pt**s*-
LIBRARY
OV THE
PRINCETON, HT. J.
DONATION OF
S A M UEL AGNEW,
/-J. . OF H U I I, A D E LPH I A. HA.
Division. ._ , (V
Shelf,
V' Book, No,..
Utter
No.
£*3S
■mrl
VINDICATION
O F T H E
TRUE T>E1TT
O F O U R
Blessed Saviour;
In Anfwer to a Pamphlet, Intitled,
An Humble Enquiry into the Scripture
Account of Jefus Chrifl, &c.
By Joseph Boys e.
C&e CWcii cnttion, Ca?reffen
LONDON:
Printed for J o h n Clark at the Bible and Crown
in the Poultry near Cheapfide. IH9'
PREFACE
VERY judicious and fe-
rious Chrillian, to whom
the Interelt of the Gojpel,
and the Glory of its lief-
fed Author is valuable and
dear, muft needs relent ic
as the Reproach and Infe-
licity of the Age wherein
we live, that while the whole of Revealed Re-
ligion is run down on the one Hand by Infi-
dels (under the Name of <r Deijls^) Some of its
moft important Articles are no lefs violently
afTaulted on the other by fueh as pretend to
the Faith of Chrijiians. I know indeed our
late 'Unitarians highly value themfelves upon
their numerous Trails (with which the Prefs
has of late Years fwarm'd) as the breaking
out of fome glorious Light after a long Night
of Darknefs ; and are ready to equalize their
Attempt of overthrowing the Scheme of thofe
they call Trinitarians^ to that of our firit
Reformers^ who oppofed the Corruptions of
^Popery. But I mult profefs, upon a diligent
and impartial View of their Writings, i am
confirm'd in the Opinion, that they have
(whatever their Authors might intend)
much more promoted the Interelt of Infide-
lity and ^Deifm^ than that of Christianity.
1 ihall not at prefent difpute the Point with
A t- them,,
T R E FA C E.
them, why they engrofs this Title of Vtti-
t avians to themfelves, when the IJnity of the
'Divine Nature is not the Matter in Difpute
between them and us. Unlefs they could
ihew us, That that Diftin&ion, which we
fuppofe to be between the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, is inconfrftent with any fuch V-
nity.
I forefee indeed they will be ready to en-
quire, Wherein I fuppofe that Difiinclion to
lye, or what are the particular Grounds oi it ?
But as to that, lam not afham'd to profefs
my Ignorance. I am contented to believe
there is fuch a 'Diftinftion between the Fa-
ther, Son, and Holy Spirit, as is a fufficient
Foundation for the diftincl: Things that are in
Scripture attributed to 'em, and yet fuch as
does not imply the Multiplication of the un-
divided Divine Eflence and Nature ; tho' I
cannot affign, or conceive the particular
Grounds of the Diftin&ion it felf. For fuch
a c DiJiinttion may be very poflible (for any
thing my Reafon fuggefts to the contrary) in
an infinite Being, notwithstanding the 'Unity
of it, as is not to be found in any finite Be-
ings, that have zfeparate Exifience. And I
think 'tis far more iafe, and exprefles a more
becoming Reverence for divine Revelation
to admit of fuch an Article (tho' there be much
in the Manner oftheThingunfearchabletous)
than to offer a continual Violence to the plain
and frequent Declarations of the Holy Scrip-
tures concerning the 'Deity of the Son, and
the Holy Spirit. And I think there is juit,
Reafon to lay, That our late Vnitariansh&ve
managed this Caufe in a Manner that tends
very
"PREFACE.
very little to the Honour of thofe Sacred
JVritingSy which are the Standard and Teit
of our Religion. For what can more effe-
ctually leffen their Authority with the Peo-
ple, than for our Adverfaries at every Turn
to call in Queltion, whether this or that par-
ticular Text be authentick and tmcorrupted?
Nay fometimes to raife Objections againlt en-
tire Books that belong to the Sacred Canon?
And mult it not needs weaken our Opinion
of their divine Infpiration, to fuppofe that
the Pen-men of 'em have in Matters of the
highelt Moment and Confequence (as particu-
larly, when they afcribe the Creation to our
Lord Jefus) us'd fuch Expreffions as need all
imaginable Subtleties of Critic ifmio expound
'em to another Senfe, and reconcile 'em with
what our Opinions fuppofe to be the Truth I
Nay, how hard is it to preferve any Venera-
tion for thofe Writings as divinely in/pird,
in which our Adverfaries fuppofe fo many
PafTages out of the QldTejtament concerning
the great Jehovah, apply 'd to our BleJ/ed Sa-
viour in the New, meerly by Way of Allufioii
and Accommodation>when yet they appear to
any impartial Reader produc'd as direct Proof
of what the Apoitles attribute to him ? So that
'tis high Time for our Unitarians to apply
themfelves to the {topping the Progrefsof that
Infidelity^ which themlelves have fown the
Seeds of, by thus unietding the Minds of fo
many in the Chriitian Faith thro' their over-
eager Oppofition to fuch important Articles of
it,as ihzT)eity and Incarnatwnof our Bleffed Sa-
viour. But yet I mult upon fecond Thoughts
tell 'em, That if they write againlt Infidels and
A 3 'Detfis
PREFACE.
Tteifls at no better rate than the late Author
of the Scandal and Folly of the Crofs removdj
(See 4th Colled of 'Unit. Trails.) it were
much better they fhou'd forbear intermeddling
in thatDifpute. For that Author has notori-
oufly betray d the Chriflian Caufe he had un-
dertaken to defend ; and can find no way fo
proper to fupport the Credit of it with Infi-
dels, as by giving up all its peculiar Doftrines
that he thought might difguit and fhock 'em.
He is for making an eafy Compofition with
'em, and provided they will allow him a few
Matters of Faff, (on which he'll put aCon-
ftru&ion too as agreeable to their Relifh as
poilible) he'll throw up all thofe Articles of
Faith to 'em, that have been hitherto ac-
counted the peculiar Difcoveries of Divine
Revelation. For in his Preface he undertakes
to give the T)e ifts an Account of the true Fun-
damentals of the Chriflian Religion, by which
they are to judge of it, and not by the jarring
Opinions of the fever al Chriftians they con-
verfe with. And thofe he has reduc'd to this
narrow Compafs, " That there is a God, and
<{ an Eternal Life (ratified and confirmed by
" the Death and Refurrection of ChrifiJ and
" that we mufi be entirely good Men, if we
" hope to be Partakers of it. Nay he tells
'em, " Revelation was propofed to no other
" End than to give fufficient Proofs of an
" Eternal Life. And what modern Infidel
or Deijt will difpute any one of his three
Principles with him I Nay how unreasonable
were it in the P)eijls, when he goes fo far to
oblige 'em, if they mould not meet him half
way, and believe with him, that our Blejfed
Sa-
T R E FACE.
Saviour died and rofe again to confirm that
Doftrine of Eternal Life, which is their own
Credd as well as ours ? They may it feems
be good Chriftians upon their Belief of thefe
three Articles, tho' they believe not one
Word of that State of Corruption and Guilt
into which Mankind is fallen, or of the In-
carnation of the Son of God, or of his dyijtg
in our Place and Steady as a Sacrifice ofAttone-
ment to the Jujlice of God, or of his Inter ref-
fion in Heaven in vertue of fuch a truly Ex-
piatory Sacrifice, or of our J unification by the
free Grace of God, thro 7 the Redemption that
is in him, or of the Neceffity of the Renewing
Grace of the Holy Spirit in order to our Rege-
neration and our continued Progrefs in Holi-
7iefs ; fuch Doclrines as thefe (that have been
hitherto thought the 'Principles of Revealed
Religion) that Author feems very willing to
difcard, on pretence of recommending it to
the Tteifts, and facilitating their Belief of it.
In fhort, he requires 'em to take no new 'Do-
Brines into their Creed in order to their be-
coming Chriftians, but only fome new Matters
of Fact that tend to confirm the 'DicJates of
Natural Light. To this purpofe he telis'em
•>ro*
again at/, io. <c That Chriftian Religion p
" perly is nothing elfe but Natural Religion,
u whofe Light Sin had almoft extinguifh'd.
" And God to give it its fir ft Splendor, yields
" up Chrift to *Death, which vindicates us from
* theSlavery of Sin. So that Chriit died to
confirm no peculiar T)oc~lrines of his own, bur
only thofe T)i&ates or Principles of Natural
Religion that Sin had almoft extinguijh'd. Such
as the three fore-menrion'd Dictates, which he
A 4 makes
T R E FA C E.
makes the Fundamental Truths of the Gojpel,
and with which our moderrfDeiJis will eafily a-
gree with him in Ranking 'em among their O-
racles of Reafon. So that his main Labour with
the 'Deifts is to reconcile 'em to this Matter of
Faff, That Chrift died ontbeCrofs. And ac-
cordingly he is very careful to takeaway from
theCrofe nfelf, whatever might be aStumbling-
block to 'em. To that purpofe, he ajjigns four
Reafons of the Death of Chrift: « The Fird is,
to attefi theTruth of this 'Doctrine concern-
ing another Life, andfeal it with his Blood.
J he Second, That he muft die in order to his
being raised again, whereby God confirms the
Truth of this c Dot~irine he taught concerning
another Life. The Third is, That he might-
leave his *Difciples an Example of fuffering
for thisTruth. The Fourth is,That his thus
dying to atteft the Doctrine of Eternal Life,
by perfwading Men of the Truth of it might
bring y em to a good Life, and fo free' em from
Sin. And this (he tells us) is all that's
meant by Chrift' s becoming a Ranfom or Price
of Redemption, his Giving up himfelf for us
that he might redeem us from Iniquity, &c.
His reconciling us to God by his blood, his
bearing our Sins in his own Body, &c.
Thefe are all the Reafons that Author is plea-
fed to ailign of Chrift 's Death and Sufferings .
But what then mall we make of all thole nume-
rous Expreflions of Scripture that reprefent
our Blejfed Saviours Death under the Notion
of a Sacrifice ? and fpeak of the Expiation of
our Sins by his Blood, &c. And this in Allu-
fion to thofe Expiatory Sacrifices offer'd un-
der the Old Teftament in order to the appealing
of
"PREFACE.
of 'Divine Juftice ? (For in this Notion of Ex-
piatory Sacrifices, viz. That they were not
meer Rites of Application to the Mercy of
God, but ofTer'd to appeafe his Vindictive Ju-
ftice, both Jews and Pagans were agreed). As
to this, the Author tells us, " That God in Con-
" defcenjion to this Ignorance and JVeaknefs y
*' and in order to put an end to all thefe Sa-
" crifices, declares, That he has accepted the
" Death of his Son ( permitted for the four
" Reafons above-mentioned) as the only Sacri-
" flee that could plea fe him, and procure the
" Remijfion of Sin ; meaning thereby only this,
" (as he immediately explains himielf) That
f{ Chrifis "Death was an Act highly p leafing to
" him, a s Phineas'j- Act of r Lea\ was, by which
" he is f aid to have made Attonement for the
" Children of 7/hzf/, Numb. 25 13. But all this
while, there is not one Word of Gods dec la-
ring in the Death and Sufferings of his Son,
his Righteoufnefs in the Punifhment of Sin.
Not one Word of Subitkution of Chrift's
Death'm the jiead of ours, for demonitrating
the Demerit of Sin, vindicating the Honour
of God's violated Law, that threaten'd Death
as the Wages of it, and rendring the Exercife
of God'sMercy in the Pardon of Sin confid-
ent with the Glory of hisHolinefs and Juitice
by fuch an Example of his Severity againlt it.
So that theDoclrine of Chrifis Satisfaction is
dropt. His Sacrifice is but metaphorical; and
all the Variety of ExpreiTions in which 'tis rc-
prefented in the Holy Scriptures, are but pom-
pous Allufions, which at the bottom fignify no
fuch thing as Chrifis Death being a valua-
ble Confideration offer d to the injured Jufiice
of
PREFACE.
of God for the Impunity of all believing and
penitent Sinners. And thus to reconcile the
Infidels to the Crofs ofChrift, he difcards the
main End and Defign of his Sufferings on it.
Ai.d afligns no other Reafons of his T>eath y
but what the 'Death of any of his Afoftle s and
Martyrs would have been as capable to attain
and ferve, if God had but pleafed to fend them
firll to preach this Doctrine of Eternal Life,
and when they had died to atteit the Truth of
it, had rais'd 'em again.
But bleffed be God, the Chriftian Religion
needs not luch treacherous Defenders as thefe.
Nor can we receive Deifts into the Chriftian
Church upon fuch eafy Terms as their believing
one or two Matters of FacJ, while they deny
not only all the other peculiar Doctrines of the
Golpel, but even i\\zx great MyfteryofGodli-
nefsy God manifefted in the Flefl). Such Profe-
lytesto the Chriftian Church wou'd be no bet-
ter than the moil dangerous fecret Enemies
under the Difguife of Friends.
And as the Unitarians are coming over to
the Deifts in Point of Doctrine, fo they are
affe&ing a Conformity to 'em in one of the
worft 'Practices. For if (as the ingenious Dr.
Nichols tells us,) fa) " The Latitudinarian
" ^Principle of joining in Communion with
«' 'People of all Religions in their fever alDe-
" votions, and complying with whatever Re-
" ligion is eftabliflod, be the very Soul of
" Deifm ; I am fure our late 'Unitarians are
come a good way towards ir, when they
have fo frankly of late profefs'd, That they
can join in the Worfhip of thofe they call
(a) See Conference with a Theift, Part II. p. Si, 82, 83, 84., &c
Trini-
PREFACE.
Trinitarians, even tho' they know that fuch
do avowedly give 'Divine ffrorjbif in the moil
exprefs terms to our Blejfed Saviour to whom
they no way believe it to be due {b). But
whatever they think of it, no ferious Chrifti-
an can think fuch palpable Diffimulationwith
God and Men to be excufable.
I have enlarg'd the more on thefe matters,
to let the Author of the Paper I have under-
taken to anfwer, fee, What a Party of Men
he is pleafed to lift himfelf among ; And
,whither their DiiTent from the Chriitian
Church, in the Point here controverted, is
like to lead 'em. And as I cannot be fo un-
charitable as to think that he wou'd be willing
to join with fuch Writers as thefe in fo pal-
pable a Defign ofundermining the Chriitian
Religion, fo I would not altogether defpair
of the Succefs of this Attempt to recover him
from his Error, if he wou'd impartially weigh
what is here offer'd to his Confideration. I
am fure he will here find, That I have not
only fairly reprefented hi s Argument s y bwt treat-
ed him with a mildnefi and temper that be-
comes fo excellent a Caufe, which needs not
the PafTions of Men for the Defence of it.
And indeed my Refpectand affe&ionateTen-
dernefs for the fuppofed Author (the Per-
verfion of whofe valuable Abilities to fo ill a
purpofe I hearily lament) were fufficient to
reftrain me from that Severity of Style, which
his unreafonable Confidence, and his inflat-
ing Language in fome PaiTages of his Book,
wou'd not only have prompted one to, but
perhaps in fome meafure juitify'd. I remem-
(b) See the Paper in rhelllil Collect. of Unit. Tratt, Entitled, Thi Scrip-
turalift's Ckriftim Condefcenfion, cmjidtr'J.
bred
5P R EFAC E.
bred the Apoftles Rule, of inftruBing with
tneeknefs fitch as oppofe themfelves y if per ad-
venture God may give 'em Repentance to the
Acknowledgment of the Truth {a). I have not
therefore treated him as an Enemy, Much lefs
have I had any Hand in his publick Profecution
on the account of the Book I have undertaken
to anfwer (asfome have very unjuftly report-
ed.) How far the Author acts from Confcience
(tho' erroneous and mifguided) in hisprefent
Oppofition to this important Truth, I leave to
God'sjudgmentandhisown. But I cannot ex-
cufe his continuing fo long in theCommunion
of a Chriitian Church,in which he cou'd not but
know that Divine Worfliip was avowedly paid
to that Bleffed Saviour •, to whom it feems he
did not in his Confcience think it to be due.
And if he thought his prefent Doctrine to be
true, and a Truth of fo great Importance, he
ihou'd in all Reafon have more early and openly
declar'd it,and not have contented himfelf with
infinuating it only inafewoccafionaldarkand
ambiguous Terms. Divine Truth feeks not
fuch Difguifes, nor is it any great Argument of
Sincerity or of a good Caufe, to ule 'em. But
whatever efTecl this Anfwer may have upon
himfelf-, (For I am not inienfible how difficult
it is to remove thofe Prejudices that are deeply
rooted, and efpecially where a Man's open Ef-
poufal of an Opinion engages his Reputation in
the Defence of what he has once ailer ted ;) Yet
I hope it may be of fome ufe to eltablifh fincere
Chriilians in the Faith of this Grand Article of
Godmanifefiedm the Flejb, and to remove the
Doubts of thofe (if there be any fuch among us)
whom his Taper may have itagger'd. And 'tis
(a) i Tim. 2. ifi
for
"PREFACE.
for this End that 1 though t it abfolutely necefTa-
ry, not to confine my felf to the bare anfwering
of the Author's Taper, without laying before
the Reader a few at leaft of thofe numerous Ar-
guments for our Saviour s 'Divinity, which the
Scriptures abound with, and which our Author
(with what Ingenuity and Candor Heave him-
ielf to judge) was pleafed wholly to over-look.
And 'tis that chiefly has drawn out this Anfwer
to fo great a length, and fo long retarded the
Publication of it. But I thought it far better to
go once for all to the bottom of thisControver-
fy by a thorough Examination of all the Au-
thor s Objections againft. our Doftr ine,and com-
paring 'em with the Arguments on the other
fide, than to Content my felf with a few hafty
and flight Remarks on 'em. And as I thought my
felf under fome particular Obligation to engage
inthisDifpute(tho , otherwifeext f reamlyaverfe
to it, leait fo excellent a Caufe fhou'd fuffer by
being in fo weak Hands) fo it encouraged me
the more, whenlconflder'd, That the Author
has fairly referr'd the Decifion of thisContro-
verfy to the Authority of the Holy Scriptures*
and has I think gone beyond any of our late^D-
nitarians'm producing the moft plaufible Ob-
jections againft the Supreme^Deity of our Lord
Jefusy that a fubtle Wit can draw from thence.
Butlmuftfubjoin, That if any Reply be made
to thefe Tapersyin which the Argumentslh&vQ
ofTer'd are not reprefented and examin'd with
that Fairnefs and Candour, with which 1 have
treated the Authors moil plaufible Reafonings
on this Subject, but only flurted at with a few
Superficial Dafhes of fuch aicornful unhallowed
Wit, as appears every where in the Pamphlets
of
? R E F AC E.
of our hieUnitarians, I mail not think my felf
any way concern'd in it. For I take this Subject
to be of that vaft Moment and Confequence,
that it ought to be argued with the greateit Se-
rioufnefs and Gravity, zn& with thcprofoundejl
Humility that a due Senfe of our own Igno-
rance, and Deference to Divine Revelation, can
infpireus with: And thofe are very unfit to in-
termeddle with, or be regarded in this Debate,
who dare to handle it with a profane Irreve-
rence and infolent Buffoonery. I mall only add,
That I have left manifold Arguments fox the Su-
preme 'Deity of Chrift from the Scriptures
wholly untouch'd, becaufe I was willing to fix
on, and vindicate thofe only,againft which the
Authors Objections were levell'd. So that 'tis
not from the leaft diflrutt of their Strength that
they are here omitted, but only to prevent this
Anfwer from fwelling to too great a bulk,
which is already enlarged far beyond my firfl
Intention. May he that is the Way, the Truth
and the Life, give ushis Holy Spirit to guide
us into all neceflary Truth, that we may grow
in Grace, and in the Knowledge of our Lord
and Saviour Jefus Chrifl, To whom be Glory
both now and for ever, Amen ! i Pet. 3.18.
J. Boyfe.
CON-
CONTENTS.
^TjFIE Contreverfy concerning the True Deity of our Blejfcd
•*■ Saviour, Jiated, from Page I, to p. 6.
The Firft Argument for the true Deity of Chriji from the Di-
vine Titles given to him, p. 6.
What the Author objecls againji it confider \d, p. 6, 7,8.
The true Deity of Chnfi proved from theTitle of God over all
bletfed for ever, Amen^fraw p. 9, to p. 14.
The fame proved from theTitle of Lord of Lords, andthe Au-
thor's Exceptions againji it anfwer'd,fromp. 14, to p. 21.
The Author'* Argument againji the Supreme Deity of Chrifi,
from his fpeaking of God as diftin& from himfelf, anfwer'd,
p. 21, 22, 23.
His Second Argument from ChriJVs owning a God over or a-
bove him, anfwer* d,from p. 23, to p. 30.
The fame Argument as reinforced, from I Cor. If. 24, 2$*, &C.
anfwer'd, from p. 30, to p. 37.
T&tf Author's pretended Scriptural Account of the Deity of Chriji,
from John 10. 35-, 36. <WHeb. 1. 8,9. refuted, front p. 37,
*o p. 41.
Phil. 2. 6. vindicated from the Author's Exceptions, from
p. 42, *? p. 47.
The Second Argument for the true Deity of Chriji from the Di-
vine Perfections ^WWorks afcrib'dto him, p. 47.
The firji Argument under thii Head from the Perfection of Ab-
folute Omnipotence, p. 49.
That fuch Abfolute Omnipotence belongs to Chriji, proved from
the Work of Creation'* being ajcritfd to him, ibid.
That the Scriptures afcribe the Creation to htm, prov'd againji
^Socinian Unitarians, from p. 49, to p. 63.
That the afcribing the Creation to our Blejfed Saviour demon-
Jirates his abfolute Almighty Power, prov'd againji the Arian
Unitarians, from p. 63, to p 68.
The Author's Arguments againji this abfolute Omnipotence of
Chriji, from John 5". 19, &c. anfwer'd, from p. 69, to p. 74.
The fecond Argument from Abfolute Goodnefs, That this is a-
fcrib'dto our Lordjefus Chriji, prov'd, p. 74. 75*.
The Author's Reafoning againji it, from Matth. 19. anfwer'd,
from p. 76, to p. 78.
The third Argument from Abfolute Omnifcience, p. 79.
That
CONTENTS.
'that this is afcnb'd to our Blejfed Lord, prov 'd from fuch PaJ-
fagcs as attribute to him the Knowledge of ail things, and
the Argument vindicated from t e Author's Exceptions, from
p. 79, *o p. 82.
the fame prov'd from fuch Paffages as attribute to him the
Knowledge of the Heart, p. 83 . 84. 85-, 86. The Author's
Exceptions agiinfl thts argument, refuted, from p. 87, toyi.
The Author's /irgument <gainji the abfolute Omnifctence of
Chrifl,from Mark 13. 31, anfwer'd, p. 92, 93.
The Author' 1 's f Remarks to reinforce his foregoing Arguments,
efpecially the lajl, anfwer'd, from p. 94, to p. 108.
the Third Argument for the True Deity ofChnfifrom thej){-
vine Worfhip due to htm, p. 108.
The Notion of Divine Worjhip Jiated, p. 109.
That the Scriptures require us to pay Divine Worjhip to our
Bleffed Saviour prov'd, from p. 109, to p. 1 19.
The different Opinion and Practice ef our Adverfaries in this
Point, and particularly that of the Englifh Unitarians, and of
our Author, from p. 1 1 9, to p. 122.
The Author's Arguments againfi giving Divine Worpip to our
Saviour anfwered, from p. 123, to p. 129.
The Unreafonablenefs of the Socinians in giving Diving Wor-
fhip to him, vhile they believe him only a dignify 1 d Man,
proved, and the Charge of Idolatry on this Account made good,
from p. 129, to p. 133.
The Opinion and Praaice of the Unitarians and the Author in
giving an inferiour Religious IVorjhip to our Bleffed Saviour
prov'd to be highly injurious to him if he be truly God. If
he be not, injurious to the Honour of God, who is the file
Object of Religious IVorjhip, and tending to jujiify both Pa-
gans and Papijis in their Demm-Wor/hip, from p. 133,^0 p.
142.
The Author's Objection again/} the True Deity of Chrift from
his Office of Mediator anfwered, from p. 142, to p. 149.
His Object, from Ad:. 2. 22. anfwered, from p. 149, to p. lfi.
His In/iances of the Unfteadinefs of Protejiant Writers in deal-
ing with the Papifts, and with the Unitarians, confidered,
from p. jfi, to p. 15-5-.
His general Reflections at the End of his Book animadverted
on, from p. i$f, to the End.
4V1N-
VINDICATION
OF'THE
TRUE T>E1TT
O F O U R
Blessed Saviour, &c.
HE Doctrine of our Blejjed
Saviour's Divinity has been fo
fully reveal'd in the Holy
Scriptures , fo univerfally re-
ceiv'd in the Chriflian Churchy
and is fo apparently interwoven
with the whole Scheme of our
Holy Religion, that there needs
no Apology to be made for a
feafonable Defence of it, when
'tis fo openly attack'd, and with fo unufual a Confi-
dence. It wou'd be rather moll inexcufable not to
contend for this part of the Faith once delivered to the
Saints, when the Honour of our BlefTed Lord, the
Peace of his Church, and the Salvation of Souls,
are fo greatly endanger'd by the violent Opposition
made to this important Truth.
B I foal]
*&y m ^Q^^i m MR
i ./? Vindication of the
I {hall at prefent confider a Pamphlet wrote on
this Subject, entitled, An Humble Enquiry into the
Scripture Account of Jefus Chrift^ or a Short Argu-
ment concerning his Deity and Glory according to the
Scriptures.
I fhall not enlarge on what is obvious to every one's
Obfervation, viz. How little the 'Title agrees with
the Strain of the Book. For few that read it with
an unprejudiced Mind can think that the Author
has made his Enquiry with due Humility , when
they confider that he has in his Paper manifestly
overlook'd the cleared Proofs of the EfTential Deity
of Chrift in the Holy Scriptures, and only put toge-
ther fuch PafTages as he thinks make againft it, and
yet on that very partial Reprefentation of the Ar-
guments on one fide ) has pronounc'd againft the Re-
ceived Doctrine of the Chriftian Church with as
much Confidence, as if he had clearly anfwer'd all
the Arguments alledg'd on the other.
Nor is it any great Argument of the Author's
Candour and Sincerity to entitle his Paper, An Ar-
gument concerning the Deity and Glory of Chrift^ when
the whole Defign of it is to diveft him of the Glo-
ry of that true Deity which the Chriftian Church
afcribes to him, and to degrade him to the Rank of
a meer dignified Creature. But we muft forgive him
that he Was willing for avoiding popular Odium,
to cover an Heterodox Book with an Orthodox
Title.
That I may therefore do fome Juftice to this im-
portant Subject by fetting it in its true Light, it will
be requifite not only to anfwer what the Author has
alledg'd againft the true Deity of Chrift, but to fug-
geft fome few at leaft of thofe manifold Proofs of it
which the Holy Scriptures fo abundantly furnifh us
with ; the due Confideration whereof will in a
great meafure take off the Force of his main Obje-
ctions againft it.
To ftate the Queftion aright, we muft briefly con-
sider, what kind of Deity the Chriftian Church
afcribes
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, 3
afcribes to our Blefled Saviour, and what our Au-
thor is willing to grant him.
What the Chriftian Church believes concerning
the Deity of Chrift, prefuppofes the Doctrine of the
Holy Trinity, viz. That tho' there is but One God,
One divine and infinitely perfect. Being, yet that this
One God, is fome way 'Three as well as One ; That he
is Father, Word ( or Son ) and Spirit. That the Per-
fections of the one undivided Nature of God are as
truly afcribed to the Word and the Holy Spirit as to
the Father -, and yet that the Word and the Holy
Spirit are by peculiar relative Properties, and bv a
different manner of Subfidance and Operation, di~
ftinguifh'd from the Father $ fome things being
afcrib'd in Scripture to the One that are not to the
Other.
Now, tho' the Holy Scriptures reveal to us fuch a
Trinity in the Unity of the divine Nature > (as par-
ticularly by requiring us to be Baptized in the Name
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit {a); By
ordering our being bkfs y d in the Name of each of
thefe facred Three ( b). (See alfo 1 Job. f. 7 — )
Yet how this One God is Father, Word, and Spirit,
they have neither fully reveal'd, nor are we probably
in this imperfect State capable clearly to apprehend
We do indeed fee fome Refemblance of a Trinity in
Unity in created Beings themfelves. We fee the
fame Sun to be the diftinct Fountain of Motion,
Light, and Heat. We fee the fame Souls of Brutes
to have diftinct Powers of Vital Motion, Senfe, and
Appetite. We can difcern in our own Souls a clear
Diftinction between our Vital Power, Under/landing,
and Will. Nay, we fee in Corporeal Beings them-
felves a threefold Dimension of Length, and Breadth,
and Depth. Now that manifeft Diftinction in Cre-
ated Beings which we find to be fo entirely confift-
ent with their Unity, gives us juft Ground to con-
(«) Matth. i8. (t>) 2 Cor. ch. 13. v. 13,
B 2, elude
4 ^Vindication*?/ the
elude, That 'tis very poffible, and no way contra*
dittory to any folid Principles of Reafon, that there
may be a much greater DiftinbJion in an infinite Be-
ing fully confiftent with the Unity thereof. And
therefore, if the Scriptures aflert fuch a Diftinclion
in the Divine Nature j if they diftin&ly afcribe not
only to the Father ', but to the Word and Holy Spirit,
the peculiar Titles, Perfections and Operations or the
Divine Nature, and require us to pay Divine Homage
to each of thefe Sacred 'Three 5 We ought to enter-
tertain with Humility and Reverence what the Blef-
fed God has thus difcover'd concerning his own
infinite Nature, without any curious Enquiries be-
yond, the Line of Divine Revelation, How thefe
Sacred 'Three are diftinguihYd from each other, and
yet are One True God.
For we do believe feveral particular Perfections of
the Divine Nature, tho' our Underftandings are in-
' volv'd in the like Difficulties how to form any clear
diftincl: Ideas of 'em, or folve all the Objections
rais'd againff. 'em. We firmly believe the fame God
to be Eternal, tho' no Man can define to us what
Eternity is, and how 'tis diftinguiiffd from, and yet
co-exifts with the Succe (five Duration of Temporary
Beings. We believe the Immenfity of God, tho'
we cannot clearly conceive, How an undivided Be-
ing can be everywhere prefent, without fomething
analogous to the Extenfion of Corporeal Beings.
And we believe the Divine Preference, tho' no Man
can explain, How the contingent A&ions of free
Agents can be certainly fore-known by the Divine
Under if anding, nor anfwer all the fubtle Arguments
that may be rais'd againft it. Nay, we that meet
with fo many things in our felves,andintheminuteft
Creatures round about us, that are beyond our reach
to comprehend, mould not at all wonder that in fuch
a Declaration as the great God gives of his own In-
finite Nature, there mould be fome things to us Un-
fearchable ; It would rather be ftrange if it were 0-
thcrvifc.
Now
True ^Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 5
Now this Paper which I defign to examine, only
oppofing the Deity of one of thofe Sacred Three, I
ihall apply my felf to the Defence of that.
As to the Author's Opinion, he does not feem
very clear in ftating the Queition relating to the
Deity of our Blejfed Saviour.
For one while he propofes it, " Whether Chrifl
" be the God of Gods, or above all Gods ? For this
" (he tells us) is the highefi and mofl glorious 'Title
" given to God in the Old Teftament, when it is defign-
" ed to make the mofi magnificent Mention of his peer-
" lefs Great nefs and Glory.
But forefeeing perhaps that Chriit, who is over
Angels, whom he tells us the Scriptures call Gods,
may be therefore ftiled according to his own Hypo-
thesis God of Gods -, he feems willing to mi ft the
Queflion, and reduce it to this, Whether Jefus Chrifl
has any God ov~r him, who has greater Authority and
greater Ability than him felf, or no ?
Now this State of the Queflion is unfair, and lia-
ble to juft Exception. For Jefus Chrifl is a com-
plex Subject, which (according to the avowed Faith
of the Chriltian Church ) includes in it, both his
Divine Perfon (on the Account whereof he is called
the Word, and the Only Begotten of the Father) his Hu-
man Nature, and his Office of Mediator. Now in
forne of thefe refpeclrs 'tis true that Jefus Chrifl^ has a
God over him j in others, 'tis not. So that his bare
proving, That in fome refpeefcs (as particularly that
in reference to his Human Nature, or to his Mediatory
Office) he has a God over him, will by no means
p r ove, that he is not the God of Gods, or Supreme
Q d, as he is the Word, and the Only Begotten of the
p a ther.
The true State then of the Queflion between him
an d us is, Whether Chrifl: as the Word and Only
gegotten of the Father, be only a Created Finite Be-
i n g, tho' raifed to eminent fubordinate Authority o-
v er all other Creatures, or be a Being of infinite Per-
fections ? Whether under this Character and Confi-
de ration he be God in a Proper Senfe as that denotes
B 3 a
6 A Vindication ef the
a Being of infinite Perfections ? Or be God only in
a Figurative Senfe, as that Word imports a moft dig-
nify* d Creature^ or (in our Author's Language) a Be-
ing in Subordinate Power ? And 'tis evident, That
our Author allows him to be no otherwife God than
in this Figurative Improper Senfe : For he denies any
of thofe Infinite Perfections to belong to him which
are the Properties of the Divine Nature. So that
our Bleffed Saviour is no more with him than a
Creature rais'd to the higheft Authority over his Fel-
low-Creatures 3 or, as he fpeaks, The chief of Subor-
dinate Powers.
My Bufinefs then is to mew, That the Scriptures
reprefent that Word that was made Flefh, that Only
Begotten Son of the Father that came into the World,
and was Partaker of our Flejh and Bloody to be the
moft High God in the Proper Senfe of the Word,
•viz. A Being of Infinite Perfections, and not a Crea-
ture and Finite Beings who is only call'd God on the
Account of his Eminent Dignity and Authority over
his Fellow-Creatures.
Now this I mall endeavour to prove from the pe-
culiar Titles of the fupream God, ( or infinitely per-
fect Being ) that are given to our BlefTed Saviour >
trom the Divine Worjhip due to him ; from the in-
communicable Works and Perfections of God afcrib'd
to him. And under each of thefe Heads I mall have
Occafion to examine and anfwer what the Author
has ailed g'd to the contrary.
I begin with
I. The Argument drawn from the peculiar Titles
of the Supream God, ( or the infinitely perfect Be-
ing ) which are given to our Blejfed Saviour.
As to this, our Author tells us, " It is not denfd
u by the Arrians and Socinians that the Blejfed Jefus
** has the Title of God afcribed to him fometimes in the
" Scriptures. But the Qucftion is, In what Senfe ?
And having told us, That the Word God in Scrip-
ture fometimes fignifies the Supream Being, fometimes
Per Cons invefled with fub ordinate Power, as Angels or
Magiilrates, he concludes, " That the bare Character
True 'Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 7
" of God determines nothing in this Cafe, becaufe it be-
" longs both to the Supream and Subordinate Beings in
" Power and Authority" And therefore propofes
the Queftion, Whether Jefus Chrifi be God of Gods,
or above all Gods ? Which he fuppofes the peculiar
Character of the fupream Being.
In Anfwer to this, We do not pretend that the
bare Title of God given to our Saviour is a demon-
strative Proof of his being the moft High God, for
the Reafon he alledges that Angels and Magiftrates
are alfo called Gods. But we muft diflinguifh be-
tween that Title being given in a proper Senfe, and
in a figurative (and by a Catachrejis.) And 'tis appa-
rent that where that Title is given to Creatures,
'tis either given in the Plural Number (as to An-
gels and Magiftrates -, ) or if given in the Singular
Number, 'tis in fuch a particular Senfe, and under
fuch Circumftances and Limitations as plainly fhew
'tis apply'd only in a figurative Senfe ; as in the In-
ftance the Author gives of Mofes being a God to
Aaron and Pharaoh. Tho' as to the former, Exod.
4. 16. 'tis only (aid Mofes mould be to Aaron infiead
of God-, which plainly fhews in how improper a
Senfe the Word is us'd. And this explains what is
faid of Mofes being a God to Pharaoh, viz. That he
fhould reprefent God's Authority in commanding,
and exert his Power in punifhing Pharaoh. So the
Devil is called the God of this World, not only on
the Account of his ufurped Dominion, but becaufe
he was worfhipp'd by the idolatrous World.
Now when we argue for the Divinity of Chrift
from this Title of God, we not only infift upon its
being frequently given to him, (which it is not to
any created Being, thefe few being the moft plan-
lible Inftances that can be alledg'd) but from its
being given without any Limitation, or any Circum-
ftances that fhould lead us to a figurative Senfe of
the Words > nay, on the contrary, in a Manner
that leads us to take the Tide in its true and proper
Senfe.
B 4 Thci
t
8 ^Vindication of the
There is no Appearance of any fuch Limitation
and figurative Senfe, when our Blefled Saviour is
call'd Immamtely or God with us, God manifefled in
the Flefio -, when he has the Title of Ku£/©» or Lord,
(which in the Septuagint anfwers to that of Jeho-
vah) given him throughout the whole New Tefta-
ment •> when he is call'd the true God, i John y.
3,0. (For that that Title belongs to him, appears not
only from the ordinary grammatical Conftruction of
the Words, but from its Conjunction with that o-
ther Title of Eternal Life, which in the Beginning
of that Epiftle, c. i. v. z. is given tQ Chrifl as di-
itinguifh'd from the Father?) When he is call'd the
Great God, 'Tit. z. 13. (For that that Title belongs
to our Saviour is evident from hence, That the
glorious Appearance there mention'd is never attribut-
ed to the Father, but always to our BleJJed Lord.)
But efpecially when fo many Things fpoken of the
great Jehovah in the Old Teftament are fo manifeft-
ly applied to our Blejfed Saviour in the New. See
among many other Inftances fuch as thefe : If a. 2.8.
16. Joel z. iz. compar'd with Bom. 10. 11, ii ?
j2, 14. So Eph.4.8. compar'd with Pfal. 68. 18.
1 Cor. 10. p. compar'd with Numb. 21. 6. So Rev. 1.
8, 11. and zz. 13. compar'd with Ifa.\\.6. And
many other fuch Paflages, fome of which I fhall
have Qccafion to fpeak of.
But to bring this Matter to a fhorter IfTue ; If it
appear that fuch Titles as are peculiar to the Supream
God, and incommunicable to any finite Being how dig-
nify'd foever, are given to our Blejfed Saviour in
the FJoly Scriptures, the Argument from fuch
Titles will hold good to prove his being the Supeanp
God. Our Author feems to allow, that if Chriji
were called the God of Gods, or a God above all Gods,
it would prove his Divinity in the proper Senfe of
the Word. Now the Proof is as cogent from any
other Titles that are equally appropriated to the Su-
pream Being, and incommunicable to any finite crea?
Ud Being.,
As
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 9
As to fuch incommunicable Titles, I mall only in-
fift on thofe two given to our Blejfed Saviour, that
of God over all blejjed for evermore, and that of Lord
of Lords.
Firft, I would argue from that glorious "Title a-
fcrib'd to our Blejfed Saviour of God over all blejjed
for evermore.
The Apoltle Paul, fpeaking of the Jews, faith of
'em, IVhofe are the Fathers, of whom, as concerning
the Flefh, Chrifi came, who is over all, God blejfed for
evermore, Amen. Rom. 9. f .
To make the Force of this Argument appear, it
will be only requifite,
I. To ihew that this Title is here given to our
Blejfed Saviour.
II. That 'tis the peculiar incommunicable Title
of the Supream God.
I. It will be requifite to Ihew, That this Title
is here given to our Blejfed Saviour.
And 'tis the more needful to clear this, becaufe
tho' Socinus himfelf freely gives up this Point, yet I
find our late Unitarians generally chufe rather to
evade this Text, by telling us, that thefe laft Words
in the Text are not a Defcription of our Blejfed Sa-
viour, but only a Doxology to the Father, and there-
fore mould be render'd thus, Of whom as concerning
the Flejh Chrifi came, God who is over all be blejjed
for evermore, Amen.
Nay, ibme late Unitarians have prefumed to tell
i;s, 'tis probable the Word God was not originally
in the Text. But this Pretence of theirs is io fully-
confuted by the late Bifhop of TVorcefter in his Vindi-
cation of the Trinity, p. 1 f 4, iff, &c. and by Dr. Whit-
by in his Paraphraje on this PafTage, p. 48, 40, that I
fhall refer the Reader to thofe learned Authors for en-
tire Satisfaction in that Point. I fhall only add, that the
Unitarians pretend their turning the Words into an
Ecphonema and Doxoiogy, is countenanced by the
Addition of Amen, which they tell us there was no
Occalion for, if the Words were intended as a De-
fer ipi ion of cur Lord J ejus,
But
io A Vindication of the
But the Vanity of this Evafion will appear if we
confider the following Particulars.
i . That (as Socinus himfelf well obferves) when the
Word 'EuXoynro? or Blejfed is intended by Way o£Dox-
clogy, it ought to be put before the Perfon to whom
'tis applied, not after him. So that if the Apoftle
had intended the Words for a Doxology they mould
have run thus, 'EuXoyifiro? 6 ci'v Itj xavTwv ©jo? A.urjv.
But I may farther add, that 'EuXoynTo? is never
put for 'EvXoyvros ss-w, but where the Senfe is im-
perfect and defective without fupplying the Verb;
whereas there is no Ellipfis or Imperfection at all
as the Words lye in the Original : So that the fup-
plying any fuch Verb has thefe two intolerable Faults
in it ; the one 9 that 'tis altogether unneceflary, the
Senfe being compleat without it ; the other 9 that the
fupplying any fuch Verb quite alters the Senfe and
Purport of the Words as they are in the Original,
turning 'em to another Subject, without any ground
for it. Nay, I may juftly add, the Words 6 &>'v in
the Original are abfolutely necejfary and ufeful 9 if we
underftand the PaiTage as a Defcription of our Blef-
fed Saviour -, whereas they are not only ufekfs if we
underftand 'em as a Doxology^ but dangerous^ as tend-
ing to mifguide us to interpret of Chrift what the
Apoftle, according to our Adverfaries, intended only
of the Father. The Reader muft excufe fuch Cri*
ticifens 9 when our Adverfaries ufe a\l imaginable Sub-
tilty to wreft fuch plain Texts from us. We are
in this Cafe fore'd to fight 'em at their own Wea-
pons.
But farther,
2. That the Apoftle intended not this for aDoxo-
gy, appears, becaufe he is always wont in his Doxo-
logies to mention the Benefits conferr'd on fuch on
whofe Account he offers 'em. But this he had no
Occafion for here : Not only becaufe thefe Privi-
leges he mentions as appertaining to the Jews 9
and particularly that of Chrifts Carnal Dcfcent from
, em 9 were Privileges feparable from Salvation, but
becaufe he here coniiders the Jews as like to lofe
all
True 'Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 1 1
all the Advantage of 'em thro' their own wretched
Infidelity, and on that account exprefles his Extreme
forrow of heart for *em 9 v.z. So that he here men-
tions Ck/rift's comings not as matter of Joy to them,
but like to turn to the Aggravation of their Guilt
and Mifery.
z. There was very juft Occafionfor the Apoftle to
add thefe words as a Defcription of our Blefled Saviour-
It was very fit that when the Apoftle, among other
Eminent Privileges appertaining to the Jews, men-
tions this, That of them Chrifi came as concerning the
Flejh 9 that he fliou'd enhance the Privilege by con-
fidering the Dignity of the Per/on that came, and his
Superiority to thofe of whom he came. Especially
when we confider, That the Apoftle fo carefully li-
mits what he had faid of Chrifi 1 s coming of them y
That 'twas only Qro %a.rci ttdpndt] as concerning the
Flefh. Whereby he plainly intimates, there was
fomething to be confider'd in him more than that
Fleflj or Humane Nature he deriv'd by his Defcent
from them. And what it was he reprefents to
'em in this glorious Title^ who is over all God blejfed
for evermore. And 'tis obfervable that every thing
in that Title is oppos'd to their falfe opinion of him,
they thought him a Mcer Man 5 the Apoftle tells
'em, He was God : They thought him inferior to
the Fathers-, the Apoftle ftiles him, God over all :
They accounted him accurs'd; the Apoftle ftiles him,
Blejfed for evermore.
I mall only add, That the Addition of Amen is
no Proof at all of-the words being a formal Doxology ;
not an Afiertion, becaufe 'tis eliewherc added upon
the mention of this Title, where there is only an
AJfertion, no formal Doxology. 'Tis fo in this very
Epiftle, (a) They ferved and worfinpped the Creature
more than the Creator^ who is God blejfed for ever-
more* Amen,
(a) Chap. 1. v. ?
But
ix A Vindication of the
But as to the Author, I need the lefs infill on
this, becaufe in difcourfe on this Subject he own'd
thefe words zs&Defcription of our Blejfed Saviour, but
expounded 'em of his being the chief of thofe Jubor-
dinate Powers that are call'd Gods in Scripture.
I come therefore
II. To fhew, That this of God over all, blejfed for
evermore, is the Incommunicable 'Title of the God of
Gods, or the Supreme God. And this will fufficiently
appear, if we confider
i. This Title is no where elfe in Scripture given
to any Created Being, or Subordinate Power, but al-
ways to the Supreme God.
I cannot find that this Title of God Blejfed, or
Blejfed for evermore, occurs oftner than four times in
the New Teftament. (For as to the word Blejfed
apply'd to God, I Tim. cap. I . v.w. and i Tim. cap.
6. v. i f . 'tis not in the Original 'EuXcynro^, but
/maxcig/©> or Happy. However 'tis there alfo ap^
propriated to the mofl High God). And in every
one of thofe places 'tis manifeftly apply'd to the mofl
High God. 'Tis fo in the Queftion propos'd by the
High-Priejl to our Saviour, Art thou Chrifi the Son
of the Blejfed? 'Tis fo in Rom. I. v. if. (of which
more anon.) 'Tis fo z Cor. 1 1 . v. 31. Where
the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrifi is defcrib'd
in Expreffions plainly parallel to thofe here us'd con-
cerning our Saviour, 6 cov 'EuXoynTor &s a;aivar, who
is blejfed for evermore. And I hope the peculiar Ad-
dition, over all, cannot be thought any Diminution
of this Illuitrious Character : For that is alfo elfe-
where given to the Father (c). I may therefore here
juflly challenge our Adverfaries to produce any o-
ther Place where this Title is given to any Creature
how dignify'd foever. And if they cannot, How
unreafonable is it to fuppofe this the Character of a
Creature here, which is every where elfe appro-
priated to the mofl: High God ? Nay, 'tis obfervable,
that where any Creatures are in the New Tefta-
(c) F.ph. 6.
ment
True^Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, 13
ment called Bleffed, the word is not 'Eu\oyfl<ro?, but
'EuXoy/ijuev©--. See Luke 1. 42. where 'tis apply'd to
the BleJJed Virgin, and tothe/ra// o/for Womb, the
A/^tf C*i&r//£ Jtyfo. Nor is that Obfervation of Dr.
Hammond groundlefs (as Monfieur Le Clerk wou'd
reprefent it) concerning the ordinary Cuftom of the
Jews to add to the Name of God this Title of
BleJJed for evermore. And had the Apoftle believ'd our
Saviour to be no more than a dignify'd Creature,
hecou'd not have put a greater Stumbling-block be-
fore the Jews to harden 'em in their Infidelity, than
by giving him a Title and Character which they
had always appropriated to the great Jehovah. For
he might be fure they wou'd take thefe words to
be an Afcription of Divinity to him in the moft,
ftrict and proper Senfe. So that the Apoftle could not
have fpoken more unwarily and dangeroufly to the
Prejudice of theChriftianCaufc, had he been of the
Opinion of our late Unitarians > but nothing could
have been added more feafonably and juftly, accord-
ing to the received Doctrine of the Chriftian Church-
But
2. This Argument is the ftronger, if we conft-
der, That this Character is given to the moft High
God as diflinguijh'd from all Creatures whatfoever.
'Tis fo in that foremention'd -p\ace,Rom. 1 . zf . where
the Apoftle charges the Gentiles with worfhippingand
ferving the Creature more than (or rather befide, Trapf)
the Creator, who is God blejjed for evermore, Amen.
The Creatures the Gentiles ferv'd were many of 'em
fuch Demons and Deceafed Heroes, as they fuppos'd
to be fubordinate Powers, but rais'd to the Dignity
of Gods ; From all thefe the Apoftle diftinguifhes the
true God the Creator of the world by this Title of
God blejfed for evermore, q.d. That God, to whom a-
lone the Blejjlng and Adoration of all intelligent Crea-
tures is and will be for ever due. Now with how lit-
tle Juftice cou'd the Apoftle fix this fevere Reproach
on the Gentile Philofophers, (for of them he here
fpeaks) when they might from his other Epiftles
retort his own Argument upon him. " Can it be
" fuch
14 ^/Vindication of the
u fuch a Crime in us to worfhip a Creature, heftde'i
" the Creator, when you your felf propofe a digni-
u ffd Creature as an Objedt of Religious Adoration,
" to whom you tell us, every Knee Jhou'd bow, and
a every Tongue confefs his Dominion (a) j nay, when
you even cloath this exalted Creature with fo glori-
ous a Character as that of God over all Blejfed for
evermore, which you here give to the Creator > nay,
when in other Writings you afcribe the Creation to
him (b) ? Can that then be Idolatry in us that is
none in you ? And fhou'd the Unitarians here iup-
pofe the Apoftle to alledge for himfelf, That he
did not give to Chrift Supreme, but only Subordinate,
Worfhip (as our Author himfelf profeiTes he does)
(c) : The Gentiles wou'd readily alledge the fame
Diftinclion, to juftifie their Worfhip of thofe Crea-
tures whom they fuppos'd to be exalted to the dig-
nity of inferior Gods. The Apoftle might indeed blame
'em for their ill Choice of thofe fub ordinate Powers
they worfhip'd, but cou'd never juftly, upon the
Principles of our Adverfaries, charge them as Idola-
tors for worjhiping the Creature befide the Creator, who
is blejfed God for ever ; when the Apoftle himfelf,
and all Chriftians, ( if they were of our Author's
Opinion) did worfhip a Creature befides the Creator,
nay, under the very Title of God, nay, of God over
all lie (fed for ever. But of this I fhali have occafion
to fpeak more fully under the Argument drawn from
the Divine Worfhip due to ourBleffed Saviour.
Secondly, I would argue from that other Title
afcrib'd to our Blefled Saviour, viz. Lord of Lords,
Rev. i p. 1 6.
And I the rather chufe to infill on this, becaufe
our Author owns indeed this Title to be given him,
but endeavours to difprove this Inference drawn from
it.
To this purpofe he tells us, " That the Title of
w Lord §f Lords denotes an Inferior Character, com-
U) Phil. a. v. io. (b) Col. i. v. I 6. (c) Seeptg. 17.
" par'd
True *Deity of our Bleffed Saviour, 15*
c < par'd with that of God of Gods, as appears by
c * that 1 Cor. 8. f . tho' it be included in the Su-
*< perior j fo that he who is above all Gods, is alfo
u over all Lords, but not contrariwife, p. z.
Anpw. That the Title of Lord of Lords notes an
Inferior Character compar 'd with that of God of Gods^
fo that he may be Lord of Lords, who is not God of
Gods, is not only aflerted by the Author without
any folid Proof, but againft the Current of the holy
Scriptures, which do as truly appropriate the Title
of Lord of Lords as that of God of Gods to the great
Jehovah, or only true God. See in the Old Tene-
ment, Deut. 10. 17. 'The Lord your God is God of Gods,
and Lord of Lords, a great God, mighty and terrible, &c.
So Pf. 1 36. z, 3. And in the New Teftament, 1 Tim.
6. if. the great God is defcrib'd as the Bleffed and
only Potentate, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.
And indeed if that Title of God of Gods fet that Be-
ing to whom it is given above all Gods whatfover,
and imply there is no God above him-, there is the
fame Reafon why the Title of Lord of Lords fhou'd
fet him to whom it is given above all Lords whatfo-
ever, and imply that there is no Lord above him. But
this the Author will by no Means grant to be true of
our Bleffed Saviour, and therefore is fore'd- againil the
Strain of Holy Writ to fuppofe there are two diflincl
Beings, (one Finite, the other Infinite) to whom yet
the fame Character of Lord of Lords does belong :
Whereas the aforementioned Text makes this to be
the Title of him who is the Bleffed and only Poten-
tate, who therefore has no Rival with him in this
glorious Char a tier.
And St. Thomas fcems not to have been of the Au-
thor's Opinion in this point, but on the conttary to
have fuppofed the Title of Lord and God equally due
to the fame ObjecT: of Religious Worfhip, when he
cries out in his devout Addrefs to our Blefled Saviour,
My Lord and my God, John 20. 28.
And I may here juitly add, That the Title of
Lord of Lords is equivalent to that of Lord over all.
Now the Title of Lord o^ver all is made by the A-
poftlc
16 ^Vindication u/r^
poftle Paul equivalent to that of Jehovah in the
OldTeflament, and yet in the fame Place is given by
him to our Bleffed Saviour. He cites from the Pro-
phet Joel thofe Words^ He that calls on the Name
of 'Jehovah Jhall be faved, Rom. io. 13. Whom the
Prophet fliles Jehovah, he calls Lord over all, ver. i z.
And that by that Lord overall he underftandsouri?/^
fed Saviour is evident from the following Verle : For
it was him the Apoftles were fent to Preach, and to
invite both Jews and Gentiles to Believe and Call
upon, v. 14. (Of which more will occur under the
Argument from Divine Worfhip.)
But our Author refers us for Proof of what he
fays, That the Title of Lord of Lords denotes an In-
ferior Character, to 1 Cor. 8. f.
But if it be enquir'd, How this appears from that
Text ? I fee not what the Author has ofFer'd to prove
it, unlefs we will take for Proof of it what he faith
in the fecond Column of the fecond Page, which I
fhall carefully confider.
" How manifestly (faith he) are the One God
" and One Lord diftinguifh'd ? 1 Cor. 8. 6. And
cc that there may be no Pretence to fay with Plaae-
<c us, That the God, and the Lord, or the Caufe
cc of which all Things are, and the Caufe by or
iC thro' which all Things are^ are but two Things
" faid of the fame one God, We may fee 'em more
cc clearly diftinguilTi'd, Eph. 4. f, 6. where by inter-
ec poling other Things between the One Lord and
<c One God, viz. One Faith, One Baptifm, it ap-
u pears evidently, That thefe were not intended as
<c two Characters of the fame Being.
Anfw. To clear this, I may juftly premife that the
Title here given to ourBleffed Saviour is not Lord of
Lords, but the Lord by zvhom are all Things. Nay,
tho' ir fhould be granted to our Author that the bare
Title of Lord may fometimes note one in Office infe-
rior to the Father (which he has yet no way prov'd)
yet this wou'd make nothing for our Author's Pur-
pofe againft the true Deity of Chrift, unlefs he could
{hew us, That Chrift's being call'd the Lord by whom
all
True *Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 17
all Things are, did imply him to be only a dignify* d
Creature, and fo a Being diftinguim'd from the Fa-
ther in Nature and EJJential Perfections. For the
Son of God may be in refpeft of Office inferior to the
Father, and fuftain a Character inferior to his, with-
out any Inequality in refpe£t of EJJential Perfections^
(as I mall have Occafion to mew afterwards)
Now that the Apoltle does not by the Lord by
whom all Things are, intend a meer dignify' d Creature,
diftinguiih'd from the Father in point of EJfence, Pla-
caus has offer'd feveral Reafons to prove, v/hieh our
Author has offer'd no Reply to, and the Author
produces but one Argument againft it, which has
no manner of force.
As to Placceus's Arguments I mail only mention
and enforce thele three.
1 . Becaufe this Suppoiition alone can render the
Apoftle's Reafoning folid and clear.
The Apoltle had aflerted, That an Idol in the World
was nothings according to the known Doctrine of
the Old Teilament, that brands all the Deities of the
Gentiles as Vanities and Nothings : i. e. All the Ob-
jects of the Worfhip of the Gentiles were nothing
in point of real Divinity. On the contrary he aflerts,
That there is none other God but one. And how do's
he prove this? 'Tis by this Argument, For tho" 1 there
be that are called Gods, -whether in Heaven or Earth •,
(i. e. tho' the Heathens have a multiplicity of Gods
both Celeflial and Terrejlrial) as there be Gods ma-
ny, and Lords many ; (i. e. as there are many fuch
Demons whom the Heathens own'd as Gods and Lords')
(a) But to us (**. q. to us Chriftians) There is but One
God the Father of whom are all Things, and we in (or
for) him : And One Lord Jefus by whom are all Things y
(a 1 That this is a juft Paraphrafe of the Apoftle's Expreffions in oppo->
/ition to the Paraphrafe of the Sociritms, re-advane'd cf late hy Mon-
{ieur Le 0erk, who underfrands by Gods and Lords, Angels and Ms-
giftrcttes, I muft refer the Reader for fuller Satisfaction to Dr. Wmt-
^y's Parapfjrafe, p. 141, where he will fee that new Expofition 10-
lidiy confuted.
C ^4
18 A Vindication of the
and we by him. Now if we fuppofe the Apoftle to
defcribe that One God (whofe Unity he intended to
prove in Oppofition to the Pagan Polytheifm) accor-
ding to two different Manners of Subjifience and Ope-
ration, which are peculiar to the Father and the Son,
viz. The Father as the Caufe of whom all 'Things are,
and we in or for him, The Son as the Caufe by whom
all Things are, and we by him, The one diftinguifh'd
by the Character of God, The other of Lord, we
make him argue confidently with himfelf, as well as
with the receiv'd Doctrine of the Chriftian Church.
And even tho' Lord fhou'd denote a lower Character
belonging to Chrifi as Mediator, yet if he to whom
'tis given be in refpect of his Nature God as well as
the Father, ftill the Apoftle argues confidently, and
well proves, That Chriftians have no other God but
one, becaufe they own but one Father that fuftains
the Rights of the Deity, and one Lord that is the
Adminiflrator of the Divine Kingdom, and is One in
Eflence with the Father.
But on the other hand, if we fuppofe, That the
Apoftle by One Lord means only a Dignify 'd Crea-
ture, a Being entirely diftinct from the true God,
and yet a God by deputation, His Way of Reafoning
will be very unaccountable and ftrange. For accor-
ding to this Suppolition the Apoftle proves there is
no other God but One in oppofition to the Heathens
Polytheifm. How? Why, becaufe tho' the Hea-
thens have many Gods and Lords, yet we Chriftians
have but one One God the Father, who alone is God
by EJfence, and One Lord, who is God by Office and
Deputation. Which in Effect is to prove, that to
Chriftians, There is no other God but One, becaufe to
them there are but Two, One EJfential God, and ano-
ther Made God, One God by Nature, and another by
Office. Befides, if we fuppofe with the Unitarians,
that the Apoftle intends One God, with that Limi-
tation, of One that is God of himfelf and by Nature,
we ought in all Reafon to apply the like Limitation
to one Lord, and underftand it of One who has this
Lordfhip and Dominion of himfelf. But this wou'd
over-
True *Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 19
overturn their Opinion concerning our Bleffed Savi-
our, whofe Dominion they will by no means allow
to be from himfelf.
2. And this Argument will appear the ftronger, if
we add to it, That the Expofition of our Adverfa-
ries wou'd give the Gentiles a fair handle to juftify
their Worfhip of their Inferior Deities.
For the Learned Pagans might juftly retort on the
Apoftle, We own as well as you, 'float there is but
One God, i. e. One who is God of himfelf and the
Supreme God; but it will not thence follow, that
all the Inferior Demons we worfhip have nothing of
Divinity in 'em, and that no Worfhip is due to 'em.
For we fuppofe 'em conftitutcd as Inferior Gods by
the Favour of the Supreme God, on the Account of
the Lordjbip and Dominion he has delegated to 'em.
We fuppofe that he has advanc'd 'em to that Digni-
ty, and allows our paying 'em an inferior Religious
Homage, {a) Now what do we in this Matter more
than you Chriftians, who beildes that One God that
is of himfelf own another God, and pay a Religious
Homage to him, even to one who is but a God by
Courtejie and Deputation ? So that if our Demons are
but Ficlitious Deities, to whom no Worfhip is due,
there is as little due to your Made God, who is as
meer a Nothing in point of true Divinity as ours. All
that I San fee capable of being reply'd is, That the
Heathens were miftaken in thinking their inferior
Deities tb be conftituted fuch by the Supreme God;
but ftill their Argument, according to the Unitarian
Hypothecs, fufficiently clears their Demon-isuorjhip
from being Idolatrous. Of which more will occur
under the Head of Worfloip.
3 . I may juftly add, That to be the Caufe by whom
are all Things, is the peculiar Character of the True
God, and therefore cannot be the Character of a meer
Dignify 'd Creature.
{*) SecCelfus making this very Plea for Demon- Worfhip, Ce!f. af.
Orig. 1.8. p. 381, 411,
C 2, 'Tis
ao A Vindication of the
'Tis mention'd as the Chara&er of the True God,
That of him, and thro' (or by) him, and to him are
all Things, Rom. II. 3f. And thisPhrafe is apply 'd
to Chriit, when the Work of Creation is afcrib'd
to him, Eph. 3. 9. Col 1. 16*. (which I mall a-
non mew to be the peculiar Work of the True and
Supream God). And therefore thofe Arrians arc
plainly miftaken who tell us, that this Phrafe, All
Things are by him, denote only a Finite Inflrumental
Caufe fubfervient to the Fir ft. Whereas it appears
from the fore-cited place, that this Exprertion is
applied to the Firft Caufe, By whom, as well as Of
whom, all Things are. All Things are of the Fa-
ther, by the Eternal Word. And this is agreeable to
Job. 1. 1, 2.
Nor can our Adverfaries juftly pretend, that the
Apoftle's faying, To us there is but one God the Fa-
ther, do's exclude all but the Father from being God.
For, by the fame Reafoning, thefe Words, To us
there is but one Lord, wou'd exclude all but Chrifi
from this Character of Lord. (As feveral of the
Ante-Nicene Fathers very well argue in commenting
on thefe Words.)
But our Author, inftead of making any Reply toPla~
causes Arguments, pretends to overturn 'em all with
one Objection, viz. " That we may fee the One God
u and One Lord more clearly diftinguijh'd, Eph. 4.
" f, 6. Where by interpofing other things between the
cc One Lord, and One God and Fat her, viz. One Faith,
<c and One Baptifm ; it evidently appears, That thefe
" were not intended as two Characters of the fame
" Being.
But how do's this evidently appear ? It do's in-
deed appear, that the Apoftle diftinguimes between
that One Lord, and the Father. But how do's it ap-
pear, that he diftinguimes between 'em, as between
two Beings, the one whereof was only a Finite Digni-
fy' d Creature, the other Uncreated 'and Infinite ? Why
may not the fame God, according to one manner of
Subfiftence and Operation be call'd God the Father^
and according to another different manner of Sub-
fiftcncc
True ^Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, 21
fiftence and Operation be ftiled in refpecl: of his Me-
diatory Kingdom Lord ? And why may not thefe
Two that are diftinguifh'd from each other in their
manner of Subfiftence, their relative Properties, and
their Characters in the Oeconomy of our Salvation,
be mention'd diftin&ly, and at fome Diftance in the
fame Paragraph, without fuppofing'em to be diftin-
guifh'd from each other in refpecl: of Ellcntial Per-
fections, or without fuppofing 'em to be two fuch
diftindfc Beings as God and a meer Dignify'd Creature
are? Efpecially when thofe Words, One Faith ', and
One Baptifm, are fitly mention'd after One Lord, as
the genuine diftinguifhing Characters of thofe that
belong to his Mediatory Kingdom. If the Author
lee any Force in his own Argument, he muft excufe
us that we do not, but think there is incomparably
greater Strength in the Arguments on the other
fide, which he thought fit to take no Notice of.
I mall only add under this Head, that the very
Title otLord, Kug/©', fo univerfally given to our Sa-
viour thro' the New Teftament, and anfwering to
that of Jehovah in the Old, has been enlarged on as
a Proof of our Saviour's Divinity by the Bijhop of
Sarum, (a) whofe Reafoning on that Head the Au-
thor has not thought fit to take any Notice of.
Having thus far purfued the Argument from the
peculiar Titles of the Supreme God being given to
our Bleffed Saviour, it will be proper for me under
this Head to take Notice of the two firft Argu-v
ments he advances againft the true Divinity of our
Bleffed Saviour.
His firft Argument is, *' That our Lordjefus Chrifi
u exprejly [peaks of another God diftincl from him/elf
" Several times we find him faying, My God, of ano~
a ther. Matth. 27. 2,6. My God, my God, why haft thou
*' forfaken me ? Sure he intended not to fay, My felf, my
" fetfi w hy h a ft t ^ J0U forfaken me ? This God was then di-
<•' ftincl from himfelf, as he declares in other Places,
(a) See the Bifhop of Sarum's Four Difcourfes, from pag no. to
P3g. Ml
C 5 " Joho
^^ A Vindication of the
" John 7. 17. He Jhall know of my DoSlrine whether
<c it be of God, or whether I fpake of my felf. So
<c John 8. 42. Where 'tis to be noted that he does
u not dijlinguifh himfelf from him as the Father, but
<c as God. And therefore in all juft Conftruclion he
<c cannot be fuppos'd to be that felf-fame God, from
Ci whom he diftinguifhes, and to whom he oppofes, him-
Anfw. 'Tis fomething ftrange, that the Author
ftiou'd take no notice of what had been briefly of-
fer'd in Anfwer to this Argument in the Remarks on
Mr. E V Cafe. But lure he can never expect
this Argument mou'd ftagger thofe who believe that
there are Two Natures united in our Lord Jefus, un-
lefs he had firft overthrown that important Article
of our Religion. ( What he has offer'd afterwards
will be confider'd in its due place.) Chrift as Man
diftinguifhes himfelf from God, therefore the TJ r ord
to which his Human Nature was united, cannot be
God, tho' apparently call'd fo. Where is the Con-
fequence ? All the Force of the Argument lies in
this, That whenever our Lord Jefus {peaks of him-
felf, he muft be neceflarily fuppos'd to include all that
is in hisPerfon. But this is a manifeft Miftake. Our
Author himfelf grants, That that may be affirmed of
a Perfon which belongs only to a part of him, p. 8.
And nothing is more uiiia) in our common Forms of
Speech than to apply that to our felves, which is
true only of a Part of our compounded Nature 5 as
one may fay, I my felf was wounded, or fick, when
only his Body is fo, not his Soul. Thus our Lord
Jefus faith to his Difciples after his Refurre&ion, Be-
hold my Hands and my Feet, That 'tis I my felf, For a
Spirit has not Flefh and Bones, as ye fee me have.
Where he calls his Body, Himfelf. And what if we
fhou'd hereupon argue as our Author, That our Blef-
fed Saviour had no Soul or Spirit, becaufe he fpeaks
of himfelf as di(Hn£t from a Spirit, and therefore can-
not be fuppos'd to have any Spirit, from which he
diftinguifhes, . and to which he oppofes, himfelf :
Wou'd he take fuch Reafoning for any better than
weak
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 23
weak Sophiftry ? And why may not our Lord Jefus
then call his Human Nature Himfelf ^ as well as his
Human Body ? Why may he not as Man diftinguifh.
himfelf from God ? And the Author knows well e-
nough, it was as Man that he fuffer'd thofe Agonies
on the Crofs, and as Man that he came to reveal
the Will of God to the Sons of Men. But the Au-
thor Ihou'd tell us, how we mail reconcile his Ar-
gument with ChrirVs being fo often and exprefly
ftiled God) whereas he fuppofes him always diftin-
guifh'd from God? And he can no wayfolve the Dif-
ficulty without that Diftinction of a God by Nature^
and a God by Office. So that the Debate will come
to this, Whether of thefe Diftin&ions be more con- S.
formable to the Strain of the holy Scriptures, viz.
Our Diftinction of two Natures in the Perfon of
our Blefled Saviour, with which we folve the Paf-
fages he mentions -, or his Diftin&ion of a God by Na-
ture, and a God by Office or Deputation^ to which he
muft flee to reconcile thofe Paflages in which Chrifl
is diftinguifh'd from God with thofe wherein he is
called God. We can mew him our Difiintlion clear
in feveral Paflages, (as 1 John 1. 14. Rom. 9. f
1 Tim. i. id.) But we cou'd never yet difcern any
Footflep of the other in the holy Scriptures, which
afliire us, that to us, (ChrilHans,) There is no other
God but One. 1 Cor. 8. 4. And the very firft Com-
mand ftri&ly forbids our owning any other as God
but him, Exod. 10. 5.
And this leads me to what he adds under this Ar-
gument from that fore^ited Text, 1 Cor. 8. 4. But
having already conlider'd his weak Reafoning from
that Paflage, p. 16, 17, &c. I ihalj refer the Reader
thither > and come to his
Second Argument, viz.
" Our Lord Jefus not only owns another than hint'
<c fetf to be God) but alfo that he is above or over him-
* c felf. W})ich is plainly alfo imitated by the Apoftles.
a Himfelf loudly proclaims his Subjeclion to the Father
iC in many Inflances. In general he declares his Father
¥ to be greater than he^ John 14. 28, yo. and 10. zp.
C 4 « He
^4 ^Vindication of the
cc He faith, he came not in his own, but his Father's,
Cc Name and Authority. John f. 43. that he fought
" not his owti, but God's, Glory-, nor made his own
c * Will, but God's, his Rule. And in fuch a Pojlure
* c of Subjection he came down from Heaven to this
Cc Earth. So that it fhou'd feem that Nature that did
<c pne^exifi did not poffefs the fupreme Will, even be-
Cc fore it was incarnate, John 6. 38. Again, he owns
*' his Dependance on his God and Father, even for
tc thofe things which 'tis pretended belong to him as
Cc God, viz. the Power of working Miracles. John y.
c< t£, io. Of raifing the Dead, v. z6. Of executing
Cc univerfal Judgment, v. 2.7. Of all which he fays,
" Of my felf I can do nothing, v. 30. In like manner
Cc his Apofiles declare his Subjeclion to another; not
Cc only as his Father, but as his God, which is mofl
Cc emphatically exprejfed in calling the mofl Bleffed God,
ic the God of our Lord Jefus , after his Humiliation
Cc was over, Eph. 1. 17. And the Head of Chrifi is
Cc God, 1 Cor. 1 i . 3 . they declare his Headfloip ever
Cc the Univerfe, and the very Foundation of his Claim
Cc to Honour and Service, to be owing to the gracious
Cc Gift of God, Phil. z. 9. And yet thefe are fome of
Cc the highefi Glories of Jefus Chrifi,
Anfw. That this Argument is of no Force againft
the true Deity o£ourBleJedLord,wi\\ appear if we con-
flder,That God thei^^r may be above Chrifi infe-
veral Refpeclrs, which yet are no way inconfiftent
with his being One God with the Father, and that
the Scriptures cited by our Author under this Head
are to be underftood only of the Father being above
him in fome of thofe Refpeclrs.
I. I fhall mew, That God the Father may be faid
to be above Chrifi in feveral Refpeclrs, which yet are
no way inconfiftent with his being One God with the
Father.
Now the Father may be faid to be above our Lord
Jefus in thefe three Refpeclrs.
I . With refpetl to his Humane Nature. Who can
doubt but a temporary dependent Creature is every
way inferior to that Eternal Almighty Being that
made him? z. With
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 15
z. With refpecl to the Eternal Generation of his di-
vine Per/on, as he is the only Begotten of the Father.
We acknowledge a Priority in the Order of fub fitt-
ing to be peculiar to the Father, who is therefore
called the Fountain of the Deity. The Father and
Son's having the fame Nature do's not deftroy the or-
der of Perjons. A Son is equal to his Father in refpecl:
of the Human Nature he derives from him, but yet
inferior in that Relative Capacity of a Son. And on
this account the Father is fometimes in Scripture
call'd God by way of Eminency, and propos'd as the
ultimate Object of religious Worfhip -, Eph. 2. 18-
I'hro' him (/. e. thro' Jefus Chrift) we have Accefs by
one Spirit to the Father, i. e. to the divine Nature as
primarily fubfifting in the Perfon of the Father.
3 . JVith refpecl to his Office as Mediator.
In One God we believe there is Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, .^nd that there is between thefe facred
Three that Diftin&ion which is a fufficient Founda-
tion for their diftin£t Actings towards each other,
of which there are evident Inftances in the myfteri-
ous Oeconomy of our Redemption. In which the
order of working follows that of fubfifting. The Fa-
ther fuftains the Place of fupreme offended Lawgiver.
The Son by a voluntary Difpenfation aflumes our
Nature, and interpofes as an Atoning Mediator. And
this is a wonderful Inftance of the Condefcention of
the Eternal Word, that tho' he was God equal with
the Father in refpecl: of effential Perfections, yet his
compalTionate Regard to us induced him to accept
a Station and fuftain a Character in order to our Re-
covery, in which the Father is greater than he- y yea,
in which he was in the Nature he aflum'd to be
humbled to fuch an aftonifhing Degree, as to be
Obedient to Death, even the Death of the Cr-ofs, to
be defpifed and rejected of Men, as well as fmitten of
God.
And in this Capacity of Mediator, after he had R-
nifh'd the Work of his humble State, he was crowned
with Glory and Honour, and defervedly advanc'd to
a fovereign Dominion over all, that in the Adminj-
ftration
16 A Vindication of the
ftration of his Mediatorial Kingdom he might ac-
complilh the eternal Counfels of the divine Will.
And in this ftate of Exaltation his Human Nature
has an eminent Degree of Dignity and Glory above
any other created Being conferr'd upon it, which
was not its original Right, but the Reward of his
Condefcenfion and meritorious Obedience and Suf-
ferings.
Now, tho' under each of thefe Considerations
God the Father is above the Son, yet none of 'em is
inconliftent with the Son's being God by Nature.
Not his being Man. For tho' as Man, he is not
God-, yet he, who is Man, is alfo God. For the
Apoftle fure do's not fpeak Contradictions and Im-
poilibilities, when he tells us, That of the Father as
concerning the Flejh Chrift came, who is over all, God
blejfed for evermore. And that divine Word who was
with God, (and fo diftinguifh'd from the Father as
to his Manner of Subfiftence) and who was God, (and
fo was one with the Father in Effence) even this Word
was made Flefh, and dwelt among us, John i. i, 14.
Not his being the Son of God, in refpect of his Eter-
nal Emanation from the Father. His Personality ab-
itractedly confider'd do's not formally include the di-
vine Ejfence, but only the Manner of his having ir,
viz. by a neceflary Eternal Communication from
the Father, in a manner to us incomprehenfible. So
that his being the Son of God, and being God, are no
more incompatible than a Thing and the Manner of
it.
Nor is his being Mediator inconfiftent with his be-<
ing God. For this Office is altogether a voluntary
Difpenfation. Suppofe a Father and Son to be joint-
ly pofTcft of the fame fovereign Power, and to Reign
together. Upon the Rebellion of their undutihil
Subjects, may not the Son leave the Rights of his
Sovereignty in his Father's Hands, and take upon
him the Office of a Reconciling Mediator, without
being divefted of the Crown? This is fome Illuftra-
tion of the Cafe before us, tho' it do's not fully reach
it. He who is the Mediator is alfo God. lie was
God
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, 27
God who purchafed the Church with his own Blood,
Ac~bs 2,0. 28. And fince it was the marvellous Con-
dcfcenfion and Love of the Son of God that brought
him into this Relation of a Mediator, what can it be
but molt unreafonable Ingratitude to turn this Fruit
of his unconceivable Pity into an Argument againft
his Deity ?
Thus we fee in what Refpe&s our Lord Jefus may
be own'd to be Inferior to the Father, and that none
of 'em are inconfiflent with his being the fame God
by Nature.
I therefore proceed to fhew
II. That all the PafTages of Scripture which the
Author produces may be underftood of our Blefed
Saviour under fome of thefe Confederations, and
therefore do not difprove his being Partaker of the
fame divine Nature with the Father.
The firft Place he mentions is, u My Father is
" greater than I, John 14. 18.
Anfw. If we fuppofe our Saviour to fpeak this of
himfelf as Man, there is no Difficulty at all. And
the Context favours this Interpretation, becaufc he
fpeaks of his bodily Prefence with 'em, of his leav-
ing 'em and going to the Father, and under this Limi-
tation adds, My Father is greater than I. And that
he do's not mean himfelf in the whole of what was
in his Per/on, is evident, becaufc in fome Senfe he
was in Heaven already, (See John 3 . 1 3 .) and cou'd
not in that Senfe fpeak of his going thither.
But we may without any Prejudice to our Caufe
frant him much more, That our Saviour fpeaks of
imfelf as Mediator, and in that Senfe aflert, That
the Father is greater than he. For tho' in refpecr. of
his divine Nature He and the Father are One ; yet in
this Relation of Mediator he was the Servant of the
Father, and fent by him, Ifa. 42. 1. And indeed had
our Blejfed Saviour been no more than a Man, his
Affertion, that the Father is greater than he, wou'd
carry but a jejune Senfe with it. For who cou'd
ever admit any Doubt about the Infinite and Eternal
Jehovah being greater than any finite temporary Being ?
Whereas
28 A V I N D I C A T I o n of the
Whereas if he fpeak of himfelf as Mediator ; the Af-
fertion was very proper and needful.
And this may alfo obviate what the Author next
" objects from John f. 43. 6. 38. That our Saviour
" came down in his Father's Name, That he came
u down from Heaven not to do his own Will, but the
" Will of him that fent him -, Upon which he puts
" this Glofs, 'That it was in a Pofture of Subjection
u that he came down from Heaven to the Earth j J@
<c that it fhou'd feem that Nature that did pra-exift
" did not poftefs the fupreme Will.
Anfw. I am glad to find that the Author will al-
low to our Blejjed Saviour fuch a prae-exiftent Nature,
but forry he fpeaks fo very doubtfully of it 3 leaft, I
fuppofe, he fhou'd difoblige his Socinian Friends. But
as to his Objection, I freely grant him, That it was
the Will of the Father which the Man Chrijl Jefus
came to fulfil. And as Man, his Will was doubtlefs
diftinct from the Will of the Father, and entirely fub-
jecl thereto. Nay, tho' we fhou'd underftand thefe
Exprefiions concerning that prae-exiftent Eternal
Word that was Incarnate; it wou'd not hence fol-
low, That the Eternal Word had not the fame Will
alfo, but only that in this Oeconomy of Things,
God the Father, who was firft in order of Being, was
confider'd as the firft Spring and Mover, by whofe
Appointment the Son came as Mediator, not to pur-
fue any particular Will of his own, which was not
the Will of the Father alfo. Nor is it inconfiftent
with the Son's being God, to fay, that in the Qua-
lity, or under the Character, of Mediator, he came
into the World (i. e. was Incarnate) in a Pofture of
Subjection.
Again, as to thofe Pafiages wherein our Lord Jefus
owns his Dependance on the Father for thofe Things
that belong to him originally as God, as the Power
of working Miracles, Raifing the Dead, and executing
univerfal Judgment, John f. ip, 20, 26, 27. They
either refer to his human Nature, or to his Office of
Mediator, for the Difcharge whereof we own his
Authority to be delegated and deriv'd. And thofe
Words
True*Deity of our B left d Saviour. 29
Words of our Lord lead us to this Expofition, in
which he tells us, 'that the Father has given him Au-
thority to execute Judgment alfo, becaufe he is the Son
of Man, v. 27. Where he both intimates in what
Nature he was to Execute Judgment, viz. as the
Son of Man y and the veiy Reafon of* the Father's
conferring that Honour upon him as Mediator, even
becaufe he is the Son of Man, i. e. has condefcended
to be Incarnate , and take our Nature on him.
But as to his faying, That of himfelf he cou'd do
nothing, John f . 50. 'tis not incongruous to fup-
pofe that he defign'd thereby to aflert his Union in
Nature with the Father, as One Energy or Principle
cf Operation-, becaufe when he ufes the fame Expref-
(ion, v. 1 p. he adds, What Things foever the Father
do's, the Son do's likewife 3 (which can never be true
of a meer Created Being, unlefs we make it Omnipo-
tent,) and that as the Father hath Life in himfelf, fo
he has (by an Eternal Communication) given the Son
to have Life in himfelf, v. 2.6. i. e. the fame Effential
Life, which according to the Order of fubfiiling is
firft in the Father.
And it feems partly for this Reafon, that the A-
poltle Paul calls the Father fo often the God and Fa-
ther of our Lord Jefus Chrifi -, not only his God, as
his human Nature was his JVorkmanfhip and Creature j
but his Father, becaufe the Godhead or Divine Na-
ture is communicated by the Father to the Son, on
which Account he was ftiled in the ancient Creeds,
God of God, Light of Light.
In this RefpecT: alfo the Head of Chrifi is God, 1
Cor. 11. 3 . Chrift as Mediator and Redeemer is but
a Means for the Manifeftation of the Eflential Glory
of God to the intellectual World.
Nay, we do acknowledge his Dignity and Glory
as Mediator (in which that Human Nature he aflum'd
fo eminently fhares) to be the Gift of God, and
Fruit of the Father's infinite Complacency in his
forward and chearful Obedience unto Death, even the
Death of the Crofs. According to what he cites from
theApoftle Paul, Phil. 2. 7, 8, 9.
So
3© ^Vin di cation of the
So that in all thefe Places there is no Intimation
of any fuch Subjeclion or Inferiority of the Son, as
fhou'd exclude him from being, in refpect of his
Nature and Effence, the fame God with the Father.
But the Author under this Head fingles out one
Text, which he tells us " is full of irrefijiible Evi-
K dence for proving an Inferiority of the Son to his
w Father, or to God, viz. I Cor. if. from 24 to 29.
I mall therefore recite the Text, and premifewhat
may clear the genuine Senfe and Scope of it, and
then examine the Inferences our Author draws from it.
The Text runs thus,
Ver. 24. Then cometh the End, when he (i. e. Chrift)
pall have delivered up the Kingdom to God, even the
Father, when he fhall have put down all Rule, and all
Authority and Power.
if. For he mufi reign till he hath put all Enemies
under his Feet.
z6. The I aft Enemy that fhall he deftroy'd is Death.
27. For he hath put all things under his Feet. But
when he faith, all things are put under him, it is ma-
nifeft that he is excepted who did put all things under him.
28 . And when all things fhall be fubdued unto him, then
fhall the Son alfo himfelf be fubfetl to him that pit all
things under him, that God may he all in all.
Now in order to the clearing the Senfe and Scope
of this Text, I muft premife, that there is a twofold
Kingdom of Chrift, his EJfential and his Mediatory
Kingdom.
His Effential (which fome call his Natural) King-
dom, belongs to him as he is the Eternal Word, by
whom all Things were made, and without whom not
any Thing was made that was made, John 1.5. For
this Dominion is the unalienable Refult of Creation,
common to Father, Word, and Holy Spirit. Now of
this Kingdom there {hall be no End. His Throne
(on this Account) is in the flri&eft Senfe, for ever
and ever, Heb. 1. 8. Even that Throne which he pof-
fefles as the Lord who in the Beginning laid the Foun-
dation of this Earth, and the Works of whofe Hands
the Heavens are. See Ver. 10. This Kingdom he
can
True *Detty of our Bleffed Saviour. 31
can never give up. He by -whom the Worlds were
made^ will for ever be the abfolute Proprietor and
Lord of thofe Worlds he gave Being to.
But befides this, there is a Mediatory Kingdom of
Chrift) which was erected on the Occafion of our
Apoftafy, and is the wonderful Expedient contriv'd
in the Divine Counfels for our Recovery and Salva-
tion. For after our Lord Jefus had in our Nature
made Atonement for Sin by becoming obedient to
Deaths even the Death of the Crofs 5 he was in that
Nature highly exalted^ had all Power and Authority
in Heaven and Earth committed to him^ was made
Head of his Churchy and Head over all 'things to it ;
nay, has Angels^ Principalities and Powers fubjetled to
him (a) ; fo that the Adminiftration of all Affairs is
in his facred Hands. Now the Eftabliihment of this
Kingdom we readily grant to be a free A£t of God
the Father^ who is therefore faid to appoint it to him.
In this Senfe God his God has anointed him, and
made him both Lord and Chrift (b). But this Kingdom
is fo far from being inconfiftent with his true Deity ^
that without it the Human Nature were abfolutely
incapable of managing fo univerfal and extenfive a
Dominion, which reaches both to this vi/ible, and
to the fuperior invifible World, (c)
Now if this Paffage of the Apoftle muft be un-
derftood of this Mediatory Kingdom^ 'tis evident that
his Inferiority to the Father in refpeel: of this his Me-
diatory Office and Kingdom^ will no Way prove his
being Inferior to him in refpe£t of his Nature andEs-
fentiai Perfections. So that we might difmifs the
Author's Reafonings, as not reaching the Matter
in Difpute. But lince he lays fo great a Strefs on
'em, let us briefly conlider 'em.
1. He
(a) Phil. 2. 8, 9, <&c Matth. 18. 18. Eph. i. it, 12.
(£) Eeb. 1, 9. Ads 2. 36.
(c) Rer. 1. 1 8. For Hades fhould there be rendred the iwfeenWbrld,
or imijible State, equally including fhc Man/ions of Glory, and the
Piace of Torment.
3i A Vindication of the
i . He obferves, " That God is excepted out of thofe
cc things that are -put under the Feet of Chrifl, and that
cc becaufe it was he that put them under him. All
this we freely grant.
Bat our Author here enquires, " How comes it
cc to pafs that "'tis fo evident a thing that another mufi
cc be the Author of this Triumph of Chriji? IVhy
c< " might it not be done by himfelf independently as the
cc Supreme God, and then there need have been no Ex-
" ception of any one Being out of all the things under
" Mm ? But the Apoflle knew that Jefus Chrift mufl
<c needs triumph by a Power derived from God, to
* c whom it was mofi eminently to be afcrib'd. And
*' then to one who had fuch Thoughts, it was manifefl
<c that there mufl be one excepted from all the things
C4 under him, becaufe he mufl needs be above Chrifl,
* 4 who enables him to fubdue all things, cr makes him
* c a God over all.
Anfw. We grant that the Father is the Author of
this Dignity and Triumph of our Exalted Lord Je-
fus. And there is this evident Reafon why the Eter-
nal JVord fhou'd not confer this Dignity on the Hu-
man Nature, to which it was united, but the Fa-
ther only, becaufe in this Oeconomy the Father ?.-
lone fuftains the Character of Supreme Lawgiver,
the Son only that of Mediator. And as fuch he was
to a6fc only by a Power derived from the Father,
who in this refpecl is confider'd as above him. But
this does by no means prove that the IVord or Son
is not God by E (fence. And for the Author's Phrafe
of Chrifl' s being made by the Father, God over all, wc,
look upon it as both irrational, and wholly unferip-
tural. A Made Creator, or a Made Self-exiflent Be-
ing, is a Contradiction in Philofophy. And a Made
God is a new Notion unknown to Scriptural Divinity.
For a Made God is by Nature no God, and fuch as
are by Nature no Gods, we are neither oblig'd to
own nor ferve, Gal. 4. 48. Of which more here*
after.
The Author obferves, " That the Son fhall deliver
w up this Kingdom to God the Father only., Jince it was
« the
True *Detty of our Blejfed Saviour. 33
u the Father who gave him all Power in Heaven and
" Earth, &c.
We grant it, that as this mediatory Kingdom was
the Gift of the Father^ and was defign'd only to be
an Adminiftration of a temporary Continuance, till
the Reafon of firft erecting it fhould ceafe -, fo when
the great Ends of it are attain'd, when the Myfti-
cal Body of Chrift fhall be compleated, all Enemies
fubdu'd, the World judg'd, and the Salvation of all
given to our Blejfed Lord by the Father fully con-
fummated, then the Work of Chrift as Mediator of
Reconciliation fhall be finifh'd. (As the Phyjiciari's
Work in the Hofpital is over when all his Patients
are perfectly recover'd and cur*d.) And then the de-
rived Power o£ Chrift, as Mediator will be return'd into
the Father's Hands j tho' our Lord himfelf fhall 011
the Account of it for ever inherit the Praifes of his
Ranfom'd People. But ftill all this makes nothing
againft his Divine Nature^ as he is the Eternal Word.
3. The Author farther obferves from this Text,
" 'that the Son himfelf fhall be fubjeSl to him that puts
" all things under him, i. e. (to God his Father) ; that
" God may be all in all) i. e. his Subjection fhall be
" then manifefied by an open folemn Acknowledgment
" of it) when he fhall recognize the Supremacy of the
" Father in that publick Act of Surrender) Sec. and
" hereupon he concludes^ can any thing be more exprefi
" five of an Inequality between God and Chrift ?
Anfw. We freely grant, that when the Mediatory
Kingdom of Chrift is deliver'd up, that Human Nature
in which he adminifter'd it fhall appear in the fame
State of Subjection to the Father as Angels and glori-
fied Saints do. So that as Chrift was before All in
All (in the Adminiftration of all Affairs relating both
to the Churchy and the World) Col. 3 . II.) So now
all things will revert to their natural Order. And
God efTentially confider'd (as inclusive of Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit) fhall be All in All for ever*
there being no need of fuch a Mediator between God
and his Saint S) when they are raifed to a State of
finlefs Perfection,
D But
34 <A Vindication of the
But our Author being aware of this Anfwer has
endeavour d to obviate it. Accordingly he propofes
it by Way of Objection to his Argument.
" // will (faith he) be [aid by Jome, that by the Son
u is meant here the Son of Man, or Chrifi as Man,
u while as God he jhall not be fubjeel to the Father.
To this he anfwers, fc That as there is no Intima-
cc tion of any fuch Dijlinclion between the two pre-
" tended Natures of the Son here, fo there is enough
" in the U r ords to fioew, 'That they are fpoken of him
" in his highefi Capacity and Character. Infomuch
" that Mr. Claude maintains it to be true of the Son
" of God as to his fuppofed Divine Nature. But thd"
" there is no need of fuppofing fuch a Divine Nature
a (which I think the Text plainly contradicts) yet his
cc Reafons will hold fo far as to prove, that thelVords
" fpeak of Chrif under the highefi Characlcr he bears
" under the Name of Son.
Anfw. If the Author had dealt fairly by Mr. Claude,
he fhou'd not only have reprefented his Expofition
of thefe Words, but what he offers to ihew, That
that Subjection of the Eternal Son of God to the Fa-
ther, which he allows, is confident with his Divi-
nity : And fhou'd have then refuted his Expofition,
and not expected that we fhou'd take it for granted
on his bare Word, That the Text contraditls Chrifs
having fuch a Divine Nature. Nor do I wave that '
Expofition as indefenfible, fince that Subjetlion may be
underllood of the Son's Inferiority to the Father in
refpect of the Order of Subfifiing and Acting, being
then manifefled. But fince I prefer the other Ex-
pofition, I mall examine the Reafons the Author fub-
joins to prove, that the Words muft be underftood
of the Son in his highefi Capacity and Character.
His firfl Reafon is, " Becaufe 'tis not [aid, the Son
" of Man, but the Son abfolutely, even the Son him-
" felf, with great Emphafis, q. d. as great and glo-
" rious as he is with all his Grandeur and Power.
Anfw. The Son is the Name of the Perfon of
Chrifi 5 and tho' it be often apply'd to him with
reference to his Divine Nature, yet 'tis fometimes
mani-
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 3^
manifeitly apply'd with refpect to his Human Nature.
'Tis fo John y . 22, 27. And tho' he faith, that it
undoubtedly implies all that comes under the Title
of Son j I do as politively affirm, that it docs not To
always, and fhall afterwards particularly mew it does
not, from Mark 13. 32.
Nay, tho' the Apoltle add the Son himfelf 'by Way
of Emphafis, yet this will not prove that he includes
his higheft Characler, but only refers to his King-
dom and Power as Mediator, which he had defcrib'd
before. Even this Son himfelf who pall reign till he
have put down all Authority and Power, mall then
himfelf be fubjctl.
His fecond Reafon is, " 'That his Subjection being
" opposed to his Reign, both mufl be under food of the
u fame Subject. Be fire the delivering up the King-
" dom can only be done by the fame- to which it was
" committed, and by which it was managed. Now
" I floall allow that only in his human Nature Chrifi
<c could give up his Kingdom, becaufe "'tis as Man de-
" legated and inhabited by God that he manages this
" Kingdom.
Anfw. To make this Argument cogent, the Au-
thor mull aflert, that Chrill's Reign as Mediator in-
cludes his higheft Charatler. But this I deny : His
Divine Nature is a higher Capacity than his Office of
Mediator.
And tho' we grant him, that the delivering up
the Kingdom can only be done by him to whom ic
is committed, and by whom 'tis manag'd, yet we
do not fay, as the Author would feign for us, that
Chrift could give up his Kingdom only as Man. For
he will do it as Mediator. 'Tis not as meer Man 9
but as God Man, that he fways and manages his
Mediatory Kingdom, and fhall deliver it up, tho' 'tis
only in the Human Nature that he will be fubjetl.
And therefore his Vindication of the Unitarians from
this Ground, who think our Lord Jefus a fufficient
Saviour, tho' he be not the Supreme God, is it felf
groundkfs. (As I (hall have Occafion to (hew when
D % he
3 6 A Vindication of the
he re-affumes and profecutes this Argument at Page
H-)
I fhall only take Notice of what he adds at the
Clofe of this Reafon.
tc That the Delivering up the Kingdom to God the
" Father makes it plain there is no God the Son, in
" the fame Senfe, or the fame fupreme Ejfence, 'with
u the Father. Becaufe if there were, then he ought
" not to be excluded from this Glory of having fuch
u open Homage paid to him, which is here appropriated
" to the Father only. And fince the Apoflle fpcaks of
" the fame God (whom he explains to be the Fa-
w ther) to the End of this Difcourfe, and faith, he
u fjall be all in all, how evidently does he floewhim to be
u far beyond all that are not God the Father ; whatever
u Characler elfe they bear. So then Jefus Chrift in
" his highcfl Capacity is inferior to the Father, how
" can he be the fame God to which he is fubjetl, or of
" the fame Rank and Degree?
Anfw. The whole of the Mediation of Chrift be-
ing a voluntary Difpenfation; and the Father, Son y
and Holy Spirit, having different Parts afcrib'd to
'em in the great Affair of our Redemption and Sal-
vation -, 'tis no Abfurdity to fuppofe that each of
'em may have a Glory accruing from thence that is
peculiarly his own. We are fure the Bleffed Redeemer
has fo, Rev. f. 9, 10. And fo has the Father, Phil,
z. 9, 10, 11. and in the Text before us. And yet
no Inferiority of Chrift to the Father can thence be
inferr'd, but what relates to his Office of Mediator^
which I have already fhewn, imports no Inferiority
in refpect of Nature and Effential Perfeblions. So
that the Delivering up the Kingdom peculiarly to the
Father does not make it plain, there is no God the
Son in the fame fupreme Ejfence with the Father.
And for Chrift' s Subjetlion, I have already fuggefted
that it refers to his Human Nature. And our Au-
thor barely aflerts without Proof, that God's being
All in All, is to be appropriated to the Father, to
the Excluflon of the Eternal Word and Holy Spirit.
§0 that the Evidence our Author pretended to bring
us
True 'Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 37
us from this Text againft our Saviour's Divinity is Co
fo far from being irreftftable, that 'tis not fo much as
difcernable. The 'Text evidently refers to Chrifi\ Me-
diatory Kingdom, in the Adminiitration whereof we
freely own he bears a Character Inferior to that of
the Father, but without any Inequality in the com-
mon EfTential Properties of the Divine Nature.
The Author under this Head, (viz. Of Chrijt's
having a God above him) proceeds to give us (as he
pretends) the Scriptural Account of the Godhead of
the Blejfed Jefus, viz. " Becaufe he is invefied with
" a God-like Authority andPower,from thefupream God
w his Father. Thus (faith he) when he was accufedby the
" captious Jews, for ajfuming the Char abler of the Son of
" God {which they perverfly wou'd ftretch, as if it imply* A
u anEquality with God) Joh.io.$f, 7,6. He explains in
4t what Senfe only he jufliffd it, viz. As one whom
" the Father had fanhified, i. e. called to a greater Of-
* c fee, and honoured with a higher Cmnmiffion than
" thofe Magifirates on whom the Scripture fo freely
" beftows the Title of Gods.
Anfw. That our Author has perverted the true
Scope of this Place, will appear if we impartially
coniider the whole Context. Our Lord J ejus at v.
28. argues the Security of his Sheep in his power-
ful Hand, from which none cou'd pluck ''em ; and adds,
that his Father was greater than all, and that none
cou'd pluck 'em out of the Father's Hands, and then
immediately fubjoins, I and the Father are One, v. 30-
Hereupon the Jews took up Stones to ilone him as
a Blafphemer, becaufe that he being a Man made
himfelf God. So that when he faid, I and the Father
are One, they apprehended the Meaning of Chrift to
be that they were One in Nature. Now 'tis evident,
that our Blejfed Saviour do's not difown this Senfe
they put on his Words, which he both fhou'd and
might moft eafily have done by telling 'em, He did
not mean One in Nature, but One in Dejign and Con*
fent ; and indeed ought to have done for the Vindw
cation of the incommunicable Glory of God, ha4
D 5 he
38 A Vindication of the
he been only a Dignified Creature . On the contrary,
our Saviour argues from the LefTer to the Greater,
that if Magif rates were called Gods, it cou'd be no
Blafphcmy for him, whom the Father had fanclified
and fent into the World, to fay, 'that he was the Son
of God. But whom did he intend to reprefent him-
felf to be by this Character of the Son of God? This
he clearly intimates in the two following Verfes,
which our i\.uthor is pleafed wholly to overlook,
tho' 'tis manifeft that they contain our Lord's Defence
of the ExpreiHon that firft offended the Jews. To
iufline his Character of the Son of God, he refers
'em to his Works, which were the apparent Effects
of a Divine Almighty Power. If I do not the Works
of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, tho'' ye be-
lieve not me, believe the Works, that ye may know and
believe that the Father is in me, and I in him, q. d.
Since my Works are the fame as my Father's, this
ihould convince you of the Truth of what I faid,
that I and my Father are One, even One in Nature y
fuch Almighty Works being the genuine Productions
of an Almighty Power that is both in the Father,
and \s\Me. So that oui'Lord do's not lay the whole
Strefs of his being the Son of God upon his being
Sanctify" 1 d and Sent ; thofe Expreflions only contain
the Defcription of his Per/on by his Office, but do
not intimate the Foundation of his title. For that
our Lord evidently refers 'em to that truly Divine
and Almighty Power that difplay'd it felf in his Works.
But this the Author thought it not convenient for
his purpofe to take notice of, tho' he might eafily
forefee it takes off the whole Force of his Argu-
ment, and eftablimes that very Account of the true
Deity of Chrift which we contend for.
The Author argues next from Heb. i. 8, p. " When
" he is there called God, 'tis explained in what Senfe,
" or of what Sort of God. 'tis to be under flood by
cc faying, that his God {intimating that he had a God
f c over him) had anointed him with Oil, i. e. had in-
" veiled him with Royal Power and Dignity (as Kings
f c were inflall'd in Office by anointing 'em with Oil a-
" mong
True 7)ezty of our Bleffed Saviour. 39
<c mong the Jews). TVhich is an Explication of his
u Godhead and Dominion. And this is fa id to be a-
cc hove his Fellows > not fire above the Father and Ho-
u ly Spirit, (which only are pretended to be his Fellows
u as God, by thofe who under fl and it of the fupreme
" Godhead) but above all other fubordinate Beings.
And he concludes, " 'this is one plain Scripture Ac-
u count of his being called God. For thefe Things are
" fpoken to him, and of him, under the Character of
" 'God. O God, thy Throne, v. 8. And he adds,
" I think Men ffou'd be well afjufd on what Grounds
" they go, before they affign other Reafons of this Cha-
u racier ; fo different from the Scripture Account.
Anfw. To clear this Paflage, I muft refer the Rea-
der to what was premis'd at/>. f. That our Lord Je-
fus is a complex Subject, including (according to the
common Faith of Chrillians) the Eternal Word, the
Human Nature, and the Office of Mediator. And
therefore very different things may be fpoken of
him in reference to his two different Natures, and
to his Office as Mediator.
Now the whole Strength of the Author's Argu-
ment turns upon this, That whatever is here laid
throughout the whole Chapter concerning our Blef-
fed Saviour, is fpoken of him in his highefl Capa-
city and Char a-tler. And therefore that when the in*
fpired Writer at v. 8. calls our Saviour God, he do's
at v. p. affign the Reafon of his Godhead, viz. be-
caufe he was by God his God anointed with the Oil of
Gladnefs above his Fellows. But thefe Suppofitions on
which our Author's Argument is founded I deny 5
and need only have recourfe to the Context for the
Refutation of.
The Infpired Writer had at v. 1. defcrib'd our
Bleffed Saviour as the Son, the Heir of all Things^
and the Maker of the Worlds, or Ages. (Even the
fame Ages mention'd by the fame Author, Heb. 11.
3. where they are evidently to be underftood of the
World oi'Univerfe)-, and at v. 3. as the Brightnefs of
the Father's Glory, and exprefs Image of his Per [on or
Subfiflence, and as upholding all things by the Word of
D 4 his
4© ^Vindication of the
his Power. (And that thefe Expreffions refer to his
prae-exiftent and truly Divine Nature, any judicious
Reader may be fully fatisfy'd that will confult Dr.
Whitby* % Paraphrafe on this Epiftle ; for I muft at
prefent attend to the Author's Argument). At the
end of v. 3. he takes notice of Chrift's Purging (or
expiating) our Sins (which was perform'd by his
becoming in our Nature our Sin-Offering and Propi-
tiation) and of his Exaltation thereupon at the right
Hand of the Majefiy on high (which imports the Dig-
nity he was advanc'd to as Mediator). So that 'tis
evident, That the infpir'd Writer fpeaks of our Sa-
viour fometimes in reference to his Pra-exiftent Na-
ture, fometimes in reference to his Human, fome-
times in reference to his Office and Dignity as Medi-
ator. But to defcend to the PafTage alledg'd, the in-
fpir'd Writer in the following Verfes produces feve-
ral Inftances of his Pre-eminence and Superiority to
the Angels (the higheft Rank of created Beings). He
proves it from the Title of Son, being given him in a
higher Senfe than it was ever given to thofe noblefl
of Creatures, at v. y. From the Hcmage and Wor-
Jhip due to him from the Angels themfelves, at v. 6,
7. From the peculiar Title of God afcrib'd to him,
and that on the Account of his Effential Dominion
and Kingdom, at v. 8. To the Son he faith, Thy Throne,
O God, is for ever and ever. Which Words cannot
be true of Chrift's Kingdom as Mediator, which mall
ceafe, and be delivered up to the Father. But of his
Mediatory Kingdom he fpeaks at v. p. where the
Reafon of it isamgn'd,becaufe he loved Righteoufnefs,
and hated Iniquity, (i. e. becaufe our Lord Jefus had in
his humbled State perform'd a finlefs Obedience to
the Divine Laws in our Nature.) Therefore God his
God had anointed him with the Oil of Joy above his
Fellows -, i. e. had exalted him in that very Nature
wherein he had perform'd that Obedience to a fuper-
cminent Degree of Glory and Joy above all his Fel-
low-Creatures, above both Men and Angels. So
that God's being called his God refers only to his Hu-
man Nature, to which the Joy fet before him, as the
Reward
True T^eity of our Blejfed Saviour. 41
Reward of his Sufferings, did belong. ( See Hebr.
ll. 1.) And therefore this Expreflion do's not at all
import any Superiority of the Father to the Son as
to his Divine Nature. Nay, as to thofe who fuppofe
(which yet I fee noNeceflity orOccafion for) that
the Father is call'd his God in his highefi Capacity , yet
even this wou'd infer no more than the Father's be-
ing above him in refpec~b to the Order of Subjijience
between the Sacred Three, (on which Account the
Son is call'd God of God in the ancient Creeds, as was
obferv'd before). But this wou'd argue no Inferio-
rity of the Son to the Father in Point of EJfence; and
much lefs, That he was only call'd God on the Account
of his Office and Kingdom as Mediator, or on the Ac-
count of his being a Dignify 'd Creature. For that
he was God in a much higher Senfe is manifeft from
the very following Words, at v. 10, 11, &c. where
the Work of Creation is afcrib'd to him, which plain-
ly fets him above the Rank of Creatures, (as I mall
anon more fully mew).
Since therefore the Author is miftakenin what he
pretends to deliver as the Scripture- Account of the God-
head of the Blejfed Jefus, we may juftly leave him to
take his own Caution, (which he thinks himfelf qua-
lify'd as Dictator to give to the Chriftian World),
u That Men fljoiCd be well affured on what Grounds
" they go in this Matter. We go on no lefs Grounds
than the Scripture's giving him the moft incommuni-
cable Titles of God j applying manifold Pafl'ages of
the Old Teflament to him that are evidently fpoken of
the Supreme God, (particularly that from the 1 ozdPfal.
apply'd to our Lord, Heb. 1. 10.) afcribing truly
Divine Perfeclions and Worfhip to him. (Of which
more afterwards). Our Author goes ur)on thefe two
Paffages, which (as I have fhewn) do both (confl-
der'd in their reference to the Context) make a-
gainfl him.
The Author concludes this Head by endeavouring
to prepofTefs his Reader againft the Argument for the
true Deity of Chnfl drawn from that noted Pafiagc,
Phil. 1. 6, & V. Of which he faith,
" As
qz A V in d'icatio n of the
u As to that Place, Phil. 2. 6. which is corruptly
" rendered in our Translation, He thought it no Rob-
" bery to be Equal with God, It is confefl by
& Acherfaries themfelves, that it JhoJi ft, be read thus*
" viz. That he did not ajffume, or arrogate, or (hatch
4t at, or co-vet^ an Equality with God. 'The Words
u are never known to be us'd in any other Senfe, as is
u floewn by Dr. Tillotfon in his Sermons againft the
" Socinians - y alfo by Dr. Whitby in his Expofaion
i6 Wn the Place, and others. So that this ra~
*■'• thcr denies than afjcYts Chrifts Equality to God, tho y
u Jiill he was in the Form of God, as that notes the
" outward Refemblance of him in his mighty Power
cc and Works, &c. which is the conjlant Meaning of
* Form in the New Teflament.
Anfw. On this Paragraph of the Author's I have
thefe three Reflections to make, which I am forry
he has given me too juSt occafion for.
I. That it looks like too great a Degree of
Confidence to charge our Translation as corrupt in
this place.
He knows well that the generality of Criticks a-
gree with us in this Verfion of the Words. And
'tis apparent to all that understand the Greek Lan-
guage, that dp7ray[j.oi Signifies Robbery, and lycu^xx.
to Think or Judge. And what tho' in Plutarch and
Helkdorus the Phrafe be us'd in a different Senfe
(which yet is lefs agreeable to the Primary Signifi-
cation of the Words themfelves) will it follow that
the Apoifle Paul ufed 'em in that Senfe? Efpecially
if we add that among all the Instances out of thofe
Authors for this Senfe of the Phrafe, there is none
that fully anfwers the Cafe before us. So that I
fee no cogent Reafon for our receding from the
moll obvious Senfe of the Words. And that plainly
overturns the Author's Sentiments. But,
z. I can Scarce look upon it any better than a
diiingeniious Prevarication in our Author, to cite
.: two Excellent Writers (the late Archbifhop
of Canterbury and Dr. Whitby) as rejecting the corn-
won Tranllation of this Phrafe, without giving us
a
True T^elty of our Bleffed Saviour. 4)
a fair and juft account of their Expofition of it. For he
knows well enough that they give fuch an Interpreta-
tion of it, as equally afTerts the true Deity of Chrift with
our own Tranllation. So that they are far from giving
up this Place to the Unitarians, as our Author's Words
would inlinuate, to an unwary Reader. If with the-
Archbiftwp we fuppofe the Form of God to be an
Expreflion parallel to thofe two oppofite ones, the
Form of a Servant, and the Likenefs of Men, the
former does as truly imply our Lord Jeftts to be
Partaker of a Divine Nature, as the latter implies
him to be truly Partaker of the Human. And ac-
cording to this Expofition, the Apoille might very-
well mention it as an Inllance or our Blefled Savi-
our's admirable Humility, that he did not in his hum-
bled State affect an Equality with God, but rather
veil'd his Divine Glory m the mean difguife of our
Sinful Flefh.
Nay, if we fhould take [xocfk to be meant of Out"
ward Appearance or Refemblance (as our Author
wou'd underftand it) He knows that Dr. JVhitby
has (according to that Senfe of the Word) given
us this clear Expofition of the Place, viz. That our
Lord Jefus as the Eternal Word, did appear under
the Old Teftament with all the External Marks of
Divine Majefiy and Glory j but that at his Incarna-
tion he did not affeel to appear in this Likenefs of God y
but emptied himfelf, (/. e. diverted himfelf of all this
External Glory) and took on him the Form or Appea-
rance of a Servant, ( i. e. of one that came to minifter,
and not to beminiftred unto, as our Lord himfelf feems
to explain the Notion of a Servant, Matt. 20. 28.}
being (for that purpofe) made in the Likenefs of Men.
Accordingly the fore-mention'd Expofitor, to con-
firm this Interpretation, mews, 1 . That the Appear-
ance or Likenefs of God under the Old 'Teftament was
reprefented in a bright fhinlng Cloud, or Light, or in a,
Flame of Fire, and in the Attendance of Angels. See
Dan. 8. 9, 10. Exod.2.4.. 16", 17. Devi, f. 22,24,
Heb. 3. 3,4, &c. 2. That Chrift as the Eternal JVord
did appear in this Likenefs to Mofes and the Patriarchs
of
44 <A V I N D I C A T I o n of the
of old. This (he tells us) was the Opinion both of
the Ancient Jews and of the Primitive Chrijlians ;
and is clearly intimated in the Scriptures (as may-
appear particularly by comparing Numb. 21. f, 6.
with 1 Cor. 10. p.) where that Jehovah whom the
Israelites are faid to (peak againjl and tempt, is by the
Apoltle Paul affirm'd to have been Chrift. See alfo
Heb. 1 1 . 26. 3 . that after his Afcenfion our Blejfed
Saviour did re-ajfume this Divine Form, this Maje-
fiick Splendor and Glory. See Acts 7. yy. AcJs 2.6". 15.
Rev. 1. 14, 16. 2 'Theff. 1. 7, 8.
Now this Expofition does evidently imply, That
our BleJTed Saviour had a Pra-exiflent Nature before
he aflum'd the Human, and that the Pra-exiftent
Nature was Divine, both becaufe that External Glory,
and that attendance of Angels, was always reckoned
the peculiar Mark of the Divine Pre fence 5 and be-
caufe He that thus appear'd under the Old Teflament,
is not only frequently ftil'd Jehovah, but does every
where lay claim to Divine Perfections and Homage.
So that tho' we fhou'd read the Words, who be-
big (before) in the external Appearance of God, did
not affebl a Likenefs to God, &c. they do by no means
favour either the Arrian or Socinian Caufe, but clear-
ly overthrow it.
3.I mall only add, That the Author has offer'd an
Exposition of this Paflage (borrow'd from the Soci-
mm Writers) that is no way agreeable to the Text
or Context.
By the Form of God he underflands the Outward
Pefemblance of Chrijl to God in his mighty Power and
Works: And fo makes it an Argument ofChrift's
Humility, that tho' he appear'd like God in his mira-
culous Works, yet he did not pretend to an Equality
with him.
Now this Expofition is liable to thefe following
Obj eel ions.
1. That this Power of ^Forking Miracles is no
where in Scripture call'd the Form of God. Nay,
according to this Expofition Mojes and feveral Pro-
phets under the Old Teftament, and the Apofilcs un-
der
True^Deity of our Ble fed Saviour. 47
der the New, might as truly be faid to be in the
Form of God as our Bleffed Saviour, fince they wrought
Miracles as well as He.
1. Whatever be meant by the Form of God, 'tis
evident, that our Lord Jefus in his humbled State
emptfd or divejied himfelf of it, and in Oppofition
thereto, took on him the Form of a Servant. But
He never in his humbled State divcjied himfelf of the
Power of Working Miracles, but exerted it not only
through the whole Courfe of his Life, but even at
his Apprehenfion (a) j nay, when dying on the Crofs.
For even then the Sun was darkned, the Veil of the
Temple rent in twain, the Earth quak'd, and the Rocks:
were rent, and the Graves opened, and many Bodies of
the Saints which Jlept arofe. See Matt. 2.7. 4^, yi,
fL. Infomuch as thefe Effects of his Divine Power
forc'd that Confeflion from the Centurion and thofe
with him, Truly this was the Son of God, v. ^4.
3 . The Text plainly intimates, That Chrift was
in the Form of God before he took on him the Form
of a Servant, and was made in the Likenefs of Men.
Whereas he appear'd in the Likenefs of Men, and
convers'd among Men, many Years before he ever
exerted his Power of Working Miracles. So that the
Apoitle fhou'd have rather faid according to this
Expofltion, That Chrifi having firft taken on him
the Form of a Servant, and being made in the Likenefs
of Men, did afterwards appear ije the Form or Likenefs
of God, and yet did not fnatch at, or arrogate to him-
felf, an Equality to him. And whereas to avoid this
Argument, the Socinians pretend, that by his ta-
king on him the Form of a Servant, is to be under-
stood his fuffering the Punifiments and Death of a
Slave ; the Vanity of that Evafion appears, both
becaufe fuffering Punifhment is in no tolerable Senfe
the Form of a Servant, but of a Criminal. For a
Man may fufFer it without being a Servant at all :
And becaufe Chriffs taking on him the Form of a.
(a) John 18. 6. Luke za. ft,
Servant
46 ^Vindication of the
Servant is conjoin'd with his being made in the Like-
nefs of Men j and (to add no more) becaufe Chrift's
fuffering the common Death of Slaves is added by the
Apoflle as a further degree of his Humiliation, after he
was found in the fafhion or habit of a Man, at v. 8.
And being found in fafhion as a Man, he became
obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Oofs.
This is evidently a diitin£f. Step or Degree of his Hu-
miliation from that of his taking on him the Form of a
Servant, and being made in the Likenefs of Men.
Once more,
4. This Exposition greatly weakens the force of
the Apo file's Argument for Lowlinefs of Mind, from
the Example of Chrifts Marvellous Humility and
Condefcenfion.
The Apoflle, according to the Author, makes it an
Argument of Extraordinary Humility in our Bleffed
Saviour, that when he was like God in working Mi-
racles, yet he did not arrogate to himfelf an Equa-
lity with God. But where is the Humility, that a
meer Man, (who according to him cou'd work no
Miracle by any Power of his own) JbotCd not affect
an Equality to his Eternal and Almighty Maker, be-
tween whom and him there is an Infinite diftance and
difproportion ? Is not this as if we fhou'd commend
the Humility of the Lord Mayor of Dublin, becaufe
he never afpir'd to the Imperial Crown of thefe three
Kingdoms? Is it fo rare an Inftance of Lowlinefs of
Mind, that a Man fhou'd abftain from the higher!
degree polTible of fiupid Blafphemy ? Let us apply
this to the Apoflles. Our Lord foretold 'em, 'That they
fiou'd do greater Works than his, John 14. 12. So
that according to our Author's Expofition, They were
as truly in the Form of God as our Saviour himfelf,
(if that muff be underftood of the Power of Working
Miracles). Nay, if Chrifi be only a Creature, they
no more derive that Power from him than he from
them, but both from the Father. Now what fhou'd
we think of the Apoftle Paul, who himfelf friar' d in
this Power, if he had propos'd this as a marvellous
Inftance of his own and Barnabas\ Humility, that
whers
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 47
when the Lycaonians cry'd out, the Gods are come
down to us in the Likcnefs of Men, and accordingly
actually offer'd to pay 'em Divine Worfhip, they re-
fused it, and did not pretend to an Equality wilhGod?
Shou'd we think this any fuch extraordinary iuiiancc
of Lowlinefs of Mind ? Is there any great need of
propofing fuch an Example to our Imitation, when
no Man in his Wits feems capable of fuch mon-
ftrous Arrogance ?
But now according to the lait Expofition given
of the Words, the Argument drawn from the Ex-
ample of our Lord is moil cogent and ftrong, -viz.
that he the Eternal Word, who had always before
appcar'd with the Marks of Divine Majejly and Glory y
did not now affect fuch a Likcnefs to God y butftript
himfelf (of all that Glory) to take on him the (con-
temptible) Form of a Servant^ and to be made in the
Likenefs of Men. This is an Initance both of molt
aftonifhing Condefcenfion and Humility y and of a truly
Divine Charity ; that the Lord of Glory fhou'd for our
fakes floop fo low, and appear in fo mean a difguife.
'Tis fuch an unparallell'd In dance of it as may at
once command our higheft Wonder, and our mofr.
-zealous Imitation.
Upon the whole it appears, that whether way we
tranflate thofe Words \_He thought it no Robbery to
be Equal with God'] or {He affected not a Likenefs to
God~] the Text ftands as a firm unfhaken Proof of
the true Deity of oux Bleffed Saviour.
Having vindicated this Argument from the Di-
vine titles given to our Bleffed Saviour, from the
Author's Objections, I might here inforce it from
the other Head of Divine Worjbip ; but that Argu-
ment will appear with better Advantage, when we
have confider'd, that the peculiar Perfections and
Works of God (the true Foundation of Divine Wor-
fuip) are afcrib'd to him.
I come therefore to the
Second Argument for the Deity of Chrift, from
the Incommunicable Attributes and Works of God that
arc in the Holy Scriptures afcrib'd to him,
I
48 A Vindication of the
I join both thefe together, becaufe the Incom-
municable Works of God plainly demonftrate fuch Di-
vine Perfections to belong to him by whom they are
perform'd.
As to thefe Divine Perfections or Attributes the
Author tells us, " That our Blejfed Lord Jejus dis-
claims thofe infinite Perfections that belong only to
the Supreme God of Gods. And adds, '"Tis mofl cer-
tain, that if he want one, or any of thefe Per-
fections that are ejfential to the Deity, He is not
God in the chief Ssnfe j and if we find him dif-
claiming the one, he cannot challenge the other, &c.
Anfw. We willingly put the Controverfie on this
iffiie, and freely grant that he cannot be the Supreme
God, to whom the infinite Perfections effential to the
Deity do not belong. Tho' as to what the Author
fuggefts, That if he want any one of ''em, he is not
the Supreme God 5 we may with equal Reafon infer
on the other hand, that if it be proved he has any
one infinite Perfection that belongs to the Deity, it
will prove his being the Supreme God. For all Di-
vine Perfections as they are infinite, are alike incom-
municable to any other Being.
The Author fixes on thofe three Perfections of
Abfolute Omnipotence, Abfolute Goodnefs, and Abfolute
Omnifcience.
I obferve, that he has omitted that Perfection of
Eternity that firft offers it felf to one's View and
Consideration. 'Tis probable he was willing to a-
void that Controverfie between thofe Unitarians that
efpoufe the Arrian, and thofe that follow the Soci~~
nkin Scheme about our Saviour* s Pra-exiflence . For
I imagine the Author himfelf thinks the Socinian
Doctrine in this Point indefenfible, and therefore
feems to allow of a Proe-exiftent Nature in our
Blejfed Lord, at p. z. And he is not the only Wri-
ter among the late Unitarians that allows (what
they call) an ante-mundane Exifience of our Blejfed Sa-
viour. But flnce he has offer'd nothing to implead
his Eternity, I mail refer the Reader to the Argu-
ments alledg'd for it by thofe that have wrote on
this
True ^Deity of our Bleffed Saviour, 49
this Controverfie, and mail only add, that the Pfal-
miji knew of no other Being that exifted before the
World but God, when he thus defcribes his Eternity,
Before the Mountains were brought forth, or ever thou,
hadft formed the Earth, thou art from everlafling to
everlafling God, Pfal. po. 2.
I iriall therefore confine my felf to xhcte three Per-
fections, which the Author pretends that our Lord
Jefus difclaims. I begin,
I. With that of abfolute and underiv'd Omnipo-
tence y which (as the Author tells us) " is one great
" and peculiar Perfection of the Deity. He who can-
" not work all Miracles, and do what he lift of him-
<c felf, without help from another, can never be the
" Supreme God, 6cc.
Now in treating on this branch of the Argument,
I mail
Firft. Prove, That the Scriptures do afcribe fuch
abfolute Omnipotence to our Bkjfed Lord; and, Se-
condly, Examine what the Author has alledg'd to
fhew, that our Bleffed Saviour difclaims it.
Firft, I mail Prove, That the Scriptures do afcribe
this abfolute Omnipotence to our Lord Jefus, or do
attribute that Almighty Power to him that is the in-
communicable Perfeclion of the Deity.
And becaufe the Power of Caufes does beft appear
by the Greatnefs of their Effects, 1 mall chiefly infill on
this one Argume 7tf (among many others which theScrip-
tures fuggeft) which I take to be both clear and con-
clufive in this matter, I mean that drawn from the
Creation of the World. And to make it good, I fhall,
I. Prove, That the Holy Scriptures do afcribe to our
Bleffed Lord the Creation of the World, in the ufual
Senfe, i. e. The Giving Being to all the feveral
Creatures contain'd in it.
II. That this Creation of the World argues the Al-
mighty Power of him that made it , and confequently
is (according to our Author's Concefiion) a folid
Proof of his true Deity.
Under the former of thefe Heads I have the So-
cman Unitarians^ under the latter the Arrian ones,
to oppofe, E i.I
5ro ^Vindication tf/ the
i. I come to mew, 'that the Holy Scriptures do
afcribe to our Bleffed Lord the Creation of the World,
in the common Senfe of the Words, i. e. That he
gave Being to all the feveral Creatures contained in
it.
Let us, to clear this matter, take a grofs view of
thofe Paflages that aflert this, and then more nar-
rowly examine the force of 'em.
Mofes begins his Hiftory of the Creation with
thefe Words, In the beginning God made the Heavens
and the Earthy Gen. i . I .
St. John begins his Go [pel with thefe parallel ones,
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God. The fame was in
the beginning with God. All things were made by
hwfa and without him was nothing made that was
made. And again at v. 10. The World was made by
him.
And that St. John by all things that were made by
him, intends all things in Heaven and Earthy men-
tion'd in the Molaic account of the Creation, is
evident if we will allow his Sentiments to have been
the fame with St. Paul's, who tells us, That by him
all things were Created that are in Heaven, and thst
are in Earth, Col. i. io\ And becaufe Angels are
n 't mention'd in the Mofaic Account of the Crea- <
tion, lead any fhou'd think them excluded (as fome
actually did, and even afcrib'd the Mofaic Creation
to 'em) the Apoftle adds all things Vifible and Invi-
fible, whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Prin-
cipalities, or Powers, all things were created by him
and for him. And he is before all things, and by him
all things confift. And the fame infpired Writer (if
we fuppofe St. Paul the Author of the Epiltle to
t'ie Hebrews) tells us, That by him (viz. his Son)
God made the Worlds, even thofe Worlds which, as
he tells us in the fame Epiflle, we underfland by
Faith that they were framed by the Word of God.
Compare Heb. 1.2. with c. i\.i. And to put it, as
far as Words can do, beyond any reafonableDifpute,
the lume infpired Writer at v, io, u, 12. of the firft
Chap-
True 'Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 51
Chapter applies to our Blejfed Saviour thefe re-
markable Words of the Pfalmifi which fo manifefl-
ly refer to the firji Creation, Thou Lord in the be-
ginning hafl laid the Foundation of the Earth, and the
Heavens are the Work of thy Hands ; they JJjall perijh^
but thou remainefi, and they all fljall wax old as a Gar-
ment, and as a Veflure JJjalt thou fold them up, and
they jhallbe changed ; but thou art the fame, and thy
Tears fail not.
Now it is manifeft, That we are fo far from
offering the katt Violence to thefe Paflages, that
we undcrftand 'em according to the plain obvious
Senfe of the Words, and their current Ufe and
Signification thro' the Scriptures, from which none
ought to recede in expounding 'cm, without cogent
Neceffity. They clearly and fully deliver our Opi-
nion, and we have no occafion to fixain 'em to re-
concile 'em with our Sentiments concerning our
Blejfed Lord.
But we cannot fay fo concerning our Adverfaries
in this point, the Socinian Unitarians^ who are re-
due'd to hard fhifts to reconcile thefe Paflages that
afcribc the Creation of all things in Heaven and Earth
to our Lord J ejus, to their Opinion of him, That he
had no Exiflence at all till about 4000 Tears after the
making of the World.
I mufl therefore confider what they have al-
ledg'd to avoid the force of thefe Texts.
And I find 'em chiefly infilling on the two fol-
lowing Evafions.
I. They do as to all the fore-mention'd Texts
(except that Hcb. I. 10, &c.) alledge, that they
are not to be undcrltood of the Creation of this ma-
terial World, but only of that Reformation of Man-
kind, of that happy change of the Moral State and Con-
dition of the World, which they tell us the Scriptures
often exprefs under the Notion of a New Creation^
and the making New Heavens and New Earth.
Now againft this way of Expounding thefe fore-
cited PaflagcSj I have thefe following Arguments to
offer*
E t l.lt
fi ^ Vindication^/ the
I. It has been often objected to 'em, That this
Expo/it ion is wholly new. All ChrifHan Writers for
if oo Years agreeing (the Arrians themfelves not
excepted ) to underftand thefe PafTages as we do of
the Fir ft Creation. So that if the general Confent
of the ChrifHan Church in expounding thefe Texts
be of any Weight, this Argument from Authority is
full againft 'em. But becaufe this Argument feems
to weigh but little with any of our late Unitarians,
who on all Occafions treat the Chriftian Church with
the utmoft Contempt, I fhall infift on fuch as are
drawn from the PafTages themfelves :
Therefore,
II. 'Tis a juft Prejudice againft this Expofition,
that it puts a very unufual and forced Senfe upon
plain and clear Exprefftons without any cogent Ne-
ceffity.
To make this good, I fhall prefent to the Reader
te fore-cited Paffages, with the Paraphrafe of our
late Unitarians upon 'em.
For that^o^ i. i, 2, 3, 10. 1 find it thus expoun-
ded in the ^d Colkclion of Unitarian Gratis. Tract 1.
p. p. " In the Beginning of the Go/pel was the Word,
" that is, 'The Lord Chrift, who being the Bringer or
" MeJJenger of God's Will or Word, is therefore caWd
" the Word, as in this 'very Chapter he is calPd Life
" and Light, becaufe he brought to Men the Gofpel
" Light, and the Means of Life Eternal. And the
" Word was with God, i. e. the Lord Chrift was ta-
<c ken up into Heaven to be inftrucled in all Points re-
" latingto his EmbaJJage orMiniftry. And the Word
u was God. In Greek 'tis, was a God. That is, It
" pleafed God to communicate to the Lord Chrift, who is
" the Mediator or Bringer of the New Teftament, that
cc Name above every Name, even the Name or Appel-
<c lation of God j as he had formerly done to Motes the
w Mediator of the Old Teftament 3 and to divers others,
" Exod. 7. 1. Pfal. 4f. 6, 11. and Pfal. Si. 6. John
cc 10. 34, 3f. 1 Sam. 28. 11, iz, 13, 14. By him
" were all things made, that is, All things relating to
" the New-Creation were made {or were effected )£y
" him.
True *Dehy of our Bleffed Saviour. 5-3
" him. The World was made by him, in the Greek,
" was modell'd by him, i. s. He reduced all
u things to a new and letter Eflate 5 by his aboliftnng
iC Paganifm and Judaifm, and introducing the Gofpel
<c Oeconomy and State.
For Col. 1 . 1 6, &V. I find it thus paraphras'd,
1 ft Collect, of Unitarian trails. Tract izth,p. 16.
" Chrift is the Lord of every Creature ; for by him
u are all, both vifible and invifible Creatures, even all
<c Men and Angels, modell'd and difpos'd into a new
u Order, being fubje bled to him and his Commands. As
" for Angels j all the Orders of 'em, whether they be
" Thrones or Dominions, none of 'em are exempted
" from his Power and Authority . He rules over 'em,
" {Which is the Meaning of v. 17.) And they are all
" as it were compacted into one Body under his Conduct.
u As for Men, as he is the Beginning and Firft-bom
cc from the Dead, fo he was alfo made Head of his
" Church his Body. So that in all things he has the
w Pre-eminence : He rules in Heaven and Earth over
cc Angels, and over the Church, which is the Senfe of
" v. 18.
For that Text, Heb. 1 . z. By whom alfo he made the
Worlds, they underftand by Worlds, the Gofpel Ages
or Times.
For Heb. 1. 10, 11, &c. they generally aflert that
'tis not apply'd to Chrift at all, or at moft only one
Claufe in the Text, about the material World's
perifhing and being changed.
As to all thefe Expofitions, I mayjuftly appeal to the
common Senfe of every Chriftian Reader, whether
they do not at firfl View appear ftrairfd and forced,
and many of 'em far fetch'd. 'Tis manifefl that the
Words in their moll obvious Senfe are to be under-
flood of the Firft Creation. Now this the Socinian
Unitarians fuppofe to be a very dangerous Error,
And yet 'tis evident that the infpired Writers might
have eafily prevented this Error which their Expref-
fions fo naturally lead us to, by frying, All things
were made new by Chrift, All things were created by
him anew in Heaven and Earth. Or were new-modelPd
E 3 by
54 'A Vindication ef the
by him. That by him God made the New- Age and
Difpenfation of the Gofpel. And 'tis evident, That
where the infpired Writers do fpeak of the Change
made in the Hearts of Men by Regeneration, in AUu-
lion to the Work of Creation, they do ufe fuch cau-
tious Expreffions as thefe, which plainly point us
to this Metaphorical Senfe. Whereas according to
them, the infpired Writers, in the Paflages under
our Confederation, have needlefly affected to fpeak
in ambiguous Language, fo very liable to be mifun-
derftood, that without an harm and forced Expo-
sition, it muft needs mif-lead and pervert the Judg-
ment of their Readers in a Matter of the higher!:
Confequence. And none can well fuppofe this of
'em, that believes they wrote by Divine Infpira-
tion.
It had been objected to 'cm by the late Archbijhop
of Canterbury ,That a Man might with the fame Dex-
terity of Wit and Fancy pervert the Words of Mor
fes that fpeak of the Firft Creation, and interpret 'em
of the Moral Change ?nade in the World by the Mofaic
Difpenfation, as they do the Words of St. John in
the Beginning of his Gofpel. And 'tis obfervable
what our late Unitarians reply to it. 'Tis this, " That
* c if it had been laid in Gene/is, In the Beginning
" Mofes created the Heavens and the Earth, &V.
" they woiCd have thought them/elves obliged to inier-
" pret that Chapter of the Moral Change made in the
" World by the Mofaic Difpenfation. And they think
u themfehes equally obligd to interpret the Beginning
<c of St. John' j- Gofpel this way, becaufe they find the
" Evangelift /peaking of the Lord Chrift, who is con-
" faffed to have been a Man, and yet faith of him,
" All things were made by him. And again, The
cc World was made by him. Hereupon the Socinians
u think it wild Extravagance to imagine more Gods
" or NewrCreators, 0c. See 3d Colled. Tract. I.
Anfw. Can anv thing be a more notorious begging
the Queftion than this ? They are ask'd, Why we may
not interpret the ift of Genefis, as they do the firft of
St.
True ^Deity of our Eleffed Saviour. 5$
St. John ? The Sum of the Anfwer is, becaufe in Ge-
ne/is the Creation there mention d is afcrib'd to God, and
not to Mofes, whereas in St. John 'tis afcribed to one
confeffed to be a Man. Is it Co ? Is it evident that the
Evangelift by the Word that was with God y and was
God, that was the Light that lighteth every Man that
comes into the World, &Cc. underftands only a Man ?
Do not his Words rather in their molt obvious
Senfe defcribe a higher Being ? Do's he not exprefly
call him God ? Does he not tell us afterwards at v.
14. that this Word was made Flejh, and dwelt among
US) Sec. and thereby plainly diilinguiih the Word from
that frail and mortal Human Nature he affuni'd in
order to his Converfe with the Sons of Men ? So
that there is nothing here that fhou'd force 'cm to put
this unufual and harm Conltruction upon the plain
Words of the Evangelift, but a violent Palfion for
their pre-conceiv'd Opinion, T'hatjefus Chrifi is only
a Man) and that he is only call'd the Word becaufe
he was the Bringer of the Will and Word of God, in
which Senfe every Prophet might affume the dime
Title and Character to himfelf, which the Scriptures
elfe where appropriate to the Son of God as his Pe*
culiar and moft Illuftrious Character, and fpeak of it
as A Name that none knew but he himfelf. Rev. I p.
12, 13. But I mud add,
III. Their Expofition is inconfifient with the ge-
nuine Senfe of thefe Paffages of Scripture.
To clear this I mall make a few Remarks upon
their Expofition of each of thefe PaJJages.
As to the Expofition they give of John 1. 1, 2, 2,
10. (mention'd p. fi.) I might take notice, how
ftrange a Conftruction they give of thofe Words,
was with God) when they expound 'em of Chriji's
being taken up into Heaven to be injirucled in his Em-
baffage and Mini fry. For they are fore'd for the
perverting 'em to invent a Matter of Fact, which
there is no Footftep of in the whole Hiftory of our
Saviour's Life ; tho' had it been true, it was of the
greater!; Importance, and a particular Relation of it
highly needful to confirm our Belief of his Divine
E 4 Million.
$6 ^Vindication of the
Miflion. I might alfo obferve, That that Author
fuppofes the Name or Appellation of God here given
to Chrijl to be the Name above every Name (menti-
on'd by the Apoftle, Phil. z. g, 10.) and yet makes
that Name to be common to him with M.oks, and Solo-
mon, with Angels and Magiftrates, which looks very
like a Contradiction. And he moft untruly insinu-
ates that Mofes is call'd a God, as he was Mediator of
the Old Teftament. Whereas he is only call'd a God
to Pharaoh, Exod. 7. 1. But againfl his Expojition,
^that all things being made by Chrijl, means only, All
things relating to the New Creation were made or ef-
fected by him : And that the World's being made by
him, imports only, Its being modelVd and reduced
to a better State, 8tc- I have thefe three Things to
offer.
1. 'Tis falfe in Matter of Fact, That all things re-
lating to the New-Creation were done by him.
All the Predictions of the Old Tejiament, the whole
of John the BaptijVs Miniflry, all the Labours of the
Apofiks in propagating the Gofpel j nay, our Lord's
own miraculous Conception, Refurrection, &c. re-
late to the New-Creation, and yet can in no tole-
rable Senfe be faid to be done or effected by the Man
'Chrifi Jefits.
z. Th.it World was made by him in which he was.
He was in the World, and the World was made by him.
But he was in this material World, and therefore the
Creation of that is afcrib'd to him!
2. That the Evangelift fpeaks not of his mak-
ing the Spiritual World, appears by the following
Words,' The World was made by him, and the Worl4
knew him not. Even that World that was made by
him knew him not. Which cannot be true of the
Spiritual World, i. e. of that part of Mankind whom
, our Saviour has made New-Creatures, and has re-
form'd ; for thofe knew and readily owrCd him. To
avoid this, they are fore'd to fuppofe that the Evan-
gelift, in the Compafs of one Verfe, ufes the World
in three different Senfes, and two of 'em directly
^ppoiite to one another. For when the Evangelift
faith j
True 'Deity of our B/effed Saviour. 57
foith, Cbrifi was in the World, they underftand it of
this material World. When he adds, 'the World was
made by him, they underftand it of that part of Man-
kind that embrac d the Gofpel, and were reformed by it.
When he adds, that the World knew him not, they
underftand it of that -part of Mankind that continued
Infidel and Unreform'd. But who can ever think
that an infpir'd Writer wou'd ufe fuch ftrange Am-
biguity as this in a plain and limple Narrative ? Espe-
cially when fuch ambiguous Expreflions were in fo
great Danger ot being mifunderftood, and have actu-
ally led the whole Chriftian Church to believe that
the Evangelift afferted Chrift to be the Maker of
the World, which our Adverfaries take to be a per-
nicious Error ? Can they reverence him as an in-
fpired Writer, who thus incautioufly plays with an
ambiguous Word to the extreme Peril of his
Reader ?
For their Expofition of Col. 1. 16, &c. I need
only run briefly over it to expofe the Absurdity
of it.
The Apoflle faith, By Chrifi were all things crea-
ted that are in Heaven and that are in Earth. Cou'd
he have us'd any Expreflions more full and compre-
henfive than thefe ? Or any more frequently us'd to
exprefs all the Creatures contained in the World? Nay,
things Invifiblc as well as Vifible were created by him.
Even 'Thrones and Dominions, Principalities and
Powers.
All things vifible were created by him, i. e. lay
they, " The degenerate ft ate of Mankind was reformed,
" Paganifm and Judaifm aboliftid, and the Gofpel
" Oeconomy introduced. But where can they find
all things vifible, and all things on Earth, us'd in Scri-
pture for that part of Mankind which was reform'd
by the Preaching of the Gofpel ? We read indeed
of the things that are feen, and which were not made
of things that do appear, Heb. 1 1 . 3 . But thofe are
meant of this Vifible Creation. And we read of all
things that are on Earth frequently mention'd as part
pf the firft Creation. But thefe Phrafes are never
us'd
58 A Vindication of the
us'd to reprefent thofe that renounc'd Judaifm and
Paganifm, and embrac'd Chriftianity ; And yet thcic
are the only, All things vijible, and all things on
Earthy that our Adverfaries will allow Chriit to
have created. For they cannot fuppofe that the A-
poitle underftands lb much as Mankind in general,
iince it was but a very (mall part of it that em-
brac'd the Gofpel. So that he ihou'd in all reafon have
only faid, fome things lijible, and fome things on Earth,
were created by him. Befides, the Apoftle treats of
this New-Creation as a diftin£t thing afterwards at
v. 2,0, 2,1, &c. But did he thus alio create all things
Invifible, thrones and Dominions, 6cc ? Did he re-
form the Holy Angels from a ftate of degeneracy, that
never fell into it ? Or reftore them to the Image and
Favour of God, who never fell from it? No. Here
his Creating does not import any fuch New-Creati-
on at all* For there was no need of it. What does
it import then? Why they tell us, That the Holy
Angels were modelVd and difpos'd by him, i. e. They
were fubjeclred to his Authority. But (befides the
manifeft harfhnefs of this Paraphrafe) how comes
the Apoftle to lay, That the Holy Angels were thus
modeWdby Chrifi? Did he thus fubjeel 'em to himfelf?
No, this was none of his Aci at all, but only the
Act of the Father, and it was by him alone that they
were thus modelVd. For 'tis he that put 'em under
his Feet, 1 Cor. if, 18. Befides, Cou'd the Apoftle
find no fitter way to exprefs the Holy Angels being
fubjecled by the Father to Chrijl, but by faying, they
were created by Chrijl himfelf ? (For that is the moll
plain and ufual fenfe of the word.) This Inferior
World was at fir It fubjecled by God to the Dominion
&f Man. But what ihou'd we have thought of Mo-
fes, if in his Hiftory of the Creation he had told us,
that all things both in Earth and Sea were created by
Man? Cou'd we ever imagine that he meant no
more, than that God when he made 'cm put 'emiin-
der his Authority. But what fhall we fay of Evil
Angels ? (For they are alfo call'd Principalities and
Powers) Why, they are faid to be created by Chrijl,
be-
True 7)eity of our Blejfed Saviour. 59
becaufe he rules over 'em with a defign to deftroy
their ufurped Dominion and Power. So that the fame
Word, apply'd to Mankind, implies Reforming 'em y
to good Angels Commanding 'em, to fallen Angels it
fignifies deftroying their ufurped Power. But upon
the whole, his Creating all things comes at laft (as
the Bifhop of Worcefter had well obferv'd) to his
Creating nothing at all. To fuch ftrange Inconfiilen-
cies are our Adverfaries redue'd by their bold At-
tempts to wreft fuch paflages as thefe from their clear
obvious meaning.
For that paflage, Heb. 1.2. By whom healfo made
the Worlds, That it is not meant of the Gofpel-Ages
or Times, will appear if we conlider, That no place
in all the Scripture can be produe'd in which arwW
is to be underltood of the Gofpel-times or Ages, where-
as 'tis evidently us'd by the Infpired Writer of this
Epiftle, for the World ox Univerfe. Heb. it.q.jBy Faith
we under fland that the Worlds were made by the Word
of God. Even by that Word or Son of God, by whom,
he is faid in this place, to make 'em.
Again, If the Infpired Writer had meant the
Gofpel-times, he fhou'd not have faid that God has
made 'em by his Son, but that he is now about to make
'em. For they were far from being then made. And
for thofe that underftand by the Worlds, the World
or Ages to come, i. e. the Heavenly Regions and the
Happinefs thereof 5 They are redue'd to the neceffi-
ty of giving us a yet harfher Expofition of the words,
when they tell us, That tho' the World inthatfenfe
be not properly made by Chrifl, (For thofe heavenly
Regions they fuppofe to be made long before he had
a Being) yet he is faid to make 'em, becaufe he made
'em ours, by giving us the Promifes of that future
Happinefs. And what plain Text may not any
Man pervert, at that wild and loofe rate of Inter-
preting ?
But I muft add,
IV. There is one of thefe Texts which undenia-
bly refers to the Old Creation, and cannot be un-
derftood of the Reformation of Mankind by the GofpeL
To
60 A V I N D I C A T I o n of the
To clear this, We mutt obferve That the Infpir-
ed Writer to the Hebrews faith at v. 8, p. To the
Son he faith, Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and e-
<ver, Sec. and immediately fubjoins at v. 10. And,
Thou, Lord, in the beginning haft laid the Foundation
of this Earth, and the Heavens are the Work of thy
Hands ; They ftoall perifh, but thou remaineft. And
they fhall all wax old as doth a Garment. And as a,
Vefiure fhalt thou fold tbem up, and they Jhall be
changed-, But thou art the fame, and thy Tears Jhall
not fail.
Here indeed our Adverfaries skill in Critics fails
'em, and all the Subtilty they are Mailers of will
not enable 'em to pervert this Paflage, as they do the
reft, to fpeak only of the New Creation. For they
plainly fee, the Heavens and Earth here fpoken of,
fhallperifj. Whereas the New Creation fhall be per-
fetled, not deftrofd, fhall laft for ever, not perifh or
be changed. And therefore under this {trait they are
fore'd to a very defperate fhift, even to deny, That
the Infpired Writer intended to apply thefe words to our
Bit 'fed Saviour. But how can that be? Docs he not
as truly apply this paflage taken out of Pfalm 102,
to our Saviour, as that taken out of the4fth? Nay,
if thefe words refer not to our Lord Jefus, to what
purpofeare they alledg'd ? What do they fignifie to
prove his Pre-eminence above thofe Angels that are
requir'd to worfloip him -, and indeed are under
the higheft Obligations to do it, if he gave 'em
their Being ? Nay, why fhould we fcruple to
apply to him the Creation of the Heavens and the
Earth at v. 10. to whom the Infpired Writer had
afcrib'd the Making of the Worlds at v. 2 ? All the
Bufinefs is, That they cou'd more eafily pervert
thofe words afj. 2. by interpreting 'em of a Metapho-
rical Creation, than they can thofe at v. 10. But ra-
ther than own Chrift as the Maker of this material
World, they feem not concern'd what Indignity
they put on the Infpired Writer, by making him
cite this paflage (according to them) to no valuable
purpofe, nay, rather to a very /// and dangerous one,
that
True*Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 61
that naturally leads us to what they account a perni-
cious Error.
But becaufe this looks too grofs, fome of 'em
feem willing to grant, That the Infpired Writer
did defign in citing this paflage outof Pfalm 102, to
apply by way of accommodation that pajjage in it t6.
our Lord Jefus, that fpeaks of the perifhing of the
old Creation. For they tell us the Deftrutlionoi this
vinble World belongs to Chrift, tho' the Creation
of it does not. But we are fure, To whom the Pfal-
mift faith, they Jhall perijh,but thou remaineft, To him
he had laid before. Thou, Lord, haft founded the
Earth, 6cc. And we are fure the Infpired Writer
makes no change of the Perfon, fo that if the latter
Claufe of this Quotation belong to Chrift, fo does the
former.
And for their Objection againft our applying this
paflage to Chrift, 'viz. That if the Author had be-
lieved Chrift to be the Maker of Heaven and Earth,.
what need he take fo much pains to prove his Su-
periority to Angels, For who doubts of the Creator
being Superior to his Creatures ? It will appear to
have no weight in it, if we conflder, That the Apo-
ftle had undertaken to iliew, not only the Dignity
of Chrift, as Heir of all things, but that he was there-
fore the Heir and Lord of all things, becaufe they were,
made by him. And for this purpofe it was proper to
cite fuch paflages of the Old Teftament as attribute
the fir ft Creation to him. And this was the more
needful, becaufe there were both fome Jews and He-
reticks that afcrib'd the firft Creation to Angels ; in
oppofition to whom the Infpired Writer had juft oc-
cafion to afcribe it to our Bleffed Lord 3 which he does
by citing this Paflage out of a Pfalm, which the an-
cient Jews had apply'd to the Mefjiah (a).
Having fhewn the Vanity of this their moft fpe-
cious Evafton, I need not infill long on their
(a) See Ike Judgment of the Jewijh Church, 8cc. p. 5$.
lid
6% ^Vindication of the
lid Evafion, viz. That tho' it fhould be allow'd,
that thefe Paffages fpeak properly of the firft Creati-
on of the Worlds yet they do not aflert, That the
World was made by Chrift, but only for him, (i. e.)
with a defign to fubject it to him. For fo they ren-
der the words <Pi dvrS John i . 3, and 1 o. And fo
Heb.i.z.
But the unreafonablenefs of this Pretence will ap-
pear, if we confider,
I . That this fenfe is no way agreeable to the O-
riginal. For if the Apoftle had intended to have
faid, All things were made for him, he fhould have faid
tPi durov.
1. This fenfe is evidently confuted by the words^
of the Apoftle, Col. 1. 16. where thefe Two are care-
fully diftinguifh'd, and both apply 'd to our BUJfed
Saviour. That all things were tnade both by him, and
for him, ^[ durx it, «raur-iv. Nay, he is therefore faid
"to be the Firfi-born of the Creation in the verfe fore-
going, and to be before all things in the verfe following
(which latter Phrafe belt explains the Senfe of the
former) becaufe all things were made by him. Where-
as it wou'd not prove, That he is before all things,
becaufe they were created for him (i. e. with a de-
fign to fubjeel: 'em to him) long before he had a Be-
ing. And to avoid this, I find one of the Unitari-
an Writers ftraining his Critical Skill, by thus Para-
phrafing the Words, All things were made for him,
and to his Service, and he is above all things. (Forfo
he groundlefiy renders xpo -nd-irov). (b) But he is
hard put to it, when he is fore'd to make the In-
fpired Apoftle guilty of fo grofs a Tautology, as to
fay, All things were made for him, and for him : For
fo efc aVov undoubtedly fignifies, (fee Rom. 11.35.)
tho' he falfly pretends that & durU fignifies fo too.
And I may by the way add, that we are fare from
the Text juft now cited, Rom. 11. 36. that all
things are only for or to him, Of whom, and by (or
(b) See Third CdleHhn of Tr*fts. Traa I. p. p.
thro"]
True ^elty of our Blejfed Saviour. 65
thro'') whom they are. So that if all things be for or
to Chrift) 'tis becaufe he is that God of and by whom
they are. And if the Unitarians make the Apoille
guilty of this "tautology here, they muft fuppofe him
to be guilty of it there too, for the Phrafes are e-
vidently the fame in both 'Texts. But there no Man
will pretend that A' aur» and rV cturov fignifies the
fame thing.
1 mall only add,
3. That the forecited Text, Heb. 1.10. is no way
capable of this Eva/ton. All things muft be made by
as well as for him 9 who founded the Earthy and the
fVork of whofc Hands the Heavens are.
Having prov'd again ft the Socinian Unitarians^
that the Scriptures afcribe the Creation of the World
to Chrift, in the proper fenfe, I now proceed,
II. To prove, in oppofition to the ArianUnitari-
ans^ That the Creation of the Word is a f olid Evidence
of the Almighty Power of him that ?nade it, and (con-
iequently) of his true Deity.
Thefe Adverfaries do indeed fairly allow us the
plain literal fenfe of the forcmention'd PafTages that
afcribe the Creation of all things to our Blejfed Savi-
our : But they deny this Inference we draw from
it. For they tell us, Our Lord had a pr<e-exiftent
Nature -, That in refpect of that Nature he was the
firft and moil perfect Being that ever God made, and
employ 'd by him as his Inftrument in the Creation of
the World. And this they fuppofe he might be, with-
out afcribing Omnipotence to him. Nay, they pre-
tend this their Opinion to be countenane'd by the
Apoille, when he calls our Lord The Firft-bom of e-
very Creature^ Col. 1 . 1 f . and by Chrift, when he
ftiles himfelf the beginning of the Creation of God 9
Rev. 3. 14.
Now to juftify the AJfcrtion I have laid down in
oppofition to thefe Adverfaries, I mail offer the fol-
lowing Confi derations.
1. The Scriptures every where appropriate the
Works of Creation to God, and exclude all other
Beings whatever from the glory of it.
The
64 -^Vindication of the
The Author to the Hebrews lays down this as a
granted Maxim, Every Houfe is built by fome Man,
but he that built all things is God, Heb. 3. 4. And
accordingly throughout the whole Old Teftament
the great God does every where diftinguifri himfelf
from all other pretended Deities by this, That he was
the Maker of Heaven and Earth ; He every where
challenges this as his peculiar Glory, 'That they, and
all things contained in 'em, are the JVork of his Hands.
""Tis one God that Created 'em, Mai. 2. 10. As fort ho fe
Gods that have not created the Heavens and the Earth,
he declares, that they fhall perifh from the Earth, and
from under thefe Heavens. But he is the true God, that
hath made the Earth by his Power, and eftablijh'd the
IVorldby his Wifdom, Jer. 10. 10, 11, 12.
Nay, he pofitively excludes any other Being from a-
ny fh are in the glory of this illuftrious Work. Thou,
(faith Hezekiah) even thou alone, art the God, even
thou alone, of all the Kingdoms of the Earth j thou haft
made Heaven and Earth, 2 Kings ip. 15*. To the
fame purpofe Nehemiah faith, Thou, even thou, art
Lord alone, thou ha(l made Heaven, the Heaven of
Heavens, with all their Hofts, (thofe Thrones and Do-
minions, Principalities and Powers, faid to be crea-
ted by thrift, Col. 1. 16.) the Earth, and all things
that are therein, the Seas, and all that is therein, and
thou preferveft 'em all. (Compare this with Col. 1 . 17.
by him all things con ft ft, and Heb. 1.3. He upholds all
things by the word of his Power.) And the Hoft of
Heaven worftjip thee. (Compare this with Heb. 1 . 6".
Let all the Angels of God worjhip him.) He alone (faith
yob, fpeaking of God) fpreads out the Heavens,]ob p.
8. Nay* the BleJJ'ed God himfelf faith, / have
made the Earth, and created Man upon it. I, even
my Hands, (i. e. my Power) have ftretched out the
Heavens, and all their Hoft have I commanded, If. 4.?.
12. And fure if any Expreflions can be decilive in
this matter, God's own words mull: be allow' d to be
fo, when he fo pofitively declares by the Prophet, /
am the Lord that maketh all things, that ftretcheth forth
the Heavens alone, and fpreadeth abroad the Earth by
my
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 6$
my f elf, If. 44. 24. How unaccountable 2nd unwar-
rantable are thefe Expreflions if the great God us'd
another, even a Created Beings as his Minifter and
Infirument in the great Work of Creation ? For none
is faid to do that alone and by himfelf which he ufes
the affiftance and mini/try of another in the perfor-
mance of. Nay, how inexcufable is the Infpired Wri-
ter to the Hebrews, that afcribes this Work of Crea-
tion to Chrifl in the fame Expreflions which the Pfal-
mifl had us'd concerning the great Jehovah, T'hott
hafl founded the Earthy and the Heavens are the Work
of thy Hands ! Heb. 1 . 1 o.
But if we allow our Lord Jefus to be the fame God
with the Father, 'tis no way inconfiilent with God's
making all things by himfelf, that the Father made
'em by his Son, his Eternal Ejfential Word. For c-
ven the fame Infpired Writers declare that God made
''em by his Word, and by the Breath of his Mouth, PfaL
33.6. The Ejfential Power of the Father zndthc Son
are the fame. But that leads me to add,
1. The Apoftle Paulmzkes the Creation of the World
a demonftrative proof of his Eternal Power and God-
head that made it.
For the Invifible things of him (faith he) from the
Creation of the World are clearly feen, being under flood
by the things that are made, even his Eternal Power
and Godhead, Rom. 1 . 20. But now the Force of this
Argument is loft, if a Being might make all thofe
things that had no fuch Eternal Power and Godhead
at all, but was it felf a created and temporary Be-
ing, and the voluntary Production of a fuperior
Being.
3 . The very Notion of an Inflrument in the Work
of Creation fecms abfurd and inconfiilent.
For God's Creation of the World is all along ex-
prefs'd in Scripture by his Commanding things into
Being. Thus in the tore-cited place, /, even my
Hands, have flr etched out the Heavens y and all their
Hofls have I commanded, If. 4f. 12. So Pf 33* £•■
He fpake and it was done, he commanded and it flood
faft. So the fame Pfalmift fpeaking of the Heaven
F of
66 A Vindication of the
of HeavenS) faith, He commanded and they were
created, Pf. 148. f. Nay, in the Account given by
Mofes of the Creation) 'tis evident that the Energy
of no created Being cou'd intervene between God's
Will or Command^ and the Effect to be produced.
He faid, Let there be Light) and there was Light)
Gen. 1.2. And what Influence cou'd any Inftrur^ent
have in fuch a Production ? There is in Creation no
pre-exiftent Matter, and therefore nothing for an
Inftrument to fix upon.
Befides, when they tell us, that God made this
pr<e-exifient Nature of Chrifl his Inftrument in the
Creation of the World) they either mean, that he
communicated thereto a finite or an infinite Power in
order to his concurring in this Work of Creation.
If they fay an infinite Power) they blafphemoufly
Deifie a Creature) by afcribing to it the incommu-
nicable Perfection of the Divine Nature. If only a
finite Power) fuch a finite Power can fignify nothing
at all to the Work of Creation) which plainly re-
quires no lefs than a boundlefs or infinite Power to
effect it. For 'tis the higheft Act of Power (the
uitimum quod fie of Omnipotence) to give Being to
that which was nothing before. And nothing can
be impoflible to the Being that can do this. 'Tis
therefore far beyond the Reach of a finite Power.
4. The Creation of all things is afcrib'd to our
Lord Jefus in Expreflions that exclude him from the
Rank of Creatures.
He who was God) and by whom all things were
made) and without whom not any thing was made that
was made) was himfelf unmade) and therefore Eter-
nal. He can be no Creature) by whom all things
were created) and who was before all Creatures. He
that was before the Mountains were brought forth) and
before the Earth or the World was formed) is (in the
Pfalmift\ Account) from everlafting to everlafiing
Cod) Pfal. 90. 2.
And for what may be objected from the Apoftle's
calling our Saviour the Firft-born of all Creatures,
(or rather of the whole Creation) it will a ;wear to
be
True Deity of onr Blejfed Saviour. 6 y
be of no Force to prove that Chrift himfelf was a
Creature, if we confider that 'tis fufficient to jurLfy
his being call'd the Firfi-bom of the whole Creation,
becaufe he tranfeends all Creatures both in Duration
and in Dignity. He is both before 'em in Time, and
is the Lord and Heir of 'em. But it cannot here
import his being of the fame Nature with 'em, be-
caufe that would make the Apoftle Paul both con-
tradict, himfelf in the Reafon he adds, viz. that all things
were created by him -, and to contradict St. John,
who faith, without him nothing was made that was
made, John 1.3. And the Apoftle himfelf explains
his own Senfe, when at v. 17. he adds, that he was
before all things. And 'tis obfervable that the Phrafe
is alter'd, when the Apoftle by Firfl-bom means one
of the fame Nature. See at v, 18. and at Rom. 8.
20. as. will appear to fuch as can confult the Origi-
nal.
And for Chrift'' 's being call'd the Beginning of the
Creation of God -, the Word ap^/i* when it does
not refer to Time, does ufually fignify either the ef-
ficient Caufe, or the Head and Chief : And neither
of thofe Senfes implies our Lord to be himfelf a
Creature, but rather implies the contrary.
Having thus prov'd both that the Scriptures a-
fcribe the Creation of the World to our Blejfed Sa-
viour, and that his Creating it is a demonftrative Ar-
gument of his Almighty Power, I fhall only briefly
lubjoin, that the Scriptures afcribe to our BlefTed
Lord other Works that are the Effects of an Almighty
Power, and are in Scripture appropriated to the
Blejfed God.
Thus what the Pfalmift afcribes to the great Je-
hovah at Pjal. 14. 50. the infpired Writer to the
Hebrews afcribes to the Son of God, that he up-
holds all things by the Word of his Power. 'Tis God
that quickens the Dead, 'tis he alone that can kill and
make alive, Rom. 4. 17. a Kings y. 7. And yet our
Lord Jefus attributes to himfclr the Power of quick-
ning whom he will. He can by his commanding
Voice caufe the Dead to hear, and rife out of their
F z, Graves
j
6S ^Vindication^ ^
Graves, John f. 21, if, 28. And his thus rajfing
the Dead, and hanging our vile Body to fafljicn it
like to his glorious Body, is by the Apoflle Paul faid
to be effected, according to the working of his mighty
Power, whereby he is able to fubdue all things to him-
felf, Phil. 3. 21. ExprefTions that import his Power
to be abfolute and irrefiflible.
Having thus fhewn, that the Scriptures afcribe
fuch abfolute Omnipotence to our Blejfed Lord, I
Come,
II. To examine what the Author has alledg'd to
pcrfwade us, that our Blejfed Saviour himfelf dis-
claims this Perfeclion.
" ""Tis mofl evident, faith he, that our Lord Jefus,
cc {whatever Power he had) confeffes again and again,
" that he had not infinite Power of himfelf, John f.
" 30. Of my felf I can do nothing. He had been
** fpeaking of great Miracles, viz. Raijing the Dead,
tc and Executing all "Judgement; but all along takes
<c care Men fljould know his Sufficiency for thefe
" things was of God the Father. In the Beginning of
" the Difcourfe, ver. 19. The Son can do nothing but
" what he fees the Father do. So in the middle, v.
" 16, 27. The Father has given the Son to have
" Life in himfelf. And as if he could never too
iC much inculcate this great 'Truth, he adds towards the
cc Conclufion, I can do nothing of my felf, Or from
<c nothing that is my felf do I draw this Power and
t( Authority. Sure this is not the Voice of God, but
ic of a Man! For the mofl High can receive from
u none ; He cannot be made more mighty or wife, &c.
" becaufe to abfolute Perfeclion can be no Addition.
cc And fine e Power in God is an EJfential Perfeclion,
u it follows that if it be derived, then fo is the E (fence
iC and Being it felf, which is Blafphemy againft the
u mofl Fligh. For "'tis to Ungod him, to number him
u among poor, dependent, derivative Beings. TVhilfl
cc the Supreme God indeed is only he who is the firfl
cc Caufe, and abfolute Original of all.
Anfw. It is no good Argument of the Author's
Impartiality in his Enquiries > that he only picks out
3
True T)eity of our Bleffed Saviour. 6<?
a few Expreffions that fcem to favour the Opinion
he has einbrac'd, without taking the leait Notice of
the Evidence fuggefted in the Context on the other
Side. And that he does fo in this Place, will appear
upon a fuller View of the whole Paflage.
We read at ver. 16. that the Jews fought to kill our
Lord Jefus, becaufe he had wrought a miraculous
Cure % on the Sabbath Day. Our Lord anfwers 'cm,
My Father workcth hitherto, and I work ; q. d. tho*
my Father is laid to reft on the Seventh Day from
the JVorks of Creation, yet he does ft ill work in the
continued Adminiftrations of his Providence on the
Sabbath Day, and I (who am his Son, and therefore
One with him) do alfo work on that Day, and do
nothing herein contrary to his Will. Upon this
we read, that the Jews fought the more to kill him,
becaufe he not only had broken the Sabbath, but faid
alfo that God was his Father, making himfelf equal to
God. Or, as the Words may be more truly ren-
dred, becaufe he calVd God his own Father, making
himfelf equal to God, i. e. call'd him his Father in fo
peculiar a Senfe as argu'd his Equality to him in
Power and Dominion. Nov/ according to our Au-
thor, the Jews charge our Bleffed Lord with the
highell Blafphemy that he can be guilty of, and
very juftly according to his Sentiments, if they did
not miftake his Meaning. It mult therefore be du-
ly confider'd, whether our Lord difowns this Senfe
they put on his Words, and faith any thing to un-
deceive 'em, and convince 'em that he meant no
fuch thing. And if it appear that what he faith ra-
ther juftifies the Senfe they put on his Words than
difowns it, it will thence follow, that he owns the
Charge, that he did fo call God his Fatlyer as to make
himfelf equal to him.
Our Lord begins at his Reply at ver. 10. Verily, ve-
rily, I fay unto you, 'The Son can do nothing of himfelf
except he fee the Father doing it. For whatfoever things
he (i. e. the Father) does, thofe things the Son does like-
wife. Now the Meaning is not as our Author wou'd
infinuate, 'That the Son can do nothing by any Power of
F 3 kij
jo A Vindication of the
his own : But, 'that he can do nothing but what he few
the Father do, i. e. nothing but what is conformable
to his Example, and his Will and Order 3 or as in the
next ver. Nothing but what the Father, who loves him,
Jhews him, i. e. directs and orders to be done in or-
der to his own Glory. But that his Power is the
fame with his Fathers he plainly intimates, when he
faith in the following Words, that whatever things
the Father does, the fame things does the Son Jikewife,
(for 'tis in the Original ravra) ; fo that we may more
juftly cry out than our Author, Sure this is the Voice
of a God, and not of a Man ! For what Creature can
or dare to pretend that whatever the Father Almighty
do's, he can do the very fame ? And how plainly does
he that fiiththis, equalize himfelf 'to the Father, as pof-
fell of the fame Efjential Power with him ? And fo
he does again at v. 21. For as the Father raifcth up
the Dead, and quickneth them,fo does the Son quicken
whom he will. And thus to raife and quicken the
Dead at his own Pleafure, is evidently the peculiar
Effect of an Almighty Power, Rom.\. 17. 1 Kings y.
7. Andtho' it is faidat v. 24. that as the Father hatfy
Life in himfelf, fo he has given the Son to have Life
in himfelf : This does by no means imply thcS^ to
be fuch a Dependent Derivative Being as Creatures are,
but the contrary. For to have Life in himfelf, and a
Capacity of imparting it to whom he will, is the peculiar
Perfection of the Self -living God. And the Father's
giving this to the Son imports not a voluntary Gift,
but his communicating this and all other Divine Per-
fections to -him by a neceffary Eternal Act (which
Divines call Eternal Generation). 'Tir true indeed,
an Authority or Right to judge the World mention'd
at ver. 22. and 27. is a voluntary Gift, which our Au-
thor unadvifedly confounds with Chrifts Effential
Power : And that Authority belongs to Chrifl as Me-
diator, and is to be exercis'd by him in our Nature
as he is the Son of Man ; as our Lord plainly tells us
at ver. 27. He hath given him Authority to execute Judg-
yte?it alfo becaufe he is the Son of Man. Whereby he both
intimates, that he mould judge the World in that Hu-
man
True Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 71
man Nature that he afTum'd, and fhou'd have this Ho-
nour conferr'd on him for afluming it, viz. That the
World fhou'd not be Judged by the Father, but all
Judgment committed to the Son. But for the EJfential
Power whereby the Dead fhou'd be rais'd in order to
their being judg'd, that belongs not to him as Man,
but as the Eternal Son of God. The Dead (faith he
at ver. zf.) jhall hear the Voice of the Son of God, and
they that hear Jhall live. And here 'tis manifeft that
our Saviour plainly diflinguifhes thefe two Titles or
Characters that belong to him, viz. The Son of God,
and the Son of Man. And makes the former the
Ground of his Divine Power or Might, the latter
of his Delegated Authority. And for what our Sa-
viour adds in the Conclufion, / can of my felf do no-
thing, as I hear, I judge, and my Judgment is juft, be-
caufe I feek not my own Will, but the Will of the Fa-
ther that fent me ; thefc Words refer not at all to
his EJfential Power of Working, but to his accurate
Obfervance of the Fathers Will in all his judicial
Proceedings, to which his Human Will was en-
tirely conformable, and his Divin? the fame with it.
But becaufe I do allow the EJfential Power of the
Son of God to be communicated to him by the Father^
I muft take fome Notice of his Reafoning againfl it.
" Since Power in God is an EJfential Perfection, it fol-
" lows that if it be derived, then fo is the Effence or Be-
" ing it felf. Anfw. If by being deriv'd he means
communicated by the Father to the Son, not by a vo-
luntary Act, but by the Son's neceflliry Eternal Ema-
nation from him, we grant that the Son thus derives
his Effence ox Divine Nature from the Father. What
then ? " Why this (fays the Author) is Blafphemy
" againft the moft High, for 'tis to Ungod him, to num-
u ber him among pooor, depende?it, derivative Beings ;
" Whilft he who is the Supreme God is only he who is
" the fir fl Caufe and abfolute Original of all.
Anfw. If by poor, dependent, derivative Beings, he
mean fuch as are the voluntary Productions of a Be-
ing diftin£t from themfelves, that depend on his
meer Pleafure for their Exiftence and the Continu-
F 4 ation
72 A Vindication of the
ation thereof, I deny that the Son of God is any fuch
poor, dependent ^ derivative Beings or that he is num-
ber d among fuch by our Conceflion, That the Father
communicates the Divine Nature, and the Perfecti-
ons thereof, to him by a Neceflary, Eternal and Per-
manent Aft. Nor is he hereby conttituted ancther
Being from the Father at all, but only another Per-
fon in the Godhead. Nor does this hinder him from
being the Supreme Go d, i. e. the firfl Caufe and abfo-
lute Original of all other Beings (as I have {hewn the
Scriptures affert him to be) tho' he be not firfl in
the Godhead in refpeft of the Order of Subfiflence
and Operation between thofe Sacred Three that are
the One Supreme God.
But the sluthor adds, our Lord confiders himfelf
hereinOppofition to his Father, who (he faith) gave
him all Power. Now if he had fuch an Eternal Divine
Word, united more nearly to him than the Father,
furely he wou'd have own'd his Power to be from
that Word or Divine Son.
Anfw. There is no fuch Phrafe in all the Context
as the Father 's giving all Power to our Blefjcd Lord,
but only giving him yluthority to execute Judgment, be-
caufe he is the Son of Man, at ver. 2.7. But to pafs by
that. By Power the Author either means Alight and
Strength^ or Authority. If the former ; 'tis evident,
That this Almighty Power belongs to Chrijl as the
Eternal Word or Son of God. And he is poifeft of
it by anecefiary Eternal Emanation from the Father,
who communicates it by a neceffary, not an arbitrary,
free Ati. And this Power the Man Chrijl Jefus was
never pofTcft. of at all, no more than of any other
incommunicable Perfections of the Divine Nature.
if by Power he means, Authority to judge the World
(which is alt the Text here fpeaks of) we own this
to be the Father's voluntary Gift, and that the Hu-
m-.m Nature is employ'd in the Exercife of it. And
this Authority fliou'd in alJ rcaiori be deriv'd from
the Father, who fultains the Character of Supreme
lawgiver, not from the Eternal Word, who affum'd
the Office of Mediator .
He
True 'Deity of our Ble (fed Saviour. 73
He concludes, " How comes he to afcribe nothing to
u that , fince "'tis fuppos'd to be equal in Power to the
" Father himfelf, and more nearly alltfd to Jefus Chrifl
" as the Operating Principle in him. So John 14. 10.
" My Father in me does the Works, by which "'tis
u evident. There was no Divine Agent in and with
" him but the Father. He only has all Power of himfelf y
" and needs no AJfiftance.
Anfw. I have already fhewn him, That our Lord
Jefus , as the Eternal Word or Son of God, does claim
a Divine Almighty Power, in telling us, That what-
ever things the Father does, he the Son does the fame
likewife. But againfl this he ftarts a new Argument
from John 14. 10. where our Lord faid to Philip,
Believejl thou not that I am in the Father, and the Fa-
ther in me ? 'The Words that I /peak unto you, I [peak
not of my felf, but the Father that dwells in me, he
does the IVorks. And in the next ver. Believe me that
I am in the Father, and the Father in me, or elfe believe
me for the Works fake. But what wou'd our Author
infer hence ? He cannot reafonably conclude more
from hence, than that the Works of our Lord Jefus
proceeded from that Almighty Power that was both
in the Father and in Him. So that by thofe very
Works the Father himfelf atteited the Miflion of the
Son, and his Unity in Nature and EJfence with himfelf.
Thus alfo the miraculous Works of Chrifl are fre-
quently afcrib'd to the Holy Spirit, and the imputing
them to a Diabolical Power is condemn'd as the un-
pardonable Blafphemy againlf the Holy Ghoft. But
becaufe both the Father and the Holy Spirit did dwell
and operate in the Human Nature of Chrifl -, it will
not follow, that the Eternal H^ord did not do fo too,
and that in a peculiar and more eminent manner.
Chrifl indeed as a Prophet raised from among his Bre-
thren, zndfent on the Father's Embaffie, was to manage
that Office under the Inspiration and Conduct of that
Holy Spirit that was given to him without meafure,
and to confirm his Mi ft on by thofe miraculous Opera-
tions of the Holy Spirit, that were the Father's Cre-
dentials,
4 ^Vindication*?/* the
dentials. And for this reafon thefe Works arc im-
puted fo often to the Holy Spirit and to the Father,
and not becaufe the Eternal Word was deftitute of
the Power of doing 'em. (a)
And now let the Author conlider, whether thefe
FafTages in which he pretends our Saviour difclaims
Almighty Power, and which are capable of fo eafy a
Solution which the Context it felf leads us to, are to
be put in the Ballance with thofe that fo manifestly
afcribe the Creation to him, that undoubted Demon-
stration of the Eternal Power and Godhead of the
Creator ? And whether he be not in Danger of blaf-
pheming our Saviour by thus Ungoding him, zndnitm-
bring him with poor, derivative, dependent Beings ?
For among fiich he is pleas'd to rank him.
Having difpatch'd this Head of Abfolute Power, I
come next to that, '
II. Of Supreme Abfolute Goodnefs. This I fully a-
gree with the Author to be a prime Character of the
Supreme Being.
And therefore I {hall, Firfl, briefly fhew, That
fuch Abfolute Goodnefs belongs to our Blefjed Saviour ;
and, Secondly, confider what he alledges to perfuade
us that our Sa~ '.out dij 'claims it.
Firfr, I mail briefly fhew, That our Bleffed Saviour
is poffeft of fuch Supreme Abfolute Goodnefs.
Now this Supreme Goodnefs difcovers it felf to us
thefe two ways ; Either,
i . By Communicating Being to all Creatures. Or,
z. By Redeeming a?id Recovering ''em when Self-de-
firofd and Lofi.
i . I have already fhewn, That our Lord has given
Being to all Creatures.
And I need not enlarge to fhew, That is an Ef-
fect of Goodnefs, as well as Power, truly Divine and
Infinite. And,
'•>
(a) See Dr. Wbitbfs, Preface to his Commentary en John.
2. For
True T)eity of our Blejfed Saviour. y$
l. For the Redemption and Recovery of Guilty and
Self-defiroyed Sinners, I hope I need not prove to
any that pretends to the Name of a Chriftian, that
this Work is afcrib'd to our Blejfed Saviour.
And one wou'd think there is as little need to
prove ? that this is an Effect of Supreme Goodnefs and
Infinite Love. I am fure 'tis a Love that the Apoftle
Paul invites us to comprehend the breadth and length,
and height and depth of, and tells us, that it fur-
paffes all our Knowledge, Eph. 3. 18, ip. Nay, 'tis
a Goodnefs and Love fo truly Divine, as to warrant
our afcribing in our molt folemn Devotions, the
fame Eternal Glory and Dominion, to him who thus
lov'd us, and wafio'd us from our fins in his own Bkod,
&c. which we elfewhere afcribe unto the Father,
Rev. 1 . y . compar'd with 1 Pet. f , 1 1 . (as I mail more
fully mew anon). And indeed his Love will appear
thus boundlefs and incomprehenfible, and truly wor-
thy of Eternal Adoration, if we confider our Blejfed
Saviour as the Eternal Word, who not only afTum'd.
our Nature into a vital indiflbluble Union, but in
that very Nature ftoop'd fo low as to die in the
Head of fuch Rebels and Enemies as we were, and
to flied his precious Blood for the Expiation of our
Guilt. And fo we are taught to conlider him, as
one who was in the Form of God, and had appear'd
with all the marks of divine Majefty and Glory, but
for our fakes dive ft ed himfelf of all that external Glo-
ry, took on him the Form of a Servant, andwas made in
the Likenefs of Men ; Nay, being found in the fafioion
of Man, he humbled himfelf yet lower, even to fo a-
ftonifhing a degree, as to become obedient to Death, e-
ven the Death of the Crofs, Phil. 1. 7, 8. For when
we contemplate the infinite di fiance and difpropor-
tion there is between the divine Nature and Ours,
we cannot but fee, Kerc is an Inftance of Love,
not only beyond all example or parallel of Human
Love, but fufficient to juftifie the highefr. Commen-
dations the Scriptures give of it, fufficient to raife
and entertain the admiring thoughts and views of
Angels and Men. For what Love can be greater
than
?5 ^VlNDICATION^/^
than this, that the Prince of Life and Lord ofGlorj 9
fhou'din our Nature and Stead fubmit to the painfull
and pameful, and accurfed Death of the Crofs ?
But if, with our Adverfaries, we fhou'd conceive
of our BJeffed Saviour only as a Creature, as a Mart 9
or (in our Author's Phrafe) a poor, derivative, de-
pendent Beings who laid down his Life for us, and
that with the profpect. of the higheft Dignity and
Glory that a Creature is capable of, as the Reward
of his Sufferings, Then indeed his Goodnefs and
Love is but finite, and may be eaiily comprehended,
and is far from furpafling our Knowledge, and wou'd
be as fir from warranting either fuch high Elogiums
of it as the Infpired Writers give us, or the Doxo-
logies they direct us to offer on the account of it.
And no wonder that thofe that think there is no more
in the Dying Love of our Saviour, fhou'd deny him
to be poiTefs'd of Supreme Goodnefs. But whofe O-
pinion and the Confequences thereof are molt confor-
mable to the Language of Scripture, Ours or Theirs,
I freely leave to every ferious Chriftian to judg e.
And proceed,
Secondly j To examine, what the Author has al-
ledg'd to perfuade us, that our BlefTed Saviour dis-
claims any fuch fupreme Abfolute Goodnefs.
And here his whole Proof relies on one {ingle
FafTage.
" Our Lord (faith he) exprefly difdaims this Cha-
iC racier, Matt. 10. 17. Why calleftthou me Good?
" There is none good but One, that is God. Where
" 'tis mofl evident that he diftinguifloes himfclf from
" God, as not the fame with him, and denies of him-
" filf vhai he affirms of God. And for that 'Divine
" Perfection of fupreme infinite Goodnefs, he chal-
<c le yiges the Man for pre fuming to fay what feem'd to
c<f attribute it to him, and leads him off to another^
" who, and who only, was ?nore eminently fo.
jlufw. I deny that our Saviour does either ex-
prefly difclaim the Cbaracler of Good, or diftinguiflj
himfelf from God as not the fame with him ; which
is all the foundation of the Author's Reafoning from
this
Trtie^Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 77
this Text. We do not (as the Author ground-
lefly imputes to us) fuppofe our Saviour's Meaning
to be, / know Man, thou doft not take me for God,
as I am, Why then doft thou give me the 'title that
belongs to him only ? For we do not fuppofe that
our Saviour defign'd to difcover his Deity to hirn
at this time. Nor did the young Man's Qiieftion
give him any occafion for it. Nor do we think
that the young Man took our Saviour to be God,
when he call'd him Good, or that he paid him any
more than a civil RefpecJ ; but 'tis probable (from his
giving him the Title of good Mafter) that the young
Man did take him for a Rabbi or Doctor of eminent
Piety and Sanctity. And we know the JewiJJj Rabbi's
affected fuch pompous and fwelling Titles. See
Malt. 2.8. from 7 to] the nth ver. Accordingly the
Young Man addreffes him in the common ftrain they
us'd to the Jewifh Doctors. Now our BlefTed Lord,
to difcountenance this Affectation of High Titles,
and fet before this young Man an Example of Hu-
mility, in oppofition to the Vanity and Self-conceit
he difcover'd, intimates to him that the Title he
gave him was in its higheft Senfe proper only for
God, and not for fuch a one as he took him to be,
viz. a Rabbi or Teacher of the Law. And the Man
does not fay (as our Author pretends) what Jefus
Chrift thought too much to he [aid of himfelf, but only
what was too much to be [aid according to thofe appre-
henfions he knew that he had of him. Nor was it at
all neceffary that our BlefTed Saviour fhou'd rectify
his apprehenfions at this time by difcovering his
Deity to him. He that had charg'd his own Difci-
ples a little before, That they Jhoald tell no Man, that
he was Jefus the Chrift, or Meffiah, Mat. 16. zo.
(tho' he really was fo, and intended in due time o-
penly to claim that Title) might much more think
it incongruous to reveal and affert his Deity to this
young Profelyte. For that were to have gravell'd a
raw Catechumen at firft dafh with the fublimeft My-
fiery of Chriftian Godlinefs. He muft be firft taught
to own him as the Mejftah, before he was fit to be
in-
78 ^ViNDicAtibN of the
inftru&ed in the Dignity and highefi Characters that
belong'dto him as fuch. So that our Saviour's Cafe
was like that of a Prince that walks incognito, and in
difguife. He had divefted him/elf 'of that External Glo-
ry that was the Form of God± to put on that of a Ser-
vant. And fhou'd fuch a Prince in difguife be ac-
cofted by any that knew him not, with Complements
too high for a Subject $ Might he riot fay, Why do
you give me a 'Title more proper to be given your Prince !
This wou'd indeed argue that he defign'd at prefent
to conceal, but by no means to deny or difown, his
Royal Authority. And the Cafes being parallel, the
Author very unreafonably infers from the like Ex-
preffions, that our Saviour here difowns his Goodnefs.
Nor was there any neceflity that the Evangelifts in
recording this paflage fhou'd enter a Caution, That
Chriit did not intend by thefe words to deny that he
was Good, and truly God. The Title of God they fo
often give to him, and that matchlefs Grace of our
Lord Jefus, which elfewhere the Infpired Writers of
the New Teftament fo largely on all occafions ex-
tol, was fumcient to guard any confiderate Reader
from fo grofly mifinterpreting fuch an occasional paf-
fage. And therefore for the Author to cry o'ut on
this occafion, " 'Tis aflonifhing to fee what violence is
" offered to this Sacred Text by fuch as maintain the
" Equality ofjefus Chrift to God his Father, when he
has faid nothing of any weight againft the common
Expofition but w hat is founded on his own mifrepre-
fentation of it, iTiews us, How Natural it is, when
Reafon and Argument fail, to bear the World down
with meer Confidence. For his Reafonings are fcarce
any where thro' his Book fo trifling and weak as on
this Head, on which he makes this vehement Ex-
clamation without the leall tolerable ground. 'Tis
much more aftoniihing that a Man of his Abilities
ihou'd Lay fo mighty itrefs on fo weak an Argument,
for 'cis he offers real violence to our Saviour's words
to make 'em krvc his purpofe, when he pretends,
That our Saviour apparently denies, Thai hs was Good
in as high a jenj'e as God his Father.
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 79
I proceed to the
\\\d Perfection, of Abfolute Omnifcience, or Unli-
mited Knowledge of all things, paft, prefent and to
come.
In treating of this part of the Argument, I
mall
Firft, Prove the Holy Scriptures do afcribc fetch Ab-
folute Omnifcience to our Blejfed Lord.
Secondly, Examine what the Author has offered to
the contrary.
Firjl, I mail prove, That the Holy Scriptures af-
cribe fetch abfolute Ommfcience to our Blejfed Lord.
And here I mall have occafion to confider what
the Author has offer' d to invalidate the Proofs com-
monly brought to evince that this Perfection belongs
to our BleJJed Saviour.
I. We argue from thofe many PafFages in the
New Teifoment, wherein the Knowledge of all things
is afcribed to our Lord Jefus. Such as thofe John 2.
23, 24, 2f. Many believed on his Name when they
faw the Miracles which he did. But Jefus did not com-
mit himfelf to^em, becaufe he knew all Men-, and need-
ed not that any JhoiCd teftify of Men, for he knew what
was in Man. So John 16. 30. Now we are fure that
thou knoweft all things and needefi not that any Man
fhouldask thee. By this we believe that thou came ft forth
from God. And again John 21. 17. Lord, Thou
knoweft all things, Thou knoweft that I love thee. Now
we conclude, That an Univerfal Unlimited Know-
ledge belongs to him, according to the plain fenfe of
thefe Expreflions.
To this the Author replies, That " thefe words are
" intended only to exprefs a great and comprehenfive
« Knowledge. As will appear (he faith)
" 1 . By Chrifs own words, who knew net the day
of Judgment.
Anfw. This I fhall afterwards confider as his main
Objection.
2. " In that it was common to afcribe all Knowledge
" to Men of extraordinary fVifdom. (As he endea-
vours to ftiew by feveral Inllances.)
Now
80 A Vindication of the
Now this I deny, nor do any of the Inftances he
alledges prove it.
The Woman of Tekoah never meant to afcribe to
David any more than an accurate Knowledge of all
the Affairs of his own Kingdom, when the tells
him, My Lord knows all things on Earthy and is as
wife as an Angel, z Sam. 14. 20. And me imputes
this Knowledge only to his Sagacity and Wildom.
Befides the Expreflions themfelves appear at firft
view hyperbolical^ and have an air of Court flattery in
'em.
For that of Chriflians being faid to know all things^
The Context reftrains it to thofe things which the
Anointing teaches all Chriftians, i. e. the neceffary
Doctrines of the Gofpel.
And for the words of Simon concerning our Lor a \
If this Man were a Prophet, he wou'd know what
manner of 'Woman this is , Luke 7. 39. They rather
charge him (as fome think) for a defeel: of Holinefs
thtm of Knowledge^ viz. That he was not fufficient-
ly inquifitive to know who this Woman was that
touch'd him, as the Pharifees ufually were very nice
and fcrupulous leaft they mou'd be defiled by the
touch of fuch as they call'd Sinners. But if they re-
fer to his Knowledge, and imply, That Simon thought
a Prophet might by Revelation ordinarily {o far know
a notorious Sinner as wasrequifite to his avoiding the
Defilement of being touch'd by fuch a one : This
fignifies nothing to prove, That they thought their
Prophets knew all things.
And for the Woman of Samaria, fhe might juftly
conclude our Lord to be a Prophet from his difcover-'
ing her fecret acts to her -, but it does by no means
then follow, That ekher Jews or Samaritans thought
their Prophets knew the fecret s of all Men, and much
lefs that they knew all things, which the Difciples in
the Places alledg'd afcribe to our Bleffed Saviour, and
to which there is nothing parallel in all thefe Inftan-
ces. But
2. The Author adds^ u 'Tis evident, thai the Dif-
* c cipJes by attributing all Knowledge to Chrift, in-
66 tended
'True *Dezty of our Blejffed Saviour. 81
cc tended no more than to afcribe to him fuch great
" Knowledge as a Created Being is capable of, becaufe
u they infer no more from it than this*, Now we be-
" lieve that thou cameft forth from God, i. e. Not
u that he was God, but One fent of God.
Anfw. The Author has no rcafon to conclude from
thefe words, Now we believe thou camejl forth from
God, that the Difciples inferred no more than Chrifi's
being fent forth of God, as other Prophets were. For
they are not faid to come forth from God, when they
are fent on his Meflage. And that our Lord, to
whofe own words (at ver. 2.8.) the Difciples refer,
intended to affirm more of himfelf, when he faith,/
came forth from the Father, than meerly his being
fent as a great Prophet, we have juft ground to fup-
pofe. For elfewhere he declares his own Nature to
be as incomprehenfible as that of the Father. No
Man knows the Son but the Father, and no Man knows
the Father but the Son, and to whomfocver the Son-
will reveal him, Mat. 1 1 . 27. Again we are told,
John 1. 18. No Man hath feen God \ at any time,
the only begotten Son which is in the Bofom of the Fa-
ther, he has declared him. Where the only-begotten
Son of the Father is diftinguifh'd from all Men, and
confequently from all meer Prophets, as one whofe
peculiar Privilege it was to be in the Bofom of the Fa-
ther, acquainted with all his Councils, and therefore
capable to declare 'em. And our Blejfed Lord, as
the only-begotten Son of God, plainly equals his own
Knowledge with the Father's, when he tells his
Difciples, 'That the Spirit of Truth whom he would
fend, fhou'd glorify him. For (faith he) he JJj all re-
ceive of mine, and ft all fhew it to you. All things that
the Father hath are mine, therefore faid I, that he flmll
take of mine, and fhall fhew it unto you, John 16. 13,
14, if. And to the like purpofe our Lord faith,
John 6. 46. Not that any Man hath feen the Father,
fave he which is of God, (6 cuv jrapd ra ®s», He that
hath his EfTence from God) he hath feen the Father.
And 'tis obfervable that our Blefj'ed Saviour gives
himfelf this Character, in oppoiition to the jews,
G that
82, A Vindication of the
that faid. Is not this Jefus the Son of Jofeph, whofe
Father and Mother we know ? How is it then that he
faith i I came down from Heaven ? He ju reifies what
he had {aid. That he came down from Heaven, and had
a higher Defcent than that from his Mother on Earth,
as the only-begotten Son of God, who had his EfTence
from him, andwhofe peculiar Privilege it was to fee
him. So that cur Author's only and confiderable
Objection againft the Obvious Senfe of thefe Paflages
appears to be founded on a miftaken Suppofition,
That the Difciples mferr'd no more from that Know-
ledge of all things^ which they afcribe to him, than
that he was the great ejl of Prophets.
And for what our Author fubjoins at the Conclu-
sion of this firft Argument for the Omnifcience of
Chrift, " That tho 1 Chrifl fhould be allowed to know
" all things which atlually are, unlefs he know all Fu-
u turities too, it would not prove his infinite Omnifcience }
I mail have occafion to confider it under the next
Head.
I mail only add, That in that pafTage of the Apo-
ftle Peter's, Lord, thou knowefl all things, thou know-
eft that I love thee, 'tis manifcft, that the Apoftle
infers Chrift's Knowledge of the hidden Difpofition
of his very Soul towards him, from the boundlefs ex-
tent of his Knowledge, q. d. The fecrets of my Heart
cannot be hid from thee, to whom all things are
known. And if fuch all-comprehenfive Knowledge
had not belong'd to our Blefjed Saviour, we might
reafonably expecb that he wou'd have check'd this
excemVe Language of the Apoftle here, or at leaft he
wou'd not have io openly countenane'd andapprov'd
the like Language from the reft of the Difciples, as
he plainly does, John 16. 31.
But the Language of the Apoftles will appear no
way hyperbolical, if we confider, That our Lord himkK
more fully claims fuch Omnifcience. But this leads me
to the
lid Argument for the Omnifcience of Chrift, drawn
from thofe Parages of Scripture that afcribe to him
that
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, 2$
that Knowledge of the Hearts of Men, which is pecu-
liar to the divine Under Handing.
That the Knowledge of the Hearts of Men is pecu-
liar to an Omnifcient Being, even to the All-knowing
God) is evident from feveral Pailages of Scripture.
It was fo in the Judgment of the wifefr. of Men,
Solomon, as is evident from that paffage in his Pray-
er at the Dedication of the Temple, when he requefts,
That God may give every Supplicant, according to his
Ways, whofe Heart (faith he) thou knowefl, For thou,
even thou tinly, knowefl the Hearts of all the Children of
Men, i Kings 8. 38, 39. So the Plalmift makes it
the peculiar Glory of him whofe Throne is in Hea-
ven, That his Eyes behold, and his Eyd-lids try the Chil-
dren of Men, Pfal. 11. 4. Nay the Pialmiil elfe-
where mentions it as one eminent Inftance of* that
Knowledge of God, which appear'd to him fo wonder-
ful and incomprchenfible, That he had fearctid and
known him, That he was not only acquainted with his
ways, hut even under flood his thoughts afar off, PfaJ.
130. 1, 1, 3, &c. And fure that one pafTage of the
Prophet Jeremiah is fufficient to put this matter paft
all reafonable doubt, when he brings in the Blefled
God, afliiming this to himfelf as the incommunicable
Privilege and Glory of his infinite Mind, The Heart
of Man is deceitful and defperately wicked, Who can
know it ? q. d. No Creature whatever can pretend to
fo marvellous a Knowledge as this. It exceeds the
limited Capacity of a finite Mind. The BlefTed God
therefore afllimes it to himfelf as his peculiar Perfects
on, / the Lord fearch the Heart, I try the" Reins, to
give to every Man according to his ways, and according to
the fruit of their doings, Jer. 17. 0, 10.
Now that the Scriptures do afcribe this Knowledge
ef Mens Hearts (which they thus appropriate to God)
to our Blejfed Saviour, is no lefs evident : And that
not only from feveral of the Paftages mention'd be-
fore, and many others that might be added, but from
our Lord's exprefs Declaration. The Churches (fiith
he) Jhall know that I am he, which fear does the Hearts
and the Reins, and will give to every Man according t,,
G 2i their
84 A Vindication of the
their IVorks, Rev. 2. 23. And the Apoftle Paul to
the fame purpofe declares, That our Lord Jefus
will come to bring the hidden works of Darknefs to
Light, and to make manifefi the Counfels of all Heart s,
1 Cor. 4. f .
Now one wou'd think this Argument to be clear
and decifive in this Dilpute, when what the great
Jehovah appropriates to himfelf in the Prophet, Our
Blefjed Saviour fo openly lays Claim to in this remar-
kable Paflage. But the Author has offer'd two
things to take off the force of it, which I mull
confider.
To this purpofe he propofcs to confider, " 1 . In
" what fenfe thefearching and knowing the Heart is pe-
" culiar to God, and incommunicable to others, 2. To
" Jhew, 'that tho y it be peculiar to God in one fenfe, yet
"■ in another fenfe it may be 'attributed to another that
u is not the mofi High God.
As to the firll (he faith) " tho 1 Solomon fay,
" Thou Lord only knoweft the Hearts of all Men,
u yet what if I fay, that "'tis no wonder that Solo-
" mon Jhou'd not know of any other to whom that
u Excellency was Communicated, Jince he underjlood
u not the My fiery of the unfearchable Riches and ful-
" nefs of Chrift, &c.
Anfw. If our Author think fit to fay fo, We /hall
think fit to believe, That Solomon was wifer then he,
and deliver'd his Prayer by a diviner Infpiration than
appears in his Book. Especially when we find not
only other Infpired Writers concurring with him,
but even the Bleffed God appropriating this Know-
ledge to himfelf, and diftinguiming himfelf thereby
from all Creatures whatfoever.
But he adds, " that fuch Expreffions appropriating
" fome Perfections to God do only import, that he has
" no Equal to him therein, and that they belong to him
" in an Eminent fenfe. As when "'tis f aid God is only
" wife, Rom. 16. 27. God only hath immortality,
1 Tim. 6.6. And accordingly, when the Scriptures
appropriate the Knowledge of Mens Hearts to God,
they m;an only, that there is none knows the Heart fo
univer*
u
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 85*
** univerfally, fo immediately and independently as he.
Cc So that he reckons we argue but weakly from Chrifl's
c< knowing Mens Hearts, that he is God, unlefs we
ic jhew that he knows 'em in the fame excellent and in-
<c dependent manner and degree as the Father. But for
" knowing Mens Hearts in a lower fenfe, by Revela-
6t tion, he tells us. This has been communicated to Pro-
<c phets, and Apoftles, 2 Kings 6. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 10.
<c Acts f. And this way Chrift may know 'em much
<c more. Searching the Heart importing the accuracy
<c of Knowledge, not the manner of attaining it.
Anfw. That fome of God's Perfections, as his
IVifdom, Power, Knowledge, &c. are communicable,
I freely grant. But I mult tell our Author, There
are fome Acls flowing from thefe Perfections that
are peculiar to God, and incommunicable to any
Created Being. So is that Acl of his Power, The
making a Thing out of nothing. And fo (if we may
believe the Scriptures ) is that Acl of the Divine
Under/landing, The knowing the Hearts of Men, i. e.
The knowing 'em by Immediate Intuition. For as to that
Knowledge of 'em that is by Revelation from another,
or is only Conjeclural, it no way belongs to God at
all, and none doubts but a Prophet or an Apoftle,- or
the Man Chrift Jefus, may thus know the Hearts of
Men. The Queftion then is, Whether the Bleffed
God have not a peculiar way of Knowing the Hearts
of Men, viz. by immediate Intuition, that is incom-
municable to any other Being ? If he have, it muft
then be enquir'd, Whether our Lord Jefus does not
challenge to himfelf that very way of Knowing the
Hearts of Men ? That God has a peculiar way of
Knowing Mens Hearts, viz. Univerfally, Immedi-
ately, and Independently, our Author grants : And fo
muft any Man that duly confiders the Abfolute Per-
fection of the Divine Underftanding, and the una-
voidable Imperfection of a finite Mind. Now I
wou'd only ask him, Whether the Bleffed God does
not intend to afTert his own peculiar way of Knowing
the Hearts of Men, when he faith, I the Lord fear ch.
the Heart and try the Reins ? 'Tis evident that he
G 5 • docs
86 A Vindication of the
docs fo, becaufe hereby he reprefents that perfect-
Knowledge of the deceitful Heart of Man, that ab-
folutely diitinguiihes him from all Creatures whate-
ver. The Heart of Man is deceitful above all things^
&c. IVho can know it ? I the Lord fear ch the Hearts,
&c. Now if thefe Expreffions reprefent God's pe-
culiar and perfect way of Knowing Mens Hearts (as
they mull do, in order to their diftinguifhing him
from all Created Beings) then that veiy perfect and
peculiar way of Knowing Mens Hearts belongs to our
Lord Jefus. For our Bleffed Saviour afferts his Know-
lege in thofe very Expreflions, and that in the moft
emphatical manner. Our Author, that afferts the
Knowledge of Chriil's Human Nature to be fo ex-,
tenfive, will not fure imagine him to be ignorant
that the Bleffed God had by the Prophet Jeremy re-
prefented his own Univerfal, Immediate, Independent
Knowledge of the Heatts of Men by thefe Exprefli-
ons. And yet our Lord Jefus ufes the fame to ex^
prefs his own Knowledge of 'em. Nay he does not
barely fay, I fearch the Hearts, £cc. But the Churches
Jh all know that I am he that fe arches the Hearts, £tc.
q . d. I am that Jehovah whom the Prophet there
defcribes as the Searcher of the Hearts and Reins.
NoW if our Lord intended to apply this PafTage of
the Prophet to himfelf in the Senfe there intended,
our Point is gain'd, and there is no Room to dif-
pute his Omnifcience. If he did not, but only intend-
ed to apply thefe words to himfelf in a lower Senfe,
(viz. of his Understanding 'em by Revelation from
another, or by probable Conjeblure) nay in a Senfe
that could not agree to the Bleffed God, we cannot
excufe his words from palpable Blafphemy, and much
lefs from the greateft. Imprudence, and Neglect of
his Father's Honour, fince they fo naturally lead all
that read 'em to afcribe to him, whom the Author
fuppofes but a finite Creature, the fome Knowledge
of Men's Hearts which the Prophet had appropria-^
ted to the great Jehovah before.
J Nay, I may here, to confirm this Argument, add,
that as the Scriptures afhgn two Grounds of God's
perfect
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 87
perfect and immediate Knowledge of Men's Hearts,
*uiz. partly his having made 'em, (a) and partly his
intimate Prefence with 'em, (b) So both thefe Grounds
of it belong to our Blejjed Saviour. I have already
/hewn, that he made 'em -, and he himfclf afierts his
own Omniprefence, when he promifes that where two
or three are gathered together in his Name, he will
be there in the midft of 'em, Matth. 18. 20. See alfo
Matth. iS.lalt ver. John 14. 10, 15. And ifit fhould
be pretended that thofe Texts (peak of Chrift's Spi-
ritual Prefence by the Influences of his Grace, this
wou'd rather confirm than invalidate this Proof of
his Omnifcience. For as we therefore prove God is
every where in refpect of his EfTence, becaufe he can at
the fame time exert the power that is infeparable from
his EfTence in preferving and fuftaining his Crea-
tures, and directing or over- ruling their Actions : fo
we may infer, That Chrift is every where in refpect
of his ErTential Prefence as God, becaufe he can be
every where at the fame time, by his Spiritual In-
fluences and gracious Operations. For chat Spiritu-
al Virtue is infeparable from his EfTence.
Having thus fhewn, That our Blejfed Saviour
claims the Knowledge of Mens Hearts in the fame
fenfe in which 'tis afcrib'd to the Father, I might
juftly pafs by all he has offer'd under the id Head.
But becaufe there are feveral Miltakes in it, that
need to be rcctify'd in order to the clearing this
Subject, I fhall briefly confidcr it. Therefore,
Secondly, " 'There is no Abfurdity (he tells us) in
" Attributing this Knowledge of the Heart to Jcjus
" Chrift, tho' he be not the moft High God. And
" to that purpofc, he argues, That the Objecl being but
u finite, It does not exceed a finite Capacity to have
u fuch an Univerfal Knowledge of the Hearts and
" IVays of Men, as is afcribed to Jefus Chrift.
(a) See Pfalm 33. if, P£»!m 139. 13. Amos 4. 13.
(b) Jcr. 23. 14,
G 4 Anfiv.
88 .^Vindication of the
Anfw. The Author fliou'd have told us, What
Knowledge of Men's Hearts and Ways he attributes to
the Human Soul of Chrifl. Whether that unerring
Knowledge of 'em by immediate Inspection and Intui-
tion which belongs to the Blejfed God, or only a
Knowledge of 'em by Revelation, or by probable
Conjecture. If the former, he runs his Head againfl
all thofe numerous Texts foremention'd that appro-
priate that immediate Knowledge of the Hearts of
Men to the Blejfed God, and plainly robs the Divine
Underftanding of what the Scriptures celebrate as its
incommunicable Privilege and peculiar Glory. If
he mean onTy the Latter, We are willing to allow
as much Knowledge of that kind to the Humane Soul
of Chrifl as can agree to its finite Capacity : And tho'
we cannot prefume to define, how far fuch a finite
Capacity can extend, yet we fee no ground at all to
extend [it fo far as our Author feems to do. As for
Inftance, We can by no means allow, that the
Humane Soul of Chrifl; actually knows all the Words
and Works, nay all the very Thoughts, and Defires,
and Purpofes of all the Men that ever liv'd on this
Earth in all the feveral Ages of the World. Nor
does the Object of this Univerfal Knowledge being
finite, prove that it exceeds not the Capacity of a
finite Mind. The World it felf, as the Object of
God's Power, is but finite ; But yet it requires an
infinite Power to make, and fuftain, and rule it. So
tho' the World as the Object of God's Knowledge be
but finite, it may require an infinite Mind to com-
prehend all the affairs of it. The Pfalmiff concludes
from God's telling the Number of the Stars, Pf. 147,
4, 5". how much more may we conclude that Un-
der ft anding to be infinite, that comprehends at once
all the Actions, and the very Thoughts and Pur-
pofes both of Angels and of Men, and that from the
Beginning of the World to this very Moment? What
higher thing can we conceive of the Divine Under-*
ftanding? Nay, if the Author's Argument were good,
we cou'd not from the World that is but finite con-
clude, That the Maker of it is a Being poifeft of
infinity
True Deity of our Bleffed Saviour, 89
infinite Perfections. But I take his Suppofition to
be fo far from being true, that 'tis more probable
that the minuteft Creature as truly requires an infi-
nite Mind fully to comprehend, as an infinite Power
to make it.
But the Author pretends to prove, " That we muft
" afcribe fuch an univerfal Knowledge to Chrifi as
" Man ^ Becaufe all Judgment is committed to him,
" and that as the Son of Man. And this Kingly
" Office by which he rules over all the World, and
" takes [fecial Care of all his Member s, as it necejja-
" rily fuppofes his Knowledge of the whole Eflate of
" his Church, and every Member of it, as far as is
" neceffary for the Difcharge of that Truft, fo it un-
" deniably proves,, this large Knowledge to be exercifed
" by him as Man, however he gains it. For fince this
*' Office and Power are given, they cannot terminate
" in the Divine Nature : For who can give to God any
" Dignity or Power, who has all originally in his own
" Being ? It muft be then given to the Man or Human
" Nature only, and confequently he muft have all re-
" quijite Abilities for it.
Anfw. The Author's, Argument turns upon a falfc
Suppofition, That this Authority to rule and judge the
World is committed to Chrift only as Man. And the
Text he alledges for it, is fo far from proving it,
that it plainly insinuates the contrary. The Words
are, The Father hath given him Authority to execute
Judgment alfo, becaufe he is the Son of Man. 'Tis not
as he is the Son of Man, (as the Author unwarily and
grou ndleily aflerts) . This Authority of executing Judj. -
meat is the Reward given to the Son of God, for becom-
ing the Son of Man ; and terminates upon the whole
of his Perfon as he is God-Man, the Incarnate Word
or Son of God. And if we confider him as the Word
made Flefh, and contemplate the Fulnefs of the God-
head as dwelling Bodily in him, he appears every way
furnifh'd with fufficient Abilities for the Execution
of his Regal Office, in the Adminiftration of the
Affairs both of t\^World y and the Church.
But
$o -^Vindication 0/ the
But againft this the Author obj e£b, " That if this
iC Power be givsn, it cannot terminate on the Divine
" Nature j for who can give to God any Dignity '
u or Power , who has all originally in his own Being ?
Anfw. Both the Father and the Son have the
Power originally. And as it was the Son's voluntary
Condefcenfion to fuftain the Character of Mediatory
fo was it the Father's voluntary Act to devolve for
a time all the Exercife of this Original Power of ru-
ling and judging the World on his Incarnate Son.
That the Father judges no Man, but has committed all
'Judgment to the Son, is a temporary Sufpenfioh of
his own Right, and therefore juftly reprefented as a
Gift : The Son acquires hereby no Authority that
did not originally belong to his Divine Nature, but
he has this Dignity conferr'd on him by a voluntary
At\ of the Father, that the Exercife of this Original
Power is folely entrufted (during the prefent State
of Tryal) in his Hands. And this Privilege theF^-
ther was capable of Giving, and the Son of Receiving,
notwithstanding his Unity inEJfence with the Father.
And indeed were this Authority devolv'd into the
Hands of a meer Man, we cou'd have no tolerable
Ground to truft, either his Capacity of under/landing
all our particular Concerns, or of ' admim 'firing fuita-
ble Direction, Relief, Afliftance, Comfort and Sup-
port on all the various Occafions we have, of apply-
ing our felves to him. 'Tis true indeed, his Human
Nature does act its part in the Exercife of his Roy-
al Authority (tho' how far its Power as well as Know-
ledge extends, we cannot pretend to determine). But
'tis the Perfections of his Divine Nature, that are a
full Security to our Faith, that he is capable of be-
ing (as the Author fpeaks) a careful, a vigorous,
an Ejfeclual Head of his Body, and Ruler of th$
World.
For what the Author faith, p. 14. Column 2d, it
runs wholly upon his own Miftake of this Authority
being committed only to Chrifts Human Nature, and
therefore we are neither eoncern'd in the ObjeElion
he propofes to himfelf, nor jn his Anfwer to it.
He
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 91
He has another Argument to prove, That this Uni-
*verfal Knowledge belongs to Chrift, drawn from his
Sympathizing Companion towards his fuffering Servants,
and that arijingfrom his own Sufferings on Earthy Heb.
4. if, 16. Seeing we have not an High-Prieft, that
cannot be touched with the Feeling of our Infirmities,
but was in all Points tempted as we are, let us there-
fore come boldly to the Throne of Grace, 6cc.
From thence the Author infers, " That fince Chrifl
" can only fympathize with his diftrejfed Servants in
" his Human Nature, and cannot fympathize with ''em
u in their Troubles without knowing 'em, he mufi there-
" fore know \m all as Man, or otherwife this Ground
" of our Hope and Confolation in our approaches to God
" is taken away.
Anfw. All that thofe Words of the infpired Wri-
ter to the Hebrews does necefTarily import, is only
this, That our Lord Jefus having been in our Na-
ture tempted, and had an experimental Senie of the
Infirmities and Miferies we are liable to, is thereby
the more capable of being a Compaffionate Intercejfor
for us. But they do by no means import, that he
has fuch a proper Sympathy with every diftreffed
Chriftian, as we have with an afflicted Friend (for
that were inconfiftent with the perfect Felicity and
Joy of his exalted State) and confequently they im-
port not, that as Man he knows all their particular
Miferies. 'Tis fumcient that his Divine Nature dif-
cerns all their particular DiftrefTes, and the Remem-
brance he has of his own Sufferings in our Nature,
renders him a compaffionate and earned: Interceflbr
for 'em. Tho' fhou'd we allow fuch a Knowledge
of their prefent particular Cafes to be communicated
to his Human Nature by Revelation from the Divine,
that is united to it, I do not fee that this wou'd at
all prove, That an univerfal Knowledge of all things
pafl as well as prefent, may be communicated to his
Human Nature : And much lefs wou'd it prove that
immediate Knowledge of Mens Hearts to belong to
him, which he fo plainly afcribes to himfelf.
And
9^ A V I N D I C A T I n of the
And for the Authorities he produces, he is hard
put to it, when he is forc'd to fhelter his own Opi-
nion of the Univerfal Knowledge of Chrifl's Human
Nature, under the Covert of that abfurd Doctrine of
the Lutherans, concerning the Ubiquity of it. They
-are Opinions well match'd, and we fhall entertain
both of 'em, when we have renounc'd owrReafon as
well as our Bibles.
And if he like their Company, we fhall not envy
him the Honour of ranking himfelf with thofe two
Patriarchs of 'Alexandria and Rome, Eulogius and Grego-
ry, if they cou'd no better confute the Agnoette than his
Citations from them wou'd argue they did : But
* fince he directs us not where to find 'em, I fhall
not be at the needlefs Pains of fecking 'em to no
purpofc.
But for the three later Authorities he quotes,
Mr. Baxter's is nothing to his purpofe, as werecafy
to mew if it were to our prefent purpofe. What
he cites from the Author of the Future State, Lim-
borch, and from Dr. Goodwin, does not afcribe to
Chrifl's Human Soul fo Univerfal a Knowledge as he
does, and particularly not the Knowledge of Mens
Hearts, about which the Difpute chiefly lies. And
thofe Authors never perverted their dubious Specu-
lations about the Extent of the Kno wledge of Cnrift's
Human Underftanding, to rob him of the Glory of
his Divine ; to which alone, as I have mewn, that
glorious Character can belong, of fear chingthe Heart
and the Reins.
Having thus prov'd the Omnifcience of our Bleffed
Saviour, I proceed
II. To examine What the Author has alledgd to
ferfuade us that our Lord Jefus does difclaim this Per-
fection.
And for that he has but one Text to lay in the
Ballance againft all the Paflages I have already men-,
tion'd and vindicated ; and that is from Mark 13.
32. Of that Day knows no Man, no not the Angels in
Heaven, nor the Son, but the Father. And to this
Text the Author flily but difingenuoufly adds, The
Father
True^Deity of our B/effed Saviour. 93
Father only, when there is no fuch limiting Claufe
in the Text it felf, but only at Matth. 24. 36. Now
from this 'Text the Author thus argues, " Here the
iC Son profefjes his Knowledge to be limited, and infe-
u rior to the Father's, i. e. The Son of the Fat her , or
w Son of God ; the Son as above Angels in Know-
" ledge, the Son in the mofi eminent Senfe. Now how
<c is it poffible, the Son fhoiCd be God infinite, and yet
<c have but a finite Under jlanding ? 6cc.
Anfw. The Author is very unhappy in his arguing
from feveral Texts, without ever confulting the Con-
text, (as has already appear'd in feveral Inftances) and
he is fo in this. For if he pleafe to look into it, he
will find, that our Saviour does there defcribe him-
felf in his final Appearance, (when he jhall come in
the Clouds with great Power and Glory, and jhall fend
his Angels to gather his Elect from the four Winds, from
the uttermofi part of the Earth, to- the uttermoft part of
Heaven) not as the Son of God, but as the Son of
Man, at v. z6. And therefore we have all poffible
reafon to underftand him here fpeaking of himfelf at
v. 32. under the fame Character and Confideration.
And even under that Character he may well enough
fpeak of his Knowledge (in the Divine Counfels to-
wards Mankind) as fuperior to that of Angels, and
fpeak of God as his Father, without fpeaking of
himfelf as the Son in the moft eminent Senfe.
Our Author being aware of this, exclaims againft
this Anfwer, as a meer Subterfuge, and Popular E-
vafton, which he intends to lay open the Canity of.
And to that purpofe he offers feveral Remarks.
Before he enters on thofe Remarks, he demands,
a Wloat Intimation of any fuch Diftincliun of two Na-
u tures, we can point him to in thefe Difcourfes of
" Chrifi ?
Anfw. I have already {hewn him, That in the Paf-
fage he alledges againit- the Omnipotence otChrift, he
does diftinguifh between his being the Son of God,
and the Son of Man. That the Paflage he alledges
againit his abfolute Goodnefs is not to the purpofe.
And
94 A V m mCAT tow of the
And fctf this alledg'd againft his Otnnifcience, the
Context clearly limits the Senfe of it. And fince the
Diftinction of his two Natures is elfewhere clearly
afTerted, (See John i. 14. Rom. 9. f. 1 Tim.-$. 16.
and feveral other Places) there is no need it fhould
be repeated on every Occallon.
I come therefore to conlider his Remarks. And,
I. He objects, " That our Blejfed Lord Jefus, if
himfelf was the -Supreme God in any Nature of his
own, cou'd not have [aid fuch things in any conjiften-
cy with Truth and Sincerity. He cou'd not fay, He
did not know the Thing he did know. For tho y we
jhoud fuppofe that he confifted of two infinitely di-
fiincJ Natures, and fo had two Capacities of Know-
ledge ; yet ft nee himfelf includes both, it follows, that
the denying a Thing of himfelf in abfolute Terms,
without any Limitation in the Words, or obvious Cir-
cumflances, does plainly imply a Denial of its belong'
ing to any part of its P erf on, or to any Nature in it.
For tho J I may affirm a thing of a Man that belongs
only to a part of him, yet I cannot juftly deny a thing
of him which belongs to one part, becaufe it belongs not
to another. As I cannot fay, A Man is not wound-
ed, becaufe thd* one Arm be Jhot or wounded, the
other is whole.
Anfw. I might here juftly fuggeft to our Author,
how unreafonable it is to meafure all our Lord's Ex-
preflions, concerning himfelf, by what may or may
not be faid of a meer Man : For that is to beg the
Queftion, and take it for granted, That there is no
fuch Union of two infinitely diftincl: Natures in him,
as we judge to be clearly reveaPd in the Scriptures.
And the Author has faid nothing to refute Argu-
ments we draw for it from fuch ParTa^es as thofe fore-
mention'd, Jrh. 1. 14. Rom. 0. f . 1 Tim.^. 16. Col.
i. 9. where he is ftiled, The Word made Fleflo, the
Seed of the Fathers according to the Fleflo, arid yet God
blefjed for evermore, God manifefted in the Flejh, One
in whom the Fulnefs of the Godhead dwells bodily. But
to convince our Author tint he is miftaken in his
Suppofition, That nothing can be denfd of a Perfott
that
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 95*
that belongs to any part of him, I mall give him a pa-
rallel Inftance, relating to our -Bleffed Lord, in which
he denies fomething of hhnfelf, without any exprefs
Limitation, which yet belongs to him, in refpecl: of
one of his Natures. Thus our Bleffed Saviour, fpeak-
ing of his approaching Afceniion, at John 17. 11.
faith, And now I am no more in the World, and / come
to thee, Sec. And again at Matth. z<5. 1 if'. Te have
the Poor always with you, but Me ye have not always.
Here our Lord, without any exprefs Limitation, af-
ferts, That he mou'd upon his Afcenfion be no more
in the World, and they Jhoiid not have him with them
always. But this is only true with refpecl: to his Hu~
man Nature, and Bodily Prefence, and by no means true
in refpecl: of his Divine Nature, and the Spiritual £-
nergy and Prefence of that : For our Lord elfewhere
tells his Difciples, ho, I am with you to the End of
the World, Mat. 2.8. 10. Nay he has promis'd, that
where two or three are gathered together in his Name y
he will be in the mid ft of ^em, Mat. 18. 2.0. Nay he
has alTur'd every particular Chriitian, that the Father
and He will come and make their Abode with him, John
14. 2,3. So that our Author might upon his Suppofi-
on, as reafonably charge our Bleffed Lord with Infin-
cerity, in denying without Limitation, his being in
the World, and with his Difciples, when in refpecl of
one of his Natures he fhou'd be fill in the World and
with them, as he charges him with Infincerity here,
on Supposition he had a Divine Nature in which he
knew the Day of Judgment .
If the Author pretend, that in the PafTages I al-
ledge, tho' there be no Limitations in the Words,
yet there is in the obvious Circumitances, which
confine our Lord's Meaning to his Bodily Prefence as
Man, I grant it. And I have the fame to alledge
here > for the Context here does more exprefly limit
his Words to his Human Nature, by giving him that
Appellation of the Son of Man that belongs only to
his Human Nature, and cannot fo refer to any f?\e~
exiftent Nature that belong'd to him. So that the
Words, as the Context leads us to expound 'em, are
the
$6 ^Vindication of the
the fame as if they had run. Of that Day and Hour
knoweth no Man, No not the Angels, which are in
Heaven, Nor the Son of Man (himfelf, that mail then
fo glorioufly appear) but the Father. And if the
Author ihou'd here demand, How comes the Son of
Man (if the words be limited to him) to be put be-
fore the Angels, as fuperior to them in Knowledge ?
I anfwer, Very j unify > becaufe, as the Son of Man,
he had the Spirit without meafure, and did tranfcend
the Angels in \he Knowledge of the Counfels and
Will of God relating to the Salvation of the Sons
of Men. He was in that Nature the principal Mef-
fenger of the Father, to reveal his Mind to us, not
only above all other Prophets, but above Angels too,
who never brought lb clear and full a Declaration of
the Divine Will as he has done. It appears there-
fore that our Lord does not deny without any Limi-
tation, That he knew not, what he knew in another
Nature : For the Context fufficiently limits his denial
to his Humane Nature.
u But our Author parallels the Cafe with that of a
<c Man who having two Eyes, flints one, and keeps the
<c other open, and then denies, without Limitation, that
" he faw fuch a one with whom he conversed, mean-
w ing, 'that he faw him not with the Eye that was
u fhut, tho J he faw him with the Eye that was open.
<c And as fuch a One wou y d be taken for a Liar or De-
* c ceiver, fo he thinks we vertually fix this Imputation
" on our Bleffed Lord, by fuppofing, that having two
" knowing Capacities, he denies his knowing that abfo-
cc lutely and indefinitely, which he does know according
u to one of thefe Capacities.
Anfw. One would think, that the Author fijut both
his Eyes in drawing this Parallel: For his Argument
proceeds upon a falfe Suppofition, both in Anatomy,
and Philofophy, and Divinity.
He goes upon a falfc Suppofition in Anatomy and
Philofophy, That a Man has two Vifive Powers
(.infwerable to the two knowing Capacities, which we
iuppofe in the Son of God, and the Son of Man) be-
caufe he has two Eyes. But this -all Anatomifis will
tell
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 97
tell him is a palpable miftake: For there is one com-
mon Senfory, where all the Nerves meet 5 and be-
fides this, the Optick Nerves have a peculiar meet-
ing-place, long before they come at this common
Centre. And therefore we underftand from found
Philofophy, that tho' there be variety of Organs fubfer-
vient to Senfation,yet there is but one common Senfory
or difcerning Principle. It is not the Eye or Nerve
fees, but the Senfitive Soul that refides where all thefe
Organs meet : And fince that fees whether one Eye
or both be open, it were a down-right Falfhood to
fay, I faw not a Man, becaufe I only faw him with
one Eye. But the Cafe is quite different where there
are two knowing Principles belonging to two diffe-
rent Natures or Minds, the one Finite, the other
Infinite. So that the Author's Simile is lame of
one Foot, or (to fpeak in his own Strain) winks
with one Eye ; for the Foundation of his Parallel
fails.
But he goes on as falfe a Suppofition in Divinity,
viz. That our Lord abfolutely and indefinitely denies
his knowing the Day of Judgment. But this I deny,
and till he tear the 16th ver. out of the Chapter, the
Context will, againft all the Subtlety he can ufe, li-
mit our Lord's Denial to one of his Knowing Capa-
cities only, viz. To that which belong'd to him as
the Son of Man.
But the Author argues, " That if Chrift had aT>\-
" vine Nature and Knowledge, no doubt his Difci-
fc pies (who, if any Body, mufi be fuppofed to believe it)
" direcled the Queftion to that, rather than te the in -
" p&feft Humane Capacity. And yet in Anfwcr to it,
" he fays, He knew not that Day, 6cc.
Anpw. What he faith, No Doubt of, I pofitively
deny, That on Suppofition the Difciples believ'd the
Divine Nature and Knowledge of Chrift, they di-
recled their Queftion to that, rather than to his imper-
fect Humane Capacity. For they knew, that Chrift
was in our Nature the Fathers MefTenger and Pro-
phet, and as fuch cou'd declare no move to 'em,
than what was revealed to his Humane Underftand-
H in?,
98 / Vindication^/^
ing, and what he had InftrucSHons from the Fa-
ther to make known to 'em : And therefore ne-
ver expected to learn from him, all that the Eternal
Word knew, but only all that it pleafed to impart to
his Humane Under ft anding for their Inftruction and
Edification. They addrefs'd their Enquiry to him
as the Son of Man, and as a Prophet and Teacher fent
from God, and expe&ed to learn no more from him,
than what he cou'd in that Capacity inform 'em of.
And accordingly, our Lord, inanfwer to their Qite-
ftion, tells 'em, and that fincerely, he knew it not.
And does it argue any Infincerity in the Man Chrift
Jefus, to deny his Knowledge of it, becaufe that
Eternal Word that was united to the Humane Na-
ture (but yet was a Being entirely diftinct from it,
and cou'd communicate more or lefs of Light and
Knowledge to the Humane Underftanding, at its own
free Pleafure) knew it ? There is no Shadow of Guile
or Infincerity in it.
But the Author is pleas'd further to parallel this
Cafe with that of a Popijh Prieft, u Who being exa-
" min'd about what he has known by Confeffion, jfhi t h
" he knows it not, and vindicates ^himfelf by faying,
<c That the Prieft in Confeffion knows matters only
" as God, and not as Man, therefore he may deny that
cc he knew y em, meaning as Man. This, the Author
" tells us, Dr. Stillingfleet cenfures as abfurd, Be-
"^eaufeto fayhe does not know, is as much as to fay,
" he does not any way know. Now faith the Au-
cc thor, If this be a good Anfwer againft the Papifts,
cc as no doubt it is, Then fare "'tis fo in the prefent Cafe.
u Therefore when Chrift fays, he knows not the Day of
cc Judgment; 'Tis as much as to fay, He does not a-
" ny way know it. And confequently 'tis a vain Shift
" to fay, It was as Man only. We mufi beware, leaft
" we bring the Holy Jefus under fuch Reproach for E-
auivocaiion, as the Romijh Priefts lye under, and
make the Jefuits themfelves think they have a good
Title to that Name, by imitating herein his own Ex-
ample, which in this very Inftance they alledge with
fo great Advantage, according to this Interpretation.
Anfw.
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 99
Anfw. The Author is very unhappy in the choice
of his Parallels. For can any thing be more unrea-
sonable and abfurd than to parallel a Rmiiflj Pricft
that has but One Underftanding or Knowing Capaci-
ty, with our Blejfed Saviour, in whom we fuppofe
two infinitely diftincl Natures, and two fo diitincl:
Understandings, the one finite, the other infinite ? Now
I have fhewn him the Cafe is plainly thus, The Di-
fciples enquire of the Son of Man, as the great Pro-
phet fent by the Father, concerning the Day of
Judgment. (And I have already fhewn him, That
tho' we fuppofe 'cm to believe the Union of his
Humane Nature to the Eternal Word, they had no
reafon to addrefs their Enquiry to him under that
higher Character.) He, the Son of Man, and that
moffc truly, tells 'em, he knew it not. For the Alan
Chrift Jefks, to whom alone they addrels'd their En-
quiry, no way knew it himfelf, and much lefs had it
in his Inftruftions to reveal to them. And what tho'
the Eternal JVord, which had afllimed the Humane
Nature, knew it? Is it any Equivocation for the Son
of Man to deny his Knowledge of it, when he reallv
never had that Knowledge imparted to him? Is
there any thing in this Cafe parallel to the Priefi's
denying his Knowledge of what he does really know ?
and folving it by ridiculoufly pretending, 'That in
Gonfeffton he knows matters only as God? when he has
but one Nature, and one Under ft anding, and is no
more truly God, than the Author believes our Blef-
fed Saviour himfelf to be. And therefore for the Au-
thor upon fo groundlefs an Occafion to tell us, That
our Interpretation enables the Jefuits to alledge our
Saviour 's Example to countenance their vile Pratlice of
Equivocation with great Advantage, argues fo great a
defect both of true Judgment, and of that Humility
that becomes any Man that oppofes the common
"Faith of Chriftians, nay fo great Irreverence to our
Blejfed Saviour himfelf, that I cannot let it pafs with-
out exprcfling fome juft diflike of it : And hope the
Author will upon fecond Thoughts with lO'indcce.t--
H a, a
ioo 'A Vindication of the
a Pafiage had never flip'd from his Pen in fo ferious
and weighty a Debate.
I proceed to his
id Remark. " As a farther Evidence, (faith he)
€i 'That Jefus Chrijl intended no fuch Difiinclion of two
M Natures as is pretended, ^Tis U be obferv'd, That he
** puts not the Difiinclion between the Son of Man and
w the Eternal Word (as fome fpeak) but between the
w Son and his Father. Not the Son knows, but only
<c the Father, Mark 13. 32. (a) By which '/ is plain,
" He had no thought of including any Perfon or Nature
u of his own among the Excepted. For whatever was
" not the Father, he fays, was ignorant of that Day.
" Now y tis certain, that in no Nature was the Son the
cc Father, and consequently where none but the Father
** knows, None who is not the Father can be intended.
" And fince our Lord was making an Exception in the
u Cafe, he wou'd not have forgot to except the Eternal
u Word too, if there had been fuch a Divine Princi-
u pie in himfelf, equal to the Father and difiincl from
u him. For "'tis a known Rule that an Exception from
cc a general Ajfertion confirms it to other Inflames not
" Excepted.
Anfw. The Father is here confider'd as the Dif-
penfer of all Divine Revelations : And tinder that
Notion he is opposed, Not to the Eternal Word and
Holy Spirit that are One in Effence and Understand-
ing with himfelf, But to thofe whom the Father
employs as his MefTengers to reveal his Will to Men.
And fo the Father is here oppos'd, Not only to all
Prophets (by whom God /pake at fundry times, and in
diver fe manners to the Fathers, Heb. 1 . 1 .) but to the
Angels, nay to the Son of Man himfelf the greatefl
of Prophets, and the moft Eminent Meffenger he e-
ver fent. But our Author pretends, " That our Lord
** fays,, Whatever was not the Father was ignorant
" of that Day. Now he argues, That in no Nature,
" was the Son the Father.
(a) Here again he cites the Text wrong, for 'tis, Not the Son, but
the Ftiir <r.
Anfw,
True Tteity of our Blejfed Saviour. 101
Anfw. Our Saviour faith no fuch thing, as That
whatever was not the Father, was ignorant of that Day :
Unlefs the Author means by Wloatever was not the
Father, the fame as, Whatever was a Being in Na-
ture and Effence dijlincl from the Father. And then
I deny, That the Son of God is in no Nature, the
fame Being in refpecr. of his Effence with the Fa-
ther. So that all the Author's Argument turns up-
on this, That that Phrafe the Father only, at Matth.
24. 36. muft of Neceflity exclude, not only all
whom God employs as his Mejfengers to Men (which
we freely grant) but even the Eternal Word and Ho-
ly Spirit (tho' the fame in Nature and EfTence with
himfelf.) But this I deny, and mall mew him in an
Inftance or two the Abfurdity of. I might urge ad
hominem all thofe Paflages where the Unitarians will
not allow the word Only, to exclude all others ex-
cept the Subject to which itisapply'd. Thus when
Solomon faith of God, I'hou, even thou only, knowejl the
Hearts of the Children of Men ; our Author himfelf
prefumes to except our Blejfed Saviour, tho' accord-
ing to his Opinion only a digniffd Creature. So
when our Saviour faith, 'thou fhalt worfhip the Lerd
thy God, and him only fhalt thou ferve, Matth. 4. 10,
the Author, I prefume, will freely own, that only
there does not exclude our Blejfed Saviour, nor dis-
charge us from our Obligation to ferve him, tho'
he be not in his Opinion the God there fpokenof.But
I mail chufe rather fuch lnftances as, are more un-
exceptionable. Thus, our Saviour faith, at Matth.
1 1. 2,7. None knows the Son but the Father : (For fo
»^«f ihou'd be render'd.) But wou'd any wile Man
from thence argue, That none that is not the Father
knows the Son, and therefore, the Son (who is in no
nature $he Father) does not know himfelf. So at John
6. ver. 46. we read, Not that any one c\j% on rh bath
feen the Father, fave he that is of God, he hath feen
the Father. But will any Man thence conclude,
That the Father hath not feen (or what is the fame^
has not known) himfelf?
H $ . To
ioz A Vindication ef the
To this the Author teems to reply, in what he adds
under this Head,
" Will they fay, 'that by the Father is meant all
cc three Perfons here, viz. Father, Son, and Holy
" Ghoft ? What, can the Father, as opposed to the Son,
" be put for the Father and the Son? What woful
" work will this make with Scripture, to fuppofe that
" what are oppofed to each other, do include each other,
" under the very Characters by which they are oppofed.
" As well may they fay, That in the Baptifmal Form$
" by the Father is meant Father, Son and Spirit, the*
" he be iiflinguijVd from the other two. Andljhou'd
" defpair of ever underfianding the Scriptures, above all
" Books that were ever written, at this rate of Inter-
u pretation. No doubt therefore but the Father as op-
u pos'd to the Son, excludes all that is the Son, and
c * then there cou'd be no Son of God, that knew of
cc that Day, which only the Father knew of, and
<c confequently, No Son that is equal to God the Fa-
" thcr.
Anfw. All this confident Reafoning is built on this
Miftake that runs thro' the whole, That the Fa-
ther is oppos'd to the Son on whatever account that
Title is given to him. But I have ihewn him the
Context leads us plainly to expound it of the Son of
Man. And if we fo expound it, all his Argument
is over-turn'd and loft. We underftand by the Fa-
ther the Firft of the Sacred Three, the Difpenfer of
all Divine Revelations, and not as he pretends, the
Father, Word, and Holy Spirit. But wefuppoie the
Father here oppos'd, not to the Eternal Word and
Holy Spirit, that are One in EfTence and Knowledge
with himfelf. Not to the Holy Spirit, for he is elfe-
where faid to fearch the deep things of God, and to know
'em, as the Spirit of a Man does thofe of a Man, i Cor.
Z. 10, ii. Not to the Eternal Word, for' he faith
elfewhere, All things that the Father has are mine,
Therefore faid I, he fhall take of mine, and fhall jloew
it unto you, John\6. if. The Father is therefore on-
Jy oppofed to all whom he imploys as \\vsMeffengers r
io Prophets, to Angels, to the Son of Man himfelf..
And
True 'Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. J03
And now, let the Author apply this to his Argu-
ment. No doubt the Father as oppofed to the Son,
(i. e. to the Son of Man, as the Context expounds it)
excludes all that is the Son (i. e. all that is the Son of
Man.) But if he infer, Then there could beno Son
of Go^ that knew of that Day, which the Father
(as oppofed to Prophet 's, Angels, and the Son of
Man) knew ofj Where is the Confequence ? Or
whence arifes the mighty Difficulty of underitanding
this PafTage according to our Interpretation, unlets
it be from his own violent Inclination to pervert it ?
I come to his
3d Remark. " 'That Interpretation muft needs be
" unjuft, which if admitted, \will make all, even the
* c moft plain Speech uncertain, and utterly injignificant :
u As this Interpretation of thrift's Words wou'd do.
" For I ask the Patrons of this Opinion, In what Words
" Jefus Chrift cou'd in brief have denied himfelf to be
u God moft High, if he had a mind to it, more plain and
u full than the fe, in which he faith, He knew not all
" things as the Father did, nor cou'd do all things,
" &c. So I would fain have 'em ftjew me, What
" Words of that nature he could have ufed, which
u the fame way of Interpretation, as they here ufe, will
" not evade and make injignificant ? For had he faid
u and fwom in plain Words thus, viz. I tell you, I
" am not the Supreme God, and none but my Fa-
" thor has that Glory, they wou'd upon the fame Rea-
a fon have faid, this was to be underftood as Man on-
" ly-i &c. So that I may fafely fay thus much, That
" the Blejfed Jefus has declar d himfelf, not to be the
" Supreme God, or Equal to the Father, as plainly as
" Words could fpeak, or in brief exprefs. And that
" this Declaration made by him already is not to be e-
" vaded, any other way, than what will make it im-
u pojfible his Mind ftjou'd be declafd by any Words he
u could have defignedly ufed in the matter. Let any
u one try this, if it do not hold true. And fun it muft
" be an abfurd way of Interpretation, which leaves a
u Man no Opportunity or Power of Spe&king his Mind
" plainly, fo as to be underftood.
H 4 Anfw.
io4 ^Vindication of the
Anpw. I hare recited this Remark at large, not
fo much for any Strength of Argument it contains,
as to take this Occafion to remind the Author that
more Humility would become him. For I do not
altogether defpair to make him fenfible that his
Confidence in this Paragragh is exceflive, and beyond
all due Meafure of Sobriety and Modefty.
^o this Purpofe I muft remind him that I have
already fhewn, that our Bkjfed Saviour does not dif-
claim the Power of doing all things, but on the con-
trary aflerts it, when he faith, That whatever things
the Father does he does the fame likewife. And that
he does not difclaim his abfolute Goodnefs at all. And
for this Paflage that refers to his Omnifcience, I have
fhewn him from the Context it amounts to no more
than this, That the Son of Man knew not of the Day
of Judgment. And now our Author asks the Pa-
trons of this Opinion concerning the Deity of
Chritl, " In what JVords Jefus Chrifi could have de-
" nfd himfelf to be the mefi High God, if he had a
" Mind to do it, more plain and full than thefe, and
" not to be evaded the fame Way ?
Anfw. He might have done it moft eafily, had
he faid, / am in no Senfe whatever the Supreme God.
I came of the Father according to the Flejh, and am
only a Creature, and no way God over all, bleffed for
evermore. I never created all things, nor have the
Power in any Nature that belongs to me, of giving
Being to the leaft Grain of Sand or Spire of Grafs,
much lefs to all things vijible and invifible, See. God
indeed fear does the Hearts and the Reins, but I can
no Way do it, and know 'em only by Revelation
from him, or by probable Conjetlure. God may in-
deed difplay his Perfections in my human Nature,
but I am not my felf God manifefted in the Fkfh\
nor does any of thofe divine Perfections belong to
me, much lefs does the Fulnefs of the Godhead dwell
bodily in me. I am only the Word as the MefTenger
of God, but never was in the Beginning with God 9
much lefs was God, or made any of his Works, being
only a Man and a Creature like your felves. Since
True Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, xof
you mull worjhip and ferve God only, you muft by no
Means give Worfhip and Homage to me, to whom
no Refpect is to be paid but what muft be given to
a dignify'' 'd Creature, and infinitely differs from what
muft be given to fuch an infinite Being as God, to
whofe Excellency and Honour I never pretended : So
that you muft upon Peril of Idolatry beware of ho-
nouring me (even in my higheft Capacity) as ye ho-
nour the Father. All thofe Paffages of the Old Te-
ftament which fpeak concerning the God of Ifrael,
if any of my Difciples apply 'em to me, muft be
underftood by Way of meer Accommodation, and not
as implying me to be indeed that BleJJed Jehovah
there fpoken of. And now let the Author try his
Skill, how he will evade all thefe Declarations a-
gainft the true Deity of Chrilt the fame Way that
we evade this Text, that no Man knows of that Day,
or Hour, nor the Angels, nor the Son, but the Father ?
We affert, that the Context expounds our Lord's
Words concerning him as the Son of Man. But for
Chrift to fay, 'That the Son of Man knows not the
Day of Judgment, is no Denial at all of its being
known to the Eternal Word to whom the Human
Nature was united. But thefe Declarations I have
laid down are not to be fo evaded -, and yet the Au-
thor is the more concern'd to make good his Chal-
lenge, becaufe the Scriptures have aflerted the quite
contrary to the foregoing Declaration in the cleareft
and plaineft Expreflions ; fo that his Argument rather
turns upon himfelf, and he will find himfelf harder
put to it to fhew us, in what plainer Words the
Supreme Deity of Chrift could have been deliver'd
by the infpired Writers, than thofe I have now men-
tion'd.
But our Author has not done. I therefore pafs to
his
4th Remark : Cl 'This JVay of Interpretation, (faith
* c he) which they are necefjttated to for upholding their
" Caufe does plainly overthrow it, and may be turned
" again ji them/elves. For it may be [aid, according to
f c //, that Jeius is. not God, without adding any
f
more.
io6 A Vindication of the
" more. Nay, a Man may fay his Creed backward 5
cc and fince the Apoftles Creed takes notice of nothing
" to be believed concerning Chrift, but what belongs
<c to his Manhood, (which is very ftrange, if there
" were any Articles relating to his Divinity, which
" muft needs be mofl important) One may venture to
u deny 'em all with this fecret Referve, vix. Meaning
cc it of the Divine Nature. So one may fay, I believe
" not that Jefus Chrift was conceived of the Holy
« Ghoft, eye.
Anfw. The Reader muft be put in mind, that our
Author has proved nothing by juft Conftruftion,
but that the Son of Man denies his knowing the Day
of Judgment. But will it thence follow, that we
may fay, in Confiftency with our Opinion, that Je-
fus Chrift is not God? By no means: It will only fol-
low, that we may fafely fay the Son of Man is not
God. And under that Reftriction no Chriftian thinks
him to be fo. So on the other Hand, it will not
follow that we may fay, Jefus Chrift was net con-
ceived of the Holy Ghoft, nor born of the Virgin Mary,
nor fuffef 'd under Pontius Pilate, &c. But only that
we may fay, the Eternal JVord or the Divine Nature
Was not conceived of the Holy Ghoft, nor born of the
Virgin Mary, &c. and under that Reftriclion the
Aflertion would be true. So that this Objection is
not founded on our Way of interpreting the Texts
which the Author refers to, but on his own Mifre-
prefentation of it. But I muft, before I difmifc
this Remark, ask the Author, Wow he comes fo con-
fidently to aflert, " 'that the Apoftles Creed takes
u notice of nothing to be believed concerning Chrift,
u but what relates to bis Manhood? Does he think
the Compilers thought him no more than a Man,
when they fay, / believe in Jefus Chrift^ his only Son
our Lord ? Has he anfwer'd either Dr. Barrow or
Dr. Pierfon on the Creed, who undertake to prove,
that the Scriptures give him that Title and Chara-
cter on the Account of his Divine Nature? and
v/ho have ihewn, that his being call'd the Son of
God on other Accounts is common to him with o-
thers ?
True *Detty of our Blejfed Saviour, 107
thers ? And that fo far as 'tis appropriated to him,
(by his being called his only, or only-begotten Son) it
does as truly import his Participation of the Divine
Nature, as his being call'd the Son of Man imports
his Participation of the Humane ? Or can he produce
any of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, that understood that
Title to be the Defcription of no more than a Dig-
nify 1 d Creature? Or has he anfwer'd what Dr. Whit-
by has produe'd to the contrary out of thofe Fa-
thers (a). ? Till he do this, one would think it would
become him better to be a little more modeft and
wary in his Affertions. His laft and
f th Remark is, " It weighs fome thing with me in
Oppofition to this IVay of Interpretation, that the E-
vangelifts never take Occafion {when they had fo
many) to fubjoin any Caution againft taking Chrijfs
Words in their obvious Senfe, when he faith, He
did not know the Hour, &c. If our Lord had
no Mind to reveal his Divinity, (tho y I fee not why
he fhould deny it thus) yet fure the Apoftles, who
wrote fo many Years after, and whom it concerned
to reveal all important Truths moft clearly, would
not have failed to fet the Reader right, by removing
fuch obvious Obj eel ions as thefe are againft the Su-
preme Deity of Chrift 3 and faying, that he fpakc
this only of his Manhood, That he knew not all things^
Sec.
Anfw. I have fhewn him, that our Lord himfelf
has in the Pafiage he fo much infills on, fav'd his
Apoftles the Labour of adding fuch a Caution, by
giving us the Caution himfelf. He has there in the
Context defcrib'd himfelf as the Son of Man that
fhall come in the Clouds with great Glory, and faid of
himfelf under that Character, That he knew not the
Day and Hour of that his glorious Appearance, but
the Father, who has the Times and Seafons (of thofe
glorious Events) in his own Power, A&s 1. 7. And
the
(a) See Dr. Whkbfs Tralitinj de Deitctte Chrijli, p, 5-9, 60, 61.
6x, &c.
ro8 ^Vindication^/ the
the like Caution, I have fhewn him, our Lord has
given againft mifunderftanding thofe Paflages, which
he makes ufe of againft his Omnipotence ', John f. ip,
27, 50. So that what the Author fuggefts is moft
untrue, that our Lord in the Paflages he has alledg-
ed, denies his Divinity. And had the Author care-
fully examiifd the Context in both Places, he might
have found his own Objeclions obviated. But he
feems to have been more intent on finding Obje-
ctions againit the Deity of Chriit, than Anfwers to
'em, when he overlooks thofe that were fo near at
Hand, and cou'd fcarce efcape an inquifitive and
humble Reader.
Upon the whole, I hope every judicious Chriftian
will fee, that thefe Objections againft our Interpreta-
tion of the fore-cited Paflages (tho' deliver'd in fo
magifterial a Strain, and in fo infulting a Way) have
much more of Noife and Shew than of any Solidity
or Strength in 'em.
Having finiftYd this Argument for the Deity of
Chrijl, drawn from the Divine Perfeclions that arc
afcrib'd to him, and vindicated it from what the
Author alledges to perfwade us, that our Lord him-
felf difclaims 'cm 5 I now come to the
Hid, and laft Argument for the Deity of our
Bleffed Saviour, drawn from that Divine Worfjip
which the Scriptures require us to pay him.
As to this Head, the Author tells us, " He doubts
u not he could maintain bis Caufe with equal Advan-
ffi tage. And accordingly he fuggefts a few Argu-
ments to mew, " 'That there is no Inflance of fupreme
u Divine Worfhip given ultimately to him in Scripture j
" but on the contrary, all the Honour it affigns to him,
u is fuch as /peaks- him to be inferior to the Father, and
" dependent on him.
I fhall therefore, in Vindication of this Argu-
ment for the Deity of Chrijl from the Worfhip due
to him, Firft, briefly ftate the Notion of Divine
Worfoip. Secondly, Shew that the Scriptures require
us to pay fuch Divine Worfhip to our Bleffed Savi-
sur. Thirdly, Confider what Worfoip our Averfa-
ries,
True^Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 109
lies, and particularly the Author, feem to allow him :
And here I fhall both confider what he objects a-
gainit our giving Divine Worflnp to him j and ihew
alfo, how evidently that Wcrjlnp he allows him en-
trenches on the Divine Honour, upon the Suppoil-
tion of his being only a dignify d Creature.
Firfi, I fhall briefly flats the Notion of Divine
Worfjip.
Now fincc Worflnp in general imports the Refpeb~l
we pay to another on the Account of his Excellency
and Superiority, Divine WorfJjip muft import fuch
Refpecl as belongs to a Being of fuch infinite Excel-
lencies and Supreme Authority as the Bkffed God alone
is pofTefl of.
And fuch Worfhip is either Internal, confirming in
thofe Ads of our Mind (fuch as Efteem, Reverence,
Love, Truft, Subjection, Self-Dedication) whereby
we acknowledge fuch Infinite Excellencies, and Su-
preme Authority to belong to the Being we adore $
or External, and this is partly exprefs'd by our
Words, in our Prayers, Praifes, &c. partly by our
Gejlures, as Kneeling, Standing, Bowing, ProJlration,fkc.
Now fuch Worflnp, whether Internal or Exter-
nal, as does in the Nature of the Acts themfelves,
or by reafonable Construction, imply the Being we
offer it to, to be poflefs'd of the Perfections and
Authority peculiar to the Blejjed God, is Divine
Worfhip.
I come therefore,
Secondly, To mew, "That the Holy Scriptures re-
quire us to pay fuch Divine Worflnp to our Blefjed
Saviour.
To make good this Aflertion, I mall briefly fet
before the Reader thole Paflages that require us to
pay Divine Worfhip in general to our Bleffed Lord,
or to offer to him this or that particular Branch of it.
For Divine Worflnp in general, all do agree that
the Honour due to the Father is Divine Worflnp.
But this Honour the Son of God challenges as due
to him, at John r. 25. What the Author objects
againit. this I fhall confider in its due place.
Again,
no /Vindication^/^
Again, Divine IVorJhip is in general expreis'd
throughout the Scripture by our Calling on the
Name of the Lord. Now we are not only ex-
prefly requir'd to pay this Homage to our Blejfed
Saviour^ but it's made the Condition of our Salva-
tion by him. To clear this we need only carefully
compare Joel z. $2. with Rom. 10. 11, 12, 12, &c.
The Prophet Joel fpeaking of the times of the Mef-
Jiah concludes his Prediction with that gracious Pro-
ixufe, And it Jhall come to pafs that whofoever Jhall
call on the Name of the Lord Jhall be faved. Now
the Apoille Paul urging the Jews to believe on and
confefs theLordJefus in order to Salvation, cites two
Pa(Iages to enforce his Exhortation ; the one from
I fa. 28. 11. JVhofoever believes on him fl) all not be a-
jhamed -, the other from Jeel 2. 32. That whoevet
Jhall call on the Name of the Lord fo all be fav'd. And
that none of what Nation foever might think them-
felves excluded from this gracious Promife, he pre-
mifes this encouraging Confideration, 'That there is
now no Difference between Jew and Greek, but the
fame Lord over all is rich to all that call upon him,
ver. 1 2. Now that 'tis the Lord Jefus whom he here
exhorts us to believe in and call upon in order to Sal-
vation, is evident not only from the whole Scope
of the Chapter and Context, but particularly from
the 14th Verfe, How then Jhall they call on him on
whom they have not believed? And how Jlo all they be-
lieve in him of whom they have not heard ? And how
Jhall they hear without a Preacher? See. In whom
they were to believe as Preach' 'd to 'em, on him they
were to call. But they were to believe in our Blejfed
Saviour : He therefore is the Lord over all that is rich
to all that call on him. And of him the Prophet Joel
fpake when he faid, IFho foever Jhall call on the Name
of the Lord Jhall be fav'd. But all grant that Joel
fpake of the true God, and of that truly Divine Wor-
Jbip which is his incommunicable Glory. ThatD/-
•oine Worfhip therefore mult be given to our Blejfed
Saviour by fuch as expect Salvation from him.
And
True ^Deity of our Bkffed Saviour. in
And thus to ivorjhip our BkJJ'ed Saviour by Religious
Invocation is fo neceflary and important a Duty, that
'tis made by the Apoftle Paul the eflential Character
and Mark of a true Chriftian. He durecls his Epi-
ftlc at i Cor. i.i. To the Church that is #LCmntb 9
To them that are fan&ified in Chrift Jefus, call'd to
be Saints, with all that in every place call upon the
Name of Jefus Chrift our Lord, both theirs and ours.
And to the fame purpofe, 'tis obfervable, that the
FrofefTors of Chrift ianity were known by this De-
fcription of 'em, they were fuch as calVd on the Name
of our Lord Jefus, Acls p. 14, 11. I know indeed
fome late Unitarians have pretended, that thefe Ex-
preflions may be render'd, Such as are called by the
Name of the Lord. But this Criticifm is fo fully
confuted by Dr. JVhitby, both in his Engliih Com-
mentary on the Epiftles, and efpecially in his Latin
Treatife de Deitate Chrifti, p. 1 6, 1 7. by mewing
that the Phrafe is throughout both the Septuagint
and the New T'eftament taken aclively, and is varied
whenever any are faid to be calVd by the Name of a-
nother, that I prefumc we mall hear no more of it.
{a. ) And this one Paflage at Rom. 10. 11, 12, 13.
is fufficient to put the Meaning of the Phrafe paii
Difpute, efpecially if compar'd with Acls 7. j-q. and
with Acls if. 17.
And what I have faid concerning Divine Worfhip
in general, may be applied to the particular Acls
of it.
As to Acls of Internal IVorftrip. Are we obliged to
make the Father the Object of our Faith and Truft ?
So mufl we believe in our Lord Jefus, as well as Call
upon him, Rom 10. 14. And he himfelf requires ir,
Te believe in God, believe alfo in me, John 14. 1 . Arc
we required to Love God above all ? So mull we love
our Lord Jefus more than Father or Mother, Brother
(a) The Reader that ur.derftands the Greek Tongue may conililt
the Septuagint in the following Places : t Kings 8. 43. If. 4. jt . if. 68. 19.
yer, 14. 19. Jer. if. 16.. Dm.$. 18, ig. Sec,
or
hi A Vindication*?/*^
or Sijler, Houfe or Lands, yea, than Life it felf,
Matth. 10. 37. Luke 14. 26. So that */ any Man
love him not, let him (faith the Apoftle Paul) be Ana-
thema Maranatha, 1 Cor. 16. 22. Are we requir'd
to fubjecfc our Wills to the Authority of God ? So
muft we be the Servants of Chrift, we muft take his
Yoke on us, and do his WiJl, Matth. 11. 29. Col. 5.
24. Are we to live to God, as our ultimate End ?
So muft we live not to our felves, but to him that
died for us, and rofe again, 2 Cor. f . 1 y. The Ad-
vancement of his Glory and Intereft muft be our
principal Aim and Defign. Are we to dedicate our
ielvcs by folemn Covenant to the Faith and Worfhip
of the Father ? So muft we to that of the Son and
the Holy Spirit, Matth. 28. 1 p. (Of which more af-
terwards). And fure we cannot conceive any more
efTential and important Acls of Divine JVorfoip than
thefe.
And for External TForfloip, we may obferve, That
the feveral Branches of it arc due to our Blejfed Sa-
viour.
One eminent Branch of it is Praife nxAThankf giv-
ing. And fure I need not tell any true Chriftian that this
part of Divine Homage muft be paid to our Blejfed Sa-
viour. How frequently do fuch Doxologies occur in
the New Teftament ? To him (faith the Apoftle Pe-
ter, fpeaking of our Lord Jefus, 1 Pet. 5. II.) be Glo-
ry both now and for ever, Amen. So 1 Pet. 4. 1 1 .
To whom be Praife and Dominion for ever. So Rev. 1 .
f, 6. To him that has loved us, andwajh'd us from our
Sins in his own Blood, and made us Kings and Priefts
to God and his Father, to him be Glory and Dominion
for ever. And 'tis manifeft that thefe Doxologies are
parallel to thofe that are elfewhere offered to the Fa-
ther. See 1 Pet. j*. 10, 11. 1 Tim. 1. 17. and 6. 16.
So that if thefe very Doxologies aremanifeftlyy/^ of
Divine Worfhip, when ufed towards the Father, we
have no reafon to take 'em for any other, when of-
fer'd to our Bleffcd Saviour : Efpecially when we
find both of 'em join'd in the very fame Doxology,
and have the fame Blejfing, and Honour, and Glory,
and
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 113
and Power afcrib'd to 'em. And yet this all Creatures
whatever are oblig'd to afcribe to him that fits upon
the Throne, and to the Lamb for ever and ever,
Rev. f. i}- And again, all the Members of the
Church Triumphant, with concordant Heart and
Voice, afcribe Salvation to our God which fitteth upon
the throne, and to the Lamb, Rev. 7. 10. And that the
Lamb mult be there underflood of the Incarnate Son
of God, and not of a meer dignify' d Man, is evident,
becaufe he is exempted from the Rank of Creatures,
which are all requir'd to pay this Homage to him,
and that on the Account of his having in our Nature
beenjlain, and thereby redeeming us to God by his Blood,
from every Kindred, and tongue, and People, and Nation,
Now if fuch Doxologics as thefe, when ufed to our
Blejfed Saviour, be not Acls of Divine Worfioip 5 if
the fame Glory, and Praife, and Dominion, be not there-
by afcribed to him as to the Father, they rauft be u-
fed info vaflly different aSenfe, when apply'd to him,
from what is meant when they are apply'd to the Fa-
ther, that we cannot think it conflflent with the
Wifdom and Sincerity of an infpired Writer to uf»
them promifcuoufly towards both, without giving us
any Diflinc~bion in what a different Senfe they are in-
tended, when apply'd to the one, and to the other :
Nay, without giving us any Caution againft the Ido-
latry we are in danger of incurring, by addreffing our
felves to both in the fame Language, if we put not a
vaflly different Conftruction on the very fame Words,
when us'd in our Addreffes to the one or the other.
For there is fuch an infinite Difproportion between
the Blejfed God, and the moft dignify" d Creature, that
our religious Refpect to the one and the other can
never be fitly paid at the fame time, in the fame Lan~
guage, and the fame External Acts of Devotion. The
Jike Glory and Dominion can never be congruoufly a-
fcribed to both. Our Language to 'em ought to put
the utmoft Difference that Words can make between
the Eternal infinite Excellencies and fupreme Dominion
of the one, and the finite Excellencies, and meerly bor-
roiv'd Power of the other. But there is no ,fuch
H4 A Vindication of the
Diftin£Hon made, when we ufe the very fame Do-
xologies to our Blejfed Saviour as we ufe to the Fa-
ther.
Again, For Prayer, We are requir'd to addrefi
this branch of Divine Worflnp to our Lord Jefus.
This is particularly included in our Calling on his
Name. And we have feveral Inftances of the Pra-
ctice of Chriftians being conformable to this part of
their Character, That they were fuch as caltd upon
his Name. 'Tis the common Form of the Apoftoli-
cai Salutations to wifh Grace and Peace to thofe to
whom they write, From the Father, and from the Lord
Jefus Chrift {a). And fometimes they wifh the Grace
of our Lord Jefus Chrift may be with ''em (without a-
ny exprefs mention of the Father (b). It was to our
Lord Jefus that the Apoftle thrice pray'd, That the
Thorn in the Flejh might depart from him, as appears
by the Anfwer given him, 2 Cor. 12. 8, o. Nor
ought we to forget the Prayer of dying Stephen, the
firft Martyr for the Chriftian Caufe, whole dying
Requeft to our Bkfjed Lord bears a noble Teftimony
to this Truth, That this part of Divine Worfhip is
due to him. Lord Jefus receive my Spirit, and Lord
lay not this Sin to their Charge, Acts 7. fp, 60. ' In
which two Petitions he has manifeftly expreft his
Faiih in our Lord Jefus, as both able to forgive the
Sin of his Enemies, and to reward and crown his
own perfevering Fidelity. Nay what greater Tefti-
mony can we have to this, than the Petition addreft
to our Lord by his whole Church, with which the
Sacred Canon is concluded, Rev. 27. 17, 20, 11. I
'{hall only add, That fometimes we find the Father
and our Lord Jefus join'd in the fame particular Pe-
tition offer d to 'emj as 1 Theff. 2. n, 12. 2 Thejf.
z. 16, 17. Sometimes the ApofHes begs fuch Blef-
fings from our Saviour alone, zTheff. 2. 16, 18. Gal.
6. 11. Phil. p. 23.
(*) Rom. 1. 7. 1 Cor. r. 5.
ij>) Rom. \6. 14. 1 Cor. 16. 23, ©v.
And
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 115
And as our Praifes and Prayers are to be addrefs'd
to him, fo in thofe two Fcederal Rites of our Holy
Religion, thofe two Sacraments of Baptifm and the
Lord's Supper j we are oblig'd to pay Divine Homage
to him.
In the Former (viz. Baptifm) we are as folemnly
baptized into his Name as that of the Father. And if
our being baptized into the Father's Name fignify our
Solemn Dedication to the Faith and IVorjhip and Ser-
vice of the Father: (As the Chriftian Church has in
all Ages underftood this to be the import of it :)
Then our Being Baptized into the Name of the Son
and Holy Spirit, mult imply the like Dedication to
them. For had our Lord intended no more by this
Form of Baptifm, than our being oblig'd to profefs
the Religion which the Father (who alone is God)
has revcal'd by the Son (who is only a Man) and con-
firmed by his Power of working Miracles, which they
fuppofe here call'd the Holy Spirit, how very eafy
wou'd it have been to exprefs the matter thus ? And
how needful was it to prevent fo pernicious an Er-
ror, as the words (according to their Opinion) na-
turally leads us into, of taking thofe three into whole
Names we are diftinclly Baptized to be that One God,
to whofe Faith and Service we are in that folemn
Inftitution devoted? Nay how unreafonable does it
appear, not only that we fhou'd be thus Baptized
jointly into the name of God and of a Creature, but in-
to the Name of Miracles, or of the Divine Power
that wrought 'em? Why might we not as well be
Baptized into the Name of God's JVifdom or Truth or
Goodnefs, which are as illuftrioufly difplay'd in the
Gofpel of Chrift, as into the Name of his Power ?
Nor can this harm, and forced Exposition of the
Form of Baptifm be jultify'd from the Ifraelites be-
ing faid to be Baptized into Mofes. If indeed they
cou'd produce us fome fuch Form as this, by which
the Ifraelites were in the fame fcederal Rite, Baptized
into the Name of Gcd and the Name of Mofcs, this
wou'd give fome countenance to their Interpretati-
on. 'Till then, we mult tell 'em, being Baptized
I 2. ir.tQ
116 A Vindication of the
into Mofes, is not the fame thing with being Bapti-
zed into his Name, and much lefs in Conjunction
with that of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and that
in the highefl and mofl important act of Devotion
imaginable.
And for the Lord's- Supper, we know 'tis the prin-
cipal Defign of it to honour our Blejjed Saviour by
a grateful Commemoration of his dying Love, by
the exercife of a lively Faith in him, by a renewed
Dedication of our felves to him as our Lord-Re-
deemer, and by a publick Afcription of endlefs Glo-
ry and Dominion to him in Conjunction with the
Father. So that our Bleffed Lord Jefus is mofl: emi-
nently the Object of that Homage and Devotion which
this Holy Inftitution calls for. And can any ferious
Chriilian doubt whether the Celebration of it be an
Act of Divine JVorfhip ? It was probable in the pri-
mitive Church one ftated part of the Worfhip of
every Lord's-Day, and was always accounted as tru-
ly a part of the Divine JVorjhip they celebrated, as
any other act of Devotion whatfoever.
And for External A els of Worfhip, we are as fure
that our Blejfed Lord did upon all occafions receive
'em without the leaft check or caution to thofe that
gave 'em. He faid not to thofe that fell at his Feet
and worfriip'd him, as the Apoftle Peter did to Cor-
nelius, Stand up, for my felf alfo am a Man, Acts 10.
2f, z6. Or as the Angel to St. John-, See thou do it
not. Worfloip God, Rev. ip. 10.21. p. Tho'many did
thus Worfhip him not only during his Life, but his
Difciples did it joyntly after his Refurreclion, and
upon his Afcenfion. See Mat. 2$. 17. Luke 24. f 2.
And if any fhou'd pretend, That our Lord did not re-
prove theie Worfhippers, becaufe they intended on-
ly to pay him the Refpect due to an Eminent Prophet,
but not the Worfhip due to God, yet fure according
to their Opinion, our Lord ought in all reafon to have
reprov'd and caution'd Thomas againft the Excefs of
his Devotion, when in fuch a Rapture of Zeal he
cry'd cut to him, My Lord and My God, John 20.
28. But our Saviour is fo far from censuring his
Devo-
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 117
Devotion as irregular and exceilive, that on the con-
trary he approves and commends his Faith at ver. 19.
And fure I need not go about to prove, That to
give fuch Divine Worfhip to our Lord J ejus was the
Univerfal Practice of the Chriftian Church in its
firft and pureft Ages, as well as inallfucceedingOnes.
Infomuch as thofe of the third Age inflft upon this as
one great Argument to prove, That the Deity of
Chrifl was the Belief of the two foregoing, viz. That J
our Lord Jefus had always been the Object of the f
Worfhip of the Chriftian Church, even while they
openly profefs'd to Worfioip God alone.
And no wonder, that our Lord Jefus mou'd be
the Object of the Wormip of the Chriftian Church,
when the Angels of God (that Heavenly Hoft) arere-
quir'd to pay the like Homage to him. For fo we
are told by the Infpired Writer x.o> the Hebrews, Hcb.
1. 6. IVhen God brought his only bemtten Son into the
World, he [aid, Let all the Angels of God Worftnp him.
And for thofe Unitarian Writers, that tell us, This
paffage is cited from Pf. 97. 7. which is no way in-
tended by the Pfalmift concerning Chrift, but ufed
by him wholly on another occafion j they do in ef-
fect tell us, That according to their Judgment, the
Infpired Writer miftook the Senfc of 'em, and quot-
ed 'em when they were no way for his purpofej and
for thofe of their Writers that tell us, This Paffage
is not taken out of the Pfalms, but out ofDeut. 32. 43 .
where the Septuagint has thefe Words, Let all the
Angels of God Worjhip him j and that this Paffage, re-
fers only to Ifrael, the meaning of it being only
this, Let all the Angels of God mini ft er for the good of
his People Ifrael, I mall only obfervc, that if this be
true, then this Paflagc is quite impertinent to the
fcope of the Infpired Writer. For if JVorftnpping
one be only Mini firing to him (as it mull: be if the
Angels are faid to Woriliip Ifrael) then it can no
way infer the Superiority of Chrift above Angels,
that they are required to ivorjhip him in this Senfc,
i. e. to Minifter to him. Angels thus miniftcr to us,
who are Heirs of Solvation: But this no ways proves
I 3 our
n8 A Vindication of the
our Superiory to 'em , Much lefs wou'd it jufti-
fy any one's faying, that they are oblig'd to IVor-
fljip us.
And as the Holy Scriptures thus require us to pay
Divine Worflrip to our Blejfed Saviour, fo they af-
cribe to him thofe Divine Perfections and that fupreme
Dominion that are the folid ground of it.
One ground of Divine Worjlnp refults from the
Tranfcendent Perfections of the great object of it, fuch
as his Omniprefence, his Omnifcience, his boundkfs
Goodnefs and Almighty Power : Now thefe are in the
Scriptures afcrib'd to our Blejfed Lord. He is repre-
fented as prefent in all Chriilian Aflemblies, Even
'where two or three are gathered together in his Name,
He is in the mid (I of ''em, Matth. 18. 20. He is re-
prefented as taking up his Abode in the Soul of every
iincere Chriftian, John 14.. 23. He is defcribed as
Knowing all things, nay as Searching the very Hearts
and the Reins of every particular Member that belongs
to his Cuurch, John 21. 17. Rev. 2. 23. He is re-
prefented as doing whatever things the Father does, as
able by his mighty working to fubdue all things to him-
felf. He is defcribed, As the Lord over all, who is
rich unto all that call upon him, Rom. io. 12. Nay
the Riches of his Goodnefs are Unfearchable^ and in
him all fulnefs dwells, even all the fulnefs of the God-
head, thflt of his fulnefs we may receive Grace for
Grace^ £phef. 3. 8. Col. 1. ip. John 1. 16.
Another ground of Divine Worfloip is God's Su-
preme Dominion. And as that is founded both on the
Right of Creation and Continual Prefervation, and
the fuperadded Right of Redemption j fo the Holy
Scriptures afcribe to our Blejfed Lord a Sovereign
Dominion founded on both thefe Titles. To him
they attribute, as I have already proved, both the
Alaking and the Upholding of all things. And to prove,
that they attribute the glorious Work of Redempti-
on to him, were to transcribe a confiderable part of
the New Teftament.
I have the more largely iniifled on this Head, both
to {hew, That we are far from going upon flight
and
True <Dezty of our Blejfed Saviour. 119
and rafh Grounds in that Divine Worjhip we give to
our Blejfed Saviour, having the whole Current of the
New Teflament on our fide, as well as the U-
niverfal Practice of the Chriftian Church 5 and to
convince every ferious Chriftian Reader, that this
Controverfy is not about a meer Speculative Point, in
which practical Religion is little concerned, but
about a Truth of great Moment and Confequence,
the Denial whereof is highly injurious to the Ho-
nour of our Blejfed Saviour, by taking away the on-
ly folid Ground of that Divine Homage and Devotion
we pay to him. But it leads me to the next Head I
proposed, viz.
Thirdly, To confider what Worfhip our Adverfa-
ries, and particularly the Author , do allow him ; and
upon what grounds they do fo.
Now as to this Point of the JVorftrip due to our
Blejfed Saviour, the Oppofers of his Deity are great-
ly divided among themlelves.
It was this that occafion'd fo fliarp Difputes be-
tween Socinus on the one Hand, and Francifeus Da-
vidii and Chrijlianus Fran ken on the other.
Socinus thought all thofe PafTagcs of Scripture
which mention the Invocation of Chrift, and alcribe
fuch an Univerfal Authority and Power to him (i. e.
that make him a God by Office or Deputation) were fuffi-
cient Warrant for giving him Divine Worjliip. And
accordingly Socinus fpeaks of the Opinion of thofe
that denied Divine TVorftoip to our Saviour as a moft
filthy and pernicious Error, that led to j'udaifm, and
was in efFeclr, The Denying of Chrift, and tending to
Epicurifm and Atheifm. Nay he goes fo far as to tell
us, he never knew any good and pious Man of that O-
pinion [a). Smalcius reproaches 'em as Perfons of little
Underftanding, and puff t up with a Jewip Spirit, (b).
Nay elfewhere faith They are no Chriftian s. Niewoje-
vius cenfures them as ignorant of Chrift, who had »e-
(a) Socin. Op. Tom. i. p. 773.
(b) Smalcius de Divin. J. Chiilli, cap. 14.
I 4 SWV
ito ^Vindication of the
ver t a fled how good and kind the Lord is : Nay tells us,
'they are Pfeudo-Chrifiians or Lukewarm One s, not built
on Ghrifl as lively Stones (c). Volkelius largely proves
fuch Divine Worfhip to be due to him (d). And Wol-
zogenius afferts, It may be juftly faid, that they da
not honour the Father, who deny the Divine Honour of
Adoration to Ghrifl as he is Man : For we have (faith
he) demonflrated that Divine JVorJhip which is due to.
the Father, is alfo due to Chrifi (e).
On the other Hand, Francifcus Davidis, Chriftia-
nus Franken, Glirius and others deny'd that any fuch
Divine Worfljip fhou'dbe given to him, being plain^
ly inconfiftent with the fir fl Commandment , and high-
ly injurious to the Honour of feocfr.
Now let us confider, What our late Unitarians
think of this Difpute, and what their own Senti-
ments and Practice are in reference to it.
They do indeed tell us,. " Some Worfhip is due to
" the Lord Chrift. And therefore they diflinguiflj be-
" tween Civil Worihip, due from Men to one another :
" Religious Worfliip, given on the account of a Per-'
u fan's Holinefs or Relation to God, which as to the
" degree may be more or leffer, as their Sanclity or Re-
" lation to God is greater or leffer \ and this fort of
" Worfhip {they tell us) is due to Holy Men and Wo-
" men, to the Miniflers of God, yet more to Pro-
" phets, and above them to glorify'd Angels and
<c Saints : And Divine Worfhip, which belongs on-
" ly to God. And this {they tell us) confifls in Re-
" figning ourUnderftanding to whatever he reveals,
u {And O that they wou'd more confcientioufly pay this
u part of Worfhip due to him /) and in Religning our
" Wills and Defuesto what he decrees and docs,and
" in giving up our Affections to love him above all.
" // confifis moreover in fuch External A£ts and Signi~
u fications of Reverence and Love, as we referve only
u for him, and never give to any other,
■ — - — ■
(c) Socin. Op. Tom. i. p. 398. and Tom. l.p. 466.
(d) Volkelius de vera Relig. /. 5-. cap. 19.
(e) Wofcog. in Mattb. 4. 10. John p. 13, 24.
Accord-
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour, xix
Accordingly they tell us, a No Texts of Scripture
" prove, "That the Lord Chrift ought to be worfhip' d
" with more than a Civil, or Religious Worfhip.
" And there are no Acts of Worftjip required to he paid
u to him, but fuch as may be paid to a Civil fower,
K to a Perfon in high Dignity and Office, or to Pro-
u phets and holy Men, or to fuch as are actually
" pofleft of the heavenly Beatitudes. See id Col-
" le&. of Tra6t. Anfw. to Mr. Milb. 40, fo.
And the fame Writer relating the Dilpute between
Socinus and his Opponents, mentions the Anfwers his
Opponents gave to his Arguments, without offering
any Reply to 'em. On the contrary, he endeavours
to mew, That Socinus's Opinion about praying to
Chrift was inconfiftent with his Office as Mediator.
But yet he endeavours to clear it from the Charge
of Idolatry, becaufe he fuppofes they may pray to
Chrift, without afcribing Omnifcience or Omnipotence
to him. And upon the whole he fuppofes they
fhould in this Difference bear with one another's
Opinion and Practice.
To the fame Purpofe, The Author of the Letter
concerning the Unitarians, blames the Polonian Unita-
rians or Socinians, who excommunicated and depos'd
from their Miniftry fuch of their own Party, as de-
ny'd that Chrift might be Prafd to, or JForftjifd
with Divine Worfhip. And he commends the Mode-
ration of the Tranfylvanian Unitarians, who admit-
ted to the Miniftry and to Profeffors Places, luch as
rejected the Invocation and Adoration of Chrift, only
obliging 'cm under their Hands, that they fhouli
not openly oppofe it in their Sermons and Lectures.
And accordingly he alledges their Arguments againifc
Worfhipping our Saviour, and anfwers fome of the
Texts alledg'd by others.
And whereas the late Archbiftjop Tillotfon had in-
filled on this Argument for the Deity of Chnfi
drawn from the Divine Worftjip due to him, His
Anfwerer tells us roundly, " They have wrote no
" Books thefe Jaft feven Tears, in which they have not
" been careful to frofefs to all the World, That a like
« Ho-
izz A Vindication of the
" Honour and Worfhip (much lefs the fame) is
u not to be given to Chrift, as muft be given to
« God.
So that upon the whole, we may juftly place our
prefent Unitarians among thofe that deny Divine
Worfhip to our Bleffed Savlonr, and that allow him
no other Worftoip than what (as themfelves tell us)
may be paid to a Per/or* hi high Dignity and Office, to
Prophet s, or holy Men, or juch as are actually poffefs'd
of the heavenly Be.uitu:-^ (i. e to glorify'd Saints).
As to our Author he does not feem at firft View
fo very clear in delivering his Sentiments about it as
might be expected. He faith indeed, " There is m
" Inflance of Supreme Divine Worjloip given ultimately
M to Chrift in Scripture. And fo far the Socinians
themfelves will agree with him. Fortho' they affert,
that truly Divine Worfhip muft be paid him, yet
they allow not him, but only the Father, to be the
ultimate ObjeCl of it : And fay, that the Divine Wor-
fhip paid to him does finally redound to the Glory of
the Father, who has admitted him to a Participation
of his own Honour. And yet there are other Expref-
fions which feem to import, that our Author entire-
ly falls in with thofe late Unitarians, who deny any
Divine Worfhip to be due to our Bleffed Saviour.
For he tells us, " The Worfhip paid to him being
iC grounded upon derived and borrowed Excellency, is
a not fupremely Divine, and cannot be offered to the
" Infinite, Self-Originate, Independent Deity, without
" a great Affront, becaufe 'tis not the moft Excellent.
From whence I think we may fafely conclude, that
our Author does not allow Divine Worfhip to our
Bleffed Saviour. For fure it were moft abfurd to
call that Worfhip Divine, which we cannot offer to
the Bleffed God without affronting him, and (as our
Author adds) without mingling Reproach with Praife.
I mail therefore in order to the bringing the De-
bate of this Argument to an Iffue,
I. Conflder what the Author has offer' d againft our
living Divine Worfhip to our Bleffed Saviour.
u. Ex-
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 123
II. Examine the Grounds our Adver ■ Caries go upon
in the Worfhip they allow to our Bleffed Saviour.
I. I ftiall confider what the Author has offer'd a-
gainfl our giving Divine Worfhip to our Blejfed Sa-
viour.
And the great Argument he infifts on is, " Becaufe
" the Worfhip given to him is grounded on derived
" and borrowed Excellency ', which therefore is not fu-
" premely Divine, nor can be offefd to the Infinite,
" Self-originate, Independent Deity, without a great
" Affront, as not being the mofl Excellent, Mai. 1.
" 1 4. To praife an Independent God for Honour and
" Power granted to him by another, fuppofes a Falf-
u hood, and mingles Reproaches with Praife.
Anfw. If the Author mean by derived and borrow-
ed Excellency, fuch Excellency as the Supreme God
communicates to a Digniffd Creature, I deny that
the Worfhip which the Scriptures require us to pay-
to Chrifi is grounded upon any fuch derived or borrow-
ed Excellency. 'Tis founded, as I have fhewn, on
the Divine Perfeclions that are afcrib'd to him, and
on that Right of Creation and Redemption that can
belong to no meer Creature how dignify'd foever.
So if our Author mean by Power granted to our
Saviour by another, any Strength, or Might, or Au-
thority which does not originally belong to any Di-
vine Nature our Lord is poffefs'd of, and is only be-
itow'd on him as a digniffd Creature by God as his.
Creator, I deny that the Scriptures amgn any fuch
Ground of the TForfirip they require us to give to
our Bleffed Lord.
And accordingly, I mail carefully examine what
our Author has alledg'd to prove what he afferts,
That the Worfhip given to him in Scripture is ground-
ed on fuch derived or borrowed Excellency, &c.
To this Purpofe he argues :
" Thus our Lord requires Baptifm {if that be an
cc Acl of immediate proper Worfhip) in his Name, be-
" caufc All Power in Heaven, and Earth is commit-*
a ted to him. i
Anfw.
ii4 A Vindication of the
Anfw. I cannot well underftand why our Author
fhould make a Doubt of Baptifm's being an A3 of-
immediate proper Worfhip. Did any Chriftian be-
fore him ever doubt of its being a Sacred Rite, by
which the Perfon baptiz'd is folemnly dedicated to
that Bleflfed God, into whofe Name he is baptiz'd ?
And is not fuch a Dedication the higheft and moft
folemn Act of Devotion that a Creature can pay to
its abfolute Owner and Lord? So that I cannot fee
why our Author fhould queflion it, unlefs he be a-
fraid, that the granting it will ftrengthen the Ar-
gument we draw from thence for the paying the
fame Divine Worjloip to the Son and Holy Spirit , as
we pay to the Father. But the Author tells us,
cc That Chrifi therefore requires Baptifm in his Name,
" becaufe all Power in Heaven and Earth is given
" him.
Anfw. Our BlefTed Lord alledges all Power in
Heaven and Earth being given him 9 as the Ground of
his fending out his Apoftles to go and difciple all Na-
tions , to whofe Faith and Obedience he had a juft
Claim. And when he faith, All Power in Heaven
and Earth is given to me^ he does not mean (as our
Author fuppofes) that he had no fuch Original Power
or Authority over Earth and Heaven belonging to
himfelf : For it did always belong to that Divine
Nature he is pofTefs'd of, and is the infeparable Re-
mit of that Work of Creation^ which I have fhewn,
that the Scriptures afcribe to him. But that the
fole Exercife of this Power is now dcvolv'd into his
Hand, and that he in the Quality of Mediator is the
fole Adminijlrator of the Divine Kingdom -, this is
the Father's voluntary Gift, and this our Lord in-
tends, when he faith, All Power in Heaven and
Earth is given to me. But this does by no means
imply, that the Worflup of our Lord is founded on
fuch a borrow' d Power as may be communicated to
a dignified Creature : But on the contrary, that 'tis
founded on the Authority that originally belongs to
the Divine Nature of our Bkjfed Saviour •, tho' the
fole Exercife of it be by a voluntary Difpenfotion
com*
True*Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. iz$
committed to him. Even among Men, two or
more may be poffefs'd of the fame fupreme Autho-
rity, and yet the fole Adminiftration be in the Hands
of one. We had an Inftance of this in a late
Reign, when the Crown was fettled on that illu-
itrious Pair King William and Queen Mary, and yet
the fole Adminiftration was in the King's Hands*
This is fome Illuftration of what I am here affert-
ing, that tho' the Father and the Son are pofTefs'd
of the fame Authority, yet the fole Adminiftration of
the Divine Kingdom, during this prefent State of
Things, may be by the Father's Confent in the
Hands of the Son. I know indeed, that we muft
not ftrain fuch Comparifons in our Application, fo
as to conceive of the Father and the Son as two di-
ftinct and feparate Beings. But yet as their Partici-
pation of the fame Divine Nature does not take a-
way that Difference and Diftinction between 'em,
which is more than nominal, fo fuch Examples may
help us to conceive the more eafily of fuch a volun-
tary Difpenfation.
Again, Our Author argues ;
" Thus we muft honour the Son, (as truly, not
" as greatly) as we honour the Father, becaufe the
" Father hath committed or given all Judgment to
" him, John f. iz, 23.
Anfw. The Text faith, That we muft honour the
Son as we honour the Father. And thefe Words {as
truly but not as greatly) are only the Author''?, prc-
fumptuous and groundleis Addition. Socinus his
Followers did from thefe very Words juftly conclude,
that Divine JVorftrip muft be given to our Saviour. For
to give him only an inferior Religious Refpccl, fuch as
we may give to a Prophet, or to a gloriffd Saint, or
a moft dignify* d Creature, is not to honour him as we
honour the Father at all. For to offer fuch Honour to
the Father were to offer him the higheft Indignity
and Affront, and to Reproach inftead of Praijing him,
as the Author well obferves : So that we cannot ho-
nour him as we honour the Father, without giving
him the fame kind of Worfhip. And the Reafon of
our
Tl6 A Vin dication of the
our thus Honouring the Son which is there amgn'd,
viz. Becaufe the Father judges no Man, but has commit-
ted all Judgment to the Son, is fo far from implying,
That we rouft not give him the fame Honour or JVor-
flrip as we give the Father, that it implies the quite
contrary. For becaufe the Divine Government is in
his Hands, fo that he is the final Judge of all, and the
fole Arbiter of our Eternal Happinefs or Mifery >
therefore truly Divine Honour is due to him. And
that this Judgment is committed to him, does not im-
port, as I have already fuggefted, That the Right of
Judging the World did not originally belong to that
Divine Nature he is pofTefs'd of ; but only, that the
Sole Exercife of it being in his Hands, is the Refult
of a voluntary Difpenfation. And by the way I may
obferve, in Confirmation of this Expofition, That
tho' the Man Chriftjefus mall be employ'd in judg-
ing the World, yet the Scriptures do alfo afcribe it
to God, and affert, That the Lord himfelf will be
Judge ; That every Knee fhall bow to him, That before
him all the Dead, fmall and great, jhallftand : And
yet we are exprefly told, The Father judges no Man,
but has committed all Judgment to the. Son : So that
God judges the World, when the Son judges it.
Nay 'tis obfervable, That the Apoftle Paul proves,
That we fhall all ft and before the Judgment- Seat of
Chrift, from thefe Words of the Prophet, Ifa. 4f .
23. As I live {faith the Lord) every Knee Jh all bow
to me, and every Tongue Jhall confefs to God. Now if
the Apoftie's Reafoning be juft, our Saviour muft be
that Jehovah, and that God, before whom the Pro-
phet had foretold that every Knee ftiou'd bow : For o-
therwife it wou'd no way follow, that becaufe every
Knee ftjou'd bow to God, that we muft therefore all
ftand before the Judgment-Seat of Chrift. So that
without fuppofing him to be God, we muft fuppofe
the Apoftle to alledge that as a Proof of his Affer-
tion, from whence it cou'd be no way juftly inferr'd.
Again, the Author argues, " Thus at the Name of
" Jefus muft every Knee bow, and every Tongue confefs
" him to be Lord, becaufe as a Reward of his Obedience
" God
True Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 117
ic Ged has given him a Name above every Name 5 and
u 'tis added, That all this Homage is ultimately to
" the Glory of the Father.
Anfw. To make this Argument of any Force a-
gainlt Giving Divine Worfhip to our Bleff'ed Saviour ;
the Author muft prove, That this Text fpeaks only
of fuch a Dominion as belongs to Chriit, as a meer
dignify 'd Creature, and makes that the fole Foundation
of the Worfhip that is to be given him. But this I
deny. On the contrary, That every Knee flwu'd bow,
and every Tongue confefs to him, proves him to be that
very God whom the Prophet Efay fpeaks of in the
forecited Place, 45-. 23. And indeed the former
Verfe plainly appropriates that Honour to the true
God. Look unto me, and be ye faved all the ends of the
Earth, for I am God, and there is none elfe, I have
/worn by my felf, &c. That to me every Knee fhall
bow, &c. See v. 22, 23. And yet that the fole Ex-
crcife of the Divine Dominion, and an Authority o-
ver Angels themfelves fhou'd be committed to the In-
carnate Son of God as Mediator^ is the Gift of the Fa-
ther, and the Reward of that Obedience that our
Saviour had paid in his Humane Nature. And our
Acknowledgment and Subjection to that Dominion does
redound to the Glory of the Father, whofe Good-plea-
fure it was to reward the tranfcendent Love of the
Son to us, by this Constitution, That he the Father
Jhou'd judge no Man, but all Judgment Jhould be com-
mitted to the Son.
But the Author adds, " So that however there may
<c be the fame common External Atls or Words, {fuch as
<c bowing the Knee, and faying Glory and Praife, &c.)
" afed to God and the Mediator ; As alfo in feme In-
<6 fiances, they are given in common to ordinary Men ;
<c Tet the Mind of a rational Worflnpper will make a
u Diftinclion in his inward Intention, as no doubt but
u thofe devout Jews did, who in the fame Ad bowed
cc their Heads, and worfhipped both God and the King,
u 1 Chron. 29. 20. i '
Anfw. For External Atls, fuch as Bowing, Kneel-
ing, no doubt we may ufe 'em to exprefs either Civil
or
8 A Vindication of the
or Religious Worfhip. And therefore the Jews might
both bow to God, and after that turn and bow to the
King, the one to exprefs their Religious Homage, the
ether their meer Civil Obeyfance. (For that they ex-
prefs'd both at once by the fame individual A6t of
Bowing is more than the Text afTerts). And here,
there was no Danger of any one's miftaking this Re-
ipect paid to the King for any other than Civil Ho-
mage. The vifible Difference of the ObjecJs does in
this cafe fufficiently diftinguiih the Nature of the
External Acts. But for JVords, and particularly fuch
as the Author refers to, the faying, All Glory and
Praife, or all Glory and Dominion be afcribed to fuch a
One for ever, we wou'd gladly fee, what Inflances
the Author can give us in Scripture of fuch Doxologies
being ever applied to ordinary Men, nay or the higjoeft
Angel, or the moft dignify' 'd Creature whatever. And
much leis can he give us one Inftance in which God,
and fuch a Dignify 'd Creature, are join'd together.
Nay, for fuch External Acls as Bowing or Pro fixation,
we may obferve with what extraordinary Caution
both Good Men and Good Angels refus'd 'em, when they
feem'd to be given on any Religious Account, tho' they
knew that thofe who offer'd em, never intended 'em
as Acls of itricHy Divine WorJIoip. St. Peter never
fufpected Cornelius, nor the Angel St. John, of mifta-
king either the one or the other for God, or of defign-
ing to worfhip either of 'em as God: Yet both ex-
prefs'd a Diflike of the External Homage, becaufe given
on a Religious Account - y and the latter advifes St. John
to appropriate all fuch External Religious Worfhip
to God. And if our BleJJed Saviour was no more
truly God, than either St. Peter or the Angel (as our
Author mull fuppofe) he mould in all reafon have
been equally tender of theZ)i^7W//"^^vr,andrefufed
all External Acls that look'd like Religious Homage.
Much more mould he have rejected with the utmoft.
Abhorrence and Zeal the irregular Devotion of fuch
as joined him with the Father, in afcribing the fame
e.n'dlefs Glory, and Honour, and Power to the one as to
the other. For here there is extreme Danger of fuch
Dqxq-
True *De'ity of our Bleffed S&vioitr. np
Doxologies leading us into what they account a per-
nicious Miftake, even to judge the Father and the
Son equal in EJJential Perjeclions, when the fame Glo-
ry is aferibed to both in the. fame Acts of folemn De-
votion : Nor would a good Intention in the Worfloipper
at all excufe fo grofs Imprudence. A Man niay bow
his Knee both to his Father and to his Prince. But
ihou'd he compliment his Father with ,thc fame Roy-
al Titles he gives to his Prince, and that in his very
Prefence, no good Intention of making a Diit-inction
in his own Mind, would excufe his Indifcretion \ no
more than the Jews would have been excufable* if^
when they bowed both to God and to the Kingj they
had ufed the fame Doxology to both, and faidj To
God and to the King be Glory and Dominion for ever ;
and gone about to juftify it by pretending, that as
Rational Worflrippers they made a Difti nction in their
bwn Minds, and aferibed this endlefs Glory and Do-
minion to the one and to the other in a very diffe-
rent Senfe. ...
\ Having thus vindicated the Divine Worflnp , we
give to our Blejfed Saviour, from the Author's Obje-
ction, I proceed,
II. To examine the Grounds our Adverfaries gd
upon, in the Worflnp they pretend to pay to him.
Now tho' they are all agreed in aligning the iame
Ground of the Worfhip paid to Jefus Chrift, viz. That
Authority they fuppofe him advanced to as a dignified
Creature, yet fome of 'em think this a fufficient Ground
for Giving him Divine Worfloip : Others think it
does warrant only the Giving him an inferior Religi-
ous Worfljip, but not truly Divine. .
As to the former of thefe, there lies an obvious and
infuperable Objection againft their Practice, That to
give Divine Worfloip to a Great nre 5 ho'VJ dignify' d foe-
yer, is flat and plain Idolatry*, if there he any fuch thing
in the World. . 'Tis the Scriptural Notion of the Ido-
latry of the Gentiles, That they flery eel the Creature be-
sides the Creator ( a ). And that they did Service (or
Homage) to thofe that by Nature vaere no Gods (b)
(A) Rom. i.af. {b) Gal+.S. s i
130 A Vindication of the
And againft this Idolatry we are folemnly caution' d
in the Firlt Command, 'thou Jhalt have no other Gods
before me, Exod. 20. 3.
Now to avoid the Force of this Argument there
are two things infilled on by the Socinians, which I
mall briefly confider.
Firft, " they fometimes tell us, they own Chrijl to
" be the true God, as that is oppofed to all falfe Gods 9
" and that the mofi High God hath communicated both
" his Perfeclions of Power, TVifdom, &c. and his
" Authority to him, and therefore his peculiar Honour
u and IVorjhip too.
Anfw. That this is a meer Evafion will appear if
we confider, that either our Adverfaries take fuch
plaufible Expreffions as thefe in their proper Sen fe^
or not.
If they take ''cm in their proper Senfe, the Meaning
mull: be, that the moft High God has made the Man
Chrijl Jefus, Almighty, Omnifcient and Supreme Lord
of all. But this is impoffible, and no better than
horrid Blafphemy. 'Tis to deify a Creature by as-
cribing infinite Perfections to a finite Being, and fet-
ing it in the place of the moft High God.
But if they mean no more, by the moll High God
communicating his Perfeclions of Power and TVifdom to
him, than that he employs his Power to execute what
our Lord Jefus would have to be done, and reveals
to him all things he is concerned to know : and if
they mean no more by his Communicating his Autho-
rity to him, than that he has plac'd him in the high-
eft fubordinate Dignity ; but that iiill Jefus Chrifi
is no more by Nature than nMan,2Xi<\ no morepof-
fefs'd of any Divine Perfeclions, than Mofes when
God wrought Miracles by him, or the Prophets when
God revealed Secrets to 'em, (as they muft explain
the matter if they will Ipeak confidently with them-
felves) then this no way takes off" the Force of the
Argument : For then ftill Jefus Chrifi \% by nature no
God, he is a Creature, not the Creator : And to give
him Divine JVorfioip, while he is fuch, is in the Lan-
guage of the Scripture as manifeft Idolatry as what
the Apofilc charges the Gentiles with. But
True *Deity of our Blejffed Saviour. 131
But this leads mc to confider their
Second Plea for Giving Divine JVorfhip to Jefus
Chrifl, tho' they believe him to be no more than a
Alan, viz. That we Chriftians have God's Command
for doing it, which the Heathens never had for the
Objects of their Devotion.
To mew the Abfurdity of this Plea, I need only
fugged 5
1 . That this Evafion fuppofes the Notion of Ido-
latry to depend on a mcer pojftive Command, and not
on a Moral.
Whereas on the contrary, the Notion of Idolatry
is founded on the Nature of Things. The Evil and
Malignity of it arifes from the manifeft Unreafona-
blencis and Incongruity of giving that Honour and
Worfhip, which the infinite Perfections and Supreme
Authority of the only true God claim from his Crea-
tures, to a Being that is incapable of thofe Perfections^
or of xh-xt Authority . There is fuch an infinite Di-
stance and Difproportion between the Bleffed God,thc
Creator and Supreme Lord of all, and the mod; ex-
cellent of his Creatures, how highly foever digni-
fy'd, that nothing can be more abfurd and repug-
nant toReafon it felf, than to give the Rcfpect that
belongs to that Infinite and Sovereign Being, to any
finite Being whatfoevcr. 'Tis raoft apparently equal
and juft, that Beings fo infinitely different in their
Nature fhou'dbe treated with the greater! Difference
poflible in the Refpecl that fhou'd be paid to 'em.
To give the Infinite God the lame Honour we give
to a finite Being is (as the \ nth or well argues) /0 offer
him the highefi Indignity and Affront. And to give his
Worfhip to fuch a finite Reing is to Deify it, and
make an Idol of it. So that God can no more be
fuppos'd to command us to give h is Worfhip to a
Creature how highly dignify a fotever, than he can be
fuppos'd to command any other thing thr': is evident-
ly abfurd and unfuitable to the Nature of things 5p
that pur Adyerfaries are redue'd to a defperatc Shift,
when they are forcM to deny ttje Morality of the firfi
Command^ which both the Jezvijh and Cbrifii
K 1 Church
i$* A Vindication of the
Church have always look'd upon as of indifpenfiblc
and perpetual Obligation. And if this be all that
Socinus meant in charging his Brethren, who denied
Divine Worfhip to Chrift, with Judaifm, viz. be-
caufe they look'd on the Firfl of the Ten Command-
ments as Moral, they need not be afham'd of the
Charge, but a6ted far more confonantly to all found
Reafon in denying Divine Worfhip to Chrift while
they thought him no more than a dignify'd Man,
than Socinus in giving it. And indeed while that
Command ftands in the Decalogue, or till the Soci-
nians have clearly proved the Repeal of it, they will
never reconcile their Practice of fettingUp two fepa-
rate Objects of Divine Worfhip, (One a God by Na-
ture, the other a Man and a God only by Office) with
the Command, of having no other God before the Great
Jehovah. Nor will they ever prove the Repeal of
it, while thofe Words of our Saviour ftand upon
Record, Matth. 4. 10. Thou fio alt Worfhip the Lord
thy God, and him only Jhalt thou ferve. For they
clearly demonftrate that the Obligation of the firit
Command is to us Chrijlians perpetual, and never to
to be fupcrfeded.
1. If this Plea were allowable, the dpofllc fixes
his charge againft the Heathens upon a wrong Foun-
dation.
He charges 'em as Idolaters becaufe they Wor-
fhip' I the Creature bef.dcs the Creator, and becaufe
they ferve d thofe thatby nature were no Gods. But if the
Socinians be in the right, There is no harm in that
at all: Becaufe if God pleafe to require it, They
may give his own Worfhip to a Creature that is by
Nature no more a God than thofe the Gentiles wor-
fhipp'd. (And they themfelvcs fuppofe that the A-
poitle and the Chriftian Church gave it to Jefus
Chrift, tho' they apprehended him only to be a dig-
nify'd Creature, and had God's Allowance and Com-
mand co do fo.) He ihou'd therefore have only
charg'd 'em with doing it without a warrant ana
command from the true God. Nay whereas the
Heathens did many of 'em pretend, That their Infe-
rior
True T)eity of our Blejfed Saviour. 133
riw Gods derived their Dignity from the Supreme,
and had Divine Honour pay'd 'em by his dllo t wance y
the Apoftle fhou'd have confuted this Pretence. So
that according to our Adverfaries Opinion and Pra-
ctice, the Apoftle makes that their Crime that
might be equally objected againft himfelf and all o-
ther Chriftians, nay fuppofes it a Sin againft the
Light and Law of Nature, and not againft any po/i-
tive Command- As is evident from Rom. 1. 25-.com-
par'd with the foregoing ver.
3. This Plea is inconiiftent with God's own mod
exprefs Declarations.
So that while thofe Paflages Hand in the Bible,
That God will not give his Glory to another, If.\i. 8.
That the Gods that have not made the Heavens and the
Earth Jball perijh from the Earth, and from under thefe
Heavens, Jer. 10. 11. (which Prediction plainly re-
fers to the time of the Gofpel) we can never be-
lieve, That God gives his own Glory to a Dignify'd
Man, and fets up one to be worfhip'd as a God that
was fo far from making the Heavens and the Earth,
that according to the Socinians he did not exijl till
about 1700 Years ago. Nay we can never look up-
on the great Jehovah to be, as he fo frequently declares
himfelf, jealous in the matters of his own Worfhip,
if he admit a Creature to be his Competitor or AJJo~
date in it. Exod. 2.0. f.
But becaufe the Author feems rather to fall in
with thofe Unitarians that deny Divine Worfhip to
our Blcffcd Saviour, I fhall proceed to confider
The Opinion of thofe Unitarians who think that
the Eminent Dignity and Power Jefus Chrift is ad-
vanced to is a fufHcient Ground for giving him an
inferior religious Worfhip, tho' not that Worfhip
which is properly Divine.
And againft this I have thefe two things to offer.
I. If what has been produe'd from Scripture to
prove that truly Divine Worfhip belongs to our
Blejfed Saviour, and that on the account of the tru-
ly Divine Perfections he is poffefs'd of, and of the
Right he has to it by Creation and Redemption, hold
K 5 good,
134 d Vindication of the
good, Then thefe Unitarians who deny Divine Wor-
ih p to our Blejfed Saviour are highly injurious to his
Honour in refufing to give it, and in putting him off
with an inferior fort of Worfhip, even fuch as them-
felves tell us, may be paid to Civil Power, to a
Per [on in high Office and Dignity, or to Prophets and
Holy Men, or to fuch as a,? actually poffefs'd of the
heavenly Beatitudes. For if an Higher Worfhip be
due to him, Thofe that give him only an inferior
Refpetl, do really offer an Indignity and * Affront to
him; and their Worfhip fuppofes afalfhood, and min-
gles Reproaches with Praife (To ufe the Author's Ex-
prefllons.) But
II. On the other Hand, If our BlefTed Lord be
no more than a Dignify' d Creature, even the paying
him any Religious Worfhip at all does entrench up-
on the peculiar Honour of God, and is an Invailon
of his incommunicable Rights.
To make good this Charge, I mail endeavour to
fhew, That the Scriptures appropriate all Religious
Worfhip to God, and allow of no inferior Religious
Worfhip to be given to a Creature ; and that the
Giving a Religious Worfhip, tho' infer iour, to Jefus
Chrift on Suppofition of his being only a dignify" 'd
Creature, will juitify both Pagans and Papifts mth&t
Demon Worfhip which the Scriptures condemn.
i . The Scriptures appropriate all Religious Wor-
fhip to God, and allow of no Inferior Religious Worfhip
to b': giyei) to a Creature.
Bv Religious Worfhip (as oppos'd to Civil) I un-
derfland fuch Worfhip as the Religion we profefs,
directs us to pay to fome Inhabitant of the Invifible
World. Now according to the Chriftian Religion,
all Worfhip paid to an Inhabitant of the invifible
World, is God's incommunicable due, and is in the
nature of it truly D/zwzAVorfhip,whatever the Inten-
tion of thofe that give it may be. And this will appear
if wc duly confider, What all Worfiip paid to an
Inhabitant of the Invifible World fuppofes in the na-
ture of the Action it felf. Now it plainly fuppofes
the Being to whom we pay fuch Worfhip to be
pre-
True Deify of our Blejfed Saviour. 4:35*
prefent with us, to under ft and the Homage we pay to
him j nay to know not only our particular Cafe and Cir-
cumftances, but even our very Hearts, and with what
inward Intentions and Affeclions we offer fuch Honour
and Refpecl to him. To pray to fuch an Invifible Be-
ing fuppofes that he can both hear and help us, and
that he can judge of the Sincerity of our Devotions.
Now iiich an Unlimited Knowledge of Humane Affairs
and Dominion over 'em, efpecially fuch a Knowledge
of the Hearts of Men, and fuch a Prefence with all
PVorftoippers where-ever they are, are Perfetlions that
belong to no Inhabitant of the Invifible World but
the Blejfed God. And 'tis becaufe all Religious Wor-
JJjip does in the nature of the act (whatever be the
Intention of the Worlhipper) afcribe fuch Perfecti-
ons to the Objecl of it, that God has appropriated
all fuch Religious Worftjip to himfelf, and excluded all
other Inhabitants of the Invifible World from it. The
Author, I prefume, will not deny that the Jews un-
derftood this to be the true import and fenfe of the
Firfi Command, 'Thou fhalt have no other Gods before
me. They paid no Religious Homage to any other
Inhabitant of the Invifible World, as reckoning it
contrary to this firft and greater! Precept of the De-
calogue. And 'tis no lefs certain that the Chriftian
Church, in its firil and pureft Ages, were of the
fame Judgment, and difclaim'd on this very Ac-
count, the giving Religious JVorfhip to any bat God
(a). (As I might ealily lhew by numerous Citations
from Juflin Martyr, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus,
and others, if that matter were contended. ) And the
Judgment both of the Jcwijh and Chriftian Church in
this point, is abundantly conrlrm'd by our BleJ/ed
Saviour himfelf : For he plainly declares his own
Sentiments of the Latitude and Extent of this Com-
mand, when he repell'd the Devil's Temptation to
fall down and worihip him with this Anfwer, 'Tis
written, thou fhalt Worftoip the Lord thy God, and him
(a) The Learned Reader may fee this fully prov*J by Dr. Whitby
* n his Traclatus de Diiute Chri/ii. p. 92, 93, 94, &c.
K 4 only
1 3 6 A V I N D I C A T I o n of the
only fi alt thou ferve, Matth. 4. 10. For whether we
iuppofe our Saviour to refer to the Words of the Firji
Command, or to thofe parallel Paflages, Deut. 6. 1 2,
14. Dent. 10. 20. ? tis evident, that he has deter-
mirfd this to be the Senfe of 'em, That all Religious
IVorjhip and Homage mufl be given only to God. And
whereas they would evade this plain Declaration by
pretending that fuch Prohibitions of Worfhipping
any other but God, rnuft be understood of that Sup-erne
and Abfolute W^rjhip^thit is due only to God, but not of
an Inferior and Relative Worfinp, which may (as they
pretend) be given to a Dignify d Creature : The Vanity
of this Evafion appears from this obvious Confiderati-
on, that if this Pretence would hold, our Saviour's An-
fwex would no way repel the Force of the Devil's
Temptation : For the Devil did not claim Supreme
and truly Divine TVorfhip ; but fuch an Inferior Refpetl
as was due to one, who was conftitutcd a God over
this lower IVorld, and to whom a Power over all the
Kingdoms of it was delivered, fo that he cou'd give it to
whom he wou'd. Nay he demands only a Relative
Worfhip, which ultimately referr'd to the Honour
of the Giver, See Luke 4. 6. And accordingly he of-
fer'd it to our Lord Jefus on Condition of his falling
down before him. Now our Bieffed Saviour does
not alledge as a Reafon of his Rejecting his Propo-
fal, That the Devil did but falfcly pretend to any fuch
Power, all the Power he had being only by Ufurr
pation and Divine Sufferance for wile and holy Ends.
(Tho' he might juftiv have alledg'dthis, and fhou'd
in all Reafon, according to our Adveriaries, have in-
iiiled on this ground for repelling the Temptation.)
But he rejects it by telling him, he demanded what
was due to God alone, and was lus incommunicable
Right 3 and what Satan cou'd lay no claim to, had
his Pretentions of fuch a Power being deliver'd tQ
him, bsen never fo true. But now according to the
A:it'uor\ Opinion, Our Blcffed Saviour Mifapplies
this PafTage from the OldTeftament. For itWou'd
not follow, That becaufe we mull worfoip and ferve
God only (i.e. with Supreme abfolute Worfmp) That
we
True T)eity of our Blejfed Saviour. 137
we may not therefore fall down to, and pay an Infe-
rior Religious Worfhip to a Creature whom Go<r/him-
felf has exalted to high Dignity and Office. For ac-
cording to them, 'tis upon this very ground that
we mult pay 'Religious Worfoip to our Blejfed Saviour
himfelf, and the Devil here defircd it on no other
Ground. So that if this Diftin&ion of Religious Wor-
foip into Supreme and Inferior, Abfolute and Relative
be allowable, and we may give the latter to a Dig-
nify'' d Creature, provided we referve the former for
God : Our Saviour here gave a very weakinfufficicnt
Anfwer, and the Devil was a weaker Difputant, that
cou'd not enforce his Temptation by the ufe of fo
pbvious a Difinclion. Whereas if the Words our
Lord cites do appropriate all Religious Worfoip to God 9
then indeed they are every way fit to filence the
Tempter, by mewing the Unlaw f nine fs of what he
demanded, even tho' his Pretcnfons had been never fo
tute. Nay, 'tis obfervable, that to the PafTage,
which our. Saviour cites out of the Pentateuch, he
himfelf has added this Exclufive Particle only. Mofes
had faid, Thou fo alt fear the Lord thy God, and ferve
him. And our Lord, to render thefe Words more
forcible againft the Devil's Temptation, cites 'em
thus, 'Thou fait Worfoip the Lord thy God, and him
only fait thou ferve : So that if we will ftand to his
Determination, thefe Words do appropriate all Re-
ligious Worfoip to God, and fuppofe the' Giving it to a
Creature (tho' only on the account of a Power or
Authority derived from him, and therefore Inferior
and Relative) to be a Violation of the Divine Law.
2. The giving Religious Worfoip to Jefus Chrif,
tho' onlv Inferior and Relative, on the Supposition
of his being only a Digniffd Creature, will clear
both Pagans and Papifls, in their Worfoip of Crea-
tures, from the Charge of Idolatry.
The Apoflle charges this Crime upon the Hea-
thens, becaufe they worfloifd the Creature befides the
Creator, who is blejfed for ever, Amen, (i. e. who is
the fole Object, of our Religious Adoration and
Praife) Rom. 1. if. and becaufe they ferved thojethat
by Nature were no Gods, Gal. 4. 8. Let
138 A Vindication of the
Let us conflder, What the Heathens reply to this
Charge, when manag'd againfl 'em by thole Fathers
that wrote in Defence of the Chriftian Caufe.
To this purpofe they alledge,
" 'That thofe Creatures they worflnfd were dii me-
ftC dioxumi & inferioris notae, a middle fort of Gods
" of inferior Note, made and advanced to that rank
" of Gods, by the Supreme God, who was the God
" of Gods, the King of thofe Gods and GoddefTes,
* c that depended on him for all the Dignity they en-
" joy'd-, and that thefe inferior Gods fell fo far Jhort
<c of the Supreme Deity, that they were rather to he
u reckoned among Men. That the Worfhip of thefe in-
" ferior Gods tended to the Honour of the Supreme,
<c from whom they derived this Dignity, and to
" whom it mufi needs he acceptable and pleafing to pay
" ''em this refpecl. This Worflnp being agreeable to his
" Orders and Council, and given on the Account of
. that Power and Authority he has vejled ^em with,
cc and of thofe Benefits and Bleffings he has made V/»
v the Conveyers and Difpenfers of (a).
Now 'tis manifest, That thefe their Sentiments
concerning Inferior Gods are very agreeable to thofe
our late Unitarians entertain concerning our Bleffed
Saviour •, whom they fuppofe to be only a Creature^
but conitituted a God y by being advanc'd to High
Dignity by the Supreme God, who has therefore
appointed him to be worfhip'dj the Worfhip we
pay to him redounding to the Glory of the Su-
preme God, from whom he derives his Power ■, and
on whom he depends for all the Dignity he enjoys.
How then will our Adverfaries juftify trie Apo-
ffcle's Charge againft the Heathens^ without cxpofing
their own Caufe ? For 'tis obvious, That the Hea-
thens might retort on the Apofle 3 if he were of the
(a) Senec. Ep. loo. Jnftin. Mart. Exhort, ad Gr. p. 19,22. Acg.de
Civ. Dei 1, 9.C. 3. I. 4. c. 9. 1. 8. c. 6. La<£r. 1. i.e. f. Celius ap. O-
Tig. J. 8. p. 381. Sc 42 1 . Hierocl. in Carm. Pyth. p. 9, io, 1 8. Calf.
ap. Orig. 1. 7. p. 377. Plato" in Phsdro, p. 24.6. Apuleius de Diem.
Socr. p. 45-. Ciern. Alex. Strom. 1. 6. p. 631.
fame
True 'Dei ty of our Blejfed Saviour. ii§
feme mind with our late Unitarians, How come you
to reproach us with worpipping a Creature befide the
Creator? Do not you Worfhip fuch a Creature too?
Do you not fuppofe him conftituted a God by Office^
and that the Worfhip you give him tends to the Ho-
nour of the God of Gods by whom he is advane'd to
that Dignity ? How comes that to be Idolatry in us
that is none in you ? Again, How come you to im-
pute it as a Crime to us that we ferve thofe that by
Nature are no Gods ? Do not you ferve and pay Re-
ligious Homage to one that is no more a God by Nature
and Efience, than thofe we adore ? Even to one that
is only a God by Courtefy, and depends on the Supreme
God for all the Power he is veiled with, and all the
Honour that's paid him ?
And if it be fvid, That Chrijiians have the true
God's Command for worfhipping Chrifl, but the Hea-
thens had not for wo rfhrp ping their Inferior Gods, (a)
the Anfwer is obvious. That the Apoitle fhou'd then
have fixt his Charge on their doing it without fuch a
Command and Warrant from the true God, and never
made it their Crime to worfiip the Creature befide s the
Creator, and to ferve fuch as are not Gods by Nature :
For this it fcems may be very lawful and commenda-
ble, when we have God's Allowance or Command
for it 5 and is only fnful when we do it without his
Order. So that all the fault of the Heathens was,
That they were mifraken in pretending to fuch an
Order from the Supreme God, when they really had it
not. And what will this lame Excufc it felf fignify to
thofe Unitarians, that tell us, " We have no fuch
" Command to Worihip Chrifi him felf, tho' they think
" it may be lawfully done, and dare not cenfure thofe that
" do it? And as for thofe other Excufes alledg'd by
the forcfaid Author of the Defence of the Hiflory of the
Unitarians, viz. " That the Heathens fet up the Crea-
" ture more than the Creator, That they fet up an Infi.
<c nite Number of Gods who had been meer Men, and
{a) Which is the heft Excufe made for 'cm by the Author of the
Dfiiice ofthi tiijl, of the Unit. p. 5-4.
" that
*4<> '^Vindication of the
cc that their Worfhip is terminated on 'em, andfo they
" made true Gods of Men : It appears by what I have"
already alledg'd from the Patrons of Demon-Wor-
fhip among the Gentiles, that they difown'd all this,
They did not fet up Creatures above the Creator
(which were Nonfenfe as well as Idolatry) Nor did they
fuppofe their deceafed deify' d Heroes to be Germany
other Senfe than our Adverfaries fuppofe the Man
Chrifi Jefus to be. Nor did they fo terminate their
Worfhip on 'em, as not to refer it to the Honour of
the God of Gods from whom they fuppos'd 'em to re-
ceive their Power and Dignity. So that our Unita-
rians have no way of mewing the Difparity between
their Practice and that of the Gentiles,but by imputing
to 'em what themfelves openly difown. Whereas it ap-.
pears, their Caufe is the fame by their making ufe of
the fame Evafions and Diftinctions in defence of it.
Upon the like grounds, We charge thofe of the
Romijh Church as Entrenching on the incommunica-.
ble Rights and Honour of God in their Invocation of
Angels and glorify' d Saints.
But our Charge is not well grounded, if thePrin-'
ciples of out late Unitarians be true. For the Pa-
pifts may defend their Practice by the fame Princi-
ples. They affign the like Grounds of their Religi-
ous Worfhip to 'em, " 'that Angels and glorify'd
cc Saints are advanced to great Dignity and Authority,
u that they have both vail Knowledge 00^ vaftPow-
<c er communicated to 'em ; that the Worfhip they
" give 'em is only Inferior and Relative, and redounds
^ to the Honour of that Supreme God, who has rai-
" fed 'em to this Dignity and Glory. And if thefe
befolid Grounds of giving an inferior Religious Wor-
fhip to a Creature, What ground is there to reproach
their Worfhip as injurious to the Honour of God, and
an Invafion of his peculiar Rights ? So that our late
Unitarians muft in this point give up the Caufe to
'em, and muft. never pretend to charge their Practice
as Idolatrous. And accordingly, The Apology which
the Author of the Defence §f the Brief Hiftory, &c.
makes for his Party is very lame. For all he has to
fay
True*Deity of our B/eJ/ed Saviour. 141
&y in the matter is, - " That the Papifls have no Texts
il of Scripture which require 'em to JVorfloip St. Peter,
<c St. Paulj and St. Francis. Were they content {faith
<c he) to keep within the bounds of Re f peel and Honour
Cc due to glorify' d Saints, they fhou'd be guilty of no
<c fault. But to pray to 'em as Mediators both of In-
c ' terceffion and Merit, To dedicate Churches to 'em,
Cc To kneel down before their Images^ &c. This ap-
6 proaches too near to Idolatry.
Anfw. We are not here Enquiring whether the
Popifo Invocation of Angels and Saints be Commanded or
Uncommandedt) or in what Particulars fome may ex-
ceed others in it : But whether it be in it felf 'injuri-
ous to the Honour of God, and juftly condemnable on
that account. And if it be not injurious to God's
Honour to give Religious TVorfloip to a dignify" 'd Crear
ture, How can it be prov'd to befo to give it gsod An-
gels and glorify' d Saints ? Not only does Socinus aflerty
That communicated Excellency is a juir. ground of
Wormip, but even the Author of the Defence tells
ils, " That as there are divers Orders of Creatures, fo
they are to be honour' d in Proportion to their Digni-
ty. And, That if the Papifls wou'd keep within the
bounds of Refpecl and Honour due to glorify' d Saints,
theyfljou*d be guilty of no fault. Now the Papifts
do not deny to Jefus Chrifl a higher Honour than they
give to Angels and glorify' d Saints. What wrong
then do they to the Honour of God, in Praying to an
Angel or a Saint, if Praying to a Creature be not in-
jurious to his Glory? If it be laid, That their Pray-
ing to an Angel or Saint, does in the nature of the Acti-
on it felf fuppofe that Angel or Saint to be prefent
with him that Prays, to underfland his particular Cafe,
nay to know the inward Intentions and Ajfeclions of his
Heart, and is therefore injurious to the Honour of
God, by afcribing to a finite Creature that unlimited
Pre fence and Knowledge that belongs to God alone,
and is by the Scriptures (as I have already fhewny
frequently appropriated to him; then the fame
Charge may be brought againft all Religious JVorjloip
to Jefus Chrift on Suppofition of his being only n
dignify' 4
rr*. A ViNDicAfiON of the
dignify 'd Creature-, becaufe on this Supposition, It
afcribes to him the peculiar Excellencies of the Di-
vine Nature. Nay if Socinus himfelf, (a) and ma-
ny of his Followers, befides all the Followers of
Francifcus Davidis, 6tc. be in the right, That we
have no Command in Scripture for Praying to Chrift 9
Their Caufe and that of 'the Papifls in the Invocation of
Angels and Saints is every way built on the fame Foun-
dation^ and mu&ftand or fall with it.
But if the Grounds they go upon be true, What
tolerable reafon can be given, why the Angel fhou'd
fo ftrictly forbid and caution St. John when he fell
down to Worfhip him, See thou do it not. Worflnp
God, Rev. i p. 10. and 22. p. Can we think that
St. John, who knew him to bean Angel, intended
him any more than an Inferior Worflnp? (Andiffuch
Worfhip be allowable to an Angel at any time, 'tis
when he appears and is prefent.) Why then fhou'd
the Angel warn him againft. it, and that by infinua-
ting to him that it wou'd be injurious to God, whom
alone he was to pay Religious Homage to ?
• Upon the whole, The Opinion and Practice of the
Unitarians plainly re-advances that Creature- Worfhip
which it was one great Deflgn of the Chriftian Re-
ligion to overturn and abolifh. It undermines that
grand Article of the Everlafting Gofpel that was to be
Preached to every Nation, and Kindred, and Tongue,
and People ; Fear God, and give Glory to him, and the
Hour of his Judgment is come, and Worflnp him that
made Heaven, and Earth, and the Sea, and the Foun-
tains of Waters, Rev. 14. 6, 7. by fetting up as an
Object of Religious Worpip a Creature to whom nei-
ther the Divine Perfections nor Works belong.
Having thus clear'd the Arguments for the Deity of
Chrift, drawn from the Divine Titles, Perfections^
Works and Worflnp which the Scriptures afcribe to
him, 'torn the Author's Exceptions j It only remains,
(a) Tho'in this (as Niemojeivts juftly tells himj he had ruin'd hisown
Cmfe, by giving thofe who oppos'd that Divine Worfhip of Chrift
which he pleaded for, the greateft Advantage againft hirx\,
That
True Tteity of our Bleffed Saviour. J43
That I anfwer thofe few flraggling Objections that
he has confufedly thrown together at the end of his
Book.
The mofl material of 'em is what occurs,^. 17, 18.
where he argues againfl the Supreme Deity of Chrift
from its being inconfiflent with his Office as Mediator.
To this purpofe he argues, " If I mufi have one
" who is Supreme God and Man for my Mediator with
cc God ', then when I addrefs to Jefus Chrifl as the Su-
u preme God^ where is the God-?nan that mufi be my
<c Mediator with him ? To fay he mediates with him-
U fetfi * s ^ Je f ame as t0 fay f mu fi S° t0 him without
cc a Mediator, &c. But the Scriptures /peak of a Me-
cc diator without a God, And who is this Mediator, if
* c we go to Jefus Chrifi as the ultimate Ob j eel ?
Anfw. All the force of this Objection lies in the
Obfcurity and Ambiguity of it. And I need do no
more to difcover the weaknefs of it, than to diftin-
guifh thofe feveral a£ts of Mediation which the Au-
thor\ Objection confounds, and to fhew what di-
ftincr. part his Divine and Humane Nature act. therein.
We believe, as well as the Author, That there is
one God) and one Mediator with God, the Man Chrifi
Jefus j 1 Tim. z. 4. And to underftand his Mediation.
aright, we mufi confider, That it may either re-
fpecr. his Pricfily or Kingly Office.
As his Mediation refpe&s his Pricfily Office, (and
to this alone the Author's Objection refers) there
are two Branches of it-, the #ȣ perform'd on Earth:
the other in Heaven. On the Earth He offered Him-
felf an Atoning Sacrifice for us •> In Heaven he appears
for us in the pre fence of God as our Inter ceff or and Ad-
vocate. Now we grant it was the Man Jefus Chrifi,
that became by his voluntary Sufferings and Death
our Atoning Sacrifice. And to this Acl of Mediation
:he Eternal Son of God concurred, by freely deliver-
ing up that Humane Nature he had affum'd to fo
f sndious Sufferings, and by giving a fufficient
Dignity and Merit to thofe Sufferings to render 'em
a valuable Confideration for our Impunity. And on
I account r he Apoflle Paulfycaks of the Church of
God
*44 :/£ Vindication 0/*^
God as purchased with his own Blood, Acts lb. z$.
Again, We grant that the Man Jefus Chrifi does
now appear in the prefence of God, as our Interceffor
and Advocate with the Father. But we believe} that
the Eternal Word to which that Humane Nature vizi
unitedjas it gave a fufiicient Value to his Sufferings^
fo it eo.nfequently gives a fufficient Efficacy to his
Interceflion.
Now we may juftly enquire of the Author, Whjf
the Man Jefus Chrifi fhou'd be lefs capable of eithet
offering himfelf an Atoning Sacrifice, or of appearing in
the Divine Prefence as our fuccefsful Advocate with the
Father on the account of his Union to the Eternal
Word? And why may not the Man Chrifi Jefus, iri
fuch a Concurrence with the Eternal Son of Godj
thus mediate with the Father, who (as I have before
fuggefted) does in this Oeconomy fuftain the Cha-
racter of Suprems Lawgiver, without fuppofmg that
God mediates with himfelf \ if by Mediation the Au-
thor intend either Dying as our Propitiation, or ap~
pcaring in the Divine Prefence in the heavenly Sanctua-
ry with the Blood of Attonement ? For thefe are acts
in which the Humane Nature is the immediate Prin*
ciple and Agent, tho' they are afcrib'dtothe Per fori
of our Lord Jefus. And fure we may eaiily conceive
how thefe Acfs fhould derive a higher Value from
the Union of that Humane Nature to the Eternal
Word. But againft this the Author Objects,
" If it he faid, His Humane Nature only acts in this
u Mediation^ tho'' as united to the Divine; I anfwer',
" That as this is fill to make Chrifi Mediator with
u himfelf, fo the Humane Nature is not God-man. And
a if the Man or Humane Nature alone be capable of do*
cc ing the part of a Mediator, then'tis not neceffary that
" Jefus Chrifi fioou'd be more than a Man inhabited by
" and related to God in order to that Office. Nor may
" it be faidj That the Union to the Divine Nature,
* c gives an infinite Efficacy to thofe Acts of which the Hu-
" mane only is the Principle ; For unlcfs by that Union
u the Humane Nature was turn'd into an Infinite or
*• Divine Nature, its Acts can no more be reckon" d
intrin*
True ^Deity of our Blcjfed Saviour. t^$
c intrinfically and properly infinite, than his Body or Un-
** derftanding are infinite becaufe fo united to an infinite
<c Nature.
Anfw. We do not fay, The Humane Nature only
nets in this Mediation, Becaufe we fuppcfethejDi^7#<?
Nature of our Lord to Confent to, and communi-
cate a Dignity and Value to the Sufferings of his Hu-
mane, and to contribute thereby to the Prevalency
of his Interceffion. And it will not thence follow,
That our Lord Jefus Mediates with himfelf, but on-
ly with the Father. Nor will it follow^ That the
Mediator is not God as well as Man-, Or that the Hu-
mane Nature alone can do the Part of a Mediator^ and
That therefore it is not necejfary that Jefus Chrifi JIjou 'd
be more than a Man inhabited by and related to God m
order to that Office. A Prophet or Apoftle, nay eve-
ry good Man, is Inhabited by and related to God : And
yet, fuppofing 'em as linlefs as our Lord himfelf, the
Blood of fuch a one cou'd never have been a valua-
ble Confideration for the Redemption of Mankind >
it cou'd never have been an Effectual Propitiation
for Sin, or a fufficient Ranfam to purchafe the Church
of God : And we cou'd have had no folid ground
to depend upon any Interceffion in the Vertue of it.
But we can depend on the Sacrifice and Interceffion
of that Humane Nature which the Eternal Son of God
afTum'd, and to whofe Sufferings it cou'd confent and
communicate a fufficient value for anfwering all the
Ends of the Divine Government.- And we do not,
as the Author pretends, affert, That the Acts of Chrifi' s
Humane Nature become properly and intrinfically infi-
nite by its Union to the Divine (for that's impoffible) 5
But only that hereby they become of Infinite or un-
conceivable, and all-fufjicicnt value. The Dignity or
our Lord' j Divine Perfon giving a value to thofe
a£h of which the Humane Nature is the immediate
Principle.
But our Author pretends to demonftrate, TIr.it:
Chrift's Humane Nature can never. be an ElFcciual
Mediator (according to our Judgment) even
pcrf jnally united to the Divine Becaufe (he iaith)
L « Ws
146 A Vindication of the
M We deny this Humane Nature fo united to have the
** Knowledge of the Secret Mental Prayers, the inward
cc defms and diftrejfes of all Chriftians, or to know a*
■" ny ones Heart. And how then can he he a Compaf-
M fwnate Inter ceffor in Cafes that he knows nothing of?
"Or how can he have a fellow-feeling of their Suffer-
w ings which he knows not that they feel at all ? What
" comfort is there in this account of ChriJFs Mediation ?
Anfw. Either the Author fpeaks of an immediate
Knowledge of our mental Prayers -, of our inward
Defiies and our very Hearts : or a Knowledge by
Revelation. As to the former, I have fhewn him,
That the Scriptures every where appropriate it to
God. As to the latter, Why may not we fuppofe
as much of this kind reveal'd to Chrift's Humane
Nature, and that in confiftency with our Doctrine,
as he ? Will Chrijl^s Humane Nature have the lefs
reveal'd to it, becaufe 'tis perfonally united to the
Eternal Word? So that if his Humane Nature be ca-
pable of fuch an Univerfal Knowledge of all our par-
ticular Cafes by Revelation, we have as much reafon
to fuppofe it as he, and are willing to fuppofe as much
Knowledge of that kind communicated to it by Re-
velation, as can agree to the finite Capacity of his
Humane Soul. If it be not, our Author is as much
concern' d to anfwer this Objeclion as we are. And
upon this Supposition, it muft be anfwer'd by afler-
ting, That as by one and the fame act he offer'd
liimielf a Sacrifice for all, the vertue whereof is ap-
plicable to every true Chriftian in particular : So his
'I nterceflion, fo far as his Humane Nature aclrs there-
in, confifts in his appearing in the Divine Prefence
in the heavenly Sanctuary, (as the High-Pried did
in the Holy of Holies with the Names of the Twelve
Tribes Engraven on his Breaft-Plate,) the benefit
whereof every true Chriftian as truly reaps as if his par-
ticular Cafe were truly known to Chrift's Humane
Soul : Becaufe in his Divine Nature our Lord does
underftand their particular Cafes, and can apply fu-
table Relief to 'em. But if his Humane Soul be ca-
pable of a more comprehenfive and particular Know-
ledge
True Deity of our Blejjed Saviour, 147
ledge by Revelation, 'tis every way as confident
with our Doctrine as with his, or rather more.
But ( faith our Author ) " The Divine Nature is
" precluded from it, becaufe they direct us to feek to
" that as the ultimate Object thro' a Mediator ; and the
" Humane Nature {they fay) may know nothing of our
" Cafe, nor knows our Hearts, whether we WorfJjip
" and Repent fincerely, or only hypocritically, and fo
" knows not how to reprefent or recommend us to God.
" What a Cafe now do thefe Men bring us into ? There
" is no Mediator left to interpofe with the Supreme
" God, fo that we mufi deal with him immediately and
" alone, which they will own is far from the Gofpel-
" Doctrine or Method. Thus is our Lord Jefus turn-
" ed out of Office, on pretence of giving him higher Ho-
" nour.
Anfw. 'Tis often harder to under fland the Author's
Argument than to anfwer it. What does he mean
by faying, That the Divine Nature is precluded from it?
Is it precluded from the Knowledge of our Hearts ? No,
fure } for we attribute to that alone the immediate
Knowledge of 'em. And what tho' the Divine Na-
ture, as it fubfifts in the Father, be the ultimate Ob-
ject of our AddrefTes, will it thence follow, that the
fame Divine Nature in the Son cannot reveal to the
Human Nature it has affum'd all the Knowledge of
our particular Cafes, and of our very Hearts, that
fuch a finite Nature is capable of ? And if it be ca-
pable of knowing 'em all by Revelation, then our
Author's Objection vanifhes -, if it be not, he is (as I
have {hewn) as much concern'd to anfwer it as we.
And now let him review upon what Ground he fo
vainly infults, when he faith, What a Cafe now do
thefe Men bring us unto ? &c. We do as much alfert
with the Apoftle as he, That the Man Chrifi Jefus is
cur Mediator with God > So that we do not deal im-
mediately with him. And we fuppofe him the more
capable to mediate effecliually, becaufe we believe
the Humane Nature aflum'd into a perf<Mial Union
with the Son of God. Becaufe the .Dignitv of his
Pcrfon is capable of giving a Value and Merit to his
L 2. Sacrifice
148 A Vindication of the
Sacrifice, and a Prevalency to his Interceffisn. But
let him coniider into what a Cafe he brings us,who
afferts what the Apoftle Paul never did, That our
Mediator is only a Man. And what is there in the
Life of a meer Man to render it a fufficient Ran-
fom for all? What value is there in the Blood of facb.
a one to Pur chafe the Church of God? What Effica-
cy or Merit is there in fuch a Sacrifice to expiate and
take away the guilt of Sin, or obtain Eternal Redemp-
tion for us? And if there be no fufficient Vertue or
Value in that, There can be as little Prevalency in
his Inter ceffion. So that all the Queftion amounts to
this, Whether the Man Chrifl Jefus is more capa-
ble of being an effectual Mediator with the Father,
conrlder'd as United to and afting in Concurrence
with and Subordination to the Eternal Son of God-,
or confider'd as deftitute of any fuch Union and Re-
lation ? And that the Apoftle never intended by cal-
ling the Mediator the Man Chrifl Jefus to exclude
his Divine Nature, is fo evident from his de-
ferring him elfewhere as not only the Seed of
Abraham, but God over all bleffed for evermore, and
by telling us That the Church of God was purchased
with his own Blood, that the Author has highly in-
jur'd him by fo grofly mifinterpreting his Words j
We are very willing to Hand to the Apoftle 's account of
this matter at 1 Tim. z. 5*. if the Author will but al-
low him to be his own Interpreter at Rom. 9. f. Acls
20. 2.8.
And what I have faid does fufficiently obviate
what he only repeats, " That they who hold true to
the Unity of the Divine Nature, or one infinite Be-
ing undrr three Modes, Properties or Relations ; do
/; " plain Conference leave no place for fuch a Medi-
ator as they require, viz. One who is an infinite
" God to be Mediator with the infinite God, when
" there is no infinite Being but his own, and he can-
{< not be thought to intercede with himfelf neither. All
this Objection turns upon the Author's not allowing
fuch a Diftincl:ion in the Divine Nature as we fup-
pofe to be between the Father ' 5 Son* and Holy
Spirit,
to
a
Ci
True ^eity of our Eleffed Saviour. 149
Spirit^ and not diftinguiiriing between thofe Ac~bs or
which the Divine Nature, and thofe of which the
Humane is the immediate Principle, of which Acts
belonging to the latter, this of Inter ceffion mention-
ed is one. And if thefe Diftinctions be made, why
may not the Man Chrift Jefus, and that as united to
the Divine Nature in its fecond manner of Sub fiitence
and Operation (or in the Per/on of the Son) both of-
fer up himfelf as a Sacrifice on Earthy and appear
in the Divine Prefence in Heaven as our Advo-
cate with the Father ? Nay, how infinitely greater
Reafon have we to expect that his Mediation will be
Efficacious and Succefsful on this Suppofition, than
if with the Author, we fuppofe him to Se only a Man ?
I fhou'd here add, That as to that part of Chrift's
Mediation which reipects his Kingly Office ; and which
the Author's Objection feems not to refer to, viz.
His difpenfing to us all Benefits and Bleflmgs from
the Father by his Royal Power •, it does more fully
appear, That the Difcharge of it does require an
Unlimited and Divine Power, and cannot be per-
formed by one that is a meet Man. How can a meter.
Man be the Head of all vital Influences to all the
Members of his Myfiical Body? or exercife an Uni-
versal Providence and Care over all the Affairs both
of the Church and the World ?
The Author at/>. 18, 1 p. refers us for an Account
of Chrift to St. Peter's magnificent Defcription or
him at the Day of Pentecoft, before his Murderers
themfelves, Acts z. iz. Ye Men of Ifrael, hear thefe
Words, Jefas of Nazareth, a Man approved of God
among you by Wonders, Miracles and Signs , which
God did by him in the midft of you. Again at ver. 26.
Let all the Houfe of Ifrael know afj'uredly, that God
hath made that fame Jefus, whom ye have crucify 'd,
both Lord and Chrift. Now the Author infers, " Why
" fljoiCd the Apoftle, if he had believ'dthe Infinite Deity
u of Chrift, leave out that moft Emphaiical Branch
" in the Defcription of him, that was the moft terri-
" fywS, Argument, and moft capable to convince bis
" Perfecutors,tkc. "WZ.That they had ilicd the Blood
L 2 4C ot
i^o ^Vindication^/ /^
" of the* Infinite God himfelf ? Whereas what he
u faith is flat and low in Comparifon of this.
Anfm. All the Force of this Argument turns upon
this Suppofition, That the Apoftle defign'd in thefe
Words to defcribe our Bleffed Saviour bythehigheft
Characters that belong to him : But this I deny :
It was only his Defign to reprefent and prove Chrift
to have been the true MeJJiah, whom they had un»
juftly crucify'd ; and that it felf was fufficient to
itrike Horror into their Confciences : But it was
not his Defign to inftrucl: 'em mall the Dignity of the
Meffiah. For if it was, why does not the Apoflle
tell 'em, they had fhed the Blood of him, that was
of the Fathers according to the Flejh, and was over all
God bleffed for evermore ; nay, of him in whom the
Fulnefs of the Godhead dwells bodily j nay, of him who
is the Brightnefs of the Fatbefs Glory, and the exprefs
hmge of his Perfon, by whom he made the World ?
For thefe are Characters of Chrifl deliver'd by other
Infpired Writers, and more magnificent ones than
what the Apoftle Peter here lays down. And fhall
we expunge 'em out of the Bible, becaufe the Apollle
Peter thought not fit to mention 'em in this Defcrip-
tion ? Nay, our Author does not confider that this
Argument is as ftrone againft himfelf. He feems to
own that Chrift had a pre-exiftent Nature, at p. z.
And he fuppofes him, One by whom God made the
Worlds, tis his Inftrument : Nay, as One far above An- ■
gels and Arch- Angels, and over all Powers in Heaven
and Earth, A God or Ruler, and the great Adminiftra-
tor of God's Kingdom, both in the Vifible and the In-
vifible World, at p. 1 1 . And if the Apoflle Peter be-
lieved all this, was it not as neceffary and as proper
to have fuggefted fuch Characters of our Lord Jefus
as thefe, to iirike the greater Horror of their Crime
into the Hearts of his Murtherers ? Is not his calling
him a Man upprov'd of God, See. all low and flat in
comparifon of this ? Does he not fee that this Argu-
ment will be as itrong in the Mouth of a Pacinian
againft Chrift 's having a pre-exiftent Nature, as 'tis in
his againft his having a Divine Nature ? And how
does
True *Deity of our Blejfed Saviour. 15 r
does he prove, what he takes for granted, That the
Apoftle baptiz'd thofe he converted without ever in-
ftru&ing 'em in this Article of our Lord's Divinity ?
Efpecially fince we are told, that 'tis only a part of
his Difcourfe to 'em that is there related. Nay, I
might here fuggeft to our Author that tho' the Apo-
ftle Peter does not mention the Divinity of Chriji as
an Aggravation of the Crime of hisMurtherers,who
perhaps did not underftand that their expected Mef-
ftah was to be God as well as Man, yet another Apo-
ftle reminds 'em of it, when he tells 'em, That had
they known they would not have crucified the Lord of
Glory , 1 Cor. z. 8. a Title often given to the great
Jehovah, and alluding to the Shecinah, or vifible Ap-
pearance of Divine Glory under the Old Teftament :
Nay, the fame Apoftle calls the Blood of Chriji the
Blood of God, becaufe it was the Blood of him that
was Go/ as wellzs Man, Acls 10. z$.
And the fame Anfwer to this Text, Acts z. 2z.may
ferve to that Text he only mentions, Acls 10. 38.
t He next adds, " That God and Qhr\^ are two Difr
4 parates or different things, as much as Chrift's Body
* and Bread are, and cannot be predicated of one ano~
<c ther in a proper Senfe, or without a Figure.
Anfw. That God and the Man Chriji Jefus are dif-
ferent things we grant him, and that they cannot be
predicated of one another in a proper Senfe. But
what fignifies this to prove, That the Eternal Word
that was made Flejb is not God ?
Why he tells us, u To be anointed imports to be
" raised by Authority and Honour conferred, 'tis in ef-
M feci to fay, the Perfon is a Creature or inferior Beiw .--
" And therefore to Jay, That Chriji is mojl High God,
u is to fay the inferior is fupreme, and the Man is God.
Anfw. How miferable Trifling is this ? When the
Author knows that Chriji or Anointed is only a Name,
that tho' given to his Perfon, immediately refers to
his Humane Nature as qualify 'd for his Offices of Pro-
phet, Priejl, £tc. Can it be thence inferr'd, That he
has no other Nature than that ? We'U grant him, if
it will do hisCaufe any Service, that the Af ant h//< a ~
L 4 minted
i$i ^Vindication of the
nomted is only a Creature and an inferior Beings and
as fuch not the moft High God : But will it therefore
follow, that the Word or Son of God, that aflum'd
and acted that Human Nature, is not the moft High
God?
" But ({kith he) if the Bufinefs may be folv'd here
" by making a perfonal Union between God and Chrift^
^ I fee not why the Papifls may not fet up fuch an Union
" between Chrift^s Body and the Bread in the Eucharift^
Ci and then Jloutly defend, that'tis the Body of Cirri (I.
Anfw. If the Author here argue at all, 'tis thus :
If ChriJFs Human Nature may be perfonally united
to the Eternal Word, fo that he may he God as well as
Man, then Chrift's Body and the Bread in the Sacra-
ment may be fo united, that the Bread may be his
Body. But what Union will the Author find out for
us to make good fo ftrange a Confequence ? Do we
fuppofe ChriJPs Human Nature tranfubflantiated or
chang'd into the Divine, as the Papifis fuppofe the
Bread to. be into Chrifs Body ? Or wou'd the Union
of the Divine to the Human Nature, infer fuch a Pe^
rietration of Bodies, and all other Contradictions to
Senfc in a proper Ob je£b of Senfe, that wou'd follow
upon the Union ofChriJFs Body to all the Confe crated
Wafers on the Romijh Altars ?
And yet the Author is fo pleas'd with this Shadow
of an Argument, that it leads him into a long Di-
greffion concerning the Unfrcadinefs of many Prote-
fiant Writers, in which he wou'd perfwade us, " 'that
*' c the Proteftants when they have anfwcred the Papifts,
u are forced to ufe thofe very Popifh Arguments they
iC had baffled againfl the Unitarians.
Let us take a fhort View of his Allegations.
" thus (he faith) we anfwer the PapiirV Charge of
* c Isovdiyby telling'em, our Religion was in the Bible,-
" and yet objetl that very Novelty to the Unitarians. .
Anfw. We do not barely tell the Papifls that our
Religion was in the Bible : But that the Subitance
of it has continued and been profefled ever fince..
That Popery is a Maft of corrupt Additions to it
Tfhicii gradually crept in$ all or moil of which were
utterly
True 'Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. #73
utterly unknown to the 3 nrit Ages, nay, many of 'cm
were not introduced till the 7th, 8th, fome not 'till
the 1 zth Age, nay many of 'em were not authoriz'd
by any General Council (as they vainly call their pack'd
Aflemblies) 'till that fcandalous one at Trent. Nay,
the chief Do£trine of Popery, the Papal Headfhifo
feems not to have been generally own'd in the Ro-
mifh Church for 1000 Years after Chrift^ and never
by the Eafiern Churches at all.
And why may we not in Confiftency with all this,
objecl: to the Unitarians^ That as their Doctrine is
contrary to the Holy Scriptures, fo 'tis to the con-
current Judgment of the Universal Church (both in
Eafi and Weft) for fo many Ages ? Is there no Weight
in fuch a Confederation ? Shou'd it not make any
wife Man cautious of rejecting an Article which the
whole Chriftian Church has for fo many Ages taken
to be fo important a part of her Creed ? And the
contrary Doctrine whereto never pafs'd in any Age
without publick Cenfure ? But the Author wrongs us
if he pretends, That we lay the main Strefs of our
Caufe here.
Again, he faith, $' We prove that the Elements in
<c the Eucharifl are not Chrift's Body and Bloody be-
w caufe they are by theFathers caWd the Images thereof:
* c But we will not allow the Unitarians Argument,
" That Chrift is not the mofi High God, be caufe £he
u Scriptures call him his Image.
Anfw. And does the Author think there is no Dif-
ference between the Notion of zn Image when ap-
ply'd to a Bodily Subftance, and when apply'd to an
Infinite Inviftble Spirit ? And will it follow, That an
Image when apply'd to the latter, imports a differing
Being from that whefe Image it is 3 becaufe it does
import fo when apply'd to the former ?
Again, he tells us, f* That we prove againflthe Va-
K P*ft s i that &■ Peter was inferior to the Church and
u the reft of the Apoftles, becaufe he was fent up and
" down by ''em 3 But we will not allow this Argument
*' when brought to prove that the Son is inferior to
* c theX'arher.
Anfzu.
1S4 <d Vindication of the
Anfw. St. Peter's being fent by the Church wa»
never brought by any Man in his Wits as an Argu-
ment to prove,, that he was inferior either to the
Church or to the Apoftles in refpect of \m Nature and
Effence 2& •A.Man : Nor indeed does it prove his be-
ing inferior in Office and Dignity to any of the reft of
the Apo "files. No more then can the Son's being fent
by the Father prove his being inferior to him in reipe^b
of his Nature and Effence, which is the Equality we
aflert - 9 and yet if it will do our Author any Service,
we will allow that it proves what St. Peter's being
fent does not, viz. The Son to be in refpect of Office
inferior to the Father 5 the Father fuftaining the
Character of Supreme Lawgiver, the Son of Mediator
in the Oeconomy of our Salvation. So unhappy is
the Author in the Choice of his Arguments, that to
increafe their Number he brings in fuch as directly
make againft himfelf.
Once more he tells us, " 'That againft the Papifis we
cc urge People to enquire into, and to examine the Mat-
tc ters in Difpitte. Rut when we have to do with the-
* c Unitarians we tack about, and bid 'em beware of
46 Reading and Difputing, and are fer implicit Faith.
Anfw. The Author may fee bythisAniwer (where-
in he will find the molt of his Book repeated Ver-
baiim, and I am fure not one Argument of any Mo-
ment omitted) that we are not afham'd of bringing
our Caufe to the Light ; and are far from either hood-
winking the People in Ignorance, or urging y em to an im-
plicit Faith. We are not only willing but defirous
they ihou'd compare our Doctrine in this Ankle
with that of the Holy Scriptures. But I hope the
Author does not cxpedt we ihou'd advife every pri-
vate Chriftian, that is under no Doubts in reference
to his Chriftian Faith, or to this Article of it, to read
all the Pamphlets wrote of late by the Deifts and
Unitarians, that tend to unhinge and unfettle his Mind
in reference to the Truth of the Chriftian Religion,
or of this particular Branch of it. Much lefs can
he expect we fhould advife 'em to read thofe perni-
cious Papers, without reading any Anfwers to 'em ;
not
True *Deity of our Eleffed Saviour. 155-
Ho more than we wou'd advife 'em to venture on
Poyfon without an Antidote.
And whereas he tells us, " That upon Proteftant
** Principles the Unitarians can ft and their Ground, and
a defend themfelves as well as the Protectants can a-
u gainft the Papiffo : I think our Unitarians fhou'd
not boaftfo much of their Proteftant Principles, when
in that important Point of Giving Religious Worfliip
to a Creature, they have fo manifeflly given up the
Caufe to the Papifts, and clear'd 'em from the Charge
Of Idolatry in their Religious Invocation of Angels and
glorify* d Saints. But I mufl tell him, That as our
Proteilant Doctrine that appropriates all Religious
Worfhip to God, will (land as long as the Bible does •>
fo it will overturn theirs, that give that Religious
Wor/hip to our Saviour, while they believe him to
be no more than a Dignify* d Creature. And all their
baffled Biftinclions of Supreme or Inferior, Abfolute
and Ultimate or Relative Worfhip, which in this Point
they borrow from the Papifts (and which are the
Plaifters they ufe to cover this Sore ) will never be
able to fupport it. And I defire the Author to fet
this one folid Proof of his Party's Unfteadinefs to the
Proteftant Caufe, againft all the imaginary Instances
of ours that he has here alledg'd.
As to Primitive Antiquity, if the Author have a mind
to try his Skill he may enter the Lilts on this Head
either with Dr. Bull or with the Biftjop of IVorceftcr
in his late Vindication of the Trinity. (For I hope he
will never take the Triflings of his Anfwerer in the
4th Colled, of Unit. Tracts for a Reply to it.) Or
even with Dr. Whitby in the few Citations he has
from the Anti-Nicene Fathers, mhisTratlatus de Dei-
tate Chrifti. And when he produces any thing of
Moment againft the Authorities they alledgc, he may
expect, it will be fairly confider'd. 'Till then, I mall
Only tell the Author that we can have no Veneration
for the great Defenders of the Chriftian Caufe, if
they fo grofly abus'd and Itrain'd their Eloquence as
to equal a Creature to the Eternal God. And on the o-
ther hand, their equalling Chrift with the Father in
refpecl:
158 ^Vindication of the
refpect. of his Effence is not inconfiftent with their af-
ferting him to be inferior in refpe<5t of Office^ by a
voluntary Difpenfation, as he may fee 2.x, p. 24, &^-
As to the Author's ProfefHon of his own Since-
rity in what he writes, I do not pretend to judge
him. To his own Matter he ftands or falls. I mail
therefore only obferve, that in his Defcription of
our Saviour's Offices he has left out his being our
Propitiation or attoning Sacrifice : And that he might
frill have believ'd the Father to be greater than Chrift y
and God to be the Head of Chriji (in the Senfe already
explain'd) without fuch a bold and dangerous At-
tempt as this, to derogate from his Honour as God 0-
ver all bleffed for evermore.
As to the Charity he recommends to us at p. 21.
from the Example of Juflin Martyr, I mall only
fay, that we are willing to extend it as far asReafon
will allow. But he muft excufe us that we dare not
truft in any as our Saviour who is not the Supreme
God. See Tit. 2. 14. compared with If a. 14. 21,22.
ffljere is no God elfe befides me y a jufl God and a Sa-
viour, there is none befides me : Look unto ?ne, and be
ye fayed all the Ends of the Earth ; for I am God,
and there is none elfe. And the Reader may compare
the following Verfe with Rom. 14. 11. to convince
him that 'tis our Lord Jefus the Prophet there in-
tends : See what is faid above at p. 1 24. And we
muft. add, that it would extreamly weaken the Ve-
neration we have for our Bleffed Saviour and his A-
poftles, if he mould be proved to be a meer digni-
fy' d Creature. For we cannot fee how he can be
excus'd from affecting Divine Honour himfelfj or the
Apoftles from countenancing our giving it to him..
And we judge, that the degrading him to the Rank
of a dignify' d Creature does molt effectually expofe
him to the Scorn of Infidels, as a vain Ufurper of the
peculiar Rights and Glory of the great Jehovah.
So that we think it every Way fafeft to adhere to the
Faith and Practice of Juflin Martyr (how far foever
we may ftretch our Charity to thofe that differ from
us in fo important an Article) when he frith, tc We
« (Chri-
True "Deity of our Bleffed Saviour. 15^
" ( Chrijlians ) worihip and adore the Father, and
" the Son that came from him, and taught us thefe
" things, &c. and the Spirit of Prophecy, honour-
" ing 'em in Word and Truth, Apol.z.p. y6. C.
Chriji crucify' d is no Stumbling-block to us (as the
Author groundlefly fuggefts). But yet we cannot
reconcile many of thofe Characters the Author here
gives him with the Opinion of his being no more
than a digniffd Creature. We cannot allow fuch a
Creature to be the Maker of the Worlds ; for what
our Author adds, of his being an Inflrumcnt ih mak-
ing x em\ is a Notion that deftroys it felf (as I have
fhewn at p. 64.) Nor can we believe him to be a
meer Creature in whom the Fulnefs of the Godhead
dwells j and who is One with the Father j (not One
in Confent, but One in Energy and Power, as I have
■fhewn the Context explains it at John 10. 30. com-
par'd with Ver. 38.) Who is far above all Angels and
Arch -angels, being the ObjebJ of their Worfloip ~ 9 who
is the great Adminifirator of the Divine Kingdom both
in the vijible and invifible World. And we think It
far more abfurd to give thefe Characters to a meer
digniffd Creature, than (what the Author with fo dar-
ing aPrefumption reprefents as the moll compleatAh-
furdity) to affert, That Chrifi is the fame Supreme G-od^
(i. e. the fame in Nature and Eflcnce) with the Fa-
ther, whoic Son and Image he is. This is fo far from
being abfurd, that our Blejfed Saviour cannot be his
Son (in a Senfe peculiar to himfclf, and incommuni-
cable to any other, or, as the Scriptures fpeak, his
only-begotten Son) without a Participation of his Na-
ture, and the effential Perfections thereof. Nor can
he without it be the Bright nefs of the Father's Glory,
and the exprefs Image of his Perfon (or Subfiflcnce) "as
he is call'd, Heb. 1 . z. (Not a vifible Image, as the
Author groundlefly fuppofes). But to give thefe
forernention'd Characlers to -x?neer exalted Man, plain-
ly confounds God and Man, Finite and Infinite^ the
Creator and the Work of his Hands, which is ano-
ther kind of Abfurdity than to luppofe fuch
a Diftin&ion in the infinite yet undivided Na-
ruvr
I58 A VlN DI CAT ION Of the
ture of God, as the Do£trine of the 'Trinity implies.
And if the Author thinks this a grievous Offence, we
cannot help it : But we think it a more real and
grievous Offence, that a profeiTed Minifter of our
Lord Jefus mould rob him of the Glory of his Ef-
fcntial Deity, the Denial whereof we apprehend ob-
fcures the Glory of that marvellous Wifdom and
Grace that are fo confpicuoufly difplay'd in the Gof-
pel, and takes away from that Divine Inftitution
what appears mod amiable in it, even the unparal-
lel'd Condefcenlion and Love of the Eternal Son of
God in his Incarnation and Sufferings for the Salvati-
on of the Sons of Men.
And for what the Author fuggefis, " that this
" Dotlrine of the Incarnation of God (i. c. of God
" the Son) hinders the Progrefs of the Gofpel, and
a occajions the Rejection of it by Jews, Mahometans,
cc and Pagans : I am fo far from being of his Mind,
that I know nothing (except Popery) more likely to ob-
itruct. the Progrefs of it than the Oppofkion of our
late Unitarians to this Article of our Religion. For
the Jews, who believ'd the extraordinary Prefence
of God in the Cloud of Glory both in the Tabernacle
and Temple, it can be no reafonable Objection to
them againit the Gofpel, that God mould be mani-
fefted in the Flejh, and dwell in that more perfect.
Tabernacle or Temple of an Human Soul and Body :
And for the Ancient Jews, our Author would do
well to confider what Bimop Kidder, in his Demon-
monf ration of the Mtffiah, has offer' d to lriew, that
they had fome obfcurer Notices of the Chriftian
Doctrine in reference to the Trinity, and particular-
ly the Divinity of the Word (a). For Pagans, their
frequent Relations of the Defcent of their Gods-
mould render the Incarnation of God no way incre-
dible to 'em j and what the greater!: of their Philo-
fophers has deliver' d concerning a Trinity of Princi-
ples in the Divine Nature, mould rather facilitate
than
(a) See Part TIT Chap. IV, V, VI.
True ^Delty of our Blejfed Saviour. 1^9
than obftrucr. their Belief of what we fuppofe the
Gofpel to declare concerning it. For Mahometans
indeed, this Doctrine may be a Stumbling-block in
their Way -, for their great Prophet has taught 'em
an invincible Reafon againil God's having a Son, be-
caufe he never had a Wife : So grofs and ftupid were
the Apprehenfions of that vile Impofior. But yet
tho' a Coalition between the Mahometans and Unita-
rians may at firfr. View feern eafy and practicable,
becaufe they both perfectly agree in their Opinion
of Jefus Chrifi, That he was the Son of Mary., and
a Great Prophet, but by no means the Son of God by
a Participation of the Divine Nature $ yet there are
two things in the Unitarian Scheme that will be as
great a Stumbling-block to the MaJiometans as he
fuppofes the Incarnation of God to be. The One is,
their making Chrifi a God by Office, and paying Reli-
gious Worship to him, at the fame Time that they
own him to be no more than a Creature. And ia
this Point the MaJoometans have certainly the Ad-
vantage, that they own none as God but one, and
worihip no other Being, not Mcdoomet himfelf whom
they fuppofe the greateil of Prophets- The Other.,
that the Unitarians own the Truth of Chrifi' s Cru-
cifixion (tho' they deny the principal End of it.)
And this it felf is a great Stumbling-block to that
ignorant but proud People, who cannot admit it
into their Thoughts, that God mould permit {o
great a Prophet as Jefus Chrifi to fuffer fuch Indig-
nity from fo defpicable Wretches as they efieem the
Jews to be. And for the Jews themfelves, the giv-
ing Religious Worihip to Chrifi as a Deputy-God, is
fuch a Scandal to them as can never be remov-
ed while the Firfi Command flands in the De-
calogue. But for the Pagans, the Unitarians may
hope for the greatcft Harveft of Profelytes among
them : For they have been fo kind as to juftify
their Demon-Worfinp from all Charge of Idolatry \
and to oblige 'em the more, they have expung'd
out of the Chrifi ian Religion all its peculiar Myfieries 9
leaving little in it but the Principles of Natural Re-
ligion.
ifo A Vindication of, &c.
ligion. So that the Pagans have now only the Do-
ctrine of the Crofs to get over. And as to that, they
are told. That Chrift died chiefly to bear witnefs to
thofe Principles their own Moralifts had taught be-
fore him, concerning another Life. For the Chri*
fiian Religion (faith a late Unitarian Writer) is no*
thing properly but Natural Religion, whofe Light Sin
had almoft extingui/h'd. And God, to give it its fir ft
Splendor, yields up Chrift to Death. See Scandal and
Folly of the Crofs removed, p. 20. And what fhould
hinder Pagans from embracing Chriftianity, when 'tis
prefented to 'em in fo agreeable a Drefs, being real-
ly no other than Paganifm refirfd and revived ? See
the Preface.
. Upon the whole, We are for taking Chriftianity
as laid down in the Bible, and dare not abandon any
of its facred Truths, how fublime and myfterious fo-
ever, to accommodate it to the Guft of Infidels. And
therefore we dare not, to pleafe them, deny the Ef-
fential Deity and Glory of the Lord that bought us $
nor are we afham'd to own him as Supreme God
whom we own as the Maker, and Ruler, and Judge
of the World, the Lord of the Quick and the Dead.
So that we can in entire Confonancy with our Prin-
ciples offer that Doxology to our Bleffed Saviour,
with which the Author concludes his Book, (tho'
according to his we cannot fee how he will clear
that Practice from the Charge of Idolatry) Unto him
that loved us, and wafted us from our Sins in his own-
Blood^-and has made us Kings and Priefts to God and
his Father, even to him. be Glory and Dominion for
ever, Amen, Rev. 1.6.
FINIS.
THE
DOCTRINE
OF THE
Stated 6c Defended.
Byfome London Ministers,
LONDON:
Prmted for JohhClark, at the Bible and
Crown in the Poultry near Cheapfide : And
E. M a t t h e w s, at the Bible in Pater-mfter
\ row. 1719.
Price ts. 6 d f
.
§4
.". • It vC[vO I I
m%m%m%m%®m%m%/jmmn
The Introdu&ion. Pag. u
By the Rev. Mr. Tong.
The Qpeftlon flatei, and the Scripture Evi-
dence of the Trinity, Pag. 1 5,
By the Rev. Mr. Robinson.
The Harmony of the Reform'd Churches,
Pag. 39 .
By the Rev. Mr. Smith.
Advices relating to the DoByine of the
Trinity. Pag. 118.
By the Rev. Mr. Reynolds.
-JO
:
•1 •-.
"
□
:
THE
INTRODUCTION.
H E proper Godhead of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, and of the Holy
Spirit, is a Doctrine that
has been fo univerfally re- 5
ceived among Proteftant
Diffenters, that it is really
a Surprize to us to fee how
much Reafon we have to
warn and exhort one another, that we hold fajl
this My fiery of Faith in a pure Conjcience.
W e have been very backward to fufpecl, that
any among our felves, who have been trained up
to have the
under fome Degrees o£
Suffering,
greateft Value for Scripture Revelation, could
have been by any Means wrought upon to call
in Queftion an Article of Faith, fo fully and fre-
quently aflerted both in the Old and New Tefta-
ment, and which has been always thought to
hold the firft Place among the Principles of the
Oracles of God. And yet that this is the Tryal
of our prefent Day is too true to be denied, and
too manifcft to be any longer concealed by us.
Every Body knows this is no part of the Con-
troverfy depending between the Nonconformiits
and the National Church, and therefore in this
B our
2 The Introduction.
our common Gaufe, we aftecl: not to acT: fepa-
rately from them ; we obferve with Pleafure the
great Judgment, Zeal and Learning with which
they govern themfelvcs in this Argument, and
we honour them for it ; and yet we think our
felvcs more immediately concerned to try whether
thofe oi : our Denomination, that are unfettled in
theic great Points of Faith, may not hearken with
more Attention to the Advice of their old Ac-
quaintance, who have been always ready to give
them full proof of true Friendfhip and the moft
tender Affection.
And yet we apprehend it will hardly be poffi-
ble for us to declare ourf elves on this Occafion, in
fuch a Manner, as not to be fufpected of an un-
friendly Difpofition towards them ; our very fup-
pofing them to have fallen into an Error, and es-
pecially our telling them how dangerous we take
that Error to be, will be thought to proceed from
too mean an Opinion of their Judgment, and
Rending, and an Inclination to leifen their Efteem
and Intercft in the World.
And it muft be acknowledged, whatever has
a proper Tendency to eftablifh and recommend
any Truth called in queftion, muft have an equal
Tendency to cenfure and explode the contrary
Opinion ; and by doing fo, it will occafion fome
Diminution of Honour to thofe who have fa-
voured and abetted the Error; this is a Confe-
quence not to be avoided, and thofe who are
aggrieved by it have no body to blame but them-
felvcs, who have (they belt know how) placed
themfelves in that unhappy Oppciiticn to the
Truth, that either their Reputation or the Credit
©£ the Truth itfelf, and of thofe that adhere to
ii, inuft neceilarily fufter; and the one Side and
the
The Introduction. 3
the other will feel this Confequence, according
to the Numbers, Intereft and Temper of thofe
that are for or again/t them.
I n this Cafe it will be no new Thing to hear
the Aggrcflbr declaim very plaufibly againft an
uncharitable, impofing, cenforious Spirit, as an
Ufurpation upon the Prerogative ot the great
Law-giver and Judge ; and it will be eafy to en-
large uppn thofe beautiful Virtues, Charity, Mo-
defty, and mutual Forberance ; and to enforce all
with folemn Protections or their own Integrity ;
by which Means, it is very probable, Imprcf-
fions may be made upon fome good and tender
Minds, to the Difadvantage of thofc that have
nothing more in their Defirc than to recover their
Brethren out of the Snarp, into zchich they are fallen:
For. our Paris, we fliould be very forry if {0
good a Caufe, as that which we ftand up to de-
tend, fliould fuffer by our unbecoming Manage-
ment. We hope the God whom we ferve will
help us to watch ever our own Spirits ; we are re-
fqlyed by his Grace, never to rake any Mcafures
but what in their own Nature, and by Di-
vine In(litution,are proper to inform the Judgment
and convince the Conference, as far as we know
our own Hearts : It is no more in our Incli-
nation than it is in cur Power to make ufe of
any other.
\V v- are fully perfwaded that the Weapons of
our Warfare are not Carnal but Spiritual, that
external Force is by no means to be ufed in
Matters of Religion ; but then for this very Rea-
fon, we think our felves the more obliged to try
the Force of Argument and Perfwafion, as the
onlv Means left us of God, to detect Error, and
defend the Truth : Rafh and inconiiderate Men
B a may
4 The Introduction.
may call this Perfecution \ but furely while we
ufe no ether Means to defend our Principles than
thofe that are otherwife minded do to attack them,
we muft on both fides be either equally clear or
equally guilty of the Sin of Perfecution.
If thefe means of Perfwa/ion and Admoniti-
on may not be ufed, we have then nothing to do,
but to put our felves into a State of Indolence
and Indifference between Scripture Truth and
Error , and (land by and filently obferve our
Brethren , cur Friends, and Relations, both in
natural and fpiritual Bonds, turn out of the Way
of Knowledge, and draw others along with them
into their unhappy Wandrings.
Perhaps we fhall be told, that even in this
Cafe, we have ftill the Liberty left us of addref-
fing our felves to God for them, we know we
have it, and hope we fhall make Confcience of
it, or elfe we could not expect the Bleffing of
God upon any of our Endeavours. And yet we
apprehend, if we fhould bring this Cafe into our
publick Supplications with thofe fervent Affecti-
ons that are fuitable to the Importance of it,
they that differ from us, would refent it as a
more formal and folemn Invective againft them ;
but while they are reproaching us for doing too
much, we fear our great God would reprove us for
omitting a known commanded Duty, prefuming
that he will fupply that Neglect of ours by his
own immediate Interposition.
For, hath not God required of us All,efpecially
of his Minifters, that we fhould bold f aft the faith-
ful! Word as rce have been taught, that by found
Do&rine ive may be able both to exhort and to comiiii e
the Gain-fayers. Tit. i. <?. "That tve jbould contend
earnejily for the Faith that xvas once delivered to the
Saints t
The Introduction. $
Saints, when Men creep in unawares denying 7W puvov
Avm-mv Giof K) wexov'mfMov ltxjisv Xetsvv that only Sove-
reign God and Lord of ours, Jefus Chrifl. Jude. 4.
That in 'Meeknefs we Jhould inftruEl thofe that oppofe
them/elves, ij par adventure God will give them Repen-
tance to the Acknowledgment of the Truth. 2 Tim.
ii. 23'.
These and many other Injunctions of the fame
Nature we find upon record in our Bibles, and
\vc cannot think they are of no ufe or Obliga-
tion in our Days. We are far from pretending to
an infallible Judgment about Gofpel Truth and
Error, but we take it to be an agreed Point with
Proteftants, that there may be Certainy, where
there is not Infallibility ; and none can deny this,
unlcfs they will venture to affert, that we can
in no Cafe know we are in the right, but by
being allured that it is impoffible for us, in any
Cafe, to be in the wrong : And if none muft take
upon them to inftrud, admonifh and reprove o-
thers that they think are departing from the Faith,
but thofe that are themfelves infallible, the Mi~
nifterial Office falls to the Ground, and even all
private Chriftian Advice falls with it, and yet
this we believe would be to carry the Matter
further than thofe, that raife fuch Objections,
ever intended.
W e hear it already fuggeifed that thofe who
are fo forward to ufe thefe Spiritual Weapons for
the Suppreffion of Error, would be as ready to
ul'e carnal Weapons too, if they had them in
their Power; this is a Specimen of fome Mens
lingular Candor and Charity for us; we wifh they
would confider whofe Prerogative they now
aUume, and what is become of that Modefty and
Tendernefs of which they have been ufed to
fpeak ,*
6 The Introduction.
fpeak i do they come by this Knowledge of us
by rational Deduction, or by lome extraordinary
Difcovery ? do they rightly conclude, that becaufe
we make ufe of thofe Means, that are proper in
their own Nature to prevent the fpreading of
Error, we would therefore, if it lay in our Power,
make ufe of Methods that are altogether im-
proper ? that becaufe we ufe thofe Means, that
we have always declared our felves to have a
Right to ufe, wefhould therefore ufe thofe Means
that we have from our very Hearts declared we
have no right to ufe ? or that becaufe we make
ufe of the Means that God has appointed, we
ihould therefore, if it lay in our Power, make ufe
of thofe Methods that he never appointed,but has
abfolutely forbidden ; this is a ftaange Sort of
Reafoning, it is not accomodated to the Judg-
ments of Men but to their Paifions and Affections,
and looks much more like to proceed from a per-
fecting Spirit, than any thing they can yet charge
upon us : but as in thefe things we are manifelf
to God, we hope we are alfo manifeft to the Con-
fidences of fober and ferious Chriftians.
It is very probable fome of our Friends, that
are well affected both to our Perfons and Princi-
ples, may think we are indifcreet in appearing
thus publickly, efpecially under our prefent Cir-
cumftances, which call for great Thankfulnefs to
our Governours, and mutual Forbearance among
our felves ; and fome may think that fo open an
Oppofition to thefe Errors may be the Occalion
of their Growth and Prevalency. To which we
can truly fay, if we confulted our own Eafe and
our perfonal or political Interelt, we fhould have
altogether kept filence ; but we confider we are
under the exprefs Commands of the Word of God,
that
The Introduction. 7
that He has appointed a rational and fcripturalDc-
fence of the Truth as a Means to fupport it, and
has from time to time blefled it and made it effe-
ctual. We confider how when prefently after the
Reformation fome Men flood up to revive and
propagate Opinions dishonourable to our Lord
Jofus Chrift, God raifed up others to oppofe them,
and after fome Struggle, the true Faith of the
Gofpel prevailed, and Error fell before it ; and
that during the Confuflons of the Civil War in
England, thofe Errors began to break out again
in the Army and eifewhere ; publick Difputations
were appointed and Books were printed in De-
fence of the Faith, and God crown'd all with
Succefs. We remember that when in the Reign
of the Glorious K. William, the Antitrinitarians
took Heart and grew very numerous and confident,
they met with a very juft Oppofition from fuch
great Men as Dr. StiUingfieet, Bp. of Worcefi.tr,
Dr. 'Jonathan Edwards of Oxford and Dr. John
Edwards of Cambridge, and feveral more, and their
learned Labours were a feafonable Service to the
Church of God. We are fenfible how fpeedy and
effectual a Stop was put unto thefe errors in Dub-
lin by the folid and clofe Reafoning of our Reve-
rend Brother Mr. Boyfe ; And tho' we pretend not
to the fame Meafures of Abilities that thefe
excellent Men were endowed with, yet we (land
up in defence of the fame Caufe, and we depend
upon the Afliftance of the fame God, and we do
not defpair of his BleiTing.
W e do not apprehend our Concern for thefe
great Truths can give any Offence to our Gover-
nours, or render us unworthy of the Favour they
have {hewed us, fince the Articles of Faith we
defend, are fuch as the Nation openly declares
for
8 The Introduction.
for,and what we have folemnlySubfcrib'd inCourts
of publick Record, when we received thePrivilege
of a Publick Indulgence, and had long before that
time embraced upon a full Conviction from the
Word of God. Our Fidelity to Confcience and
to our publick Confeflions, can never turn to our
Prejudice with a Government fo wife and juft as
that under which we now live.
Nor can we fee that a rational Defence of the
great Articles of our Faith is any way in confident
with our avowed Principles as Proteftant Diflen-
ters. We do not know that it was ever owned to
be a Principle with them, that Error was never
to be oppofed, nor Truth defended by Perfuaiion
and Admonition ; nay far from that they always
thought it was their Duty not only to difpute for
much lefler Points of Religion than thefe, but
even to fufter for them rather than give them up ;
their Religion was always dearer to them than
their Liberties, and always will be fo to thofe
that know the true Nature of it, they valued
their Liberty for the Sake of their Religion, not
their Religion for the fake of their Liberty.
Perhaps it will be faid, tho J Men may be al-
lowed to argue and reafon one with another in
fuch Points as thefe, yet they fhould not be pofi-
tive nor importunate, they fhould forbear Admoni-
tion and Reproof, which looks like a {fuming an
Authority over their Brethren, and accufing
the other Side of Dumefs or Obftinacy. And
indeed as for thofe that are not yet arrived at
fuch a Certainty of Knowledge and Faith in
this great Doctrine, it would be very improper
for them to prefs it fo earneftly upon others ; they
ought rlrft to be well perfwaded in their own
Minds, but if the Doctrine be true, it is poflible
it
T^ Introduction. 9
it may be known to be true, and thofe that
know it to be fo, may be allowed to tell others
what they believe, both of the Truth and Impor-
tance of it j and this may be done without vain
Glory in themfelves, or an uncharitable Contempt
of thofe that are otherwife minded.
That there may be Truths, both of great Evi-
dence and of great Importance, which yet fome
Men of good Senfe and Learning do not difcern,
is generally acknowledgM ; fuch are the Matters
in Controverfy between Proteftants and Papifts,
and between Chriftians and Jews. The Truths
controverted are fufrlciently evident, and of the
greateft Confequence; and yet many Learned,
Sober and Inquifitive Men, not only doubt of
them, but deny them : Of this their Ignorance
and Error, there mufl be a Caufe and a culpa-
ble one, which is not to be fought for in the
Doctrines themfelves, or in the Revelations we
have of them ; but in the Minds of thofe that
do not receive them. It may indeed be difficult
for them to difcern where it lies ; but it is known
to God to be fuch as will juftify him, tho' he
fhould leave them to all the evil Confequences of
their criminal Miftakes.
The real Importance of any Doctrine, does not
depend upon fubjectivc Evidence, that is, upon
the certain Perfwafion I have of it in my own
Mind: It is neither lefs true, nor lefs important,
becaufe I am in doubt concerning it ; the Impor-
tance of it is an intrinfick Thing, it arifes out
of its own Nature, and the Place it naturally
holds in the Chain of Scripture Principles, and
the direct Influence it has upon the Vitals of our
Religion as Chriftiari : And tho' I fhould not
difcern this, another may; and if he does, it will
C not
io !5f Introduction.
not only be lawful for him, but kind in him to
convince me, how eflential a Truth that is which
I reject, and how deftru&ive the Rejection of it
would be in its own nature to my Soul : and this
Zeal and Earneftnefs of his, ought not to be cen-
iured by me, as any want of Charity in him;
unlefs I could be fure, that he did not underftand
the Cafe better than I do: and fince I cannot be
fure of that, it becomes me to put the favourable,
not the fevere Conftruction upon the Importunity
he ufes with me.
If indeed this zealous Friend of mine fhould
ma.ke ufe of carnal Weapons to conquer my Un-
belief, I iliall foon difcern that, whether I be in
the Right or in the Wrong, he has miftaken the
Nature of the Cafe, and acted without Autho-
rity from God ; nay, if he fhould pafs a Sentence
of Condemnation upon me, I fhall have Reafon
to conclude, he has tranfgrefTed the Bounds of his
Commiffion : Since nothing is more certain, than
that every Man's ^Judgment is from the Lord, and to
his own Mafter he mu ft ft and or fall. And how far,
and in what Cafes, the infinite Mercy of God
may interpofe, and prevent thofe pernicious Effects,
which fuch an Error deferves, and would natural-
ly produce, if left to it felt, are Secrets only known
to. God the Judge of all, who is the Wife and So-
vereign Difpoler of his own Grace ; but ftill the
moral Nature and Demerit of fuch an Error
remains to be what it was.
I t is ufual with Perfons of all Opinions, and
none more than thofe that have efpeufed wrong
ones, to infift very much upen the Truth and
Sincerity of their own Hearts ; and the more lin-
gular they are in their Sentiments , the better
right they think they have to be believed, becaufe
the
T^ Introduction, i i
the Way they have taken is like to expofe them
to fome temporal Inconveniences.
But without any Difparagement to that ex-
cellent Grace of Godly Sincerity, or without
difputing the Claim they lay to the Honour of
it; it will certainly be proper for both one Side
and the other, to confider that this is the common
Plea of thofe that efpoufe the grofleft Errors: and
therefore it becomes us all to maintain an humble
Jealoufy cf our own Hearts; not to truft them too
far, nor boaft of them too much, left God fhould
leave us to our felves to let us fee what is in them.
The molt upright Saint on Earth, is not free from
(infill Guile, but often fees Caufe to complain of
a treacherous Heart : And therefore, that great
Joy, that refults /row the Teftimony of a good Confci-
ence depends not meerly upon the Credit or vera-
city of our own Spirits, but chiefly upon the Spi-
rit of God witnefjing with our Spirits, without which
we could not draw that comfortable Inference,
that we are the Sons of God.
Since then it is a difficult Thing for us to
know our own Hearts, and a dangerous Thing
to truft them, it will be our wifer Way to judge
of our Hearts, .by the Scriptures, than to judge
of the Scriptures, by the good Opinion we have
of our own Hearts. For Truth and Error will
ftill be the fame in their own Nature and Im-
portance, whether my Heart have been fmcere
in fearching after them or no : and if it fhould at
length appear, that I have really fallen into Errors
that are in their ownNature damnable, and yet do
not prove eventually fo to me , I mud wholly
alcribe my Salvation to the rich Grace and Me-
rit of my mod; merciful iii^h Prieft, who knows
how to h.ive Companion on the Ignorant, and thofe
C 2 that
12 The Introduction.
that are out of the Way : I have nothing to afcribe
to the good deferring of my own avowed Sin-
cerity.
We do not queftion but an erroneous Judg-
ment, even in fome weighty Points of Faith,
may confift with an honeft Heart ; and therefore,
how great foever our Concern is for our Friends
and Brethren who are changing their Principles, it
will be a great Satisfaction to us, to obferve
that they fiill hold f aft their Integrity.
W e hope therefore, in all thefe Matters, a-
bout which they have raifed Debates among us,
they always will take care to be free, and open,
and Confident with themfelves, in all Places, and
in all forts of Company : that they will be fair
and faithful in rcprefenting the Judgment and Be-
haviour of thofe that differ from them: that when
preft. with their real Sentiments by thofe that are
diffatisfied, they will not raife an artificial Cloud
of ambiguous Phrafes, and fo get off for the pre-
fent themfelves, leaving the Complainants under
the undeferved Reproach of falfe Accufation.
Those that place the whole of their Religi-
on in Sincerity, and expect that this Virtue lTiould
make up all Deficiences in Knowledge and Faith,
had need to preferve it found and intire;and mod
carefully to avoid every thing, that may either
draw them away from it, or deprive them of that
Comfort they receive from the Evidences of it :
For if this alfo fhould fail them, it behoves them
to confider , what they will have left to fupport
either their Reputation with Men, or the Peace of
their own Consciences in the fight of God.
A s to this particular Doctrine, that lies before
us , concerning the God head of our Lord Jesus
Christ and the Holy Spirit, we wonder indeed
there
T/tf Introduction. i $
there fhould be any Doubt raifed among us, at
this time of Day,as to the Truth of it j but we won-
der much more any Queftion fhould be made
about the I?nportance of it. Surely it muft be either
a very important Truth, or a very important Er-
ror : tor either Side to miftake created Nature for
uncreated, finite for infinite, neceffary for contin-
gent, fupreme lor fubordinate, muft unavoidably
introduce the greateft Confufion and Falfehood in-
to all our Conceptions, Affe&ions and Devotions.
I f our Lord Jefus Chrift be really God by
Nature, of the fame Subftance with the Father
and the Spirit, it muft be highly difpleaiing to
him to have that fupreme Glory of his defpifed
and denied by thofe that yet call him their Lord
and Saviour ; and tho' they may fay a thoufand
honourable Things of him in other Refpe&s, yet
while they deny him that which is his higheft
Excellence, they have little Reafon to think he
will accept any Offering at their Hands.
B u t if He be not God by Nature, it muft be
a great Provocation to him that is fo, to fee us,
both in private and publick Ads of Adoration, gi-+
ving azvay his Glory to another. This furely muft be
in danger of turning our Religious Affemblies in-
to Sacrilegious Confederacies againft the One li-
ving and true God.
And while thofe that are yet called Chriftians
are thus divided about the Object of Divine Wor-
fhip, there muft needs be great Confufion and Jea-
losies among the Worfhippers ; eachParty being
afraid left they fhould have fellowship with Idols :
and it will hardly be poffible for them to vvorfhip
God together, in the fame Places, and under the
fame Adminiftration, with a good Confcience, or
to their mutual Comfort and Edification.
For,
t
14 T^lNTRODUCTIONi
For, whatever may be pretended, this is not
a Controverfy about fome metaphyseal abftradt
Notions, of perfonality Subfiftence, modal Di-
ftinftions in the divine Nature ; in thefe there will
be always room left for different Speculations and
Sentiments. It is not a Controverfy about Forms
of Church Government, or Degrees of Order and
Office there ; nor about Rites and Ceremonies in
external Worfhip, like that depending between
us and the National Church ; nor about the Sub-
ject, Time and Manner of adminiftring a particu-
lar Ordinance, ,as that between us and the Anti-
pacdobaptifts ; but it is a Controverfy about the
very Object of Religious Worfhip, Whether that
be the only one, living and true God: which has
been ever acknowledged to be a Point of the
greateft Moment, both in natural and revealed
Religion. We really think the Godhead of Christ
and the Holy Spirit to be the primary Article of
reveal'd Religion, and the Unity of the Godhead
the primary Article of natural Religion ; and
when thefe are called in queftion, we think we
are called up to defend them.
W e have therefore, at the Defire of fome of
our Brethren for whom we have a great Refpe<5t,
taken the Freedom thus to addrefs ourfelves to thofe
whofc Thoughts have been agitated and un fet-
tled in thefe Matters ; and having firft endeavour-
ed to remove general Prejudice, we offer to their
View a brief Collection of Scripture Evidence
and Authorities, the only Rule and Ground of our
Faith ; and then proceed to fet before them the
harmonious Confent of the Reformed Churches^
not as a Rule of Faith to others, but as a Symbol
of their own ; a Cloud of WitnelTes which will
have its due Regard with fober and confiderate
Per-
rifflNTRODUCTION] 1 5
Perfons. After this we would hope that faithful
and affectionate Advice, which clofes all, will not
be defpis'dby thofe for whofe fpiritual Safety and
Advantage it is principally intended.
W e have comprifed the whole in as narrow a
Compafs as the Nature and Dignity of the Sub-
ject would allow, referring thofe that have Lei-
fure r Capacity and Inclination to look more tho-
roughly into this Subject, to the learned and vo-
luminous Writings of both antient and modern
Divines, where they may fee the prefent Truth
triumphing over all the Strength and Sophiltry of
its Adverfaries : In the mean time if it fhall pleafe
our glorious Redeemer to blefs thefe our Endea-
vours, for promoting his own Honour, and prefer-
ving the precious Interefts of Peace and 'Truth a-
mong us, we doubt not but that abundant Grace
through the "Tfjankfgiving of many ivill redound to the
Glory of God.
CHAP. I.
Containing the Explication, and the Proof of the
Doctrine of the Trinity.
SeB. if I 'H a t there is a God, is not a Point at
1 prefent in Debate among us : fo far
from it, chat the Gentlemen with whcm we are
concerned, do (We believe, very fincerely) agree
with us, that the Being of God is not only a true,
. Priri-
16 ffe State 5/
Principle, but the very firft Principle of Natural
Religion ; and every where fuppos'd in the Scrip-
ture Revelation.
Seci.2. Whether there are more Gods than One,
or One only living and true God ; is not the Que-
ftion neither : however fome appear inclin'd art-
fully to pafs this for the Point in Controverfy,
upon the Unthinking part of the World : This
Principle , the Unity of the Godhead, is fb
plainly the Sen fe of our prefent Antagonifts, that
they often, and fome of them very learnedly and
openly have appear 'd in the Defence of it : nay,
they not long ago, did aflume to themf elves (and
feem'd very defirous to engrofs) the Name of
Unitarians. And We, on our Part, always did,
and do ftill frankly and openly declare, that We
do believe, that there is, and can be, but One on-
ly true God. This too with us is a foundation
Principle of Natural Religion : and this is alfo the
Language of the J acred Scriptures. Thus we learn
from Mofes, Deut. 4. 35. 'The Lord, He is God;
there is none elfe bejides Him. And, Deut. 32. 39,
I, even I am He, and there is no God with me :
J kill, and I make alive, &c. And, Deut. 5. 7. It
is exprefly charg'd, Thoujhah have no other Gods
befides me. The Prophets alib fpeak the fame Lan-
guage : thus Ifa. 44. 6, 8. Befides me, there is no
God : Is there a God bejides me ? yea, there is
no [fuch] God ; I know not any. So in the New
Tejiamem. Mar. 12.32. there is one God, and there
is none Other but He. And 1 Cor. 8. 4. there is
none other God but one. Thus far we are fully a-
greed with them : and therefore if this be all that
they contend for, here may at once be an End of
all Strife : for (fo far) we are Unitarians as well
as they.
Sett.
the Q^u estion. 17
Sett. 3. ,But what then is the Controverfy of
the preient Day ? Why really 'tis hard to re-
duce it to a fingle Term : but We think it is y
ia^JVho, or What this oneGoD is? Whether He be
only the One, meer Perfon called the Father ;. or whe-
ther the Threejn Scripture fpoken of as Father, Sen,
and Holy-Ghofl I And in confequence of this (it*
we may be allowed to fpeak the plain Truth) we
fear, the next and main Queftion between us will
be found to be, Whether the Divine Being is not
more clearly and fully known to thefe(whom we do
allow, fome of 'em to be) very Wife Men than to
the ^//-iw'/eGoDhimielf? At leaft, Whether they
are not able to fpeak more juflly and exactly cf it,
than H e has any where thought fit to do himfeif
in the facred Scriptures ?
These Gentlemen will do, what none have
ever done before ; they will by fearching find
out God, by all means they will find him out
unto Perfe&ion : tho', at the fame time, they do
not know Themfelves, no not even their own A 7 a-
tare and Make ; what that Union of Body and Spi-
rit is, which does etfentially constitute a Man ;
wherein it does confift ; how it was effected, or
how maintained : Nor do they kiaow fo much
as what it is that does individuate the external
Frame of a Man ; and render what we call our
Body, the fame Body : Nay, there is not the
meaneft part of the Creation, not a Worm, not a
Flie, not a very Mite, nor ev'n a fpire of Grafs,
but what is an Over-match for the Underftard-
ingof the greatefi Philofopher in the World : and
yet they will needs pretend to know the GcD,t^.e
Author ot Univerfal Nature. They know him
i'o well, that they do not need that he fhould
teach them how to fpeak concerning him : We,
on the other Hand, cg earneftly pray, that we
D may
iS The State of
may be always taught of God ; and fenfibly feel
that we no where need it more, than when we are
to form our own, or direct and affift the Thoughts
of others, upon fo awful a Point, as what we
are to believe concerning God. They pronounce
very pofitively,what God has nowhere faid ofhim-
felf , fo far as we can find : and they as perempto-
rily deny that to be true, or even lo much as pof-
fible, which he has faid not only once or twice
of himfelf ; but has plainly wrought into the
whole Texture of the {tiered Scriptures. We are
fo far from declining the Teftimony of Scripture,
that we appeal to that, as the Rule and the only
Rule , by which we do, and ought to deter-
mine ourfelves, both in this and every other Doc-
trine of Religion that is fuper-natural : Nor are
we fond of faying lefs or more than what is
written there : However that fhall always guide
(and therefore we are fatisfy'd, will alfo guard)
what we undertake the Defence of, particular-
ly upon this great Subject.
Sell. 4. Now therefore that which upon this
Foundation, we affert, and are ready earneftly
to contend for againft all Oppofers, is, That there
are Three, who do plainly bear diftinft Names in
Scripture, to wit, the Name of the Father, of the
[Word, or] Son, and of the [Spirit or] Holy-
Ghofi : We fay, there are thefe Three, to whom
we find the Scriptures do afcribe and attri-
bute any thing, every thing that is mod peculiar
and appropriated to the Divine Nature, without
any Difference. The moft peculiar Things, that
do diftinguifh God from any, from every made or
derived Being ; do not diftinguifh Thefe [as to
their EJfence or Being] from each other : What is
moft appropriate to God, is not (in Scripture) ap-
pro-
the Qjx E ST i o N. 19
propriated either to the Father alone ,• or to the
Son alone ; or to the Holy Ghojl alone : but, as
we faid above, is there indifferently attributed
to each,or any one of thcfe facred7/;rft?. And while
this is the conflant Language or" the Holy Scrip-
tures, What would thefe Gentlemen themfelves
have us to infer, what can we poflibly infer from
thcnce,other or lefs than this,That it is thefe Tbree^
(and not any One of the 'Three alone) are the One
only living and true God. ?
SeB, 5:. We are as fenfible as they can be, or others
that have been before them, that this is a Way of
fpeaking which we fhould hardly ever have fall'n
into, if we had not been led into it : We, upon the
utmoft Improvement of Natural Reafon,unafTifted
by fupernatural Revelation, fhould nofooner have
come at the Conviction, that there is only One
God ; but we fhould very probably have been
ready to infer, as thefe Gentlemen do, That this
One God is One only Perfon, fimple, uncom pound-
ed, undivided, &c. What we wonder at, is not
that any wife Men fhould talk thus ; but that
any (that in a Judgment of Charity, we cannot
but yet look upon to be) Pious and Good Men,
and fuch as know and believe what is written in
the Sacred Scriptures^ fhould either talk or write
at this rate. €
But, in good earneft, mull we then for-
bear the Ufe of Scripture-Language ; and even
upon fuch a Point as this, fpeak as our own
Jbaliow (I might fay corrupt, and carnal ) Rea~
(bningty cr even our meer (and vain) Imaginations
dictate to us ? We could have done no other-
wife indeed, it we had been left altogether to
cur felves, to rind or make our Way as we cou'd
alpne, without any fupcr-added Light or Afllftance
D 2 beyond
20 The State of
beyond what is meerly Natural: But furely,
we that own the Scriptures to be the Word of
God, fhculd pay a mod: awful and reverential
Regard to the very Language of Scripture every
where ; and efpecially where God fpeaks of
himfelf, who is only known to himfelf. M he
fays not any where, that the Father alone (exclu-
five of the' Son, or of the Bkjfed Spirit) is the
One God ; but does throughout the Scriptures,
both of the Old Teftament and of the New,
fay that which would molt naturally and eafily
lead any that do believe this to be a Divine Re-
velation, to conclude that thefe Three (not any
one lingly of thefe Three) are that One God
w horn we are to own, to worfhip , to depend
upon, to adhere to, and to have our final and
eternal State determin'd by; no one ought to
w r onder at it, that we do with all the Zeal and
Concern that we exprefs (upon (o great an Oc-
casion) appear in the Defence of the commonly
received Faith.
Sect. 6. We do not ourfelves pretend to fay,
hoiv thefe Three are diftinguijh'd from each other :
that we leave to thofe, who are bold enough to
fpeak (even upon fuch a Point as this) without, if
not againft what the Scriptures themfelves any
v. here have faid : We only fay, that there they
are diftingnijh'd.
Sect. j. We further add, that tho' thefe Three are
in the Scriptures diftinguijh'd from, and therefore
not to be confounded with each Other: yet we have
learnt nothing there , either of their being com-
punded, or divided : nor do we therefore under-
take to fliew explicitely, and in Particulars, how
they are Three ; nor, how (tho' Three, yet) they
are One. What we aflert again is only, that
they
the Q^U E S T 1 O K. 21
they are Three, fome way or other ; and tho 5 in
fome refped Three, yet but One God.
Sell. 8. Nay, tho' thefe Three are m the
Holy Scriptures fpoken of under the Names of
Father, Son, and Hcly-Ghcft ; and as begetting, be-
gotten, and proceeding : yet itill we leave it tothofe
who are wifer, or at leaft more bold and daring
than we, to fay that this does, and to iliew af-
terwards how it does relate to the Divine E (fence.
For we, who have no Notion of a Greater or Leffer
in the God-Head, do think, that where-ever that
does belong, it mult equally belong : and confe-
quently, that it is not any one of the Three ;
but that thefe Three are the One Supreme God;
Seel. p. Let it be added, before we produce
our Proofs, that thefe Three are not meerly Three
Names : The Gentlemen, with whom at prefent
the Controverfy lies, do not yet feem inclined to
fay that they are fo : They do as well as we,
put the hard Name of SabeUianifm, upon this
Opinion : They own, as we alfo do, that thefe
three Na?nes have fome Dijlinction (tho' neither
they, nor we know what it is) : that thefe Names
do not every where in Scripture, if they do any
where, bear One and the fame Meaning.
Seel. io. W f fhall now only venture to fay
once more, that whatever the Diftinflion is be-
tween thefe Sacred Three, or wherein-foever it
dees conliit ; as on one part it does not deftroy
the Unity oithz Divine Nature, fo on the Other,
it is fuch (fo real, and fo great) as is a juft and
fufficient Ground to fupport whatever is diflincl-
ly faid of the One or the other of them in the
Holy Scriptures. So as that thcPerfonofthe Father
is not the S.n; nor the Son, the Father; nor either
of thefe the Holy-Ghofl. Thus Br the ferious plain
Chriftian,
22 The Scripture-Evidence of
Chriftian, may venture into this awful Myftery
of the BlefTed Trinity : but whatever pofitive and
bold Propojitions, or whatever fubtil and enfnariug
Quefiions, are defign'd to carry him further than
this ; he will do beft for his own Safety and Com-
fort, as well as for the common Peace, to avoid
and keep clear of them, according to the Advice
of the Apoftle, 2 Tim. ii. 23. Foolijh and unlearn-
ed Quefiions avoid, knowing that they do gender Strijes.
The S CRIPTUR E-E V I D E N C E of /fc
TRINITY.
HAving thus far endeavoured to preferve
the honeft and unwary Chriftian from the
Snare of needlefs and dangerous Explications up-
on this Point; we now proceed (for the Ufe
and help of fuch efpecially) to give you the plain
Scripture Proof "and Evidence of this DoBrineotxhe
Bleffed Trinity, in a narrow Compafs. And
I. A s to the firft - named of thefe facred
Three, the Father [fo call'd], he is fo oft and fo
expreily caird God, and with fuch Attributi-
ons and Afcriptions ; that thefe Gentlemen the m-
felves are pleasM to admit the Claim in his Favour.
Nay,they are (o far from excluding Him(as neither
have we at any time, or dare we attempt to do)
from the Notion of the God-head ; that they
do, if we underftand them right, aflert the very
P erf on of the Father [as diftind from, and with
the Exclufion of the Son and Spirit] to be the
One God, the only God ; the One Supreme Caufe
and Original of all Things, the file Origin [ or
fountain] of all Power and Authority ; abfolute-
ly S preme over all, &c. Perhaps, they may here-
after fee reafon to agree with us, that the Term
[Father]
^ Trinity, 23
[■Father] does not in Scripture every where denote
the Per/on fo call'd ; but is often to be under-
ftood of the Divine EJfence abfolutely confi-
der'd.
However, thus far thefe Gentlemen have
excus'd Us, that we do not need laborioufly to
produce the particular Texts, which are necefla-
ry to prove that the Father is God; or, that there
is that faid in the Scriptures concerning Him,
which will not fufter us to form an Idea of the
One God, but what muft neceflarily include
Him.
II. But then we further fay, that thofe who
will think and fpeak of the blefled G o d, accord-
ing to what he has revealed of himfelf in the
Scriptures, muft admit tlie Son [fo call'd] alfo in-
to the Idea which they form of Him.
W e are moft exprefly allured, that the blefled
God has and will have a Name which he will
poflefs alone, Pf. hxxiii. 18. and a Glory which he
will not give to another, Ifa. xlii. 8. Now if we find
this [Son] does in thofe facred Oracles bear the
very fame Names, and has in all Points the fame
glory given to him with the Father ; we furely
muft conclude, that however elfe the Father and
He are diftinguifh'd from each other, yet they
are not One and another [a Supreme, and Subor-
dinate'] God,- but muft needs be One and the
fame God.
Tis not about a meerName that we contend :\Ve
know, that there are both in Heaven and Earth
\_Angels and Men] many that are called Gods, even
as many as do bear the Commiflion and a<5t in
the Name and with the Authority of Gcv,, 1 Ccr.
viii. 5. Jo. x. 34, 35. tut the' the Mediatcr,
nay, the very Man Chrifi Jefus, might have (upon
this
24 The Scripture-Evidence of
this Account) and perhaps often has the Name
of [G o d] put upon him ; yet, we cannot think
he would in Scripture be fpoken of as he there
very ufually is, if the Defign had not been to
fignify to us that this [Son or Word) is God emi-
nently, or the Sup-erne God. And here,
i. E v e n in the Old "Teftament, while the Go/pel
Oeconomy was under a Veil, yet this Point was
not altogether veifd. That Jehovah , againft
whom the Ifraelites murmured in the Wildernefs,
and whom they tempted and fpake againft there,
was not himfelf the Meflenger of God [a Deputy
God~] ; for Mofes then ftood in that place : but
thefe Murmurers (we read) fpake againft God,
and againft Mofes, Num. xxi. 5. And the God
whom they tempted and fpake againft is the great
God, even the great King above all Gods ; the Lord
our Maker, &c. Pfal. xcv. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9. Yet
even the Lord Chrift is this very God, i Cor. x. 9.
The Pfalmift prays very earneftly to God,
Pfal. cii. 24. O my God, take me not away, &c.
and urges his Suit from the mention of the Di-
vine Eternity and Unchangeablenefs, ver. 25. 26, 27.
Of old haft thou laid the Foundation of the Earth,
■and the Heavens are the Work of thine Hands, &c.
This muft certainly be fomewhat very differing
from a meer God by Office, or one who only acted
by a Divine Commiilion. But all this is moft
dire&ly and plainly apply M to the Son To the
Son, it is faid, 'thou Lord in the beginning, dec.
Heb.i. 10, 11, 12.
That God fo loftily defcrib'd, Pfal. lxviii.
as riding upon the Heavens, v. 4. as in his holy Ha-
bitation, v. $, as the God of Jfrael, at whofe Pre-
fence the Earth fhook, the Havens alfo dropped, v.
8. and (to fay no more) the Almighty, v. 14. He
whofe
the TrINIT Yf 2$
whofe Chariots are, [fhall we fay, drawn, or at-
tended by] the very Angels, v. 17. He that is
our GOD, the GOD of Salvations, God the Lord,
to whom belong the IJJues from Death, v. 20. Can
this be any other than the Supreme GOD? Yet
the Apoftle teaches us to underftand all this of
CHRIST, Eph. iv. 7, 8. compare Pf. lxviii. 18.
The Prophet al'fo fpeaks in the fame fort of
Language : Ifaw, fays He,- the Lord fitting
upon a Throne, Ifa.v'x. 1. It was that High and
moft exalted Throne, where Seraphims them-
felvesonly are in waiting, v. 2. the LORD of Hofisy
own'd and ador'd as fuch, v. 3 . (not to mention
a great deal more) : Yet even this, all this,
which the Prophet faw in a Vifion, and thus
fpake of, was, and is the Glory of CHRIST, John
xii. 41. compare Ifa.vi. 1, 10.
H e goes on, Chap. xlv. / the Lord, theft
is no GO D elfe befides me, ajuft God and a Savi-
our, there is none befides me, v. 21. I am God,
and there is none elfe, v.%2. This is He [the GodJ
to whom every Knee fiall bow, every Tongue fh all
fwear, v. 23. The LORD, in whom we have Righteouf-
nefs and Strength, to whom Men Jh all come, this
is the Lord, in whom all the Seed of Ifrael fhall be
juftified and fiall glory, v. 24, 25. Arid yet,
this is the lord CHRIST, Rom. xiv. 10, 11,
1 Cor. i. 30, 31.
And not to multiply Texts unnecelTarily,
let the confcientious Chriftian compare , Joel ii.
32. with Rom. x. 13. Zech. xi. 4, 13. with
Matt, xxvii. 9, ic. Zech. xii. 1, 10. with John
xix. 37. And He will not need to be told, that this
CHRIST 'is the fame GOD to whom the Scrip-
tures of the Old Teftament do bear Witnefs :
E as
26 The Scripture-Evidence of
as we have feeti both from Mofes, from the Pro-
phets, and the Pfalms.
2. L e t us now go on to the New Teflament,
and here we fliall very diilinctly rind, all the
Names whereby God has made himielf known ;
the moil eifentisl and incommunicable Proper-
ties and Perfections by which He is diilinguifh'd
from every Creature ; the Operations and Powers
that are moil peculiar to Him ; and the Worjhip
and Homage which does belong roGoD only ;
all belonging, and all afcrib'd to Him [whom
we call t^e fecond Perfon in the blefled Trinity]
the $>oN, or the Word, or Cbrift Jefus.
Sect. i. T o besin, This SO N here bears the
Names whereby God has made him felt known.
Thus He is exprefsly call'd God with us, Mat.
i. 23. The Lord, their God, i. e. the God of
the Children of Ifrael, Luke i. 16, ij. He is
called [God] abfolutely, Johni. 1. Alts xx. 28.
God manifefl in the Fief), 2 'Tim. iii. 16. And
the Apoille Thomas calls him, by way of Emi-
nency and Appropriation , his Lord and his
God, c Jo!m xx. 28. Surely, this muil be the true
GOD.
Seel. 2. However, that we may not be in
doubt, he does not only bear the Name ; but the
moil eilential and incommunicable Properties and
Perfections 01 God are attributed to Him. Thus
He is the true [not an imaginary] God, John v.
70, 21. He is the Great GOD [not an inferiour,
not an Underling], Tit.ii. 13. He is the King
of Kings, and LORD of Lords, Rev. xvii. 14. —
19, 16. The Living GO D, £*p, Rev. i. 18.
That has Life in himfelf, John i. 4. and gives
Life to Other r , Jof'mV. 21. even to whom He
•will, *i @5Aw. That is, He is the abfolute Arbiter
and
/^Trinity. 27
and Lord both of Life and Death ; He does not
act herein as One deputed only, and dependent on
the pleafure of fome Superior ,• but it is even
as He himf.lf will. Again, He is God over all,
and [as fuch] blejfed for ever, Rom. v. <?. He
is Immenfe and Qmniprefent, Mat. xviii. 20.
28. 20. John Hi. 13, He fills all in all, Eph. i.
23. and in Him dwells all the fulnefs of the God-
head bodily, Col. ii. 9. Befides, He is Omnif-
dent ; knows all "Things, John xxi. 1 7. Heb. iv.
13. Even the Reins and the Heart, Rev.il. 23.
Yet this is peculiar to God only, 2 Kings viii.
39. Jer. xvii. 9, 10. What fhail we fay fur-
ther, He is Unchangeable, Heb. i. n, 12. 13.
8. He is Almighty, [« ri'j.v7t>K&Tv$~\ Rev.i. 8.--
11. 17. And to add no more under this Head,
He is [the Scriptures reprefent Him as] Eternal,
and necejfarily exifling, Heb. i. 8. Col. i. 17.
Rev. i. 8, 11, 17, 2.8. 21. 6.
22. 13, 16.
Seel. 3. Besides, there are thofe Operations
and Powers afcrib'd to him, that are mort pecu-
linr to the Divine Being. Thus, He is the
Author of the whole Creation,- we fay, He
is the Author and the Original of it : and not
meerly a Minifler or Inltrument employ \1 in
that great Work. Accordingly we read not
only, that it is by Him [A* ium~\ that the World,
and all things were made, John i. 3, 10. but al-
fo, that He is that very Lord [Jehovah] who'
him felt laid the Foundation of the Earth, and the
Heavens are the Work of his Hands, Heb. i. 10.
It is in Him \\v *u7w] that all things were Crea^
ted, Cil.i. 16. as the fame ApofHe had before
laid, that it is in Him [in God] unlive, and
move, and have our Bting, Alls xvii. 28. And
E 2 to
28 T-be Scripture-Evidence of
to fay no more, All things were fo created \b y
Him] as that they are alfo created [for Him\
hi &*n>v, Col. i. 1 6. juft as we read of Go d, that
of Him and thro 1 Him [eft* *w«] and to Him \_ht
uiuivv] are all things, Rom. xi. 36. Now the SON
could not be, as he plainly is, the final Caufe of
univerfal Nature, if he were not the proper
Author and Efficient of it : And He that thus
made all Things, is undoubtedly the Supreme
God.
I t is He alfo who does Providentially
fuflain and govern the whole World : He does
uphold afl things by the Word of His Power, Heb. i.
3. and. by Him all things conjifl, Col. i. 17.
Nay, He does not only thus eftablifh and
give Force to the Laws of all created Nature ;
but He does (and can) at pleafure ove r-r u l e
and change the Courfe of J em : that is, He has
the Power of working Miracles; which
does belong to none but the Supreme GOD. 3 Tis
true, Angels or Men may be, and oft have been
employed herein as Agents, or Inftruments; but
did ever any of 'em fo far forget themfelves, and
their Mini ferial Character, as to attempt to
work a Miracle of themfelves, at their own
Pleafure, in their own Names, or by their own
Power : No, a Pretenfion of fuch a Kind would at
once be molt impious and moft abfurd : ridicu-
loully u-eak, as being fure to fail of the corre-
fpondent Effects which only could fupport it ,•
and horridly blafphemous, as it intrenches on the
Prerogative of the mofl High God. According-
ly, this the Apoftles carefully avoid and difclaim
every where ; it was not [they would not have
it thought "to be] by their own Power, or by their
Hdi.ief, Acts iii. 12. they a&in another Name,
•" . even
^Trinity. 29
even the Name of CHR 1ST: Thus in the Cafe
of the impotent Man, fays Peter, In the Name of
Jefus Chrift of Naz,areth rife up and walk, Acts iii.
7. So fays Ananias, Brother Saul, the LORD (even
Jefus that appear 5 d to thee in the Way) has fent
me, that thou mightefl receive thy Sight, Ac\s ix. 17.
And Peter again fays, JEneas, 'Jefus Chriji maketh
thee whole, ver. 34. They afcribe the Succefs of
all to his Name ; His Name, (fays Peter) thro
Faith in his Name hath made this Man flrong, &c.
Acts iii. 16. So Chap. iv. ver. 7, 10. they affume
nothing of it to themfelves. But how differing
is the Language, when HE [this Sm~] is fpoken
of, in reference to any miraculous Works : He
fpeaks and adts as from Himfelf; and neither
does nor needs to refer to any other Name :
Thus He fays to the Sick of the Palfie, [and this
not as deputed and enabled by a derived Power,
but as being Himfelf fufficient to the Underta-
king] Arife, take up thy Bed, Mat. ix. 6. So in
the Cafe of the Man that had an Infirmity Thirty-
eight Tears, He only fays to Him, Rife, &c. John
v. 8, 9. He does not fay [in the Name of the
Supreme GOD, or by Virtue of His Commijfton
which I bear, &c.'] yet this furely would have
been added, it He had herein acted meerly as
His Deputy. And, when great Multitudes came
from all Parts to be heai'd of their Difeafes, and
all that did but touch Him were accordingly
healed, 'tis added that the Vertue by which it was
done [the Atulajw*] won forth from Him, Luke vi.
19. So in the particular Cafe of the Woman
mentioned, Luke v iii. 43, &c. the Vertue which
wrought her Cure, went out of Him, ver. 45. This
Vertue therefore [this Power] was His own, in-
herent in Himfelf j not what was witLout Him,
deriving
jo The Scripture-Evidence of
deriving meerly from a Commifhon that had been
granted Him from another Hand.
And whereas, it is HE who fhall raife us from
the Dead, John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54. and who (hail
finally judge the World, Rom. xiv. 10, 12. 2 Cor.
v. 10. (tho J it is true, that this Honour is put
upon the Mediator, John v. 22. Ads x. 42. even
upon the Man Chrift Jefus, Ails xvii. 31. yet)
it is fit to be moft ferioufly confider'd, How He
could poffibly fuftain and go thro* fuch an Un-
dertaking, if He were not alfo O O D in the
higheft Senfe.
Seel. 4. Once more, that Mlrjlrip and Ho-
mage which is due only to the Supreme GOD, we
are directed to pay to Him [this SON] : Thus we
are to believe in God ; we are alfo to believe in
Him, John xiv. 1. to hope and trufi in God; yet
blefled are all they that put their Truft in Him,
Pf. ii. 12. to love God with all our Hearts; fo are
we to love Him, 1 Cor.xvi. 22. and this not only
in Sincerity, Eph. vi. 24. but Superlatively, and
above every thing befides, Mat. x. 3 7. Luke xiv.
26. But to haften, what is He, and what ought
we to efteem and reckon Him, into whofe Name
we are to be baptized, Mat. xxviii. 19. to whom
we then and thereby folemnly are devoted ; whofe
Name we are to call upon, (a) and to be called
by (b) ; He, in whofe Name we are to be
moil folemnly blejfed (c) ; by whom we are to
(wear (d) ; to whom we are to pray upon ail
'Qccafions, and for all kind of BleiTings, nay
(a) Afts ix. 14. 1 Cor. i. 2. (b) James ii. 7.
(c) Rom. xvi. 24. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. (d) 1 Thef, v.
27. Rom. ix- 1. 1 Tim. ii. 7.
even
^Trinity.' 31
even in our very laft Agonies (e) : And what is
He, to whom we are to afcribe Glory for ever
and ever (/) ; who is thus to be worfhipped,
not by particular Perfons, but by the Univerfal
Church (g) : Not only by His Redeemed Ones, from
whom it is juftly due upon that Account ; but
by every Creature, even by the Angels themfelves,
into whofe Cafe he did never enter with any fuch
Character. Upon this laft Hint let us paufe
awhile : He, who is Lord alone [to fay no more
of Him] is the God whom only the Hoft of
Heaven -worfiippeth, Neh. ix.. 6. the Lord who
reigneth, and is fo largely defcrib'd, Pf xcv. is
He, whom only thefe Gods do zuorjhip, v. 7. He,
whom they do worfhip (we are aflur'd) is a
jealous God, particularly in Relation to the
Worfhip which he claims ; that Glory he will
not give, not fuffer to be given to any other,
Jfa. xlii. 8. yet this Hofi of Heaven, thefe [Gods']
all of them do and dare not but worfhip this
SON, Heb.i.6.
SeB. 5. I n a Word, All Things, whatfoever
the Father hath, are HIS, John xvi. 15. All the
IVifdom, all the Power, the Self-Fulnefs, the AU-
Sufficiency, &c. which belongs to the Father,
belongs alfo to the Sen. Again, all Things,
whatfoever the Father doth, thefe alfo doth the
SON, John v. 15?. And, as if this were not
enough it is exprefly added, Thefe the SON
doth [o<uoia?] exactly in the fame Manner as the
Father does : Therefore, not One furely as the
(e) Afts i. 24. 2 Cor. xii. 8. A£ts vii. 59.
(/) 2 Pet. iii. 18. Rev. i. 5, 6. 2 Tim. iv. 18.
\g) Rev. v. 12, J3, xxii. 20,
proper
3 2 The Scripture-E violence of
proper Author, the Other only by Cvmmiffwn and
Warrant from Him ; not One as the Efficient
and Principal Caufe, the Other as a Subordinate
Inftrumental Means ; not One abfolutely and of
Himfelf, and the Other as depending upon 'meer
Will and Pleafure : For this would make a
very wide Difference in the Way and Man-
ner of their Working ; whereas we are affur'd
they work exactly alike. And hereupon alfo
they are reprefented to us as being in each other,
John x. 38. — xiv. 11. and, as being only known to
each ether, Matt. xi. 27. and at laft, as being one
'Thing each with other, John x. 30.
Thus far we have proceeded in the Difco-
very of this great Myfiery c/God [or of the
Divine Being ] : and find according to the Scri-
pture Account of it, that it includes in it both
the Father, and this Christ, Col. ii. 2 .
III. I t remains in the laft Place to fhew,
that the Holy Ghost[To caird,upon whatever
Reafons] does alfo enter into the Scripture Ac-
count, which we have of the blejfed God. Thus
He is not only fpoken of as the Spirit of God,
his Holy Spirit, his good Spirit, both in the Old
Teftament and in the New : but we plainly
feem to be led into the Thought, that He is
the Spirit of God, as the Soul is the Spirit of
Man, 1 Cor. ii. 10, 11. Not that we would
or can fuppofe, that both Branches of the
Comparifon are in every thing alike : but let
any one tell of a Comparifon made in Scrip-
ture, where there is no Refcmblancc ; and
then let them fay, what the Refemblance is
or can be, if the Spirit of God is not as Ef-
fential to the Divine Being, as the Spirit of a
Man is to the Humane. We therefore think,
we
^Trinity, $3
we have fufficient Grounds upon which to afTcrt,
not only that He is the Spirit of God, but that
He is alfo the Spirit, which is God.
SeB. i. That the Name of [God] is put
upon HIM in the Scriptures, we think is very
plain ; though thefe Gentlemen are very pofi-
tive, that the Word [God'] in Scripture does no
where fignify the Perfon of the Holy Ghost,
We read of Ananias, that he had lied to the Holy
Ghoft, Acts v. 3 . it follows, v. 4. 'Thou haft
not lied unto Men, but unto GOD. And they
are faid to be the Temple of God, in whom
[ and for that very Reafon, becaufe ] this Spi-
rit dwelt in them, 1 Cor. Hi. 16. To whom
can a proper Temple belong, but unto GOD ?
And for what Reafon can any Perfon or Thing
be called the Temple of God, unlefs God dwells
in it or them, as in bis Temple ? Befides this
Spirit is called the GOD of Hope, Rom. xv. 15.
He is the living GOD, 2 Cor. vi. 16. compared
with, Lev. xxvi. 11, 12. He is the GOD of
Jfrael, and their Reck, 2 Sam. xxiii. 2, 3. He is
that Jehovah, from whom the Prophets fpake of
old : Their Language always was, Thus faith
the Lord ; or, The Word of the Lord, &c. And in
the New Teflament we read, that in the Times
paft God fpake unto the Fathers, by the Pro-
phets, Heb. i. 1. Now this God was the Holy
Ghost, 2 Pet. i. si. and 2 Tim. Hi. 16.
Setl.z. Besides, He has all the Properties
and Perfections of the Divine Nature belonging
to H 1 m. This Holy Ghoft is not only a Spirit,
but He is by Way of Eminency The Spirit.
It would be endlefs here to mention particular
Texts : Now what can this mean ? We know
there are many, innumerable Spirits, Humane
and
34 The Scripture-Evidence of
and Angelical, if there be not other Spirits
befides, which we know nothing of. But here is
a Spirit, which is above all other Spirits : Surely
this muft be the Supreme God. And this feems
the more ftrongly to be concluded, becaufe He
is alfo reprefented as One Spirit, [that is
not only a principal Spirit, but a Spirit, which
is by Himfelf alone, befides whom there is no
other [fuch] Spirit : Thus we read of the fame
Spirit, i Cor. xii. 4. of one and thefelf-fame Spirit,
i>. 11. and of one Spirit, v. 13. again, Eph. ii. 18. —
iv. 4. What other Spirit can this be but God, for
Godis a Spirit ? John vi.24; Belides,He is the Holy
One, 1 John ii. 20. tho 3 we know there is none
Holy as Jehovah, nay none befides Him, 1 Sam. ii.
2. Rev. xv. 3,4. He is the Spirit of Ho-
liness, Rom. i. 4. And fo He alfo is the
Spirit of Truth, John xiv. 1 7. — xv. 26. —
xvi. 1 3 . and the Spirit of Life, Rom. viii.
1. Rev. xi. 11. that is, He is that Spirit which
is the Original, the Fountain both of Hulinefs,
Life and Truth -, He not only has, but He is all
this, 1 John v. 6. Again, He is Omnipotent:
For He not only does what God alone can do,
but He is exprefly ftifd the Power of the Highefl,
Luke i. 35. He is Immense and Omnipre-
fent : He fills Heaven and Earth, Pf. cxxxix.
7. He is A l l-w 1 s e : He kno\ys what only
God does or can know : He knows the "Things
•which are to come, John xvi. 13. Now upon this
Head there is a Challenge enter'd againft all
falfe [pretended] Gods, or thofe of a Subordinate
Rank, If a. xli. 23. — xliv. 7. He knows the
Things of God, what does belong to God ; not
only what God does and defigns, 'but this Spirit
knows what God is ; He knows the deep Things
of God ; nay, He knows all Things, 1 Cor. ii.
10,
^ Trinity. 35
10, 11. John xiv. 26. Once more, this 'Spirit
is the Eternal Spirit; therefore cannot
be a made Thing, Heb. ix. 14. And to fay all
in one Word, that Most High and Glo-
rious God, fo loftiiy defcrib'd by the Pro-
phet, in the fixth of Ifaiah (which we have once
before referr'd to, upon another Occafion) is
this very felf-fame Spirit: compare Acls -axviii.
ij, 26,27. with If a. vi. 8, 9, 10. He, that glo-
rious JEHOVAH, gives the Menage in Charge
to the Prophet 5 So 'tis in the Old T-eft anient :
and in the New, we are told it was the HOLY
G HO S T, who employed the Prophet as his Mef-
fenger, at that very time and upon that very Oc-
cafion,to fpeak thofe very fame Words. We cannot
fomuch as fufpect that any fincere and plainChri-
Itian will furlcr Himfelf to be (o far practised upon,
as to be perfwaded that this Holy-Gh ft (after
all) only was the Meffenger employ 'd on this
great Errand j tho J fuch attempts will be made
upon them : But it is fo plain, that this is the
Place of the Prophet himfelf, in both Texts ; that
unlefs the Holy Ghofl may be allowed to be that
great and glorious GOD Himfelf, we do not fee,
that He can here have any Place at all.
Seel. 3. Again, there are fuch Operations and
Powers afcrib'd to this blelled Spirit as do be-
long to GO D only. I here (only for the fake of
Brevity) pafs by the mention of the Work of
Creation, and of univerfal Providence: and only
infift upon the fe two Heads, the Works of Mira-
cles, and of Grace. — As to zh& former, this Spirit
is every where reprefented, not as the mm Mi~
nifter employ \{ and authori/M to work Mirddes y
in the Name of the great God, as an Angel or
even as a Proph.t or an Jpofle might <\o :
E ? ' but
3 6 The Scripture-Evidence of
but he is ftill fpoken of, as one [who Himfelf
was the immediate Author and Original of 'era.
To this purpofe, He is exprefsly faid to work all
thefe, i Cor. xii. u. Nay, they are faid to be done
by his Power, Rom. xv. 19. and, at hispleafure
too : for it is [^9»* &*kn*t) juft as He will: in
this great Aftair, it is (we think) very plain,
this blefled Spirit is fuch an Agent as is abfo-
lute,arbitrary, unaccountable ; and therefore fure-
ly, He is independent and underived. 'Tis need-
lefs after this to add, that in the Day of Pente-
ecft, (when the Apoftles fpake in all kind of Lan-
guages,) that which the amazing Difpenfation
is finally refolv'd into, is, that they were filed with
the Holy-Ghost, Al~ls ii. 4. Nay, even our Lord
Jefus Qthat Man, that authorized and greatefi
Minifier (furely) that ever was] when He cafts
cut Devils, afcribes it to this blefled Spirit,
Matt. xii. 28. Now in this Cafe muft we look
upon Him as a Servant of Servants ? and does
what He here fays of His acting in the Vertue
and Power of this Spirit, tiz,miy that He then
lay under the Curfe of Chain £01* Canaan] .<* Gen.
ix. 25. And there are none of all the Works cf
Grace, but what are every where afcrib'd to this
blefled Spjrit .- Who is it that does Anoint, that
does furnifh and fit any for the Work of the Mi-
ni fry and incline them to it ; is it not this Spi-
rit, even tho* we begin the Account from the
Head and firft Minifter} Luke i v. 18. Who is
it, that does appoint, and put Perfns (who truly
belong to it) into the Miniftry ? it is this Spirit,
Acts xiii. 2. — xx. 28. Who is it, that did in-
dite the f acred Scriptures ; and there lay down the
Laws, which are to direcl: and regulate their
Miniflraticns who were before us; ours, and all
. r ■». i ,4 that
^Trinity. 37
that are to come after us > It is this Spirit.
2 Tim. iii. 16. And then, who is it, that does
and only can effectually blefs thefe Gofpel-Mi-
niftrations with Succefs ? 'tis only GOD that giv-
eth the Encreaf e , but it is this Spirit,
1 Cor. iii. 6, 7.
Accordingly, by this Spirit it is that we
are enlightned, Eph. i. 17,18. So al fo that we
are enlivened, John v.i. 63 . That we are renewed,
and born again, Titus iii. 5. John iii. 5, 6, 8.
that we are SanElify'd, Rom. xv. 16. 1 Cor. vi.
11. 1 Pet. i. 2. 2 Theff. ii. 13. That we
are ftrengtheued and eftablifh'd in Grace, Eph.
iii. i<5. and, that we are Sealed unto the Day of
Redemption, Eph. iv. 30. it is all the Work of
this Spirit.
And yet further, to us (even in the prefent
Life) this Spirit is a Spirit of Adoption,
and as fuch, bears Witnefs with our Spirits, that
we are the Children of God, Rom. viii. 15, 16.
a Spirit of Grace and of Supplication, and as
fuch, enclines and enables us to pray, Zech. xii.
10. Rom. vii. 26. A Spirit of Power, thro 5
whofe AfTiftance we do and are able to mortify th?
Deeds of the Body, Rom. viii. 13. A Spirit of
Wisdom and Underftanding , to direct our
Way, If a. xi. 2. Rom. viii. 14. A Spirit of
Love, by whom the Lone of God is fhed abroad
in our Hearts, Rom. v. 5. And a Spirit of
Peace, by whom we are formed to the love
of one another, 1 Pet. i. 22. Briefly, the Fruit of
this Spirit (where-cver He dwells) is Love, Joy,
Peace, Long-furring, Gentlenefs, Goodnefs, Faith
[or Faithrulnefs], Meeknefs, Temperance, Gal v.
22, 23. And this, all this is only the Firft-fruit;
of the Spirit, Rom, xiii. 23. What then will the
full
38 The Scripture-Evidence of
full Harvefi be ! If He is all this to us, and
works all this in us even here ; What will He
be to us, what will he do for us when we come
to Heaven ! And can we then look upon this
blefled Spirit, as any Other than God, even the
mofl high God ? Or can we believe, that any one
but God can do thefe things !
SeB. 4. We now add in the laft Place, that
the JVorJhip and Homage is due and owing to
the Holy-Ghofl, which does belong to God only.
Thus, in Baptifm we are to be folemnly devoted
to HIM, Mat. xxviii. 19. and at the Holy Table
we are to drink into this one Spirit, i Cor. xii. 13.
When we are directed to pray, the Lord make you
to encreafe and abound in Love, to the end he may
ftablifh your Hearts, 1 Theff. iii. 12, 13. and, the
Lord direB your Hearts into the love of God,
2 Thelf. iii. 5. the Lord here prayed to, mud
furely be this Spirit ; for in one Place, the Father
and the Lord J ejus Chrifi had been exprefsly
nam'd before, as diftinct. from this Lord : and
befides, He who does both efiablijh us, and fhed
abroad the Love ofGOD in our Hearts (accord-
ing to the Language of the Holy Scriptures) is
the Spirit. Beiides, we are* taught folemnly to
appeal to the Holy Ghost, Rom. ix. 1. And
HIM, we are to hear, to believe, to be obedient
to, whatever He fays, Rev. ii. 7, 11, 17, 25?.
— iii. 6,13, 22. And to add no more, we are
folemnly to beblejfedin HIS Name, 2 Cor. xiii.
And now, upon this Evidence which we
have here offer'd, (befides a great deal which
fhould have been added, if we had room) we
leave it with the ferious and plain Chriftian to
judge, whether we have or have not dealt faith-
fully
^ Trinity. 39
fully with them, while fr-ipon this Foundation]
we have conftantly taught them, what alfo the
Univerfal Church has agreed in, That thefe
'Three [the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghofi^
are the One God, the fame in Subftance or Ef~
fence } equal in Power and Glory.
CHAP. IL
Of the Harmony of the Reformed Churches
in this Article of the Blejfed Trinity;
with fome ftevious Obfervations.
TH E Queftion before us is not, Whether
every Doctrine revealed and taught in
the Holy Scriptures be true ? that is acknow-
ledged by all profeffing Chriftians : but, Whether
this particularly, of the Blejfed Trinity, be there-
in taught ? And of this there may be Certainty
(as hath been fhev/d) where there is not Infallibili-
ty. Acquaintance with theBible,either in the origi-
nal Languages, or any right and true Tramlation,
with due Regard to the juft and neceiia'ry Rules
of Interpretation, may fufficc for that ; elfe were
it a Writing of little or no Ufe, if the main
Points in it could not by fuch proper Means be
difecrned.
4© Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
difcerned. Only we would diftinguifh between
the Do&rines and Points propofed in Scripture
to our Belief, and the Things themfelves that
are the Matter and Subject: of them. The For-
mer may be known, and Ground fufficient feen
for receiving them ; where our Reafon, at leafl
in this its weak and impaired State, can't reach
the full, clear, and adequate Underftanding of
the Latter. Not attending unto this may
occafion Difficulties and Intanglement in the
Thoughts, which otherwife would be prevented.
If Perfons bring their preconceived Notions and
Ideas of God, and of what is fit, or not fit for
him to fay or require, and by thofe pretend pre-
cifely to meafure and fettle the Difcoveries and
Declarations of his Word ; no Wonder if many
times they be found more bold, than wife (a).
For our Parts, we go by other Rules. Having
fufficient Evidence that the Scriptures are the
Word of God, purpofely given to lead us to a
right Knowledge of Himfelf and of His Will,
we apply to them for forming our Conceptions
of both i and if any thing therein tranfcend our
(j) " Should there be found fome Place* of Scripture, where It fnou'd
H be exprefly written, that God was made Man, or did afTume human
" Flefh ; they fliould not prefently be taken according as the W*rds
" found, fince that is altogether repugnant to the Divine Majefty } but
** would require to be expounded in fuch manner, as by Figures not
" utterly unufbal in Speech a fitter Meaning might appear to us. Socin.
Dfputat. de Jefu Ctirifto. Operum Tom. I. p. 714. "* If not once only,
"■ but often nt Ciiuld be written in the facred Scriptures, that Chr?jt
" made Satisfa&ion to God for Sins ; I would not therefore believe th.it
" the Matter is fo, as you imagine. Utm de Satisfaffiene, P IB, r. 6.
p. 204.. *' Any, the greateft Force is to be ufcd with Words, rather than
" take them in the obvious 9enfe. Setmd Epifilt 10 Balcerimkiu*.
O/etum Tom. I, p. 42;.
Reafon,
in the Article b/r/^ Trinity. 41
Reafon, yet, fince God hath faid it, we con-
clude it is not in itfelf repugnant or contradicto-
ry ,• and that faid it He hath, we difcern by the
Places and Parages themfelves, confidered with
their Context, and the Scope of what is written,
and by comparing Scripture with Scripture. We
do not caft in our Minds what poffible Senfe the
Words or Phrafes abftractly taken may bear;
but what in the Places where we find them,
confidered as above, they contain, or at leaft
moft aptly and fairly lead us to. And thus
judging for ourfelves, we are convinced that
this great and important Article of the Ever*
blejjed Trinity is taught in the Holy Scriptures.
And the more confirmed are we herein, when
we fee fo many concurring in the fame Senfe.
The Church of God hath witnefled to it in all
Ages. *Tis acknowledged to have been the
common received Opinion fince the Council of
Nice, and for the Times before the Proofs may
be feen in divers, who have laboured in fuch
Collections (a). The Purpofe of this Part of
thefe Papers is only to reprefent in one View the
Judgment of the Reformed Churches concerning
this Matter, according as we find it in the
Body of their Confeffions^ printed together at
Geneva, An. 1654. ^ n reference to which Con-
fefjions we would only premife the following
ObfervationSi
{*) Dr. South'* lAmmdiverfions on Dr. Sherlock'* Vtndicatian of the
Trinity, ch. 8. £p. Bull's Dsfen/io Fidei Nicenae. Efxfiem Judic. Ecclef.
de Neccjfitat, credend- Chriftum tjj'c vertim Dettm. The Fathers Vindicated
touching the Trinity t in D-fcnce of Bp t Bull. Dr. Hancock'* *Arianifm not
Primitive Chr/flianitj,
G i. After
4 2 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
i . A f t e r the Church had long groan'd un-
der the Corruptions of the Papacy, and upon
breaking out of fome Light, was itrugling and
crying out for Reformation, and in divers Pla-
ces did gradually draw oft and feparate them-
felves from the Romijb Communion ; to flop
which Reformation, more than for rectifying
what was amifs, a pretended General Council
was called and held at Tfent ; fome before
that Council, fome in the Time of it, and fome
after, drew up their Omfeffions of Faith, therein
to aifert and difplay the Truth, and declare
againfl fuch Errors, as they found had corrupted
and darkened Religion, especially in the great
and mod momentous Points of Faith and Wor-
ihip. Now when all in thefe Weftern Parts
were thus flired up, and fet upon fearching in-
to things, in order to purge Grnfi's Floor, cach-
ing out the Chafrj and keeping the good Grain,
this Doctrine was not found fault with, or look'd
upon as any Part of the Apoftacy ; but on all
fides held faff, as what appeared fo well and
plainly founded on the Scriptures, and delivered
down from the Apoftles Times, that no juft
Exception could lie againft it, but it muff,
be taken as pure and Primitive Truth, as it
is with us, and other Chriftian Churches to this
Day.
2. These Confefjions and Declarations were
. not drawn up before ever the Contra verfy now
on foot had been darted, and Oppofition made
againft this great Article of the Cnriftian Faith ;
thofe Reformers were well apprifed by whom,
and how it bad been attacked, and how defend-
ed ; they knew the Pleas and Pretences, the Cri-
ticifms
in the Article o///^ Trinity- 43
ticifms and fubtil Arguings of its Enemies j
how dextcrcufly the Caufe on that Side had
been managed by fome Men of corrupt Minds
before their Days, fo as perhaps it hath net with
greater Advantage iince ,• yet were they not
fhock'dor moved thereby, but held faft this Point,
as well as others of the common Faith once deli-
vered unto the Saints.
3 . They went upon the fame Principles that
we do, and as it is allowed we ought to do, viz,.
that of judging for themfelves, and taking the
Holy Scriptures as the fole Ground of their
Faith and Hope; the divine Authority and Per-
fection of which they as clearly and fully aflert-
ed and owned, as we can ; as likewife the Ob-
ligation of all to ftudy and cenverfe' with
them, and guide their Confcienc33 by them,
and not by the Authority or Dictates of any
meYe Men, or Body of Men. They Taught the
Scriptures Perfpicuity, at lcaft in the great and
ncceffary Points of Religion : that thel'c are fo
plain, that every honeft Mind with competent-
Pains and Diligence may fee them, and be fatis-
iied of them. We do not produce them there-
fore as adding any thing to Scripture Authority,
on which alone they did, and we do depend ;
but as Witnefles of its Doctrine, who upon free,
diligent, and impartial Searches gave into the
fame Senfe, as upon like Examination we do :
v>e mean in Subftance, it not always in the
fame Wcrds ; though moftly there is an Agroe-
ment in the fame Terms too. * .
4. These are the Teftimonics not of feme
few particular Perfons only, but of whole Bodies
ok Men, among whom there were many of great
G 2 Piety
44 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
Piety and Ability, Skill in Languages, and all
ufeful fubfervient Literature, who could under-
ftand the Signification and Force of Words, the
Drift and Scope of* the infpired Writings, the
Laws and Rules of juft Reafoning, and Inter-
pretation, as well it may be as any fince : in a
word, Men, confider'd thus conjunctly, as little
likely to be miftaken, or designedly to miflead
others, as any in our Time.
5. To this we may add divers advantageous
Circumftances in their Teftimony. They were
not under Influences of Fear, or of Flattery ;
they were remote and diftant, many of them,
from one another; drew not up their Confeflions
by concert ; but at feveral Times, and in feve-
ral Places, only with the fame common Rule,
the Holy Scriptures before them, as their Foun-
dation, in the Senfe of which for the main
they agree. In Rites and Ceremonies, and fuch
like lelfer Matters, there is Variety with Cha-
rity ; but in the Subftance and chief Heads of
Doctrine they were of the fame Mind, and fpake
the fame thing, and the true Faith and right Wor-
ship were the Matters they were mod intent upon,
and concerned about. They were not carried
with Prejudices for, or againft this, or that Article,
or Senfe ct it ; but deliberately weighed every
Thing, and freely declared againft, and caff, out
what Corruptions they found in the Religion of
{heir Country and Anceflors, however long or
univerfally they had obtained. And as there is
no ground to queftion but this Point of the
Trinity, about which they knew there had been
often great and folemn Debates, did now pafs
under their mature Coniideraticiij fo had they
taken
in the Article of t he T R i N i T y. 45
taken it for an Error, they would as readily
have parted with it, as they did with many
others ; yea more readily, becaufe of the Con-
nexion and Confequence of it, in Reference to
the whole Scheme of their Religion. For,
6. They had like Thoughts with us of the
Importance, as well as of the Truth of this Do-
ctrine ; that it is not a fmall, or a meer fpecu-
lative Matter ; but a Prime and Fundamental
Point, whereon the greateft Truths and Du-
ties of the Gofpel are grounded. The greateft
Demonftration of the Evil of Sin, of the Love
of God to Men, the Difcovery of the PoiTibi-
licy of a Mediator, of the Suitablenefs and Suf-
ficiency of Chrift for this Purpofe, of his Me-
rit and Grace, Satisfaction, and powerful In-
terceffion, of the Virtue and Efficacy of his
Spirit to renew and fanftify, to guide and bring
Souls to Glory; all have their Bottom in this
Doclrine of the Bkjfed Trinity, and could not,
that we can fee, be well accounted for with-
out it. And as to Gofpel Duties, fuch as
Faith, Love, Obedience, Worfhip, <&c. all as
Chriftian have this one God, who is Father*
Son, and Holy Ghofi, as their Object In
this one Name \v r e are baptized, and to this
God is all Service and Honour due, and by
every true Chriftian paid. All Chriftian Mo-
rality arifeth out of this Belief. In a Word,
utter Ignorance, and efpecially Denial of this
Article, thefe Reformers reckoned could not
ftand with a right Chriftian Profeffion ; they
cenfured Impugners of it as Overthrowers of
the Chriftian Foundation, and none of their
Communion.
7. Would
46 Harmony of ths Reformed Churches
7. Would- not Advantage be given to
Deifts and Antifcripturifts, nor to fay Atheifts,
to feoff at the Bible, if after Pretences of its
Truth and Authority, and that its great End
is to call off the World from Idolatry and
Polytheifm to the Knowledge, Worfhip, and
Service of the One only and true God, and
of its Plainnefs to fuch Purpofes, being for
the Ufe of all ,• yet even as to this main Point,
the Setting forth of this one true God, diftin-
guifhing him from all other Beings, it is allow-
ed to be done in fuch a Manner, that not
only one, or a few, through Carelefnefs or Pre-
judices, or judicial Blindnefs might miftake ;
but that the Generality or Chriftians in all Ages
have miflaken, under as good Capacity to un-
derftand it, as good Means and Helps thereto,
as much Concern and Diligence, Impartiality
and Faithfulnefs in the Study of it, as fincere
and earned Prayer to God for his Guidance,
and as good Ground to hope for it from him,
as any can pretend to ? What Ufe, may they
fay, can fuch a Book be of, or what Likelihood
that it is from God ? Could he not fpeak
plainly of himfelf, where 'tis pretended he de-
signed to do fo ? Is all there lb delivered, that
the World might, and almolt all actually have
erred, as to the very Object of their Faith,
Worfhip, and Obedience, and in whom their
Felicity is placed ? Would not that Book, in-
fcead of leading to Life and Salvation, be the
moil: inflating and dangerous one that can be ?
Of what Tendency mult thofe Notions be,
from which any fuch Confequences would juftly
follow ? Once more,
8. True
in the Article of the T r i n i t y. 47
8. True Chriftian Virtue and Religion,
according to thefe Confifjlons, hath been not on-
ly under, but by Influence of this Belief. And
the Compofers of them did not think, nor can
we, that a falfe Faith can be productive of a
good and holy Life, either in the Nature of the
Thing, or by the Operation of God owning
and accompanying of it. Do Men gather Grapes
cf Thorns, or Figs of Thiftks ? The Fruit will
be agreeable to the Root, both in Nature and
Morality. Wrong Principles and Grounds will
have Effects accordingly ; nor will the God of
Truth and Gocdnefs make ufe of the former,
to the producing fomewhat contrary in the lat-
ter. It fhould feem by the new Scheme, ci-
ther that fuch as have gone upon the old are
perifhed ; or that they have been*brought to the
Enjoyment of the true God by Belief of, and De-
pendance on a Falfe one.
These Things premifed, we fhould now
come to the Confefpons themfelves; but feve-
ral Antient Creeds being refer'd to in them, it
will be needful to fet down what they fay upon
this Article.
The APOSTLES CREED, as it is
called, the Compiler of this Harmony faith, " is
**' the Confellion of the Faith of all Chriftian?,
" the univevfal Rule of all other Confeffions,
" containing the Analogy of Faith, the Sum
<c of the facred Gofpel, comprehended in the
c * Old, and efpecially in the new Teftament :
" that none may fay that Creed is not extant
" in the holy Scriptures/' The Places cited are
here mark'd.
J Believe
48 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
<c I Believe in God, the Father (a) Almighty,
" Maker of Heaven and Earth.
Heb. 11. 6. Pjal. 33. 6. Gen. 1. 1, Prov. S. 22,
&c. Pfal. 116. 10. 1 Cor. 8. 6. Rom. 1. 25.
Col. 1. 16. £o/». 10. 11. Matth. 28. 19.
"And in 3k/# J Chrift, his only Son, our Lord.
Pfal. 2. 7. Matth. 3. 17. //#. 9. <5. John 3. i6»
1 Cor. 8.6. Heb. 7. 3. 7/a. 7. 14. Zafce 13. 5.
lfa. 11. 1. and 53*2. Matth. 1. 18, 25. and 3.17.
John 17. 3. and 12. 36. J?ow. 9. 33. iPef. 2. 6.
jfotw 3. r6. Heb. 2. 16. <?«/. 3, 16. Pi//. 2. 7.
2 Pe/. 1. 17.
"I Believe in the Holy Ghofl.
1 jfr/?H 5. 7. Matth.1%. 19. 2 Cor. 13. 14. 7/<*. 59.
21. and 48. 16. Matth. 3. 16. A&sio.i%. Rom.
8. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 11.
The Doctrine of the Sacred Trinity here pro-
fcued well agrees with the Scripture Doctrine,
and what we may be well allured went with
Baptifm, as Matth xxviii. 19. Teach all Nations,
baptising them in the Name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl : three Relatives,
but one Name, one Authority, Power and
Majefty, one God. This is the Catholick Faith.
( a ) " Obforve {fait St. Auftin ) that when he Joins the
* c Name of God the Father in the Confeflion, he fhews, that he djd
" not fitft begin to be a God, and after that a Father ; but with-
" ouc any Beginning he was always both God and Father. There-
" fore when ever you hear the Name Father, acknowledge that he
" hith a Son truly begotten. His true Son is the Word.
Sermon. He Temp. Serm. 1 8l ■ p. 525. So alfo Ruffinus. " By this
*' Name Father the Son is alfo demonftrared to fublift with him.
Expof. in Symbol. ^4pofl. 1. 4. p. 566. " Since the Sabeliian and ^Arian
" Herefies efpecialiy this Interpretation hath been infifted on. S- P. K.
IJ'fi. of the Creed, p. 80, 81.
" From
in the Article o/^ Trinity. 49
" From this Place (faith Brugenfis) did the An-
" tients gather the Unity of Nature and Plu-
" rality of Perfons in God." This Profeffion,
as a learned Perfon obferves, (a) hath been co-
eval with Chriftianity. " Among the Jews the
w Controverfy was about the True MefTiah,
" among the Gentiles about the True God :
" it was therefore proper among the Jews to
" baptize in the Name of Jefm, that he might
" be vindicated to be the True Mefliah ,• among
" the Gentiles in the Name of the Father, and
" of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft, that they
" might be thereby inftructed in the Doctrine
" of the True God. Hear this, O Arian, and
" Socinian" faith the learned Lightfoot (b).
The N I C E N E CREED.
" W f. believe in one God, the
Firfl General cc p afher ^mighty, Maker of all
Council 0/318 « th - vifible and invi f lb ie :
Bijbopsat^cc, tt A * fn Jef CMfl the
*mL £l ' " <**v begotten Son of the Fa-
. " the'r, God of God, Light of
" Light, very God of very God, begotten not
" made, of one Subftance with the Father,
" by whom all things were made, both which
" are in Heaven, and which are in Earth ,• who
" for us Men, and for our Salvation descended,
" and was incarnate, and made Man, fullered,
(a) Idem, p. 3j, 137, 317.
(^ See hi* Works, Vol. II. j>. 27$, and p. 1130. ~W *» P- "?[•
fiuh he ; " r ftall only oblerve thefe thing. : (I.) As they blalpliL-me
" the greawffi, fo the plained Truths in the Bible. I can't but won-
" der at their Denial of the Godhead of ChM, &c U-) They go
** clean crofs to ihe Scream of K-ripcurt : the main Parpwle ot
" th»t is to extol Chrfl 3nd ths tidy Qh»\l t the n»un Tarp-ie of
\\ thefe to ab^'e them." &c -
H " and
5© Harmony of the ReforrnM Churches
" and rofe again on the third Day, and afcended
" into Heaven, and fhail come to judge the
" quick and the dead .-
"And in the HJy Ghoji.
" And thofe who fay there was a Time
" when he [ viz. Chrifi ] was not, and that
" before he was born he was not, or that
" he was made of nothing, or of another Hy-
" poftaiis or Subftance -, or that fay the Son of
" God was created, or is changeable, or alter-
c - able ; thefe the Catholic and Apoftolic Church
" pronounceth accurfed."
Thus that mod: antient and venerable
Council, fummoned from all Parts of the Em-
pire, which at that Time included almofl
the whole Church. Here, as in the Creed
foregoing, the Order pointed out in the Bap-
tifmal Inftitution is ftill followed; what En-
largement it hath is explicatory, occafioned
chiefly by the riling Herefy of Arius ; on ac-
count of which, together with the Bufinefs of
Eafter, this Council was call'd. Here the Te-
nets of Arius were inquired into and difcuffed,
the Terms ufed weighed and lifted, and the
Profeffion above mentioned agreed to by three
hundred and eighteen Bifhops, a very few ex-
cepted. The true and proper Deity of Chrift,
his Coeflentiality and Coeternity with the Fa-
ther were examined by the Scriptures, and
judged agreeable thereto, as alfo to the Mind
of the Chriftian Church in the preceding Ages,
and thofe Terms liked as expreflive of the
Truth, and proper to cut off Evafions of Men of
fubtle and corrupt Minds. Arius had before
been cenfured in the Church of Alexandria:,
where-
in the Article of the Trinit y. 5 1
wherein he was a Presbyter, by a Council called
by Alexander their Bilhop for Examining this
Affair. " The Things, faith Alexander, which
11 they [viz. Arim and his Adherents] publifhed
" contrary to the Scriptures were thefe : That
" God was not always a Father, nor the Word
" from Everlafting, but had his Beginning of
" nothing; that he knows not the Father fully
" and abfolutely, nor can perfectly difcern him ;
" that he was made for our Sakes, that God by
<c him as an Tnftrument might make us. Arim
cc therefore and his Adherents who uttered
* thefe Tilings. We, tosechcr with other Bi-
" (hops ot Egypt and Lpia{ in Number near
" an Hundred, meeting for the fame Purpofe,
" have pronounced to be held of all Men ac-
" curfed. What Man hearing John affirm, lit
" the Beginning zvas the fflrd (a), will not con-
<c dernn thofe, that fay there was a Time when
" he was not ? Who when he heareth in the
iC Gofpel, The enly hgctten Son (l>); and, By him were
lC all 'Things made (c) ; will not deceit thofe, that
ci affirm the Son is one of the Creatures ? How
" can he refemblc the Things that were made
" of him ? How is he in Subftance different
" from the Father, being the perfect Image and
" Brightnefs of the Father (7/), when he faith,
" He that hath feen me, hath feen the Father al-
" fi ( e ) ■ How is he alterable and mutable,
pc ivhen he reports of himfclf, / am in the Fa-
" ther, and the Father in me (f) ; and, / and my
" Father are one (g) ; and by the Prophet Malachi,
(') John i. 1, 2. (b) lb. xv. 18. (c) CoLi- 1?. (J) H;b. i. 3.'
{■) JJiuxiV. j>, j». (;) lb. ver. 10 ir. (») lb. x. }o.
H ? " /
5 2 Harmony of the Reforrrfd Churches
" I am the Lord, I change not (a) ? Tho 5 that
" may be reiered to the Father, yet is it fitly
" applicable to the Son ; who is, as the Apoftle
" writes, jfefw Chrift the fame Tefterday, and n
" Day, and for ever {b). When they had once
" determined to war againft Chrift, they reje&ed
" his Words, where he faith, As the Father know-
tc eth me, even fo kmw I the Father (c). If the
* Father knoweth the Son imperfectly, then the
¥ Son lmoweth the Father imperfectly j but if
i: this be Impiety and Blafphemjr to fay, and
" the Father knoweth the Son perfectly and ful-
" ly ; then doth it follow, that even as the Fa-
tc ther knoweth his own Word, fo the Word
" knowcth his own Father, whofe Word he is.
Cl J Twas our Saviour's Warning : fake heed left
" any deceive you (d). And Paul wrote, that in
tc the latter 'Times fame would fall from the true
" Faith (e), and give ear to Spirits of Error,
<c and Doctrines ot Devils, eppofing the Truth.
" Now w r e hearing their Impieties with our Ears,
" not without Caufe have proclaimed thefe cut
" off from the Catholic Church, and fir from
u t [ ie r ight Faith. And we have certified
w you, that if fuch prefent themfelves before
" you, you give no heed to them ; for it behoves
" us, who are Chriftians, to efchew all fuch, as
" open their Mouths againft Chrift, and fuch as
" are alienated in Mind from him, as Enemies
*' of Gcd ; and that we bid not fuch God-fpecd (j%
" left we become Partakers of their Sins (g). "
Thus did this Bifhop and Synod endeavour
to crufh Arianifm in its Birth. But the Author
CO Ma!, iii. 6. (/ ) Hcb. xiii. 8 (<) John x. Ijr. (->) Mn.
xtiv. 4. (#; 1 Tim. iv. 1. (J) 2. Epift. John. {») i^.o/Alexand.
itd, Soarat. L. I. c, 6.
of
in the Article of the T r i n i t y . 5 ?
of it, and his Followers, difguiiing their true
Sentiments, and concealing the Poifon of their
corrupt Doctrine, got Intereft in many, and by
fuch Means fpread their Leaven, and occahWd
great Troubles in the Church, of which the
BifliOp in another Letter before that now men-
tion a made great Complaint. In it he likewife
laid open their Hercfy; averted the Deity of
Cbrifi, that as the Word he fub/ifted from Eter-
nity, and is equal with the Father, being of the
fame Nature; and confirm 'd all by convincing
Proofs from Scripture. And after opening other
Parts of the Creed, of the Incarnation, of Chrijl
and the Refurre&ion, and about the Holy Spirit,
&c. he adds, " This is the Doctrine of the
" Apoftolic Church, " for which he faid he was
ready to die ; and that Arim, &c. were caft out,
becaufe they taught another Doctrine ; and ex-
horts his Fellow Bilhops to avoid them, and
join their Help for repreffing or this Herefy.
This is related by Thecdcret in his Hificry, lib. 1.
cap. 4. But all not availing, the Caufe, as hath
been fignified, was brought to the Council of
Nice, and there, after full Examination and
Difcuffion, the Proceedings of Alexander and his
Council were approved, their Sentence con-
firmed, and the Faith of the Holy Trinity
cleared and fettled according to the Sacred
Scriptures, efpecially In relation to the Deity of
Chrijl (as was faid) his Eternity, and Oncncfs
in Subftance with the Father.
Both Eufebim and Cc/z/?^//^ himfeif wit-
ness to the Charader and juft Proceedings of
tins Council. " It was compofed (a), faith
(a) Vita Conftunr. L. III. esp. 7j 8, 5.
" Eufebiw*
54 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" Eufebim, of the chiefeft Learned Men of
" feveral Nations, fome famous for Wifdom of
" Speech, fome for Gravity of Life, and fome
" for both ; feme venerable for their Age and
" Experience, others for their Ingenuity and
" Wit. " He compares it to " a Spiritual
" Garland compofed of the choicer! Flowers. "
Sabinm the Macedonian attefts the juft Character
of this Eufebim for Learning and Fidelity ; tho'
fo inconfiftent is he., as at the fame Time to
contradift his Teflimony, even in thefe Things
that he fo well knew, and of which he was fo
much a better Judge and Witnefs than Sabinm,
being himfelf one of the Greateft Men in the
Council. Ccnfiantine alfo, by whom the Council
was called, and who was prefent, and in a fort
we may fay moderated in it, or at lea ft fuper-
vifed the Conduct of it, in his Letter (a) to the
Church of Alexandria fignifies that " He with
" the Council endeavoured that the Truth in
" Controverfy might be throughly tried out :
" that all Things were narrowly lifted. How
" great and horrible Blafphemies, faith he, have
" fome uttered againft our Great Saviour, a-
" gainft our Hope and Life ! When more than
<c three hundred Bifhops, Men of great Fame
" for Modefly and good Underftanding, had
" confirmed one and the fame Faith, found true
" by the Truth itfelf, the Teftimony of the
" Holy Scriptures fearched into for that Purpofe,
" Arim was found to have fallen from the fame,
" and to have fowed among you fii'ft? and then
". among us, this poifoned Error of Perdition.
i J) Sscrat. Eccl. Hift, L. I. cap, p.
" Where
in the Article o/^Trinity. «J $
<c Wherefore let us embrace the Doctrine that
" God hath deliver 'd to us : let none dagger,
" none delay; but all jointly with willing Minds
" return to the moft perfect Way of Truth. " We
may conclude what concerns this Nicene Creed
and Council with the Words of Bifhop Bull.
"In this Synod, fan he, the Bufmefs
" was of a chief Head of the Chriftian Reli-
" gion, viZi the Divinity of the Perfon of
" Jefus Chrift our Saviour; whether he be to
" be worfhiped as true God, or to be brought
" down into the Order and Rank of Creatures,^
" and of Things fubjeft to the true God. If
<c in this Queftion of greateft Moment we con-
" ceit that all the Governours of the Church
" have been utterly miftaken, and inftilled their
" Errour into the Chriftian People ; how will the
" Faithfulnefs of our Lord Chrift appear, who
" promifed he would be with the Apoftles, and
" with their Succeflbrs to the End of the World?
<c As often as I weigh thefe Things with my
" fclf, fo often almoft do I, not without Indig-
" nation and Horror, think therewith of their
'* monftrous Folly, or rather impious Madnefs,
" who have not feared openly to rave againft
" thofe venerable Fathers, as thofe who have
" malicioudy, or to be fure out of Ignorance,
" and rafhly, depraved the Catholic Doctrine of
" the Perfon of: Jefus Chrift delivered by the
<c Apoftles, and prefcrvcd in the Church thro'
" the three firft Ages, and obtruded a new Faith
" upon the Chriftian World. — Suppofe they
" had been weak and unlearned, as Subinus the
" Macedonian without Ground fuggeftcd ; yet
" were they for the moft part Men of Piety. It
" is incredible that fo many holy and gocd fylen,
" coming
$6 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" coming together from all Parts of the Chrifti-
" an World, who, whatever Unskilfulnefs other-
*• wife they labour'd under, yet could not be ig-
" norant of this Elementary Doctrine of the Sa-
«' cred Trinity, that ufed to be delivered to the
" Catechumens, or what themfelves had learned
" of that matter from their Anceftors ; that they
" could wickedly confpire together to this pur-
" pofe, to innovate the receiv'd Faith of the
" Church in a chief Article of Chriftianity.
TheCONSTANTINOPOLITAN
CREED little differs from
Second General tnat Q c Nke ^ anc j - 1S f omet imes
JiiT'l ° f C 5 ° Calkd by thC fame NamC - S ° me
zjjops at on- exp ij cator y Enlargement it hath,
itanunople, a- . h „ . J , & , Tr
galnfl Macedo- chld ty in what concerns the Ju-
nius, Anno 3 8 1. h Spirit, in oppofition to Mace-
donius, who denyed his Deity,
as Arms had that of the Son (a). Here in this
Council the Nicene Creed was recited and ap-
proved, and the Claufe concerning the Spirit
enlarged thus:
" And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver
" of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who
" together with the Father and the Son is wor-
" fhiped and glorify 'd ; who fpake by the Pro-
" phets M . The Words [and the Son] were af-
terwards added to thofe [who proceedeth from
the Father] and this hath been long owned by
the Churches.
(<*) Socrat. Hiff J, v. c. 8.
The
in the Article of the Trinity. 57
The EPHESINE COUNCIL
Third General madc »° T ne f C £ ff D > but
Council of 200 on aI l Hands proreiled to cleave
SZ/fo/tf at Ephc- to the Nicene, and cen Cured fuch
Jus, *£<««// Ne- as fliould frame any other ; only
ftonus^«« 04 3>. thc y enlarged upon the Do-
ctrine of the Incarnation, according to the Senfe of
Cyril's Second Letter to Nefiorius, which they ap-
proved. It was to this effect, viz,. " Tiiat me
" Son of God was made Man, and born of a
" Virgin, yet without Change cf the Natures,
" cither of the Flefli into the Godhead, or of the
" Divine Nature into the Manhood, without any
" Alteration or Mixture ; yet fo, as the Word be-
?' ing uniced hypoftatically (a) with the Manhood,
" makes but one Chrifl, that we may not divide
tl the two Natures, nor look on them as united
" merely by an Union of Dignity, Authority, or
" Affection, &c.
The CHALCEDON CREED wa>
likewife the fame with that of
Fourth General ffi cft wn ich With the Omft.inti-
s>;' *;U 3 i° ™rt?» *w ri %*%&
ccdon, aciinft on °r the Council or Lphejus, and
Eutyches," Ann. Pope Le,/s Letter to this Ch.'Le-
45 «• don Council, were read and appro-
ved. In Leo's Letter ',ci$ qbferv^i-
blc, he exhorted them iC to judge and determine
" of all Do&rines of Faith by the Rule of the
" Holy Scriptures," (b) as accordingly theyprcfef-
fed to do. In oppofition to the Herefy of E'ltyche-,
they thus explained the Article concerning Chrifl ;
" (c) We believe in one Lord JefusCurill, the Son
f JuxU Subfljh'uijm vnifum (L) Hip. MigJeb, dnf. V. c. p.
(>) l.'u. Ciuiu:d. Synod. Confefs. 5.
I c < or
5 8 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" of God, perfect God and perfect Man, confubn
Ci ftantial with the Father as to his Divinity,
<c and with Man as to his Humanity; in whom
c< there are two Natures united without Change,
" Diviiion, or Separation, To that the Properties
" of the two Natures are in, and agree to, one
" and the lame Perfon, who is not divided into
" two, but is one and the fame Jefus Cbrift, as is
" faid in the Nkene Creed." After reading this all
cried out : " This is the Faith of all the Fathers,
" this is the Faith of the Apoftles, we all thus be-
" lieve, and this let us all follow, (a) " Having
mention'd a Letter of Leo to this C until, let us
take Notice of fome other Paflagcs in his Letters
to the prefent Purpofe. (b) Letter 93 : He rejoiceth
that they had confirmed by their Judgment the
Doctrines that he had taught agreeably with the
Catholic Faith ; they did not then go by the
Authority of any but their own Judgment, gui-
ded by the Scriptures. Letter 134: He demonstrates
that it was ncceflary for the Reconciliation of
Man to God, that Jefus Chrift ftiould be God and
Man, and that the divine and human Nature
fhould be united in one Perfon ; and proves by
many Scriptures, that thefe two Natures are real-
ly and truly in Jefus Chrift; and flisws the fams
from the Fathers. Thus of the General Councils.
Some Creeds alio drawn up by particular Perfons
are mentioned, vi%,.
fa") D* P'* takes notice, there were but 350 Rifhops named
in the Acts of th's Council ; thereto! e tho' Leu's 77th Letter ("a th a-
bout 600, by it, after the manner of the La^n>, may be meant only a
jireat Number. Others j'irlge that the Metropolitans re ko'n'J the BaTioas
that were under them tho" abfent, and (b the Narober migh: be railed to
that of 600. And feeing no new Faittj was profefs'd, bjt the fame v hich
tOofe who were Abi'cnt hcid, the Metropolitan might hive their Leave
to put their Names tc it. (0 Ibid. Cm. v. of Leo. p. 99,
I R E-
in the Article of the T r i N i T Y» 59
IREN^US^ CREED. "The
" Church, fais he, planted thro' the whole
" World, even to the Ends of the Earth, hath
" from the Apoftles, and their Difciples, received
u this Faith, which is, In one God, the Father
" Almighty, who made the Heaven, and the
" Earth, the Sea, ■ and all that is in them : and
" in one Jefus Chrift, the Son of God, who was
" incarnate for our Salvation : and in the Holy
" Spirit, who by the Prophets preached the
" Appointments of God, &c (a) "
TERTULLIAN's CREED. "The
" Rule of Faith, fais he, is this : We believe
" there is one only God, who is no other than he
" that is the Creator of the World, who produ-
( a ) This befn£ an ^inte-Nicene Father, fee how he underftood his
own Crted, by PalTages cited from his Works in Bp- B til's Dcftnfio fid.,
Nice**, edit. 410. p. 41, 126, l.$. and Dr. Hancocks ^Arianijm not prim.
Chrijl. p. 27, &c. The Dottor cites thefe Words of Iren^us : " Nor
" art thou uncreated, O Man, nor didft thou always coexift with God,
" as his proper Word did. LM.ij. e, 4. The immenfe Father is meafuredby
* the >cn, for the Meafure of the Father is tlie Soil, b'ecaufe he comprs-
h*nds him . Lib. iv. c. g. It was meet that the Mediator between God and
Man lhould by his dwelling with both reconcile them. Lib. Hi- c. 20.
** The Sun ot G*d, whi 1? God, Hull come, lb, c. 23 " He proves from
his remitting Sins that he t- truly God- Lib. v.c 17. " Speaking of the
Valtntiniam lie laith : " Thiy were ir.etigious not on'y toward God the
Create j but toward C»r;jt, and the Holy Spirit. Lib. n. r. 31. " He ap-
plies to Chrifi. Rom. 9 5 in the S nfc of the Trinitarians \ Who is over all„
Gtd bUffed j<,r ever. Lib. in. c- fa'' He calls film" the moft nbightyGid . Lib .
ni.e 22 " Sairh, " Twas he- that appeared to Mofesih rile Buffl, who is
called the God of '%Abraham t ;;nd the uv, I .'m. Lib.iv. c 1 1 " He faith.
He receives eveiy Way this Tefhtrtony, thac he is tru'y Man and truly
God, from the Father, from ijie Son it. ticm tlie Angel:, &r. Lib. iv. n
14, K,s W>'<! and Wifdom, his S n and S/jhic v ere always with
him, to v. ho:n lie fpake, laying, Let us nuke fiiin. 1". c. 37. " He
prove, hi> Eternity hon etov- 8" 2}. lb. He laith, " Neither the
" Lord, nirthe UAy Spirit, nor the Apoftles, did definitively and abso-
lutely (.ill any one Gad, unlets he were veiy Gjd ; and that
when the Scriptures name th >fc G >di, tli.it are not Gods', it is done in
(Lkh a Manner, or to fitch Persons, as v. e may ealily (ee iiiey do not in-
tend God by EJfence and Nature, but by Defiginticui and Appoint-
\' aient, or Opinion, or fame fuch Thing. Lb.ni f.6. "
I a ccd
60 Harmony of the ReformM Churches
" ced all things out of nothing by his Word ;
tc hrft of all fent forth that Word, called his Son,
" who in the Name of God was many ways
" feen by the Patriarchs, and always heard in
t£ the Prophets ; at laft came down by the Spirit
" cf God the Father, and by his Power upon the
" Virgin Mary was made Flefh in her Womb, and
<c of her was born Man, and is Jefus Chrifl, who
" fent his Powerful Agent, the Holy Spirit,to work
" in thofe that believe, &c." (a)
This Tertullian gives as the Faith of the Church,
in his Book of Prescriptions againft Heretics, and
aflerts the Agreement thereof with that of the
Apoftles, and that it is the common Doctrine of
the Churches in Europe, AJia, and Africa.
" We, fats he, have the ApofUes for our
" Teachers."
A T H A N A S I U S's CREED.
The Catholic Faith is this : " That we Worfhip
" one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity,
( a ) This likewife being an ^Ante-N'icene Father, fee his Senfe in
I>p. Bull's Dtf. fid. Nicen.p. jj f) I 50, 397. And in Dr. Hancocis's ^Arianifm
not the prim. Coriftianvj, fee tliL'fe Paflages, p, 61. &c. *' We have learn'd,
" fdh he, that he [i. e. Chrift] was begotten of God, and is therefore called
" the Son of God, and God, rrom their being of one Subftance, ex unit die
" fuljl.mtU.^pclcget c.ip.21. And De orat. cap. 2. When we fay ; Our fa'he*
" &i. we call him God, and the Son is invocated in the Father ; for, faith
" he, I and mj tuner are One. We invocate only the Deity- De CarneCiri-
" fti tap. 3. agahfi Marcion. Thou can'ft not fay if he has been bo.n, and
" truly put on M?n, he would have ceafed to be G.^d, looting what he
" was, v hile he aflunud what he was not ; for there is no Danger of Al-
" ligation in God, dp. 6- The PoiTeflinn of both Subftan es fliew'd him
" both Man and God — with equal Verity of both Natures. De licfur
" Cm- cap. 6. Bczjig in the V*rm of Goi t he thought it no Robbery [pariair
" Deo J 10 be eq,t.il with God. " So he underftood Phil. 2 6. And fo Cont .
" Marc. I. 5. cap. jo. and againft Praxeas the SM-eUhn. " The Devil endea»
" vours fometimes to ihake the Faith by defending n i. e. by denying the
V Diftin&icn of the Pcrfon , of the Father, Son, and Holy Gholt, in
" the unity of the fame lnfin re, Incomprehensible Eflence. Cap. 2, The
" Divine Nature fufiers no Diviiion in the Son and Holy Ghoft. — The
" Three Perfcnsin the Trimty are of one Sitbftance, of one State, and
" of one Pcwer, brcaufe one God>"
« nei-
in the Article of the T R I n i t y . 6 1
" neither confounding the Perfons, nor dividing
" the Subftance ; for there is one Perfon of the
" Father, another of the Son, and another of the
" Holy Ghoft 3 but the Godhead of the Father, of
" the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft is all one, the
" Glory equal, the Majefty coeternal. Such
li as the Father is, fuch is the Son, and fuch is
" the Holy Ghoft. The Father uncreate, the Son
" uncreate, and the Holy Ghoft uncreate ; the
" the Father incomprehensible, the Son incom-
" preheniible, and the Holy Ghoft incomprehcn-
" lible ; the Father eternal, the Son eternal
" and the Holy Ghoft eternal • and yet they are
" not three eternals, but one eternal ; as alfo
" there are not three incomprehenfible, nor three
" uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incom-
" prehenfible. So likewife the Father is almighty,
" the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghoft al-
" mighty ; and yet they are not three almighty.s,
" but one almighty. So the Father is God,
" the Son is God, and the Holy Ghoft is God ;
" and yet they are not three Gods, but one
" God. So likewife the Father is Lord, the
" Son Lord, and the Holy Ghoft Lord ; and
" yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like
u as we are compelled by the Chriftian Verity
" to acknowledge every Perfon by himfelf to be
" God, and Lord ; fo are we forbidden by the
" Catholic Religion to fay there be three Gods,
" or three Lords. The Father is made of none,
" neither created, nor begotten ; the Son is of
<c the Father alone, not made, nor created, but
" begotten ; the Holy Ghoft is of the Father
" and of the Son, neither made, nor created,
" nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one
" Father, not three Fathers ; one Son, not three
" Son'. ;
6i Harmony of the Reforrti'd Churches
" Sons i one Holy Ghoft, not three Holy Ghofls.
* And in this Trinity none is afore or after
" another* none is greater or lefs than another ;
<c but the whole three Perfons are coeternal
C{ together, and coequal. So that in all things,
" as is aforefaid, the Unity in Trinity, and
* c the Trinity in Unity is to be worfhiped — Firf- 4
tc thermore the right Faith is, that we believe
€c and confefs that our Lord jfefus Chrifi, the
cc Son of God, is God and Man : God of the
" Subftance of the Father, begotten before the
<c Worlds ; and Man of the Subftanee of his
<c Mother, born in the World : perted God
" and perfect Man, of a reafonable Soul, and
<£ and human Flefhj fubfifting equal to the Fa-
cc ther as touching his Godhead, and inferior to
" the Father as touching his Manhood : who
(( altho* he be God and Man, yet he is not
" two, but one Chrift This is the Catholic
" Faith. •'
This Creed, by whomsoever framed, hath
been long received in the Church, and look'd on
as agreeable to the Scriptures, and an excellent
Explication of the Chriftian Faith. Conflantino-
pie, Rome, and the Reformed Churches have
owned it. Caz,onovius in his Firft Epift. to Calvin
adds the Churches of Servia, Bulgaria, Rufjia and
MufcQvy, as thofe who alfo approved it. Our pious
and excellent Mr. Baxter, in his Method of Theol.
p. 123. fpeaks thus of it : " In a Word the
" damnatory Sentences excepted, or modeftly ex-
" pounded (a), I embrace the Creed commonly
(<;) Such a modeft Explication of the Damnatory Claufe* Tee in
Dr. Wetofs Eylic, and Vmdk. ofiht^rbanufun Creed, in his Third Later of
ike Tlir.'r.y
" called
in the Article of the T r i >! I T y. 65
fC called Athanafiuss, as the bed Explication of
" the Trinity." And in Vol. 11. of his Works,
p. 132. Of ih* ,Reaf. of the Chr. Rel. fais he : " I
" unfeignedly account the Doctrine oi : the Tri-
" nity, the Sum and Kernel of the Chriflian Re-
" ligion, as exprerfed in our Baptifm, and Athana-
" Jius's Creed, the beft Explication of it that ever
" I read.
I 1 o the Helvetic Confefjton is prcfiVd the Impe-
rial Edicl by Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodofius,
out of the Code otjufiinian, and T'ripart. Hift. I. p.
c. 7. defcribing " who are to be accounted Ca-
* tholics, who Heretics.
« \V E would have all People under our
fc Government, fay they, live in that Religion
<: which w r as delivered by St. Peter, and from him
?c taught to this time, and .which it is known
" Pope Damafus, and Peter Bifhop ot Alexandria,
<£ a Man of Apoftolic Sanctity, do follow, #&.
" That we fliould believe according to the Doc-
" trine of the Apoftles and Evangelifts, one God-
(C head of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
" Holy Glnfl, of equal Majefty, and in an holy
" Trinity. We would have the Name of Ca-
" tholic Chriftians comprehend thofe who fol-
" low this Rule, but that others bear the Brand
« of Herefy, &c ( "
W h a t the Faith and Doctrine of the above
mentioned jpamafus was, appears by his Creed,
which is this.
" W e beiieve in one God, the Father Almighty ;
" and in one J ejus Chrift our Lord,thc Son of God ;
tc and in the Holy Spirit. We worfhip and con-
" fefs God, not three Gods, but Father, Son
tc and Spirit, one God; not fo one as it folitary,
1' nqr as if the fame were Father to himielf, and
>'V'\ -
6\ Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" himfelfthe Son,- but that he is the Father who
" hath begotten, and he is the Son who is begot-
" ten y but that the Holy Spirit is neither begot-
<c ten, nor the unbegotten, not created, nor made,
" but proceeding from the Father and the Son,
" coeternal , coequal , and Cooperator with
" the Father and the Son : becaufe it is writ-
" ten , By the word of the Lord the Heavens were
Ci eftablijhed, i. e. by the Son of God, and their
" Virtue by the Breath of his Mouth. And elfe-
" where: Send forth thy Spirit, and they [hall be
" Created, and thoufialt renew the Face of the Earth.
cc Therefore in the Name of the Father, and of
" the Sen, and of the holy Spirit, we confefs
" one God, which is a name of Power, notPro-
" perty ; the Name proper to the Father is Fa-
" ther, and the Name proper to the Son is Son,
" and theName proper to theHoly Spirit is Holy
" Spirk. In this Trinity we worfhip one God,
et becaufe he who is of the one Father is of 0112
" Nature with the Father, of one Subftance, and
" of one Power. The Father begat the Son not
" by his Will, nor by Neceffity, but by Nature.
" The Son in the laft Times came down from
" the Father to fave us, and to fulfill the Scrip-
" tures, who never ceas'd to be with the Father.
" He was conceived by the holy Ghoft, and
" born of a Virgin, took Flefh, and Spirit, and
" Senfe, i. e. perfecl: Man : loft not what he was,
" but began to be what he was not ,* fo yet that
" he was perfecl: in his own Nature, and truly in
" ours. For he who was God, was born Man ;
" and he who was born Man, works as God ;
<c and he who works as God, dies as Man ; and
" he who dies as Man, rifeth as God, who
" having overcome the power of Death, with
" that
in the Article o/^Trinity. 65
<c that Flefh wherein he was born, and differed,
" and died, and rofc, afcended unto the Father,
" andiittethat his right Hand in Glory, which
" he always had, and hath. By his Death and
'* Blood we believe that we are cleanfed, and
" that we fhall be raifed by him at the laft Day
" in this Flefh wherein we now live ; and expect
" that we fhall receive the Reward of good Works,
" or fuffer eternal Punifhment for our Sins.
" Read thefe things, believe them, retain them,
" bring thy Soul to this Faith, and thou fhalt
" have Life, and a Reward from Chrift. "
Whether this was the Work of Damafm,
whofe Name it bears, is doubted, the Writing
attributed to Jerom, whence it is cited, being
judged none of his. Du Pin thinks this to be a
Confeflion of Faith taken partly from Gregory of
Batica, who lived about the time of Duma/us, viz,.
toward the End of the iv. Century, but that it
was brought into the Form it now hath long after ;
becaufe the Holy Ghoft proceeding both from the
Father and the Son was not in l"o antient Creeds, (a)
The Helvetians, who have this Creed at theJLnd
of their Confejjion, fay : " Peter, Bifhop of Alexan-
" dria, taught and believed the fame as Damafm
" and Athanafias, as is gathered from Tripart. Hi ft.
" lib. vii. cap. 37. & lib. viii. cap. 14. And feeing we
" are all of this Faith and Religion, we hope,
" fay they, we fhall be reckoned by all not Here-
" tics, but Catholic Chriftians.
We now proceed to the
REFORM'D CONFESSIONS.
TheHELVITIC CONFESSION being of
the earlicfl Date, is placed firft in this Collection.
It was drawn up in a more concife Form by Bullin-
W H'" 4<*<>nn' »/ Jcioji, Ecst. H'Ji- C"*r. v. />. lo«.
K ger y
66 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
ger, Myconius, and Grinam ; and in an AfTembly of
the reformed Cities of Helvetia, held at Arcvw, it
was fignirled that that Cvnfeffion was received by
all the Helvetic Churches. Thence it was fent to
Wittemberg by Capita and Bucer, and well liked by
the Divines there. It was alfo approved in fome
Afiemblies of moft illuftrious Perfons, and Proteft-
ant States. But feeing that Confeffion was fhort, for
weighty Reafons it was inlarged, Ann. 1566. To
which thofeof 2«r/c,and Bern, Schajfhaufen, St. Gall,
the Grifons, Mulhaufen, and thofe of Biel, and Ge-
neva did fubfcribe ; and all the Churches of Eng-
land} Scotland, and France, with the Belgic Church-
es, as alfo many in Poland, Hungary, and Germa-
ny approved the fame. What it contains in refe-
rence to this Article of the "Trinity is as follows.
Cap. in. Of God, bis Unity, and Trinity.
" We believe and teach that God is one m
" Effence or Nature, felf-fublifting, independent,
" invifible, incorporeal, immenfe, eternal, Cre-
<c ator of all things, &c. But we abominate
" a Plurality of Gods, becaufe it is exprefly writ-
" tefi, The Lcrd thy God is one, Deut. vi. 4. Bejides
" me there is no God, If. xlii. 8, 10. If. xlv. 14, ai,
" and xlvi. 9. Exod. xxxiv. 6.
" Neverthelefs the fame one undivided God,
c< we believe and teach, is in Perfons, without
c< Separation or Confufion, diftincTt Father, Son,
<c and Holy Spirit, 1 John v. 7. So that the Father
" from Eternity begat the Son, the Son by an
" ineffable Generation is begotten, the Holy
tc Spirit proceeds from both, and that from Eter-
" nity, and with both is to be worfhiped. So
" that indeed there are not three Gods, but three
" Perfons, confubftantiaL coeternal, and coequal,
" diftinft as to Subfiflencies, with a Precedency of
" Order
ifp the Article u/^Trinity, 6j
" Order, but with no Inequality : for as to Na-
" ture or Effence they are Co conjunct, that they
C£ are one God; and the divine Effence is common
11 to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Scripture
" hath delivered to us a manifeft Diftinction of
<c Perfons, Luke i. 35. Matth. iii. 16, 17. Luke Hi.
" 22. Jfbni. 32. Matth. xxviii. 19. John xlv. 26.
" John xv. 26.
" Briefly we receive the Apoftles Creed, which
" delivers to us the true Faith. Therefore we
<c condemn Jews, Mahometans, and all that blaf-
" pheme this holy, and to be adored Trinity.
" We condemn likewife all Herefies and Here-
" tics, who teach that the Son and Holy Spirit
" are God in Name, and Title only, and created,
tc and ferving, or bearing Office to another in the
" Trinity; or, that there is in it any thing unequal,
" greater or lefs, corporeal or in bodily Shape,
" different in Difpofition or Will, or confufed,
" or folitary : as if the Son and Holy Spirit were
" Affections and Properties of one God the Fa-
" ther, as the Monarchies thought, Novating
" Praxeas, the Patripjjfans, Sabellius, Samofiienus,
" Actius, Macedonius, the Antbropomorphites, Arias,
Cap. x 1 . Of Jefm Cbrift, true God & Mmjkc.
" We believe that he [viz. Chrijf] was begotten,
" not only when he took Flelh of the Virgin
" Mar\, nor only before the Foundation of trie
" World was laid ; but indeed ineffably of the
" Father from all Eternity, fits goings foith have
IC been from <>f old, from EvcrLijliug, Micah v. 21.
" And John in his Gofpfl fais : In the beginning was
" the W^rd, and the fvbrd was with God, and the
K 2 " Word
68 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
il IVcrd was God, John i. i. Therefore the Son,
** as to his divinity, is coequal and confubftantial
" with the Father, Phil. ii. 6. the true God,
" not in name only, or by Adoption, or any
" authorising Grant; but by Subilance and Na-
" ture, as John faith again : "This is the true God,
" and eternal Life. And Paul alfo fakh : He
" appointed the Son Heir of all things, by whom alfo
' c he made the Worlds : who being the brightness of
tl his GLry, and the exprefs Image of his Perfon, and
tc upholding all things by the Word of his Power, &c.
<c Hebr. i. 2, 3. In the Gofpel our Lord pray'd :
" Glorify thou me with thine own felf with the
w Glory that I had with thee before the World uvw,
<c John xvii. 5. And we are told, the Jews fought
16 to kill Jefus, becaufe he [aid God was his Father,
" making himfelf equal with God, John i. 8. We
tc deteft therefore the impious Notions of Arius,
u and of all his Followers againft the Son of
« God. "
" I n one and the fame Jefus Chrift, our Lord,
" we acknowledge two Natures, the divine and
" humane ; and we fay thefe are fo conjoined or
" united, that they are not fwallovved up, con-
" founded, or mixt ; but the Properties ot the
" Natures preferved rather, and continuing.
" They are united or conjoined in one Perfon :
" fo may we worfhip one Chrift the Lord, not
" two, one that is true God and Man ; as to
" his divine Nature confubftantial with the
" Father, and as to his humane in all things like
" unto us, Sin only excepted' — Whatever hath
<c been defined out of the Holy Scriptures of the
" "Myftery of our Lord^ Incarnation, and is
" contained in the Creeds of the four fir ft and
" bell: Councils, of Nice, Cmftantinople, Ephefus,
; ' and
in the Article of the T r i n i t y. 69
" and Chalcedony together with that of Athana-
" fius, and the like, we fincerely believe and
" profefs, condemning the contrary. And thus
" do we keep the Chriftian, Orthodox, and
" Catholic Faith pure, and intire ; knowing that
** in the Creeds aforefaid nothing is contained,
" which agrees not with the Word of God, and
" makes altogether for the right Explication of
<£ the Faith. ' And thus far of this Confeffion
which is fubfcribed by all the Miniflers of the
Churches of Chrifl in Helvetia, (a)
The CONFESSION of Faith of the
FRENCH CHURCHES, exhibited to Charles
ix. Ann. 1561, turned into Latin, Ann. i<$66.
i. Parag. "We believe and acknowledge one
" only God, who is one only fimple, and fpiritual
" EfTence, eternal, invifible, immutable, infinite,
" incomprehenfible, &c. Dent. iv. 35, 39. and ch.
" vi. 4. 1 Cor. viii. 4, 6. Gen. vi. 1. John iv. 24.
" Exod.ii'i. 15, 16. Rom. i. 20.
v. Parag. After owning the Authority of
the Scriptures : " Wherefore, they fay, we for
" this reafon alfo approve the Apoftles, Nicene,
(-») Thofe of Zurk, GUris, Bafil, Schaffhaufen, ^Appetiz.eU, St. Gall,
Cvtrc of ihe Grifms ; and among the Confederates in the Churches pro-
fciTmg the Gofpel on this Side and beyond the stipes, thofe of Mulhiufen,
and of Bui ; with whom the Mmifters of the Church at GenevJ, and
jXewburg, &c. join'd themfelves; and theM^nifters of the Pelifh Church in
the Dukedom of Z > h m and Ofaiedn contented to it, when it was publifh-
td; alfo the Minifter; of the Scorch Chjrches, who in a Letter to Tneod.
BfT.it, dated Sept. 1566. among other Things lay; " All we who were pre-
" fern inthisAfferr.bly have fubfcribed and fealcd ir, with the PubUckSeal
" of tins Univerlity." And at De hre^in in Hungary, sin. 1567. was pnptcd
a Cot.fejlon with fome Article dedicated to John II. King of Hungary, jn
V hirh are thc-fe Word;: "All the Mm.fters of the Church on th's Side
" and beyond the The->Jfe, who are met in the Synod at Debrcz,in, the 24
" ot Feb. 1567. among other Confeflions havereceivd and fubfcribed the
*' H'lvetic C',fe/fion t publifh'd ^4p* 1566, to which the Mimfters of the
* Ch.i.,Ji of Gcruv^ind others have fubfcribed. SuPrrf.it ibuHelv.ConfejJlori.
* and
70 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
€i and Athanafian Creeds, becaufe they are agree-
" able to that written Word of God. "
vi. Parag. "This holy Scripture teacheth us,
" that in that lingular and limple divine ErTence
" there fubfift three Perfons, Father, Son, and
" Holy Spirit ; the Father the 6r$ in Order, the
<£ Caufe, and Original of all things ; the Son his
cc Wifdom, and eternal Word ; the Holy Spirit
" his Virtue, Power, and Efficacy : the Son
" begotten of the Father from Eternity, the
" Holy Spirit from Eternity proceeding from the
<c Father and the Son. Which three Perfons are
<c not confounded, but diftinct ; yet not fcparate,
" but coeffential, coeternal, and coequal. Dent.
" iv. 14. Matth. xxviii. 19. 1 John v. 7. John
" i. 1. and ch. xvii. 5, 10. Laftlyin this Myftery
" we approve what thofe four ancient Councils
" have determined ; and we deteit all Seels con-
" demned out of the Word of God, by thofe
" antient, holy Do&ors, as by Athanajius, Hilary,
" Cyril, Ambrofe, &c."
vii. Parag. "We believe that God, three Per-
" fons cooperating by incomprehensible Power,
" Wifdom, and Goodnefs, made all things."
xiv. Parag. " We believe that Jejus Chrifl, the
" Wifdom, and the eternal Son of the Father,
" aflumed our Nature ; (o that he is onePerfon,
" God and Man. Man (w r e fay) paffible both
" in body and foul, and in all things like unto us,
" Sin only excepted. And therefore all thofe
" Herelies whereby the Churches of old were
" difturbed, we deteft as contrary to that Truth,
" and particularly the heliifh Opinions of Serve-
" tus, attributing to our Lord Jefus Chrifl an
" imaginary Deity,- as who, he laid, was the
u Idea and Exemplar of all things, and whom
* « he
in the Artile u/^Trinity. 71
" he called a perfonated or figurative Son of God t
" framing him a Body made out of three uncre-
" ated Elements, and therefore mingling and
" deftroying both natures. Johni. 14. Phil.ii. 6.
" Hebr. ii. 17. and iv. i?. Alls xiii. 25. Rom. i.
cc 3. and viii. 3. and ix. 5. 2 Cor. v. 21. Phil. ii.
" 7. Mzr& i. 8. ZA i. 35.
xv. Parag. "We believe that in one and the
" fame Perfon, which is J ejus thrifts thofe two
" Natures are truly and infeparably fo conjoined,
" that they are united, each of thofe natures
" neverthelefs remaining in its own diftincT: Pro-
" priety. So that as in that Conjunction the Di-
" vine Nature of the Word retaining its own
" Properties, remain'd uncreated, infinite, and
" filling all things ,• fo alfo the humane Nature
" remain'd, and fhall remain to eternity, finite,
£c having its own natural Form, Dimension, and
M Property : for neither his Refurrection, nor
" Glorification, nor Exaltation to the right Hand
" of the Father, took from him the Truth of his
" humaneNature. Therefore we fo confider Chrifl
" in his Deity, that we rob him not of his
" Humanity. "(a)
(j) See the general Account of the Confefi<ms, fet before the Helvetic
Cnj'ffum. " This French Conjtfliin v, as framed in a National Synod at
" Paris, ^An. i jj9 prefented by Brz^j, in the Name of the Churches of
" France, to King Charles IX in the Conference he!d at P^JJaw, ^4n. 1 j6l.
" It was confirm 'd in a National Synod at Rochcl, ^An, 1571. and after it
" rnd been openly read, was with tlv:ir own Hands fubfrrib.d by the
" Queen of Navarre and her Son (afterwards King of France, by the
" Name of Henry IV.) alio by Henry Prince of C»nie, Lerv:s Count of
" NaJJ'au, Gaffer Coi:m of Cajlile, Admiral ot France-, and, in the Name
" of the French Churches, by ths Pallors and E'dcrs, who r>ut of nil ;hc
" Provinces of France v/ere lent to that National Symd. Hew fcrca. an
" AiTembly, adorn'd with memorable Piety, and the brightest Gilts, and
" excelling in ail kinds o: Virtues !
The
7 2 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
The ENGLISH CONFESSION,
firft as fet forth in Bp. Jewel's Apology for the
Church of England, printed Ann. 1562, with the
allowance and Authority of the Queen, and ad-
vice of the Bps and others ; but drawn up, and
written as a public Cunfeflion of the Catholic
and Chriftian Faith of all Englijh Men. In which
is fhewn our confent with the German, Helvetian,
French, Scotch, Genevian, and other Reformed
Churches, as Dr. Humphery tell us, in his Life of
Bp. Jewel, p. 177. A Work fo valued, that being
writ firft in Latin, it hath been tranflated into the
German, French, Italian, Spanifi, and Greek Lan-
guages. It was defign'd to be joined to the
Articles, and put into all Collegiate and Cathedral
Churches, and recommended to private Houfes.
The Confejjton in this point is as follows.
"We believe that there is one certain divine
" Nature, and Power, which we call God; and
" that it is diftinguifhed into three Perfons, who
" are equal, into Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; all
" of the fame Power, of the fame Majefty, of
" the fame Divinity, of the fame Subftance. And
* tho' thefe three Perfons are fo diftinct, that
" neither the Father is the Son ; nor the Son the
" Holy Spirit, nor the Father ; yet we believe that
" there is but one God, and that the fame one
" God created Heaven and Earth, and all things
" contained within the Compafs of Heaven.
" We believe that Jefus Chrifl, the only Son of
" the eternal Father, took Flefh, and the
" whole human Nature.
" We believe the Holy Spirit, which is the
" third Perfon in the Sacred Trinity, is that true
" God, not made, not created, not begotten ;
*' but in a manner not known to Mortals, and
" ineuable,
in the Article of the T r i n i t y. 73
" ineffable, proceeding from the Father and the
« Son."
O n Occafion of Harding's Cavils the Bp.
brings many Paflages of the Fathers, which
from the Scriptures confirm the Deity of Chrift y
and the Holy Spirit. As Origcn (a) : " "Tis not as
" Man that thrift is where ever two or three
" are met together in his Name, nor as Man
<c that he is with us always to the end of the
" World j but that divine Power, or Nature that
" was in Chrift.' 3 So Fulgentius (b) : " When
" Chrift is faid to be abfent from us, as in the
" Form of a Servant, as to his Humanity ; and
" with us, as in the Form of God, i. e. as to his
" Deity. " Harding excepts againft fuch an
Exposition, but Jewel confirms it by that of Leo.
" What is it to be in the Form of God ? Anf. To
C£ be in the Nature of God (c). The Form of
'* God is the Nature of God, Chryfoft (d). There-
" fore, faith Jezvel y when Fulgentius faith the
" Form of God, he means thereby the Subftance,
" the Nature, and the Divinity of God; as when
" he faith the Form of a Servant, he means the
<c Nature, or Subftance, the Truth and Perfection
" of the Manhood. The Drift of his Difcourfe
" is, That Chrift being both God and Man, by
" the Nature and Subftance of his Godhead
" is every where; but by the Nature and Sub-
" ftance of his Manhood, and Truth of his
" Body, is only in one place according to his
" Humanity. Saith the fame Fulgentius : Chrift
" was locally on Earth, according to his Deity
" he filled both Heaven and Earth ; the Man-
11 hood of Chrift is contained in place, the God-
00 U Matt Trs£t. 33. (i) .Ad Thnfymundum Regsra. (<■■) Eptft
!>7. C, 3. (0 ^id Phiiipp, Hofnft. 6,
L " head
74 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
fi head of Chrift is infinite and in all places (a)*
" So Vigilius the Martyr : The Son of God ac-
f< cording to his Manhood is departed from us,
" according to his Godhead is ever with us.
" He is in all places according to the Nature of
" his Godhead, and contained in one place ac-
" cording to the Nature of his Manhood, (b)
" And Cyril : According to the Flefh only he
cC would go away; but by the Power of his God-
u head he is ever prefent. (c) And Gregory :
Ct The incarnate Word abides with us by the
" Godhead, departs as to the Manhood, (d) "
Thus at once the Judgment of the Fathers and
of this great Reformer is feen, as to the Deity
of Chrift.
And for that of the Holy Spirit, what he
faith is fpecially to be noted at this Juncture.
Harding faith : u They [the Papifts] acknowledge
u the Article true and Catholic, but there is not
" exprefs Scripture for it, " fay they. To which
Jewel oppofes that of Auguftine: £c The Holy
*' Ghoft is God, whence Peter when he had faid
" to Ananias, Thou haft dared to lie againft the
" Holy Ghoft ; prefently tells what the Holji
" Ghoft is, faying : "Thou haft not lied unto Men,
tc but unto God. (e) " And from the fame Auftin :
ec St. Paul ihews us that the PXoly Ghoft is God,
tc and therefore is not a Creature ; refering, I
" fuppofe, to that of Peter in the AEis, (J) 3 '
And again : " Left any one fhould deny that
cc the Holy Ghoft is God, Paul prefently adds :
<c 'Therefore glorify God in your Body, and in your
(a) ^Ad Regem Thrafym. lib. il (b) Lib. I contra EJtych. (c) In Joan.
lib. ix. c.2l. (d) Horn. 30 in dk Pentecoft. {e) dnir. Lit. Petil. /.
iii. c 48. (/) De morib Eeet. Cath. lib. i. c, 1 6.
i( Spirit
in the Article of the T R i N i T Y. 75
" Spirit, which are God's, (a) 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.
ct If God can't be God, unlefs allow'd by the
u Church of Rome, adds Jewel, then we are
ct come again to what Tertuuian writes .- Niji ho~
u mini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit : (b) If God
" don't pieale Men, lie fhan't be God. We be-
" lieve, fats Jewel, that the Holy Ghofl is very
" God, indeed not upon the Pope's, or his Clergy's
" Credit ; but (as St. Auflin faith) upon the
* c fpecial Warrant of the Word of God. (c) "'
He concludes with that of Naz,ianz,en : " Some
" will fay, 'tis not written that the Hoi)"
" Ghofl: is God ,* but I'll bring abundance of
" Teftimonies, whereby it will appear, that the
<c Godhead of the Holy Ghoft is plainly wit-
" nelled in the Holy Scriptures : unlefs a Man bo
c< very dull and utterly void of the Holy Ghoft."(Vi)
Thus Bp. Jewel, fpeaking the Sen fe of the
Church of England, and the other Reformed
Churches, and making good the fame from the
Scriptures, and the Fathers.
It follows according as it paffed in Convoca-
tion, and was fubfcribed by the Bifliops and
Clergy of both Provinces at London, Ann. 1562.
1. Artie. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity.
" There is but one living and true God, evsr-
" Lifting, without Body, Parts, or Paffions, of
" infinite Power, Wifdom, and Goodnefs ; the
" Maker and Preferver of all things, both vifible
" and invifible ; and in the Unity of this God-
" head there be three Perfons, of one Subflance,
" Power, and Eternity, the Father, the Son, and
t: the Holy Ghofl. "
(.') A'ifj. Efifi. i 7+ . (!■) T -mill, hi^pr.hrerho. (i) JejffclV D:f. of the
tyit, in hi: mikf, l «?. (d) J)<- Spirit; Sfnttg.
L 2 ii. Artie.
76 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
11. Artie. Of the Wordy or Son of God y which
was made very Man.
" The Son, which is the Word of the Father,
" begotten from Everlafting of the Father, the
" very and eternal God, of one Subftance with
" the Father, took Man's Nature in the Womb
" cf the Blefled Virgin, of her Subftance ; fo
" that two whole and perfect Natures, that is,
<c the Godhead and the Manhood, were joined
" together in one Perfon, never to be divided ;
" whereof is one Chrift, very God and very Man,
? &c. "
v. Artie. Of the Holy Ghoft.
" The Holy Ghoft, proceeding from the Father
" and the Son, is of one Subftance, Majefty,
" and Glory, with the Father and the Son, very
(C and eternal God.
vii. Artie. Of the three Creeds.
" The Three Creeds, Nice Creed, Athanafius
" Creed, and that which is commonly called the
" Apoflles Creed, ought throughly to be received
" and believed ; for they may be proved by moft
" certain Warrants of Holy Scripture. "
The Articles thus in Englifi being authentic,
and originally fubferibed, we have chofen to
give them here, rather than a Translation of our
own from the Latin.
I n other Matters confider'd in this Convocati-
on there was Diverfity of Opinions, and great
Debates ; but in thefe Points full Agreement, and
unanimous Confent. They had pafled all along
indeed from the very Beginning of the Reforma-
tion as undoubted Truths, grounded en the Ho-
ly Scriptures, and received by Chriftians in all
Ages, (a) In Convocation^//. 1536'. Preachers
(<») Bp. Burnet, Hifi. Ref. Vol. I. p. 215.
were
in the Article of theT rinity. 77
were to inftruft the People in the Scriptures, and
the three Creeds as agreeable to them, viz,.
the Apoftolic, Nkene, and Athanafian, and Here-
fies contrary thereto were condemn'd (a). The Re-
formers rejoiced herein. It was the Do&rine fet
forth in The mcejfary Erudition of a Chrifiian Man,
Ann. 1 540. (b) and in that elaborate Work, The Re-
formation of the Ecclefiafth Laws, begun in the
Reign of K. Hen. vin. returned and finiihed juft
before the Death of Ediv. vi. (c) A Work in which
Cranmer had a great Hand ; but which was done
by thirty two Men of greateft Ability, Divines,
and Civil and Common Lawyers. What relates
to this Matter may be here fet down.
Cap. 11. What is to be believed concerning the
Nature of God, and of the Blejfed Trinity.
" Let all the regenerate Sons of God by Jefus
" Chrift, out of a pure Heart, a good Conscience,
" and Faith unfeigned, believe and confefs, that
" there is one living and true God, eternal, and in-
" corporeal, impaffible, of immenfe Power, &c.
cc and that in Unity of his divine Nature there
" are three Perfons, of the fame Efience and
" Eternity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit : that the
" Father is of himfelf, not of any other, either
ct begotten, or proceeding ; and that the Son is
u begotten of the Father ,♦ and that the Holy
" Spirit does proceed from the Father and the
cc Son. Not that there is any Diversity, or Ine-
" quality of Nature in that Diftinction of Per-
" foils ; but that as to the divine Subflance or
(<0 Bp. Burnet, Htft. K>f- Vol. i. p. 218. (i) Ibid., p. 286. 0) Ke-
form. /.-;;. Ecclrj. Lond. ifi+o,
Effence
78 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" EiTence (as they fpeak) all among them are
f| alike, and equal.
Cap. in. Of Chrift, and the Myfteries of
our Redemption.
L e t it alfo be believed — " That the Son,
" who is the Word of the Father, in the Womb
" of the blefTed Virgin Mary, of the Subftance
" of her Flefb, took humane Nature ; fo that
" two Natures, divine and humane, were en-
<c tlrely, and perfectly, and infeparably conjoined
" in a Unity of Perfon , of which is one Chrift,
tl true God and true Man, <&c.
Cap. v. Of the Three Creeds.
<c And becaufe almoft all Things which re-
" late to the Catholic Faith, both as to the
" Blejfed 'Trinity, and as to the Myftery of our
" Redemption , are briefly contained in the
" Thee Creeds, that of the Apoftles, and of Nice,
C£ and of Athanafius ; therefore Receive and Em-
* { brace thofe three Creeds, as a certain Corn-
's pendium of our Faith ; becaufe they can
c< eafily be proved by moft ftrong Teftimonies
4< ot the divine and canonical Scriptures.
Under the next Title, Of Herefies.
Cap. v. Of the two Natures of Chrift.
Ct There are divers pernicious Errors about
cc the twofold Nature or" Chrift ; of thefe fome
" are of the Seel: of the Arians, who make Chrift
* fo to be Man, that they deny him to be God ;
" others judge him fo to be God, that they ac-
tC knowledge him not to be Man, &c. All
ct which Errors are to be corrected by the Au-
<c thority of the Scriptures, that Chrift be taken
ec in his better Nature for eternal God, and
;: that he is indeed the equal of God the Fa-
" ther,
in the Article o/^Trinity. 79
ct ther, but in his humane Nature he hath a
u Body made in Time, &c.
Cap. vi. Of the Holy Spirit*
" As theie rotten Members are to be fevered.
" {rem the Body or the Church, who judge fo
" perverfiy of Chrijl the Head ; fo alfo is their Im-
" pudence execrable, who with Macedonius have
" confpired againft the Holy Spirit, not ac-
" knowledging him to be God.
I n Queen Elizabeth's time before a Convoca-
tion could meet , a Profeflion of Doctrine
was order'd to be read by all Incumbents to
their People, wherein this Article of the Trinity
was the fame as now (a). It appears not indeed
that the Church of England ever was Avian, or
Socinian; when Popery prevailed, this Doctrine
was not denied, but was tranfmitted down as
from the hrft Ages. Tertullian having men-
tis n'd the Nations of Gaul and of the Britain?;,
faith : " The Kingdom of Chrift was advanced
" among them, and Chri(l was folemnly wor-
" fhiped by them" (0). Surely they worshiped
no other than God alone, as they believed Chrift
to be. The Council of Aries, (c) which the
Britijh Bifhops fubferibed to, determir/d: "If
" any leave an Hereiie, and return to the Church,
" he fhall be ask'd concerning the Creed; and if
" it be known that he was baptized in the Name
" of the Father, and c£ the Sen, and cf the
" Holy Ghoft, Imposition cf Hands only Ihnli
<c be given him. But if he acknowledge not the
lc Trinity, he fhall be rebaptiz'd" (d). That is, the
(») B : jbtp Bji net's H>(1 of Rtf. Vol. 2. RrcmK B 3 • Num. j 1 (■) l.'b,
centra Jud. cap, 7. „4n. 2I0. (1) ^An i 14. (d) Can. 8. Du Pm.
Eccl. H-jt. the iv Cttif, p. 247.
Baptifm
80 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
Baptifm he had fliall be look'd on as null, and
he fhan't be admitted till he renounce his Er-
ror, and then fhall be baptiz'd anew. This
Canon was reinforced by the Council of Nice,
where moit probably were Btitijh Bifhops too.
Thev determin'd : <c That thofe only who re-
" nounced the 'Trinity fhould be rebaptiz'd/' (a)
As to what followed afterward in the Council of
Ariminum, where were Britijh Bifhops alfc, it
can in no juft Conftruftion weaken what was
fetjed before : becaufe while they afted with any
thing of the Freedom of a Council, and fpake
their own Senfe, they declared for the Confejjion
of Nice, and would not receive any other. (£)
They made a folemn Decree to this purpofe,
which was fign'd by all the Bifhops, and to it
fubjoin'dAnathematifm againftthe Error of Arim,
which are related at the end of St. Hilary's Frag-
ments. Urfacius and Valens (who had propofed
the Sirmian Confeffion that favoured Arianifm,
and refufed this) were condemned by the unani-
mous Confent of all the Bifhops. And of this
they fent an Account by Deputies to the Emperour
"Theodoftusi who (being an Arian) excufed himfelf,
by pretence of want of time, from feeing their
Deputies, and order'd them to wait his Leifure.
The Council upon this anfwer'd him, that they
would never depart from what they had done,
and earneftly prayed him to permit the Bifhops
to return to their Churches before the Rigour of
the Winter. But inftead of complying with their
Requeft, he fent Orders to his Governour, that he
fhouid not naffer any Bifhop to go away, till. he
(a) Can. 19. (t>) Du Pin's Eecl. Htftir, Cent, p. 163.
had
in the Article of the T R I N i T y. Si
had fign'd Urfacius's Form, which they had be-
fore rejected. At firfl they all teftified much
Conftancy, but at laft all were forced to comply.
Which laft Action of their's was protefted againft
by all the Deputies of a Council aflembled at
Nice, a City of Thrace (a). And themfelves
when they were got free, and returned to their
refpective Provinces, endeavoured to repair their
Fault, by aflembling many Synods to annul
what had been done at Ariminum, and main-
tain the Nicene Faith : particularly in France,
St. Hilary aflembled many Councils for re-efta-
blifhing the Faith of the Council of Nice. In
the Fragments of St. Hilary is a Letter of a
Council held at Paris, wherein the Bifhops there
prefent acknowledged they had done ill to con-
lent in the Synod of Ariminum, that they fhould
fpeak no more of the Word Subfiance. They
profefs to believe that the three Perfons of the
Trinity are of the fame Nature, and of the fame
Subftance, and condemn Urfacius (b). The Bi-
fhops of Italy alfo did the fame. And the Britijb
Bifhops in all lik«lyhood, (c) for after that Coun-
cil of Ariminum, (d) Athanafms takes Notice of
the Britijh Churches adhering to the Nicene Faith;
and (e) St. Jero?n and (/) St. Chryfofiom menti-
on their agreeing with other Churches in the
Chriftian Faith j which is a fufficient Argument;
to clear them from the Charge of Arianifm ,
which no othcrways lay on them,than as they had
Bifhops at the Council of Ariminum. (g) See
(a) Du V-.n Ikid. p 266 (/;) Bid. (c) B'(h»p StilKngfleet Or^.
Brit. p. 175, 176 (d) ^idfovttn. p. 2<s6. (') ^id M.trcel. \si<t Evagr.
if) Tom 3. p. 696. hid. 6. p. 6iS- Ibid. S. p. ill. (%) Dj Pin. £c<.'.
h'Jl. iv Cent. p. 270.
M alfo
82 Harmony of the Refer m'd Churches
alfo the Council of Rome under Damofus, which
confirms the Faith of Nice, excommunicates
thofe that believe not that the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit are one and the fame Divinity, and
one and the fame Subftance ,• and obferves, that
the Council of Arimmum could not prejudice the
Deciiicns of the Council of Nice, becaufe thofe
who made the Creed of Ariminum protefted af-
terwards againft what they had done.
This Article of the "Trinity hath been no
Point of Difference between the Church of England
and the Chief Bodies of Diffenting Proteftants in the
Nation. Ann. 1643, the Two Houfes of Parlia-
ment fent 19 of the Church of England's Articles
to the Affernbly of Divines at Weftminfter, to clear
and vindicate them (a). Fifteen of thefe they
revifed and returned, fome with no Alteration,
others with very little. The Firft, Of Faith in
the Holy Trinity, they fent back in the fame Words,
but with Texts of Scripture added for Proof of
the Doctrine : and the Second, Of the Word, or
Son of God, which voas ?nade very Man, all the fame ;
only a Claufe added, Of the Sufferings of Chrifi in
his Soul for our fakes: the Fifth, Of the Holy Gh ft :
and the Eighth, Of the three Creeds, altogether the
fame ; only the Order of the Words in the Fifth
a little changed. When they were afterwards
with more Liberty ordered to draw up a Ccnfefjion
of Faith for the Three Kingdoms, there was in it
a perfect Agreement with the Church of England
in this, as well as in other Doctrines. And in
thefe Things the Congregational Divines were con-
curring. Thefe laft in their own Declaration of
their Faith, agreed on at the Savoy, Otl. 12. 1658.
{a) Stetbe ^Aeeamit and ^Article: printed Lond. 1647.
ufe
in the Article ^/^f Trinity. 83
life the fame Words with the Wejlminjier Affem-
bly in this Point. And thofe of the Baptijl Per-
fuafion likewife, in their Confeffion, agreed on by
the Minifters and Mefiengers of above an hun-
dred of their Congregations, and printed Ann.
1682, and a third Edition Ann. 1699, (a) agree
in Subftance, and very near in Expreffion. On-
ly thefe two, the Congregational Divines and the
Baptifts, clofe this Article in their Confejjions with
this Claufe added, viz*. " Which Doctrine of
" the Trinity is the Foundation of all our Commu-
" nion with God, and comfortable Dependence
" on him.
Thefe Confejjions of the Three Denominations (as
they are now called) viz. the Presbyterian, and Con-
gregational, and Baptijl are as followeth, viz,.
The PRESBYTERIAN and CON-
GREGATIONAL CONFESSION.
Cap. ii. Of God, and of the Holy Trinity.
" There is but one living and true God, who
" is infinite in Being and Perfection, a moft pure
" Spirit, invisible, without Body, Parts, or Pafli-
" ons, immutable, immenfe, eternal, incom-
" prehenfible, almighty, &c.
" In the Unity of the Godhead there be three
" Perfonsofone Subftance, Power, and Eternity,
" God the Father, God the Sj;?, and God the
" Hv/y Ghofl. The Father is of none, neither
" begotten, nor proceeding ; the Son is eternally
" begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghoft eter-
" nally proceeding from the Father and the Son.
" Which Dotlrine of the Trinity is the Foundation
" of all our Communion with God, and comfortable De-
" pendence upon him." (b)
(ajlVi-i(b ii that here referred t». (t) The l«jl W«rds in Italic ire in the
CoHgr. C-'pJi n t in all others she Treshy. and Ctngr, a r e the fame.
M 2 Cap.
84 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
Cap. viii. Of Chrifi the Mediator.
<c The Son of God, the Second Perfon in the
" Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one
" Subftance, and equal with the Father, did,
" when the Fulnefs of Time was come, take up-
" on him Man's Nature, with all the eflential
" Properties, and common Infirmities thereof,
" yet without Sin ; being conceiv'd by the Pow-
" er of the Holy Ghoft, in the Womb of the
<c Virgin Mary, of her Subftance ; fo that two
'* whole, perfect, and diftinct Natures, the God-
" head and the Manhood, were infeparably joined
cc together in one Perfon, without Converfion,
cc Compofition, or Confufion. Which Perfon is
Ci very God and very Man, yet one Chrifi, the
" only Mediator between God and Man.
TheBAPTIST CONFESSION.
Cap. 11. Of God, and the Holy Trinity.
" The Lord our God is but one only living and
cc true Gcd, whofe Subfiftence is in and ofhimfelf,
ce infinite in Being and Perfection, whofe Eflence
** cannot be comprehended by any but himfelf;
" a moft pure Spirit, invilible, without Body,
" Parts, or Paflions; who only hath Immortality,
" dwelling in the Light which no Man can ap-
<£ proach unto ; who is immutable, immenfe, e-
" ternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way
w infinite &c.
" I n this divine and infinite being there are
<c three Subfiftences, the Father, the Word (or
tc Son) and Holy Spirit, of one Subftance, Pow-
a er, and Eternity. Each having the whole
c< divine Eflence, yet the Eflence undivided.
" The Father is of none, neither begotten, nor
" proceeding,- the Son is eternally begotten of the
" Father j the Holy Spirit proceedeth from the
u Father
in the Article of the T r i n i t y. 8 $
" Father and the Son : all infinite, without be-
" ginning, therefore but one God ; who is not
" to be divided in Nature and Being, but dif-
" tinguifhed by feveral peculiar relative Proper-
" ties, and perfonal Relations. Winch Doilrine
. " of the Trinity is the Foundation of all our Commu-
" nion with God, and comfortable Dependence on him.
Cap vui. Of Cbrtfl the Mediator.
" The Son of God, the fecond Perfon in the
" Holy Trinity, being very and eternal God, the
" Brightness of his Father's Glory, of one Sub-
" fiance, and equal with him, .who made the
** World, who upholdeth and go verneth all things
'* he hath made, did, when the Fulnefs of time
" was come,- take upon him Man's Nature, with
" all the eflential Properties and common Infir-
" mities thereof, yet without Sin, being conceived
" by the Holy Spirit, in the Womb of the Vir-
<c gin Mary, the Holy Spirit coming down upon
" her, and the Power of the Moft High over-
" fhadowing her; and fo was made of a Woman,
<c of the Tribe of Judah, of the Seed of Abraham
" and David, according to the Scriptures ; fo that
" t\vo whole, perfect, and diftinct Natures were
" infepsrably join'd together in one Perfon, with-
" out Converiion, Compolition, or Confufion.
" Which Perfon is very God and very Man, yet
" one Chrift, the only Mediator between God
" and Man.
To thefe Confefjions are annexed proper fcrip-
ture Proofs, for which whoever would be inform'd
of them may confult the Prints.
Some things it may not be amifs to take No-
tice of out oT the Preface to the Congregational
Cvnfejjion. They fay: " Confeffion of Faith, when
" juifcly call'd for, is a Duty coming under the
" firft
86 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" firft Commandment. When made by a
" Company jointly to that End, the Ufe is, that
" under the fame Form of Words they exprefs
" the Unity of their Faith, that fpeaking the
" Aime Things they may fhew themfelves per-
'* fectly joined in the fame Mind, and in the fame
" Judgment, i Cor. i. 10. Such common Con-
" feffions of the Orthodox Faith ought to be en-
" tertaincd by thofe that love the Truth as 'tis
" in Jefus, with anfwerable rejoicing, A&s. i. 5".
" efpecially when delivered in the fame Subftmce,
" and Words for the moft Part, that other
" Churches and Affemblies, reputed the moft
" Orthodox, have done before them. In fuch
" Correfpondency, all may fee that Accomplifh-
" ed, which the Apoftle prayed for, Rom. xv. <5,
" 8, 9. That converted Jew and Gentile might
" glorify God with one Mind, and with one
" Mouth ; and as the Soundnefs of the Matter,
" fo the Freenefs of the Spirits of the Confeflfors
" contributes K) the Beauty of it. As in Prayer,
<c fo in Confeffions, if two or three met do agree,
" it renders both to either the more acceptable.
" This Confeflion, they fay ', was made at a Time
" when every Truth almoft, even the greateft as
" well as the leaft, had been call'd to the Bar and
" Impleaded, under the Pretext that all fhould
" not be bound up to the Traditions of former'
" Times, nor take Religion upon Truft. Whence
" many found Profeifors were put on a new Search
" into the Truths they had taken for granted,
" and lived on the Comfort of, that they might
" be able to convince others, and eftablifh their
*' own Hearts againft that Darknefs and Unbelief
" that is ready to clofe with Error, or to doubt of
c ^ the Truth when Error is fpeciouily prefenced.
And
LC
in the Artile of the T r i n i T y. 87
<c And they counted it the Advantage and Ho-
" nour of the Saints and Minifters, that examin-
ing and learning over anew do&rinal Truths,
both out of the Scriptures, and with a frefh
fc< Tafte of them in their own Hearts, they
u might after trying all Things hold fait that
" which is good. Tried Faith is as an Anchor,
" fure and fteadfaft. They affert and plead for
w mutual Forbearance in extra-fundamental
cc Things j but keeping to, and holding faft the
u neceilary Foundations of Faith and Holinefs.
Several Things to like Purpofe are alfo
in the Preface to the Bapift Common, They
fay : c< They chofe the Order and Method of the
K Ajjemblys and the Congregational Ccnfejfcn, and
" to make ufe of the very fame Words with both
" in thefe Articles, wherein their Faith and Do-
" ctrine is the fame with theirs, abundantly to
" manifeft their Confent with both in all the
" fundamental Articles of the Chriftian Religion;
" as alfo with many others, whofe Orthodox Con-
iC frffivns have been publifiYd unto the World, on
" Behalf of the Proteftants in divers Nations and
" Cities : as alfo to convince all, fay they, that
" we have no Itch to clog Religion with new
" Words, but readily acquiefce in that Form of
" found Words, which hath been in confent with
" the Holy Scriptures ufed by others before us :
" thereby declaring before God, Angels, and
" Men our hearty Agreement with them in that
" wholefome Proteftant DoBrine } which with (o
" clear Evidence of Scriptures they have aifert-
" ed.
And thus of the Engl if) Qnfejficxs more
largely reprefented, for Rcafons obvicus at tins
Day.
The
88 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
The SCOTCH CONFESSION
of Faith, firft publifhed Ann. 1568. fubicribed
by the King, and Nobles, and States of the
Kingdom in Parliament, Ann. 1580.
1. Artie. Of God.
" We confefs and acknowledge one only God,
" to whom alone we ought to cleave, whom
" only we muft ferve and worfhip , and in
u whom only we muft put our truft, who is eter-
<c nal, <&c. one in Eflence, and yet diftinguifhed
" into three Perfons, Father, Son, and Holy Spi-
" rity by whom we confefs all things in Heaven
<c and Earth were made, Deut. vi. 4. If. xliv. 6,
" Deut. iv. 34. Matth. xxviii. 19.
vi. Artie. Of the Incarnation of Qhrift.
cc When the Fulnefs of Time was come,
* God fent forth his Son into the World, his e-
" ternal Wifdom, who arTumed humane Nature
" of the Subftance of a Woman, viz,, of the
" Virgin, and that by the Operation of the
" Holy Spirit ; and fo was born that righteous
" Seed of David, the Angel of the Council of
" God, the very promifed Mcfjiah, whom we
" acknowledge and Confefs to be "Emmanuel,
" true God, and true Man, two Natures uni-
" ted and conjoined into one Perfon. By which
'* Confeffion of ours we condemn the damnable
" and peftilent Herefies of Arius , Marcion,
" Eutycbes, Neflorius, and others ; who either
" have denied his eternal Deity, or the Truth of
<c his humane Nature ; or who confounded, or
" divided them, Gal. iv. 4. Luke i. 6.
The Scotch Commiffioners fitting in the Af-
fembly at Wefiminjler, and that Nation and
Church having received the AJfembly's Confefjwn,
no more need be faid here.
The
in the Article o/^Tkinity- Sg
TheBELGIC CONFESSION,
Written firft in French y Ann. 1561. confirmed in
a Synod of the Belgk Churches, Ann. iJ7p.
1. Artk. "We all with the Heart believe,
" and with the Mouth confefs, that there is
" oneonly limpie and spiritual Eiience, which we
" call God ; ana that he is eternal, incomprehen-
5' fible, invisible, immutable, infinite, &c.
viii. Artie. "We believe in this one God,
" who is one only Effence, in which are three
u Perfons, truly and really diftinguifhed from all
<c Eternity by incommunicable Properties, yi*»
" Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is
u the Cauie, Origin, and Beginning of all things
ct vifible and inviiible ; the Son is the Word,
" Wifdom, and Image of the Father ; the Holy
Cc Spirit the eternal Virtue, and Power, pro-
<c ceeding Irom the Father and the Son. Never-
" thelefs this Diftin&ion doth not make God to
tc be divided into three, feeing the Scripture
<c teacheth us that the Father, Son, and Holy
u Spirit have each an Hypoftaiis, or Subjiftence^
c ' diftinguifhed by it's own Properties ; yet fo as
<c that thefe three Perfons are but that one only
cc God. Therefore it is manifeft that the Fa-
" ther is not the Son, nor the Son the Father,
" and likewifc that the Holy Spirit is neither the
* c Father, nor the Son. And in the mean time
" thofe Perfons fo diftinguifhed are not divided,
" nor confounded, nor mixed among themfelves j
" for the Father did not a Hume Fleih, as neither
<c the Holy Spirit, but the Son only ; the Father
" never was without the Sen, nor without his
<c Holy Spirit ; becaufe thefe three are equal in
" one and the fame Eifence and Eternity : here
." is nothing former or later, feeing all three are
N " one,
90 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" one, both in Truth and Power, and in
" Goodnefs and Mercy.
ix. Artie. " W e know all thefe things as well
" by the Teftimonies of the facred Scriptures,
" as by the Efte&s of the Perfons themfeives,
" thofe efpecially which we perceive in ourf elves.
xi Teftimonies of facred Scripture, waici teach
" us to believe this Holy Trinity, are excant in
" many places of the Old Teftament, which are
" not fo much to be nu.nbred, as to be fele&ed
" and weighed, Gen. \. 26. 27. ch. iii. 22.
" — But what is a little more obfeure in the
" Old Teftament, that is very clear in the New,
cc Matth. iii. 16,17. ch. xxviii. 15?, 20. Lukei.
"35. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. 1 John v. 7. By all
" which places we are fully' taught, there are
<c three Perfons in the one Eilence of God. Tho*
<c this Doctrine far exceed all reach ot humane
" Undcrftanding, neverthelefs we now believe it
" from the Word of God, and exped the perfect
tc Knowledge andFruition of him in Heaven. And
cc we may moreover obferve the fingular Offices
" and Effects of thefe three Perfons toward us.
" The Father is called our Creator by his Power,
" the Son is our Saviour and Redeemer by his
" Blood, and the Holy Spirit our Sanctifier by
" his dwelling in our Hearts. And this Doctrine
€t of the Holy Trinity hath always been allerted
" and preferved in the true Church, down from
" the Age of the ApoftleS unto this very day,
" againft Jews, Mahometans, and fome falfe
" Chriftians, Heretics, viz,. Marcion, Manes,
" Praxeas, Sabellius, Samojatmus, Arius, and others
<l fuch like, who were rightly and defervedly
" condemned by the Orthodox Fathers. There-
More in this matter we willing! v receive thofe
" Three
in the Article o/^ Trinity. 91
c< 'three Creeds, the Apoflolic, Nicene, and \Atba-
" nafian, and thofe tilings that have been efla-
" blifhcd by the ancient Fathers according to
" the fenfe of thofe Creeds.
x. Art. " We believe that Jefus Chi [I, as to
" his divine Nature, is the only begotten Son of
" God, begotten from all Eternity, not made or
" created, but of the fame EiTence with the
" Father, coeternal, the cxprefs Image of his
" Father's Pcrfon, and Brightnefs of his Giory,
" in all things equal to him ; who is the Son of
<: God, not from that time only when he took
tc our Nature, but from all Eternity, as thefe
" following Teftimonies compared with one ano-
* ther teach us. Mofes faith, God created the
" World ; but St 'John, that all things were made
" by the Word, whom he calls God. And the
11 Apoftle faith, God made the World by his
" Son, and God created all things by Jtfus Chrifl ;
" therefore it neceflarily follows, tiiat he who
<c is called God, the Word, the Son, and J ef us
" Chrifl was then exifting, when all things were
tc created by him. And therefore the Prophet
<c Micah faith, His goings forth have been from cf
" old, from the Days of Rte-rnity : and the Apoftle,
" He is without beginning of Days, and without
" End of Life . Therefore he is that true, etcr-
" nal, and almighty God, whom we call upon,
" adore, and worfhip.
xi.Art. c: Wc further believe and confefs,thatthe
" Holy Spirit from Eternity proceedeth from the
" Father and the Son -, therefore that he is 1
" made, nor created, nor yet begotten, but only
" proceeding from both : who is in order the third
" Pcrfon in the Trinity, of the fame Eflence,
< c Majefiy, and Glory with the Father and the
■ N 2 i( Sv ,
9 2 Harmony of the Reform'd Chu rches
" Son, and fo true and eternal God, as the fa-
" cred Scripture teacheth us.
xix. Art. " We believe that the Perfon of the
" Son was infeparabiy united and conjoined with
" the human Nature; fo that there were not two
" Sons of God, nor two Perfons, but twoNatures
<e united into one Perfon : both which retain their
" own diftincl: Properties in fuch manner, that
<c as the divine Nature always remains uncre-
<( ated, without Beginning of Days and End of
ce Life, filling Heaven and Earth ; fo the human
" Nature loft not it's own Properties, but re-
" main'd a Creature — — Wherefore we confefs
" him [ viz,. Chrrfl 2 to be true God and true
" Man : true God, that he might overcome
<c Death by his own Power ; and true Man, that
<c as to his weak Flefh he might die for us. (a)
The POL I S H CON F ESS I ON,
with one confent exhibited and declared in a
Synod held at Cz,ongrad on the Tbeyjfe, and
printed at Debrez,in> Ann. 1570.
Of the one and only God.
"We truly and fincerely confefs, according to
u the Holy Scriptures, that the true God is one,
" and alone the Author and Preferver of all things ;
<c who hath maniiefted himfelf fo, that he is Pa-
" ther, Son-, and Holy Spirit.
Of the Trinity of the one Jehovah*
?' This one and only God we believe to be
(a) Th'\s Confejum w as read over and examined in the famou- Synod
of Dori, ^Ar.n. 1 6i 9. And the ^icl s of that Synod teftify, that the Doc-
trine contaifTd therein was approved by the unanimous Judgment of all,
b nh the foreign and provincial Divines, as Orthodox.and agreeing with
the Word of God.
There were prefent at that Synod the bed: and moft Learned N<fen
from Great Entuvt, from the Elector PaUtjnfs Dominions, and thole of
the Landgrave cf Hijfe, from the four ^epublicks of Helvetia, from the
Republics and Church of Geneva, of fyemen, and of gmbdtn, befides
thole of th? I'nited Prtvincet, How great Names may be feen m the
xAclis Sjnodi na.iaaa'as Dordrcctan* ! Dordrecht;, ^Ann. I620.
cc three
in the Article o/^Trinity. 95
tf three Witneffes in Heaven, the Father, Son,
" and Holy Spirit ; who tho' they are three in
" their fubfifting Properties, and difpenfatory
" Offices ; yet thefe three are alfo one, as the
" Apoftle teftifies, 1 John v. 7.
Of the Eternal Father,
" From the Word of God, we call the Father
" God, and Jehovah; having Life in himfelf,
" exifting from none, and without all Beginning,
" who of his own Hypoftafis, or Perfon, without
" all Beginning, or Change, from Eternity begat
" his only begotten Son, as the Character and
" Brightnefs of his Glory, by whom from Eter-
" nity he foreknew and ordered, and in the be-
" gining created, and preferves all things, and
" juftifying his Elect faves them, but condemns
« the Wicked.
Of the Son of God.
" We believe that Chrift is according to the
" Flefh the Son of David, in all things like un-
a to his Brethren, Sin excepted. This fame Chrift,
" as to the xby&,or Word, we believe and confefs,
" is the Son of God, the only begotten of the
" Father, God, and Jehovah^ equal to the Fa-
" ther; and that he is from the Beginning begot-
" ten before all his Works. Who when he was
" in the Form of God, equally with the Father, hum-
" bled himfelf, and took on him the Form of a Ser-
" vant : Co by the Virtue and Power of the Eter-
" nal Spirit, in the Flefh which he had taken, he
41 paid the whole Ranfom, or equivalent Price ;
■ c becaufe it pleafed the Father that in him the
" whole Fullnefs of the Godhead Jbotild bodily, or
" truly dwell, that fo all things might be refto-
'* red by him. Eph. i. Col. ii.2. 2 Cor. 5. Tho'
" tothi^ Chrift, according to the'Flefli,a Beginning
" and
94 Harmony of the Reformed Churches
cc and Nativity be afcribed, as to a true Man,
tc in all things like his Brethren, Sin excepted ;
<c yet as the only begotten of the Father, fub-
" lifting in the Form of God, fo having Life in
" himfelf, as the Father, he is without all Be-
" ginning and Change of time ,* becaufe he is Je-
" hovah, coming forth from Jehovah, and fent
" out from the days of Eternity, by a myftical
<c and ineffable Generation the only begotten of
<c the Father. Matth. i. 3 . Luke i. 2, 7. Rom. i.
•' 6, 9. Heb. iii. 8, 9. John i. 3, 8, 10. ?hil.
" ii. Mica. v. Zach. ii. 3, 10. Pro. viii. Pfal. ii.
Of the Holy Spirit.
" We alfo believe and confefs,that the/&/y Spirit,
" proceeding from the Father, and from the Son,
" fent out into the Hearts of Believers, is the
<c Lord Jehovah, as the Holy Spirit calls him-
fC felf in Ezechiel ii. 3, 6, 10. to whom all
" Praifes proper to the one only God are given,
" even as to the Father and the Son, viz,. He is
" called Jehovah, Lord God, Pfal. xcv. Heb. iii.
<c God the Lord, that fearehes the Hearts, and trieth
fi the Reins, God almighty, the Creator, Preferver
" Regenerator, and SanElifier, Jfa. vi. 1. 1 Cor.
" i. 2, 3. He is the Author and Giver of all the
<c Gifts of God, 1 Cor. xii. Gal. v. 6. Eph. v. 6 .
" The Fruits of the Holy Spirit are Faith, Hope,
" Chanty, Ro?n. iii. 4. 6. Gal. iii. 4. He in
" the Prophets foretold Things to come,
"he chofe, and fent out, Apoftles by
*' his Authority, Acts xiii. Thefe three, Fa-
<c ther, Word, and Spirit, becaufe they are
" one in efifential and eternal Deity (a), Will,
" Counfel, and Works, they are alfo one in
u Worfhip : for as God the Father cannot eled:,
u create, or fan&ify without his Son and Ho~
(*) Vntan funt in Jehovali & in sterna Dtitate, &ct
in the Article of t he T R i N i T y . 95
" ly Spirit ; fo the Father without the Son and
" Holy Spirit, God, the Lord, cannot be wor-
" fliiped.
Of Eternity.
" Eternal is taken many Ways in refped
" of God, as often as it is afcribed to God the
" Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it fignifies Perpe-
<c tuity, without Beginning,and End,and Change.
u Thou Lord inhabiteji Eternity. Thou Lord God
li art for ever, Ifai. ix. and chap. v.
Of the Mediator.
ct We confefs this whole Chrift, the Son of God
" and Man, according to both Natures is the
" true Me!chiz,edec, High Prieft, King, Media-
<£ tor, Saviour, and Redeemer for thele Caufes :
" (1) For tempering of Juftice and Mercy, that
" by dying in theFlefh, thro' the Virtue and Effi-
ct cacy of "the Eternal Spirit, he might fatisfy in-
" finite Juftice and the Law, condemning for Sin;
tc and that alfo the Mercy of God quickening the
" Eleft, by the almighty Power of the Word; and
" only begotten Son of God, according to the eter-
'< nal Election in Chrift made from Everlafting,
<c might be well pleaied. (2) For the Ranfom,
" or equivalent Price, i. e. that the Mediator
" might fully pay the Price of Salvation for the
" Elect : viz,, this, that he might die in the Flefli
" for the Sins of Men, and that he might deftroy
C£ Sin, Death, the Devil, Hell, and the Curfe of
a the Law ; but might repair the loft Image of
" God, Life, Righteoufnefs, and the Wifdom
" of God, and might enliven and reftcre allThings
<c by the Efficacy and Power of his Deity, Rom.
tc iii. 4, 8. 2. Cor. Hi 3, 5- Col. i. 2. Eph. i. 3. (3)
<l Eecaufe literally the Mediator is called the en-
f 6 Harmo&y of the Reform'd Churches
u ly begotten Son of God, immortal, i. e. true God ;
" eternal Life, i. e. immortal Jehovah ; eternal
<c God, to be greatly praifed for ever, the great God,
tl who faves by his Power and Efficacy, i Cor. i,
"3. Col. 1. Heb. 1.7,8,9. Zech.i. 3, 10, 13,14.
" Hof. i. 2,3 , 1 2 .The fame Mediator between God
" and Men is called the Alan Chrifi Jefus. They
m are therefore the Deftroyers of the Glory of God,
ct and of the Truth and Righteoufnefs of the De-
t( ity, they are the Enemies of Peace among Men,
" who deny Chrifi the Mediator, i. e. the Son of
" God, the only begotten of the Father, and true
" Man ; for it is impoffible that the Glory of God
cc in the Heavens can be perfected, the Law and
(C Gofpel fulfilled, and the Salvation and Happi-
u nefs of the Eleft accomplifh'd, without the Son
u of God, true God and Man, and truly Man.
" Rom. i. 3. Col. i. 2. Eph. i. 3.
There follows after this Confeffion the Confent
of the Reform'd Churches of greater and lefler
Poland, with fome Minifters their Brethren, about
the Mediator, made in the general Synod at Sendo-
mir, April 1. 1570. The Article agreed is this,
•viz,.
" We believe that Jefus Chrifi is the Mediator
tc between God and Man, fo as that we deny not,
cc but conftantly affirm, that the whole Force and
<c Efficacy of his Mediation, performed in the hu-
c * man Nature, did proceed from the Divinity
11 of the fame Son incarnate, not of the Father
" incarnate, nor of the Holy Spirit incarnate. "
The
in the Article of the T R i N i T Y. .97
The C O N F ES S I O N of the F O U R
C I T I E S, viz,, of Strasbwrg, Conftance, Memmin*
gen and Lindau.
Cap. 11. Of the [acred Trinity, and the Myfiery
of Chrift Incarnate.
" Agreeable with the Scripture are thofe
" Things, which the Church of Chrift ha£h hi-
" therto believed concerning the Holy Trinity,
" viz,, that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one
<( God in Subftance, nor have any difference
" but that of Perfons ; and that our Saviour
" Jefus Chrift, the fame true God, was alfo made
" Man, the Natures indeed unmixed, but fo
" united in the fame Perfon, that they fhall never
" be feparated to all Eternity We acknow-
" ledge him [viz,. Chrift] to be prefent with his
" Church to the End of time ; that he reftores,
cc fanc"tih"es,and,as his only beloved Spoufe,adorns
" it with all Manner of beautifying Virtues. Itl
" thefe things, becaufe we vary nothing from the
" Fathers, nothing from the common Confent of
" Chriftians, we think this may be enough to have
" teftified our Faith in this Manner.
This Confejftvn, written in German and Latin,
Anno 1530. was exhibited to the Emperouf
Charles V. by the Deputies of thofe four Cities
in the Diet of Ausburgh, the fame wherein the
Aus burgh Confeffion was prefented.
The AUSBURGH CONFES-
SION, exhibited to Charles v. in the Diet
held there, Anno 1530. was written in the time
of that Diet by Philip Melanchthon* -It was re-
vifed, and again exhibited to the Emperor Fer~
dinand in the Diet of the Empire, Anno 1558.
and Anno 15 61. The Edition here followed is
that printed at Wittemberg, Ann. 15 40.
O j. An,
98 Harmony of the ReformM Churches
1 Art. " The Churches with us with great
" Confent teach, that the Decree of the Council
*' ot Nice concerning the Unity of the Divine
" Eflence, and of three Perfons, is true, andwith-
V cut any doubting to be believed, viz,. That
" there is one divine Eflence, which is both
4t called, and is God, eternal, incorporeal, that
" can't be divided into Parts, &c. — And yet
" there are three Perfons of the fame Eflence, and
" Power, and coeternal, Father, Son, and Holy
" Spirit. And the Word Per/on they ufe in that
" Signification, wherein ecclefiaftical Writers in
" this Caufe have received it, that it fignifies not
" a Part, or Quality in another, but what properly
11 MM*.
They condemn all Herefies rifen againft this
" Article, as of the Mankhees, Valentiniam, Art-
cc arts, Euno?nians, Mahometans, and all like thefe.
" They condemn alfo the Samofateniam, old and
" new, who when they contend that there is but
<c one Perfon only, craftily and impioufly cavil
" concerning the Word, and the Holy Spirit,
" that they are not diftinct Perfons; but that the
" Word fignifies a vocal Word ; and Spirit, a crea-
iC ted Motion in all Things.
in. Artie. " They alfo teach that the Word, i.
<l e. the Son of God, aflumed the human Na-
<c ture in the Womb of the bleifed Virgin Mary,
" that two Natures, divine and human, infepa-
" rably joined in a Unity of Perfon, might be
c< one Chrift — truly God and truly Man, born
<f of the Virgin Mary, who truly fuffer\i and
<c was crucified, &c. that he might reconcile the
" Father to us, and might be a Sacrifice not only
" for original Sin, but alfo for all the actual Sins
" of Men, &c. according to the Apofiles Creed.
XXI.
in the Article of the T ri n it y. 99
xxi. Art. " Invocation is an Honour to be gi-
" ven only to God almighty, viz,, to the eternal
tc Father, and to his Son and our Saviour Jefiis
" Cbrift, and to the Holy Spirit (a).
For expounding this Confeffion, w ritten on a
fudden, as Meknchtbm who writ it witnefles him-
felf in his Apology, the following Confejfions (faith
the Compiler of this Harmony) are annexed
thereunto.
The SAXON CONFESSION* was
writen Ann. 1551.111 the Synod at Wittembcrg,
where the Pallors of the Saxon and Mifnian
Churches, and Dcclors of their Univerlitics met
together, who all fubfcribed it as the Aujlurgh
Confeffion repeated, to be propofed, and which was
propofed, to the Council of 'Trent. The moft il-
luflrious Brandenburgh Princes, and the moft
noble Counts of Mamfeldt, and Minifters of
Strasburgb, and Doctors of the Churches of Po-
merania, by Writings annexed to the Confeffion ap-
proved it ,• and the fame was approved by other
Churches, and it was commended by the Polijb
Churches in their Agreement, or Pacification. The
Confeffion follows.
Art. Of Doctrine.
" We adirm openly before God and the uni-
" verfal Church, in Heaven and in Earth, that
cc we embrace with a true Faith all the Writings
? £ of the Prophets and Apoftlev, and in that ge-
" nuine Senfe, which is exprefs'd in the Creeds oc
. (") This ^Ausburgb Confefllon yr** exhibited to his Imperial M.ijefty
by Jou-i Duke and Elector of Saxony, G'<ri* Marquefifof Br-andenbureb,
trnejt Duke of Lunenburgh, Phflip Land-^vc of Htjfi, Jchn Fred.rhk^
Duke of Sax'nj, F'ffitph Dike of Lwntutrgn, Wd&'ing Parse of ^inhdi,
iho S.iuic and Magiftrarc; n K»femle% an t iheS naw i >l ■''• linger.
O 2 the
c;
ioo Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
<c the Apoflles,o>'iNice, and of Athanajius,and thefe
" Creeds themfelves, and their genuine Meaning,
<6 without Corruptions, we have always ftedfaft-
<c ly embraced, and by God J s Help fhall ever
" embrace. And we conftantly condemn all
" Errors repugnant to thefe Creeds, as are the
" monftrous Opinions of Heathens, Jezus, Maho-
" metans, Marcionites, Manichees, Samofatenians 9
cc Arians 9 Pneumatomachians, and others con-
demned by the true Judgment of the Church.
Seeing the divine Effence is but one, the
" eternal Father, the coeternal Son, the Image of
a the Father ; and the coeternal Holy Spirit , pro-
" ceeding from the Father and the Son ; of im-
" menfe Wifdom, Power, Goodnefs, &c.
tc We condemn the Errors of Marcion, and the
<c ManicbeeSy and the like, that agree not with
te the Senfe of the Church of God in this whole
ec queflion.
Art. Of praying to Saints departed.
<c I n Ifai. chap. xlii. it is written : / am
11 the Lord-, that is my name. My glory I will not
11 give to another. Invocation is the moft pro-
* c per Glory of God, as Matth. iv. "Thou jhall
u worjhip the Lord thy God, and him only Jhalt
lc thjuferve. And it is the eternal and unchange-
* c able Commandment, 'Thou (halt have no other
" Gods before me : no ftrange Gods. There-
" fore it is neceffary to keep the Doctrine of In-
<c vocation moft pure in the Church ; for cor-
cl rupting of which the Devil hath various Ways
cc down from the beginning been fcattering his
te Seed, and will fcatter it Ml — There is no-
" thing o£ greater power, no more efficacious
<c confolation than right Prayer. It muft
lt not be as the Heathens , of whom our
« Lord
in the Article of the T R. I N I T Y. i oi
c< Lord faith : Ye worfhip you know not what.
" He will have his Church conlider what they
" worfhip. We know what we worfhip, John
" iv. 22. This reproof contains thefe three
" plain Arguments, (i) To attribute Omni-
'* potency to a Creature is impiety ; but to pray
" to a Creature, is to attribute to it Omnipo-
" tency ; becaufe it is a Confeffion that he fees
" all Hearts, and difcerns true Groanings from
<c Counterfeit : thefe things are only to be afcrib-
" ed to the eternal Father, and to his Son Jefus
" Cbrift our Lord, and to the Holy Spirit — In
" Praying to a Creature you depart trom God, and
<c confider not what you cali upon. Luther faith of-
" ten, 'Tis an iiluftrious Teftimony in the Old -^
" Teftament of the Divinity of the Meffiah, m
" that it affirms he is pray'd to. (2) Invocation,
" or Prayer^ without Faith is in vain, and no
" worfhip is to be brought into the Church with-
* £ out a divine Command ; but there is no Sen-
tf tence that Ihews Prayer made to Men is pleaf-
" ing to God, or of any avail. (3) 5 Tis ex-
" prefsly written : T'kere is one Mediator between
" God and Man, the Man Chrifi Jefus. Upon
" him we muft look in all our Prayers, and know
a the Doftrine of the Gofpel concerning him,
u that none can come to God, but by Faith in
" this Mediator : who both intercedes for us,
u as himfelf faith, None cometh to the Father, but
tc by the Son ; and bids us fly to himfelf, faying,
" Come to me ye that labour, and are heavy laden,
" and I will give you refl. And the Manner of
" Prayer he teaches, when he faith : Whatsoever
" you fiall ask the Father in mv Name, he will give
" it you. Only this high Priefl enters into the
" Holy of Holies /'. e. into the fecret Councils
« of
1 02 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
* c of the Deity, and fees into the Breaft of the
" eternal Father, and intercedes for us, and car-
" ries our Griefs, and Groans, and Prayers to
" him, andfearchethour Hearts. — Prayer is made
" to God, who hath manifefted himfeif, viz,.
" to the eternal Father, to his Son our Lord
" Jefus Chrift, and to the Holy Spirit ; that he
" would receive, and hear, and fave, for the
" Son's Sake. And 'tis exprefly made to the Son,
" as 2 7%efs. ii. 16, 17. Our Lord Jefus Chrift
<c himfeif and God even our Father, which hath
(f loved us, and given us everlafling Conflation, and
<£ good Hope thro' Grace, comfort your Hearts, and
iC eftablijh you in every good Word and Work. And
" in Gen. xlviii. 15, 18. Jacob names God, and
" the Mediation of his Son, when he faith :
" God before whom my Fathers Abraham and Ifaac
"■ did walk, the God which fed me all my Life long
<c to this Day , the Angel which redeemed me,
<; blefs the Lads. Therefore we ufe thefe Forms :
<e I call upon thee, almighty God, eternal Father of
" our Lord Jefus. Chrift, together with thy Son Jefus
il Chrift our Lord, and thy Holy Spirit. I call upon
ct thee, Jefus Chrift, thou Son of God, who waft cru-
ct ct fed for us, and raifed again, have mercy upon me %
<; intercede fr me with thy Father, and fanciify me by
u thy Holy Spirit. In thefe Forms we know what
"' we fpeak to: and fince there are Teflimonies
" in the Word of God, which fhew that fuch
" Prayer pleafes God, and he hears it, fuch Pray-
C£ er may be offer'd up in Faith (a).
f /») In thsfreface to thhConffffm they fay .- " Ic is theD jty of Cnch as are
*' a-k'd to rr.aki known t tic i r Djftnne ; efpecially when the Churches
" arc accufed of fpread:n£, or receiving ftlfe Opinions, and rafb'y thro'
" Anbition, or Hatred, or any evil Aiicciion, depart from the Cora-
" mja Scnfc \o .epeat ofcen the true Explication of the Djilrme is plea-
The
in the Art He of the Trinity. 103
The WIRTEMBURG CONFES-
SION was propos'd to the fame Council of
Trvnt, Ann, 1552. by the Deputies of the mofl
Illuftrious Cbrifiopher Duke of IVirtemburg, as its
excellent Preface fhews. The Confeffion itfelf is
thus.
Of God, and of three Perfons in one
Deity.
" W e believe and confefs that there is only
u one true, eternal, immenfe God, almighty,
" Creator of all Things vifible and invisible ;
" and in this one and eternal Deity there are
" three Properties, or Perfons fubfifting of them-
" Celves, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as the
u Scriptures of the Prophets and Apoftles teach;
" and the three Creeds, the Apoflolic, and Nicene,
" and Atbanajian explain.
Of the Son of God.
"We believe and confefs that the Son "of
" God, our Lord Jefus Chrift, begotten from
* Eternity of his Father, is true and eternal
** God, confubftantial with his Father, and in
w the fulnefs of Time was made Man to expi-
" ate Sin, and procure the Salvation of Man-
u kind ; that Jtfus Chrifi, true God and true
* c Man, might be one Perfon only, and in one
ct Perfon there might be two Natures, not one
* alone, as the holy Fathers explained it by
" Teftimonies of facred Scripture in the Coun-
" cil of Ntce, and in the fir ft of Ephefus, and of
" fing toGod.and fome knowing th°. Scripture? are invited to the Truth.
^ind ag<i»; Having featthed the Scriptures we have faithfully deliver-
ed thejr whole Doctrine, and by tc.ithing we propagate it \ v:e
" faithfully retain the Beliet of the Catholic Church loncernng our Lord
Jtftts Chnft f and open the Doctrine neceflary to th? Knowledge of the
" Son of God, and the Salvation of Men, &e.
" Chahedon :
104 Harmon) of the Reform'd Churches
" Chalcedon. Therefore we deteft all Herefy,
" that is repugnant to .this Doctrine of the Son
" of God.
Of the Holy Sprit.
"We believe and confefs that the Holy Spi~
fl rit from Eternity proceeds from God the Fa-
" ther and the Son, and is true and eternal
" God, of the fame Effence, Majefty and Glo-
" ry with the Father, and the Son, as by Autho-
" rity of the facred Scripture the Holy Fathers
tc rightly explained it in the Council of Conftan-
" tinople againft Macedonius.
The PALATINE CONFESSI-
ON, as the fame is extant in the lafl Will
and Teftament of the moft Illuftrious Prince
Frederic in. Count Palatine of the Rhine^ E-
lector of the Roman Empire : printed Ann. 1577.
by order of his Son, Prince Cajimire, profeffing
alfo the fame Faith.
"In general, faith the EleFtor, with a fincere
" and conftant Mind I confefs, and firmly be-
" lieve, all thofe things which in the facredDoc-
" trine and Writings of the Prophets and Apo-
" ftles are revealed, contained, and delivered,
" and by Teftimonies thereof confirmed , and
" founded, altogether fo as the Church in the
n Times of the Apoftles comprifeth the chief
" Heads of Chriftian Doctrine in our CnriiHan
" Faith, which they call tne Apofkles Creeds
" and as afterward in the Nicene^ and Atbana-
" fian Creed, the true Explication of the forefaid
" Apoftolic Faith, or Creed, is faithfully fet
" forth. That is,
1. " I believe and confefs the eternal Father
J' of our Lord Jefus Chrift-, who created out of
" nothing
in the Article of the T r i n i T y. 105
" nothing the Heaven and the Earth, with all
" things that are therein, &c. "
11. " I believe and confefs that Jefus Chrifl,
" Son of the almighty God, begoten from e-
" ternity of the Facher, is equal, and one only
" God with the Father , and Holy Spirit ; and
tc that at the Time which was appointed in the
" eternal Council of God, he was conceived by
" the Holy Spirit in Mary, always a Virgin,
" took our Flefli, and was born into the World,
" &c. That he fuftered Death to free us from
* eternal Death, which had otherwife for ever
" lain upon us, and from the Curfe &c. I be-
tc lieve that he rofe again from the Dead on the
" third Day and that we now by his Power,
" and Efficacy, are raifed to a new Life — Tho*
" as to his human Nature, he be no longer upon
tc Earth, but in Heaven ; yet as to his Divinity,
" Majefty, Grace, and Spirit, he never departs
" from us. "
in. " I believe and confefs that the Holy Spi^
" rit, with the Father and the S:n y is that true,
" eternal, and only God ; and that he is given to
" us, that he may make us by true Faith Par-
<c takers of Chrifl, and of all his Benefits. In
" this Confelfion of the true ChriPcian Faith,
" both now, and at any Time, I commend my
<c SouU whenfoever it fhall depart out of this
" EoJy, to the holy and undivided Trinity ; to
tc God the Father, the Creator ; to God the Son,
" the Redeemer, Mediator, and my only Savi-
" our, Jefus Chrifl ; and to God the Holy Spirit,
" my true Comforter, &c. I exhort and af-
* c fectionatly intreat my moft dear Children,
" Heirs, and Succeflors ; and my Subjects, com-
" mitted by God to my Truft ; my Counfellors,
P " and
i c6 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" and Magistrates 5 and efpecially my Univerfi-
** ty, and School Mailers, and Miniflers of
" Churches, of whatever State, and Condition
" they be, and their Poflerity, that they keep
<v the Way of the Lord. — And that, not in their
" private Capacity only, they conftantly per fevere
" to their Lives end in the faid Confeffion of
" Faith, and without Fear, couragioufly profefs
<: it before God, and the whole World, nor ever
" decline from it ; but alio, as it becomes pious
. and Chriilian Princes, and Magiflrates, to
" whom the Defence and Propagation of ac-
ct knowiedged divine Truth is commited, as
" their chief Duty, they would with fpecial
<e Care, Study, and PainS, faithfully and deli-
<£ gently apply thereto ; that the facred and
ct laving GofpeJ, and the Truth of God, ac-
<c cording to the Scriptures of the Prophets, and
£< Apcftles, may be purely, iincerely, and uncor-
<c ruptly taught, and preached, and by the
u Bleffing of God may be propogated, and tranf-
*' micted in a continued Succeffion down to Pof-
" terity,
This admirable Confeffion for Clearness, and
Scundnefs of Judgment, and the extraordinary Spi-
rit of Piety exprelied therein, is well worthy e-
vcry ones reading, that hath opportunity for it.
His dying Expreffions were : " This is a faithful
" Saying, and worthy of all Acceptation, that Chrift
" yf us canie * nt0 t ^ :e World to five Sinners, of
" whom J am chief. " And to thofe who flood
. about him : " Enough, now encugh have I lived
" for you, it is time that at length I fliould alfo
" live for myjGelf. Let my mercifuil Father
" call me hence whenfoever he pleafeth, I enjoy
u a pleafant and joyful Confcience in Chrift my
w Lord
in the Artkle of the T R i n i t y« i 07
" Lord, whom I have fmcerely ferved, and thro'
" whofe Goodnefs I have lived to fee" this, that
" in the Churches, and Schools under my Go-
" vernment, my Subjects, taken of from the Au-
<c thority of Men, have been led to Chrift alone.
" / have fought a good Fight, I ha-ue fnijh'ed
" my Courfe, I have kept the Faith, henceforth is laid
" up for me a Crown of Righteoufnefs:
The BOHEMIAN, or VVALDEN-
SIAN CONFESSION, framed out of
their moft antient Confijjlonf, approved by a
Writing of Luther, and of Alelanchthcn, Ann. 1552.
and by the TJniverfity of tjfiitemberg, and at laft
by the Free Barons, and other Noblemen of the
Kingdom of Bohemia, prefented to King Ferdi-
nand, Ann. 1535. It includes in it the Faith of
thofe of the Alar chion ate of M-ravia, and others.
111. Artie. Of the Faith of the Holy Trinity.
" They teach from the Scriptures, that by
F Faith God is known to be me in Subftance of
" Divinity, but three in Perfons, Father, S n, and
" Holy Spirit. As to Perfons indeed they have
" Dillinaicn, but as to Eflenee, and Subihrcc,
" they have Coequality Without Dij
" The Catholic Faith, and the Agreement of
" the Nicene Council, and of others with this ;
" their Decrees, and Canons, and the Confefiion
" or Creed of Athanafms, plainly teftify thi. c ,
" And hence they teach the fupreme Power,
" V/ifdom, and Goodnefs of this one God, and
lC his three mod: excellent Works, agreeing to
c£ bim alone, and to no ether befides him, viz.
l: the Work of Creation, of Redemption, andcf
" Prefervation, or Sah&itication. They alio
" tench that this only true Gcd, in one divine
" Eflenee, and blejfed Trinity of Perfons, rs
P 2 i( - always
loS Harmony of the Refbrm'd Churches
" always to be adored and flood in awe of, and
" with gi-eateft Reverence, Honour, and Praife
" to be worfhiped, as the great Lord and King
" of all. reigning to all Eternity ; and that on
" him do all things depend, from him do they
" expect and feek all, to him alone is higheit
M Subjection, Obedience, Fear, and Truft to be
<c yeilded, and for this all religious Worfhip is
" fincerely to be paid him : and whofoever does
<c not that, brings on himfelf Damnation, Deut.
u vi. 'Thou [hall worjhip the Lord thy God, and him
" only Jhalt thou ferve. And again : Thoujhah
(i love the Lord thy God with all thine Heart, and
Ci with all thy Soul, and with all thy Mind, and in
" fum, with all thy internal and external
cc Powers,
vi. Artie. Of the Lord Chrijl, and Faith
in htm,
ic They teach firft of all, that there muft be a
ct fure and firm Faith of Chrift the Lord, viz,.
" That he is true, and by Nature God, and al-
ft fo Man ; by whom all things in Heaven and in
" Earth, vifible and invilible, were made; whom
" John calling the eternal Word interprets that
" he is God, the Light, the only begiten Son, that
" is in the Bo font of the Father, full of Grace and
* Truth."
The CONSENT in Faith and Religion be-
tween the Churches of greater and lefler P Q-
LAND, and Dukedom of LITHUA-
NIA, &c. at Sendomir* Ann. 1570.
Preface.
They fay, « They fhun all Herefies repug-
a nant to the Chriftian Faith as revealed in the
? c Scriptures, and to the Apofiolic, and Nicene, and.
J? Athanafian Creeds, as agreeable thereto.
I N
in the Article o/^Trinity. 109
In the iv. Ac"l of the Synod of Cracow tis faid (rf):
*• When fome Avian Preachers and their Hearers,
" of their own accord, came to our Synod, and
" would there difcourfe of their Opinion ; the
cc Synod, after ferious Conlideration of thofe
" Things, refufed Conference and Difputation
" with them, and made thisDecree: Seeing thefe,
iC who went out from us, continue not in theDo-
a drine of Cbrifl, and Faith concerning the true
" God, x\\eFathei; and the Son, with the Hly Spi-
** rit, and fo have not God ; and having already
" been by Conferences and Writings very ofterx
" admonifhed by us, and yet pertinacioully con-
" tinue in their Error, we will have no farther
" to do with them. So long as they continue to
" defend their Opinion, we will admit no more
" of their Difputations, but will fhun them and
" their blafphemous Books, according to the
" Command of the Holy Spirit : leaft otherwife
" we feem to fhake the Foundation of the Chri-
" ftian Religion,and to call in doubt the moft firm
" Faith concerning God, in whofe Name we are
a baptiz'd ; and left we be Partakers of their evil
" Deeds, poifon'd Do&rines, and Blafphemies a-
tC eainft the Glory of our Lord.
The BASIL CONFESSION was
firft exhibited in the Diet at Ausburgh, Ann. 1530.
and fo is of the fame Date with the famous Auf-
burg Confejfion. Then five Years after the Refor-
mation of their Church it was Printed, Anno
1 5 34. and hath fince had feveral Editions.
1. Artie. Of the Nature of God.
" W e believe in God the Father, in God the
" Sm x and in God the Holy Ghofi, the Holy di-
(j) Hirmon. f. Jjo
r vine
1 10 harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" vine 'Trinity, three Perfons, and one eternal
" almighty God, as to Eilence and Subftance,
<c not three Gods. This is proved from many
" places of the whole Scriptures ol the Old and
" New Tefcament.
iv. Artie. Of Cbrift, true God and trueM.w.
" We believe and conftantly confefs that Chrijl
Cl was made Flejfii for us, /. e. this Son of God u-
" nited to the humane Nature in one Perfon,
" was made our Brother, that we by him might
" be made Partakers of the Heritage of God,
" Matth. i. 21. Luke ii. ic. gfc, John i. 14. Phil.
" ii. 6, 7. Matth. vi. 8, 5?. Rom. viii. 15, 16, 17.
" Heb.ii. 10. They conclude their Confejjim;
"To the King eternal, incorruptible, im-
" mortal, invisible, the only wife God, Father,
" Son, and Holy .Spirit, be Honour and Glory
" for ever, Amen.
The CONFESSION of the GREEK
CHURCH, given by Gennadim Scholarius,
Patriarch of Conftantinople, to Mahomet 11. Empe-
ror of the Turks, alter his Co: queft of that City,
&c. Ann. 1453. And upon this Demand of his :
Q. W h a t do you Chriftians believe ?
T o this the Patriarch anfvvered :
Anf. 1. Cap. " VV e believe that there is a
" GW,who made all things out of nothing, who is
" not a Body, nor hath a Body, but lives intel-
" le&ually, and is the bell:, moft perfect, and
" moft wife Mind, without Compolicion, with-
" out Beginning, and without End, is not in-
" eluded in any place, but is in all Places. Thcfo
" are the Attributes (a) of God, by which he is
" difdnguiihed from the things that he hath
: made: and thtrs are others like thefc
11. Cip.
in the Artkk o/^Trinity, hi
ii. Cap. "He is wife, and good, and true,
" even Truth itfelf : whatever Excellencies his
" Creatures have feparately, he hath all in an
" higher Manner in himfelf alone ; and thofe
" Perfections his Creatures have, becaufe he gives
" them to them ; and they arc good ; becaufe he
cc is wife, thefe are wife ; becaufe he is true,
" thefe are true ; and after the fame Manner in
" the reft, only with this Difference, they are firft
<c and properly in God, but Creatures have them
" by Communication.
in. Oip- " W ■ beleive that there are in God
*' other three Properties (a), w ■ hich are as it were
" the Principles and Fountains of all his other
" Properties (b). And by thefe three Properties God
" eternally lives in himielr", and before the World
" was made by him ; and by thefe he made the
" World, and by thefe he governs it. And thefe
" three Properties we call three Subjiftetices, or Perfons
tc (c). And becaufe thefe three Properties themfelves
" do not divide into parts the one, and molt fim-
" pie Eilence or" God, therefore God in thefe
<c three Properties is one God ; and there are not
H three Gcds, as feme daringly fpeak.
vi. Cap. "The Word of God put on hu-
tc mane Nature, that as Man he might converfe
" with Mem \ and as the Word of Gcd, and
" the WiMorri ot God, he might teach Men to
<f believe in the only true God, and to live ac-
" cording to the Rule which iiimfcif had given :
a and agairjj that as Man he might fee forth his
<c own 'Ccnvcrfaticn an Exemplar of his Dcc-
u trine , fcr he hirrjfelf hrft lived according to
" that Rule which he gave unto Man ; but as
" the Word of God, and his Power, he might
(•i) 'ifivfvvrat (h) lAmjuttTUV (0 cf) wjtsw Tf/'i \i\ipsf\* oW-
1 1 2 Harmony of the RefbrmM Churches
cc be able happily to effed that univerfal Good
" which he purpofed, becaufe it was impoffible
Ci that by the Power of Man alone the World
" fhould be turn'd to God their Happinefs.
11 Thus therefore by his IVord the almighty and
" invilible God fow'd the Truth in Jerufakm,
€i and by his Spirit he enlightened and ftrength-
" ned his ApofHes, that they might fow the
" Truth even in all the World, thro 1 the love of
" God who fent him, and for Love of the Salva-
" tion of the World, after the example of Jefus,
" who according to his Humanity freely died to
11 lave the World. Thus we believe One God in
" Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as our
" Lord J ejus Chrifi hath taught us, becaufe he
" is true : we believe he is Truth itfelf.
vn. Cap. "We believe that the Word of
<c God, and the Man which that Word of God
" affum'd, is the Chrifi; and that Life of Chrifi
* in. his Flefh, was the Life of: more than an
" Holy Man; the Power of his Wifdom, and
c< of his Works, was the Power of God .
vm. Cap. "We believe that as the Soul and
" Body of one Man make one Man ; fo the Word
" of God on the one part, and on the other
Cc part Soul and Body: there are always two Na-
" tures perfectly diftin<9: in one Man ,* and fo the
" Humanity and the Deity are in Nature per-
" feftly diftinft in one Chrifi , but only in
" Subiiftence and perfonally they are united : and
" neither was the Word of God chang'd into
" the Flefh, or into the Soul of Chrifi ; nor
" was the Flefh of Chrifi, or his Soul, chang'd
" into the Word of God; but there was, and is in
" Chrifi, after that moft wonderful Difpenfation,
" the Word of God, and the Humanity is Hu-
1 manity
in the Article c/^Trinity. I i 3
" manity. It was not the Humanity of
fi Chrijl that aflumed the Deity, but the Di-
" vinity of the Word of God afTumed the Hu-
" mane Nature, in the a& of AfTumptipn join-
" ing it with himfelf. Whatever is in God,
" and of God, is by Nature God, becaufe
<{ there is no accident in God; and therefore
* the intelligible Word of God we call, and be-
" lieve to be God. And becaufe this Word of
" God was in Chrifi, therefore we confefs Chriji
" to be God and Man, viz,. Man becaufe of
." his Soul and Bo<iy; but God, becaufe of the
" Word of Ggd which is in hirn.
ix. Cap. " W e believe that the Word of
" God was in Cbrift, and in the World, and in
*' Heaven, and in God the Father ; becaufe the
" Word of God is infinite, as God is infinite,
" who begat him but he was in God in one
" manner, in Clrrifi in another, and in the World
" in another.
x. Cap. — T he Goodnefs of God, and his
lt Power, and his Love to Men was more abun-
" dantly magnified by the coming of the TVordoi
" God himfelf, who is God, with all his Power
*' in Jefus; than when he fent one Grace or
" two into his Prophets, and into one Prophet
<l lefs, and into another greater.
XI. Cap. We believe that Chrift, as to his
" humane Nature, was crucified and died (with
" Confent of his Will) for many and great Be-
" nefits ; but the Word of God is neither cm-
" cified, nor dies, nor rifeth again ; but rather
" himfelf raifei the Dead, as he railed alfo his
" own Flefh, which he had carried about
" him, &c.
Q. xui.
1 14 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
xiii. Cup. "But why was it neceftVy that
" the fVord of God , who is God, fliouid be in-
" carnate ? There are many neceflary Reafons
" of this, and when it is needtul we are ready
" to give them ; but befide thofe Reafons, thefe
" feven Things fully perfwade us of the truth
" of our Faith.
xiv. Cap. (1). " Because the Prophets of the
" Jews, (whom wc alio approve) foretold con-
" cerning Jefus, and the Things that he did, and
u what were done in his time, and which his
" Difciples did afterwards <by his Power.
XV. .Cap. (2.) " Becaufe all the Writings of
" 'our Faith agree in all Things, by reafon that
cc the Writers ot them had all one Teacher, the
<c Grace' \_fo be calls the Spirit] ot God; for
" otherwife they would in fome Things have
" difagreed.
XVI. Cap. (3.) tc Becaufe Men everywhere
" with great Eameftnefs, and many hazards re-
<c ceived this Faith, tho' it was new , and
" flrange j and not ignorant and unlearned Per-
" fons only, but the prudent and wife ; and
tc by this the Deluiions of the Devil were ut-
" terly confounded.
XVII. Cap. (4) Becaufe this Eaith hath no-
" thing in it impoflible, nothing contradictory,
" nothing flefhly, but all fpiritual ; and it is
tc the way to bring the Souls of Men to the
** Love ot God, and of eternal Life to come.
xviii. Cap. (5). Ct Because as many as
tc received this Faith, and lived virtuoufly ac-
" cording to the Rule of Cbrifii received great
i( Gifts from God, and wrought many Miracles
" in the Name of Jefusj which would not have
*' been,were this Faith contrary to the Truth.
xix.
in the Article uf/l/f Trinity, i i <
xix. Cap. (6). " Because whatever fame
<( fpeak againft this Faith, we can eaiily and
" with good Reafon fclve.
xx. Cap, (7). "Because Kings, and their chief
lc Governours, for three hundred and eighteen
" Years, having been worfhipers of many Gods
"and Idolaters, with many Punifhmcnts and
"Slaughters war'd againft this Faith ,' but
" could nothing prevail , but the Faith conque-
" red, and remains to this time, and when our
" Lord cometh lie (hall find it. It" this Faith
" were not from the W ill of God, it had eaii-
" ly been deftroy'd.
To this our Lord Jefas Cbrifl be Glory,
Amen, (a)
T h e C nfejllon of Cvri!, Patriarch of Conflanti-
waa/e,infcr;bed, The ORIENTAL OON-
F E S S I O N of the Chriftian Faith.
" Cyril, Patriarch of C n/lautinopk, to thofe who
" are inquilitive to underhand concerning tHeRe-
" ligion of the Eajlem, that is of ' thcGreeLCburcb,
" what we believe , and what we think of the
" Articles oi' the Orthodox Faith, in the N '.me
tC of all Chrifcinns in common, explains this
" fbort Cohfeffton, that it may be for a Teitimo-
,c ny before God and his whole Church, with-
" out Diiiimulaticn, and with a good Con-
" (cience. •
t. Art. " We believe one true God, almightr,
v< and infinite; three in Perf.ms, Father, Son,
" and Holy Spirit. The Father unbegoten ;
" the Son begoten of the Father, before alt
" Ages, confubftantial x\ ith the Father ; the
(a) See th s imytrtam Ctifjfim in {/a tin Crafigfr's Titrcog'.tci* l
Lil>. u, inn.
C^ 2 Holy
1 1 6 Harmony of the Reform'd Churches
" Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father by
<c the Son, having the fame EHence as the Fa-*
" ther and the Son. Thefe three Perfons in
" one Eilence we call the Sacred Trinity, al-
" ways to be r^lefTed , glorified , and worfhip-
" ed by every Creature.
iv. Art. " VV e believe that this one God in
" three Perfons, Father , Son , and Hdy Spirit ,
u is the Creator of Things vifible and invifi-
*' ble, &c.
vn. Art. "We believe that the Son of God,
u our Lord Jefus Chrifi, humbled himfelf, and
11 in his Subiiftence, cr Perfon, took humane Na-
" ture, conceived by the Holy Gholt, and was
" made Man, in the Womb of Mary* always a
" Virgin, born of her, &c. (a)
Take only one PaiTage more cited from Dr.
Smith by Mr. Martin, in his Dijfertation on
i John v. 7. Page 83. the Words of another
Greek Confejfton, viz,. " The Father, the Son, and
w the Holy Ghofi are all three of one and the
<c fame Effenca, according to the Words of the
" Evangelift St. John: 'There are three that bear
c< record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and
" the Holy Gfaji, and thefe three are one.
{/) Cyril delivered this Confeffon, wricen by hVnfe'f in Latin, to the
Dutch Ambaffador at the Tur^ijb Port, ^Anvo j6 30. AfteTward- he pyt
forth the fame in the Greek, Language, ftnngthen'd with Auihontys of the
Sacred Scripture, and erJzrped with the Addition of Come Q.eftions.
And before the French Ambillador, and others, the Patriarch profefled,
that it was his own, and inthit profelTion of Faith he continued io long
as he lived, The fame ijluftriou^ Perfon fert ihe lame to G'««vj, to be
put forth in Print, that wirh his Confent and Ueli'e it mijiht be commu-
nicated to the Chriftian World 5 and that all might be allured thereof,
he fent the Original v nten with his own Hand , wht h all might fee
vho defred it. It was accordingly punted m Greek, and Linn, it Geneva
andZ**'t<^, which is in every ojies Hands. Here vve were content wiih the
Latin Edition.
A S
in the Article of the T r i n i t y. 117
A s to the Northern Churches, Sweden and
Denmark, being both Lutheran, they follow the
Ausburgh Confeffion, ot which fee before. And
jMufcovy receiving Chriifianity from the Greek.
Churchy this with it follows the Athanafian Creed.
T H u s have we gone thro 5 the Account pro-
pofed, from the Body of the Confejjions of the
Reformed Churches, with fome others occafionally
mentioned. From all which we rind a Cloud
of Witnefles both to the Truth and Impor-
tance of this Doctrine of the Bleffc-d 'Trinity :
That there are three Perfuns in the Godhead,
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghofi , and
thefe three are one God, the fame in Sub-
ftance, equal in Power, and Glory. Wc clofe
this part therefore only with this Reflection :
Should there be a falling away from this Profef-
fion, we mean as to the Subitance of the Doc-
trine, in whatever Words exprerfed : fhould
there be a a denying of the Lord that bought us,
or of the Holy Spirit, the Sancririer, and Com-,
forter; drowning them to be truly and proper-
ly by Nature God, of the fame Eifcnce, and
Eternity as the Father, and with him the one
God, not three Gods, or a threefold ^jj?*, habi-
tude, or conljdcraticn of the one Peribn of the
Father : fhculd there be a General detection from
the truth to fuch Errors as thefe ; with too
much reafon it might be faid, the Glory is de-
parted from us, whether Dijfenters, cr of the
EfiabliJ/d Church that hath been counted the
Head and great Support of the Protectant
Churches. Should we, or they thus fall, thofc
Protectants, whefe Confejjions we have mentioned,
yea, and all Chriflians abroad, muft upon their
prpfelfed Principles renounce us, as not holding
the
i 8 Advices concerning the D OCTRINE
v-5
the Head ; and as to this great and fundamen-
tal Article of the Blejfed Trinity^ fallen into a
\vorfe Apoftacy even than Rome itfelf. But -we
hope better 'Things both of theirs and ours, and
Things that accompany Salvation-, though we thus
fpeak.
***** ******** *«*:*********:*******
****************:********* *******
CHAP. III.
Some Advices relating to the Doctrine
of the ever Blejfed TRINITY.
It now remains that we recommend a few
Things to the Consideration of thofe , who
have their Thoughts exercised about thefe Points;
which how generally foevcr they have been hi-
therto received, are of late become the unhappy
Subject of Diftnite.
D i d we apprehend this to be a Controverfy
cf little Confequence, they to whom we do more
particularly addrefs ourfelves , are too well ac-
quainted with our Perfons and Circumftances, to
imagine we would ever have given them or our-
felves any trouble about it.
They muft needs judge, we think it to be of
the greateft Moment, and that nothing could in-
duce us to have taken this Method (forely a-
gainft our Inclinations, and thofe many Argu-
ments that would have engag'd our Silence) did
we not find ourfelves compell'd to it by fo plain
and
of the ever Blejfed Trinity. 119
and urgent a Neceflity, as ought to bear down
ail other Confiderations whatsoever ; or, if they
in the leaft doubt of this, we can profcfs feriou-
ily that fo the Cafe ftands.
Being under this Conviction of Mind, we
ought to omit nothing on our Part ; that may
conduce to the prefcrving thofe important Truths,
which we have fo long and fo peaceably enjoy'd ;
or that may tend to the guarding againft Errors,
that are not only moft dangerous in themfelves,
but if once entertained muft unavoidably draw
after them a Multitude of others of the like
Nature and Tendency.
T o what has been already oiTer'd, we think it
our Duty therefore to add the following Things,
which as they are of great Weight with us, fo
we hope they will not be wholly disregarded by
Thofe for whom they are more efpecially de-
fign'd.
FIRST Head of Advice.
When new Notions are vented and propaga-
ted, it does very much concern Thofe, who are
inclin'd to tamper with them, to take care they
indulge nothing in Themfelves, which may pro-
voke the Holy and Jealous God to leave them
to a Spirit of Dclufion. Every one fhould think
it his Duty, at fuch a Time more efpecially, to
fearch his Ways and narrowly to infpect his own
Heart.
It is certain, that whatever be our Notions,
an unholy Life is a damning Error in Pncticc ;
which (befides what is to be apprehended from
the juft Difpleafurc of God) will or itfclfftrong-
ly difpofe Men to Errors in Opinion. We fettif-
120 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
ly give into thofe Sentiments that are pleafingto
our corrupt Nature. The Accounts we have
of thofe who firft departed from the Faith, fhow
them to have been Perfons of no good Life, for
tho' they profejfed to know God, yet in their
Works they deny'd him. Tit. i. 16. and were
Enemies to the Power of Godlinefs, notwithstand-
ing they retain'd the Form of it. Tim. iii. 5. It
was this made way for the dangerous Errors
they fell into. Wherefore thofe Opinions are
juftly to be fufpe&ed, that are found to take moft
with Men of a corrupt or vain Converfation.
W e cannot with too fenfible a Concern, ob-
ferve the great Decay of ferious Piety there is a-
mcng us , Religion with raoft People being
dwindled into a lifelefs Form, and become the
Matter of their Speculation and Talk; but not
of their Practice. It muft. be faid to the Ho-
nour of our Forefathers, that they took care to
Adorn their Profeflion with a fuitable Life, be-
ing ordinarily Men of real Holinefs and Vertue,
Happy were it for us could we fupport an equal
Claim to the like Character ! But alas ! there
is too much Evidence of the contrary. Indeed
in Point of Knowledge we have rais'd our Pre-
tenficns to a great Height, fo as not only to equal
All that have gone before us, but to exceed
them in Clearnefs of Conception and Juftnefs of
Thought. But if whilft thus we profefs our-
felves to be wifer than our Forefathers, we fhall
fall vaftly beneath them in all the Inftances of
holy Converfation and Godlinefs, it muft needs
be a very great and inexcufable Reproach upon
us.
And if this fhould prove to be the Cafe, will
it not afford Ground to doubt of fuch Pretenti-
ons .f
of tfo ever Bleffed Trinity. 121
ons ? Is it likely God fhould make the clear-
eft and fulleft Difcoveries of himfelf to Thofe,
who fhall have that leaft at Heart, which yet
we muft fuppofe him principally to intend by fo
gracious a Vouch fakement ? Our Saviour
fpeaking of the Myfleries of the Kingdom of Hea-
ven, gives it as a Rule of Divine Conduct, that
whofcever hath (that is, makes good Ufe of his
Knowledge) to him fo all be given, and he Jh all have
more abundance, but whofcever hath not (makes
not fuch ufe of it) from him fhall be taken away
even that he hath. Matt. xiii. 11, 12. Abufed
Light is either a woful Prefage of Darknefs
coming on, or an Indication of its being already
inflicted. The Gentiles had a great Conceit of
their Wifdom and Knowledge, and yet at that
very time they ran into the fouleft Errors.
*Tis faid, 'They became vain in their Imaginations
and their foolijh H-art was darkned, prof effing them*
felves Wife they became Fuels. Rom. i. 21. If
God permitted them, even when they thought
fo well of themfelves, to difgrace their Under-
ftanding in fuch a Manner for acting contrary to
their natural Light ; have we nothing to appre-
hend for our Abufe of thofe infinitely greater Ad-
vantages we have by the fuperadded Light of
Revelation ?
When making thefe Reflections, we dare
not pafs our Judgment on any Perfons further
than their own Actions fhall evidently Condemn
them ; and fo far the Gofpel allows us to go,
which tells us that by their Fruits we fhall know
them. Matt. vii. 20. 'Tis applied there to falfe
Prophets, but may be extended farther ; for what-
ever People are, in regard of their Doctrines whe-
ther Sound or Erroneous, 'tis certain They can
R never
122 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
never be good Men, who are of a bad Life. And
it muft be the greateft Aggravation of Sin a-
bove all others to profefs the Truth and not
live under the Influence of it. This has been
fo much the Cafe of the prefent Age, that we
rear the Guilt of it is become prevailing, which
makes k the lefs ftrange, that God fhould fuf-
fer dangerous Errors, like an infectious and wafting
Plague, to break out as a righteous Judgment
upon us.
Surely it is an awful and fpeaking Provi-
dence we are under, which loudly calls upon
every one to examine himfelf, and to lay his
Sins moil deeply to Heart, nor is it enough that
we confefs them to G o d, unlefs we do as Men
in good earner!, enter w r ith fpeed and refolution
upon ah fuch Meafures as are proper and necef-
fary to rectify what is evidently amifs among
us. This.ieems to be the only Way left to aver:
the Divine Wrath.. Were it once effectually
done, and inftead of fomenting Difputes about
Matters pf the moft tranfcendent and awful
Nature,, did we heartily reform in thofe Things,
that have been too long the common Complaint,
but without due care to red refs them ; 'tis to be
hop'd, God would direct, us in a Way that
fhould end our Differences, and al fo prevent the
Judgments that otherwife threaten us and are
even at the Door.
SECOND Head of Advice.
\V h a t we would recommend in the next
Place, is earnifi Prayer to GoDtiu Father of
Lights ; that He would mercifully pre ferve us
irom all dangerous Dc&rines, and guide us in-
to
of the ever Blejfed Trinity. 12^
into the Knowledge of his faving Truth. This
mud approve itfelf to Ail that have any Scriouf-
nefs left with them, and will be defpis'd by none
but fuch as are of an Atheiftical Spirit. Prayer
is a lolemn Ordinance of God, a Duty which
none have reafon to be afham'd of, and what All,
that have any thorough Acquaintance with k^
muft highly efteem for the Benefit they have
found by it.
And what more promifing Method can we
take towards the fettling of our Minds in rela-
tion to the Points in queftion than this ? God
who beft underftands his own Nature , is beft
able to lead us into the certain Knowledge of
what He requires to be belie vM concerning
Himfclf. He being infinite and unfearchable
(for who can find out the Almighty to Perfection ?
Jib xi. 7.) can doubtlefs if He pieafes, propofe
that to our Faith which is unfathomable to our
Reafon. But in order to know whether He has
done fo, we ought previously to all our In-
quiries, to feek his Direction and Afliftance. In
doing this we fhould be very fincere, and very
importunate too , inafmuch as it is not a-
bout Matters of indifference , but .fuch as di-
re&ly concern the Object cf our TVorfhip ; and
confequently are cf the higheft Nature and Mo-
ment which muft be determined, in order to
the regulating of our religious Worfhip and
Behaviour : And it through any faulty Byaft in
us, they be not rightly determined, may prove
very hurtful if not fatal to us.
We could never want Motives to this Duty,
did we rightly confider and were we duly impreiVd'
with a Senfe of the Mifery of our Condition by
the Fail. What can be more affecting than
R 2 thofe
124 Advices concern'wgthe DOCTRINE
thole Accounts which the Scriptures give us of
it ? How great is that Darknefs which, like a
thick Veil, is fpread over the whole Mind and
Heart! Epb. iv. 18. How deplorable the Weak-
fiefs which our Faculties have contracted 1 By
reafon of which we are fo far from knowing or
difcezning the "Things of God in a right and fpi-
ritual Manner, that we are not fo much, as ca-
pable of receiving them, i Cor. xii. 14. Nor does
our Mifery lie in a bare Incapacity of Na-
ture , but a rooted Averjion and Hfttility ,
(hewing itfelf in a Way of Oppojition to fucli
a Degree, as if Enmity to GOD, were now
the chief and diftinguifhing Property of the carnal
Mind. Ro?n. viii. 7. Again , the Heart of
Man is fet forth as deceitful above all Things
and defperately Wicked. Jer. xvii. 5?. Whence
it is, that we are eaiily decoy'd and led into
Errors, but not fo aalily reclaimed from them.
And befides all this , we have a fubtil Ene-
my , who is ever watchful and ready to im-
prove the Advantages thefe give him to play
his Artifices upon us, and to make us the of-.
ficious; tho J unwary Inftruments of our own
Deftruftion. He that fhall duly confider this
as the real Condition of every Man by Nature ,
and that even by Grace we are not perfectly rid of
thefe Evils, but there are ftill large Remainders
of them in the very Bcft, mull needs fee how
little Reafon he has to truft to himfelf, but how
much to implore the gracious God that he
(who only can do it) would mercifully conduct
h,im to the favine Knowledge of ail neceiiary
Truth.
King
of the ever Blejfed Trinity. 125
King David, tho" he had many Advantages
above other private Men, yet thought it his
Intereft as well as Duty, to make this the Mat-
ter or his molt humble Supplication. Shew me
thy Ways , O Lord, teach me thy Paths, lead
me into thy 'Truth and teach me, &c. Pfal. xxv. 4,
5. We find him making the like Requeft not
lefs than fix and twenty Times in the CXIX.
Pfalm. To what mult fo importunate an Ad-
drefs be o\\ ing, but the deep Senfe he had of his
need or* God to cure his Ignorance, and pre-
ferve him from the Treachery of his own Heart ?
The Apoftle Paul pvay'd very earneftly for thofe
to whom he wrote his Epiltles, That God
would give them Under/landing in all Things. 2 Tim.
ii. 7. That the Eyes oj their Under/landing being
enlightned, they might know what is the hope of their
Calling. Eph. i. 18. And can w r e take a bet-
ter Cci rie for ourfelvcs ? JVho is there that
teachetb like GOD} Jeb xxxvi. 22. Who at the
fame tirre he propofes to us the Objects of our
Faith, can heal the diitemper'd Faculty and
give an Underflanding to difcern both Good and
Evil, Truth and Error, a Blefling which none
can bellow but himfelf.
THIRD Head of Advice.
T Prayer we arc to join the careful read-
ing and confulting of the Holy Scriptures. We
fliould be very much in the wrong, did we
judge, that after Prayer to God, we might
then very fafcly. commit ourfelves, to the iingle
Conduct of our own Reafonings ; for thus we
fhould It j 1 1 wander in the Dark : But we muft
make ufe of the Help which he hath given us m
order
n6 Advices concerning the DOC TR INE
order to affift us in our great Weakneiles, and to
fupply our vait Defects. We are to take the
BIBLE into our Hands and give diligent
heed to that, as unto a Light that fiftieth in a dark
Place. 2 Pet. i. 19. It were a dangerous Fallacy
to imagine, that becaufe we have fought the
divine Direction, we rauft thereupon be prefcived
from Miilakes , alt ho* we followed no other
Light than that of our own Reafon. This were
a Degree of wild Enthujiafm , againff w r hich,
how much foever fome may inveigh, They moft
certainly come nearer! to k, who form their
Idea's of God purely from within themfelves,
without the Affiftance of his Word, and not they,
who regulate their Conceptions of his Nature
and Worfhip altogether by it.
The Method which he is pleafed now to
take in revealing his Mind, is a Method
the molt agreeable to our reafonable Nature that
can be. And as this is done on his Part, fo that
which he expects on ours is, that we be not
wanting to ourfelves in any thing we are ca-
pable of. He hath condefcended to favour us
with his written W O R D, in which is con-
tain'd all that we need to know, believe, and
do in order to our Salvation. And whatever is
necelfary hereto, he hath deliver'd there with fo
much intelligible Piainefs, that it will be a
Man's own Fault if he perceive it not. This
Word he hath given, and appointed to be the
common Rule of every Man's Faith and Prac-
tice, who being furnifhed with natural and
moral Capacities is required to fearch into it,
John v. 3 p. and to make ufe of the Means and
Abilities, that are afforded him in Order to
find out the Scnfc of it.
J And
of the ever Bleffed T r i n i t y^ 127
And that none might impofe upon us, it is
made not only the Privilege, but the Duty of
every one to judge for himfelf. But tho 5 it be
fo we are diligently to obferve, that it is not
leftabfolutely to our Liberty to think and judge
as we pleafe. We are no more to put or force a
Senfe upon the Scriptures, by any preconceived
or private Notions of our own, and thereby to
make a Faith to ourfelves, than others are to
do it for us ; but muft take them in their
own Senfe, which is the common Senfe in which
all are to underftand them. And this being
(as has been faid) in all Things neceflary to Sal-
vation fufficiently plain, it' a Man ihall notwith-
ftanding this fall into Error, it will be no Ex-
cufe for him to fay, that he apprehended the
Scriptures in another Senfe than God intended
them.
However to prevent this, we muft beware
of being infeparably attached to thofe Notions
we have preconceived by the bare and unaflift-
ed Light ot our natural Reafon, but muft take
Care to regulate thefe Notions of ours by the
Scriptures, and not to govern the Senfe of Scri-
pture by them, which were all one with a
Man's pretending to correct the Light of the
Sun by holding a Candle to it. In order to un-
derftand the true Senfe of the Scriptures, we
muft according to Reafon and the Practice of all
true Proteftants hitherto, let them be their own
Interpreter , and explain their own Meaning.
This we fhall do by finding out the Occa-
fion and Defign of their feveral Parts; the Scope
of the Argument that is treated of j the Con-
nexion of any particular Place with what .goes
before and alter ; the genuine Meaning of the
Words
128 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
Words by comparing them with other Places
and taking them according to the Intention of
the V/riter in this or that particular Place. And
when by obferving of thefe or any other allowed
and reafonable Rules of Interpretation, it fhall
manifeftly appear, that fuch a Propofition or
fuch a DocTrine is taught us, we are bound to
believe it, altho' the Doctrine fo taught be vaft-
ly above and altogether incomprehensible to our
Reafon. For as the great Chillhigxmrth hath
well obferv'd. l^o Demonstration can be ftronger
than this, GOD hath faid fo , and therefore it
mufi be true.
Besides this, we have the Liberty of making ufe
of any further additional Helps, which are af-
forded us by the Difcourfes and Writings of thole
who have purpofely treated of thefe Points, and
have made it their ftudy, to fhow what Scrip-
ture Evidence there is on the Side of the com-
monly received Faith, and to difco^.erthe Falla-
cies of thofe who have endeavoured to embarafs
and pervert it. And doubtlefs it is but prudent
and juft, as well as our Duty not rafhly to
go over to a new Faith before we have calm-
ly and impartially heard, read, and confider'd,
what is to be faid in vindication of the O/d.
But (till in the Ufe of thefe, or any other
Means, our chief Dependance mufi: be upon
God, without whofe Affiftance and Blefling,
we are liable and but too prone through the na-
tural Prejudices and Corruptions of our Hearts
to fall into Miftakes ; which Confi deration fhould
ever mind Us of our Duty, and make us in all
our fearches after Truth to be very earned: with
God , that He would of en our Under (landings as He
did that of the Difcipks that ive ma) under/land
the
of the ever Bleffed Trinity- 129
the Scriptnres, Luke xxiv. 45. and behold the won-
drous Things contained in his Law. Pfal. cxix. 11 8,
FOV RT H Head of Advice.
And j:hat we may not fail of this great and
neceffary Bleffing, the Principal Duty, that is
indifpenfably required on our Part, is a Meek
and humble Difpojition of Mind y which is the laft
Thing we fhall take the Liberty to recommend
in a more particular and efpecial Manner.
I t is faid that the Meek he will guide in
judgment, and the Meek he will teach his Way.
Pfal. xxv. p. It is twice mentioned, the more to
invite our Notice, and affect us with a Senfe
or its Neceffity and Importance. This is the
beft Preparatory in order to gain a true and right
Knowledge of Spiritual Things, and the fitted
Temper of Mind to fecure our Intereft in the
Prom ife. It concerns us therefore to underftand
wherein it lies, that we may accordingly apply
our Endeavours for the obtaining of it.
W e think it proper in the firfl Place to illu-
flrate it by its Contraries, which, tho' we fhall
but tranfiently glance upon , deferve however to
be confider'd with all the Deliberation and Se-
rioufnefs that is poffible.
They then that are truly meek and humble
do avoid, as much as may be, all angry and
wrathful Paffions, as knowing that the Wrath of
Man worketh not the Righteoufnefs of GOD,
James i. 20. ' They are not of a proud and hafty,
a fierce and furious Spirit, that will bear no
Contradiction.
They entertain no fuch fond Conceit ot their
own Opinions or Reafonings, as fhall make them
S defpife
120 Advices eoncern'wa the DOCTRINE
■dcfpife and run down thofe, who do not in all
Things conceive as they dc, and are far from
engrofling all Knowledge and all Wifdom to
them felves. As if they were the People, and IVif-
dun mufl die with them. J ob xii. 2.
Thi y are not of a bold and prefuming Temper,
and think thcmfdves capable, and affect, to pry
into the fecret "Things of GOD, which do not
belong to us. Dent. xxix. 29.
Thiy are not of a captious and cavilling
Humour, and be apt to wrangle about every
Thing, and delight to ftar-r. Dilficulties, even
where there are none.
T h e y are not of fuch a litigious and ftuborn
Spirit, as rather then own a Miftake, to main-
tain an Oppolition, tho' all Objections have been
fairly anfwer'd.
They are far from taking Delight in fetting
People at variance, in caufing Divilions, or pro-
moting Animclities and Strifes among fellow
Christians, but greatly lament and bewail them.
Being delirous to know the Truth ,
They do not furfer themfelves to be biafs'd by
any felfifh Views. They practice no Deceits.
They put on no Masks or falfe Drefles. They
appear not in an outward Shew only of Humili-
ty. They make no ufe of Diffimulations or
cunning Arts to cover or palliate their fecret
Sentiments. They have recourfe to no finifler
and unfair Methods in propagating their No-
tions, cr bringing thofe under Difcredit and Dif-
reputaticn that differ from them.
All which foremention'd Inltances make up
the Scripture Account that is given of thofe,
who, in the Apojlolic Times, did endeavour to
pervert the Gcfpel of Chrift. Who iiiftead of
being
of the ever Blejfed Trinity. 131
being meek and humble, were proud Boaflers of
themf elves, heady, high minded, fierce Defpifers of
thcfe that are good, having a Form of Godlinefs but
denying the Power thereof (a). Eifewhere they
are defcribed as Wolves in Sheep's Chathing (if).
As thofe that caufed Divifions and Offences con-
trary to the Doclrine that had been received, and by
good Words and fair Speeches deceiving the Hearts of
the Simple (c). Ufing Slights and cunning Craftinefs
whereby they lay in wait to deceive (d). Creeping in-
to Hrufes and leading captive filly Women, fee. (e)
From all which the primitive Chriftians were
carefully warned and exhorted by the Apoilles
to turn away, and to r.v- id them (f).
In like Manner it is our Duty, not only
needfully to watch againft thefe Evils in ourfelves,
and to keep at a Diitance from fuch as practice
them, but to follow the wholfome Counfel that
is given by the Apoftles St. Peter and St. James,
which is, that laying afide All Malice, and Ah l
Guile, and Hypocrijies, and Envies, and All evil
Speakings, and All Fihhinefs, and Superfluity of
Naughtinefs , we do, as new bom Babes, (that is,
v. ith an harmlefs and humble Mind) defire the
fincere Milk<f the Word (g).
And mw, this excellent Temper and Difpo-
fition does take place in us; when we arc truly
fenfible of our own Deiecls, and pay a juft Def-
ference to thofe Gilts and Graces we difcern in
Others.
When we are tradable and willing to be
(0 Tm. iii. 2. *. ('') Maith. vii. ty. U) R',r. xvi. 17. 18
(iy Eil'. >v 14. In a T.m. iii 5. (/) )\tm. xvi 17. (g) 1 I'm _
u. a. James 1. 21.
S 2 in-
i$2 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
inftrufte'd, inclin'd to hear what is offered, and
lay cur feives open to Conviction.
When we are dipaffionate, fedate and calm,
ready to give every thing its due Weight and
Conlideration.
When we are candid and fincere , fair and
above board, honeft and impartial.
When we are peaceable, gentle, and eafy to be
intreated, taking up with what is reafonable for
Satisfaction, counting it no Dishonour to own
our Miftakes , or if it be ,• are willing to take
the Shame of it, and glad to receive the Evi-
dence of Truth from whatever Hand it comes.
When our Spirits are really broken under
an abating Senfe of our Sin and Guilt, our Vile-
nefs and Mifery ; being deeply convinced of the
abfolute need we have of Salvation, and yet the
great Obflacles that lie in the Way to it from
the extreme Corruption of our Nature and the
Malice of the Evil one.
When our chief Solicitude is to know the
Truth as it is in yefus, and in order to that,
have our chief Dependance upon GoDto guide
us in our Inquiries after it.
When we reverence his Word above all
Tilings, obey its Counfels, fubmit to its Au-
thority, filence the Mutterings of Unbelief, and
quafh the Objections of proud and carnal Rea-
fon againft its plain Dictates. And, in a Word,
when this is made the chief End of all our In-
quiries, that we may know the Will ci God
in order to obey it.
These are the Things pointed at in all fuch
Paflages of Scripture which direct us to a Con-
cern for our Souls more than any other
Thins
of the ever Bleffed Trinity. 13$
Thing, (V) which fpeak of theKnowledge of Salvati-
on as the principal 'Thing (b). Which direct us to
bafe ourfelves (c), and ailure us that God rejifieth
the Proud, but giveth Grace to the Humble (d). That
he hideth from the Wife and Prudent^ what he is
pleafed to reveal to Babes and Sucklings (e). Which
exhort that if any Alan feem to be wife, he become
a Fool that he may be wife, becaufe he that, is
puffed up and thinketh that he knov*eth any things
the fame knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know (f).
Which advife us not to lean to our own Under/landing,
but to acknowledge GOD in all our Ways (g). and
affurcs us that he that trufleth 'his own Heart ij a
Fool (h). Which requires us to fpeak the Truth in
Love (i), to be fwift t) hear, flow to Wrath (k)
to do nothing through Strife and vain Glory, but in
lowlinefs of Mind to efleem ethers better than our [elves
(/). And finally to cajl down Imaginations and every
high thing that exaketh itfelf ' again (I the Knowledge of
GOD, and to bring into Captivity every thought to
the Obedience of C h r i s t (m).
Advantages of the foregoing
Advice.
I n all thefe Particulars it is our Duty to fhow
the unfeigned Meeknefs and Humility of our
Spirits. Thefe are what the Scriptures largely
infift upon and very much inculcate, wherefore
we fhould endeavour by all the Motives of Per-
fvvalion to exhort one another to them. And
(«) Mttth. xvi. ;6. (t) Prtv.iv. 7 (c) Matth. xrm. 1 2. (d) J,n.
Jv.'iS. (r) Matt. xi. 2$, (j) 1 C.r. viii. i, 2. (^J Tr v. in i&
(b) Ibid xxvin. 26 (>) Efk. iv. 15. (() Jiw j, 15 (/; nn
II- 3. (ctJ 2 Or, x. s-
certainly
I 34 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
certainly there is nothing of greater Confequence
in the prefent Cafe, or that would more effectu-
ally prepare our Hearts for the Divine Inftruc-
tion. This Humility as it is the Qualification
God requires on our Part ; fo were we once
thoroughly poffefs'd of it, we fhould foon per-
ceive its blelfed Effects many Ways.
For were Men of this meek and humble
Spirit, could we practice it in all the Inftances
that have been mentioned; and more particu-
larly did we fhow it in the deepeft Concern about
the chief Affair our Salvation ; were we duly
feniible of our loft Condition by Nature, and
fully convinced how much depends in Relation
to our everlafting Happinefs in another World,
upon a right Belief of thofe great Doctrines,
Tvhich are now dlfputed ; how many Impedi-
ments might it remove out of our Way 1
One would hope it would prove an effec-
tual Means, in the firjl Place, to deliver thofe
from their Scepticifm and Indifference, who would
feign imagin it to be of no great Moment, which
fide of the Queftion is held in the prefent Con-
troverfy, that is y whether they affirm the Son
and Holly S p i r i t to be of the fame undi-
vided Nature with the F a t h e r, or deny that
they are (o, or fufpend their Belier. And ac-
cordingly whether they Worfhip them as one
God, or different in Nature, or (being in doubt)
worfhip they know not what. It is very fur-
prizing, that Things of this Import, fhould ever
be looked upon with fuch Indifference. Bat were
Men deeply humbled under a right View of their
moft wretched Condition by reafon ot Sin, and
were they brought under the laft degree of Con-
cern
of the ever Biejfed Trinity. "135
cefn to know how they might be faved ; doubt-
lefs they would think it ot great Moment with
regard both to their Comfort here ana Safety
hereafter, to underftand what a Saviour and what
a SanLlifier they have to truft to, and how they
ought to demean themieives towards them.
And as in fnch a Cafe thefe Things would
appear to be of no fmall Confequence, To would
they be exceeding vary how they lell into Mis-
takes about them. They would be very ferious
in their Inquiries about Matters of fo folemn a
Nature, and very fearful cr offending God, to
whom alone they mult be beholden ior the true
and faving Knowledge cr them. In treating of
thefe Things they would endeavour to excite the
moil: becoming Awe in their Spirits, and to be-
have themieives in fuch a Manner, as fliould
teftify the profound Reverence they have cr the
Holy and Infinite Majefty cf God. They are
the Unfenfible, thePrcud, and the Profane, that
make them the Subject cf familiar Talk, and
bandy them about in common Convcrfation
with a light and vain Mind, to the great Dif-
honour of Religion and Grief of all gcod Men :
but they that have any becoming Apprehensi-
ons of G o d, that knew the infinite Diitance
there is between him and them, cr have a juft
Senie cf their own Cf.fe; v, culd be very cau-
tious how they male held with the melt fpcred
Myfteries cf his 11 lcruiT.Lle Nature, for fear
left his Jealoufy beirg enkindled, he fhculd fanc-
tify him felt upon them by fen e Hidden and ex-
amplary Token cf his D.'fpleafure.
Besidis, were Men's Spirits fuft'ciertlv
fubdu'd and humbled, would ic net greatly tend
to leffen thefe Difficulties which now they make
fuch
1 36 Advices concerning the D OCIRINE
fuch a Stir about? 'Tis probable they would
not think it fo hard a Matter for God, whom
they acknowledge to be incomprehenfible in his
Nature, to propofe fuch Things for the Object
of their Faith, which are incomprehenfible to
their Underftanding ; thereby to try their Faith,
their Submiffion and Obedience. They would
not be fo ready to explode a Doctrine concerning
his infinite Being, becaufe they cannot bring it
to the Level of their finite and {hallow Capacities,
nor would they confidently prefume to charge it
with Contradictions, and, under Pretence of a-
voiding them, run themfelves into thofe that are
really and palpably fo. They would not be fo
forward in concluding nothing to be true, but
w r hat they are able to underftand, and thereby
exalt (contrary to the Proteftant Principle) their
own poor Reafon above the Divine Revelation,
and make That, in effect, and not this, the Stan-
dard of Truth and final Determiner of what is
right or wrong, true or falfe.
Nay, might we not expect, They would
judge it a high Degree of Arrogance to pry into
thofe Things, which God has concealed with-
in himfelf, as we juftly deem thofe to be very
bad Servants, who (tho* it were only out of Cu-
riofity) fhould attempt to open and look into a
Secret, of which, their Matter had not entrufted
them with the Key. And would they not think
it very rude to form Difputes about the facred
My fleries cf our Religion, which in the Nature of
Propofitions are plainly enough revealed, merely
becaufe they cannot explain the Manner cfthem?
s Tis likely, they would judge it highly difho-
nourable, not to believe what God fays of him-
felf, unlefs he fhow them how it can be fo j as
it
of the ever Blejfed Trinity. 137
it would in fome Cafes be a high Affront to an
honeft Man, not to believe what he folemnly
affirms, unlcfs he demonitrate the Thing to them,
or let them fee it with their own Eyes. They
would more ealily trace the fearful Confequen-
cesof fuch a Carriage,and obferve how it not only
deflroys all -Divine Faith, by leaving nothing to
be receiv'd upon the bare "T.ftimony of God
concerning himfelf, but opens a wide Door to
Infidelity and downright Atkeifm. Fcr if we
will believe nothing, till all the Difficulties our
wanton Minds may ftart about it are anfwer'd,
we muft remain Unbelievers for ever.
A s thefe are the advantageous and falutary
Effects, which a meek and humble Temper does
naturally tend to produce ; fo for thefe Reafons,
we cannot but recommend and prefs it with ail
the Earneflnefs that the Cafe deferves. We are
certain that this is the only fure Way of attain-
ing to the Knowledge of the Truth in thefe
Points, not only from the Nature of the Thing,
but becaufe it is the Way which God hath ex-
prefly inftituted for this End, with the Additi-
on or his gracious Promife for our Encourage-
ment. And indeed, without fuch a Temper as
this, we fliall have but little Comfort by entring
into Difputes ; tor unlefs Men can be brought to
fubmit their corrupt and captious Reafon to the
Authority ot G o d's Word, and acquiefce in his
fole Tejltmony concerning thefe tranfeendent and
fublime Matters , it is not in our Power, nor do
we pretend by any other Arguments to convince
them. And lince we all profefs to be feeking
Truth, there is no ingenuous or impartial Perfon
can be averfe to that , which is the only way
ot coming at it ; efpecinllv in this Cafe, where
the Qucft'on is of fuch Moment.
T 7,V
*}8
Advices comtrnino the D0CJR1KE
t>
The Case Argud,
God knows how far ft is from our Dcfign
to irxreafc the Prejudices of Thofe we would
endeavour to perfwade ,• yet we muft be faith-
ful. We are willing to take to Ourfelves the
Siiame of all that Blindnefs , Vanity, and De-
ceit we find in our own Hearts, and hope that
Thofe to whom we now apply, will take it as no
Reflection, that we think' them to have their
Share of the fame Corruption, it being what is
common to Mankind; for which Reafch we have
all Caufc enough to be humble. We would by
no Means leflen thofe valuable Abilities, which
God hath bellow 'd upon any, but we crave leave
to remind them or that faying, Knowledge
puffetb up y i Ccr. viii. i. Great Parts, whether
natural or acquired , have oft-times prov'd a
dangerous .Temptation, and the worlt Errors
have been cbfervM to proceed from Men of the
moft fubtil Wit.
Those are not always on the furclt Side,
that have got the Art of Thinking out of the com-
mon Way. We may affirm this, in relation to
the necellary Articles of our Faith. Here what
is mod com iron is moft true, for what is ne-
cellary to Salvation, God would have believ'd
by All, and therefore Perfons of the greateft
Attainments have rcafon to fufpect themfelves,
v. hen departing from that which has been gene-
rally believ'd by ChrifHans of all forts, a few
only (and that but now and then) excepted.
Ard grant that fome of Thofe who efpoufe the
new Notions, are Men of Learning j yet what
Pretentions can they make, which others of the
contrary Sentiments may not do with equal
lullice ? What Skill have they in the original
Van*
of the ei/er feleffed Trinity. 1^9
Languages, which others have not had to as great
a Degree ? What fair and juft Rules of Inter-
pretation have they follow'd, which the other
have not done ? What Strictriefs and Impartiality
have the One ufcd in their Inquiries, that can-
not (at leaft with equal Truth) be faid of the
other ?
And have they no Ground for Sufpicion iri
themfelves, when diffenting from the whole Chri-
flian Church in Points that have been fo often
and narrowly cxamin'd ? Which tho' fometimes
opposed by bold and crafty Men, were never
long doubted ofj but have been the more efla-
blifn d, by how much the greater Fury it is
with which they have been attacked. Has the
Catholick Church been all along in an Error about
thefe great Doctrines, or have they hitherto wor-
shiped they knew not w hat ? Then every Chri^
fhan Temple fhould have the fame Infcription
upon it, as was upon the Athenian Altar. T o
the unknown god, A£ls y xvii. 2 3 . Then
the Apoftle was in an Error, when he faid, /
know whom 1 have believed, 2 Tim. i. 12. Is it
the Defign of the Scriptures to direct us only in
the Manner of worlhip, and leave People to form
Conceptions of the ObjeSi as they think proper ?
Or is it not to give a more diftinct Account of
the Object, and from thence to fhew us how we
ought to worfhip Him ? Should they not for
Modcfty Sake entertain fome Jealoufy'of their
Notions, rather than condemn in an unreafon-
able, as well as uncharitable Manner, the whole
Chriftian World ?
Are they certain they have no Caufc of
Miftruft ; no Ground of Fear on their Part?
Not any at all ? tho' God hath told us that the
Jh Art of Man /'/ deceitful above all 1'hingi, and
T 7- deft*-
140 Advices concerning the DOCTR 1NE
defperately Wicked? Are they fure they have no
latent Evil in them that might difpleafe the Al-
mighty ? Have not learned Men and Minifters
their peculiar Temptations ? And is not Satan
ufually more bufy with them in relation to thefe
Matters than with others, as knowing how much
more it will turn to his Account, it' he can but
draw them into a Snare ? Should they not upon
fueh an Occalion put to Themfclves all the clofe
Queftions that are proper ? For our Part we de-
lire ftrictly to judge ourfelves, nor would we re-
ly wholly upon our own Scrutiny, but beg of
God, that he would fearcb us, and know our
Hearts, that he would try us and know our 'Thoughts,
and fee if there be any wicked Way in us, and lead
us in the Way everlafting. Pfal. exxxix. 23 . We think
it r.o Breach ot" Chriilianity to befeech others to
do the like. Is there not a Caufe ? Surely it is a
Time of Temptation, and fhall we not inquire
wherefore God is come to prove us, and that in
the very Matters of our Faith ?
VV e have no fmall Conflict in ourfelvcs to
behave aright under this fad Difpenfation of
Providence. We are afliir'd on the one Hand,
that God is a jealous God, who trieth the
Reins and Heart, keeping a watchful Eye upon
us : And wo unto us, if through our Fault the
Truth fhall fufter and our People be milled by
the Slight cf Men, and cunning Craft inefs. And
yet on the. other Hand, we muff be very cauti-
ous left we tranfgrefs thofe Rules of Charity
which the Gcfpel prescribes. We defire to keep
a Ccnfcience void of Often ce towards God and
towards Men. We are fure it is our Duty
to hold f 'aft the faithful Wird, Tit. i. 9. To con-
tend earneftly fir the Faith, which was once deli er-
td to the Saints, Jud.iiL And Christ in his En-
tile
of the ever Bleffed Trinity. 141
file to the Church in Pergamos commends her,
that fhe held faft his Name and bad not deny &
his Faith, Rev. ii. 13.
Our Charity then muft never be in Preju-
dice of the Truth. Tis certain we are not to
judge the hidden Principles and Motives of
Men's Hearts, nor are we eagerly to contend
with them about Things that have no neceflary
Connexion with their Salvation, neither are we
to determine any thing concerning their final
State : But yet it* by Charity and a Catholic Spirit,
any fhall intend an indolent and carelefs Temper,
that fhall leave Men to an unbounded Liberty
of Opinion, without making a Difference as to
the Doctrines they hold ; \\ e are fatisfy'd there
is a Snare in it, and that fuch a Charity can be
no way acceptable to God. For this would
neither confift, with the Zeal we are requir'd to
exprcfs for thofe Truths that are eflential to our
Religion, nor with that unfeigned Love we are
bound to fhew to the precious Souls of Men.
The Gofpel Charity indeed obliges us to hate
no Man's Perfon, but to manifeft a Love to al!,
but then for this very Caufe we ought to tefti-
fy our Dill ike of their dangerous Doctrines, even
as Christ himfelf is faid to hate the Doctrine
of the Nicolatians, Rev. in. 1 5. For wherein can
we exprefs our Love better, than by a faithful
Warning them of thofe Errors, which may other-
w lie prove fatal to them, and by ufing our Endea-
vours to deliver them from the Danger they are
in > We acknowledge that as to the Manner of
doing this, our Charity does further oblige us
to uCc all thcfe Methods that are proper in the
Caffe, which are by no means thofe of outward
C<)nfulfum and Force , but thofe of Argument
and Pafcaji.n, we are r do all with the Spirit
of
142 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
of Meeknefs, but we mult not let them alone,
or indolently fulFer them to go on in any damning
Error, for this would be no Charity but rather
a hating them in our Heart, Lev. xix. 17. And
how much is it to be winYd, that as to all thefe
forementioned particulars, the Parties on both
Sides might have their Confciences, bearing them
witnefs that they make it their fincere Endeavour
to keep ftricUy to the Rule.
Motives 0/ Perswasion.
And what in all the World would be more
pleafing and joyful to us, than to find God prof-
pcring our Attempts to the recovering ot
any among us that are taken with the new
Scheme , which how plaufible foever it may
appear has> in our Judgment, a very danger-
ous Tendency, and the more for that Var-
nifli, which Men of Learning and Wit have
put upon it. We are truly concerned, that
fuch Notions fhould be broached and propagated
any where, but it afflicts us in a particular
Manner, to find any among ourfelves in danger
of being infected with them. There are many
Confidcrations to render this exceeding grievous
to us, which they muft be appreheniive of as
well as we ; but the greateft Grief of all is to
reflect on the Snare they are fallen into, and the
dangerous Confequence of it to themfelves and
others. It would no way become the Friendfllip
we have always proreffed, nor the Relation we
bear to them on a Spiritual Account, did we
not exprefs the tendereft Concern on fo lamen-
table an Occafion.
W 1. pcrfwade ourfelves, it can hardly be in
their Power to imagine we have any Delign up-
on them, but that oi' their Good. There is no
Te mp-
of the ever Blejfed Trikity. 145
Temptation to move us to the contrary, and we
have too great a Regard to the Intereft in which,
from a pure Principle of Confcience, we are im-
bark'd, to do any thing that might weaken or
impair it. They know themfelves the hearty
Refpcft that has been always paid them, and
how ready we have been to miniiter all the kind
Offices that have lain in our Power, to further
and comfort them in their Work. If there fhall
be any Debate, it cannot owe its Rife to per-
fonal Pique on our Part, but only to that juft and
neccflary Concern we are bound to have for the
moft facred Truths of the Gofpel, the Honour
of the Redeemer, and the Welfare of their own
and other Mens Souls. They are confcious that
no Doctrines have by us, and all the reformed
Churches, been ever rcckon'd of greater Impor-
tance in the whole Chriftian Religion, than thofe
that are now difputed, nor any Opinions more
dangerous than thofe that are repugnant to the
proper Divinity of our Saviour and that of the
Holy Spirit. For which Caufe they have all the
Reafon in the World, to impute thefe our En-
deavours to a Chriftian and Friendly Deiign.
W e hope they \\ ill accept them as fuch, and
therefore we beg leave to intreat them by all the
Intereft v e have ever had in their Eiieem and
Affection, to befeech them for God and their
Souls Sake, to receive what v e have thus laid
before them into their moft ferious Confiderati-
on. We paflionately conjure them to do it with
all that Calmnefs and Sedatenefs of Mind, with
that Mcekncfs and Humility of Spirit we have
been fo tree as to recommend to them.
Wf. pray them to reflect on the deplorable Prof-
pect, which a Difference about Points of this
Nature muft needs open to them and us. For
ftiould
144 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
ihould they diffent from us in thefe Matters,
how great a Breach will it in all likelyhood
caufe among us ! For feeing we cannot but
think it an effential Duty in our Religion, to
worftlip the Son and Spirit as one God, of the
feme Subflance with the Father, fhould they judge
otherwife and deny them to be fo, How will they
be able, with any good Confcience, to join with us,
when according to their fuppofed Sentiments,
we muft be chargeable with the Sin of Idolatry
for our fo worfhipping of God. ? And how fhall
We on the other Hand be able to join in Worihip
and Communion with them, that ihall refufe that
Honour to the Son and Holy Ghoft which we be-
lieve to be indifpenfibly their Due ? And what muft
be the Confequence of this, but their feparating
from us, or our withdrawing from them, were
it only upon this Account ; not to mention other
Caufes, that will necenarily flow from a Diffe-
rence in fuch eflential and fundamental Points as
thefe ? And will not this greatly fadden our
own, and the Hearts of all good People, to fee
things brought to fuch a pafs ? To obferve that
comely Band of Union and delightful Harmony,
which has fo long obtained among us, difTolv'd.
and broken ? To hnd that we who were wont to
worfhip God and take fwcet Counfel together,
that liv'd as Brethren in fo much Love and Peace,
to divide and feparate from one another ? What
can be more afflicting !
Add to this the warm Difputcs, which a
Dilfention about thefe Things will mofl proba-
bly (it not unavoidably) create. The bitter
Strifes it may occaiion through human Frailty,
and Satan with his Instruments continually blow-
ing the Coals. What a fore Exercife will this
prove, to fuch as arc ot a chriflian, meek and
peace-
of the ever Bleftd Trinity. 14$
peaceable Spirit ? Yea, wlnt a Hindrance to all
the more delightfull and profitable Performances
of the Minifterial Office ? Tnefe are Infelicities
that are obvious to every One. But when the
Corruptions of Men fliall be ftirred up, their
Paffions inflam'd, and their Spirits exafperated
one againft another, who can fee to the End ot
all thofe Calamities and Miferies which thefe may
be the Caufes of ? Young and unexperienced
Heads for the moft Part have little Thought oi'
thefe Things, but grave and wife Perfons can-
not think of them without much Grief and Sor-
row of Heart.
Besides this, what an unexpreflible Diftur-
bance will it give to Multitudes of poor People,
to obferve Thofe, that fhould teach them the
Way to Heaven, and inftrucl: them in the Know-
ledge of faving Truth, failing out among Them-
felves and contending with the greatelt Eager-
nefs and ObfHnacy about the moft ellential
Points ? What a Temptation will this prove to
the loofer Part ? Into what endlefs Perplexities
may it caft the Honeft and well Meaning ? And
how great an Obftru&ion in general will it be to
the Succefs of the Gofpel ? Who, that has the
Concern of Souls, the Intereft of Religion, and
the Honour of God at Heart, can rerlecl: on
thefe Things without bitter Anguifli oi' Spirit ?
Surely thefe are not Matters lightly to be palled
over. God will obferve how we carry it under them.
W e can profefs in great Truth, that the more
we think of thefe Thing,, the more difconfolate
it makes us. Were Perfecution for Righteoufnefs
fals what we only dreaded; we fhould not be with-
out our Support under fuch a fore Rebuke of Pro-
vidence ; but the Profpeft which thefe give us is Co :
difmal, that it leavesusin a Manner wjthoutCom-
forr, as indeed itdeferve< to be dreaded more than
U any
1 46 Advices concerning the DOCTRINE
any mere outward Sufferings whatfoever. Such
Reflections as thefe, ought they not to excite and
jjuftity the utmoft Endeavours we can ufe in put-
ing the fpeedieft Stop that is poffible to Evils fo
deftructive and pernicious ?
A is d can they with whom we have to do, be
no way touched with thefe Things ? Mud it
not grieve them to leave ourAflemblies, to fepa-
rate from their old Acquaintance and hearty
Friends ? Muft it not grieve them to fee their
dear Relatives and Others weeping and lamenting
for them ? Muft it not afted them to behold the fad
Divifions and Diftraclions which this may caufe,
(if God prevent not) to the Difcredit and Weak-
ning of that Intereft, which hitherto they have
thought the beft, and durft not defert thro';! any
Profpect of worldly Advantages, or any Fear of
Hardfhips and Sufferings ? Would it not afRicl:
them, were it only to obferve the Doubts, the
Fears, the Uncertainty of Spirit, the grievous Per-
turbations which this muft caufe in the Minds of
Others? And to fay no more, muft it not trouble
them, to fee none rejoicing but Infidels and Athe-
ifis, who will hereby be tempted more ftrongly
man ever, to think there is nothing at all in Re-
ligion, when the principal Points oi it are call'd in
Queftion, even by thofe that profefs it ?
The ferious Consideration of thefe Things,
is enough to move the Heart of any one, and
cannot but be a fufficient Warrant not only to
us but every Body elfe to do what in them lies
to prevent fuch unfpeakable Mifchiets. No
Motives or Arguments fhould be negle&ed, no
Prayers or Intreaties wanting, no Means omitted
that have any Tendency to anfwer fo defirablc
an End. We do therefore in the moft tender
and affectionate Manner renew our importunate
Requefts to thefe our Friends that they would
in
of the ever Bleffed Trinity. 147
in the Fear of God, and with all the Regard
that is due to Confcience, obferve and follow
in the (Iritteft Manner thofe Precautions and
Counfels we have humbly ofter'd.
We have the greater Reafon to hope they
will comply with this our Requeft, becaufe
Thofe , at leaft, of the Brethren here, that
incline to favour the new Scheme, have not yet
(fo far as we can learn) fully, openly, and pe-
remptorily declared themfelves ; but feem ra-
ther to be in doubt only about thefe Mat-
ters, tho* we are forry that by any Methods,
whether clandefUnly or openly , they fhould di-
ffract the Minds of People with thofe Doubts of
theirs, before they were fully determined in their
own Minds. How ardently is it to be wifh'd
that we might ftill continue to think and /peak
the fame 'Things ! We would befeech them there-
fore in the Words of the infpir'd Apoftle, that if
there be any Conflation in Chrifl, if any Comfort of
Love, if any Fellow/hip of the Spirit, if any Bowels
cf Mercy, they would fulfill our jfoy, in being like-
minded, having the fame Love and Being of one Ac-
cord, of one Mind with uf, Phil. ii. i, 2.
For our Part, might we be fo happy as to pre-
vail, we harbour no fuch ill Will againft rhem, we
have no fuch Averfion or Prejudice to their Per-
fons, that can hinder us, upon their fincere and
hearty acknowledging of theTruth, from receiving
them again with the moit friendly Embraces.
We can allure them, that as nothing could hi-
therto make a Diviiion among us, fo that nothing
fhalldo it, fave what they make themfelves, and
that in the Mattel's of our G d. They cannot be
infenfible of the Joy that we, and thoufands
more theirFriends, would conceive upon their Re-
turn ; and fhould it pleafe G o d to crown thefc
our poor Labours with Succefs, we will vow all
the>
1 48 A d vi ces concerning the DOCTRINE
the Glory of it toHimfelf, and he fhall inherit
the manyPraifes and Thankfgivings of ourHearts.
But it' what we have thus attempted fhall
have no Effect, but on the contrary be rejected
and defpis'd (which God forbid J) tho' it will
be to the fore Grief of our Souls, yet we fhall
have this to reflect upon, as fome Matter of Com-
fort, that we have not been wanting in our En-
deavours to reclaim them, that we have afford-
ed them our Affiftance, and done it as far as
we are able, with all the Temper and Mo-
deration that the Gofpel requires, that is con-
fident with Faithfulnefs , or that the Impor-
tance of the Cafe will admit. That we hare
thus far the anfzuer of a good Conference, and mltft
do ourfelves' the Juftice to fay that we (land but
where we were, That they have left us and the
Truth not we them , and they mull be anfwer-
able for all the fad Confcquences that fhall en-
fue upon this unhappy pifrerencc. They have de-
parted from the Doctrine that has been all along
received among us ; T'bey have been very much
the Occafion of all the I)iftrac~tion that is in the
Minds of poor People ; "They have difturb'd the
Quiet of our Churches,- And what We have done
has been only in neceffary Defence ol ourfelves
and the mofi important Truths oi our Salvation :
nor this, till with great Concern of Heart, we
found them many Ways invaded. Should we upon
fo loud a Call as this, have fat wholly ftill, wc
could never have anfwer'd it to G o d , to his
Church, M our own Conferences, to the pre fen t
and fun: - Generations, but had been juitly the
Rep- 1 of the whole Ci.riftian World, and m-
dec . or all Mankind.
ISIow to the Father, Son and HJj Ghvft, three Per*
fins, but One only eternal G D, be Pralfe and
Dominion fir ever and ever. A M t n.
FI1VI&
j0*fti..
<m
J!? *' : "
*\~ —*
IE