Satisfaction or Inftruction of all fober Men, with the Words of Archbishop Synge in a fmall Tract called, A plain and eafy Method, &c. which I would beg leave to recommend to the serious Confideration of all Perfons, who have been baptized into the Chrif tian Faith.

Sect. 35. "All, who profefs Christianity 66 agree in this, that there is but, one God a❝lone; but the Controverfy concerning a Trinity in the Unity of the Divine Nature has "been no fmall Disturbance to the Church. "The Doctrine I take to be very evidently "grounded upon the Holy Scripture, the Au

thority of which is on both Sides allowed; "for the Father, the Word or Son, and the "Holy Ghoft are there very often spoken of

exactly in the fame Manner, as we always

speak of three several Perfons; and of each "of these Perfons fuch Things are frequently

faid, as cannot agree to any but God. Where"as all the Objections, that are made against "it, are grounded upon this palpable Mif"take; that the Objectors always understand "the Words, Perfon, Nature, Substance, and "all the other Terms made use of in this "Difpute in the fame Signification, as we use "thofe Words when we speak of Men like H 2

our

"our felves: For Example, three human Per"fons, fay they, are three distinct Men; "therefore, if they were really three Divine

Perfons, they must be three diftinct Gods, "Again, it is abfurd, fay they, to imagine, "that God, who is omnipresent and fupreme, "and infinite in Power, can be sent by any "one; but the Father is faid to have fent the "Son, and the Father and the Son are said to "have fent the Holy Ghoft; from whence "they would infer, that therefore neither the "Son nor the Holy Ghoft is God, with much "more to the like Purpose, that frequently "occurs in the Writings of the Unitarians. • But have we not the fame Arguvery "ments against God's Wifdom and his Love "to Mankind, as the Unitarians bring against "the Trinity of Perfons in the Unity of the "Godhead? And may we not after the same "Manner argue against every Attribute and "Action of God? which for Want of more 66 proper Words we are forced to exprefs in "the very fame Terms, that we make use of

in fpeaking of whatever correfponds there"unto in Man. Here then a fober Unitarian, "as well as every other Man, muft, I think, "have Recourfe to the Principle just now laid down, Sect. 34 (viz. the fame Difference

"that

"that there is between the Root, Spring or "Principle, from whence any Property, Habit, " Attribute or Action proceeds, the fame there "must be between the Properties, Habits,

Attributes or Actions themselves; however, “for Want of sufficient Variety of Words we "are often forced to call them by the fame Name) and fay, that as the eternal and per "fect Nature of God is altogether of a diffe"rent Kind from the created and imperfect "Nature of Man; fo is there fully the fame "Difference between the Properties, Attri "butes and Actions, that exift in, or proceed * from these two feveral Natures. Al"though therefore, God is not wife with that Kind or Sort of Wisdom that Man is, nor loves with that Kind or Sort of Love, that Man does; yet we truly and properly fay, that God is wife, and that "he loves and we demonftratively prove 66 thefe Truths from the outward Effects of

both, although our weak Understanding cannot frame a Notion, what the Divine "Wifdom and Love internally, and in them"felves are, when at the fame Time we are * fenfible that we enjoy the Benefit and Comffort of them both. This I take to be a ra

tional

❝tional and satisfactory Answer, and fuch as "is to be made ufe of, whenever any Argu"ments are drawn from the bare Signification “of any Words that are in common applied, "both to God and Man, or any other Crea"ture. Let us then fee, whether this very "Answer will not in the fame Manner clear all the Difficulties that arife from fuch "Sort of Objections as are ufually made aIgainst the Doctrine of a Trinity of Perfons "in the Unity of the Godhead. For when "we fay, that there are three Perfons in the

66 up

Unity of the Divine Nature, we do not "mean fuch Kind of Perfons as three Men "are, any more than by Wisdom, Love, or

any of the Attributes or Actions of God, we "mean the fame Sort of Qualifications or Ac❝tions, as we do when we apply the fame "Words to Man. But our Meaning (as well

as in fo fublime a Doctrine I am able to exprefs it) is, that in the Divine Nature, “which is but one, (and that numerically as "the Schools speak) there is a threefold Dis"tinction internally, and, as it is in itself, altogether incomprehenfible to us; but out

wardly in the Holy Scriptures represented "to us under the perfonal Names of the Fa"ther, the Word or Son, and the Holy

"Ghost

"Ghost or Spirit; to each of whom we there "find distinct perfonal Actions afcribed, and perfonal Expreffions always accomodated.

66

Although therefore, it is beyond the Power "of Human Understanding to conceive this Mystery as it is in itself; yet by Faith we "believe it to be as God has represented it "unto us; and this Representation we take to "be a fufficient Foundation for all fuch Du"ties, as are consequent upon or arise from "the Doctrine. And because it is impoffible "to express our Meaning without the Ufe of "Words, nor will any Language furnish us "with other Words to express the Things of

66

God, but fuch as are used to fignify what "we apprehend to have the nearest Correfpon"dence thereto in Man; for this Reafon we "are forced to make Ufe of the Words Per"fons, Subftance, &c. not that they do denote "unto us the Things as they are in them"felves, for in that Refpect we exprefly own "them to be incomprehenfible; but only as they are analogically, and according to our Capacity, represented to us by God in his Holy Word, as a Foundation for several "Christian Duties. And when the Son or the Holy Ghost are faid to be fent (which was "the other Objection mention'd) by fending

66

"it