The catholic doctrine of a Trinity, proved by above an hundred short and clear arguments, expressed in the terms of the Holy Scripture ... and digested under the four following titles: 1. The divinity of Christ. 2. The divinity of the Holy Ghost. 3. The plurality of persons. 4. The Trinity in unity. With a few reflections ... upon some of the Arian writers, particularly Dr. S. Clarke: to which is added, A letter to the common people, in answer to some popular arguments against the Trinity

Front matter

Glass.

Book.

THE

Chap. I

The divinity of Chr st demonstrated by a comparison of such texts as serve to interpret one another ---..--- 39

A2

6 CONTENTS.

Page.

Single texts abused by Avians, cleared up

by a comparison with other texts - t 63

Divinity of Christ proved, by another series of arguments ---,---. 72

The word consubstantial justified by the terms of scripture ---.-«,. 76

CHAP. II. i

The divinity of the Holy Ghost demonstrated by a comparison of different texts - 83

Objections answered by the scripture - - 97

The great usefulness of the Old Testament,

in this subject of the trinity - - - - 101

Br. Clarke's sophistical treatment of the

Chap. III

Ctod is distinguished in the Old Testament, by a great variety of plural names and expressions ------.-» 106

The divine plurality is a trinity of persons 118

The controverted text of 1 John v. 7. cited

by the Latins before the council of Nice - 1 23

An instance of Dr. Clarke's distress and sophistry, in evading the terms Lord of hosts, as applied to Christ by St. John 127

A caution against a trite artifice of the

Chap. IV

The unity of the trinity demonstrated, 1. By the application of the incommunicable name Jehovah, and other supreme appellations, to the three persons «■ - 130

CONTENTS, 7

Page.

2 By the same divine attributes equally as-

cribed to them - 137

3 By an ineffable communion, in the same

acts of omnipotence 139

A summary of the whole work, in a conclusion ------ 144

A practical address to the Catholic reader 150

A LETTER TO THE COMMON PEOPLE.

The origin and issue of Arianism - - - 155

I. Arian writers work upon the pride of

the common people ------ 157

II. They tell them their common sense is

a sufficient guide without the clergy 159

III. They invest the people with a right of judging as they please 161

IV. They try to set them against the Athanasian creed 163

Their objection returns much stronger upon themselves 164

V. They forge a contradiction, and put it

into the Athanasian creed - - - - 164

VI. Fallible Avians rail at the orthodox for being fallible men : yet these fallible men do not deliver their own doctrines, but such as they receive

from an infallible God 165

VII. Their prostitution of Protestant principles 166

VIII. Faith of the first reformers reflected upon by Arian writers; but is an argument against themselves - - - 170

IX. They think the reformed faith as bad as popish idolatry : but the ground of their accusation is weak and blasphemous 171

8 CONTENTS-

Page,

They alter the scripture to keep this accusation in countenance ----- 17?

X A sophistical objection to the Litany,

by the author of The Confessional - 177

XJ. The Avians plead seriously for the removal of the orthodox faith, because it is offensive to Jews and Turks - 1 70

XII. They encourage the people with the example of some of the Arian clergymen - - - 182

They court the mob for their assistance

against the church ------ 188

A warning to the people not to be cheated once more into their own ruin ; from which there will probably be no second restoration ------ 184

Preface

TO THE

THIRD EDITION

MY bookseller having solicited me to republish this iittle treatise, I have corrected the typographical errors of the last edition, and enlarged some passages of the work itself.

The attempt of a late bishop of Clogher to propagate Arianism in the church of Ireland, induced me to keep the doctrine of the trinity in my thoughts for some years ; and I had a particular attention to it, as often as the scriptures either of the Old or New Testament, were before me. This little book was the fruit of my study ; of which I have seen some good effects already, and ought not to despair of seeing more before I die.

Many other observations have occurred to me since the first publication, which I should willingly have added. But some readers might have been discouraged, if I had presented them with a book of too large a size: and the merits of the cause lie in a small compass.

The republication of this work, though merely accidental, is not unseasonable at this time, when we are taught from the press,* (and the author seems to be very much in earnest) that the only sure way of reducing Christianity to its primitive purity, is to abolish all creeds and articles. But the great rock of offence, with this writer, is the trinity ; to get rid of which, he would at once dissolve our whole ecclesiastical constitution and form of worship.

This wild project furnishes a melancholy confirmation of the censure passed on us by some learned Pro-

* Id a sew work, entitled Tbr Confession ai.

10 PREFACE.

testants abroad ; who have reflected upon England as a country productive of literary monsters ;* where some old heresy is frequently rising up, as old comets have been supposed to do, with new and portentous appearances. And the reader whose sight can penetrate through the vehement accusations of Popery, bigotry, persecution, imposition, and other fiery vapours with which this author hath surrounded his performance, will discover little, if any thing, more than Arianism at the centre.

The scripture is the only rule that can>enable us to judge*, whether that or the Catholic doctrine of the trinity is more agreeable to truth : therefore I have confined myself to this unexceptionable kind of evidence for the proof of the latter, and have made the scripture its own interpreter. But our adversaries, though they allow the sufficiency of the scripture, and unjustly pretend to distinguish themselves from us by insisting upon it, do nevertheless make such frequent use of a lower sort of evidence to bias common readers, and shew the expediency of what they are pleased to call reformation ; that I have thought proper to exibit a specimen of their method of proceeding in that Tespect, by adding to this edition A Letter to the Common People^ in answer to some popular arguments against the trinity. These arguments are extracted chiefly from a small book, entitled, An Appeal to the Common Sense of all Christian people ; a thing very highly commended by the author of the Confessional^ But in this author's estimation, every writer that op-

f " Which book," (says he) " has passed through two editions without any sort of reply that I have heard of. This looks as if able ters were not wiling to meddle with the subject, or that willing wriwriters were not able to manage it," p. 32(h The Rev. Mr. Landon published an answer to this book in 1764, printed for Whiston and White : and he has mentioned another himself in a note. But had the case really been as he hath reported in his text, it will by no means follow, that a book is therefore unanswerable, because it hath received no answer. If this be good logic, I could present him with a c©adusion or two, which he would not very well like

PREFACE, 11

poses the faith of the church of England, is ipso facto invincible: and consequently, this retailer of Dr, Clarke's opinions, whoever he is, must come in for his share of merit and applause ; which I by no means envy him.

So far as the scripture itself hath been thought to furnish any objections to the received doctrine, I judged it the fairer and the surer way, to answer them as they were offered by Dr. Clarke himself; and have therefore no apology to make for neglecting some of his disciples, who have not made any improvement on his arguments ; as I do not find that this gentleman hath : the second edition of whose Appeal was published in 1754, since which there have been two editions of the Catholic doctrine in England, and one or more in Ireland.

By all the observations I have been able to make, the greater number of those who disbelieve the trinity upon principle (for many do it implicitly, and are credulous in their unbelief) do not profess to take their notions of God from the Bible, but affect to distinguish themselves from the common herd by drawing them from the fountains of reason and philosophy. We cannot be persuaded, that the trinity is denied by reasoners of this complexion, because ihe scripture hath not revealed it : but do rather suspect, that some philosophers dissent from this point of Christian doctrine, because they are not humble enough to take the scripture as a test of their religious opinions. In which case, the whole labor of collecting of texts, and framing of comments, and fishing for various readings, is an after-thought. It is submitted to rather for apology than for proof; to reconcile readers of the scripture to that doctrine, which they would be more jealous of receiving if they knew it to have been originally borrowed v from another quarter. He that would deceive a Christian, can seldom do his work effectually without a Bible in his hand : a consideration, which may help us to a sight of the consequences, if persons were per-

12 PREFACE.

mitted to teach in our churches without any previous inquiry concerning their religious sentiments, and so allowed t© take the same liberty, either through mistake or ill design, as was taken by the arch deceiver in the wilderness,* who never meant to use the scripture for edification, but only for destruction ; not to apply it as an instrument of good, but to turn it, as far as he was able, into an instrument of evil. The Bible was given us for the preservation of the kingdom of Christ upon earth ; as the book of statutes in this kingdom is intended to secure the authority of the government, together with the life, peace, and property of every individual ; and we want no prophet to foreshew us the consequences, if all the malcontents in the nation were allowed to be public interpreters of the laws. These considerations I leave the judicious to apply as they find occasion. I use them chiefly as hints, for the benefit both of such as may be in danger of wresting the scriptures to their own destruction, and of such philosophers as those alluded to by St. Paul,\ who through the profession of fancied wisdom fell into real folly, and purchased a reputed knowledge of things natural and metaphysical, at the lamentable expence of losing the knowledge of God.

Pluckley, Jan. 1, 1767.

* Matt. W. 6 t Rem. I 22. 1 Cor. I 21.

THE Christian religion is best known and distinguished by the God proposed in it, as the object of our faith and obedience : and as there is no true religion, but the religion of Christians, so is there no true God, but the God of Christians.

Before the coming of Christ, and the fulfilling of the law, God was known by the name of Jehovah, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. The Israelites, who were the seed of Abraham, and drew their whole religion from a divine revelation, had the knowledge of the true God ; and the people of every other nation, who were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, were also without God in the world* Though they talked much of God, and wrote much of him, and offered him many sacrifices, yet they knew him not : the being they served, was not God, but another in the place of him, falsely called by his name. And though some modern Christians have forgot there was any difference, yet the very heathens themselves, upon some occasions, were ready enough to allow it. Naaman the Syrian, when he was cured of his leprosy by the prophet Elisha, made a public confession of it — Be-

a Ephesians ii. 12, B hold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, hut in Israel.** The same is affirmed by the inspired psalmist — All the Gods of the heathens are idols ; c and God himself declares them all to have been vanities A The case is now with the Christians under the gospel, as it anciently was with the Jews under the law : they believe in the only true God ; while the unchristian part of mankind, who are by far the majority, either know him not, or wilfully deny him ; as Pharaoh did the God of the Hebrews when he was told of him. And we are now got to such a pitch of indevotion and ignorance, that among those who profess and call themselves Christians, there are too many who are almost come to be heathens without knowing it. For there is a fashionable notion propagated by most of our moral writers, and readily subscribed to by those who say their prayers but seldom, and can never find time to read their Bible, that all who worship any God, worship the same God; as if we worshipped the three letters of the word God, instead of the being meant and understood by it. The universal prayer of Mr. Alexander Pope was composed upon this plan ; wherein the supreme being is addressed as a common father of all, under the names, Jehovah, Jove, and Lord. And this humour of confounding things, which ought to be distinguished at the peril of our souls, and of comprehending believers and idolators under one and the same religion, is called a catholic spirit, that shews the very exaltation of Christian charity. But God. It is to be feared, will require an account of it under

b 2 Kings v. 15. c Psalm xcvi. 5. d Jeremiah xiv, 22= another name ; and though the poet could see no difference, but has mistaken Jove or Jupiter for the same father of all with the Lord Jehovah ; yet the apostle has instructed us better ; who, when the priest of Jupiter came to offer sacrifice, exhorted him very passionately to turn from those vanities unto the living God; e well knowing that he whom the priest adored under the name of Jupiter, was not the living God, but a creature, a nothing, a vanity. Yet the catholic spirit of a moralist can discern no difference ; and while it pretends some zeal for a sort of universal religion, common to believers and infidels, betrays a sad indifference for the Christian religion in particular. This error is so monstrous in a land enlightened by the gospel, and yet so very common amongst us at present, that I may be pardoned for speaking of it in the manner it deserves. And let me beseech every serious person, who is willing to have his prayers heard, to consider this matter a little better, and use a more correct form ; for God, who is jealous of his honor, and has no communion with idols, will certainly reject the petition that sets him upon a level with Baal and Jupiter.

The true God is he that was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; there is none other but he ; and if this great characteristic be denied, or any other assumed in its stead, a man is left without God; after which, he may call himself a Deist, if he will ; but his God is a mere idol of the imagination, and has no corresponding reality in the whole universe of beings.

€ Acts xiv, 15,

The modern Jews, by denying their God to have been manifest in the flesh, are as effectually departed from the true God, as their forefathers were, when they danced before the golden calf, and called their idolatrous service a feast to the Lord. For the being of God is not an object of sight, but of faith ; it enters first into the heart; and if it be wrong there, the first commandment is broken : if a figure of it be set up before the eyes, then the second is broken likewise. The first forbids us to have any other God ; the second, to make any graven image of him. Now though we make no image, yet if with the heart we believe in any God different from the true, the idolatry indeed may be less, but the apostacy is the same. And this seems to be the case of the Jew.

The Mahometans are another set of infidels, who abhor idols, but have in express terms denied the Son of God, and set up an idol of the imagination, a God in one person. They inveigh bitterly against the Christians for worshipping three Gods ; for so they state the doctrine of a trinity in unity, as some others have done ijeside them.

In answer to all these abominations of the Deist, the im% and the Mahometan, and to shew that no unbeliever of any denomination can be a servant of the true God, it is written — whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father : f and again — whosoever trans* gresselh and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.S And let the Socinians, who have not only vindicated the religion of Mahomet, but preferred it to

i Uobnii. 23. g 2 John 9.

the Christianity of the Church of England, which with them is no better nor other than a sort of paganism and heathenism,* let them consider what a share they have in this condemnation.

And to bring this matter home to the Arians ; it is to be observed, that every article of the Christian faith depends upon the doctrine of a trinity in unity, if that be given up, the other doctrines of our religion must go with it, and so it has been in fact, that the authors who have written against the trinity, have also disputed away some other essential parts of Christianity ; particularly the doctrines of the satisfaction and of original sin.

The whole Bible treats of little else but our creation, redemption, sanctification, resurrection and glorification, by the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit : and the reader will find hereafter, that there is neither name, act, nor attribute of the godhead, that is not shared in common by all the persons of the trinity. If, therefore, the persons of Christ and the Spirit are not God in the unity of the Father, then the prayers and praises we offer to them, as the authors of every blessing, will not be directed to the supreme Lord and God, beside whom no other is to be worshipped, but to his creatures and instruments : which overthrows the sense of our whole religion ; and drives us upon a sort of second-rate faith and worship, which, beside

* See Leslie's Theological works, fol. vol. i. p. 218. where the reader may find a great deal more to the same purpose j and particularly an epistle of the Socinians, to the Morocco embassador, in the time of Charles II. a great curiosity, wherein their whole scheme is laid open, t© the bottom by themselves,

B 2 the blasphemy of it, can be nothing but confusion and contradiction. It is no wonder then, that the Avians and Socinians, with their several under-sects and divisions, who have fallen into this snare, and departed from the divine unity, while they pretend to be the only men who assert it, have never yet been able to agree in the forms of religious worship. Some of them allowing that Christ is to receive divine worship, but always with this reserve, that the prayer tend ultimately to the person of the Father. So that Christ is to be worshipped, only he is not to be worshipped : and if you should venture, when you are at the point of death, to say with St. Stephen — Lord Jesus, receive my spirit* 1 — and confess the person of Jesus to be the God of the spmts of all flesh 1 by committing your own spirit into his hands ; you are to take care not to die without throwing in some qualifying comment, to assure him you do it only in hypocrisy, not meaning him but another. Others, again, knowing this distinction to be vain and indefensible, and the same for substance with the Latria and Dulia by which the church of Rome excuses her adoration of the blessed Virgin, <fcc. have fairly got rid of it, by denying to the person of Christ any divine worship or invocation at all ; which is the case with our Socinian Unitarians here in England; for those of Poland are quite of another mind. How far such differences as these must needs affect a liturgy, it is very easy to foresee : and that it will for ever be as impossible to frame a creed or service to please all those who bear the name of Christians, as

h Acts vii. 59. i Numbers xvi, 22, to make a eoat that shall fit men of all sizes.* Prayer and divine worship and religious confession, are the fruit and breath of faith; and out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh ;k so that until we are agreed in matters of faith, there is neither hope nor possibility of our agreeing in any form of worship, God is the fountain-head, and religion the stream that descends from it. Our sentiments as to religion, always flow from the opinion we have formed of the divine nature ; and will be right or wrong, sweet or bitter, as the fountain is from whence they are derived. It is the having a different God, that makes a different religion. A true God produces a true religion; a false God, a false religion. Jews, Turks, Pagans, Ikists, Arians, Socinians and Christians, all differ about a religion, because they differ about a God.

These few observations will be sufficient, I hope, to raise the attention of the reader ; and persuade him, that a right faith in God is a much more serious affair than some would make it ; that it is of the last concern, and hath a necessary influence upon the practice and holiness of our lives ; that as no other devoir Matthew xii. 34. * Hales of Eton, in his sarcastic and malicious Tract upon Schism, proposes it as a grand expedient for the advancing of unity, that we should u consider all the liturgies, that are and ever have been ; and remove from them whatever is scandalous to any party, and leave nothing but what all agree on." He should have closed this sentence a little sooner; and advise us fairly and honestly to leave nothing; for that will certianly be the event, when the objections of all parties are suffered to prevail ; there being no one page of the liturgy, wherein all who pretend to worship God as Christians) are agreed, tion is acceptable with God, but that which is seasoned with love and charity and uniformity, the very mark and badge whereby his disciples are to be known from the men of this world, it is the principal duty of every Christian to know in whom he ought to believe, that with one mind, and with one ?nouth we may glorify God : l for a right notion of God, will as surely be followed by a sound faith, and an uniform profession in all other points, as a false faith and a discordant worship will grow from every wrong opinion of him.

All that can be known of the true God, is to be known by revelation. The false lights indeed of reason and nature are set up and recommended, as necessary to assist and ratify the evidence of revelation : but inquiries of this kind, as they are now managed, generally end in the degradation of Christ, and the Christian religion :* till it can be shewn therefore that the scripture neither does nor can shine by a light and authority of its own, the evidence we are to rest in, must be drawn from thence ; and as we all have the same scripture, without doubt we ought all to have the same opinion of God.

But here it is commonly objected, that men will be of different opinions, and that they have a right to judge for themselves ; and that when the best evidence the nature of the case will admit of is collected and laid before them, they must determine upon it as

1 Rom. xv. 6. * You may have a proof of this from the Essay on Spirit, by comparing the book with its title, which runs thus— The Doctrine of the Trinity considered in the light oj "Reason and Nature, &c.

it appears to them, and according to the light of their own consciences : so that if they adhere as closely to their errors after they have consulted the proper evidence as they did before, we are neither to wonder nor to be troubled at it.

This very moderate and benevolent way of thinking, has been studiously recommended by those, who found it necessary to the well-being of their own opinions, that not a spark of zeal should be left amongst us. And surely it is no new thing, that the advocates of any particular error, next to themselves and their own fashion, should naturally incline to those who are softest, and stand least in the way. Hence it is, that however magisterial and insolent they may carry themselves in their own cause ; they always take care to season their writings with the praises of this frozen indifference, calling that Christian charity, which is nothing but the absence of Christianity : and any the least appearance of earnestness for some great and valuable truth, which we are unwilling to part with; because we hope to be saved by it, is browbeaten, condemned, and cast out of their moral system, under the name of heat, want of temper, fire, fury, &c. They add moreover, that articles of faith are things merely speculative : and that it is of little signification what a man believes, if he is but hearty and sincere in it : that is, in other words, it is a mere trifle whether we feed upon bread* or poison ;f the one will prove to be as good nourishment as the other, provided it be eaten

* See and compare Deut. yiii. 3. Amos viii. 11. Acts xx, 23, t James iii. 8,- 1 Tim. iv, U

SS TO THE READER.

with an appetite. Yet some well-meaning people are so puzzled and deceived by this sophistry, that they look upon concord among Christians as a thing impracticable and desperate ; concluding a point to be disputable because it is disputed; and so they fall into a loose indifferent humor of palliating and thinking charitably, as it is called, of every error in faith and practice ; as if the church of Christ might very innocently be turned into a Babel of confusion.

Now that men do maintain opinions strangely different from one another, especially on subjects wherein it most concerns them to be agreed, is readily confessed : we are all witnesses of it : and, allowing them to be equally informed, there are but three possible sources from whence this difference can arise. It must be either from God, or from the scripture, or from themselves. From God it cannot be, for it is a great evil ; it is the triumph of Deists and reprobates, and the best handle the enemies of Christianity ever found against it : and God is not the author of evil. Nor can it be from the scripture : to draw it thence, is but another way of imputing it to God. The scripture i3 his word ; and he is answerable for the effect of his words when written or reported, as when they are suggested at first hand by the voice of his holy Spirit. It remains therefore, that the only source of this evil must be the heart of man : and that it is really so, will be evident from the scripture, and the plainest matters of fact. The account we have of this affair is, in short, as follows — Ever since the fall, the nature of man has been blind and corrupt ; his understanding darkened™ and his affections polluted : upon the face of the whole earth, there is no man, Jew or Gentile, that understandeth and seeketh after God ; n the natural man, or man remaining in that state wherein the fall left him, is so far from being able to discover or know any religious truth, that he hates and flies from it when it is proposed to him ; he receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God. Man is natural and earthly ; the things of God are spiritual and heavenly; and these are contrary one to the other : therefore, as the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God? so the wisdom of God is foolishness with the world. In a word, the sense man is now possessed of, where God does not restrain it, is used for evil and not for good : his wisdom is earthly, sensual,* devilish '? it is the sagacity of a brute,* animated by the malignity of an evil spirit.

This being the present state of man, the scripture does therefore declare it necessary, that he should be transformed by the renewing of his mind, 9 and restored to that sound mind x and light of the understanding? that spiritual discernment? 1 with which the human nature was endued when it came from the hands of God, but to which it has been dead from the day that evil was brought into the world. And where the grace of God that should open the eyes, and prepare the heart to receive instruction, 3 * has been obstinately