Page images
PDF
EPUB

and Us.* I have often thought no Hands fo proper to be employed against the Doctrine of the Bleffed Trinity, as Those which are good only at pulling down, and not at building up. If once you come to fettling and determining Points of à myfterious Nature; there will be as fair a Plea for This alfo: And I doubt not but the fame Thread of Reasoning, which first brought you to question it, will, when carefully purfued, and as foon as you perceive the like Difficulties almost in every thing, bring you to make lefs Scruple of it. But left others fhould imagine, from what hath been faid, that They may have fome Advantage over us; let me add these few Confiderations farther.

1. That what hath been urged, is not purely arguing ad Hominem; but it is appealing to what good Senfe and impartial Reafon dictates equally to You, or Us; on fuch, or fuch Suppofitions.

2. That if we come to reafon minutely on any other Matter, alike incomprehenfible as This of the Holy Trinity, we may foon lofe our felves in inextricable Mazes.

3. That if They plcafe to take any other Hypothefis of the Omniprefence, They may meet with Difficulties there alfo, perhaps not inferior to the former.

4. That if They chufe to reft in generals, without any Hypothefis at all, and without defcending to the Modus, and Minutia of it; Answer to the Sixth Letter, p. 39, 40.

This is the very Thing which we defire, and contend for, in regard to the Bleffed Trinity (which ought certainly to be equally dealt with) and then we may foon come to a good Agree

ment.

By pursuing this Point, I had almost neglected the learned Doctor's Third Aphorifm: That nothing Individual can be communicated. Here is as great a Fallacy and Ambiguity in the word Individual, as before in the word Being. I fhall make This plain to you. That particular Substance, which is fuppofed to pervade, and to be commenfurate to the Sun, is an individual Being, in fome Senfe; unless there be a Medium between a Being and not a Being, which the learned Doctor admits not: The whole Substance likewife is one individual Being, and Perfon too; upon the Doctor's Hypothefis: And we fay farther, that three Perfons may be one individual Being; having, we think, a very good meaning in it. So here are plainly three Senfes of the word Individual; and till you can fix a certain principle of Individuation, (a Thing much wanted, and by which you might oblige the learned World) any one of these Senfes appears as just and reasonable as another. Now, the Doctor's Maxim, rightly understood, may be true, in all these Senfes. For, in refpect of the First, what is peculiar and proper to one Part, is not communicated, or common to other Parts: In refpect of the Second, what is proper to one PerN 2

Jon,

fon, is not common to other Perfons: And fo, in refpect of the Third, what is proper to one Effence or Subftance, is not common to other Effences or Subftances. All this is very true: but to what purpofe is it, or whom does the learned Doctor contradict? This is only telling us, that fo far, or in fuch respect, as any thing is fuppofed individual or incommunicable, it is fuppofed individual or incommunicable; which no Body doubts of. But whether This, or That be communicable, or how far, or in what manner (which is all the difficulty) remains a Question as much as ever; and the Doctor's Maxim will not help us at all in it. It may be the fafest way, first to try the strength and the use of it upon the Doctor's own Hypothefis. Let it be aks'd, whether the Wif dom, &c. refiding in that Part which pervades the Sun (for it feems that it must be intelligent, and infinitely fo; unless one infinite Intelligent be made up of Unintelligents, or finite Intelligents) I fay, let it be ask'd, whether that be the very individual Wifdom which refides in another Part, at any given Distance. I prefume, to this Queftion, you must answer, Yes: And then we are to obferve, that here is but one individual infinite Wisdom, which is intirely in the whole, and intirely in every part; proper, in fome Senfe, to cach fingle Part (fince it can have only fuch Attributes as inhere in it) and yet common to All; Dif fufed through cxtended Subftance, yet not

Co

Co-extended: Nor multiplied, because but One. If you admit thus far, as I think you muft, we shall have nothing to apprehend, in point of Reafon (which nevertheless is what you chiefly truft to) against the Doctrine of the Trinity. The Communication of Effential Attributes, which we fpeak of, is, at least, as Intelligible as what I have been mentioning; and every whit as confiftent with the Doctor's Maxim, that nothing which is Individual can be Communicated. Only You have your Senfe of Individual, and We have our's; and You can account no better for fo many, and infinitely diftant Parts making one Perfon, than We for three Perfons making one Subftance, or one God. Let us therefore be content to stop where it becomes us; and frankly confefs our Ignorance of thefe Things. For, by pretending farther, we shall not discover lefs Ignorance than before, but much greater Vanity. I would not have prefumed to difcourfe thus freely of the tremendous Subftance of the eternal God (infinitely furpaffing Human Comprehenfion) were it not, in a manner, neceffary, in order to expofe the Folly, and the Prefumption of doing it. If the Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity is to stand or fall by this kind of reafoning, it was very proper to make fome Trial of it firft, where it might be done more fafely, to see how it would answer. You, I prefume, cannot complain of me, for treating you in your own way; and turning upon you your own Artillery. But

to proceed; You are pofitive in it, that the Son of God hath not the individual Attributes of God the Father; for then, fay you, He muft be the Father. On the contrary, I affirm that He hath the individual Attributes of God the Father, as much as He has the individual Ef fence: For, otherwife He must be a Creature only: And therefore the Question between you and me, in plain Terms, is, whether the Son be God, or a Creature.

QUERY X.

Whether if They (the Attributes belonging to the Son) be not individually the fame, they can be any thing more than faint Refemblances of them, differing from them as Finite from Infinite; and then in what Senfe, or with what Truth, can the Doctor pretend that * all divine Powers, except abfolute Supremacy and Independency, are communicated to the Son? And whether every Being, befides the one fupreme Being, must not neceffarily be a Creature, and finite; and whether all divine Powers can be communicated to a Creature, infinite Perfection to a finite Being.

I

Have put under One Query, what before made Two, because the Substance of Them is nearly the fame; and contains but one Arguiment. I have two Things upon my Hands at once;

Script. Doctr. p. 299.

« PreviousContinue »