsistence is eternally conceived positively in the Divine Mind; consequently the Subsistence of the Deity in the positive Conception of it in the Divine Mind, is also eternal.  
9 It hath appeared from the condition of the mental nature, that the Deity doth subsist in two distinct perpetual (that is Eternal) subsistences, 
Cap. 4.10. Cap. 5.8.  whereof the one, that is the first, is a real subsistence of the Divine Nature, and the other is a subsistence of the Divine Nature, by being conceived in the Divine Mind. Now since the first is a real and substantial subsistence of the Divine Nature, and yet not a subsistence by being conceived in the Divine Mind, and the second (whether substantial or not) is a subsistence of the Divine Nature by being conceived in the Divine Mind; these two subsistences of the Divine Nature, are substantially distinct; for seeing the first subsistence is substantial, if the second be not substantial, there is a substantial distinction betwixt them. Because any subsistence that is substantial, is substantially different from one that is not substantial; but if not only the first subsistence of the Divine Nature, but likewise the second be substantial, then because the one subsistence is not the other, the one real substantial subsistence, is not the other real substantial subsistence, and therefore they are substantially distinct one from the other.  
10. It remains therefore to be inquired, whether these two subsistences which are thus really distinct, do differ as a real, from what is not real, 
C. 4. 2, 10.  or as one real differs from another real: now because this nature is an Omniscient Mind, and an Omniscient Mind does ever positively conceive its own Nature, 
Cap 5 4.  and because the Perfection of the Divine Truth is such, that whatsoever subsists in the Divine Mind by being positively conceived, hath by being so conceived, a real and substantial subsistence: therefore this subsistence of the Divine Nature which is by such positive conception▪ is real and substantial. And because the first subsistence is substantial as well as this second, therefore they differ as one real from another real; therefore there are two real substantial subsistences of the Divine Nature, which are substantially distinct the one from the other.  
11. By this account it likewise is plain, that the conception whereby the Divine Nature subsists in its second subsistence, is not a conception creative of the Divine Nature; for a creative conception gives being to a substance that otherwise hath no real subsistence, but the substance which hath its subsistence by this conception, 
〈◊〉 ●. 6.  hath otherwise a real subsistence. I say therefore this conception is not creative; but yet it is procreative or generative, by which I mean, it is such a conception whereby a substantial nature hath a second real subsistence, which hath otherwise than by conception, another real subsistence. And this procreative or generative conception infinitely differs from the creative; for the creative is indifferent, because God may be, 
Cap. 5.7.  and yet may or may not create a World; but this procreative conception of the Divine Mind, is essential to its nature; and therefore the second real subsistence which is by this procreative or generative conception, is natural to the Being of the Deity, as well as the first.  
12. The Divine Mind in its first subsistence does conceive the Divine Nature. If this Divine Nature so conceived, 
Cap. 4.10.  be not the same the very same with the Divine Mind, that doth conceive it, than there is some defect in the truth of the Divine Conception, God conceiving not his own very Nature, but some other Nature instead of his own; which is contradictious to the Attribute of the Divine Truth. We have therefore the assurance of God's Essential Truth, that it is the same, the very same Divine Mind, the very same Divine Nature, subsisting in the first of these two real Subsistences, not conceived, and in the second, conceived. Therefore there is really and truly only one and the very same God subsisting in these two real Subsistences, which are really distinct Subsistences.  
13. If the Divine Nature really subsisting be not God indeed, then to be God, and not to be God, is all one (which is a contradiction:) but if the Divine Nature really subsisting be God indeed, than the Divine Nature really subsisting in the first real subsistence is God indeed, and the Divine Nature really subsisting in the second real subsistence is God indeed▪ so that each of the two is God indeed, as well as both is God indeed.  
14. Now since the Divine Mind in its first subsistence does conceive the Divine Nature, 
C●p. 4.10. Cap. 5.10.  and that nature hath by such conception a second distinct subsistence, therefore the first with respect to the second subsistence of the Divine Nature, is the Parental subsistence of the Divine Nature; and the second with respect to the first, is the filial subsistence of the Divine Nature.  
15. It hath been showed before, that it is of the Essence of a mental nature to conceive; wherefore since God in the filial subsistence, 
Cap. 4. ●. Cap. 5.14.  is the divine mind substantially subsisting, he does in this second subsistence conceive the divine nature. But then the conception, whereby the divine mind in its second subsistence does conceive the divine nature, is not procreative. 
I use the Latin Conceptus, because one English word is too much debased in common use.  And the reason of this is heedfully to be observed; for the very form of this second subsistence is Divinus Conceptus; and therefore the divine mind in this subsistence conceiving, imports no more, than this its own formal subsistence of the divine nature; and consequently by it, there is no other real subsistence of the Deity but precisely its own; for when a thought thinks, a life lives, a Conceptus conceives, it is no more than barely a thought is or subsists, a life is, or a Conceptus is; so that when the Divine Conceptus conceives its own nature, this is neither more nor less, than the Divine Conceptus does actually exist in its own Essential Subsistences; therefore this Conception, which the Divine Mind in this its second Subsistence hath of its own nature, inferring no other Subsistence of the Deity, but only its own, is not a Procreative Conception.  
16. The Conception, which the Divine Mind in its first Subsistence does conceive, 
Cap. 4.10 Cap. 5.10.  is procreative of another Subsistence of the Deity, but then this Procreative Conception is one and eternally the same. Now because the Conception, which the Divine Mind in its second Subsistence hath, 
Cap. 5.15.  is not procreative, therefore according to the reason of the Divine Nature, the Deity hath no more than one and the same Subsistence by being conceived. There is then but one Filial Subsistence of the Divine Nature, and that is eternally the same.  
17. But yet the Divine Mind in its second Subsistence does conceive with a Conception, creative of other things; for though in this its second Subsistence, its conceiving its own Being, is precisely its own second Subsistence, yet it is plain conceiving a World is not so. Now, because whatever is positively conceived by the Divine Mind, hath a real Subsistence by its being so conceived; 
Cap. 5.4.  therefore the Divine Mind in its second Subsistence, whenever it conceives any other Nature besides its own, does conceive with a creative Conception, which gives a substantial Subsistence to that other Nature conceived. Therefore the Divine Mind in its first Subsistence only, does by conception procreate another Subsistence of the Divine Nature, but both in its first and second Subsistence, it doth create the World. Thus doth the condition of the Divine Nature discover, that God, the Creator, doth subsist in no less than two real substantially distinct Subsistences: For if we will not affirm God to be a Dependent Being, or assert other things to be independent; if we will not reduce him to the measures of a Creature, nor deny him in truth to be the Creator, we cannot deny, but at least there are two real distinct Subsistences of the Deity; but whether the Most High Being discovers itself to have a third, comes now to be considered.  
18. In order to which we must remember, that every Mind, that is, Spirit (animus) hath resentments, 
Cap. 2.9.  whereby it is pleased or displeased, liketh or disliketh, 
Cap. 3.12.  and that no Mind could frame the World but a Mind endued with Spirit. The Divine Mind, as has been showed, is a Spirit; 
Cap. 3.14.  which is also certain, from the Attributes of the Deity; for if the Divine Mind was without resentments, it would have no concern for its own, or any other Being: It would not indeed like evil, but neither would it like good; it would not be miserable, but neither would it be blessed; it would not be unholy, but neither would it be holy, as being a Nature wholly uncapable of such perfections. But it is sure, and confessed by all, that goodness, blessedness, and holiness, are essential to the Divine Nature, which therefore has resentments, and likes or dislikes, is pleased or displeased. Now these being in God, the resentments of a conscious life, they are therefore voluntary, 
Cap. 2.9.  and consequently God wills or nills, as he likes or dislikes. These things being acknowledged, and certain;  
19 I observe the natural good of every thing in its self, is the preservation or improvement of its Being: and that is naturally good to other things, which contributes naturally to this good of them. All benevolence therefore (that is to say, all willing of good) does will the being, or improvement of the thing, to which it is benevolent. Now it being infallibly certain, that God does not dislike his own Divine Being; for it is the very Spirit of the Devil, to dislike his own Being, and the Divine Being too; and it also being certain, that he is not indifferent towards it, for that is repugnant to the Spirit of his Mind; 
Cap. 2.9.  therefore he does like the Being of his own Divine Nature; and because he wills as he likes, therefore he does certainly will the Being or Improvement of his own Divine Nature; but because the Being of the Divine Nature is the Most High Being, and it is contradictious to the whole Nature of all Being's, 
Cap. 3. ●.  to be higher than the highest Being actually is, it is therefore a contradiction for any Volition that wills Being, to will the Improvement of the highest Being; consequently that Divine Volition, which wills the Being of his own Divine Nature, is a complacential benevolence, whereby precisely the Being of the Divine Nature itself is willed.  
20. Every Volition which really wills the Being of any thing, if it be an absolute Volition without Reserve, it does so will the Being of that thing, that the thing does really subsist by being so willed, if in case it be in the power of that will; but if the thing willed does not subsist thereby, than it is from some defect in the power of that will, from whence such a Volition becomes a vain and empty wish. But God's Volition of the Being of the Divine Nature, is an almighty, unreserved, all-sufficient willing of it; therefore through no defect of power, is the Divine Volition a vain or empty wish; and consequently the Being of the Divine Nature is, and does subsist for Being so willed with such an almighty Volition: for it is a contradiction for that not to be, which is willed unreservedly by an omnipotent Mind, even because it is willed, and since it is the real Subsistence of the Divine Nature that is willed, 
Cap. 5.19.  therefore the Divine Nature has really such a Subsistence by being so willed, even because it is so willed.  
21. Now because this Divine Volition doth statedly exert itself, this Subsistence of the Divine Nature doth proceed statedly from such stated willing; the Being of the Divine Nature therefore in this Subsistence, is by procession.  
22. And as I remarked concerning the second Subsistence, so I may proportionably of this Subsistence; 
Cap. ● 1●.  for it never proceeds forward to another Subsistence of the Divine Nature by Volition, because all Subsistence of the Divine Nature by Volition, is no other than this very Subsistence of the Deity.  
23. But though the Deity in this Subsistence never proceeds forward to another Subsistence, by willing the Being of the Divine Nature; yet that hinders not, but the Divine Nature in this Subsistence may efficaciously will the Subsistence of that which is not the Divine Nature, such is the World; and consequently the Divine Nature in this Subsistence of it, is no less creative of other things, than in its two forementioned Subsistences.  
24. I say the other two; for the first real Subsistence of the Divine Nature, being its Subsistence in vital Agency conceiving, and the second being its Subsistence by being conceived, they are really two distinct Subsistences, and this real Subsistence by procession being neither of them, it is therefore really distinct.  
25. No Nature is willed, but a Nature conceived in the Mind; therefore the real Subsistence of the Divine Nature by conception, according to the reason of the thing, is in order before its Subsistence by Volition; and because the Subsistence by conception, is in order posterior to the real Subsistence of the Divine Mind conceiving the Divine Nature; therefore the Divine Mind conceiving, that is the Deity in its Parental Subsistence, is the first in order, and the Divine Mind conceived, that is the Deity in its Filial Subsistence, is the second, and this its Subsistence by being willed, is in order the third; which because it is by Volition, 
Cap. 2 ●.  is therefore the Deity in its Spiritual Subsistence.  
26. Yet it is no other Nature which really subsists in this third Subsistence, but the same which subsists in the other two; for as I shown, it is the same, 
C p 5.19.  the very same Divine Nature, whose Subsistence is willed; therefore only one, and the same God substantially subsists in all these three distinct real Subsistences.  
27. If the Divine Nature really subsi●●ing be not God, then there is no God; but if the Divine Nature really subsisting be God, than the Divine Nature really subsisting in this third real Subsistence, is God; so every one of these Three is entirely the one God, as well as all the Three entirely is the one God.  
28. To conclude therefore, having learned from the things that are made, and the Creation of the World, that God is, and is the Most High Being, the Supreme Spirit▪ we are in consequence to acknowledge from the perfections of the Supreme Spirit, that he subsists in three really distinct substantial Subsistences. But this consequence we shall not perceive, unless our understandings have first cleared themselves from false apprehensions of the Spiritual Nature; for if we only build upon our childish fancies, and conceit a Spirit to be an extended substance, but much purer than the thinnest Air, or subtlest Aether; and thinking it not yet rair enough, refine it higher into a mere imaginary space: or finding all places full of bodies, that we may find room for it to exist in, affix to it penetrability, or some such arbitrary notion; we shall as certainly conclude according to this process of Thoughts, that the Supreme Spirit hath but one real Subsistence, as we are sure that matter hath no more. But if laying aside such incoherent notions, we ground our Thoughts of a Spirit, upon what Nature itself (God's Grace assisting) does plainly teach us all, we shall then be fully convinced, that there is a Being, which does conceive a difference betwixt Existence and Nonexistence, betwixt something and nothing; which being so, conceiving is a Mind or Spirit; and that this Mind forming Conceptions of its own Being, or of other things, does thereby give them such a Subsistence in itself, as is answerable to its conceptive Abilities; of which also Nature gives us an absolute Assurance. This will lead us directly to conclude, that the Supreme Spirit does indeed subsist in three really distinct Subsistence, according to the reason of its most blessed Perfections. For God subsists in vital Agency conceiving his own Nature; as God is really true, he does also really subsist by being so conceived. God absolutely wills the Being of his own Nature; and as God is really holy, he does also really subsist by being so willed. He that denies this, denies in Reason the Being of the Supreme Spirit; he that confesses it, confesses Three real Subsistences of the Most High Being. God says of himself, I am that I am; and conformably we may say, he is Existence in a Subsistence; and he is no less so, in real Truth; and he is no less so in real Holiness. And when we have said this, we may perceive, we have said at once, that he is the Supreme Spirit, and that he subsists in a Trinity of real Subsistences, if we do but observe, that there is no Truth, but what subsists in a Mind (the Truth of a notion in a notional Subsistence, and the Truth of a thing in a real Subsistence) and that there is no Holiness, but what subsists in a Will. If therefore we do not disbelieve God's real Truth and Holiness, traducing thereby his great and terrible Name Jehovah, we are in reason to confess the ever Blessed Trinity.   

CHAP. VI The Natural and Moral Consequen●●.  
1. BEfore we proceed to the Scripture Evidence, we may observe, First, some Natural, Secondly some Moral Consequents, reserving the Practical to the close of all. In deducing the preceding account of the Trinity, I oft used the terms [because and consequently] which are to be understood as causal or consequential in arguing, not in the reason of the Existence: For we having in our Mind a prior Evidence of one Divine Perfection or Subsistence, do thereby discern that this perfection or subsistence is of such a Condition, that it does not subsist without another, but in the Divine Nature, or its Subsistences. There is no Cause or Consequent, there being nothing in God before or after, either in causation, or in time. But we perceive the Divine Mind doth not substantially subsist conceiving the Divine Nature, if the Divine Nature doth not also substantially subsist in conceptu. And the Divine Nature being spiritual, doth not in its two first subsistences will its own real subsistence, if it does not also really and substantially subsist, being willed by an Almighty volition. By this whole process therefore, we are to understand, that the Divine Nature is such, that according to its condition, it does subsist in Trinity, but the cause of its doing so is not assigned, only the cause of our apprehending it.  
From hence we see that the three real subsistences being natural in the Deity, since the Deity is Eternal, the Nature, and all its three real subsistences are therefore coeternal. As we would say, whether matter be Temporary or Eternal, its subsistence and its three dimensions are all Contemporary, or Coeternal.  
2. By the like reason, we see there are no more than three distinct real subsistences of the Deity. For since the supreme life, light, and benevolence, or the supreme life, mind, and will, do complete, or are the entire spiritual nature, there are neither fewer nor more subsistences than agree to the reason of such a nature.  
And as that has appeared to be no less than three, so we find no more belong to such a being.  
About thirty years ago came forth a Pamphlet of the Origenian Doctrine, which, as I remember, was to this effect. The super-abundant fullness of Being in the Deity, did represent itself in a second subsistence, which though somewhat rebated in its perfections, was yet nevertheless really Divine: and so proceeded to a third, which was inferior to the second, but yet truly Divine likewise; and then the Divine faecundity being so far exhausted, that there could be no more Being's truly Divine: what was made afterwards, was Created Celestial Spirits, and the Souls of the World, and then Matter: a substance wholly passive; and than what was not wholly substance, such as material forms, which some account evanid substances, others moods and accidents of matter, and so being quite effected it ceased. But this should not have been given us as the Origenian, nor yet as the Genuine Platonic Doctrine of the Trinity, if we may believe the Factors of that Philosophy, for that (they say) was nearer the truth, if not the very truth, whence soever its Heathen Author came by it. But whether Plato received it from the Jews, who in his time, and before, had their Synagogues for Worship in Greece, or from others that learned it from them, or from some Ancient Tradition, or from the reason of the thing (which I have showed to be practicable) we are no ways concerned to know. But it is true, this Scheme was consonant to the opinion of the later Platonists, and from some such invented model of old, the Arrian Heresy seems to have had its rise, some few Texts of Scripture being pressed by force to serve the Hypothesis. For this whole draught is mere presumption, and arbitrary fiction, which though it be laden with a thousand absurdities, yet has no ground to support it, but the pretty fancy of a gradation, whereby they would avoid what they account the too great distance betwixt the Divine Nature, and the Created. But since God is infinitely Blessed over all, there will be an infinite distance betwixt the perfections of his Nature, and those of all Natures not infinite. So that this is a Fabric erected without any Foundation, and would not answer the use it was designed for, though it had been never so well supported. Such finenesses may indeed serve to entertain the leisure of a Reader, but every considerative Man frames the Counsels of his Life upon the solid Evidence of Nature, and not on the concinnity of a pickquaint Wit. And to speak a sad truth, the licentiousness of Hypothesis-makers' hath done unspeakable mischief to the present Age, that is of itself but too much addicted to the gaiety of Romantic Conceits.  
But for what concerns the Divine Being in this devised Scheme, we may observe, that it is plainly frivolous: for should the reason why the prime spiritual Nature does subsist in no more than three representations be as he says it is, because the faecundity of the Divine Being was exhausted so far, that it could yield no more afterward; with the like reason we are to affirm, that God made Matter (which is the prime Corporeal Nature) to subsist only in three dimensions for this very Reason, even because there was not stuff enough in it to replenish four dimensions or more. But as we see well enough, that the too great consumption of matter is not the reason why it subsists only in three dimensions, but because the Corporeal Nature is perfectly complete in these three, and an extended substance is uncapable of more.  
In like manner we learn, that the Deity exists in no more than three subsistences, not for lack of any sufficiency for then he is not the Supreme Being) but because his Spiritual Nature (as has been seen) is perfect in these, and admits no more.  
3. And for the inequality of these three, suggested in the Hypothesis, it is also repugnant to the perfections of the Deity. For since the Divine Nature is independent on any other thing, that subsistence which it has in the agency of an Eternally Holy Will, is equal to that which it hath in the agency of an Eternally Perfect Truth; and each of these is equal to that subsistence which it hath in the agency of an Eternally Conscious Life.  
4. The three Divine Subsistences have been thought by some to be only our partial inadequate conception of the one Divine Nature; and one Writer observing that the Divine Intellect and Will have commonly been considered in the explication of the Trinity, he has through great ignorance (not without scornful slander of the Catholic Faith, and contumelious usage of the Divine Majesty) exposed them to the World under the approbrious style of Faculty Gods: But it appears from the foregoing account of the Trinity, that such apprehensions and wrath are from mere mistake; for the infinite Life, Light, and Love, or the infinite Life, Mind, and Spirit, is entirely the Divine Nature, and this subsists entirely in the first subsistence, conceiving, and entirely in the second, conceived, and entirely in the third, willed.  
5. Since the Divine Mind in its first subsistence is not itself, unless it does conceive the Divine Nature, and yet there is no conceiving the Divine Nature, if there be no conceptus of the Divine Nature, and vice versâ no conceptus of the Divine Nature subsists, if the Nature subsists not conceiving it: therefore the first and second substantial subsistence of the Divine Nature are not at all themselves, if they be separated.  
5. Again, no Nature subsists by being willed, unless it also subsists in conceptu, therefore the subsistence of the Divine Nature by volition is not itself, if it be separated from that subsistence of the same Nature which is in conceptu. Therefore no one of these subsiences of the Divine Nature subsists at all, or is its self, unless all three subsist in coexistence.  
6. But though they be inseparable, yet every one in their coexistence is in itself independent: for though no one is itself, unless in union with the other, yet being in union, each is what it is by its own independent subsistence; therefore though the Parental subsistence is not itself what it is, if it be not coexistent with the other two, yet being in union, it is what it is by its own independent subsistence. And for the same Reason, neither is the second, nor the third itself, if not in union with the other two, but being in coexistence, each is what it is independently, and consequently every subsistence is an independent subsistence.  
7. These three subsistences have yet their order, and that not arbitrary, but natural. In the Angles of an equilateral Triangle, any one is the first arbitrarily, as we please to begin; but in natural order they are all simultaneous: but in a solid, the length is in natural order, the first dimension, the breadth the second, and the depth the third. The Divine Nature in its first subsistence does not suppose the subsistence in conceptu, though it does connote it▪ but the subsistence in conceptu doth both suppose and connote the first, and the subsistence in volition doth suppose and connote both the other. So here is but one the first, and that is the first in the Natural Order, therefore there is but one Principle in the Godhead, and then the second subsistence, and third in the Natural Order. But when the first is called the Fountain and Original of the Trinity, these expressions are so very Metaphorical, that though they sound not amiss, yet their sense is very undeterminate.  
8. The three subsistences have also a mutual inexistence or in-being of one in the other, that is to say, not only the one individual Nature exists substantially in three distinct subsistences, but every one of those subsistences hath mutually a real existence in the other two; for example, the Divine Nature in its first subsistence is God not conceived; but this same Divine Nature, and its first subsistence are positively conceived to be, and therefore both this Nature, and its first subsistence have in this conception a conceived subsistence, which is a second real subsistence; but then the first subsistence of the Deity unconceived, is the first subsistence subsisting in its own proper form; but as it subsists in the second, it is not so, but in the conceived subsistence, and in the third, in the willed subsistence; and correspondently it is in the reciprocal in-being of the other two; this is plain in the notional subsistence of things in our own Minds, and this I take to be the mutual consciousness, 
Cap. 4.7.  which a very Learned Author of late hath at large discoursed of in a Book of great instruction.  
9 The Subsistences being thus in themselves, and thus related to each other, it is manifest, that every one of these is God, and all the same God, because the same Divine Nature does substantially subsist entirely and equally in all, and in every one of the Three. Therefore the same Glorious Nature, the same Supreme Majestic Nature, the same Incomprehensible, Eternal, Omnipotent, Uncreated Nature, does subsist one and the same in all, and every one of the three Subsistences. Therefore there is but one Uncreate, one Almighty, Eternal, Incomprehensible one Supreme in Glorious Majesty.  
10. This one Blessed Mind in all its Subsistences does operate with one agency upon all other Inferior Being's that are in the Universe. Now as we find in ourselves. If our Life, Understanding, and Will have internally amongst themselves divers interests, yet their energy in the motion, whereby they move our Bodies from place to place, is but one, they therefore yield but one force, that moves the hand or foot in one only single Line, strait, or crooked. Wherefore, though the Deity in all its three real subsistences operates upon other things▪ yet there is but one Divine Agent, and one Divine Agency in the World. There is then but one Creator, one Redeemer, one Sanctifier; there is but one Invisible, Adorable Being, one Lord, one King, one Judge, one Majesty to whom all subjection is due.  
11. Let us now proceed to the Moral Consequents. The Physical Goodness of the Divine Nature is the Divine Nature itself, considered as a thing to be willed. But the Moral goodness of the Divine Nature, is its free willing of the Divine Being. Since therefore the Divine Nature itself in its third substantial Subsistence, 
C●p 5 2●.  does subsist in this Almighty, but free Volition of the Divine Being; therefore this free Volition, which is the Divine Moral Goodness, hath in God a substantial Subsistence: So that Moral goodness is substantial in the Divine Nature, but is not so in any other Nature how sublime soever. In this sense, none is good, save one, that is God.  
12. Because this free Volition is a complacential Volition, and is the Divine Moral goodness which is substantial; 
C●p. 5.19.  therefore the Divine Blessedness, which is his being most highly pleased, is also a substantial Blessedness; and this also as such is an incommunicable Attribute.  
13. A Complacential Volition is Joy, and Delight. Now Mental Glory is the fullness o● Joy in the Mind, exulting in the stability and compleatness of the Blessedness of its own Being: Therefore the Divine Glory, which is the same with the Divine Joy, as the Divine Joy is the same with the Complacential Volition, hath also a substantial Subsistence in God. We confess, that Goodness, Blessedness. Glory in God, are substantial: But unless there be three substantial Subsistences of the Godhead, and the willed real Subsistence be the third, I think we merely say so, but have no meaning.  
14. From hence we learn also, that the Deity is a Being of the most absolute Liberty, and that there is no necessity superior to the Divine Will. The Heathen Poetry and Mythology fastened their Deity as it were to a Stulp by the Chain of an uneluctable Fate. Their Philosophers in pity, let him lose from the Sculp; but then the greater part of them taught him such a device of folding his hands and feet together himself (semel dixit semper seq●itur) that he had as little Liberty ever after, as when he was b●und with the Chain. But the Christians ever confessed their God to be most absolutely free, believing that he is most freely, what he is, and does most freely, what he does. For he that worships one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, in consequence he must not deny this absolute Freedom to be in God; as may thus in short be seen. There is no will but in a conscious life: 
Cap. 2.11.  Every Spirit is endued with a will: Every will is naturally free. Now no Subsistence of the Deity is itself, unless in coexistence with the other two: 
Cap. 2.9.  Therefore since the third Subsistences of the Deity doth subsist by being freely willed, all the Three Subsistences do freely subsist, 
Cap. 6 5. Cap. 5.20.  and so the Deity does wholly, and eternally subsist, and act by its own free choice.  
15. And yet there is no fear, lest the Divine Nature should therefore become uncertain and contingent, because it subsists wholly by its own free choice. For seeing that Holiness in a Spirit, is a plenary, resolved, unreserved, complacential good will to the Supreme Being, and that God is most absolutely holy, 
Cap. 5 1.  he doth therefore with a Volition eternally unchanged, and yet most absolutely free, will the Subsistence of the Divine Being.  
16. From all which we must therefore conclude, that the Universe of all being created and uncreated, hath its sanction, establishment, sanctification, preservation and persistence in the eternally inviolate Holiness of God. To this sense, do the Blessed Society sing continually, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord, God Omnipotent, which was, and is, and is to come. Thou art worthy, O Lord! to receive Glory, and Honour, and Power; for thou hast created all things, and fo● thy will, they are, and they were created Such is the Worship, such is the God of Christians.   

CHAP. VII. Of the Personalities in the Deity.  
THE Adversaries Opposition, rather than any thing else, makes it needful to show, these Three distinct real Subsistences of the Deity are Three Personalities: For they imagine, if there be Three several Persons, and every one God, then there are Three several Gods. Even as amongst us; if there be Three several Persons, and every one a Man, than there are Three several Men. Both parts of this Argument, are mistakes. This matter therefore I shall expedite in three Considerations, before we proceed to the Scripture Evidence.  
1. Whatsoever is to be said about Personages amongst Men, no Solocism can be charged on the Language of the Church, for styling the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Three Persons. For it matters not what the word Person signifies, when spoken of any other Subject, since it is certain, that constant use for above a thousand years in the Church, hath fixed it to signify nothing else than one of these three, when we speak of the Divine Being. For what all Men mean by a Voice, when they speak of any particular matter, that is the true and genuine signification of the word, when applied to that matter, whatever they mean by it, when they are speaking of another subject; and were it not so, all the Languages of the World must be modelled almost quite anew. Should a Seaman, having a Country Nail maker and a Tailor aboard with him, tell them after he had turned his Ship, that he had just then, made a Tack, either of them might tell him, it was no such matter; the one, because it had neither head nor point, as all Tacks have; and the other, because it had never a stitch in it. But I think such refined Wit, would qualify neither of them for a Doctor, whatever the Lord Mayor may think of it upon the next vacancy for a Clown. For in good earnest, to me they seem not to observe, what is the reason of the proper significancy of words, who cavil at this. Whether then there be three such distinct Subsistences of the Deity, may indeed be inquired; but whether they are to be styled Personalities, needs no further search, than to know, whether the Christian Church hath so used to call them; and this is a matter of fact evident beyond all dispute.  
2. What they assume about the reason of Personalities amongst Men, is likewise a mistake. For Cicero, who best knew the sense of persona (Englished person) after a long discourse to that purpose, tells us the quite contrary. 
T●●. ●●t. ●●●. 1.  For (says he) Nature gives, or (as it were) imposes upon every Man two persons, and he himself assumes a third. Here then is a Trinity of persons in every one Man from the condition of things in Nature: wherefore, whatever the Nature of a Personality is, we are assured by the Sovereign Authority, which this Man hath ever had in these matters, that a single substance, one rational Nature, is not only capable of having, but actually hath three Personalities, and that every individual Man is no less than three persons, and those three persons, no more than one Man. There is therefore no absurdity, contradiction, or the least incongruity in speech, from the Nature of a Personage, to affirm that one single Divine Nature or Substance, is no more than One only God, and that One God no less than Three Persons. So that all the reproach that hath been cast upon the Church on this account, has been owing not to its Doctrine, but to the Scoptical Humour of the Adversaries ignorance or dissimulation. For all Classical Latinists according with Cicero (as is well known) in this use of the word persona. The Church for what concerns the expressions, wherein she delivers her Faith, is justified by these, the sole Authentic Judges of such Controversies; and for the truth of the thing refers herself to the Authority of God in Nature and Scripture.  
3. Now though this be abundantly sufficient for this verbal Controversy, yet we may observe, that in accord with this sense of the word Person, the Scripture itself teaches us in many cases to distinguish betwixt a Man and his Person; as when it says, both that God accepts no Man's Person, & yet that in every Nation, he accepts the Man that feareth God and worketh Righteousness. Whereby we learn, that God accepts the righteous man, & yet accepts not the righteous man's person. I observe then, every Spiritual Nature is voluntary, and no Nature whatsoever is capable of any Personal Subsistence at all, that is not voluntary; which being premised, it is easy to observe that according to the Classical and Scriptural use, a Person does not precisely signify the Being of a voluntary Nature; but a voluntary Nature subsisting with a Reciprocal Aspect upon somewhat, as it were mutually fancying one another; in which Reciprocal Aspect, the voluntary Being is considered directly in no other, than its voluntary Capacity. Thus it is in all persons made by Prosopopaeia, in all Mimical, Histrionical, Hypocritical, and all other persons; whose Personality is fictitious: so it is in all real persons, both necessary, and arbitrary, in Civil, Political persons, in Bodies Politic (that is, one person consisting of many Men) in Moral and Natural persons. Now the Three Persons of the Trinity, are plainly of this last sort, being persons from the nature of the thing in itself. For the Divine Nature being spiritual, that is, a voluntary Being, and subsisting, (as has been showed) in three real distinct subsistences, it has in every one of these three subsistences: a distinct reciprocal aspect upon itself in its other two real subsistences; and therefore the Deity subsisting in any one of these real subsistences, is a real Person, and consequently the Deity is in himself three several distinct Persons in the propriety of the word Person.  
Nor would it be otherwise, were the account to be given, not in the ancient Native, but in the present English use of the word Person, wherein the reciprocal aspect (always employed in Personality) is that of a thing upon itself; as when we say, every Man's Person is himself. For according to this acception of the word, if we should say, the Father is himself, the Son is himself, and the Holy Ghost is himself, than every one's self here, is the Person of him whose self it is. Therefore the same difference that is betwixt the Father himself, and the Son himself, and the Holy Ghost himself, the same there is betwixt the three Persons; but the Father is not the Son, but as has been showed, is really distinct; therefore the Person of the Father which is himself, is not the Person of the Son, 
C. 5.9, 10.  consequently here are two really distinct Persons, and the Holy Ghost by the like reason is the third.  
4. And the Course which the Latin Church took to establish the Ecclesiastical use of the word when it began to be questioned, does very little, if at all, differ from this account. Hypostasis (englished Person, Heb. 1.) is of Divine Authority, and Persona did intent the very same thing in the Latin Church. For Hypostasis signifies the subsistence of a Nature or Being in its Station or State; and since it is plainly applied (Heb. 1.) to a Voluntary Nature, whose State is Personal, the Divine Authority of the Greek warrants the use of the Latin, as an Original does a Translation done with due allowance of Idioms. This appears by the method used afterward on this occasion. For to express the real subsistence of the Being in its state, the Latin Schools used the term suppositum, which hath in its make a manifest reference to the Family of the Greek Hypostasis: And because this was the Hypostasis of a Spiritual Nature, which is always Personal, to answer that voluntariness of the suppositum, they added rationale, and so defined a Person, suppositum rationale; which, as they understood rational, was very allowable: For the Schools intended their Definition of Person, should reach not only Minds Incorporate, but likewise Mind Celestial: And they likewise generally Taught, that Angels had their knowledge not by ratiocination (collecting from what they know already, the perception of what they know not) but by intuition: therefore they here took rationale not in the imperfect sense for the faculty of reasoning, but for the conscious perception of the formal reasons, which are the very Nature or Essence of things. And in this sense, not only Angels are rational, but likewise God himself is most eminently rational: accordingly, Cicero attributes to the Divine Nature Summa Ratio. According to this intention, the Schools definition of a Person agrees to every Being, that is a Person, and to none else.  
Howbeit, I have thought the Personal Capacity of any Being consists in its voluntariness, more immediately than its rationality: because the chief (if not only) consideration of a Person, respects decent, undecent, praise, dispraise, right, wrong, merit, demerit, misery, happiness: now all these have their proximate aspect on the Will, and not the Reason. I confess, when any of these are concerned in a Persons actions, consideration uses to be had, whether the actions were done wittingly or not; but this is not enquired after for itself, or directly, but only as a sign of their being done willingly. For, should a Man, contrary to all reason, give away his Estate from his own most entirely Beloved Son, to his greatest Enemy in the World, the Right in Nature will pass by his mere Will, though he declares that wittingly, and without any reason, and contrary to all reason but his own Will, he so disposed of it. I have therefore given the account of personality, not from the rationality, but voluntariness of the Suppositum: though I know no inconvenience in the School Definition, but that we cannot so expediently argue upon it; and for my dissent in such a formality, I presume that is enough.  
In short, the first Consideration does vindicate the Churches Right to the use of the Word; the second proves that she used her Right well; and the third, that it is not now in the Power of the Church honestly to disuse it, as being agreeable in its proper significancy to the reason of the thing: and from all we learn, that in the three distinct real Subsistences, there are three distinct real Personalities. I shall therefore conclude here the Natural Evidence, whereby I suppose it is sufficiently manifest, that the Church's acknowledgement of three Persons and one God, is so far from being Contradictious to reason, that the denial of it is repugnant to the condition and reason of the Divine Nature.  
5. And though by this means the Adversaries Artillery is turned upon themselves, yet it is done with no hostile intention, but rather with a charitable design to aid them in their straits: for since they have so weak a Faith, that they cannot believe God's word without relief from the evidence of Reason, I hope I have sufficiently showed them, that they may be most strictly Catholic Christians, and yet most rigorously Rational Men. For if they will reason warily enough, I see not how they can use reason too much about the Christian Religion. And it will ever be found most reasonable, that Christian Men should employ all the Reason that God hath given them, not to spy out incongruities in the Language which he uses with his Church, but rather to maintain the verity of all those things, which he has with perspicuity, and great veracity of expressions asserted in the Holy Scripture, which I shall presently show he has done on the Subject in hand. Indeed the Papists of late by a sly Artifice, would have had us account the Trinity a senseless Doctrine, that it might make a fit Prologue (as they used it) to introduce the Monster of their Transubstantiation, but we find it is no way accommodate to any such purpose. For what the Christian Doctrine Teaches of the Trinity, is exactly agreeable to the Reason and Nature of the Supreme Spirit; but Transubstantiation teaches nothing but what is repugnant to the Condition of the Corporeal Nature. For first, they tell us of a thing that has not at all the Nature of a Body as they describe it, and then teach us, that the Bread and Wine are turned into that Body. It may indeed well enough beseem Persons that have Worldly Designs of their own to be served upon the Christian Religion, to resolve Faith, and all the Points of it into an obscurity of assent, that other Men may take their Creeds from their mouths, and believe as they would have them for their own turns; but for such as intent no other end in their Faith, than the Salvation of their own and others Souls, I see not but reason, if used with soberness, is of great advantage and comfortable use to them in their Religion. For my own part, I like not the Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity ever the worse, but rather much the better, because I find, that all the reason in the World which I can understand, is in that Mystery on the Church's side.   

CHAP. VIII. The Scripture Evidence.  
NAture teaches first, what a thing is, or is not in itself, and having implanted in us self-love, and other concerns, thereby prompts us to consider the thing Comparatively with reference to our own interests. So that the Natural account of the thing, is best delivered in the most simple and bare terms. But Prophetical institution passing through the Spirits of the Holy Men of God, is to be delivered in terms that express both the things themselves, and their devout regard to them conjunctly: and therefore such an institution is at once adapted to instil Knowledge and Religion into the Hearers Minds; for Religion is not naked speculation, but that belief of things, whereby we form the Counsels of our Lives, and Affections of our Hearts. St. Paul assures us, that this is eminently the Character of the Christian Institution, which he therefore styles the Doctrine, and again the Truth, which is according to Godliness; and refers to this notion on so many several occasions, that it is plain, he looks upon it as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Christian Religion. Therefore the Expressions wherein the Christian Doctrine is taught, will accordingly be such, as in the common use of words do bespeak reverence, or Holy Fear and Love. The Gospel Preaches Christ to be the Lord of all, to whom Divine Honour is due on the account of the Excellency of his Person. Now since the subsistence of things in conception as amongst Men, is but weak, as being only notional, and in common use through pravity, is extremely subject to vanity; had Christ been called the Divine conceptus (the infinite distance betwixt God's conceptions, and ours being not obvious enough in common use) this Style had not been so well accommodated to procure Reverence, as is calling him the Son, the only Begotten Son of God. But the Religious Concern being set aside, for the bare truth of the thing, Nature more expeditely teacheth it, by assuring us that God is a perfect Mind, and therefore he perfectly conceives, or has a perfect conception of his own Divine Nature; for this is certain at the first sight from the Condition of the Mental Nature. But if we say God is a perfect Mind, therefore he begets his own Nature; many things must be cleared, before the necessity of this Consequence will be perceived; whereby we see Nature teaches best in one set of Expressions, and Prophets in another; which by the way, may take off offence, if I have given any by using some terms in explication of the Trinity, that are not Scriptural, whilst the Argument led me not to consider the importance of it in Religion, but precisely the Natural Evidence of its Truth.  
2. But when I consider, that almost all words are inadequate to the signification of any words in other Languages; I easily believe that this Observation may be needful only for our Vulgar Tongues; for so large is the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉, gigno etc. That if we use any term significant of Breeding, it is included within the comprehensiveness of these words, which are the Scripture expressions most commonly used on this occasion. For these words applied to Corporeal Productions, import the joint interest of both Sexes, and the entire efficiency of either severally, as likewise breeding by spiration, by fusion, by solar influence, by the Earth; as in Beasts, Infects, Fishes, Plants, etc. So that they are not limited to any particular form of causation in breeding, but signify with the greatest latitude, and are therefore to be rendered into the Modern Languages by such words, as are in use upon particular occasions. Whether then we say conceive or beget, we are within the compass of the original significancy: For whether we say well, the Earth breeds or begets Grass, we say well, terra gignit herbas. So homo & herba nascitur, is well said, though it be neither well englished; Man and Grass is born; nor Man and Grass do grow.  
3. It is manifest both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. signify not only Coporeal Generation or Conception, but likewise Mental, and this with such indifference, that I see no reason, why they should be thought less proper, or more metaphorical when they are applied to these, than to the others; for Proud Thoughts, Humble Thoughts, Love, Joy, Fear and Grief, etc. are all properly begotten in our minds, by being conceived in our minds. These indeed have only a Notional Subsistence, but yet their Nature, (such as it is) is begotten by the minds conceptive powers; wherefore if a Substantial Nature is conceived in a mind by a Conception wherein it hath a Substantial Subsistence, that Nature is very properly begotten in such a Subsistence by that Conception.  
4. Wherefore since it hath appeared by the Natural Reason of the Supreme Being, that the first Person is the Deity in its Parental Subsistence, and the second in the Filial: (Chap. 5.14.) And the Scripture teaches the first Person is the Father, and the second the Son; we are hereby assured, that the Scriptural and the Natural Account of the Trinity are the same in the general, only Nature teaches the bare thing as in itself, and the Scripture in its Religious state. Having said this to justify the main of the process, I shall now proceed to Evince that the particular Characters of the three Persons, are the very same in Scripture, with those I have delivered from the Light of Nature. But I must first advise the Reader, that I am not now so much to prove the Trinity from Scripture, which has been done abundantly by many others; but to compare the Natural Doctrine with the Scripture, and show their accord in all the branches of each; which I shall do a briefly as I can.  
5. Reason taught us, that the Divine mind in its first Subsistence does Subsist, Conceiving the Divine Nature (Chap 4.10. Cap. 5.10.) this is confirmed by the Holy Oracles of the Father to the Son. Thou art my Son, this Day have I begotten thee. We learn from the Divine Nature, that the first Person is really distinct from the second; (Chap. 5.9, 10,) and we learn from the Scripture also, that besides the Son that bears witness of himself, there is another (even the Father) that bears witness of him; and these are the two distinct witnesses. But yet the reason of the thing assures us, that it is one and the same Divine Nature that Subsists in these two distinct and real Subsistences, (Chap. 5.12.) And accordingly Divine Revelation teaches us, I and my Father are one, (●) one nature or one thing.  
6. Natural Light instructs us, that the second Subsistence of the God head is a Substantial Subsistence, (Chap. 5.9, 10.) The Holy Scriptures conformably affirms, That in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, (that is, Substantially.) The Son himself is Naturally God, even God by himself, and that by Nature, (Chap. 5.11, 13.) The Scripture attests the same, styling him God, even God blessed over all; and warns us of the future appearance of the great God, even our Saviour Jesus Christ. That the Deity in its second Substantial Subsistence is the Son, and that not by Adoptive Reputation but Real Generation, appeared from the nature of the thing, (Chap. 5.14.) and this is confirmed by the Testimony of God's word, which says, This day have I begotten thee. That the Son conceives his own Divine Nature is a Natural Document, and likewise that this is neither more nor less than his own Essential Subsistence, (Chap. 5.15.) Both these the Sacred Dialect teaches, declaring that he Lives, in him is Life, And as the Father hath Life in himself, so hath he given the Son to have Life in himself. The Son begotten of the Father is one and Eternally the same, as reason teaches (Chap. 5.16.) and the Religious institution styles him therefore the only begotten of the Father. The Son Conceives the Divine Nature, but with a Conception that does not Procreate another Subsistence of the Deity; as was showed (Cap. 5.15.) And accordingly as the Scripture teaches, that there is but one, which is therefore the only begotten of the Father; so it teaches there is but one, the same that is the only begotten Son of God; confirming the Natural Doctrine, that there is but one only Substantial Subsistence of the Divine Nature by any Conception of it whatsoever. But yet nevertheless the Father's Conception and the Sons Conception are equally creative of all other things, as is taught, (Chap. 5.17.) which the Scripture witnesses; For the Father worketh hitherto, and I work; and whatsoever the Father doth the same the Son doth also. All things are of the Father, and by the Son all things were made, that were made; and without him was not any thing made, that was made. He laid the Foundations of the Earth, and the Heavens are the work of his hands, and in him all things consist. Thus we see in all points the Principles of Natural Truth, and Instituted Religion do harmoniously accord.  
But let us with the like brevity touch the other Scriptural Characters of the Son, and observe how exactly they are conform to the natural condition of his Person; for since the Essence of any Being as conceived, is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 
The Word of God. The Word.  therefore the Deity subsisting in Conception is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and consequently this second Subsistence of the Divine Nature, both according to the reason of its Nature, and of the Religious Style, will either be turned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Emphatically the WORD, or else Explicitly the WORD OF GOD: & because Reason teaches that this is the Divine Nature in a Substantial Subsistence: 
Cap. 5.10.  This will be properly signified by affirming the Word itself to be God, and that in it is Life; all which St. John distinctly takes notice of, 1 John 1.23. Telling us likewise Explicitly, Rev. 19.15. That THE WORD OF GOD is his Name, or the Character given him from the condition of his Person. 2. 
TRUTH  The reality of the Divine Nature Subsisting in the second Person, consists in the Essential truth of the Divine minds Conception; as was showed (Cap. 5.10.) This person is therefore with peculiar respect to this condition of his Being, to be called the TURTH, as we read he is, I am the TRUTH, THY Word is TRUTH. And St. John inculcates this so vehemently, that it's manifest he puts a special remark upon it; that we might not omit to take particular notice of it. 
1 Joh. 5.20.  We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given unto us an understanding, that we might know him that is TRUE, and we are in him that is TRUE, even in his Son Jesus Christ; he is the TRUE GOD, and Eternal Life. 3. For the like cause this person will be styled the Light, as he oft is; that is, the intellectual Light of a Conscious Life; seeing his Subsistence is in the perspicacious Conception of the Divine Mind, as the Nature of the thing teaches (Cap. 5.10.) 4. And because what is perfectly conceived, is thereby thoroughly understood, and it is an infinite wisdom to understand all the perfections of the Divine Nature, and their true excellencies, for God is all in all. Therefore this Wisdom conceiving, is the personal Wisdom of the Father; but then this Wisdom Subsisting Substantially by being conceived is the Son, or it is Sapientia nata, as St. Austin speaks distinguishingly, after an Elaborate disquisition of this matter. And as I have showed the Reason, if the Supreme Spirit does teach this, (Cap. 5.10, 11, 12, 13, 14.) so it is confirmed in the Scripture, where we read of a Wisdom Subsisting with God, which was brought forth conceived or begotten from Everlasting, brought forth before the Depths, the Hills, or ever the Earth was; and such the Second Person of the Deity in Reason is for ever, for in him are hid all the treasures of Wisdom. 5. This Second Person being Divinus Conceptus (Chap. 10.15.) is not the Image of the Divine Nature, for he is the very Divine Nature Subsisting really in this Personal Subsistence; and in him the first Subsistence does really Subsist; but in the Reverse or Antitype (as it were) this Nature dictates (Chap. 4.7. Chap. 6.8.) Therefore though the Son be not the express Image of the Divine Nature, yet he is according to the Reason of the thing, and of the Holy Language, (as we find Heb. 1.3.) the express Image of God the Father; which being so critically expressed by that Divine and Accurate Author, does manifestly point out to us, the very Account (which from Nature I have offered) of the Subsistence of the Second Person. For indeed all these Scriptural Characters are so agreeable to the reason of the thing, that they leave us no rational doubt in this matter.  
7. The third Subsistence of the Deity is by volition, and volition is the agency of the Spirit of the Divine Mind; this was proved by Reason, ch. 5.20. ch. 6.11. and this is attested by the Scriptures, as often as they style the Third Person the Spirit of God, or emphatically the Spirit; which is so frequently, that I need not hint the places. This Person proceeds, and is not begotten, as appears by the reason of the Divine Nature, cap. 5.21. accordingly the Scripture no where says the Spirit is begotten, but that it proceeds from the Father, and is the Spirit of the Son, and sent by the Son. The Nature of the Deity taught there is one, and but one substantial subsistence of the Godhead by procession; (ch. 5.22.) the Divine Oracles confirm this, for there is one Body, and one Spirit, even one and the self same Spirit. This Spirit creates according to the condition of its subsistence in Nature, cap. 5.23. which we also learn, Psal. 33 6. where all the Host of Heaven and Earth are Created by this Divine Breath. This Person is a real distinct subsistence by itself of the Divine Nature, (cap. 5.24.) and the Scripture teaches, he is not the Father, being sent by the Father, nor the Son, being sent by the Son: And whilst this Spirit like a Dove did alight upon Jesus at his Baptism, the Father at the same time, by an audible voice from Heaven, did own him for his wellbeloved Son, and the Son declares that the Spirit is another from himself: and as Nature (ch. 5.25) so the Scripture teaches he is the third in order by the Ordinance of Baptism; in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We learn from Nature that the Spirit is God (ch. 5.27.) which is averred by the Scripture, teaching us that lying to the Holy Ghost, is lying to God, and ascribing such perfections to this same Spirit, as are incommunicable to any other Nature.  
But let us proceed to the other Scriptural properties of this Spirit, which we may observe to have a singular Congruousness with the natural Condition of this third Divine Person. For since the third Person subsists by the Almighty Volition of the Divine Spirit, c. 5.20. According to the Reason of the thing, and of the Sacred Language, it will exegetically be called the Power of the Most High, and the Finger of God, as it is Luke 1.35. c. 11.20. and because it subsists in the Divine Benevolence, ch. 5.19. with some peculiar attribution will this be styled the Good Spirit, as Nehemiah 9.20. Thou gavest them thy Good Spirit, Psal. 143.10. Thy Spirit is Good, and this Spirit of the Lord accordingly is directly opposed to the Evil Spirit, and the prime Communication of this Spirit, will be Love to all the World of Spirits, because Moral Truth consists in the constancy of the Will, (c. 5.21.) therefore this is the Spirit of Truth in the Moral sense, as the Scripture often teaches; which is an eminent virtue in a Witness or a Friend. But above all, we are to mark that according to the Nature and Reason of the thing, this Person subsists in the Eternal Unchanged Holiness of the Divine goodwill, ch. 6.5. because the Most Famous Character which the Scripture gives of this Person, is that of the Holy Ghost. So punctually doth the Testimony of the Scripture agree with the Doctrine of Nature.  
8. From the Natural Condition of the Three Persons, the Consequents were, that they are Coeternal, Three in Number, Coequal▪ each entirely God, inseparable, self-subsistent, and mutually inexistent, and one Principle only. In confirmation of all this, the Scripture teaches the Father is God from Everlasting to Everlasting; that the Son is set up from Everlasting, whose go forth are from Everlasting; that he endures, and his years have no end, that the Spirit is the Eternal Spirit. It likewise teaches us there are three, but no more, and in the same order as Nature doth, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: And again, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; one of these Three accounts it no Robbery to be equal with another, asserting all to be his, which the other hath, that he was with the other, and in the beginning with the other, that he is not alone, but the other is with him, yea, one mutually inexistent in the other, I in thee, and thou in me; and as the one hath life in himself, so the other hath life in himself.  
9 Nature & Scripture than we have seen do both teach each of these three Persons is God: and yet notwithstanding Nature assures us that there is not therefore three, but only one God, as is taught (ch. 5.26.) and the Scripture every where confirms this Natural Dictate, assuring us that there is but one God. Thou shalt have no other Gods but me; I am, and there is no God besides me. There is but one Uncreated, Self-sufficient, Almighty, Eternal, Incomprehensible, One Supreme in Glorious Majesty, according to the Evidence given by Reason (ch. 6.9.) Now though the Scripture (as has been showed) does attribute the perfections of the Divine Nature to every one of these Persons (as well as reason did) yet not where doth it speak of more Eternals, more Almighty's, more All-sufficients than one only. And there being in Nature but one energy upon the Creatures abroad (ch. 6.10.) the Scripture concurs herewith, teaching there is but one Creator, one Saviour, one Sanctifier, one King, one Lawgiver, one Judge, one Lord, one Adorable Being, or Object of Religious Worship, and one Majesty. According to the voice of Nature, Truth, and Moral goodness, have a substantial subsistence in God, (ch. 6.11, 12.) this is asserted by the Scripture, as often as it says, God is Light, or God is Love. That the Spirit of God is free, Nature tells us, ch. 6.14. and the Scripture affirms it, Psal. 51.12. Establish me with thy free Spirit, which Spirit is the Fountain of all liberty, Natural, and Moral; for where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. When the Scripture teaches, that God swears by his own Life, we are sure he therein doth no more than what he had a right to do, and therefore he has his life in the disposal of his own will, which he gauges as he pleases, and so all things stand in the infinite holiness of the most absolute freewill of God, both by Natural, and Supernatural Evidence.  
10. Lastly, Nature teaches these three real distinct Subsistences are really Personal (ch. 7.) and the Scripture owns it, for Christ acknowledges the Holy Ghost hath Personal Rights, but that he should not speak of himself, but should take of that which was the Sons, and show it to the Disciples; and presently thereupon informs us of the distinct Personal Rights of the Father and the Son; all things that the Father hath, are mine, says the Son; where we see, though they all have right to the same things, yet each hath his own distinct right here asserted, according to that, all thine are mine, and mine are thine, and therefore each of the three is a Person. When St. Paul teaches that the Spirit does act, dispose of, and bestow things by the disposition of his own will; this is what nothing but a Person can do, nor can any other Person do so justly, but the Owner or Lord of the things so disposed or bestowed. I have thought for a Heathen, Hierocles guessed ingenuously, that God did Create all the material substance of which the World was made, or else he could not justly have framed the World, because he would have meddled with what was none of his own.  
11. Thus Nature by the reason of things, and Scripture by the reason of speech, do both teach the same Trinity in all Points, the one by natural, the other by instituted significancy: Gods Works, and God's Word conspiring to assure us there is one God, and three Persons. For the Coincidence of the Rational and Scriptural account in all particulars, I take to be the proper evidence of this truth; because had the account been given upon an Hypothesis, the coincidence of it with the Scripture, had been only a proof of the good contrivance of its Maker; but being all deduced from the very first Principles of Sense and Reason, the Coincidence proves the truth of the thing itself, and demonstrates there is no contrivance in it; for where Nature leads, there if no room left for invention, but things must be taken as they are found in themselves. The Arians begged a Days or a Minute's time for the making of their second and third God in; this was a blunder in the device itself, for a God cannot be made in less time than a Triangular Circle. But I am not exposing their pretence in point of ingenuity, but observing that when they say, there are such made Gods without the evidence of Nature or Scripture, this is Hypothesis and Fiction, and therefore it will then be time enough to write serious Confutations of such imaginary Being's, when it is become fashionable gravely to prove at large that Romances are not Histories.  
12. To the Divine Revelation of this Doctrine, I might subjoin the Authority of the Catholic Church, whose Faith is delivered in our common Creeds, and evince that these are perfectly conform to the Doctrine of the preceding Discourse; but these being so well known, I shall seem in the judgement of the intelligent Reader to write the same things over again, out of mere formality. Yet, because the Adversaries do boast of their late attempts against the Athanasian Creed with such an insolence of glorying, it is not amiss to remark particularly, that there is no expression in all that Creed about the matter of the Trinity, but what hath been above distinctly accounted for from Reason and Scripture; what there concerns Christ's Incarnation, I shall consider afterwards. I might also observe, that the common Institusion of the Christian Schools giving an account of the Second Person, from the Divine Wisdom, and of the third, from the Divine Love, or Benevolence, cannot be understood to differ from the main reason of what has here been taught. So that besides the Divine Evidence Natural, and Supernatural, we have all that can be accounted Ecclesiastical Authority to confirm us in this Belief. And as the Creeds, and their Expositors; so the form of Baptism in the Name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is the very Text that all the Creeds themselves were purely designed to expound, and is of Divine Appointment, and irrefragable Authority, does as a foederal Rite give further confirmation of the Truth of this Doctrine. But being to give an account of the Mystery of the Trinity, what concerns the nature of the Trinity in that Stipulation, shall be there considered, with its Covenant-use in the Christian State.   

CHAP. IX. The Adversaries Interpretations of the Scriptures.  
IN the mean time, having before shown how the Unitarians have dealt with the Evidence of Reason, I must here observe, how they use that of Authority: For having resolved all the General Councils, and the Christian Doctors and Schools into the number of Adversaries, they disclaim all Ecclesiastical Authority, and assume to themselves the right of being their own Judges; which Office so assumed, in consequence they are to execute without a deference to the Judgement of the main body of Christians (and if they be haughty) with defiance to it. Their demur to the Authority of the Christian Church being somewhat extraneous to the Merits of this Cause, I need not examine. Though Protestants indeed allow it not to be a proper jurisdiction, yet all sober Christians must confess that it hath an argumentative force, next to that which is Divine. But since these Men had rather want so great a confirmation of their Faith, than not to please themselves, even to themselves be it; the Rights of God and of his Church cannot be vacated by such Judges as Create their own Office.  
2. Though these men do not formally disown the Divine Authority of the Bible, yet they treat all the Scripture proofs of the Trinity with great contempt; and that they might seen to do so with less absurdity, they take no notice of the great accession which that sacred Evidence acquires by the concurrence of so many circumstances, in such a great number of Testimonies, and variety of Expressions; which adds a mighty force to what they would have if they were only to be considered asunder, as we experience in all sorts of Evidence which is given us of the Existence of things. And yet even against the single Texts they have nothing to allege but some Evasions, which are manifestly so far fetched, that (if charity did not bid us hope better) they would tempt us to suspect instead of a serious Paraphrase, they designed to entertain us with a sort of Traversty transprosed, the Text and their sense being confronted appear to speak of things so vastly distant. Ex. Gr. St. John agreeably to other Scriptures, and in exact accord with the reason of the Divine Nature as before explained, 
John 1.2.  tells us; In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made, that was made. The Gloss of those who pretend to the most rational interpretation of the Scripture, in plain sense is to this purpose: In the beginning, [That is, (as they expound) Not in the beginning, but in the days of Augustus Caesar] Was the word, [That is, not the word, but a mere man whose name was Jesus, and and not the word.] And the word was with God, [That is, not in Heaven where God is, but in Galilee, in a retired privacy; as if one should say God knows where.] And the woe d was God, [That is, not God, but one by false reputation so styled.] All things, [That is, not all things, but somethings] Were made by him, [That is, not made by him, but disposed into another order by him.] And without him, was not any thing made that was made, [that is, every Substantial thing that was made, was made without him, but some respects of some things were not without him, disposed otherwise than they had been before.] Thus they. Surely this is to read us a Riddle, or give us an Account of some Parabolical Projection, and not to give us the exposition of a Doctrinal instruction; for here every word shifts its signification, to comport with a secret contrivance, which the speaker had projected in his thoughts, not to inform, but to amuse the Hearers. But after the adversaries have with such force and artifice set this Scene, all the expression following for Ten or Twelve Ver●●s together, lie so crossly, that though they torture their wits, they cannot wrest them to any tolerable compliance with their design; and their Comments upon other Texts are much what of the like consistency. But when the word as hath been proved, does so properly signify the Subsistence of the Deity in the Divine Conception, and all the subsequent assertions about it in this Chapter, are as Natural as could be chosen on a subject of so august solemnity; it would tempt a friendly Monitor to ask these men, what they see in such a ramble of fanciful extravagance that can please them better than the plain obvious and native sense of this portion of holy Scripture.  
That a force is used upon the expression, is as manifest as can be to every one that understands the Language; but it appears not what could constrain these men to use it besides some reasonings about the thing in their own minds; and than it is their own preconceived opinion, and nothing else that necessitates them thus to dstort the Scriptures: For I have showed what is here said, is most consonant to the Nature and reason of the thing in its self, and to many express assertions in other Texts. All their reasonings which have appeared against the Scripture language on this Head, have no other foundation but a presumption, that because they see all Created Being's must needs Subsist in one Subsistence alone, therefore the Divine Nature cannot Subsist in any more. Whereas it is manifest upon more wary thoughts, that though all dependent Substances (seeing there is but one Divine Energy, Ad Extra,) can have but one, and that a dependent Subsistence; yet a Substance yielding to its self it's own Subsistence, will yield itself so many distinct real Subsistences, as the condition of that blessed Nature doth require; and whether that be one or more, cannot be concluded from the manner of the Subsistence of other things in the World without interpreting the Parable wherein the World does present to us the Divine Nature; how that is to be done I have briefly hinted above. The face of the World which we behold bears in it the Prints of the maker's hand, by which we reasoning right from our outward and inward sensations, may understand what a Being the Deity is; but then we must remember in all our reckon to allow for all Parabolical Projections in the delineation as not only we, but the Antitrinitarians themselves do in all other questions of the Divine Nature; but this they not allowing or not heeding in the question of the Trinity, are in consequence forced to make all the Scriptures Parabolical which teach the several branches of the Doctrine of the Trinity as it is in Truth; and this is the cause of their rending and tearing the words and the sense asunder. The case of Christians in this point stands thus; if we be not Naturalists skilful enough to resolve the Projection, then however God has given us the Scripture as an intelligible declaration of what God would have us to believe concerning his own Divine Being. Now nothing can be more absurd than to pretend to understand a Persons meaning by his say, and yet at the same time to destroy the very reason of that speech, making it insignificant of that which the expressions signify to all that understand the Language. But if we can interpret the Parable of Nature aright, than we see the words of Truth in the Scripture interpret themselves; for we see the Language of Scripture understood according to the Reason of Speech, speaks the same that the Nature of the thing doth, when we have made such an allowance for the different realities as Reason teaches us there is betwixt a Dependent and self Originate Substance.   

CHAP. X. Of the Mystical Trinity.  
1. THings secret and abstruse which lie out of the way of common understanding are according to their subject matter, usually termed Mysteries of Art or Nature, of Trade or State, of Iniquity or Religion: These last being styled by Christ the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, 
Mat. 13.11.  they are therefore such things as belong to the invisible State of God's Kingdom. Yet it is neither the abstruseness of the things, nor their Religiousness, nor yet their invisible state in the intellectual World, that completes the form of their Christian Mysteriousness: For St. Paul teaching, that God manifest in the Flesh, is (the Ground and Pillar of Truth;) and the confessedly great Mystery of Godliness; we thereby learn that it is the relation to, or dependence upon the words being made Flesh, which now constitutes a Religious Mystery in the Christian State. Accordingly Lactantius frequently denies that the Heathens understood the Mystery of the World, though they knew the Natural Condition and Frame of the World; I suppose no less than Christians. I would further observe, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are mostly applied to such things as are appropriate to the use of propitiating and conciliating the favour of the Deity; and so the Mysticalness of Religious things, will properly import their constitution in the Sacerdotal State of the Universe. But I must here lay no stress upon this, lest I beg a Principle of those that will not grant it: I note it however for the sake of them which know the Truth, that they may discern the whole of what I include in the complete notion of a Christian Mystery.  
2. Nature instructs us in the knowledge of God's Eternal Power and Godhead, 
Rom. 1.20. Acts 14.17. Rom. 1.32.  and of his Providence and Righteous Judgement, and likewise teaches that his Subsistence is such as belongs Naturally to the Supreme Self-Originate Spirit (what that is I have showed above.) But that God is Incarnate, that he now Governs the World in Humane Nature, and will Judge the World in the man Christ Jesus, is not to be learned from Natural, 
John 1.14. Mat. 28.18 Acts 17 31.  but only from Supernatural, Revelation. Nothing then that depends upon these (as all Religious Mysteries now do) can be proved otherwise than from the Scriptures.  
3. From the Natural Reason of the thing, we have therefore no evidence to assert that Christ is God; 
Mark. 1.1 Joh. 20.13.  but there is nothing that the Gospel makes more certain than that Christ is the Son, the only Son, the only begotten Son of God; this being the grand assertion of the New Testament: And this being made certain to us by the Gospel, the former discourse (whereby we naturally learn there is one only Son of God) does assure us that whoever or whatever Christ is, 
Cap. 5.  though he be even a man, he is himself really and truly God, and yet not God the Father, nor the Holy Ghost. This is all that our present undertaking obliges us to say, in demonstration of our Saviour's Divinity.  
4. But that I may not wholly balk the expectation of the Reader, I shall annex the sum of a large Scriptural evidence made ready to our hands; as I find it recapitulated by the excellent Dr. 
III. Serm. of the Trinity. P. 86,  Wallis after a particular enforcement of it. He therefore who is (as Christ has been showed from the Scriptures to be) God, the true God, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Eternal God, the First and the Last, (before whom nothing was, and after whom nothing shall be) That Was, and Is, and Shall be, the same Yesterday, and to Day, and for Ever; the Almighty, by whom the World was Made, by whom all things were Made, and without whom nothing was Made, that was Made; who Laid the Foundations of the Earth, and the Heavens are the Work of his hands; who when the Heavens and the Earth shall fail, His Years endure for Ever; who searcheth the Hearts and the Reins to give to every one according to his Works; who is Jehovah, the Lord God of Israel; the Supreme Being, who is over all, God blessed for Ever; who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords; who only hath Immortality, to whom be Honour and Power Everlasting. Amen. That God (says he) of whom all these things are said is certainly not a mere Titular God, who is called God, but is not a Creature God, or only a Dignified Man; for if these be not Characters of the True God, by what Characters shall the True God be described.  
5. We are now to observe how the Natural Doctrine of the former Discourse, does correspond with all these, viz. That Christ is Man, and is the Son of God, is God, but not the Father, nor the Holy Ghost.  
First then, Of the Humanity of Christ, (about which more anon) we must remember that there is no Created Nature, 
Cap. 5.5. Cap. 5.10.  but has its Being wholly by being Conceived in the Divine Mind: therefore Christ's Humanity is a Nature Subsisting by being Conceived by God.  
2. The Divine Nature in its second Subsistence is the only begotten Son of God, as being God Conceived; therefore Jesus Christ being the Son of God, is God conceived and being but one, and yet Man, he is God conceived, one with Man, or he is, God conceived and Man conceived in Unity by the Divine Conception; and therefore by virtue of the Divine Essential Truth, God conceived one with Man, is thereby really one with Man. Thus Christ abideth ever God and Man in one.  

Cap. 5.5.  6. But because it is God conceived that is thus one with Man, therefore it is neither God the Father, or the Holy Ghost that is one with Man. For God Conceived or Begotten is the Deity in its second subsistence. Christ therefore is the Son of God, even of the Father, and from him, and the Father, proceeds the Holy Ghost.  
7. Since Unity hath several significations, it will be impossible in some sense, for God in any subsistence to be one with Man; therefore we must observe, that God the Son being Eternally God conceived, is Eternally God, and Eternally conceived; he therefore is not changed in his nature nor subsistence; which being still the same, he ceases not to be God, nor the Son of God, by becoming Man. And we may say more generally, he ceases not to be what he ever had been, but gins to be, what before he was not. There is therefore neither a Conversion of the Godhead, changing it from a Divine into a Humane Nature, nor yet a confusion, whereby upon the union of the two Natures, there results a third, which is neither of the two: as when a blue thread is dipped into a yellow Vat, there comes out a third colour, which is neither blue nor yellow, but green; so that the Properties Natural and Personal of the Son of God, remain the same unvaried by this Union.  
8. Jesus Christ being one, who is God conceived and Man conceived in the unity of the Divine Conception, he is the Son of God both in his Divine and Humane Nature. This subsistence therefore of the Son of God in Union with Man, is Mystical in the full and adequate notion of Mysticalness; for the Divine Nature might have been, and have governed the whole Creation, 
Cap. 10.1.  though in no one of its Personal subsistences, it had been one with Man. Jesus Christ therefore the second Person of the Blessed Trinity, hath in him a Mystical subsistence of God and Man become one, and therefore is a Mystical Divine Person.  
9 And because this Mystical Union was effected by the unity of the Divine Conception, therefore God conceiving the Divine and Humane Nature is one, 
Rom. 15.  in as such, the God and Father of Jesus Christ, and therefore is as such, the Divine Nature in its first subsistence become Mystical.  
10. And the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son in this their Mystical subsistence, being as such, the Spirit of the Father of Jesus, 
1 Cor. 2.12  and the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Jesus, is the Divine Nature as such in its third subsistence, hereby become Mystical. 
Rom. 8.9. Gal. 4.6. Phil. 1.19. Cap. 10.1.  So that God in the three subsistences of the Divine Nature upon our Saviour's Incarnation, is become Mystical.  
11. Now it is this Mystical Trinity that the Gospel teaches. Indeed, whilst the Scriptures deliver the Doctrine of the Mystical Trinity, they do (as I have said) insinuate the state of the natural Trinity, but so they instruct us in almost all things in Nature, whilst they teach us their relation to the Mystical and Sacerdotal state of the Divine Kingdom. On the other hand, we see the knowledge of the Natural Trinity, which we learn from the perfections of the Divine Nature, does so lead us to the Faith of the Mystical, as to leave that Christian Mystery to be wholly of supernatural Revelation. For the Mystery, I say the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity, rests wholly upon the ground and pillar of Truth, which is confessed to be the great Mystery of Godliness, God manifest in the flesh; so that our Faith of this Mystery it is plain, stands not in the Wisdom or Reasonings of Men, but in the veracity of God's word. This is sufficient to justify the distinction which I make betwixt the Mystical and Natural Trinity; for this is but analogous with the reason of that difference, which is betwixt Christian and Natural Virtue; for though the Natural form of virtue may be understood by Natural Light, yet the Christian form cannot, which includes all the Vertuousness of the Natural, and somewhat more, which is likewise praiseworthy.   

CAP. XI. Of Christ's Humanity.  
1. WE must confess if Christ's humanity had been wholly Created anew, by its being conceived one with the word, it would then have been nothing of kin, either with Man, or with any other thing in the World. Whereas we are assured, he that is the word, came into that World which had been made by him; 
John 1.10. 1 Joh. 4.17.  and we are in this World, even as he was in this World; his Humane Nature was not therefore strictly Created, but made of some substance preexistent in the World.  
2. Neither was his Manhood made out of any thing, that is not of humane race, for than he had had no more cognation with that Mankind, that is in the World, then with any other parts of this mundane System; but we are taught, 
Heb. 2.14.  that because the Children are partakers of Flesh and Blood, he also himself took part of the same; he has therefore a prime relation to us, and as such, 
Heb 3.11  he is not ashamed to call us his Brethren.  
3. If Christ's Humane Nature than be made out of that one blood, whereof are all the Nations of men, he is the Son of man, and is made so of God by Nature; and therefore the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, 
Heb. 10.5.  as the Author of Nature produced this Manhood.  
4. But though it be God that does produce this Human Nature, yet if he do it by the sole powers of Natural Ordination, according to the Laws established before in the World, for the Production of Mankind, he will not thereby carry off any corrupt or inordinate sensuality, which passes according to course in the natural constitution of things; and though we should suppose that the Personality of this individual Manhood is not subsistent, because of the personal Union with the Divine Logos; yet that of itself changes not this Human Nature in its dispositions; and therefore this Nature would indeed be like ours in its Causes and Constitution, but it would be too like us, because it would not be undefiled. Whereas we know this Nature was Holy, and Harmless, and Undefiled, 
Heb. 7.26. 1 Pet. 1.19.  that it might be offered without spot to God, as a Lamb without blemish, and without spot. It was not therefore solely produced by the powers of Nature.  
5. If the Manhood wherewith God is one, be produced by the Powers of Nature so far as they will reach with rectitude, and by Divine Power superadded, to supply what is defective, than this Manhood hath all that is really and essentially natural to us, and so is related naturally to us; and the supernatural Divine Operation takes away all the depravation of Nature. Whereby it comes to pass, that though he was in all things to be like unto us, that he might have the feeling of our Infirmities and Temptations, 
Heb. 2.17. Heb. 4.15. Heb. 7.27, 28.  yet he had no sin at all; for our Highpriest can have no Infirmities or Sins of his own to offer for, according to the fundamental constitution of the Divine Kingdom, though Moses his Law allowed sinful Men to be Priests, and to offer first for themselves, and then for the People.  
6. Wherefore God in framing the humanity of Christ did continue the powers of Nature to work by their own stated Rules, and without exalting them by a supernatural efficiency added thereto, did produce an effect in the world, which is beyond the force of Natural Powers. Now all such effects as are produced, by the force of Natural Powers, and Divine energy added thereto, are ever in Scripture peculiarly attributed to the Holy Ghost. 
Gen. 1.4.  Thus when the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters or liquid, such effects followed, as the powers of water are naturally uncapable of producing. So both Jesus, his, and his Disciples miraculous operations upon the powers of Nature, and all supernatural Graces, are peculiarly ascribed to the Holy Ghost; for all these diversities of Operations, worketh one and the same Holy Spirit, by the personal disposition of his own Will.  

1 Cor. 12.4, 11.  7. This Manhood become one with the Son of God, is peculiarly therefore the work of the Holy Ghost; and because it was effected by the Holy Ghost coming upon a Woman, and the power of the Most High overshadowing her, and so was born of her, 
Luk. 1.35. Mat. 1.20.  therefore this is a Child conceived by the Holy Ghost, and has that Woman for its Mother.  
8. It is also the Child of Adam, 
Luk. 3.38: Gen. 3.20. Mat. 1.  and of Eve the Mother of all Living, and of Noah. And if God had said, that it should be by the descent of any particular Line, as of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Jesse, David, it will be the Child of these progenitors, and such Predictions and Promises are Divine Characteristics of the individual Person of God's Son become Man, both to the Ages preceding, and following his Birth.  
9 The depravation of our Nature being removed not by the natural efficacy, but supernatural efficiency of the Holy Ghost, there will be no more reason to assert this Woman to have been herself born without all inordinate sensuality, because she was the Mother of this Child, than to affirm the same of all his Pro-parents in the direct Line up to Adam.  
10. But whether she is to be called the Mother of God, is a question of names, and strife of words; for as much as there is a sense wherein she is, and another wherein she is not; therefore it can neither roundly be affirmed, nor denied: Explicate the meaning of the ambiguous Phrase, and the Matter hath no difficulty. The Scripture sometime says that this Person, that is God and Man, is the Son of Abraham, of David, etc. and sometimes with restriction, 
Mat. 1.1. Rom. 1.3, 9, 5.  explains the expression, that it is appertaining to the Flesh.  
11. Seeing God the Son is one with Man of Humane Race; put case that this Man had had a Personal Subsistence in the World before this Union, then until this Union they were two several Persons, and then if the one of these two was Christ, the other was not. And unless this Union altars their Condition, they still continue two several Persons; and so if the one of these two be Christ, the other is not. But we have before proved, that the properties personal and natural of God the Son are unvaried by this Union: therefore unless the Man be altered in some respect, Christ is not God and Man; 
C. 10, 7.  which is contrary to the supposition whereon the inquiry proceeds, How God and Man is one in Christ. Should then the Humane Nature of this Person, by its Union with the Divine Nature, be Annihilated or Changed from its Manhood, Then the Son of God is not by this Union one with Man, but with some other thing, which is likewise contrary to the supposal. And yet if the distinct Personal Subsistence of the Manhood, as well as the Nature should continue after this Union; then they will remain as much two as they were before; but this is contrary to the supposal, that they were become one. It remains therefore that there is some Change in the distinct Personal Subsistence of the Man, by becoming one with the Son of God; but because Personal Capacities are indivisible, no Change of them is partial, but all total.  
Now a total Change of a Person, by Union with another Person, extinguisheth the Changed Personality; so that though it was a voluntary Nature, yet by the Union the voluntary Nature becomes a Natural Property of the Person to which it is United. If therefore the Manhood of our Saviour had had a Personal Subsistence in the World, before its Union with the Godhead; the consequence of such Union had been, that they which before were Naturally two voluntary Agents, by this Personal Union became one Natural Voluntary Agent; and so two Natures both Voluntary become one Person. And because neither the Divine Nature or Personality of the Son of God is changed, this one Person is a Divine Person no less than he was before the Union. Now though there was no Manhood in Being before its Union; for when God sent forth his Son, he was made of a Woman; 
Gal. 4.4.  yet by this case put Hypothetically, we may the better conceive the Nature of the Union betwixt the two Natures in Christ.  
12. For as this Nature did in the fore-described formation, arrive at the form of a Humane Nature by the Efficiency of the Natural and Supernatural Powers, it had its Personal Subsistence in the Word: for since (as has been showed) a Humane Nature that had a Personal Subsistence in the World, being United with the Divine Word, may thereupon become one Person with the Word, and its own Personality be extinguished. Much more shall a Nature that never had Humanity or Personality before, as fast as it attains a Humane form, so have its Personal Subsistence by its Union with the Divine Word, that God and Man are one Voluntary Agent thereby; and all the Rights, Disposals and Acts of the two Natures, are Really and in Truth the Rights, Disposals and Acts of this one Person, that is God and Man.  
13. According to which measures it may be truly said, that God redeems his Church with his own blood; though the Godhead hath no blood of its own. 
Acts. 20.28. John 6.62. John 3.13.  And the Son of Man ascends into Heaven where he was before, though that was never before the place of the Humane Nature; and whilst he was speaking of that future ascent, the Son of Man was even then in Heaven, though his Humane Nature was at that time only on Earth.  
14. God that made two Stones in the condition of two several moveables, so that one may move upwards whilst the other moves downward, or one rest whilst the other moves; could have made the Substance of these two stones to have adhered together inseparably, and become only one movement. And though Volitions are not motions, yet Volitions are the Acts of Wills; as Motions (if they be Actions,) are the Actions of Bodies. We cannot make Natural Wills, and consequently we cannot make Natural Persons; and therefore it is that we cannot make many Natural Persons, to become one Natural Person: But when God hath made men that are Natural Persons we can of them Create Political Persons, because we can Create a Political Will; and therefore we can also of many Political Persons, make one Political Person. We can make one man a King, because we can give one a Sovereign Will in this Country, and another a King in another Country, and a third in another; and we can join all these three into one Political Person, by making the Will of the major part the will of the whole; Governing all these Kingdoms in the Person of a Trium virate. For the Power of making many Persons of any kind into one Person of the same kind, is but commensurate to the power of making several Persons of the same Condition. Wherefore, since God can make several natural Persons, he can by the same Omnipotence make two Natural Persons to become one Natural Person; for this must needs be as feasible to the Divine Power, as the other is to ours. Now though the Divine Nature and Person of God the Son be Eternal, yet the Humane Nature being Temporal, it is obnoctious to the Divine Arbitrament (notwithstanding its voluntariness) whether it shall have a Personal Subsistence of its Self, or be the Natural Property of the Person of the Son of ●od, and so God and Man be so United that they become one Voluntary Agent and one Divine Person. Now since we are ascertained that God wills the Word to become Flesh, 
Rom. 5.17. 1 Cor. 8.6. Eph. 4.5.  we are thereby assured that God wills God and Man to be one Christ, one Lord, and one Person.   

CHAP. XII. Of the Mystery of God's Kingdom.  
1. NOW if the Son of God be one Person with Man, he is one Person with a Humane Body Vitally United with a Reasonable Soul; let us reflect then upon our own make and frame, that we may the better understand this Mystery of the Universe. Now a Humane Body is a Body exalted by a regular Efficiency of Man's Prolific Powers, to that Curious, Stupendious and Unparallelled Mechamisme by Organization, and to that refined Temperature by more than Myriad of exquisite Percolations, as is not to be found in any other parts of this Visible World; which being for Contrivance and Counsel, as it were the Masterpiece of Divine Skill in Matter, God statedly beholds this singular Work of his own Hands when arrived at due Maturity, with such a favourable Aspiration, as is no less (or but a little less,) than that which he vouchsafeth to the Inhabitants of the Intellectual World. And as we see, much what the same measure of strength as suppots a weight, will serve to raise it, so same the favourable Aspiration that upholds an Intellectual Creature in Being, is of force sufficient to raise it into Being: Therefore such Aspiration will give Being to a Conscious Life, as preserves the Mental Natures of the Invisible World,  
2. But then this Aspiration being included in the Divine favourable intuition on what his hand hath curiously wrought in these lower parts of the Earth, 
Psa. 139.15.  though it hath a Conscious Life for its effect, yet it is not a separate Conscious Life, but a Conscious Life enlivening that accurate frame of Matter: now a conscious Life vitally United to a Humane Body is a rational Soul.  
3. And because this Soul doth result from the Divine Aspiration on a being framed by the course of Natural Causes in the material System of this World, therefore it is not Properly Created, nor yet Miraculous, but Natural.  
4. Yet this Soul cannot be said to be therefore educed out of the powers of Matter; because the Divine Aspiration is not of that kind which concurs with Corporeal Motions, but such as is afforded to the Intellectual Natures; though upon the approbation of this singular piece of Divine Workmanship in this World of Bodies.  
5. He that said of the Humane Soul, Creature infundendo, or, infunditur Creando, spoke something this way, but whether expressly enough needs not be inquired; since the Scripture assures us that the Lord who Created the whole frame of this Visible World, besides that does form the Spirit of Man within him. That the Spirit in Man being by the Inspiration of the Almighty, 
Zech. 12.1. Job. 32.8.27.3. Gen. 2.7.  is Intellectual; and the breath in our Nostrils, our Spirit and Life, is the Spirit of God which he Breathed into Man's Nostrils, by which he became a living Soul. So that if Brutes have Souls, and they be educed out of the Powers of Matter; yet the Soul of Man according to a course settled by God in Nature, being a Conscious Life, is by a Divine Aspiration correspondent to those of the Superior World. By which it appears Man's Nature participates both of this and the other World in its Constitution.  
6. Therefore the Son of God, who is God, being one Person with Man, hath thereby a new alliance both to the Material and Intellectual World, and a new Cognation both with the Celestial and Terrestrial Inhabitants; and because the Union of God and Man in Christ is Mystical, 
Cap. 10.8.  therefore the whole Kingdom of God is put into a Mystical state and frame upon this new Cognation with all things in Heaven and Earth.  
7. And if according to the Opinion of some of the most celebrated Philosophers in this Age, the motion of every part of Matter does really so diffuse itself that the whole System of Matter is affected thereby; and if withal, the parts that make up the Intellectual World, have a correspondent Communion amongst themselves; then by this Union of God and Man there is (as it were) a new Leaven, which may be sufficient in Gods due time, to Leaven the Mass of the whole Creation: And Christ's Resurrection is a Specimen of its efficacy, and a ground of our expectation. But should this prove only to be their Conjecture, and not the Natural way of efficiency; yet we are however sufficiently assured that the effect shall be produced; and that in Christ all things in Heaven and Earth shall be recollected into one, 
Eph. 1.10. Col. 1.17, 18, 19, 20. 2 Thes. 2.1. Acts. 3.21.  and that there shall be a restitution of all things whereby they shall be restored into one blessed frame.  
8. The Mystical constitution of the Divine Kingdom, being therefore for the restoration of the Natural Kingdom in a renewed integrity; it is a form of Government, which in its Nature and design is manifestly subordinate to the Original Government of the Divine Kingdom in its Primitive institution.  
9 If then the Supreme Governor be the same, yet as King of this Mystical Kingdom, he is less than the King of the Natural Kingdom; not in himself, or Naturally, but in the state of a Governor or Politically (the Ancients call it Oeconomically:) But in plain terms the sense stands thus. God that humbleth himself when he inspects the things that are done in Heaven and in Earth; however he undertakes the Government and Management of them, does yet more humble himself, when for the good of the Creation, 
Psal. 113.6.  he governs the Universe in the Mystical constitution for the redintegrating of the Natural Kingdom into one blessed frame.  
10. Whereas then God in the first Subsistence of the Divine Nature, that is, God the Father is first in the Address, as Lord of the Natural Kingdom: so God, even the same God, in the second Subsistence of the Divine Nature, that is, God the Son is first in the Address as Lord of the Mystical Kingdom, considered as Mystical and Subordinate; because God manifest in the Flesh is the Pillar and Ground of Truth and the confessedly great Mystery of Godliness.  
11. Before the Mystery was made known, therefore the stile Lord did more directly and more usually indigitate God the Father as we find in the old Testament; but since the Mystery is to be acknowledged by all the Subjects of God's Kingdom, the Title of Lord doth more directly denote God the Son, and is therefore in the new Testament most commonly attributed to Jesus Christ, though they be both one Lord as well as one God.  
12. The Son therefore being Lord of the Divine Kingdom in its Mystical and Subordinate State, in treating with his Subjects, will have occasion to speak of himself, as less than his Father in many of the affairs of the Mystical Kingdom and Government; especially in and about the change of the Natural into the Mystical Frame, though he be the same God & Lord with the Father: For God doth humble himself more in condescending to Govern the World in this State, than in the first Natural Constitution of his Kingdom. The Son therefore is less than the Father, not only as Man, but also as God, Governing the Divine Kingdom in the Mystical State. 
John 3.35. Mat. 11.27. Acts 2.32. Joh. 10.20. 1 Cor. 11.3. John 6.38. 1 Cor. 3.23. 1 Cor. 15.27. Phil. 2.7. Zech. 3.8. Joh 17.5.  Accordingly we read the Sons Power is given, is received of the Father, he receives command from the Father; the head of Christ is God even the Father; for he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him. Christ is Gods who put all things under his feet, yea in all he is the Father's Servant; but this is only until the Mystery be finished, and then the Son shall be glorified with the Father, with the same glory which he had with him before the World was.  
13. I need but note, the Constitution of the Divine Kingdom being thus far changed in the Mystical State; that the Laws and Privileges, the Rights and State of its Subjects, its Provisions and Defences, its Power and Administration, are all altered so as shall comport therewith; for these are plain enough in the Scripture to observant Readers; and for our own particular, it is sufficient to remark, That Repentance toward God, 
Acts 20.21.  and Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; which had no place in the Primitive Institution of God's Kingdom, are now the sum of the Articles in the Fundamental Contract of this Mystical Kingdom.   

CHAP. XIII. Of the Covenant of God's Kingdom.  
MOSES designing to teach the Church in the Wilderness, that it was Jehovah (that is the only God and their God) which Created the World, as we read, Ge●. 2.4. ●e so introduces that Conclusion, Chap. 1. That it appears their God by the saying of his Word, and the operation of his Spirit did make all things; which with the Psalmists exposition does sufficiently insinuate, that God, his Word and his Spirit was the maker of the World. 
Psal. 33.6.  When therefore St. John informs us there are Three in Heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, 
1 Joh. 5.7.  and these three are one; he therein teaches no other than the Doctrine of Paradise. It cannot be doubted but men's apprehensions of this as well as other things were very much darkened by the fall, but God not sealing up Mankind irrevocably for Hell, did continue to his People in the succeeding Ages, some sufficient knowledge of this as well as of other saving Truths. For in the Old Testament there are such attributions to the Word of God, as could not belong to a verbal significancy of what God means, nor yet to the Works of God as indications to men of what was in God's mind. Those Holy Men therefore that attributed such things to God's Word, did conceive in it a more Vital Substantial Subsistence; as hath been asserted by many Doctors, not only in the Christian Church, but also amongst the Jews.  
2. But though God's People of old had believed the Doctrine of the Trinity most distinctly, yet the Reasons of State in the Divine Government did not then call for their express acknowledgement of it in that stipulation, whereby they held their Rights in God's Kingdom. For, 1. The most proper form of Covenant against the defection by Anarchy; is the acknowledgement of the Divine Government: And 2. Against the defection by Polytheism, the acknowledgement of the Divine Monarchy: And 3. Against the defection by Sophistry, depraving the Divine Nature, the acknowledgement of the Trinity; as being Sacraments most accommodate to List men on God's side, in direct opposition to these respective Apostasies as they did arise in the World.  
3. For first, Before the Flood, were the Violent, the Ungodly, that thought not on Heaven, would do what they Listed, 
Gen. 6.11. 2 Pet. 2.5. Mat. 24.37. Gen. 6.5, 12.  and were Ungovernable, and these acknowledged therefore no Superior Power Governing the World. And therefore Josephus (as I remember) somewhere calls them the Anarchical. The acknowledgement of Subjection to the Divine Government, as was then the most apposite form of Covenant which Men were to enter into, and they that took it were called the Sons of God; in the sense that Subjects in opposition to Strangers or Aliens, are called the Children of the King, 
Gen. 6.2. Mat. 17.25. Mat. 8.12. Gen. 4.26.  and the Children of the Kingdom. In the days of Enos Men began to be called the Lords, (as making such a Public Profession;) for so many interpret that Expression, Gen. 4.26. Somewhat like that of jacob's, Gen. 48.16. But more parallel to that of St. Paul, Of whom the whole Family of Heaven and Earth is called. 
Eph. 3.15. Judas 14. 2 Pet. 2.5.  Enoch's denouncing vengeance asserts the Divine Rights of Government; and Noah's Preaching Righteousness Proclaims the Divine Judicature: But Wickedness and Irreligion prevailing against the methods of Governing Grace and Wisdom; God destroys them, bringing in the Flood upon the Ungodly, but saving Noah and his House. Yet soon after the same Anarchical Impiety sprung up again, for at Babel God complains of the Children of Men, 
Gen. 11.6.  (the style of their Predecessors in the Old World) that they were all one, and would do what they listed, and would not be restrained or governed. And the Divine Vengeance which destroyed the Error, leaving the Men alive on Earth was peculiarly adapted to their Case; for the Dividing of their Tongues being a stroke immediately upon their own Mental Nature, by confounding their Conceptions either of Things or Words, did so throughly convince them that there was a Superior Being which exercised a Power over their minds, that we meet not with one Atheist for many Hundred years after; nor with any Nation of Atheists ever since this very Day. So far then did the acknowledgement of the Divine Government obtain.  
4. But shortly after there grew up another Error alike pernicious; for we find in Abraham's days, Polytheism did spread very far. Against this God calls forth Abraham, 
J●s. 24.2, 3, ●●. 15.  and afterwards Isaac and Jacob; and charges them with the care of his Truth; appearing to them by the Name of God Almighty, (Exod. 6.3.) which is that style that infallibly asserts the Unity of the Deity, for as much as two or more Almighty's, is a plain contradiction. So that now the fundamental Covenant in opposition to Polytheism required an explicit acknowledgement of one God only, and of the Divine Monarchy. To this Josephus refers in many places. For however it was before, not only the Anarchical but the Antimonarchical were now all Aliens and Traitors to God. But when this one God Almighty upon his delivering Israel out of Egypt, did assume to himself the style of the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, as his Everlasting Memorial. This was an introduction to the Covenant of peculiarity, which he made expressly with his Church as separate from all other Nations. 
Exod. 3.15.  When God therefore as Jehovah, the God of Israel, indents with them, that they should have no other God beside himself; thereupon he takes that Nation to be to him a Nation of Priests, 
Exod. 20.  whereby (as Philo Judaeus rightly asserts) the Nation of Israel, became the Priest of all Mankind, 
Exod. 19.5, 6.  and consequently of all this lower World.  
But alas, this National Priesthood, was so far from bringing the blessing of Abraham upon the Gentiles, contained either in the Monarchical Covenant of the one true God, or in the Covenant of peculiarity to Proselytes of the gates, or of Righteousness, that they themselves did shamefully prevaricate, and joined with the Heathen in their Idolatry. So that God after long patience did serve the designs of his own Kingdom, by their miserable Dissipation and Captivity; for he had oft times foretold them by his Prophets, that when they were cast out of their own Land, both they should know that he was the Lord, and he would be sanctified in them before the Heathen; both which we find exactly fulfilled in the Event. For (1.) In their Captivity, they learned in a few Years to renounce the Heathen Idolatry for ever, which in their own Land they could not be taught to do in many Ages. And (2.) Forthwith an Edict is issued forth over the greatest Empire in the World, 
Dan. 3. Ezra. 1. Dan. ●  requiring an Universal acknowledgement of the one True Supreme God, above all other Gods; and after that, another by Cyrus of the like purpose; and a third by Dairus over all the Empire of the Medes and Persians. It is to be further observed, that the Ten Tribes were first dispersed into the Cities of the Medes, and sometime after the Jews were scattered about the Assyrian or Babylonian Monarchy: So that the Israelitts had conversation with almost all Nations, and they owning but one God and Worshipping him in their several Dispersions; considering men being acquainted with their pretensions, would by the reason of the thing be drawn to favour the Truth, and by further inquiries abroad be fully satisfied. And accordingly after this Dispersion of theirs, we begin to meet with the Grecian Sages and Philosophers; whereas before they had nothing amongst them but Mythology, which was some obscure remainders of Ancient Tradition, but so disguised with old fabulous stories, that Truth could not be known from Falshood. And as many Learned Men, (as well of late as formerly) have proved from the Ancient Records of those times; the effect of all this was, that generally all Nations did acknowledge one God over all, though they did not leave off the Worship of their Heathen Gods: No more than the Papists, that believe but one Supreme God, do therefore forbear to Worship many of the Invisible World, or to invocate the Aid of Saints and Angels, whilst they confess but one Advocate with the Father. Thus much did Truth gain for the establishment of the Divine Monarchy, and asserting the Unity of the Godhead.  
5. In the mean time some Sophisters had devised a new way to subvert the Divine Government and Religion, under the profession of one God. There being two ways of doing this, both were abetted, and that by very many for some time before the coming of our Saviour.  
The first giving us for the Supreme God, a Vivacious Self-activity, or an Universal Life without Understanding, assigning this to be the source of all Motion. Now though this Life, (according to their fancy) is all the force of the World; yet it is plain the force is not Omnipotence, as that attribute belongs to the true God; and being it is supposed to have neither Wisdom or Goodness, no thanks or Religious regard is due to it. These were those spurious ●permatists, who though they were not form into any Sect, were yet growing very Popular; and these instead of God, who is a blessed mind, intruded upon us an Eternal vivid impetuosity impelling all things without Counsel.  
The other were the infamous Sect of the Epicurians, who confessed indeed the Divine Nature to be an intelligent mind, but without all concern or resentments, uncapable of being pleased or displeased; and so for God that is a Holy Spirit, they substituted an Everlasting Gaze. I know they oft depredicated the blessedness of their Deity, which had it been done without collusion, would indeed have argued him to be a Spirit: But (as Cicero said of these same men long ago,) we are not to regard what they say, but what they are to say in consequence of their own Opinions. The blessedness of their God which they mean, and as they define it; is nothing else than no pain of Body or grievance of Mind; and then a mind that is no Spirit, nor capable of being pleased or displeased; (in their notion of blessedness,) must of necessity be ever blessed; and so is the Body of a Stone and the Soul of a Psychopannuchite most perfectly blessed. Now it is plain, all Religious Addresses or Respect had to an unconcerned Mind, which having no Spirit, is uncapable of liking or disliking, are most absurd and Ridiculous. So that each sort of these Philosophers in their several ways, may profess and believe but one God only, and yet both wholly evacuate the Power of the Divine Kingdom, and defeat all the Counsels which God had in revealing himself unto Mankind, and entering into a Covenant with them.  
6. But when in the Wisdom of God (as St. Paul observes) the World through Wisdom (even this spurious Philosophy) knew not God, 
● Cor. 1 21.  it pleased God, through preaching, to save them that believe. The Truth therefore by which God saved Men from these destructive Delusions, was that which the Apostles Preached; which we know was the very same Faith which they Baptised Believers into; and we are sure they were to baptise into the Name of the F●●her, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. 
●a● 28.  Therefore the acknowledgement of the Trinity, was the Covenant Stipulation instituted by God, and set up against the Error that was brought in by the Grecian Wisdom; to save men from perishing by that growing destructive mischief. For it is manifest from the foregoing account (ch. 4. ch. 5.) that the Psychical Men, that believe God to be Life without Conciousness, cannot acknowledge there are more real Subsistences of the Deity than one; and whoever believes more, must in consequence confess God to be an Intellectual Being. The Epicureans might own two (though not Personal) Subsistences of their Deity, but being consistent with themselves, they could not confess a third whilst they denied Gods being pleased or displeased: (as appears ch. 5. ch. 6.) Therefore this form of Covenant requiring the explicit acknowledgement of three Persons in one God, was as directly opposite to those deceits that were then prevailing in the World, as was the express owning of the Divine Government, to the Anarchical Old World; or of the Divine Monarchy, to the Antimonarchical Heathen World; for all these are suitable Sacramental engagements, listing men for God against these several Apostasies. And considering the Trinity in the state of the Divine Nature, and not in its Mystery; these are so many forms of a Covenant, that is, one and the same in Substance, but diversified in the Expressions; as the condition of Religion in the several Ages of the World did require. And from hence, (1.) It appears that God entered our express belief of the Trinity into the Covenant of Life, not only because it was a most true and weighty, a most honourable and glorious acknowledgement of his Divine Majesty; (for a Trinity of real Subsistences, (as has been seen) speaks all the most absolute perfections of being in Substantial Subsistence) but likewise out of pity to the pressing necessity of Mankind; because it was necessary and seasonable, wholesome and profitable to Men, to save their Souls from the Deceits of this present World. (2.) Atheism and Polytheism being provided against by the two former forms of Covenant, it appears, if men be not Psychical or Epicurean Divines, in consequence of their own opinions, they are to acknowledge the truth of the Natural Trinity. So that Deists, Jews, Mahometans, and all Genuine Philosophers, will join with the Trinitarians, when they please to reason warily upon their own Principles; which when they do, it may somewhat dispose them to a better opinion of Christianity; if they please to remember that this sublime Doctrine was the institution of the Holy Fishers, and withal take notice that they had been with Jesus.   

CHAP. XIV. Of the Christian form of Baptism.  
1. HAD Christianity been nothing else but Natural Religion, yet this account might have been given, why we should have made a formal recognition of the Blessed Trinity, at our foederal initiation into it; but because our Religion is a Mystery of Godliness, and Baptism a Mystical Rite of that Religion; we are further to observe, that God having given us (as far as is possible) an ocular demonstration of the Trinity, by sending the Son, and the Spirit visibly into the World, 
Cap. 10.8  our Saviour Jesus Christ being the second Person in the Mystical Trinity, and in that state commanding all Mankind to be Baptised in the Name of his Father, Himself, and the Holy Ghost, 
Math. 28.  his and his Father's Spirit: it is plain, by this Command he obliges all formally and primarily into the confession of the Christian Mystical Trinity, but no● of the Natural Trinity, saving as in consequence thereof; 
1 Pet. 3.21.  and because Baptism does now save us upon this Recognition hearty made, the acknowledgement of this Mystical Trinity by this institution of Christ is become necessary, that we may be instated with the peace of God in the Rights of the Divine Kingdom.  
2. This is evident from the very foundation of the Christian Religion, which is, that Jesus is the Christ; for he that believes that Jesus is not the Christ, is lost beyond all Redemption; 
1 Cor. 3.11.  but he that believes that Jesus is the Christ, believes that Jesus Christ is one and the same Person. And he that believes that Jesus the Son of Man, is Christ the Son of God, does believe that the Son of Man and the Son of God is one and the same Person; and because this Jesus is so the Son of Man, as to be himself Man, and this Christ, so the Son of God, as to be himself God, therefore God and Man is one and the same Person, even Jesus Christ. And because this same Person that is God and Man, is so God, as to be the Son of God, therefore there is another Person beside even his Father, that is God. In the confession of Jesus to be the Christ, 
Cap 1●. 8, 9  there is included then the acknowledgement of two Personal Subsistences of the Godhead, and because the one of these is in Personal Union with Man, therefore both he himself, and his Father are Persons of the Mystical Trinity.  
3. But because God and Man was not always united in one Person, it is to be considered by what Power this Union was effected. If he that is to be Baptised knows not, he is first to be instructed, before he may be Baptised, yea, though he hath had some initiative engagement to believe in Jesus, he is to be taught and baptised again, as the case of those Ephesians shows (acts 19) But should the person demanding Baptism be so profligate an admirer of the power of darkness, as to aver that the Infernal Powers did unite the Godhead into this personal Union with Man, and then Inaugurate this Person into his Office by a visible descent upon him, and authorise him to teach the Doctrine which he taught, and empower him to work Miracles for its confirmation, and afterwards in ostentation of his power over God and Man, first ignominiously put him to death, and then raise him from the dead, etc. this height of flagitious obloquy and horrid blasphemy being never to be forgiven, he is never to be baptised, but utterly rejected as an eternally unpardonable Reprobate. But if the Union of God and Man in one Person be acknowledged to be effected by the Divine Power, 
Cap. 11 6. C●p. 1●. 10.  than the Holy Ghost, which is the Divine Power thus operating, is the Spirit of the Father of Jesus, and the Spirit of Jesus, and consequently is a Mystical Person of the Blessed Trinity. Therefore our Confession of Jesus to be the Christ, does contain in it the acknowledgement of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost in the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity. And this is the Faith, which the Church in all Ages is to contend for, into which it is to baptise all its visible Members, and to explicate in its Symbols, or Creeds. For the shortest abridgement or foundation of the Christian Faith is, Jesus is the Christ: The next is the Mystery of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in the Baptismal Stipulation; and the next the Creeds.  
4. The practice of this Faith is briefly deduced thus. Since the natural Trinity is become Mystical by the incarnation of the only begotten Son of God, 
Cap. 10. Cap. 12.  and thereupon the Universal Kingdom of God is put under the government of God in that Mystical state of the Divine Nature, wherein as such, God the Son made Man, is the first in the Address; the same honour therefore belongs to the Son, as to the Father. And in the retrospect, since Christ says, that the Father hath totally committed the government of the Divine Kingdom to the Son, 
John 5. John 5.22, 23.  and that because he is the Son of Man, that is, the word made flesh, and thereupon all are to honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, and that he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father; this duty supposes the belief of the Mystical Trinity, as that belief inferred this duty. For we cannot understand how to go about the discharging this duty, unless we believe the Father and the Son either to be two several equal Gods, or being they are two different Persons, to be each equally one and the same God. For to honour one Person in my heart, as I honour another, whose personal perfections at the same time I believe to be inferior to the others, is such a thought as no Man's Mind can think, though ●e would never so fain. But every one honours the Son as he honours the Father, who believes that the Father is God, and that the Son is the same God conceived, and with infinite truth and reality living and subsisting himself in that conception, and that he is nevertheless God for his being Man. For it is plain, such a one cannot deny the Divine Being of the Son, but he must deny the Being of God the Father, or deny any perfection to be in the Son, but he must deny the same of the Father. Therefore according to the reason of the Mystical Divine Kingdom, and the Testimony of our Saviour: This equal honouring of God the Father and the Son, is the Moral and Religious form of all Christian Worship and Service. Which proves that though the Doctrine of the Christian Trinity be speculative in the disquisition of it (as even Justice and Temperance are) yet it is such a speculation, that without the attainment of that Faith in our Minds, we can perform no Religious Duty truly Christian, a Christian Life itself being nothing else, but the Praxis upon the belief of the Kingdom of God, as governed in the hand of Christ by the Mystical Trinity. We are then to receive the institutions of Christ, not as the Ordinances of a Moses, a Mediatory Angel, or a Vicegerent, but as the Orders of a Lord in his own House, 
Heb. 3.2, 3, 4.  which is the whole Family of Heaven and Earth.  
5. Having pointed out the practical use of this Doctrine in general, I need not descend to the particulars. It's other uses, are first the Political, for the re-establishing the state of the Divine Kingdom, by reconciling all things in Heaven and Earth; so that the part that had made a revolt, might upon satisfaction given, be re-instated with the peace of God into the Blessed Society, and all things in Heaven and Earth become one. And 2dly the Spiritual, for redintegration by physical (or if you please supernatural) efficiency, quickening all things with such Divine Life, as is requisite to the happiness of the Subjects of God's Kingdom, that are in his favour. But I desire to be excused from meddling with these, because the Antitrinitarians generally now denying the Sacrifice of Christ's death, whereon the political force does depend, and scarcely confessing the Resurrection of the Body, which is the most conspicuous effect of the re●integrating virtue of the Divine Life in Christ. I intent not to enter into any Dispute up●● these Points; yet if I might not displease them. I would, as a Friend remind them, that as I hope it does now competently appear. 〈◊〉 their opposition against the Trinity is grounded upon a Metaphys●● presumption of theirs, wherein they take it for ●●anted, that th●●●pream Spirit must needs subsist only in one real Subsistence; fo● 〈◊〉 Reason, because it is impossible for Matter, or any Created Spiri●● have any more, which now is found to be no reason at all. 〈◊〉 doubt not, but upon due examination they will find, that their de●● of Christ's Satisfaction, is built up●● a false System in Morality 〈◊〉 Politics; and their scruple about 〈◊〉 Resurrection, upon an arbi●●●●● and insufficient Hypothesis in Physics.  
6. But whatever they do, since we have found, that the Reason 〈◊〉 Nature of the Thing, and the Testimony of the Scripture, the My●●●ry in the Incarnation of the Son of God (God manifest in the Fl●●● and the Obligation of our Vow in Baptism, do all concur to con●●● us in the belief of the Blessed Trinity; let us, who have attaine● the acknowledgement of the Truth as it is in Jesus, be sure to hold 〈◊〉 Mystery of the Faith in a pure Conscience, and then we shall both ●●ceive the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Love of God, and Communion of the Holy Ghost, and likewise give Glory to God Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, Three Persons, God, Holy, Blessed, and Eternal: For his is the Kingdom, Power, and the Glory, for Ever, and Ever, Amen.   
FINIS.