must be perfectly alike in all respects, or not. If not perfectly alike, and without any difference in any respect, then one or the other must be imperfect; for absolutely infinite perfection admits of no variation or difference; so that, if any two beings differ in any respect, they cannot both be absolutely perfect; therefore cannot both be God. But, if they are perfectly alike in every respect and every thing, then they are perfectly one and the same; and the supposition destroys itself, being a direct contradiction. And there can be no possible need of more than one God; and therefore, were this possible, it is not desirable. There can really be no more existence than one infinite Being, or any addition to infinite perfection and excellence ; therefore no more can be desired, and nothing can be effected or done, more than he can do. In a word, he is all-sufficient, and no addition can be made to this, or even conceived. - DR. SAMUEL HOPKINS: System of Doctrines, chap. 3; in Works, vol. i. p. 61.

This demonstration of God's oneness is not made by its author in reference to any theory of three divine persons; but it may be well applied to all such propositions as convey the notion, that the Deity consists of several distinct, eternal, and equal or unequal intelligences, whether called persons or beings. Dr. HOPKINS here virtually refutes his own Trinitarian or Tritheistic views, as will be quoted in p. 290.

Whatever disclaimer may be made as to Tritheism, the comparison of individuality in the Godhead with that among men does essentially involve theoretical Tritheism. If not, then how could the Greeks be accused of polytheism, who believed in a common nature among the Di majores? And if not, then we must come to the absurd conclusion of GREGORY of Nyssa, that it is catachresis when we speak of Peter and Paul and Barnabas as three men, because in truth they have but one common human nature. It is impossible to put the mind upon receiving such an incongruity, without its reluctating. It instinctively revolts.... Now and then, a zealous partisan of the Nicene Symbola BULL, a WATERLAND, a JONES of Nayland, or some writer of this cast - has told us of three distinct consciousnesses, wills, and affections in the Godhead, and of the eternal" society" which must have always been in it. But the ears of intelligent Christians in general are not now open to these things. Yet still the unwary and unthinking are affected by them, and led unconsciously, it may be, into real Tritheism. . . Of some of these definitions, i.e. those of MELANCTHON and MORUS and some others, it might be said, that the word "person," as applied to three different men, could

......

scarcely receive a more full and complete sense than is given it in respect to the Godhead. Tritheism in theory seems to be the unavoidable deduction from such definitions. . . . The theory of personality which represents three intelligent beings, distinct in such a full sense that each has his own individual consciousness, will, affections, purposes, &c., must amount to theoretical Tritheism; for such are the principal distinctions that exist between three individual men. . . . Any definition of personality in the Godhead which represents person to be ens per se, or substantia individua non sustentata in alia natura, ... seems plainly and substantially to infringe on the idea that there is but one and numerically the same substance in the Godhead. I am not able to see why it does not clearly involve a logical contradiction. MOSES STUART, in Biblical Repository, vol. v. p. 314; and vol. vi. pp. 84, 92–4.

For other valuable remarks on this tritheistic Trinity, STUART'S supplementary note to his Second Letter to Channing (Miscellanies, pp. 60–2) may be consulted. They will be found applicable also to the theory of a Triune God presented in the following subsection; for, except in mere terms, there seems to be no difference whatever between a Trinity of distinct minds or beings and a Trinity of distinct persons, subsistences, or agents.

§ 9. THE TRINITY OF DISTINCT PERSONS, SUBSISTENCES, OR AGENTS.

We should carefully study and duly be affected with that gracious consent, and as it were confederacy, of the glorious Three, in designing and prosecuting our good; their unanimous agreement in uttering those three mighty words of favor to mankind, Faciamus, Redimamus, Salvemus, - “Let us make man out of nothing; Let us recover him from sin and perdition; Let us crown him with joy and salvation." We should with grateful resentments observe them conspiring to employ their wisdom in contriving fit means and methods to exert their power in effectual accomplishment of what was requisite to the promoting of our welfare, . . in prosecution of that gracious design which their joint goodness had projected for us. We should set our mind on God the Father, before the foundation of the world from all eternity, . . resolving to send his own dear Son from his bosom, to procure and purchase the redemption of mankind; . . . then actually sending his only Son, and clothing him with human flesh; ... also sending and bestowing his Holy Spirit to dwell in them [who obey Christ]. — DR. L BARROW: Def. of the Blessed Trinity; Works, vol. ii. pp. 157–8.

...

[By "person"] I certainly mean a real person, an hypostasis; no mode, attribute, or property. . . . Each divine person is an individual intelligent agent; but, as subsisting in one undivided substance, they are all together, in that respect, but one undivided intelligent agent. ... The church never professed three hypostases in any other sense but as they mean three persons. DR. DANIEL WATERLAND: Vin

dication of Christ's Divinity, pp. 350–1.

The Scriptures teach us that there are three in this one God, not three Gods, for this would be a contradiction; but that this infinite Being exists in such a manner as to be three distinct subsistences or persons, and yet but one God. ... These three are spoken of or addressed in the Scriptures in such terms as are used to denote a distinct personality, such as I, thou, he, or him. Thus the Father speaks of himself and the Son; and thus the Son speaks to the Father, and of him, and of the Holy Spirit. . . . . . . The three persons in the Godhead form an infinitely high, holy, and happy society,

the original and perfect pattern of all true love, friendship, and happiness. . . . Jesus Christ, the Mediator, is the medium by which the society of the redeemed in heaven will be united to the infinitely more excellent and perfect society, — the eternal Trinity of persons, who dwell in the infinitely high and holy place, far beyond the reach or comprehension of creatures; from whom the same benevolence and social love is shed down through the Mediator on these redeemed ones, forming them into one most happy society, in union with the blessed Trinity, and so as to be a little image of the Deity, - the Three in One, and One in Three. DR. SAMUEL HOPKINS: System of Doctrines, chaps. 3 and 13; in Works, vol. i. pp. 62, 65, and vol. ii. pp. 58-9.

The Scripture represents the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as distinctly possessed of personal properties. The Father is represented as being able to understand, to will, and to act, of himself; the Son is represented as being able to understand, to will, and to act, of himself; and the Holy Ghost is represented as being able to understand, to will, and to act, of himself. According to these representations, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three distinct persons, or agents. Accordingly, they speak to and of each other as such. Thus the Scripture leads us to conceive of the one living and true God as existing in three distinct persons, each of whom is possessed of all personal properties, and is able to understand, to will, and to act, as a free, voluntary, almighty agent. Hence the Scripture represents the

...

three persons in the sacred Trinity as absolutely equal in every divine perfection. ..... If there be but one God, then it necessarily follows that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not three Gods, but only three persons in one self-existent, independent, eternal Being. The three persons are not one person, but one God; or the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three in respect to their personality, and but one in respect to their nature and essence. . . . We find no difficulty in conceiving of three divine persons. It is just as easy to conceive of three divine persons as of three human persons. No man perhaps ever found the least difficulty in conceiving of the Father as a distinct person from the Son, nor in conceiving of the Son as a distinct person from the Holy Ghost, nor in conceiving of the Holy Ghost as a distinct person from both the Father and Son; but the only difficulty in this case lies in conceiving these three persons to be but one. And it is evident that no man can conceive three divine persons to be one divine person, any more than he can conceive three angels to be but one angel; but it does not hence follow that no man can conceive that three divine persons should be but one divine Being. For, if we only suppose that "being" may signify something different from "person in respect to Deity, then we can easily conceive that God should be but one Being, and yet exist in three persons. The doctrine of the Sacred Trinity, as represented in Scripture, gives us a clear and striking view of the all-sufficiency of God. Since he exists in three equally divine persons, there is a permanent foundation in his own nature for the most pure and perfect blessedness. Society is the source of the highest felicity; and that society affords the greatest enjoyment which is composed of persons of the same character, of the same disposition, of the same designs, and of the same pursuits. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who are three equally divine persons in the one living and true God, are perfectly united in all these respects; and therefore God's existing a Trinity in Unity necessarily renders him the all-sufficient source of his own most perfect felicity. . . . . . We have as clear an idea of these three divine persons as of three human persons. There is no mystery in the personality of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, though there is a profound mystery in their being one God. DR. N. EMMONS: Works, vol. iv. pp. 107–8, 110–11, 114–15, 125.

.....

This is perhaps as plain and intelligible a statement of the doctrine of an hypostatic Trinity as can be found anywhere; and is the less repulsive from its omission of the palpably inconsistent notions of eternal generation and procession which have been inculcated in so many creeds and confessions.

That is, it is plain and intelligible in so far as it asserts, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct persons or agents, equal in every divine perfection; each capable of thinking, willing, and acting of himself; and each deriving his happiness from the society of the others. To such language, gross and polytheistic as a portion of it seems, we can attach definite conceptions. But, when it asserts that these three equally divine persons are only one Being, it either expresses no ideas whatever, or utters a manifest absurdity; for, as applied to an intelligent, thinking, voluntary agent, it is inconceivable that the term person can mean any thing else but a being. The words are synonymous or convertible. God is a person or being, because he is, thinks, feels, wills, and acts: Jesus Christ is a person or being, because he is, thinks, feels, wills, and acts. They are distinct persons or beings, because each of them has his own separate consciousness, will, and mode of action. To affirm, then, that these persons, with another called the Holy Ghost, constitute but one Being, is a contradiction in ideas; or is equivalent to asserting that the three persons are only one person,—

which is a contradiction in terms.

66

REMARKS.

Although ... I would not drop the use of the word "person," yet I would protest against the license which is often taken in speaking of the persons of the Godhead. When authors speak of their eternal and mutual society, and converse together; of their taking counsel together and deliberating, just as if an effort were necessary in order to harmonize them, or to bring them to one and the same conclusion, or to be of one and the same mind, or in order to cast light upon what it may be proper for them to do; when they tell us of one person entering into covenant with another, simply as divine, and before the foundation of the world; of one divine person commanding, and another, simply as divine, obeying, — all this, and much more of the same nature, so long as it is indulged in, will continue to bring upon Trinitarians the reproach of Polytheism; and I had almost said that the reproach is not destitute of at least a semblance of justice. MOSES STUART, in Biblical Repository for July, 1835; vol. vi. pp. 99, 100.

A very large portion of the Christian teachers, together with the general mass of disciples, undoubtedly hold three real living persons in the interior nature of God; that is, three consciousnesses, wills, hearts, understandings. Certain passages of Scripture, supposed to represent the three persons as covenanting, co-operating, and copresiding, are taken, accordingly, so to affirm in the most literal and dogmatic sense. And some very distinguished living teachers are frank enough to acknowledge, that any intermediate doctrine, between