YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

THOUGHTS

ON THE'

TRIM I T Y,

THO U G H TS

ON TH*

TRINITY,

By GEORGE ISAAC HUNTINGFORD,
Df D. F. R?S.
WARDEN OF WINCHESTER COLLEGE,
AND
BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER.

" Nor let thine own inventions hope
f< Things not reveal'd." Milt. Par. L. B. VII. 121.
" Win ftraying fouls, with modefly, again ;
" Caft none away." Shakes p. Hen. VIII. V. iii.

LONDON:
PRINTED FQR T. CADELL AND W. DAVIES,
IN' THE STRAND,
BY NICHPLS A.NB SpN, RED-LION-FASSAGEj FLEET-STRSET,
1804.

( v )
TO
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
H ENTRY ' ABB IN ©TON.
Dear Sir,
W HEN we look at Great Britain as a
well-regulated Nation, we find in its Establish
ments several, causes, which should make us
admire its sound judgment, great wisdom,
and right dispositipn. There is however one
subject of contemplation, which is particu
larly ihterefting and highly gratifying to a
serious mind. It is this. Our Country may
be considered as dedicated to the worship and
glory of Almighty God ! For such is the
nature of our Constitution, that it is not only
provident for the due direction of human
A3 concerns.

( vi )
concerns, but with great sollicitude it extends
also its attention to the inculcating and ad
vancing of continual regard for things divine.
With its public institutions of Civil Polity it
so' blends Religion, that with the spirit of
Liberty is indiflblubly combined a spirit of
Sanctity ; and both equally pervade our Laws,
It is in perfect correspondence with this
idea of National Consecration, that the King,
by our Constitution, is invested with authority
to take the lead in Religion. And amidst
th~e"various and awful circumstances, which
during the course of many late years past have
materially affected several Nations of Europe,
a great blessing it has been to our Empire
that its Sovereign, by a moral and pious
life, has fulfilled his solemn and sacred obli
gation in a manner exemplary and on prin
ciples conscientious. Thai-

( vii, )
That a. Monarch, who is actuated by a
sense of duty to God and Man, should at a
season of difficulty have consigned the ad
ministration of public business to your care,
was an appointment naturally to have been
expected. For, discerners of character, who
themselves are possessed of probity and
goodness, know how to appreciate the same
virtues when conspicuous in others: more
particularly when those most excellent quali
ties offtthe heart are farther recommended by
Talents of the Understanding, tried and ap
proved from the days of Youth to the meri
dian of Man's age. f
To His Majefty, to, those Minifters of
whom You were Chief, to the whole Legis*
lative Body, the Church not long sinCe was ,
much endebted, for having rescued its Clergy
from the cruel operation of an oppressive
Statute. The remembrance of this interpos-
a 4 ition

( viii )
ition in our behalf should be to. us an addi
tional motive for increased diligence in out
Clerical Functions., -r '
It is one part of our duty to mark occasions,
when unequivocal and decided declarations
of our opinion on Religious Poctrines may
be useful and requisite. Some such occasion
has recently presented itself; and has suggested
the following sentiments, which are offered a*
" Thoughts on the Trinity."
The subject is indeed sublime ; but not on
that account to be avoided. Quite tpe reverse.
With whatever, the mind is much conversant,
from the same it is,. accustomed to receive im
pressions. The contemplation of grave and
Jofty arguments is calculated to create in us
similar conceptions. Meditation on Deity,
by directing our views from earth to heaven,
has a tendency to raise us above all that is lowand

( * )
and abject, little and sordid. This effect of
it, allow me to say, you have sensibly expe
rienced and eminently shewn. On God and
Immortality you began to reflect at an early
period of your life. It was thence you de
rived those high and pure principles, on
which in private you have ever founded your
actions as a virtuous Man, and on which in
public you rested your measures, when, hap
pily for this Country and honourably to your
self, you conducted the State as an attentive
and able, a discreet and upright Minister.
I am, Dear Sir,
Your most Obliged servant
and affectionate friend,
GEORGE ISAAC GLOUCESTER.
Winchester College, >,
June 18. 1804.
PRE-

( xi )

PREFACE.
JL HOUGHTS are here given in preference
to Dissertations, for the sake of brevity
and compression.
The several Clauses appear detached : there
is however a connexion between them. The
Subject is begun on principles of abftract
reasoning; continued, with reference ,to Hea
then and Jewish opinions ; pursued, with
consideration of the Baptismal Form delivered
by our Lord, and as taught by Evangelists,
Apostles, Fathers. Of the question there is
then taken a retrospect ; which leads- to the
Conclusion, The

xii preface.
, The mind of the Writer has long been
much impressed with the force of this solemn*
charge; " When thou art converted, strengthen
thy brethren."" He is anxious to obey it.
On examination and reflection being himself
convinced, he employs his efforts to assist
others, and support them in the Ancient Faith.

THOUGHTS

, THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY*
f-

W hen we mean to speak of a circumstance
as difficult to be understood, or as altogether
inexplicable, we call it a " Mystery." In
these acceptations of the word " Mystery,"
the existence of the Universe ; the production
of the several substances in the mineral, ve
getable, and animal kingdoms; the combi
nation of instinct with brute forms, and the
union of rational faculties with the human
body, are each of them respectively a Mys-
, tery. They are however all matters of fact :
from which consideration we are led to con
clude, it is not consistent with true philosophy
to deny the reality of a thing, merely because
it is mysterious. B II. It

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY".

II.

It has been often said, " Where Mystery
" begins, Religion ends." The assertion i$
erroneous. -For, nothing can be so myste
rious as the existence of God. Yet to believe
that God exists, is the foundation of all Reli
gion. Mystery then and Religion are inse
parably connected, and must inevitably pro
ceed with each other. .

III.
Whdn Simonides was asked his opinion
concerning the nature of God, he required a
day to be given him for deliberating on the
question. On the morrow -he was asked a
second time. He required two days for de
liberation. The question was frequently re
peated; and on every repetition he doubled
the number of days. Hiero was surprized at
this hesitation and delay, and demanded the
reason of it. He replied, " The longer I
. " think on this subject, the more obscure it
'J appears."

/

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 9
" appears." Here then we have, from a mart
of learning and wisdom, an ingenuous ac
knowledgement, that the nature of God is
incomprehensible to the human mind. And
the same confession must every one make,
who ,hath duly considered the limits pre
scribed to our finite understanding, and who
is not afraid to own, that of many things he
must be -ignorant, till his intellectual powers
shall be enlarged in the renovation of his
nature* IV.
If at this time we ourselves were asked>
'" What is God ?" we should answer, " A
. iet Spirit.*' " And what is a Spirit ?" " Some-
" what which is not Corporeal." " Of what
" subsistence ?" Here we are lost We can
say what God is not ; but are utterly unable
to say what He is, with respect to Essential
Subsistence. v*
When we contemplate the extensive scale
of existence, and the various degrees which
s 2 appear

4 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
appear in that scale, by reasoning on analogy
we are led to suppose, there are as many or
ders of Intelligent Beings above Man, as there
are classes of irrational creatures below him.
The modes of existence and spiritual qualities
may be as much diversified in the several or
ders of Intelligent Beings, as the vital .state
and animal properties are of infinite variety
in the subordinate classes of living , creatures
extending downwards from Man te the Zoo
phyte. That in the order superlatively exalted
above all others in its mode of existence and
in its spiritual qualities, Deity should be an
inherent attribute, it is by no means unrea
sonable to imagine. VI.
- By Deity, or Divinity, or Godhead, we
mean an essential Nature and a Mode of Ex
istence the most exalted and perfect that can
possibly be; and also we mean Power, Wis
dom, Goodness* and Holiness, more than
human, more than angelic, greater than any
words of mortals can describe, or thoughts
conceive. That Deity, thus considered, can not

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 5
not reside in Three Spiritual Intelligences, on
principles of reason no man can prove.

VIL
From the inability of the human mind to
comprehend Deity, iiasv arisen imperfection
of language, with which to discourse on that
subject. For want of other terms, we use
" Person ; Subsistence or Substance ; and
" Consubstantial," corresponding with Tlpoir-
onrov ; x"tnro^a.o-iq or Ouina ; 'Opouo-wg ; ex
pressions frequent among the Christian Greek
Writers. By " Person," we mean " one
" that has actual being." By " Subsistence
" or Substance," we mean " essential na-
" ture." By " Consubstantial," we mean
" having the same essential nature." By
" sameness of essential nature," we mean
such identity of nature, as when we say, the
essential nature of a fountain and of a river is
the same ; tbe essential nature of the sun and
of a sun-beam is the same. This acceptation
of opowios " Consubstantial," and this mode
of illustration, are of very high antiquity and
most allowed authority among Christian
b 3 Writers ;

6 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
Writers ; as in that satisfactory Work, the
'" Defensio Fidei Nicaenae," has been . co
piously and ably proved. VIII.
The word " Man" sometimes implies all
Mankind ; and sometimes " that which pos
sesses the properties of Mankind." The
word " God" sometimes comprehends all
Deity; and sometimes it means to express
¦' that which has attributes characteristic of
" Deity," Our tag ra ®soe StiXa]ix.ov, " The
*' word God indicates the essential nature,"
says Justin Martyr, or rather, " The Expo*
*' sjtion of Faith," which goes under his name,
IX.
The Works of Creation demonstrate the
existence of Deity exerting itself with Unity
of Design. But they do not demonstrate that
Peity and Unity of Design must therefore
, necessarily be attributes inherent in one Intek
ligence only. A human .instance will illus
trate, A piece of mechanism curiously con
structed

THOUGHTS ON. THE TRINITY. 7
structed to carry on regular motion shews
unity of design : but it does not shew that
therefore it was the work of one mind only.
The design indeed will be one ; but the work
may have been produced by more minds, all
co-operating in the same design.

That which has all the properties of a
Buman Being, is Man. That which has all
the qualities of a Spiritual Being, is Spirit.
That which has the essential nature, the mode
of existence, the power, the wisdom, the
goodness, the holiness attributed to Godhead,
must be God. The consequence seems to be
inevitable. XL
The Peripatetics and later Platonists main
tained that the World was eternal. It is not
then offering violence to the human ap
prehension, to say that Three Spiritual Intel
ligences, Divine in Essential Nature and At
tributes, have existed from Eternity.
¦ b 4 Whether

8 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
Whether One, or both, of these suppositions
may be erroneous, is not here the question.
The only point at present maintained is, that
according to the natural apprehensions of man
in the first instance, one of these ideas can be
received by the mind with as much facility
as the other. XII.
The Eternity of the World we prove to be
a doctrine erroneous, from what we know
concerning the properties of Matter. The
Eternity of Three Spiritual Intelligences in,
quality, of one Godhead, we cannot prove to
be a doctnne erroneous ; because we have no
sufficient knowledge of Spirituality and Es
sentially Divine Nature. We have therefore
in this case no ground on which to reason. If
we talk of our own conceptions, and make
them the standard of what may be correct,
and what may be erroneous, we must con
fess, if after the deepest examination we
would speak ingenuously, we can no more
form an adequate conception how One should
exist from Eternity, than how Three should exisf

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 9
exist from Eternity. We can adequately con
ceive neither case. And, supposing the Ge
neric Unity of Divine Essence asserted, then
there is no argument which will tend to dis
prove the eternal existence of Three in that
essence, which will not go to disprove the
eternal existence of One. So that without
great care, Metaphysical Reasoners against a
Trinity in the one Godhead will prove too
much, unless they mean to prove there can
be no such thing as eternal existence either in
any Quality, or in any Being.
XIII.
It would be Tritheism, if we should main
tain a Triplicity of Divine Intelligences, each
diversified in different and opposite essential
natures, different and opposite powers, dif
ferent and opposite wills, different and oppo
site counsels, different and opposite energies,
But it is not Tritheism when we maintain that
Three Divine Intelligences exist, being all of
the same essential nature, the same power,
the same will, the same counsel, the same
'energies :

10 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY,
energies: for, by maintaining the Sameness
of Quality, we preserve the Unity of Divine
Attributes, and thus also preserve the Unity
of Godhead. XIV.
To say that Three Intelligences are one In
telligence, would be contradiction. But to
say that three Divine Intelligences are one
God is not contradiction. They are One
God, by possessing the attributes, and acting
with the energies of One Godhead,
XV.
As all human conceptions of Deity must be
imperfect, all illustrations of the doctrine in
question must be inadequate. Let it how
ever be observed, that in human cases, Unity
and Multiplicity may be combined. Thus
we read ; " All the rest also of Israel were of
" One heart to make David king." 1 Chr.
xii. 38. " Also in Judah, the hand of God
"was to give them One heart to do the com-
" mandments of the king, and of the
" princes."

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 11
"princes." 2 Chron. xxx. 12. " And the
" multitude of them that believed were of
" one heart, and of one soul." Acts, iv. 32.
If, without contradiction, Unity of Mental
Attribute may be ascribed to many Human
Beings, it will follow, that without contradic
tion, Unity of Divine Attribute may be ascribed •
to Three Divine; Intelligences. XVI.
However much through fanciful additions
they may have deviated from their primitive
correctness, yet it is reasonable to suppose that
opinions, of high antiquity and general uni- "
versality, must have been founded originally
in truth. For, had the case been otherwise,*
they probably would long ago have been en
tirely rejected from the human mind. The
idea and. doctrine of a Triad, have indeed
undergone very strange modifications: but, ,
as the histories of Ancient Egypt and of Mo-
dem India demonstrate, that idea and that
doctrine have existed for ages in Oriental
nations. The fact is extraordinary ; and the
most obvious method, by which we can ac-
count

12 • THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
count for ity is this ; to conclude, that the
doctrine originated with the Progenitor of
Mankind ; by him was communicated,' as a
notice which he had received from his Maker,
and therefore of importance to be preserved
among his immediate descendants ; and from
them it was delivered down through succeed
ing generations, from the first to that which
is now in being. Taken then by itself, and
divested of mythology, the doctrine of a Tri
nity is entitled to our regard and veneration,
because so ancient and so universal.
XVII.
By Revelation we mean that knowledge
?which is imparted to lis by divine communi
cation. The doctrines imparted to Moses,
and the doctrines taught by Christ, are respec
tively doctrines of Revelation.
XVIII.
The divine Legation of Moses is demon
strated by the certainty of the Miracles, which
rGod empowered him to work; and by the ful-
filment^

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 15
fil ment of the predictions, which God enabled
him to deliver. But of Moses, in the scrip
tures it was never said, that he pre-existed
before he appeared on earth ; that he was
supematurally born into this world ; that after
death he did not experience' corruption, but
previously to any such corruption rose from
the grave. Moses gave not laws either pro
mulgated in his own name, or intended for
all mankind, or applicable to all conditions,
situations, places, times. Moses never was
represented as impeccable; nor as knowing
the most secret thoughts, words, and actions,
of Man ; nor as possessing inherent efficacy
for giving agility to the lame, hearing to the
deaf, speech to the dumb, sight to the blind,
life to the dead, and this spontaneously and
on all occasions which to himself might seem
proper. Moses never on his own authority
pronounced pardon and forgiveness to sin.
He never asserts of himself, that he should
Jay down his life for his true disciples; that
his true disciples should not perish, but have
everlasting life; that he had power to lay
down and then to resume life ; that he was
the author of resurrection and life ; that he
would

14 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
would call forth the dead from their graves J
that he should judge all mankind, and assign
to every one his just and final retribution ;
that he was to be honoured even as God the
Father is honoured ; ihat he was in divine-
glory with God the Father before he' came
upon earth ; that to .such glory he should re
turn ; that God was his Father, and himself
was the Son of God, in the most lofty and
adorable sense which those terms could bear
according to the apprehension of the Jews:
Moses never spoke explicitly of heavenly
things ; promised not future rewards ; sent
not apostles to teach all nations, and admit
disciples by a form of words which profess
the worship of himself no less than that of the
Father ; and of the Holy Spirit. Moses re
ceived no testimony by voice from heaven
that he was the Son of God ; is no where
styled the Saviour of mankind; the Lord;
the Lord whom ye seek ; the express image
• of the invisible God, in which image the full
ness of Godhead dwells.; that Eternal Life
which- was with the Father ; Emmanuel or
God amongst men in the exercise of his di
vine powers-; nor the Surt of Righteousness ;
nor

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 15
nor Jehovah our Righteousness ; nor the Word
of God ; nor Creator of all things that have
been created ; nor in a direct and unqualified
manner is he styled God. It is however fact,
that every s proposition here denied with re
spect to Moses, may on the grounds of Scrip
ture be positively affirmed with regard to
Christ. The inference is obvious : Moses was
human ; Christ was divine.
XIX.
The design of Revelation is first to re-esta
blish the primaeval Laws of Morality, and the
primaeval Doctrines of Religion, which were
originally imparted from God to Man, at the
time of Creation: and then, to superadd more
explicit communications of knowledge on both
these subjects. XX.
Nothing introductory is so full and clear
as the complete Work, to which it is intended
as an introduction. The First or Mosaic Co
venant was introductory to the Second or
Christian ;

1©> THOUGHTS OlST THE TRINITY.
Christian ; it* is not therefore so full and clear
as' the Christian/ What the Old Testament
intimates obscurely, the New Testament illus
trates with brighter light. XXI.
Revelation speaks to us, as to Beings endued
with Reason, and expected to exercise our
reasoning faculties. It does not therefore al
ways teach us by methodical System; but
often leaves us, from certain Facts and given
Premises, to draw our own conclusions ; con
clusions however so obvious, that they cannot
well be mistaken. This is remarkably the
case in the Christian Revelation.
XXII.
The Laws and Ordinances established among
the Jews were designed to guard that people
from heathen idolatry. On the recollection
of this circumstance it appears extraordinary,
that Moses, when he is describing the .crea
tion of the Universe, should, in order to ex
press his conceptions of the Deity, introduce a term

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY, 11
a term which implies Plurality; and, fre
quently connecting it with verbs and persons
singular, should use that term thirty times*.
Extraordinary also it is, that as in the Deca
logue, when first delivered, so also on a Sub
sequent repetition of their Laws, afterva solemn
address demanding their attention, he should
speak of the Deity in any words, which could
possibly convey an idea of Plurality. Yet
such an idea has been conveyed, in the very
declaration which/is intended to assert the
. Unity of Godhead. XXIII. v,
ft will not surely be presuming too much,
if we suppose Joshua and Solomon to be more
deeply instructed in the Jewish Religion, than
to be capable of using improper language re
specting the Deity. Yet the former says,
"Ye cannot serve the Lord, for he is the
Holy Gods" (Josh. xxiv. 19.); and the latter
gives this weighty instruction, " Remember
thy Creators in the days^ of thy youth."
(Ecclea. xii. 1.) In the book of Proverbs
there is also this passage ; "The fear of Jeho-
/ vah is the beginning of -wisdom; and know-
c ledge

18 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY,
ledge ofthe Holies is understanding." (Prov.
ix. 10.) XXIV.
When we put together these several .consi
derations ; That the doctrine of a Triad is very
ancient and general ; That Moses applies to
the Deity a term of Plurality ; that Joshua
and Solomon do the same ; there is reason for
concluding that among the Jews, as among
v other People, there was an idea of a Trinity :
with this difference however between them
and the Heathens ; the Jews admitted nothing
into their opinion, which could contradict
Unity of Divine attributes. XXV.
- The Mosaic Histpry does not so entirely
differ from Heathen, as that there, should be
no kind of similarity between them, The
former is indeed more correct and pure; the
latter imperfect and blended with fiction. Still
however in many instance? there may be
traced a resemblance between them,,. Why
may we not reason: after this, manner, with
regard, to the Doctrines of Reljgion? and
why

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 19
why not say, the Mosaic and Jewish concep
tions of Unity in the attributes of the Divine
Triad were indeed most perfectly correct and
pure : but as to the doctrine of a Triad in
itself, between Jewish and Heathen opinions
there was some faint resemblance; such re
semblance as might lead us to imagine both
Jews and Gentiles originally derived the doe-
trine from true communication; but whilst
the former preserved, the latter grossly cor-:
rupted the truth. XXVI.
If Moses and the Jews held the doctrine
of a Trinity, and the word " Elohim" imports
Plurality, it is natural to ask, How comes it
tO pass, that the Septuagint Version renders
the first verse of Genesis in this manner, Ev
apxy eiromo'tv o @zog tov n^esvov ? The learned
and excellent Ridley, after Allix, has answered
this ¦ question : "The Talmudists own, that
the LXXII Interpreters did purposely change
the notion of Plurality implied in the Hebrew
" Elohim" into a Greek Singular, lest Ptolemy
Philadelphus should conclude that the Jews,
c,2 as

20 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 1
as well as himself, had a belief of Polytheism;"
According to the Ovop/xg-mav, " the Greek
appellations of divinity were ©so?, &eoi, Aw
pom : Plato calls the Deity ra Tlavrvg KuSgf-
vjjtj?!/, peyicov Aati/Aovdil to Gbiov and Akihoviov
are in signification the same," The expression
to KpUTjov might also have been added; Of
all these, ©eog was the only simple and direct
term which they could adopt, to counteract
idolatrous misconceptions. *
, XXVII.
The opening of St, John's Gospel ex
pounds the opening ofthe Mosaic History.
>The words of Moses are, " In the beginning
Bara Elohim created the heaven and the
earth." (Gen. i. L) St. John tells us the par
ticular person of the Triune Godhead, by
whom the Work of Creation-was carried into
effect. It was, by the Aeyag, who was wgog
tov Oeov, and who was himself ®sog, " Bv
Him'all things were made; and' without Hirn
was not made any one thing, which was
made." By Him, " the World Was made'."
He became "flesh and dwelt among' us," He

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 21,
He was not "God the Father," but the Movo-
ytv>jg wx(>ot Uar^g, by whom " God the Fa
ther" created the Universe, and from time to
time revealed himself to Mankind. The
Aoy6g and Movoyivr^g mean the same person
" God the Son," the second of the Mosaic
Trinity. So true it is that the Old Testament
intimated in general terms', what the New
Was afterwards to explain in a manner more
particular : and that between both there is the
closest connexion, the one being the inter
preter of the other. XXVIII.
Grotius denies that the imputation of Tri-_
theism can be charged on Christian, with
more justice than on Jewish worship.
" Philo," he observes, styles the Reason, or
"Word of God, the Maker of the World ; and
with the Rabbi Nachman, calls him the
Angel, or the delegated Person who takes
care of* the Universe. The Cabbalists distin
guish God into three Lights, ^nd some of
them by the very names which the Christians
use, the names of Father, Son, and Holy
c 3 Spirit.

22 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
Spirit. The Hebrews allow, that the Spirit,
by whom the Prophets were inspired, was not
any thing created, and yet was distinct from
him that sent it. Many of them also have a
tradition that the divine power, which they
call " Wisdom," should dwell in Messiah;
whence by the Chaldee Paraphrast Messiah is
called " The Word of God ;" as by David,
Isaiah, and others, to the same Messiah is
given the awful appellation of " God and
Lord." This is the substance of what is re
marked by Grotius, a writer not to be disre
garded on such a subject. XXIX.
For the certainty of their having been re
spectively wrought and spoken, the works of
Christ and the words of Christ rest precisely
on thd same authority, the authority of his
torical testimony by the self-same witnesses. '
XXX.
The credibility, or in other words, the rea
son why we think the works recorded and the
doctrines

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 23
doctrines taught have a.claim to our belief, is
founded on conviction of Veracity and Com
petency, both in the Sacred historians and in
the divine Instructor. The Evangelists and
Apostles gave proof that they were true, in
what they related concerning circumstances
they were competent to ascertain : and' Christ
demonstrated the reality of his divine cha
racter; Consistently with which, he could not
but speak the words of truth, when he deli
vered doctrines which in his superlative know
ledge of heavenly things he was enabled to
communicate. XXXI.
It lias been said the expression " Trinity in
the Godhead," Tf>utg bv Qewr^Ti, does not oc
cur in Scripture. True. Nor does " Unity
in the Godhead" 'EvoTyg iv @j.<ot.,t.. Nor the
term " Sacrament." But the subject matter,
which those expressions are designed to indi
cate, does occur : so that the objection has in
it no. substantial validity.

c 4 XXXII. " Go

24« THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

XXXII.
v 1 1 ^ n c
"Go ye therefore and teach all na '
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," are
the words in which our Lord delivered to his
Apostles their final commission. (St. Matth.
xxviii. 19.) They may be thus paraphrased:
*' Go and make disciples in all nations, ad
mitting them by baptism into the acknow
ledgement and religious service of the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
XXXIII.
t On the clause, "In the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost," we may observe, there are pointed
out three distinct objects, each of which has
reference to one and the same act of mind
implied in the expression ," into the name,"
i. e. into the religious service or worship : and
the expression "into the name," though but
once written, is in sense and force applied to
each of the three objects. Considering then this

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 25
this parity of reference and application, consi
dering also there is not introduced a single
word by which to give us an idea that in the
acceptation of either term is intended a change
from substance to quality, we have the
strongest grounds for maintaining that if Sub
sistence belongs to the first object, Subsistence
belongs also to the second, and to the third.
And, if there be any such thing as propriety
in writing, and analogy in rendering, con
sistently with such propriety and such analogy
we cannot say, that the terms Father, and
Son, imply each of them Subsistence, and
then by an abrupt transition unsupported by
any word which can indicate mutation, pass
at once from real Subsistence to attributable
quality. As then by the term " Father" we
understand real Subsistence, so in the term
" Son" and in the term " Holy Ghost," we>
must respectively understand Subsistence.
XXXIV.
If the regular, natural, and unforced con*
struction of our Lord's final command will
lead us to conclude, that by the expression " Holy

26 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.'
" Holy Spirit" is meant real Subsistence ; con
sideration of the solemn occasion when that
command was given ; of the . importance
which must necessarily be attached to k ; and
of the improbability that it should be so deli
vered as to be ambiguous, will furnish a
strong reasqn for adhering to that conclusion.
XXXV.
The argument drawn from his final com
mand would certainly be less forcible, if it
did not appear that previously to giving that
command ' our Lord himself had spoken of
the Holy Spirit as^a real Subsistence. He
does 'however so speak. cO Se HupuKhviTog, to
Theopot, uyiav, o weptyet 5 TitxTVflt ev tu ovojiuti px,
eneivog " \>y,ug §.§«£e» ¦nroevTot, koh UTropvyo-ei vpotg
TsavToi a. enrov tfuv.'' (St. John, xiv. 25, 26.)
In whatever sense we take TlagmcXviTog, whe
ther as " Comforter, or " Advocate," or " In
tercessor," it implies real Being : for, " teach
ing and reminding" are properties belonging
fo real Being. But the " Holy Spirit" is that
Tla,goM\viTog ; has the properties of teaching
and reminding ; He has therefore real Being. In

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 27
In this passage it is also to be noticed, that
the Father, Son, and. Holy Spirit, are distinctly
marked out. Again1: " When He, the Spirit
of truth, is come, He will guide you into all
truth : for, He shall not speak of himself;
but whatsoever He, shall hear, that shall He
speak^" (St. John, xvi. 13.) In this passage,
" Hearing" is ascribed to the Holy Spirit : but
" Hearing" is a property belonging to real
Being. The consequence is obvious. The
same spirit is to speak from another, and not
from himself only : of course, by the Spirit
here mentioned we cannot understand the
Father, but some One who should speak What
'he heard delivered from the Father.
XXXVI.
It is observable, that when our Lord has
occasion to speak t of the Resurrection, or of
the HOly Spirit, his disciples express no won
der, his enemies shew no displeasure at the
.doctrines. ', The reason might be this. The
doctrine of a Resurrection was certainly holden
by the Pharisees, and therefore was not novel,
nor would appear strange. Probably also
some

. 28 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
some ideas respecting a Holy Spirit were en
tertained by them; though in both instances
there was need of that more full illustration
and decisive confirmation, which they re
ceived from our Lord's express declaration and
positive assurance. Indeed the more we con
sider how frequently our Lord speaks of a
Divine Spirit, and how familiar the expression
appears to have been among his hearers, the
more we shall be persuaded, that however
much of this must be ascribed to the idiom of
'i
Scripture Language, yet in the time of our
Lord the Jews certainly retained, what they
had received from their Ancestors, traditional
notices which impressed their minds with an
opinion that there was an uncreated Spirit
really subsisting. This opinion, with all their
hatred towards Christianity, the Jews conti
nued to hold for some ages after the com
mencement of the Christian asra.
XXXVIL
If we are required to prove the completion
of Christ's promise that the Holy Spirit should
" teach and guide/' we shall here use the
same

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 29
same kind of proof which we adopt when we
demonstrate the real exertion of divine Pro
vidence : we shall refer to the actual effects,
which the Holy Spirit has produced, and still
produces. The effects were extraordinary in
the Apostles and first Converts; they are also
powerful in their influence on the hearts and
lives of Thousands at this moment.
» XXXVIII.
Tr
To effects we refer, '/when we would de
monstrate the divinity of the Holy Spirit. We
add also the circumstance of our Lord's com
mand, that we should at our baptism be ad
mitted into the religious service and worship
of the Holy Spirit. Religious service and
worship, in the opinion both Of Jews and
Christians, must be offered to nothing created,
whether Man or Angel. The Holy1 Spirit
therefore, which is to receive our religions
service and worship, must be more than Man,
more than Angel ; must be divine.

XXXIX. It

$0 THOUGHTS Of* THE TRINITY.

XXXIX.
It does not appear that the Jews ol
to the mere expression " Son; Ipf God" ab
stractedly taken : the cause '.of their rage and
the ground of their accusation Was, that Christ
applied this exalted title: to himself ;: which
they deemed blasphemy. We may hence
draw these two inferences ; the Jews had an
idea there did exist one, whom they emi
nently styled the " Son of God;" and the
" Son of God" in their apprehension was es
sentially possessed of divine attributes.
XL.
Comparison of text and context, common
sense and. the reason ofthe thing, will in most
cases tell us when a word is to be taken in its
usual and primary, and when in a figurative
and secondary acceptation. Speaking Of him
self, our Lord says, " Before Abraham was» I,
am." — " I came forth from the Father and
am come into the World : again I leave the
World

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY- SI
World and go to the Father." — " O Father,
glorify Thou me with thine own self, with the
glory which I had with thee before the World
was."-r— " I speak that which I have seen with
my Father."—" All power is given unto me
in heaven and in earth." To the high priest,
who said with great earnestness, " I adjure
thee, by the living God, that thou tell us
whether thou be the Christ the Son of
God," our Lord answered " Thou hast said ;"
words which the Jews immediately under
stood to be directly and unequivocally affir
mative. St. Mark's account is, " The high
priest asked him, " Art thou the Son of the
Blessed ?" and Jesus said, " I am." St. Luke's
relation corresponds with St. Matthew's in
phraseology; and both agree in sense with
St. Mark. If on occasions where the context.
leads us not to expect parabolical illustration
or metaphorical allusion, language thus expli
cit is not sufficiently clear and precise to prove
the pre-existing glory and the present divinity
of our Lord, words can have no meaning,
and all language must be inadequate for con
veying ideas. XLI. It

52 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

XLI.
It was expedient and necessary that at the
close of his Mission our Lord" should assert
himself to be "The Son of God." He makes
the assertion in terms direct, We do not
however .find that in the course of his Mi
nistry he is continually making mention of
his divine character at all times and at all sea
sons indiscriminately, as though he rather
wished the name of his divinity should be ob
truded by repetition, than that the substance
which that name imports should be collected
by inference. He proceeds in a different
manner, a manner more consonant with truth
and more satisfactory to a candid mind. He
performs extraordinary works : to those works
he makes his appeal : to the same, as to visible
and palpable proofs, he refers us : then on
the fair ground of argumentative reasoning
that extraordinary effects must proceed from
adequate causes, he leaves us to form our own
opinions. This is dealing with us as with
Beings rational ; free indeed to exercise the
powers of judgment, but assuredly accountable for

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 33
for the wilful neglect, or misapplication, or
perversion of those powers. XLII. i
The Evangelists undeniably describe our
Lord as a Man. But did they mean nothing
more than to describe him as a man only ?
If so, whence these expressions ? " What
manner of Man is this, that even the winds
and the sea obey him ?" (St. Matt. viii. 27.)
" Thou art the Christ/ the Son of the living
God." (St. Matt. xvi. 16.) " Truly this was the
Son of God." (Matt, xxvii. 54.) " I saw and
bare record that this is the Son of God." (St.
John, i. 34.) " We believe and are sure that
thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
(St. John, vi. 69.) " My Lord,! and my
God !" (St. John, xx. 28.) No one, who un
derstands the language of Scripture, will say
the term " Son," as used in these passages, has
no farther import than what it usually implies
•in common acceptation. The Jews perfectly
understood our Lord to intimate divinity of
.character by that appellation : and hence their
anger, that he should assume to himself a title
d so

-34 - THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. .
so eXal,ted. The Evangelists then designed to
represent his nature as also more than human.
For this purpose they introduced the confes
sions made on several occasions, as testimonies
to the divinity of his nature. The same divi
nity they proved also by recording a series of
Facts, the result of constantly inherent powers,'
such as never, resided in mere man.
Undeniably also Christ often styles himself
" the Son of Man." But wherefore ? In
allusion to Dan. vii. 14, and with intimation
that he was himself the character described by
the prOphet. What then is the representation
of Christ's person and glory delineated by
Daniel ? Is it that of a mere Man ? The
plainest reader can answer, when he has con
sidered these words ; "1 saw in the night
visions, 'and behold, one like the Son of Man
came with the clouds. of heaven, and came to
the Antient of Days, and they brought him
near before him ; And there was given hint
dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that all
people, nations, and languages should Serve
him ; his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
that which shall not be destroyed." XLIII. To

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 3S

, XLIII.
To Christ, at the very opening of their re
spective Gospels, St. Matthew applies Isaiah's
term " Emmanuel ;" St. Mark the expression
" Son of God ;" St. John the appellation,
which corresponds with the " Word of the
Lord, the Word of Jehovah" in the Old
Testament, but which " Word" he affirms
Was made flesh and dwelt among us," the
appellation of Aoyog who " was with God, and
was God." From such introductions to the
narratives they proposed giving, they* may be
understood as professing that they believed
Christ to be divine, and that they engaged to
prove his divinity. # These exordial declara
tions intimate what is to be expected in the
sequel of the histories : and Conformably with
them the subject is so pursued by a plain state
ment of exuaordinary Facts, that the divine
nature of our Lord is by far more strongly
characterised than- the human. • There is no-
thing like elaborate composition, or studied
period, in their Gospels; but from beginning
to end in each there is one design. St. John
d 2 tells

36 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
tells you expressly, " These things are written
that ye might believe that jesus is the Christ
the Son of God."

. XLIV.
The zeal of the Jews for the name of God
is well known. How then can we account
for St.. Thomas's addressing himself on a most
remarkable occasion in these words to Christ,
" My Lord, and my God !" (St. John, xx.
28.) We cannot sufficiently account for it
otherwise, than by saying, that even to this
Apostle, who was far from being credulous,
the Resurrection appeared to be, as it certainly
was, an incontestable proof that. our Lord' was,
what he had asserted himself to be, in nature
Divine. But if Divine in nature, then God.
XLV.
To what extent1 the meaning of any word,
or clause, is to be restricted, must be deter
mined by the consideration of parallel'passages
and collateral circumstances; '^When our Lord.
replied, " It is written, Thou shalt worship the
Lord

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 37
Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve;" (St. Matt. iv. 10.) he had in view the
command in Deuteronomy. But the. com
mand in Deuteronomy, and many other simi
lar injunctions throughout the .sacred Books
of the Old Testament import this; '" Thou
shalt worship the Lord thy God and him
only, in exclusion of all heathen gods re
presented by molten and carved images, the /
works of human hands." That our Lord did
not mean to exclude the worship of himself is
clear from the sequel. For, he admitted re
ligious worship to be paid him: he bade us
honour himself as we honour the Father.
And for this reason. Honour to him redounds
to the glory of God the Father, because their
divinity is one, XL VI.
The acceptation of wpoirxuvea must be deter
mined by the context. On some occasions it
is used to express the act of prostration, as a
mark by which Orientals paid outward respect:
on others, it is applied to express the same act
accompanied with an inward sense of devo-
d 3 tion,

58 THOUGHTS Otf THE TRINITY.
tion, and therefore intended as a token of
religious worship. When, according to the
Septuagint, Moses says in Exodus, ii. t, " All
these thy servants shall come unto me and
wfwjwvijo-iwi fie, the word is $.0 be understood
and rendered, as our English Version has un
derstood and rendered it, " shall bow them-
selves down to me :" not in token of religious
worship,; but as a mark of respect. For, nei
ther could Moses mean to intimate, nor in
itself was the circumstance such as might in
any degree be expected to happen, that the
Egyptian servants of Pharaoh, who were gross
idolaters and who detested the " Israelites,
should ever mean to worship Moses, though
they prostrated themselves before him. "Bow
themselves down" to him, as to a man whom
they feared, they naturally might, in the hope
of softening his resentment and prevailing on
him to interpose for averting evil : but that
they thould intend to worship him as a God
is inconceivable, because irreconcileable with
Egyptian ideas. But, when., after our Lord
had exercised command over the Elements,
which at his word obeyed him, his disciples
wpoTeftwwtxv ocvtu) (St. Matt. xiv. 33.), and ac
companied

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. $9
oompanied their external act with this con
fession, " Of a truth thou art the Son of God !.'
when, after they had seen an open manifests*
tion of our Lord's divine glory at his ascension,
the disciples were ra-foo-KUMjoram/ avrat, before
they returned; to Jerusalem (St. Luke, xxiv.
5^,), there can be no more doubt that they
meant religious worship, than that St. Stephen
meant actually to pray unto Christ, when in
his dying moments he called on his Saviour,
" Lord Jesu receive my spirit!" (Acts, vii. 59.)
XLVII.
Never, after their return from captivity in
Babylon, did the Jews relapse into idolatry.
They held it in abhorrence. When therefore
they offered to our Lord religious service,
his disciples must have been' convinced his
nature was divine, on account of which it
could not be idolatrous to adore him.
XLVIII.
Some of the writings contained in, the New
Testament were denied to be genuine in the
d 4 , firs^.

40 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
first instance ; but were allowed to be such on
subsequent consideration. Two conclusions
may be drawn from this fact : " The primi
tive Christians scrupulously examined, before
they admitted Writings to be of authority :"
and, " When once Writings had "been ad
mitted to be of authority, all doubts of their
pretensions and characters must have been
completely removed," i
XLIX.
. t.
The Books of the New'Testament, as now
received, were cited as Canonical by writers
in the first four Centuries of the Christian
asra. The several writers who from time, to
time cited them, lived much nearer the periods
at which the respective Books were com
posed, and thence had means of obtaining
more accurate information with; regard to cir
cumstances of external testimony which esta
blished the authenticity of every Book, than
can have been possessed by later enquirers.
Devoutly therefore it is to be prayed, that the
Canonical Scriptures, which have stood so,
many Centuries unaltered, may never be sa
crificed

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 4t
cri-ficed to any specious reasoning, or fanciful
conjecture, or bold assertion of modern cri
ticism ; because in this particular branch
modern Criticism does not rest on ground so
sure and strong as ancient Christian knowledge.

The Epistles contain the doctrines of the
Apostles. Their doctrines we believe, to be
true, on account of the power with which
they were endued to work miracles. The
certainty of their 'miracles is demonstrated,
not only by historical testimony, but by the
effects produced in making converts from,'
heathenism.

LL

Missionaries of modern times are deficient:
neither in ability, nor zeal, nor piety : yet the
converts they make bear no proportion to the
numbers whom the Apostles converted. The
reason is this. Missionaries cannot produce
immediate effect by working miracles. The
Apostles did produce such effect by working
miracles ;

42 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
miracles ; and by thus giving visible proof of
their divine mission to preach ,the Gospel,
they converted Thousands, who yet through
the influence of the word only preached, and
unaccompanied with any extraordinary de
monstrations of more than usual power, would
probably never have renounced heathenism.
L1L •
Reflection on any subject presents, to the
mind certain ideas on that subject. Repeti
tion and continuance of such reflection fix
those ideas. Ideas thus formed and fixed are
often indelible, and they often so predominate
as to shew themselves prominent on all suitable
occasions. Consistency of sentiment produces
consistency of language : the words perhaps
may vary, but the general meaning of the
expression will in effect be- the same, when
we deliver our thoughts on the same subject.
The " jcaXoiucyuStoi" of Socrates continually
recurred to the good Xenophon. The &eo«js
of our Lord was ever present to the mind
of the sublime St. Paul, and impressed it so
forcibly, that he labours for words sufficiently strong

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY- 43
strong to cOnvey adequately the conceptions
he had formed. Hence these ..passages;
" Who is over all, God blessed for ever."
(Rom. ix. 5.) "The Lord, of Glory."
(1 Cor. ii. 8.) ".Who being in the form of
God." (Phil. ii. 6.) " In him dwelleth all
the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Col.
ii. 9.) " God was manifest! in the flesh."
(1 Tim. iii. 16.) "The brightness of his
(God's) glory, and express image of his per
son." (Hebr. i. 3.) All which passages are
by the Apostle used in reference to our
Lord. LIII.
Our common Version of the New Testa
ment renders the words of Rom." ix. 5, in
terms corresponding with the Original, as they
were read in Manuscripts received by the
Interpreters, and since defended by Mill. In
this, as on many other occasions, our Trans
lators gave proof of their fidelity, and shewed
, they had a right sense of the manner in which
they were to give an interpretation of Scrip
ture for Public Use. They were bound to
give

44 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.'
give a Literal Translation. " Literal Trans
lations?' (says Michaelis) are those, in which
it is proposed to express the original text ver
batim, notwithstanding the obscurity of many
Phrases, and the inelegance of many Con
structions, in the language into which the
book is translated. It is expedient that the
Translations, which are intended for the public
use of the whole Church, should be of this
kindl For in these the Translator should
presume as little as possible to obtrude his
Interpretation, if it be in the least excep
tionable, upon a whole Church ; for he is a
man, and subject to error. If he doth not
render verbatim certain Phrases, which admit
of more, than one Sense, he delivers, instead
of the word of God, an arbitrary Interpreta
tion of his own,; which -may chance to be
fajse. The same consideration -obliges the
Translator to render all Ambiguities in the
Original Text, if possible, by, words equally
ambiguous, in order to leave to his reader the
Choice of that Sense which appears to him
most probable. It is folly in Translations of
this kind to study elegance of stile, and so
incur the hazard of laying before the Church
a doubtful

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 45
a doubtful exposition instead of the pure word
of God. For as public Translations of this
Jcind must be kept in use for some centuries,
.without an alteration, and as the taste of a
language varies with almost every generation
of men, those beauties of stile are soon
decayed." Michaelis's Introduct. Lectures
to H. Script. a sect.' 73. /Translated by Butler
in 1761.
These remarks are just, and should be ob
served by those, who at any time hereafter
may be employed to revise our Translation of
the Scripture. With*all 4 deference, let ano
ther hint be suggested. Such persons would
do well to take our Common Translation as
their standard, and make very little farther
alteration, than merely substituting words
more modern, for some that in the course of
Centuries have changed their meaning.
LIV.
The commonly received reading of Rom.
IX. 5, is this : e\ uv o XfOta-Tog to xajot (rccpxpt, I
uv S7r» 'syuvjwv ©eog euXoyvijag eig Tzgctiwag. Not
tp know the efforts which have been made,
sometimes.

46 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
sometimes to' transpose, sometimes to new
punctuate, and sometimes to alter, the words
in this passage, would betray great ignorance.
Not to acknowledge the fact would be a de
gree of dissimulation. But^o change the
reading on the ground of any one argument
hitherto adduced from the days of Erasmus,
or Crellius, down to the present .moment, '
would be an act of weak concession. The
passage in question corresponds with St. Paul's
ideas expressed in his Epistles to the Colpssiansj
to Timothy, to the Hebrews ; to the Phillip-
pians, ii. £, to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. xv* 27.
And it is difficult to conceive what point
"would be gained with respect to Doctrine and
St Paul's ideas of Christ's divinity, even if
this passage were totally expunged, when there
are so many other explicit declarations of the
Apostle's sentiments on that important subject.
LV.
When he applied to our Lord the appella
tion ©eog, St. Paul in that term undoubtedly
comprised the several attributes which &eog
usually imports. Of course he ascribed to
our

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY^ *47
our Lord Divine Wisdom. How then is ik
tbat, when speaking of the " Everlasting God"
in Rom. xvi. 27, 28, where he confessedly
tneans " the Father," he should say, " Tq
God only wise ?" and in his Epistle to Timo
thy "the only wise God ?" (1 Tim. i. 17.)
Two explanations may be given of this.
From the context of the passages just cited,
St. Paul seems to have had in view a particu
lar instance of divine wisdom : and that was,
" the salvation of mankind by Christ cruci
fied;" a doctrine, offensive indeed to the
Jews, and ridiculed by th% Greeks, but to all
Christians, "the power of God and the wis
dom of God." (1 Cor. i. 24.) The Apostle's
mind was ever full of astonishment and of
gratitude, at •the mercy thus, vouchsafed to all
Mankind, and to himself more especially:
On- various occasions he speaks of it as a stu
pendous demonstration of such Wisdom, as
neither Jews nor Greeks, with all their pre
tensions, in the smallest degree or at -the
greatest possible distance were enabled to par
rallel. They must stand confounded," and
acknowledge that all their learning and all
their philosophy were but mere folly, when
compared

48 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. »
compared with this dispensation ; a dispensa
tion which shewed that not Man, but God
only was its author. So that St. Paul in these
places appears to have called " God only
Wise," in opposition to ignorant and ineffi
cient Man.
But farther ; neither " povog" nor " solus,"
nor "only," is always taken in a sense so
absolute and limited, as to admit not, under
modification, any other than the single object
to whjch it is 'applied., We say " Gpd only
is to be feared ; God only to be praised ; God
only to be honoured ;" yet we dread Men
with fear ; we commend Men with praise ;
we respect Men with honour. On these and
similar occasions, " Only" means " Primarily."
So in the passage Move* <roq>a> @e«, the Apostle
is speaking in strictness of speech, and with a
view to primary and abstract meaning. The
Annotators in Poole give this explanation :
" He is said to be the Only Wise,' because He
is Qriginally Wise; his Wisdom is of Himself."
But it does not thence follow that Divine
Wisdom may not also be an attribute of the
Son, and of the Holy Spirit, communicated
by Him who is " Originally Wise." Ac
cordingly

THOUGHTS ON 'THE TRINITY. 49
,'*'f' ' ''¦''"' :>l • i "¦¦¦¦<'>
.cordingly at. Paul, when he would .shew.' the
high' superiority of Christ to Angels, ancf
point out "godhead to be the attribute of Christy
but not of .Angels, says to the Colbssians, ," In
whom (q. d. and not in Angels) are hid allthetrea-
sures of Wisdom and Knowledge." (Col. ii. 3.)
The 'acceptation in which we are to take.
ucvog, as used by St.' Paul, will explain the
words of our Lord himself in his solemn
prayer; "This is life eternal? that they
may know Thee the Only true God."
(St. John, xvii. 3.) If is always to be recol
lected, that neither by himself, nor by the
Evangelists, nor by the Apostles, is our Lord
styled "The Father;" but " The Son." .The
appellation " Father" is applied tp Him who
(in the words of the Annotators in Poole,
1 Cor. viii. 6*,) " is the foundation of the
Deity, communicating his divine nature to
the other two persons, and of whom are all
things;" and who therefore is emphatically
called the " Father," that being " a term
which signifies the primary cause and author
of all things," With ITim and from Him
the author of all things, " God the Father,"
existed from eternity" " God the Son." The
E correlative

50 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
correlative terms "Father" and " Son" convey
an idea of Paternity apd Filiation. Paternity
and Filiation imply identity of nature, but
distinction in origin. To this distinction does
our Lord refer, when he calls the Father
«' The only true God," The Father is " The
only God," in strictness of speech, because
he is the author of Godhead, by whom, says
Pearson, p. 323, edp 1704, " Godhead was
communicated to the Son." And He is
« The True Gpd," either abstractedly in the
same point of view, or relatively in opposition
JO heathen idolatrous gods,
The explanation of one passage leads to the
exposition of another. St. Luke calls Baiv
nabas " a good man." (Acts, xi. 24.) And
nothing is more common than to say of a
person " he }s a good man ;" if we mean to
jsommend his excellent virtues. Yet, when
the Ruler applied, that appellation to our
Lord, he received this answer; " Why callest
thou nie Good ? There is none Good but one,
that is Qod." .(St. Matt. xix. 17.) The words
pf pur Lord imply either of these meanings:
f[ All Goodness proceeds originally froni God
&e Father, and therefore jn strictness of
speeph

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 51
speech He only is absolutely Good." Or,
" Perfect Goodness is the attribute of a Divine
Being, and as such you do not acknowledge
me."

LVL
The Scriptures tell us David was a keeper
of flocks : shall we therefore deny he was a
king ? They tell us he was a king : shall we
therefore deny he was a keeper of flocks?
In either case we should decide partially, be
cause we considered not both statements toge
ther. Let us apply this illustration. St. Paul,
to convince the Athenians a resurrection was
possible, assures them a Man had actually
risen from the dead 5 and he asserts this fact
to be a ground of confident expectation, that
the World would nereafter be judged "toy
that Man whom God had ordained," the
very Man who had risen. (Acts, xvii. 31.)
He intimates to Timothy, and through him
to the Ephesians, that salvation is intended,
for Gentiles, equally as for Jews. To con
firm them in this persuasion, he points out the
relation in which all Men indiscriminately
e 2 stand

52s THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
stand to the One Mediator, from the circunv
"stance of his having assumed the nature com
mon to all Men. Therefore the Apostle not
only insists on there being but One Mediator
for all the race of mankind, but specifies also
the human character qf that Mediator, calling
him " the- Man Christ Jesus" (l Tim. ii. 5),
to shew the intimate connexion-- between the
¦ Mediator and the whole race of Mankind.
On- the Philippians he inculcates humility, by
proposing for their imitation the example of
Christ, when he "took upon him the form
ot a servant, was made in the likeness of
men : was found in fashion as a man/' (PhiL
ii. % 8.) If we consider this and the two
p.'-s&ages above quoted, we shall .find they
were used on particular occasions^ which
made the mention of Christ's human nature
fBrtioularly apposite. But shall we hence
conclude, our Lord's nature was therefore
merely human ? This would be- either to
forget, or to neglect, the several expressions*,
in which the same Apqstle asserts, our Lord's
divinity : it would consequently be to con
clude on a partial and limited view of the
subject-. Let u^ look again at Phil. ii. 7, 8,
The

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 5$
The very place which speaks of Christ's hu
man character, speaks also of his divine glory
antecedent ' to his human character, and of
his divine nature during the assumption ofthe
human character. The closest, reasoner among
English Writers has proved this point. " The
person here spoken of (says Sherlock), Jesus.
Christ, was in the form of God. — Being in
the form of Gpd, he laid aside the glories
proper to the form of God, and took upon
him the form of a servant, in the likeness of
man. Whatever he was as to Nature and
Essence, when he was in the form of God,
that he continued to be still, when he became r~
Man : but the <ry$p.a Qev, the glories of the
form of God, he laid down : and although
he continued to be the same, yet, as to the
a-xwa> ast0 outward dignity- and appearance,
he was mere man, being found, as the Apostle
says, " in fashion" as a man. Had the Apostle
conceived him, whilst here on earth, to have
been mere. Man only, in what tolerable sense
-" could he say of him, " being found in fashion
as a man ?" for, in what fashion should a man
be found but in the fashion of a man? What
need was there of this limitation, that he was
E 3 found

54* THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
found a Man as to -his fashion, if in reality"
he was not something more than a Man ? But
if you consider. the man Jesus Christ to be
the same person who was iii the form of God,
and who, according to that dignity of nature,
had a right to appear in1 the majesty and glory
of God, it is proper to ask, How did he ap
pear on Earth ? And the Apostle's words are a
proper answer to the question, " He was
found in fashion as a Man."
There is yet anotlier passage " in which St,
Paul by his subject is led to point out tha.t
Christ was man. He is dravving a contrast
between Adam the natural man ; and Christ
the Spiritual Man : between Adam the fcede-
ral representative of mankind as subject to
death ; and Christ the fcederal representative
of mankind as redeemed unto life. " The
first man is of the earth, earthy : the second
man is, what ? a mere human being ? infi
nitely above every thing human, or angelic ;
"The, Lord from heaven." (1 Cor. xv. 47.)
No words^can more expressly shew that union
of divine with human nature in our Lord,
Which the Scriptures uniformly assert. St.

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 55
St. Peter speaks of Christ as a Man. (Acts,
ii. 22.) But does he ascribe to our Lord no
other properties than those which had be
longed either to men in general, or even to
signal prophets, who had lived and died be
fore him ! The sequel will shew. " This
Jesus hath God raised up, vvhereof we are all
witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand
of God exalted, and having received of the
Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he
hath shed forth this, which you now see and
hear" — i. e. the power of speaking in divers
languages. (Acts, ii. 32, 33.) " Therefore let
all the house of Israel know assuredly, that
God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye
have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (36.)
Could St. Peter mean to say, that a mere Man
was thus incorruptible, thus exalted, thus de
nominated with divine appellation ? Impos
sible; because irreconcileable with the con
fessions he had made of our Lord's being
" the Son of the living God, and having the
words of Eternal Life" (St. John, vi. tf8, 69),
and with his declarations in i Ep. i. 19, 20.
iii. 22. However then this Apostle may be
understood as asserting the human nature of
e 4 Christ,

56 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINI.TY.
Christ, he must in this passage be understood
,as equally asserting the divine nature of our
Lord. LVIL
Connect these circumstances"; namely, The
Rabbinical manner of briefly alloding to pas
sages in the- Old Testament, and slightly
quoting them ; the mystical intapretations of
figurative types by real completions ; the me
thod of softening down reproof before given;
the very striking instances of the e~vvxQpcu<rptog
in that animated and finely written eleventh
chapter ; all which peculiarities occur in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, and all which are
characteristics of St. Paul's writings ; consider
the similarity of doctrines maintained, and
duties inculcated in this, Epistle, with doctrines
and duties elsewhere delivered by St. Paul :
recollect also, the. certainty of its being com
posed while Jerusalem was standing; the co
incidence of allusions in ch. x. 34, and ch.
xiii. 23, with events recorded in the history
of St. Paul's life; and the general opinion of
. the. Greek Fathers in its favour: put tose- ther

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 57
ther all this, and you will have the strongest
ground of internal.evidence, and very power
ful support of external testimony, on which
to rest your persuasion, that the deep, interest
ing, and very valuable Epistle to the HebreWs-
was written by St. Paul. Witsius and Wol-
fius, Owen and Pierce, well considered the
question. They decided in the affirmative.
More than that. The Church admitted it
into the Canon of Scripture. But Epistles
were not admitted into the Canon till their
genuineness had been proved.
It must be observed ; that even were the
Epistle not written by St. Paul, it would still
carry with it great weight : for it would be an
early document by which to prove, what were
the opinions of primitive Jewish Converts re
specting our Lord's divinity.
LVIII.
A single act often implies a great variety of
circumstances. When a heathen threw but
a grain- of salt on an idolatrous altar, by that
act he acknowledged himself devoted to ido
latrous worship in all its points- of persuasion, duties,,

58 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
duties, and consequences. When a Mahonn
medan swears by the Koran, he intimates his
belief in the contents of that volume, and his
sense of obligation to receive every thing
taught, and to comply with every thing com
manded in its several books. With a single
Word, or a single Clause, are often combined
many concomitant ideas. When Faith is said
to be the condition of Salvation, it implies
also Obedience corresponding with that Faith.
When Obedience is said to be the condition of
Salvation, it implies also Faith as the source
from Which such Obedience should spring.
We pray that the " Name" of God may be
hallowed. In that term we include all the
attributes of God, and every consideration re
lative to the glory of God. It is said, " Let
every one that nameth the name of Christ
depart from iniquity." (2 Tim. ii. 19.) The
import is, that every one, who calling himself
a Christian, thereby acknowledges himself
bound to believe all the doctrines, and obey
all the precepts, delivered by Christ, should
avoid wickedness of every description. When
the multitude, and when Cornelius, by St,
Peter (Acts ii. 41. x.*48) ; the Ethiopian, by St,

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 59
St. Philip (Acts viii. 38); and the Keeper of
the prison at Philippi, by St. Paul (Acts xvi.
31); were baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus, they were admitted into the profession
of all that the Lord Jesus had commanded
his Apostles to " go and teach ;" the very
article connected with which command is,
the acknowledgement of " the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Spirit." UpOn a con
struction of the above-mentioned passages even
in a limited sense, and supposing the converts
were required only to acknowledge, that
Christ was the Messiah, even then, on the*'
principle that the " Greater, contains the
Lesser," such acknowledgement would lead to
an obligation of professing all consequent
points of faith and practice. For, if Christ
was Messiah, he was authorised to teach ; and
what he taught, his disciples were bound to.
observe. From a confession that Christ was
Messiah, that is, as appears from St. Peter's
declaration (St. Matth. x-vi. 16), and as it Was*
well understood in those days, " the Son of
God" eminently and emphatically, the duties
of receiving and observing his doetrines ne
cessarily followed* LIX. " I

€0 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY/
LIX.
** I thank God that I baptized none of
you," says St. Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor.
i. 14). Why should the Apostle manifest so
great earnestness, and why express himself sO
very strongly on this occasion I Because, he
thought it would be dishonouring. Christ, if
he had admitted disciples in his own name.
And wherefore should he be anxious on that
account, if he had believed Christ to have
been merely human, and to have been still
sleeping in the grave? He could have in
curred no evil present. or future,, had Christ
been merely human, and still sleeping in the'
grave. It is clear then he believed Christ to
be more than human ; to be raised from the
grave ; to be the witness, 'the judge, the re-
warder of his actions. LX.
The phrases " baptized in the name of
Paul," and " baptized unto Moses," occur in
the First Epistle to the Corinthians (i. 13, x. 2).
It is to be observed, that the sense of the
self-

THOUGH i'S ON THE TRINITY. 6l
self-same expression often varies, as the subject
with which it is connected varies. The word
" Cultus" applied to " Deorum"' will signify
•*,' worship ;" applied to " Arvoritm," it will
signify " Cultivation." " Pietas in Deos"
means what we understand by religious'
" piety :" " Pietas in Parentes," or " in, Fra
tres," will mean " Filial," ©r " Fraternal
affection." ©epoLirew (as used by Xenophon)
from Men to Gods signifies *' worship :" the
same word implied in Seqoiirsveiv (used by the
same author, Mem. i. 4, 10) from1 Gods to
Men, signifies " providential care :" Utg-ig in
Acts (xvii. 31) is " an assurance given" that
an event will happen: in Rom. (xiv. 23)
" confident persuasion" that a thing is right :
in Rom. (xii. 3) ff a thing entrusted:" in
Rom. (i. 17) "faith in God's promises." "To
be baptized in the name of Paul," means " to
be admitted by baptism as the disciples' of a
religion instituted by Paul." '**To be bap
tized unto Moses/' is a figurative expression,
and, when applied to the Israelites, means
" to profess themselves followers of Moses-'and
engaged in the Mosaic- Covenant." But " to
be baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and

62 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
and Holy Spirit," means, " to be admitted
by baptism into a religion professing belief
that there is a, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit;"
and then, through that relation in which Man
stands to each of those divine Persons in the
work of Redemption, and through the moral
obligation thence resulting, the same ex
pression means by inference, " being admitted
into a religion which professes such belief,
and also' the worship of the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost." Being " baptized unto Moses,"
could never mean " the worshipping of
Moses,*' because the idea of worshipping
Moses is in itself blasphemous. But not blas
phemous is the idea of worshipping the Fa
ther, because worship is due to the Father.
Therefore, we may interpret " being baptized
into the name of the Father," as signifying
" into the worship of the Father," without
impropriety. But if we can so take the
words as implying religious duty towards the
Father, we may take them as implying the
same duty towards the Son, and towards the
Holy Spirit. For, the same act of our mind,
which either by direct sense, or by necessary
and obvious deduction, can be understood in
the

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 63
the expression etg ovopot as extending to the
Father, must be understood as extending to
the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. And as the
words 'T<« and nvevpoiTog refer each to tig
evof4.ee, each object has reference to the same
act of our mind.

LXI.
In his zeal for true religion St. Paul was
much disturbed, when he beheld Athens full
of idols (Acts, xvii. 16). In the same spirit,
on one occasion he denies the entity of those
imaginary gods, which idols were formed to
represent (1 Cor. viii. 4); on another, he
calls them "dumb idols" (1 Cor. xii. 2).
With earnestness he proposes this question;
What agreement hath the temple of God with
idols? (2 Cor. vi. 16.) He tells the Thessa
lonians it is to their praise, that they " turned
to God from idols." (1 Thess. i. 9.) £till
farther, In his Epistle to the Colossians, he
cautions them against being seduced tp the
worship of angels, as mediators between God
and Man, lest by such worship they should
7,pse their Christian reward. (Col. ii. 18.) It is

64 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
is however worthy of notice and considera
tion, that this same Apostle, Who had thus
expressed himself respecting idolatry and
respecting Angel-worship, nevertheless says
to the' Corinthians " I besought the Lord,"
i. e. Christ, intimating thereby an act of
prayer (2 Cor. xii, 8) ; and to Timothy, " I
thank Christ Jesus our Lord ;" implying the
power of Christ to hear those thanks, {l Tim.
j. 12.) He exhorts the Ephesians to give
thanks for all things unto God the 'Father,
" in the name of our Lord Jesus /Christ."
(Eph. v. 20.) , He animates the Roman Con
verts by an assurance, "that Christ is risen
again, is even a_t the right hand of God, and
makes intercession" for us" (Rom. viii. 34);
by whioh exhortation and by which assurance
St. Paul must be understood as telling them,
that when prayers were offered on the ground
of Christ's perfect righteousness and all-suffi
cient atonement, our Lord heard them, and
makes them accepted of the Father, in whose
glory hO is most highly exalted. And now
let us ask ; Is it probable, that an Apostle thus
zealous against idolatry, and thus strenuous
against angel-worship, should yet himself adore

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 6*5
adore and admonish .others to adore Christ
with religious service, if he had not been
actually convinced that Christ was really
existing in that region where God's glory is
particularly manifested, and that he was en
dued with attributes more than angelic ? The
adoration paid by himself, and the direction
given to others for similar practice, must, con
sistently with St. Paul's sentiments, language,
and actions, be considered as proofs that he
believed the existence and the divinity of
Christ. He forbids worshipping idols; he
forbids worshipping angels; yet he himself
worships and bids others worship Christ:
Christ therefore must be more than angel;
and if more than angel, God.
LXII.
When St. Peter styled our Lord tov A^ijy»
£«ijff» " the Leader who would conduct us, to
eternal life" (Acts,, iii. 15) ; when of our Lord
he boldly affinmed before the Jewish Rulers,
"Him hath God exalted to be'Ap^qyw xai
2wtij£#, " a Leader to eternal life and a Sa
viour" (Acts, v. 31); when he shewed the
f * completion.

46 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
completion of Daniel's prophecy, ii. 44, con
cerning Christ's eternal kingdom, and called
him "Lord of "All" (Acts* x. 36); when St* "
Johntdenominated him to be our " Advocate
with the Father," interceding in behalf of
penitent sinners (1 St. John, ii. 1) ; did these
Apostles then speak of Christ, as of a man
,still sleeping in the grave ? as of a person dis
tinguished by no characteristics peculiar to
himself and himself alone, in contradistkic-
. tion to all that ever existed in this world '? , No
candid interpreter, who knows the force of
words, will answer in the affirmative.
LXI1I.
Remarkable is that passage in St. Peter's
first Epistle, where the Apostle teaches us,
that Christ by his Spirit signified to the pro
phets, the sufferings lie should first endure,
and the glories to which he should afterwards.
be exalted : events these, which though by
Christ they were clearly, discerned, were yet
, to Angels obscure. *(l St. Peter, i. 11, 12.)
This pre-eminence of foreknowledge shews
also pie-eminence " of character in Christ.
Consistently

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 61
Consistently with which distinction the Apostle
again says of Christ, " who is gone into hea
ven, and is at the right hand of God, Angels,
and Authorities, and Powers, being made
subject unto him." (1 St.- Pet. iii. 22.) Di
vine prescience, divine dignity, divine supe
riority, are thus attributed to Christ, whom
the Evangelists and Apostles considered as
Divine; and if Divine, God.
LXIV.
" There are diversities of gifts, but the same
Spirit : there are differences of administrations,
but tlie same Lord : there are diversities of
operations, but it is the same God," says St.
Paul to the Corinthians. (1 Cor. xii. 5,6.)
Why this express and distinct mention of Spi
rit ; Lord ; God ? The same Apostle pro
nounces on the Corinthians this final and so
lemn benediction : ".The grace jof the Lord
.Jesus Christ ; and the love of God ; and the
communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you
all." (2 Cor. xiii. 1.4.) Whence again this
threefold distinction ? Both passages, clearly
•allude to the baptismal form of words, * In
f 2 the

68 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
Of the Holy Ghost :" therefore, whatever of per
sonality and of divinity in each of those sacred.
Three that form implies, the same do these
passages of the Apostle imply. In Poole's
, " Synopsis Criticorum," we have the follow
ing remarks on the Benediction. " Sunt hlc,
ut in Baptismo, aperte nomina 7% Tpalog
ejus, quam Christiani colunt." (Grotius.)
" Plainly here, as in the Baptismal Form, are
the names Of that Trinity, which Christians
worship." " Hinc constat, Spiritum S. 'ejus.
dem esse naturae cum Patre et Filio," (Erasmus ,
ex Chrysostomo.) " Hence it is evident, that
the Holy Spirit is of the same nature with the
Father and the Son." LXV.
That a solemn invocation to the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Spirit, was used at the ad
ministering of Baptism in the Second Century,
is an allowed Fact. This invocation, which
probably had prevailed from the time of our
Lord, shews evidently that the sense, in which
the early Christians understood the baptismal words

Thoughts on the trinity. 69
words delivered by our Lord, was the sense
commonly now affixed to, them by Trinita
rians. For, it is not to be conceived, they
would invoke solemnly any thing, which,
they did not believe to have existence : nor,
that they would solemnly invoke with Godj
any thing which they did not think might be
named with God without dishonour to his
holy attributes. On this ground we may cpnr
elude, they believed the Son and the Holy
Spirit to have real existence, and such ex-
. istence they believed to be divine.
LXVL
•-, These two assertions will scarcely be con
troverted ; That on Questions of Christian
Religion we "should appeal to the Scriptures;
and, That in order to interpret the Scriptures
justly and properly, we must compare toge*
ther several different passages, and explain
one by another. Through want of attention '
to these rules, the Docetas and the Cerinthians,
Sectaries of the Second .Century, fell into op
posite extremes in their opinions respecting
Jesus Christ. Truth is commonly found to
f3 be
>

70 THOUGHTS- on the trinity.
be placed between extremes. It was so iri
their case. From their contrary- OpirftottS,
howeve'r, Macknight has justly inferred, it is
" probable that the Apostles taught, and that
the first Christians believed Christ to be both
God and Man. For, if the Docetas had nOt
been taught the divinity of Christ, they had
no temptation to deny his humanity. And if
the Cerinthians had not been taught the hu
manity of Christy they would have been under
no necessity of denying his divinity."
LXVII.
'If an -author •attests' a Fact, the reality of
that Fact will in no degree be affected by any"
Opinion which the author may have formed
respecting the Fact itself. -Be his opinion
what it may, his testimony is the same. Or
rather perhaps, rif although he condemns a
Fact, he nevertheless attests it, his testimony
in that case Is of greater weight;' for he
speaks, not from partiality, but from mere
veracity. Pliny, in his Epistle to Trajan,
asserts " that the Christians were accustomed
on a stated day to assemble! before it was light,
" , and

THOUGHTS ON the TRINITY. 71
and to sing a hymn to Christ as to a God."
Thus even an enemy to Christianity proves
that in the time of Trajan, a time long ante
cedent to Constantine the Great, the divinity
of our Lord was acknowledged and adored
by Christians. LXVIII.
The Writings of Homer were not therefore
less excellent because Matron perverted and
misapplied them in parody. Quite the con
trary. The best things are most easily made
subjects of burlesque, because the outlines of
their character are most strongly marked, and
thence most readily traced and imitated. The
doctrine of the Trinity was not therefore less
true, because Lucian in his Philopatris thought
proper to ridicule that, with other Christian
doctrines. The levity both of Matron and of
Lucian has furnished us with ground for
ascertaining two circumstances. They are
these. From the parodies of the. one, we
know that the Writings of Homer existed in
the days of Matron. From the dialogue of
the other, we know that the doctrine of the
-f 4 Trinity,

72 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
Trinity was holden by Christians contempo1-
raries with Lucian. But Lucian lived under
the Emperors Trajan, Adrian, Antoninus Pius,
and Marcus Aurelius : he proves therefore the
doctrine of the Trinity to have been holden
lOng before the reign of Constantine the
Great. LXIX.
The prejudiced Jew disliked the very name
" Galilean," and " Samaritan." The preju-
diced Greek disliked the very name " Ca-
rian ;" f( Theban ;" " Macedonian." So much
in actual life are we carried away by mere
names. v In religious opinions the case is simi
lar. Many reject the Athanasian and Nicene
Creeds, merely because they are called
" Athanasian," and " Nicene."
LXX.
The rainbow seems as if it could be
grasped : and the sun as if it set in the sea.
The fact however is not so in either instance,
however it may appear. Deciding therefore on

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 73-
on appearance only, is unphilosophical, be
cause it may be often in opposition to reality.
Such judgment has that been, which on a
slight and cursory view has at any time pro
nounced the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds
to be in contradiction one to the other. How
ever they may appear at first sight, yet if exa
mined, they will be found to contain this
same doctrine ; namely, there is one vitosoung-
of Godhead ; but there are three •arj.oo-.wa in
that vTrog-txo-ig. One Godhead ; Three Persons.
And they both mean to guard against any
idea, that the Son of, God was of a nature
created, and therefore they assert him to have
the same essential nature as the Father; i. e.
divine nature : for the sameness is a sameness
t in quality. LXXI.
Neither he who begun the Reformation of
our Religion, nor he who effected the Resto
ration of our Constitution, was among the best
of men. Good however were the doctrines
of the Reformed Religion ; and good the doc
trines of the Restored Constitution, It does not

74 THOUGHTS Otf THE TRINITY.
flot then follow, that because the maintainers
of a doctrine are bad men, the doctrine itself
cannot be right. In common life we learn
from sad experience, that teaching is one
thing, practice another. * The doctrine of the
instructor may be sound ; his conduct, impru
dent. And this. remark is made, because some
Writers on Ecclesiastical History have objected
to the doctrine of the Trinity, through just
disapprobation of Members in Councils, who
were corrupt Men, but maintained that
dbctrine. LXXII,
Some have denied the existence of God :
some, the superintending care of divine Pro
vidence: some, the truth of Jewish and of
Christian Revelation. But it does not follow
from the objections of such persons, that either
of these doctrines is unsupported by Argu
ment and Fact. The error then, or the pro
priety of a Doctrine, does not rest either on
the reluctance with which it is received on
the One hand, or on the readiness with which
it is adopted on the other. LXXIII. For-

»

THOUGHTS ON, THE TRINITY. 75

LXXIII.
Formularies of Faith give general proposi
tions, rather than particular explanations.
Such explanations they leave for those, whose
province it is to expound. The Creed, which
contains the opinions of Athanasius, may be
thus elucidated.
1... The Second, Twenty-eighth, and Forty-
second Verses are to be taken in the same ac
ceptation as the passage of St. Mark's Gospel,
xvi. 16, on which they are grounded. The
implied;% qualifications, which are admitted in
the interpretation of the Gospel declarations,
are to be admitted in the exposition of those
clauses in the Creed. Do you ask, what those
qualifications are ? Weigh well these expres
sions ; " Shall not the Judge of all the Earth
do right?" (Gen. xviii. 25.) " Unto whom
soever much is given, of him shall be much
required." (St. Luke, xii. 48.) And then, if
you have right ideas of equity and mercy,
and recoHect Man, as a rational Being, is re
sponsible to God for the wilful neglect and
wilful

76 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
wilful perversion of his Intellectual Talents,
you will yourself answer that question.
2. The Tenth and Seven following Verses
contain the Attributes of Deity : and they
mean to say, that although such Attributes
belong to each Person individually, neverthe-
^ ^ less from the identity of their nature, the
identity of authority on which they act, the
identity of design and end with t which they
exert those Attributes in the works of creation,
providence, moral government, and redemp
tion, by whatever denomination each may be
called, as expressive of divinity, yet they are,
* to all intents and purposes of uniform quality
and uniform effect, but one God.
The object of these clauses is to guard
against the idea, that Christians maintain the
doctrine of three Principle's contrary and op
posite to1 each other, as the Manichajans con
ceived of their Two Pririciples; , -
3. That things equal to the same thing are
equal to one another, is the fundamental
axiom on which mathematical demonstration
and logical reasoning proceed. It cannot be
denied, that in whatever circumstances various thingg

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 77
things agree, so far they are equal. It cannot
be denied, tliat such equality, so far as it ex--
tends, excludes comparison of greater or lesser.
Apply this to ver. 25, 26. Time and Power
are the circumstances, to which those verses
allude. With a view to these circumstances
they affirm, that as the Three have existed
from Eternity, there can in their existence be
no priority with regard to Time. And, as the
Three act in one and the ssame power, there
can in the authority of their acting be no re
lative superiority with regard to the nature of
that power. , Unity admits not disparity.
It is true, our Lord did indeed say, " My
Father is greater than all," (St. |ohn, x. 29.)
But it is also true that he said immediately
after, " I and my Father are One." (x. 30.)
How are we to interpret this ? By referring
to the context. Our Lord had intimated,
that eternal life and salvation should be given
to his disciples. Their enemies might indeed
here persecute them ; yet notwithstanding
such malice, of their final reward they should
hot hereafter be deprived ; for his Father,
who " is greater than all," i. e. than all their ,
enemies (as the context shews) would by his
Power

7S THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
Power secure to them that ultimate recom
pence. He instantly subjoins, " I and my
Father are one." In what respect ? What
was the subject on which our Lord was at that
moment discoursing ? On the Power of the
Father. Our Lord meant, then to say, " I
and my Father are One" in Power. And so
the Jews understood him. For they prepared
to stone him, because he had " made himself
God." (x. 33.) Not God " the Father," for
he had marked out that distinction most
clearly ; but Gpd " the Son," acting in die
power of the " Father," and in that respect
equal. To this equality of Power. the Creed
refers, when' it asserts, " none is greater or
less than another." -
It cannot be forgotten that our Lord -said,
" My Father is greater than I." (St. John,
xiv. 28.) But the occasion, on which he
spoke these words-, must be recollected. It
was a season of sorrow and fear^ to his disci
ples, who were perplexed in their thoughts and
dismayed in their apprehensions of losing their
Master. He consoled and encouraged them
by suggesting, that however much they might
despond at his predictions of the sufferings he
was

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 79
A 1
was soon to endure,, yet they should have
confidence in his "Father," who could not
suffer : however much they might doubt of
his own future power to help them, because
of his present humiliation, yet they should
not distrust the " Father," who could not be
so humbled. With reference then to himself
as a suffering and humbled Man, our Lord,
at the time to which we allude, used the ex
pression " My Father is greater than I :" not
intending thereby to weaken the force either
of his exhortation previously given ; " Ye
believe in God ; believe in me also" (St. John,
xiv. l) as the Messiah ; or of dje declaration
before made; " I and my Father are One;"
a declaration which intimated that unity of
Power asserted by the Creed.
4. No position is to be so strained, as by
forced construction to be made bear a mean
ing, which was never intended. The words
" None is afore or after other, but the Three
are Co-eternal," were meant, with respect to
that eternity from which . each has existed.
The words " None is greater or less than ano
ther, but the Three are Co-equal," were
meant, with respect to exertion of -that same
Power

80 THOUGHTS O^ THE TRINITY.
Power by which they each act. As to the
origin of that Power, it is entirely another
question not in the contemplation of these
two Verses, 25, 26. It is a question, which
being totally distinct, had been distinctly ex
plained in Verses 22, 23. In . those Verses,
the " Father" is asserted to be the fountain
and origin of divinity, and of course the foun
tain and origin of, all divine Power. The
Nicene Creed, which corresponds with the creed
under consideration, intimates the sarhe, when
it styles our Lord Qeov ex ®ev, (pug ex (purog, Qsov
ahyQivov ex ©£» uXyhvit, " God of i. e. from
God, Light of Light, very God of very God."
And the most learned writer ont this subject
has shewn, that the Primitive Christians before
the Council of Nice as well as after that
Council, held this doctrine. " Uno ore do-
cuerunt" (are his words), " they taught it
with one voice," so unanimous were, they in
this opinion. Perfectly consistent therefore
with each other are Verses 25, 26, and Verses
22, 23, for they are considering the subject in
a different point of view. On the one' hand
they assert that the Time of Existence, and
the nature of Power, is the same to all : on
the

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 81
the other, that nevertheless the origin of such
existence and of such Power is with the
" Father." And these were the general ten
ets of the ancient and most early Christians,
in consonance with which are the sentiments
of the Established Church, as delivered by
Pearson in the moil approved manner. " The
godhead was communicated from the Father
to the Son, not from the Son unto the Father*
Though therefore this were done from all
eternity, and so there can be no priority of
Time, yet there must be acknowledged a pri
ority of Order, by which the Father, not the
Son, is first ; and the Son, not the Father, is
second. Again ; the same godhead was com
municated by the Father, and die Son, unto
the Holy Ghost; not by the Holy Ghost to
the Father, or the Son. Though therefore this
was also done from all eternity, and therefore
caii admit of no priority in reference to Time ;
yet that of Older must be preserved." (Pear
son on the Oeed, p. 322, ed. 1704.) It is
neediess to prove, that if the Father cemmu-
a1) .cated Godhead, he iiv„;it he the origin of
godhead. g 5. It

£3 ffjrotrGirrs on the trinity*
5. It has been frequently said by others^,,
and may be said again in this place, that, in,
Ver. 28 and 42, the expressions " must thus
think," and "this is -lhe Catholic Fahh,"
apply only to the general doctrine of the Tri*
nity, and not to the particular mode of ex*
planation given in this Creed. To the general
doctrine, considered apart' from the explana
tion, every Christian is bound; because it is
the very doctrine of his Baptismal admission
into the Christian church ; the very doctrine
he professes in his Creed, called the Apostles
Creed. For although the word " Trinity"
is not mentioned in that Creed, yet the " sub
stantial meaning" of the word is implied.
6. The effects, which result from a certain,
combination of inherent qualities,, we do
know : but by what particular- manner* ex
cept by the Will of God I such combination
of those qualities is effected, in many instances-
we do not know. If we admit as true, no
thing but what we can explain,, our faith wilt
be extremely limited i and such limitation
will exclude from Our assent, Facts reallv ex-
isting. Can we explain the union of these
properties*

'THOUGHTS ©tf THE tRINITY-. 83
properties, Nvi2. of the vegetable and sensitive
in the plant ; the torpid and animate in the
insect ; the animal and instinctive in the
beast; the animal and rational in man? As-
-surtedly not; And yet, that these properties
are united in the respective, instances men
tioned, is Fact. Inability then to account for
a thing, is no proof that the thing could
never have existence. It is therefore no proof:
that human and divine nature may never have
been united. So far as it refers to oiir own
powers of explaining, every instance of union
before mentioned is just as wonderful and un*
accountable as this. Do you say* I never"
4aiw ari instance of human and divine nature
tohitdel ? True t but others have : men of ve
racity : many in number i credible witnesses :
.competent judges;. , -You may not Only read
their evidence; but you may ascertahi the
effects of such Union, in the history Of Con*
Version from heathenism which took place in
.Mtksms savage and idolatrous; Do you an
swer, I liatist see an instance of such unio®
with niy own eyes, before I Can assent ii Suteh
an answer will be no ttmre consistent wiA
&&utod phitoiophy, than would -be ithe answer
G 2 of

'84 Thoughts on The trinIty.
of an dtaheitean, who should say he must
'see the Works of our Arts and Sciences before
he Could believe they existed : or of a tropi
cal inhabitant^ who should say he must see
the phasnomena of the Northern Hemisphere
before he could believe their actual appear*
ance. The hesitation of neither would avail
towards disproving the matter of Fact : it
would only shew his ill-grounded difficulty in
believing, and the mistaken principle on
which he would have drawn his conclusion.
The application of all this to our Lord's in
carnation is obvious.
7. Whoever is sincere in using the Aposdes
Creed, may without scruple assent to the lead
ing doctrines of the Athanasian Creed; for
most assuredly they both mean to inculcate
one and the same doctrine of a Trinity in
Unity; that is, ^of Three Divine Persons
united in one Substance of Godhead, distin
guished by the appellations of Father, Son^
and Holy Ghost : and the same doctrine of
our Lord's Incarnation. The ancient Creeds
Of Irenaeus and Tertullian agree with, these in
teaching similar articles of faith.- And all
correspond with St. Paul's wwdsy Eph. iv. 5, 6*
" Where

thoughts on the trinity. ' 85
" Where (says Cleaver) we may obviously
recognise, though in an inverted order, the,.
leading articles of all subsequent Creeds :
Faith in one God and Father of all; in one
Lord Jesus Christ; in one Holy Spirit; one
Body or Catholic Church ; one Baptism for
the remission of sins; one hope or looking
for a resurrection .to everlasting life."
LXXIV.
That there should be variety of judgments
concerning the ancient Christian Writers, is
no more extraordinary than that there should
be variety of judgments about other men,
who have rendered themselves conspicuous
by their literary productions or active exer
tions. Of Thucydides, for instance, biogra
phers speak differently. Some represent him
as dishonest to his country ; others affirm he
was an impartial historian. It is to be feared,
that perhaps according to diversity of inclina
tions, as much as "according to diversity of
conceptions, in general friends extol, enemies
censure. Both probably will be excessive.
Right opinion will be between both. With
g 3 regard

86 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY-
.regard to the Fathers, learned readers, will
judge for themselves ; the unlearned will sup
pose that where much is said for and against
them, though $here may be somewhat to
blame, yet there must be also somewhat to
commend. Neither praise, nor reproach,
indiscriminate and unqualified, is applicable
to Man, ot to any Work of Man* so mixed
is the character Of every thing human.
LXXV.
If blind admiration be a fault on one side,
entire contempt of the Fathers is a fault on
the other. " It would be a false inference
(says Jorlin) to conclude from the blemishes
and mistakes of the Fathers,, that they are td
be cast aside as altogether useless."
LXXVI.
Of Justin Martyr, who lived in the Second '
Century, Thirlby says, " Non ille quidem
• omnium qui unquam fuerunt autdisertissimus
aut acutissimus : sed tamen vividus, aeer, et .
multis nominibus utilissimus; et quanquam minus

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 87
minus aptus fortasse fastidiosas hujus delicati
sagculi elegantias, ut iis tamen temporibus
doctrina, judicio, eloqUentia minime vulgari.
Has virtutes duo maxime vitia obscurant: in-
credibilis quasdam in scribendo festinatio, et
stylus iracundus." Jortin represents him as
" a hasty writer, and of a warm, and credu
lous temper :" but he gives us also the better
side of Justin's character, by adding, he was
" a virtuous, pious, honest man, incapable of
wilfully deceiving. He wanted neither learn
ing, nor vivacity, nor an unartificial eloquence.
The love of Truth was his predominant pas
sion, to which he sacrificed all worldly consi
derations, and for which he laid down his
life with great resolution ; and therefore who
soever loves Truth, should love him and his
memory." The testimony of such a man in
proof of this point, " that there did prevail
in his days a certain doctrine," deserves cre
dit. He says, "We praise the Maker of
all things through his Son Jesus Christ, aud
through the Holy Spirit;".." We adore the
Son and the Spirit." By which expressions
he does attest it as a matter of Fact existing
and acknowledged, and on his testimony it is
g 4 to

88 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
to be believed, that the doctrine of the Trinity
was in substance maintained by his Contem
poraries, who lived long before the ^Council
of NJice. The same remark will apply to
; Athenagoras, the " civility, and. decency,
and politeness" of whose Apology, "are (in
Jortin's opinion) observable.
Theophilus was a Convert from heathenism
to Christianity, as Justin and Athenagoras
were, and in the Second Qentury. He writes
like. a Man who believed on conviction, after.
diligent research and serious reflexion. It js
true, we find him not exempt, from what is
vicious in point of good taste ; but fanciful
and far-fetched conceits in any author, wijl
not invalidate his credit as a Man, when cited
to prove the existence of a Fact. Theophilus
then by his expressions demonstrates, that the
doctrine of a Trinity was holden in his days.
Of Justin, Athenagoras, and Theophilus,
it is to be observed, they imbibed not this,
doctrine in their childhood, nor were Trini
tarians through the . prejudices of early edu;-
cation. They were Heathen Philosophers:
were converted to. Christianity : and embraced
this as an original principle of Christian Faith.
LXXVII,

VHQfJGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

LXXVIL
For the opinions of Plato, for the opinipn^
of Aristode', we refer to Academic, or to Peri?
patetic Commentators. For -Christian Opin
ions in early days, why we should not appeal
to Christian Commentators, who lived in those
days, nosufftcient reason haseveryet been given.
The question here is not, Whether these opinr
ions were in themselves right or wrong,? but,
Whether the Commentators have treated "of
those opinions, and given illustrations of them,
and thus proved they were then Christian
ppinions ? LXXVIII.
If before the Reformation too great defe
rence was paid to the Fathers, as though they
were infallible ; since the Reformation too
Jittle respect has been shewn them, as though
they were absolutely incompetent to judge,
and incapable of speaking truth* So prone
are we to run from one extreme; to, another :
and

SO THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
and so easy is the transition from error on one
side, to error in a direction entirely opposite.

LXXIX*
-i Why the most early Fathers should not be
at least as competent to interpret Scripture, as
we'^ourselves are, no just cause can be as
signed. Why they should be much more com
petent than we ate, may be adduced reasons
Which will appear strong, to those who con
sider the proximity of the times, in which
many of the Fathers wrote, to the commence
ment of Christianity; and the opportunities
they had of collecting the sentiments of thp
Aposdes themselves, some by personal inter
course, and others by not very remote tra
dition.
- , .« ' "V,*\ LXXX.
'¦¦•¦iliV^
Speaking of the Nicene and Constantino-
politan explications of the Christian Doctrine,
Ridley observes, " The Fathers who lived
about those times, a little before or after the
latest

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 91
latest of those Councils, such a9 Basil, the
two Gregories, Didymus, and Cyril of Alex~
andria, in their Discourses on the Holy Spirit,
drew their doctrines entirely from the Scrip
tures, and did not then fashion, but succeeded
to the Faith, by tradition of those who pne»- *.
sided: in the Church from the Apostolical age
to their own times. To which they appeal,
producing their testimonies, and tracing it up
to the New Testament ; where they challenge
a cloud of witnesses." Ridley's " Eight Ser
mons" shew him to have been a man of erur
dition, and well acquainted with the Writings
of Heathen and Christian Antiquity.
LXXXL
Philostorgius (says Suidas) hath made men
tion of Basil, in words to this effect ; " In
those times flourished Basil of Cassarea of Cap
padocia, and Gregory at Nazianzen, and Ap-
pollinarius in Laodicea of Syria. These three
men contended for the doctrine of " Con-
subtanstiaUiy" against that of " Different-Sub
stance," by far excelling all the advocates of
$hat heresy, who had ever written before, or
who

Q% THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY^
jwho -have written since from that time to my
pwn ; so that even Athanasius was thought a
child when compared with them. For they
had made very great proficiency in what is
called extraneous, i. e. profane learning ; and
in the Sacred Writings, with respect to what?
ever - perfected the reading and quick recol
lection of them, they had great 'experience;.
and Basil the most of all." Philostorgius was
an Arian. He was nevertheless candid enough
pot to withold from tliese eminent persons
their due praise, although they were of a
different persuasion. In this he gave an exT
ample of moderation to be comniended and
jrnitated. LXXXII.
• Whether, among the early Christian Wrir
ters, the most approved by the Christian World
in general did or did not maintain the doc
trine of a Trinity, is as much a question of
Fact, as whether Sir Isaac Newton did or did
not maintain the principles of gravitation and
attraction. That such Writers did maintain
that doctrine, no man can possibly doubt, who

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINlTYl 9t
s
Who will read the work to which we have
before referred, and which, (to use Waterland's
words) " will stand as long as clear sense,
sound reasoning, and true learning have any
friends left," the " Defensio Fidei Nicasnag/'
LXXXHI.
By ascribing divine attributes to Three Per*
-sons,- the ancient Christian Writers asserted a
Trinity in the quality of Godhead ; by main
taining the " Father" to be the onlyvsource of
Divinity, they asserted Unity in the Power of
divine Government, LXXXIV-
Whence did the primitive Christians collect
their ideas respecting the Trinity ? From
examining, and comparing with each other,
Various texts and various passages in the Scrip
tures; and by reasoning on the whole put
together.

LXXXV.

#4 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

LXXXV.
St. Paul confuted the Jews, who denied
that, Jesus Christ was the Messiah, <ru/*£.£a£W,
" by bringing together" a variety ,of texts
from the Scriptures of the Old Testament.
These he applied to Christ ; and by shewing"
the correspondence of real character in him,
with intimations given and delineations marked
out, in the Sacred Writings of Moses and the
Prophets, the Apostle proved what he wished
to demonstrate (Acts, ix. 22), This method
is analogous to the process of reasoning in the
human mind. We put together various facts,
and then draw our conclusion from those facts.
It is the very characteristic of Man's nature,
as Rational, to proceed thus*
LXXXVt.
We act in conformity with St. Paul's prat*
tice,,and with the ordinary course of human
reasoning, when we bring together various
texts of Scripture, and thente prove the doc-*
'-¦- ( trine

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY, 95
trine of a Trinity and Unity. Divine Nature is
One. Three Persons have the attributes of di
vine nature : in divinity of nature they must be
One. Divine Government is One : Three
Persons direct their energies to effectuate the
self-same ends of that One Government : in
the purposes and power of divine Govern
ment they must be One. But divine nature
and divine Government are the very qualities,
which essentially constitute Godhead. >In
Godhead then, the Three must in quality (we
repeat the words to obviate misconception),
must in quality of Godhead be One. But if
One in Godhead, they must essentially be
One God. LXXXVII.
In all concerns of moment, before we de
part from what has been long received, we
may properly ask the question " Cui Bono?"
" for what good purpose" are we to innovate ?
Let this question be proposed in the case be
fore us. "For what good purpose of obtain
ing more distinct knowledge concerning the
Essential Nature and Eternal Existence of God*
should

96 THOUGHTS OJf tHE TRINITY^
should we reject the doctrine of a Trinity ? Fof
none. It would in that point of view ansWei4
no purpose whatever to reject the doctrine of a
Trinity. Men, good and acting on the most
pure intention, have indeed imagined they
could comprehend God's Essential Nature and
Eternal Existence better in Unity, than in
Trinity. Their thought however could be
but imaginary. For, provided they main
tained (what most have maintained) not any*
Materiality, but the Spirituality of God, they
could then no more form an accurate idea of
God's Essential Nature and Eternal Existence
in Unity, than they could in Trinity. They
could precisely and distinctly know nothing
in one, or in the other Case. And wherefore ?
For the same reason that a Man bom blind
knows nothing of Light in the Solar Orb;
We have no powers of mind commensurate
to any particle of such a subject as divine.
Essential Nature and Eternal Existences
LXXXVitL
, Supposing, for the sake of argument, we
reject Christianity ; and reverting to what is
, . called

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 91
called Natural Religion, let us stand upon
that ground. The degree of knowledge,
which could be acquired in Natural Religion,
can be collected only from considering those,
who have actually lived under that Religion.
With that knowledge then, " what more per
fect ideas respecting God's Essential Nature
and Eternal Existence, could we form in our
Minds, than those we now form V* The
Master-Moralist will tell us. cOt< pev ytx^ rot
S's.a vireo ypuzg, Tltooiti oyXov. Attowvj as tu
xgetTTOvi Ti\g Swuftuog avTisg o~e£eiv< Ota. <fe ei&iv9
%Tk\ eVfjllV paSlOV, S.TS t^TSlV $BfMT0V. (XenO*
phori's Epistle to ./Eschines, vol. V. part ii.
p. 173., ed. Wells.) " That there are divine
Beings above us, is to every person evident.
And it is enough to worship them, on account
of their superiority in power. But of what
nature they are, it is neither easy to discover,
nor lawful to enquire." That there really
did exist divine power, and that the exercise
of such power for the happiness of Man was
demonstrable in the works of creation, and
providence, Socrates in his valuable dialogues
with Aristodemus and Euthydemus very forci-
H bly

98 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
bly maintained. But that we can know the
essential nature of those Beings, in whom
such power resided, that he denied ; as may
be seen' in several passages similar to the
above, in the Writings of his modest and ac
complished encomiast. What reason have
we to think, that if we were standing on the
same ground of natural Religion as Socrates,
we should have more perfect knowledge of
divine things, than1 Socrates ? Did the phil
osophers of Rome know more? Did our
British ancestors, who were Druidical ; or our
Anglo-Saxon progenitors, who were Idolaters,
know, more ? Certainly not, so long as they
were heathens. Their more pure wisdom,
came from Christianity : and from the same
source comes our wisdom. But Christianity
' brought to themr delivers to us, and carries
with it, whereyer it goes, the doctrine of a
Trinity. LXXXIX.
Supposing we reject Christianity, and adopt
Judaism ; let us see what satisfaction concern ing.

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 99
ing the point in question, we shall thence de
rive. We no sooner open the Sacred History,
than we find a word implying Plurality intro
duced, as the title of the Almighty. How
ever we may labour to account for this, yet
after all it is a very striking circumstance, that
when the Sacred Writer might have used a
word of singular import (as he does elsewhere),
and thus have precluded all ambiguity, he
nevertheless uses a word of plural import thirty
times, at the beginning of his History and in
its primary chapters, and thereby admits am
biguity. And knowing, as we do, that from
this and other circumstances, it has been main
tained by very learned and considerate men,
that the Jews held a Plurality in the God
head, we should be led to conclude, /that at
-least the doctrine of Unity is far from having
been unquestionably the doctrine of the Jews.
The point has been disputed, and is still con
troverted. With respect therefore to deriving
any certainty on this doctrine from Judaism,
we should be disappointed* The matter is
doubtful. h 2 XC. He

100 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

XC.
He that should say, " the doctrine of the
Trinity has been disputed among Christians,
and is therefore questionable," would say what
is fact. But if he should urge this as a suffi
cient plea for rejecting the doctrine altogether,
he would judge hastily, and conclude erro
neously. - For he should consider on which
side of the question by far, very far the major
part of Christians, from the Apostles to the
Fathers, from the Fathers to us» through all
ages of Christianity, have most decidedly de
termined. He should consider, that while
only individuals, comparatively few, have oc
casionally denied the doctrine of a Trinity,
whole nations in a continuance and .in the-
most public manner have asserted that doc
trine, through successive generations during
the long course of Eighteen Centuries. On
these considerations, as the weight of general
and public judgement is evidently against
him, he should see there are strong grounds
for suspecting, .that they who deny the doc-
, trine

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 101
trine of a Trinity, merely because it has been
controverted, may possibly be wrong, and are
probably wrong, in their dissent from that
doctrine. XCI.
To him that should say, " the supporters
of the Trinitarian doctrine were fallible men, "*
and therefore might be mistaken ;" the reply
would be, "your remark is pardy inaccurate,
and partly correct. Inaccurate in the highest
degree with respect to our Lord, whose doc
trine it is, and who in his divine wisdom was
absolutely infallible ; inaccurate also accord
ing to the ideas of all Christians, with respect
to the Apostles, whose inspiration taken in the
' 'most limited sense, at least prevented them,
from being mistaken, when delivering funda
mental Truths. With regard to other Writers,
your remark is correct; they certainly were
fallible men, and as such might be mistaken.
But upon the same principle you also may be
mistaken. And anions the infinitude of
Writers, whether long since dead or still living,
who on principles conscientious and with ta-
H 3 lents

102 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
tents adequate have interpreted Scripture Texts
relating to this subject, the most able and the
most numerous Expositors will prove that you
.are mistaken ; but that the maintainers of a
Trinity are right in their opinion ; on the
grounds of Scripture, the grounds on which
the question must ultimately stand,
XCII.
For Our religious principles, whilst they are
confined to ourselves, we are responsible to
God only. For the manner in which we
openly declare our religious principles, and.
for the conduct we pursue under the influ
ence of them, we are responsible to Society
also. XCIII.
As the forming of right opinions depends
upon a combination of many circumstances,
how far it may or may not be in our own
power to form right opinions, admits of a
question. But about the impropriety of in
juring society by any mode of propagating our

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 103
our opinions, there should be no question.
For, nothing can be more clear, than that
man living in society, is bound by moral and
political obligations not to injure such society
either by word or deed. xciy.
Those, who hold, the doctrine of a Trinity,
however individually they may give different
explications of it, are nevertheless Trinitarians :
as those, who protest against a particular
Church, although unhappily among them
selves they have separated from each other
by multifarious divisions, and discriminate
each other by subtile distinctions implying
even dimidiation, are nevertheless all Pro
testants. In the former case, disputes about
exposition do not prove that therefore the
doctrine of a Trinity does not exist in Scrip
ture. In the latter case,, dissentions about
difficult a°d nice points do not prove" that
therefore the religion of Protestants is not to
be found in Scripture.
h 4 XCV. To

J04 THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.

XCV.
To particular minds, particular passages of
ancient Authors will frequently recur. What
if these sentiments were often recollected ?
Ciflpl S OiV 8/360-
ttuv (pgecriv etfivXetxiui
KVOtpiQptllTOl XpefAObVTCtl.
" around the minds of men hang innumerable
errors." (Pind. 01. 7.) "Seek not out the
things that are too hard for thee ; neither
search the things that are above thy strength.
But what is commanded thee think thereupon
with reverence: for it is not needful for thee
to see with thine eyes the things that are in
secret. Be not curious in unnecessary mat>
ters : for more things are shewed thee than
men understand." (Ecclesiasticus, iii. 21, 22,
23.) The remembrance of these verities,
founded on experience, how should it ope
rate? It should teach Humility and Mode
ration.

XCVI. Be

THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY. 105
XCVI.
Be the subject what it may, in holding the
same Doctrine, taken in a general and en
larged sense, men may agree : in their senti
ments about particular points and particular
explanations of the principal Doctrine, they
may nevertheless differ. And on this account
neither side should censure the other. Till
the minds of all men can in their talents and
conceptions be entirely alike, the j udgements
of all men cannot be entirely alike. To ex
pect it, were to expect an impossibility.
XCVIL
So long as it preserves command of tem
per, decency of language, propriety of ex
pression, adherence to sound, argument either
by reason or proof, candid' allowance for dif
ference of thinking, and above all, respect for
Public Opinion on subjects of a serious and
sacred nature, Partiality for one's own senti
ments is. venial. Venial therefore it will be in
a Member of the Church of England, if he
commends the Collect of his Church for Tri
nity Sunday, which precisely corresponds with

106* THOUGHTS ON THE TRINITY.
with his own views of the subject, as a very
fine specimen of clearness and comprehen
sion combined. XCVIII.
Considering the mutability of the human
mind, and the several melancholy instances
of well meaning persons, who under the de
bility of age have fallen from that rectitude
of judgement, which they shewed in the vi
gor of life and in the full strength of their
mental faculties, we cannot conclude our
" Thoughts" on the Triune Godhead more
properly, than by offering with all humility
that solemn prayer, in which we are well in
structed thus to supplicate for divine aid, in
wisdom spiritual and in concerns temporal : .
" Almighty and everlasting God ! who hast
given unto us thy Servants grace, by the con
fession of a true faith, to acknowledge the
glory of the Eternal Trinity, and in the power
of the-Divinc Majesty to worship the Unity ;
we beseech Thee, that Thou wouldest keep
us stedfast in this faith ; and evermore defend
us from all adversities ; who livest and reignest
One God, world without end. Amen."

107 )

REFERENCES,

No. III. " When Simonides."] Cicero de Na-
tura Deoriim, L. I. xxii. p. 54, Davis's 2d edit.
No. V. " When we contemplate."] ' Bp. Bull's
Sermon on the Exiftence of Angels.
No. VII. " has been -copioufly."] Defenfio
Fidei Nicaenae, pp. 25, 35, by Bp. Bull, ed. 1721.
No. VIII. " The Expofition."] Paris edition
of Juftin Martyr's Works, p. 374. This Exk<ng
is probably of later date than Juftin Martyr's
time. No. XI. " The Peripatetics and later Plato-
nifts."] Leland's Advantage and Neceffity of the
Chriftian Revelation, vol. I. p. 285, ed. 1768.
No. XVI. " Triad."] Cudworth's Intellectual
Syftem. Parker's Free and Impartial Cenfure of
the Platonic Philofophy, p. 113. Maurice's In
dian Antiquities, vol. IV. p. 426.
No.

I08 REFERENCES.
No. XVI. " delivered down."] De hypofta-
fium quoque diftinctione, quanquam eo per1 fe
pertingere non poteft humana ratio, aliquid ex
Traditione Veteri haufifle putatur Plato, et ut
quidam exiftimant etiam Ariftoteles. Grotii Pro
legomena Di6t". Poet, apud Stoboeum.
No. XVIII. " With regard to Chrift."] St.
John, ,i. i. vi. 38, 62. viii. 58. St. Matt. i. 20.
St. Luke, i. 35: Acts, ii. 24, 31, 32. St. Matt.
v and vi. xxviii. 19. 2 Cor. v. 21. Heb. iv. 15.
St. John, xvi. 30. xxi. 17. St. Luke, ix. 47.
St. John, iv. 18. St. Mark, ii. 8. St. Matt. xii.
.25. St. Matt. xi. 5. ix. 6. St. John x. 15. iii. 15.
4 x. 18. xi. 25. v. 28, 29. St. Matt. xxv. 31. St.
John, v. 23. xvii. 5. xvii. 24. v. 17. xiv. 2.
St.. Matt, xxviii. 19. iii. 17. St. Luke, ix. 35. ii.
11. Mal. iii. 1. 2 Cor. iv. 4. Col. i. 15, 19. Hebr.
i. 3. 1 St. John, i. 2. St. Matt. i. 23. Mal. iv. 2.
Jer. xxiii. 6. St. John, i. 1. ii. 3. St. John, xx.
a8. Rom. ix. 5.
No. XXII. " Thirty times."] Allix's " Judg
ment of the Jewifh Church againft the Unita
rians," p. 116, ed. 1699. See alfo, p. 11.9.
No. XXII. " Decalogue."]- " That the plural
Word is ufed withdie defign of intimating a plu
rality in the Godhead, in fome refpeft or other,
it is ftrange that any one mould doubt, who has
obferved; that it is ufed in places,' in which if
there

REFERENCES. ICMJ
there be in truth no plurality in the Godhead,
the infpired Writers muft have been determined,
by the principles of their religion, ftudioufly to
avoid the ufe of a plural ; efpecially as they had
fingulars at command. The plural is ufed in that
.. very precept, which prohibits tha worfhip of any
God but one. "I Jehovah am thy Gods, that
brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of
the houfe of bondage." — " Be not unto thee other
Gods befide me;" and in every fubfequent part
of the Decalogue, where God is mentioned, the
-plural word is introduced. In the fecond com
mandment, " For I Jehovah am thy Gods." In
the third, " Take not the name of Jehovah thy
Gods in vain." In the fourth, " The Sabbath
of Jehovah thy Gods." In the fifth, "The
land which Jehovah thy Gods is giving thee."
See p. 20, Animadverfions on Dr. Geddes's Cri
tical Remarks on the Holy Scriptures, printed by
Wilkes and Taylor, 1803.
No. XXII. "repetition."] "Hear, O Ifrael
(faith Mofes), Jehovah our God is one Jehovah."
.. Deut. vi. 4^ as tranflated by the late good and
learned Dr. Randolph, p. 131, vol. II. " A View
of our BlefTed Saviour's Miniftry." The fame
paflage is tranflated by Dr. Randolph thus alfo ;
^ "Jehovah our Gods Js one Jehovah." This
.(adds Dr. ,R,), if he did not hereby tiefign to
denote

110 REFERENCES.
denote a Plurality of Perfons in the Godhead,
ihould feem to be a ftrange form of expreflion.
P. 7. "Vindication of the Worfhip of the Son
and of the Holy Ghoft," ed. 1775;. " Let thofe,
who have any doubt whether Elohim when
meaning the true God, Jehovah, is plural or not,
confult the following' paffages, where they will
find it joined with Adjectives, Pronouns, and
Verbs plural." P. 22. Ed. 1792. Hebrew and
Englilh Lexicon by Parkhurft, who refers to
^twenty-five texts, in the Old Teftament, on this;
occafion. The fame Expofitor thus explains;
Jehovah — " the peculiar and incommunicable,
name of the Divine EfTence (fee If. xliii. 8. Hofi
xii. 4, 5.), fubfifting in a Plurality,' i..e. Trinity
of Perfons." See Deut. vi. 4. xxviii. 58. Lexi
con, p. 173.
No. XXIII. " Holy Gods."] Allix's. " Judg
ment of the Jewifh Church," p. 118.
No. XXIII. " thy Creators."] Allix, p. 118.
Kidder's " Demonftration of the Meffias." Part
III. p. 82.
No. XXIII. " the Holies."] Dr. Randolph's.
Prsele&iones Theologies," Prasl. I. p. 347, vol..
II. " View of our Blefled Saviour's Miniftry."
No. XXIV. " ancient and general."] Ridley's;
" Eight Sermons on the Divinity and Operations
Qf the Holy Ghoft," p. 52. Ed. 1742.
No.

REFERENCES. Ill
No. XXV. " a referhblance between them."]
Grotius " De Veritate Religionis Chriftianae,"
Lib. I. 1 6.
No. XXVI. "Ridley."] " Eight Difcourfes,"
P- 79-
No. XXVI. ".Ow/wngwiw."] Julii Pollucis,
Lib. I. C. i. S. i.
No. XXVI. " 10 Kfg/Txw."] ^Eliani Var. Hift.
L. III. C. i. vol. I. p. 197. Ed. Gronovii.
No. XXVII. "the opening of St. John's
Gofpel."] " As we read, Gen. i. 1,. that God —
Elohim — created the heaven and the earth, fo we
are taught by St. John that " the Word was
God," and that " all things were made by Him."
P. 7, Dr. Randolph's "Vindication," &c. cited
above. >
No. XXVII. " clofeft connexion."] See "Eight
Difcourfes," by Rev. Charles Daubeny; now
Archdeacon of Salifbury.
No. XXVIII. "Grotius."]' De Veritate Re-
ligionis Chriftianae, L. V. 21.
No. XXX. " that they were true."] Grotius,
Lib. II. 6. " The Truth of the Gofpel Hiftory,"
by Macknight, pp. 180, 410.
No. XXXVI. " holden by the Pharifees."]
Acts, xxiii. 8. xxiv. 15. See Bifcoe's " Hiftory
of the Acts Confirmed," and the references he
makes in vol. I. p. 95. Ed. 1742.
No.

112 REFERENCES.
No. XXXVI. " for fome ages after."] Allix,
p. 173. Ridley, p. 86.
No. XXXIX. " blafphemy."] St. Matt. xxvi.
63 — 5. St. John, X--33- See "The Divinity
of Chrift proved from his own Declarations at-
tefted and interpreted by his Living Witnefles»
the Jews ;" in a Sermon, by Thomas Burgefs*
now Bifhop of St. David's: preached in 1790.
No. XXXIX. * « Son of God."] Allix, Chap- v
ter 17.
No. XL. " Before Abraham."] St. John,
viii. 58.
No. XL. " I came."] St. John, xvi. 28.
No. XL. " glorify"] St. John, xvii. 5.
No. XL. " I {peak."] St. John, viii. 38.
No. XL. " All power."] St. Matt, xxviii. 18.
No. XL. " I adjure."] St. Matt. xxvi. 63.
No. XL. " of the Blefled."] St. Mark, xiv.
61, 62.
No. XLIII. " appellation of Aoyoj."'] Allix,
Ch. 12. Kidder, Part III. Ch. v.
No. XLVIII. " were denied."] With the di-
vifion of the Books in the New Teftament into
'Ofx.0K0yxiJ.svu, and Knihiyofttva., made by. Eufe-
bius, every ftudent in Divinity is acquainted.
See alfo Grotius de Verit. Rel. Chr. iii. 3. and,
" Ilhiftrations of the Truth of the Chriftian Reli
gion," by Edward Maltby, p. 32, fqq. Ed. 1802,
where

REFERENCES. IIJ
where the discriminating marks which diftinguifll
the Genuine from the Spurious Gofpels are pointed
out with much learning and ingenuity. *
No. XLLX. " in the four firft Centuries."]
See " A New and Full Method of fettling the
Canonical Authority of the New Teftament," hy
Rev. Jeremiah Jones. Vol. I. pp. 42, 62. Ed.
*79s- No. LIII. " fays Michaelis."] Michaelis's " In- *
troductory Lectures to the Sacred Books of the ..
New Teftament ;" tranflated by Butler, afterwards
Bifhop of Hereford, in 1761.
No. LIV. " Erafmus, or Crellius."] See Mill's
Note on Rom. ix. 5. Wolfii . " Curas Philolo-
gicae," on the fame paffage. Michaelis in But
ler's Tranflation; p. 64.I The fame ProfetTor's
" Introduction to the New Teftament," tranflated
by Marfh. Vol. II. pp. 387, 417, 471.
No. LVI. " clofeft Reafoner."] Sherlock, vol.
IV. Difc. i. p. 42, Edit. 1764,
No. LVIII. "all confequent points."] .See
Bifhop Cleaver's " Origin and Utility of Creeds ;'*
a Sermon preached in 1S01.
No. LX. " that relation."]. See Butler's "Ana
logy of Religion Natural and Revealed/' p. 225';
&c. Ed. 1 77 1. Part II. Ch. i.
•No. LX. "the fame duty."] See .Bifhop
Porteus's " Lectures on the Gofpel of St.
I Matthew."1

114 REFERENCES.
Matthew." Leet. xxiv. p. 335, &c. vol. II.
Ed. 1802. Biftiop Pretyman's " Elements of
Chriftian Theology-." Part III. Art, i. p. 84.
vol. II. Ed. 1799. Both thefe Writers found
the Doctrine of the Trinity on our Lord's final
commiflion in St. Matt, xxviii. 19; and with the
ftrongeft reafon.
'No. LXVI. " Docetae."] Macknight's « New
Literal Tranflatibrt of all the Apoftolical Epiftles,?
Sect. III. Preface to fhe Firft Epiftle of St. John.
No. LXVII. " Pliny."] Epiftles, io, 97. ^
No. LXVIII. " Matron."] See " Ariftotle's
Treatife on Poetry," tranflated by. Twining, Note
15, p. 175. Ed. 1789.
No. LXVIII. " Philopatris.?] Dialogue of
Lucian fo entitled. In vol. II. p. 998, Ed. Bene-
dicti. Bifhop Bull maintains this Dialogue tahave
been written by Lucian, in oppofition to the opi
nion of Micyllus, who afcribes it to fome more
early Author. If however it was written by fbme
more early Author, it, proves (to ufe Bp. Bull's
words) " qualifnam fuerit Ghriftianorum fides de
SS. Trinitate, etiam fub Trajani imperio, dia
ante Luciani tempora." Def. Fid. Nic. p. 69,
Ed. 1721.
No. LXXIIL " what thofe qualifications are."]
See Bifhop "Cleaver's " Origin and Utility of
Creeds."

REFERENCES. Il£
Creeds." Sermon 1801, pp. 21, 22. See alfo
pp. 5, 6.
No. LXXIII. " Uno ore docuerunt."] Defenf.
Fid. Nicaena?. Thefis I. pp. 222, 228.
No. LXXIII. " Inability."] See p. 299, &c.
of Gifborne's " Familiar Survey of the Chriftian
Religion." Ed. 1799.
No. LXXIV. " commend."] See pp. 8, 12,
25, in the Firft Sermon preached at the Bampton
Lecture, by Mr. Kett.
No. LXXVI. " Jortin."] - Charge II. p. 397,
vol. VII. Ed. 1772.
No. LXXVI. "Thirlby."] P. i6, " Dedicatio"
to' his Edition of Juftin Martyr's ," Two Apolo
gies," and " Dialogue with Trypho." See Jor-
tin's " Remarks on Ecclefiaftical Hiftory," vol.
II. p. 155.
No. LXXVI. " We adore."] Juftin Mar
tyr, Apol. II. pp. 56, 98. Ed. Paris, 1636,
No. LXXVI. " Athenagoras."] Jortin's " Re
marks," vol. II. p. 85. Athenagorae " Legatio
pro Chriftianis," pp. 10, 11. Added to Juftin
Martyr's Works in the Paris Edition.
No. LXXVI. " fanciful."] Theophilus "Ad
Autolycum," L. II. p. 94. Added to Juftin
Martyr's Works in the Paris Edition.
No. LXXX. "Ridley."] Eight Sermons,
p. 56.
No.

11$ REFERENCES.
NVLXXXVIIL. " that he denied."] See p.
377, " Thefis," annexed to " Illuftrations of
the Truth ^i^ChriiJian Religion ;" by Edward
Maljby, B.tf. Ed. iSocu
No. XCV. " that are in fecret"] See a.Dif-
courfe on Deut. xxix. 29, by Dti John Stufges^
of Winchefter, in his Volume pubfifhed 1792.
No. XCVII. " temper.';] The feve'ral. quali
ties he^e .enumerated are all £ojnbined in thai
prime Scholar, acute Critic, 'excellent Man, "and.
faithful Friend, Dr.'CharlesBurney; the Urbanity
of whofe Manners is equal to thcdepth of his
Erudition ; and both confefledly -" place him at
the head of Literary Characters molt eminent in
this Nation.

Nichols 'and Sow, > Printers,
X«i Dm Poffagri, Ttal-Stmt. "

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08576 0040