and Light of Light, may be faid to be Wifdom of Wisdom, if God the Father be not Wisdom,but only Ansh top 160.162 begets Wifdom; and by the fame reafon we may fay, Anshhp 159 that he Legets his own Greatnefs, and Goodnefs, and Eternity, and Omnipotency, and is not himfelf his own Greatness, or Goodnels, or Eternity,or Omnipotency,but is Great, and Good, Eternal and Omnipotent, by the Greatness,Goodness, Eternity, Omnipotency,which is born of him; as he is not his own Wildom, but is wife with that Wifdom, which he begets. The Master of the Sentences follows St. Auftin exactly in this Point, and urges this unanswerable Argument for it, which he grounds upon St. Auftin's Principle, That in God, to be and, to be wife is the fame thing, and if it be, he cannot be wife with the Wisdom he begets, for then he would receive his Being from this begotten Wisdom, not Wisdom from him: for if the Wifdom he begets be the Caufe of his being wife, it is the Caufe alfo, that he is; which must be either by begetting or by making him; but no man will fay, that Wisdom is any way the Begetter or Maker of the Father which is the heighth of madness. And ? Si boc eft ibi effe quod Sapere, non per illam Sapientiam quam genuit, Sapiens dicitur Pater, alioquin non ipfa ab illo, fed ille ab ipfa eft. Si enim Sapientie quam genuit, Caufa eft illi ut Sapiens fit, etiam ut fit, ipfa illi Caufa eft, quod fieri non poteft nifi gignendo eum, aut faciendo, fed nec genetricem nec conditricem Patris ullo modo quifquam dixerit Sapientiam; quid enim eft infanius. Lib. 1. Dist 320 cap. Fræterea. in the next Chapter he teaches, That the Father is un- Anga he p 159 begotten, the Son begotten Wifdom; fo that ac cording to St. Austin and the Master of the Sentences, An she.p.160 who is the Oracle of the Schools, the Father is Eter-163. nal Wifdom, or an Eternal Mind, and the Son Eternal Wisdom and Mind, though both are united into One Eternal Wisdom; and if we confess this of Fa-, Am se top 164 ther and Son, there can be.no Difpute about the Ho ly ly Ghoft, who is Eternal Mind and Wisdom, distinct, both from Father and Son. Nothing is more familiar with the ancient Fathers, An. SR he p166 than to reprefent Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, to be three as diftinct Perfons, as Peter, James, and John are, as every one knows, who is at all verfed in this Controverfie; and this is charged on them by fome men, as little better than Polytheifin, or a Trinity of Gods, as Peter, James, and John are a Trinity of men; but this must be true with reference to diftinction of Perfons, if we will acknowledge a real diftinction between them; for if the diftinction be real,and not meerly nominal(which was the Herefie of Sabellius) their Perfons must be as diftinct, as three human Perfons, or three men are: The Father is no more the Son, or the Holy Ghoft, than Peter is James or John: but then they are not feparated or divided from each other, as Peter, fames and John are; for that indeed would make them three Gods, as Peter, James and John are three men. There is no Example in Nature of such a distinction and unity, as is between the Three Perfons in the Godhead, and therefore the ancient Fathers made ufe of several Comparisons to different purposes, which must carefully be confined to what they applied them, for if we extend them farther, we make Nonfenfe or Herefie of them. There are three things to be confidered in the ever bleffed Trinity; the Diftinction of Perfons, the Susans or Sameness of Nature,and their Effential Unity; and the Fathers make ufe of different Comparisons to represent each of these by, because no one can reprefent them all; but inconfi dering Perfons feck for all in One, and because they cannot find it, they reject them all, as impertinent, dan dangerous, or heretical, and reproach the Fathers, fometimes as ignorant of this great Mystery, fometimes as bordering upon Herefie,which I am fure does little fervice to the Doctrine it felf, and gives great countenance to falfe and corrupt Notions of it; when the Fathers themselves, even thofe who were the most zealous Oppofers of Arianifim, are thought Favourites of fuch Opinions. I fhall have occafion Favourers to take notice of feveral Instances of this, as I go on, at prefent I fhall confine my felf to the Diftinction of Perfons,which cannot be more truly and aptly reprefented than by the diftinction between three men; for Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are as really diftinct Perfons, as Peter, James and John; but whoever fhall hence conclude, That thefe Fathers thought, 'that Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft are no otherwife One alfo, than Peter, James and John are, greatly abufe them without any colourable pretence for it, as will appear more prefently; but this Comparison of theirs fhows what their fenfe was,that thefe Three Divine Perfons are Three Eternal and Infinite Minds, as really distinct from each other, as Three men are; though effentially united into One Infinite and Eternal Mind,or One God. But I need not infift on this, for the real diftinction of Perfons is fo plainly taught by the ancient Fathers, especially after the rife of the Sabellian Herefie, that there is more difficulty to understand, how they unite them into One God, then that they make them diftinct Perfons,and what they fay about the unity of the Godhead,abundantly proves this distinction of Perfons. Secondly, Let us therefore in the fecond place confider, How they explain this great Mystery of a Trini P 188.230 Trinity in Unity; they all agree, That there are Three diftinct Perfons, and that thefe Three Perfons are but One God; and they feem to me to agree very well in that account they give of it; though fome te Writers are very free, and I think very unjust,. in their Cenfures of fome of them as fcarcely Orthodox in this Point: I fhall only remind you, that An 1h hep 171 172, this being fo great a Mystery, of which we have no Example in Nature, it is no wonder, if it cannot be ,explained by any one kind of Natural Union; and therefore it was neceffary to use feveral Examples, Anga hp 224 297 and to allude to feveral kinds of Union, to form an adequate Notion of the Unity of the Godhead, and we must carefully apply what they say to thofe Ends and Purposes for which they faid it, and not extend it beyond their Intention, as I observed before; and there are several Steps they take towards the Expli-· cation of this great Myftery, which I fhall reprefent in fhort, and fhow, that taking them altogether, they give a plain and intelligible Notion of this Unity in Trinity, and indeed no other than what I have already given of it. 1.51. Anga.he. p 172 177. 1: The first thing then to be considered is the 2. 177. S or Co-effentiallity of the Divine Perfons. That Susans all Three Perfons in the God-head have the fame Nature, which they fignified by the word on: now whereas the fame Nature may fignifie the fame. and after him Dr. Cudworth, have abundantly proved, Numerical, or the fame Specifick Nature, Petavius, Cudworth's Intellectual that the Nicene Fathers did not understand this word Syftem, p.603 of a Numerical but Specifick Sameness of Nature: or the agreement of things, numerically differing from one another in the fame common Nature. As An shep 174 Trin.l.4.c.5 •186. &c. Maximus Holy and Ever Bleffed TRINITY. Maximus very plainly tells us, that that is faid to be us which has the fame Notion or Definition of its Effence, as a man differs nothing from a man, as he is a man, nor an Angel from an Angel, as he is an Angel: and therefore this word did equally overthrow the Sabellian and the Arian Herefie; as it affirms both a diftinction of Perfons, and the fameness of Nature, as St. Ambrofe and others obferve; for nothing is soov Ambrof. 1-3. de to it felf, but to fomething elfe, diftinct from it felf, Fide,c.7. but of the fame common Nature: and therefore fome, who owned the Sośnov, rejected the ovono and σενέσιον and ταυ' όσον as favouring of Sabellianifin and implying fuch a Numerical Unity of Effence in the Godhead,, as destroyed all diftinction of Perfons; for which reason the donor it felf was rejected by fome, as abused by the Sabellians, till the fignification of that word was fixt and declared by the Fathers at Nice, as Petavius obferves. 107 Angary 175 Ομού του 5ειν, ὁ ἢ αὐτὸν ἐπιδέχεται λόγο 350 This is One thing wherein the Fathers place the, Ash.hcp 177.178 Unity of the Godhead; that all Three Perfons have the fame Nature; and to be fure, this is abfolutely Am SR 178.183 necessary to make Three Perfons one God; for it is impoffible they fhould be One God, if they have not the fame Nature, unless Three distinct and separate Beings of divers Natures can be One God; that is, unless the Divine Nature be not One pure and fimple Act, but a compound Being, and that of different Natures too. But fome of the Fathers went farther than this, and placed the Effential Unity of the Divine Nature in the fameness of Effence; that there is but One God, because all the Three Divine Perfons have the fame Nature. And it will be neceffary P 2 An⋅ JR. hep 177-078 |