a Fey a Maan 4 iat v 1p tally ded fe RN Me # ai aed a, U “a PR HEH Ya oa rth at * vyinh SORES Pe eet oa hey Sat igi oa ie | yavaeites 1 Jeane t. Pegged ¥ HAGE et nil oa We Uni ad re 4 tb aly EE yaw a aT 7 STS ee 3 Sse SS Su ees: Jef 4 “pie, 2 har te a ey PNY 4 ey ent ‘ Ht ie bk held Hy}? H} seats) psp cae eae ety Te Ph wa sha i ‘ rela Sy Aiea a4 Bit quae 44Mah iy hea Sat iM ies ti) abt Ter he Y SPR eeip LeARatkt oe oct 2) alts 4 st ah eet abraded GR ix ibd day $08 ser ropa) fi sa bi h) eae aS: Bae Lig eeny aba ey iy wry % ives iba SR ge ies bt Maa Wy sit tamed iosen mee a ALS et: Satya! sue y sta oti Ne pte | seething aN 4 a ‘ Rob asi e pdoih valn day : oe panama tt SPA sais Pe Paideity Aine a ti | ty Ciba a ert 4 “ih a Whecemiae iis V4 43054 Arps sO ied thay ‘ft Heya Cl fon cnyh Lean, nf iy AsO} Had rere eds yiiae ty 4 © ‘i aft st i tH seen Rr i ae hee SSeS 2 ee eiite: SA 7 hier ibe Needs ihe a he 41h ihe halt Sha IF) HAN iM i eh My it Perr eeT: ih PE Fee aay vine Rip Qaaeett Moat cake Meta SMP sal Al TaN i OL ea ton an Cir ck BE ov en ehh se ys PMR are A nite Rema ie Oh oe tO Be ays wis is WAV cbs fase ira’ Pan ey) oy Ta Leet PRINCETON « NEW JERSEY CBD. Donation of samuel Agnew rod ips fa Re So Gs ke od eo al. ad, James, 176! ‘. fa , he v oO 5 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/essayondoctrineoOOkidd 1 it) Me fa i aN) | N ESSAY ON THE Aoctrine of the Trinity: ATTEMPTING TO PROVE IT BY REASON AND DEMONSTRATION, FOUNDED UPON DURATION AND SPACE: AND UPON SOME OF THE DIVINE PERFECTIONS; SOME OF THE POWERS OF THE HiUMAN SOUL; THE LANGUAGE OF SCRIPTURE; AND TRADITION AMONG ALL NATIONS. np ae BY THE REV. JAMES KIDD, A.M. MINISTER OF THE CHAPEL OF EASE, GILCOMSTON, AND PROFESSOR OF ORIENTAL LANGUAGES IN THE MARISCHAL COLLEGE AND ONIVERSITY, ABERDEEN. lM) Dy spt aan MY Pwr Ox aD CNN mwa 2 SMAI PR Ix PR enyt mam’ yd oy qow yes Psat. xix.—: Dp rows Atvott to yrasoy te Ore Pavecov esuv sy auross’ 0 yee OQ avtos ePavegwot. Te yup aoguta auTe amo KTiCEas HOTS TOS Wosnwocs yowpesvee scebopeetos, yre asorG- auee Ouveepess xe Seorns? eis Fo exvas “UT8S aVETwOAOYNnTOUS.—-ROM. i. London: PRINTED FOR J. HATCHARD ; OLIPHANT, WAUGH, & INNES, EDINBURGH ; M. OGLE, GLASGOW ; AND Ae BROWN & CO. ABERDEEN, 1815, Entered tr Sfattoners’ pail. fn winner ctnaalcraehtigiianrmaaneased ieee ‘> ADDRESS THE ELDERS AND THE MEMBERS i THE CONGREGATION, WHO WORSHIP IN THE CHAPEL OF EASE, GILCOMSTON, BY ABERDEEN; Breruren, From the day in which the good providence of God brought us together in the relation of pastor and people, it has been my con- stant aim and effort to instruct you as particularly as possible in the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, whose thrice holy name you bear in baptism, as the foundation of all the doctrines of revelation, of all true religion, and of all faith and practice, according to the Scriptures. As this doctrine is / the most difficult of all others, it requires great patience and “perseverance to obtain any con- siderable knowledge of it : lying so far out of the general comprehension of common capacities, it requires a particular turn of mind, and mode of thinking, to enter fully into it, a 2 1V ADDRESS. Besides those instructions from the pulpit; in order to carry forward the knowledge of the subject in your minds to greater perfection, I have drawn up the following Essay, with much care, and as much perspicuity as the nature of _the subject would admit ; for the express purpose, that a present and permanent help might remain ‘among you, after I go the way of all the earth. I have availed myself of every assistance that I could obtain, and have spared neither labour nor expense to render the work as worthy of the subject as possible. When my manuscript was finished, I shewed it to the Rev. Mr. M‘Allum of Aberdeen, who most kindly and_ obligingly read it, and was pleased to express a favourable opinion of the design of it, and, in ihe most dis- interested and friendly manner, signified his rea- diness to recommend it to the notice of some of his brethren in London. ’I then sent it to St. Austell, Cornwall, to my very wortby friend and correspondent, Mr. Samuel Drew, author of the Essay upon the Immateriality and Immortality of the Human Soul, and also of the lissay on the Identity and General Resurrection of the Human Body, who perused it with his keen and piercing ADDRESS. ™ penetration, and was pleased to write me several letters upon his views of it, in general favourable. I went to London, to consult with my friends there relative to publication, and carried Mr. M‘Allum’s letters of introduction with me. His friends at once entered into my views of the sub- ject, and, with a cordiality which I never before experienced, kindly offered their support. | The Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke entered into it with an ease and readiness peculiar to himself, and very rare to find. The Rev. Mr. Benson also perceived my theory, and expressed a favour- able opinion of it, Dr. Clarke opened his own house for me to deliver private lectures on my manuscript; col- lected his friends and others; and gave all the countenance and encouragement that I could have expected from a brother, wary These private lectures were attended by gen- tlemen of different denominations: among the rest, the Rev. Dr. Simpson of Hoxton Academy was pleased to attend one; so were the Rev. Mr. Bel- sham and Mr. Broadbent, with frankness and great a 3 Vi ADDRESS. candour, notwithstanding their sentiments on the subject were diametrically opposite to mine.— The Rev. Mr. Jerment attended; and a num- ber of ministers of the Methodist connection, whose names I do not know. Mr. Butterworth, M.P. was also pleased to attend; as were Mr. Simpson of Bush Lane, Mr. Birnie of Alpha Road, Mr. Stephen of Great St. Helens, and others whose names I do not know. And after submitting my views of the sub- ject to these gentlemen, and several others, they were all pleased to express their approbation of publication. If, then, the work be of any use in illustrating and establishing the great doctrine of which it treats, it is to these gentlemen you and I have to render thanks, as instruments in the hand of providence of bringing it into the light, so soon. Were it not that delicacy forbids, I would more particularly point out the private support and encouragement I received from Mr. Samuel Drew, Dr. Adam Clarke, and James Gilliland ‘Simpson, Esq. But as this cannot be done, I now entreat you to join with me thus publicly in offering the expression of our gratitude to these ADDRESS. Vit worthy friends of truth, who so heartily co-ope- rated in the cause. For your sake, and that of all other plain readers, I have kept the style in some instances verbose and expletive, and even in places some- what tautological. Of all this, I was fully aware at the time of composing ; but did not know how in any other way I could make a subject so high, level to ordinary capacities, which require line upon line, and precept upon precept, to attract attention, and lead to reflection. And now, Brethren, to you, to those gen- tlemen already mentioned, to the true church universal throughout the world, to our Lord and Saviour the great King and Head of the church, and to that God of whom it treats, I commit the work, most earnestly imploring the divine bles- sing upon you, and upon every reader of this work,—and remain, with due affection and re- gard, Your Pastor, and their sincere humble Servant, JAMES KIDD, Aberdeen, May 1815. . et Gr 104, | onatia oad ; be oni bow ne Goethe ei i ihe | nih ki ‘ocathieies | te pai latbinin april, sea srrenion gd a | prs ae ee pa cline’ aha, a | ia ast Dy a SN td oft. to : oo ‘ oe rai Sk Hl 8 og ta - | | tec ababine:: an stots ay i PREFACE. I. No subject upon which the human mind can turn, is more excellent in its own kind, more ex- alted and important than the doctrine of the Trinity. In itself it has every thing that can arrest the attention, awaken the imagination, and attract the judgment and reason. It is pro- found, mysterious, highly metaphysical, and sci- entific, and every way momentous and interest- ing. It has for its object the great First Cause, the Creator of the universe, the moral Governor of heaven and earth, the self-existent and all- perfect Jehovah. What human capacity can do justice to a subject, in all its parts so great and transcending ? | With respect to the human race, it 1s the only real foundation of natural and revealed religion ; of all truly virtuous doctrine and practice ; of all hopes of a future glorious immortality : the foun- dation of the glorious and interesting plan of re- demption ; of all the ordinances of the church in every period of the world. A subject every x PREFACE. way so interesting, claims the most profound at- tention, the most patient investigation, the most unwearied research, the most careful meditation and study. And to contribute assistance to this great pursuit, the following Essay is chiefly in- tended. The writer trusts he is fully aware of the very deep and serious nature of the subject, , and also of the many difficulties attending it, and desires to be humble, and fully sensible of his own defects; and wishes, with becoming diffi- dence, only to cast in his mite for the illustra- tion of the deepest of all subjects, and for the advancement of the glory of that uncreated ie of whom it treats. If. The difficulties which the student of the doctrine has to encounter, are both numerous and considerable; yet they ought to be surmounted by every effort possible: and by patience, labour, and time, they may, in a certain degree. The abstract and metaphysical nature of it renders it hard to those who are not accustomed to the severity of thinking closely, This is what makes it so unpopular, and puts it beyond: the reach of the superficial thinker. The doctrine of the human mind is placed Jast in the course of academical studies, because it PREFACE. xi requires the greatest efforts to pursue it with suc- cess. And some of the difficulties attending it are the following:—The vast number and the rapid succession of the operations of the mind, make it very difficult to give due attention to them. As the flashes of the lightning passing before the eye, with a rapidity and flight so quick, that the judgment and reason cannot lay hold of them, and they even escape the memory; so the succession of thought in the mind, far surpassing the rapidity of objects before the eye, makes it almost impossible, without long prac- tice, patience, and perseverance, for the mind it-- self to catch its own thoughts, or to detain them when it has laid hold of them. No succession conceivable can be swifter than that of thought: thought can transport itself through the solar system, with a celerity far surpassing the light- ning. He who tries to retain the same thought in his mind for one single moment only, will perceive the force and truth of this statement. In the study of the mind, we go directly con- trary to those habits which we have acquired in the early part of life, and which are strongly confirmed by long practice, before we are able to attempt this study. And after we do enter ya PREFACE. upon it, it is a considerable time before we are able to get clear of our early habits of attending only to external objects. . Besides, the very nature of the operations of the mind, leads to attend to other objects than itself. AIl our sensations are only natural signs, and lead the attention directly to the thing sig- nified. All the perceptive powers do the same; and, what is equally remarkable, all the active powers operate in the verysame way. And thus “* the mind, like the eye, while it surveys all the surrounding objects, takes no notice of itself ;” so that when we attempt to turn the mind to any of its own thoughts, that thought instantly es- capes, unless by great labour, and thorough ac- quaintance with the subject, we have learned to detain it. And still farther, it is not enough that we are able to give attention to the thought, and detain the idea; but it is necessary that we be able to distinguish our thoughts, and analyze our ideas, according to their subtle and minute dif- ferences and distinctions; and also to analyze complex operations into their simple constituent parts. And besides all this, it is only since the days of Dr. Reid, that the inductive system of reason- PREFACE. Xl ing and argumentation was introduced into me- taphysics and moral philosophy, and the ideal system which so long prevailed, was laid aside. For though it had been suggested long before by Lord Bacon, yet it had never been fully adopted. III. With all these difficulties the student of the ‘Trinity has to contend; and must get ac- quainted with the knowledge of the human mind before he can possibly undertake the study of the Divine Being, with the least hope of success. In addition to the foregoing, there are other great difficulties which must be overcome; and these are—to distinguish between scientific and natural knowledge; to rise from every ,created object, whether of matter or mind, and ascend to the Creator of all. The surrounding objects of mat- ter so entangle us, that we cannot get free; and the more fugitive objects of created mind, bewilder us in our ascent to the grand primitive Source of all. And this Source, so’ overwhelm- ing in all its perfections, amazes, while it sur- passes created intellect. The church is at a great loss for the want of a society established for the express purpose of illustrating the doctrine of the Trinity. The xiv PREFACE. subject is too vast for any individual, however extraordinary his genius may be: it would re- quire the united efforts and combined talents of the most enlarged capacities to investigate and elucidate the subject, in a manner becoming the greatness and importance of its nature. | We have societies established for almost every difficult branch in the arts and sciences. What a pity that the most difficult and interesting of all scientific knowledge should want’a society for the express purpose of making more researches into it! Is not the subject more worthy than those of the societies for manufactures, for agri- culture, for the Asiatic researches, or even those of the Royal Society for the investigation of nature? Surely there should be one for the de- vout and pious purpose of exploring the essence, perfections, and personality of nature’s God. Into this pious society, pious men of all ranks, whether clergy or laity, should be admitted. Of what use have the different orders and societies of monks been to the church of Rome? Had it not been for the order of the Jesuits, that church would have been entirely overturned at the Re- formation. And so evident was this to the pre- sent Pope, that he has endeavoured, with all in. PREFACE. XV genuity, to revive that order once more, hoping thereby to subjugate the nations of the world to his authority. And need we mention the Fraires Polont, who, by their writings, are the grand support and bulwark of the Socinians, even at the present day. Every presbytery, synod, and inet of cler- ‘gymen, ought to constitute themselves respec- tively into societies, for the express purpose of ulustrating this grand doctrine more fully ;— and by their united and continued efforts upon this one point, the church would receive great light upon the subject; those who deny the doc- trie would meet with arguments on every hand which they could not answer; and the cause of ‘Christianity would be triumphant. Might they " not unite in this, as well as in the Missionary cause? IV. To all this it may be replied, The Serip.- tures are a sufficient guide, and they are sufhi- ciently clear upon the doctrine. Without pre- suming to derogate or detract in the smallest de- gree from» the value and authority of the holy oracles, we fully admit that all they teach is true, and that whatever contradicts them is dan- gerous, and not to be received. But it should XVI PREFACE. be remembered, the Scriptures do not pretend to teach all the divinely-purposed operations of the Supreme Being ; all the phoenomena of the creation; and all the events of providence. or many things in ecclesiastical and civil history; which clearly indicate the will of God, are not found recorded in the sacred volume; nor even every particular of the life, doctrine, and mira-. cles of our Lord. For they say, even the world atself would not contain the books that should be written on the subjects. But they record as much as is necessary for us to believe. A What a blaze of truth and natural knowledge bursts from the Newtonian system, properly un- derstood, without one text of Scripture to sup- port it? Were this system directly contrary to Scripture, it ought to be rejected as false; but so far is this from being the case, that it supports the Scriptures, and strengthens the cause of re- velation. What a treasure of scientific knowledge, meta- physical and moral truth is found in the writings. of Locke, of Cudworth, of Reid, and of Stewart, without a single text of Scripture in proof of it. And what a magazine of political and juridical truth is found in Grotius, Tucker, Bantum, and» PREFACE, XVit Kenyon, and other writers on the law of nature and nations, agreeable to many things taught in the Scriptures, but not proved by a single text. Who is it that does not see the force of mathie- matical truths, comprehending geometry in all its branches, and the noble science of astronomy,— all beneficial and ornamental to man, without being proved by texts of Scripture. Indeed, the whole circle of the:arts and sciences may be ad- duced in support of our reasoning. Now, are not all these useful and profitable? And is it not the will of God that men should study them in subordination to:his glory? And do they not all, when. fairly followed out, greatly support and ornament the doctrines of the sacred Scriptures? ‘So much is this the case, that when the Scrip- tures address men, they’take it for granted that men may know God from the works of creation and providence.—*‘ The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handy- work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words. to the end of the world.’ ~-‘ Because that which may be known of God is b xvii PREFACE. manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being un- derstood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.’ © Now, if the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament fully prove, as they clearly do, that the works of creation and provi- dence lead men to the study of the Divine Being without a written revelation, and leave them en- tirely without excuse if they do not; is not the inference fair and conclusive, that men may as- certain the existence of the Divine Being by the light of nature? And if'men be able to ascertain the existence of the Divine Essence without the light of revelation, they-may ascertain at the very game time that it is’ necessarily existent; they may also ascertain the perfections of goodness, wisdom, and power, necessarily inhering in that Essence: and the farther investigation of these divine perfections leads directly to the persona- lity of the Divine Essence, and the personality leads directly to the Trinity... And thus we evi dently perceive that the study may be safely at- tempted’on the wars of reason and demon Btrations® (ras. mens ah oy cy Si ati PREFACE. XIX V. And this by no means.proves revelation to be useless; but, on the contrary, considering mankind as they are, and how few have either time or talents to pursue this profound specula- tion, it proves that divine revelation is an inex- pressible blessing to the human race. But not- withstanding the inestimable privilege of the sacred oracles, we clearly discover a sufficient warrant for the attempt, made in the first part of this Essay, to ascertain the doctrine of the Tri- nity upon the sound principles of reason and demonstration. .How far the attempt has been successful, is sabmitted respectfully, without any apology, to the decision of the learned world: the author, conscious of the rectitude of his views, and fully convinced of the truth of the reasoning, can neither flatter the reader, nor fear the shafts of criticism. ‘The honest enquirer after truth will make allowances for imperfections in an attempt entirely new, and upon a subject where no assist- ance could be borrowed ; and the censures of the weak, captious, and uncandid, he despises. His enquiry has been after truth; and all he de- sires is, the illustration of the fundamental doc- trine of all true religion: and with caution and reyerence he has laid down his views, willing to hy2 XX PREFACE. receive assistance, and refusing contradiction or any other principle than manly reasoning and demonstration. He cannot shrink from his at- tempt until fair reasoning is advanced to prove he is wrong; and if this ean be done, he shall willingly concede, and embrace the truth from whatever quarter. If it be said that no one of the ancient philosophers ever made the attempt, nor ever made the discovery of the Trinity; the answer is—they were all satisfied with the know- ledge they had of it by tradition. And besides, it is perfectly evident that 10 one of the ancient philosophers ever ascertained the powers and faculties of the human mind correctly; how then was it possible for them to have ascertained the perfections and personality of the Divine Ks- sence? Impossible.: Their fault lay in vain ima- ginations, in unfounded theories, and the pursuit of non-existing ideas, without that calm and so- ber research of the faculties and powers of their own mind, by inductive reasoning, which would have enabled them to rise in their views of the Divine Being. Yet they pretended to account for the origin of all things; some admitting one _ principle, which they called Fate; and some ad- _ mitting two principles: and, wandering in the PREFACE.” ¥xa vortex of unfounded theory, they said much, and proved little. But grant that they never made the discovery of the Trinity; does that prove that it never could be made at any other time? Does it follow, because it never was discovered by the ancient philosophers, that now, when it is revealed, it may not be proved by the light of nature from reason and demonstration? This is only an attempt to ascertain that the Divine Being was the same before revelation was made that it now is, and this attempt guided by the infallibi- lity of the divine perfections. VI. Again; how are we to argue with a per- son who denies the doctrine of the Trinity alto- gether, and the inspiration of the Scriptures at the same time? He uses his reason against all this; and must we be silent, or quote texts of Scripture which he dees not admit to have the meaning we affix to them? There is no ground Jeft to meet such an opponent, but his own field of reason and demonstration. Here, then, let us meet him, and try on which side reason prepon- derates. If he is right, let us give up the cause ; but if he is wrong, let us treat him respectfully, appealing to his reasoning faculties, and conyine- b 3 xxii PREFACE. ing him of his great error. Quoting texts with such an antagonist is of no use; and yet it is our duty to defend the doctrine, and that too upon the principles of our opponents. ‘Let us mieet them on their own ground, and turn their own weapons against themselves. This is fair; and revelation loses nothing by the attempt. It is to be farther observed, that the fathers of the council of- Nice urged all their arguments against the Arians from reason and demorstra- tion, and almost never quoted Scripture: but they were not acquainted with the inductive sys- tem, and therefore argued concretely, and not abstractly, This proves, that in the purest times of the church, reason was applied to the illustra- tion of the subject, in the best manner the rea- soners could; and if it was so then, why may it not be so now? Upon examination it will be found, that almost every one of the arguments used by Athanasius against Arius ate taken from reason applied to the subject, but searcely one is advanced from Scripture. Those who deny that reason may be applied to the subject, would do well to examine the arguments of the council of Nice as they appear in the Nicene creed, and the arguments advanced by Athanasius as they appear PREFACY. KML. in the Athanasian creed. The reader will find the proof of all this in Cudworth. Now, if Athanasius and the whole council thought it lawful to argue the subject in this way with the Arians, why is it not lawful in the same way to argue it now? Indeed, until the subject be fairly established by reason and demonstration, those who deny it will never be satisfied nor silen- ced. We may go still farther, and tell those who say that reason and demonstration should not be applied to the subject, but the language of Scrip- ture only,—they would do well, in treating of it, to read the words of Scripture only, (which every common reader can do as well as they,) for the moment they begin to use their own words or language upon the subject, that moment they apply reason to it, seeing they do not pretend to inspiration. They may say they found their rea- soning upon Scripture, and draw their conclu- sions from-the divine word, ‘Yo this we answer, that if we found our reasoning upon the divine -perfections, and draw our conclusions fairly from them, our reasoning is as legitimate, and has as much divine authority as theirs. Reason- ing from the perfections of the Divine Being, when fair inductive conclusions are drawn, is h 4 “x1¥ PREFACE, a3 true and as safe as that drawn from the words of Scripture. Therefore, to, argue the subject from the perfections of the Divine Being, dis« coverable by the light of nature, is fair; meets the adversary upon his own principles; and, while he admits the existence of the Divine Being, we reduce him, by the necessity of reason, to admit the doctrine of the Trinity. When he refuses to be guided by reason, he fairly gives up the con- troversy, and then admits all the conclusions of reason, revelation, and tradition, upon the sub- ject; and here we hold him as vanquished, whe- ther he may be silenced or not. VII. And that nothing may be wanting to satisfy those who deny the doctrine, and to sup- port it from every source of argument, we have employed the assistance of Scripture, as well as that of demonstration, to prove what we have already advanced, that fair reasoning from Scrip- ture, and from the divine perfections, strengthens each other in the proof of the doctrine. ‘Thus, if those who deny it can be bound both by reason and revelation, they may giye up the contest ; rest satisfied that truth is upon our side; receive the whole plan of redemption, in all its comfort. ing and glad tidings; and embrace the second - PREFACE, xxv person of the Divine Essence, in oui nature, as their sanctifier and comforter, and walk with God as his covenant people. ‘It is hoped that the arguments taken from re- velation will appear convincing and satisfactory. They are arranged on a plan entirely new, and will attract attention the more readily, and exhi- bit the doctrine in a light in which it has not appeared before. And in order that the oppo- sers of the doctrine may have still a wider range of proof, we have pursued the subject by the light of tradition through the four quarters of the habitable globe, so that every reader may see how strongly the belief of this doctrine has been impressed upon the minds of men by an over- ruling providence, through the medium of tradi- tion, without the light of revelation. It is there- fore hoped that the opposers of the doctrine will take the matter into serious consideration; and, with becoming candour, weigh the arguments deliberately, as every thing has been done, in the power of the author, to treat them with the most affectionate respect. VIII. It is painful to think of the general ig- norance of the doctrine even among those who profess to believe it; and it is no less painful to KXVI PREFACE. consider the general prejudice that prevails against arguing the subject on the principles of reason and demonstration. Many cry out, * Be not wise above what is written ;’ and add, ‘It is above yeason, but not contrary to it.’ Now, we would ask those captious disputants what they mean by beige wise above what is written? If they mean that we should use no other words than the lan- guage of Scripture when treating of the subject, such of them as are clergymen do the very thing they condemn, every sermon they preach. And we would ask, how they know it is above reason, but not contrary to it? If they mean that reason cannot find out every particular of it, the very same thing may be said of every doctrine peculiar to Christianity. Does any one pretend to find out every particular of effectual calling, of justi- fication, of sanctification, of union to Christ, of the union of our Lord’s divine and human nature in one person, of the Spirit making the body of the believer a temple to dwell in, of the being and attributes of God; or even any object of matter,—a pile of grass, or a grain of sand? Surely not; yet no man doubts but it is lawful to apply reason to each and every one of these, while, at .the very same time, he admits that PREFACE: XXVIA there may be particulars in every one of them Which we cannot follow in all their bearings, — Now; if reason should not be applied to the doctrine of the Trinity, neither should it. be applied to any of these. But it is high time to abandon such childish weakneéss, and to eniploy all the powers and faculties of the mind in the investigation of a subject so grand, so noble and interesting. It is time to burst the fetters of prejudice, and to examine religious doctrines as they really are. For we must either give up all the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, or defend them with reason and demonstration against those who deny the infallible authority of the Scriptures. Those who deny the doctrine of the Trinity, deny also the plenary inspiration of the sacred oracles, and, by consequence, all the peculiar doctrines of revelation. | Now truth can only be one side: either those who believe, er those who do not believe, the doctrine of the Trinity, are right. ‘To which side shall we turn? If we give up the doctrine of the ‘Trinity, with it we give up the divine personality of our Saviour, and also of our Sanctifier; and, to- gether with this, also the doctrine of effectual cal- ling, justification, sanctification, and every other *xxXVLt . PREFACE. tenet peculiar to Christianity. ‘This would be a costly sacrifice to what we have hitherto judged to be an error. There is no way left, therefore, but either to defend or abandon our religious te- nets. And when we are publicly attacked, and challenged from the pulpit and the press, with the most severe and reproachful epithets, it is necessary we should bring forward those argu- ments with all the force of truth which they com- prehend. And our efforts will be the more ar- duous, as many of those who deny the doctrine are most amiable characters in other respects, and most learned and profound disputants; so that nothing but the swords, the arrows, and the spears of truth, together with an impregnable coat of mail, composed of reason and demonstra- tion, can ward off their powerful and impetuous assaults. ‘Truth, however, has all things on its side; for God is the God of truth,—and with the God of truth we humbly venture to rest the issue, with devout submission. N.B.—The phrase i moral distinction, is used in a few places in a peculiar sense in this Essay, and means, that we cannot ascertain the personality of the Divine Es- sence, but by the medium of its own moral excellence, CONTENTS. Address to the Elders and the Members of the Congrega- tion who wor ‘ship tn the Chapel of Ease, Gilcomston, by Aberdeen - - ~ - Pace iti—viili PREFACE - - ~ - IX—XXVili First principles, or axioms, laid down in the following Es- say - ie oh gh = - 13 Explanation of words - i eer! 3—A Prop. I. Proving the ewxistence-of the Divine Being from the nature of Duration — - - Oe S—26 Pror. Il. Proving the existence of the Divine Being from the nature of Space dhe tak hes a6 —37F Prop. II. Proving the doctrine from the nature of the divine efficiency - ~ - - 38—5S Prov. IV. Proving the doctrine from the active, energe- tic, and operative influence of the divine effictency, by the first mode, exerted or manifested to the very utmost, according to the economy or law of vis nature, as eternal, ummense, and immutable, necessarily communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, and there- by constituting a distinct, not separate mode, or person, an the Divine Essence = - 59—IZ Prop. V. Proving the doctrine from the nature of the divine intelligence —- - . 93—110 Prop. VI. Proving the doctrine from the way tn which the Divine Being knows the eternity of ats own wesdom, and thereby of all tts other perfections, V11—124. CONTENTS. Prop. XXVIII. Proving the doctrine from tradition, m Chaldea - - - - 492—504: Prov. XXIX. Proving the doctrine from tradition, m Persta ae J bs - 505—511- Pror. XXX. Proving the doctrine from tradition, in Scythia, comprehending Thibet, Tartary, and Siberia, 512—515 Prov. XXXI. Proving the doctrine from tradition, v2 China - - - - 516—521 Pror. XXX. Proving the doctrine from tradition, im Egypt. - - - : 522525 Prov. XXXII. Praving the doctrine from tradition, among the Greeks - - - _ §26—529 Prov. XXXIV. Proving the doctrine from the sentiments _ and opinions of the Greek philosophers who had visited Chaidea, Persia, India, and Egypt, and who taught the doctrine of thé ‘Lrinity after their return to Greece, 530—541 Prop. XXXV. Proving the doctrine from tradition, a- mong the Romans - - - 542—544 Prop. XXXVI. Proving the doctrine from tradition, a- - mong the Germans - oa ~ . 545—546 Pror. XXXVIT. Proving the doctrine from. tradition, among the ancient Americans - - 547 —550 Prov. XXXVI. Proving the doctrine from the sentt- ments of the Cabbala, and other documents of direct evidence, besides the Scriptures, of its being known in the church from the earliest periods until the present day - ~ - - i = Notes ie A a = ~ - 561 a } Ax ’ Ki RST PRINCIPLES, OR AXIOMS, LAID DOWN IN THE FOLLOWING ESSAY, LOT PRE PRIA SRT Tur Divine Essence being necessarily, natu- rally, and most perfectly spiritual, must be im- material, simple, and indivisible. The immateriality, spirituality, simplicity, and indivisibility, of the Divine Essence, does not pre- vent it from subsisting in personality, according to all the qualities and attributes of its own nature. ? Ais the Divine Essence is naturally and necess sarily perfect, it must subsist in the most perfect personality, accerding to its own nature. ‘The Divine Being was as necessarily existent, ‘perfect, and happy, before creation and provi- dence, as since; and would for ever continue to De as happy as it now is, were the whole universe extinguished in a moment, and.reduced to its original nonentity, never again to exist. A . Cap Necessary life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, must be active, energetic, and operative: the very law of their nature is acti- vity, energy, and operation. One mode of subsistence, or personality of that which is eternal, immense, and immutable, can never exercise or manifest its own moral perfec- tions, according to the law of the activity, energy, and operation of their own nature; because no perfection can be both agent and object at the very same time, and in the very same act. As the moral being is created after the image of the Divine Being, it is entirely consistent with the most perfect rules of reasoning, to trace a per- fection in the created moral essence, to a similar perfection in the necessarily existent moral essence. When the essence and perfections are, in all respects, precisely the very same naturally, neces- rily, and essentially, the modes of subsistence of that essence, and perfections, cannot possibly constitute inequality. | . That which is necessarily eternal, immense, and immutable, if ever, in any one instance, it (3) ‘be exercised at all, according to its own nature, must be exercised eternally, immensely, and im- mutably. - EXPLANATION OF WORDS. Mode, in the following Essay, signifies the con- iinuation of the Divine Essence and perfections, identically the same in moral distinction. ' Personality is considered as the same with the identical mode of subsistence, in moral distinc- tion. Subsistence, or to subsist, means the same mode of the essence and perfections continuing in an immutable moral relation. Relation means the order of distinct subsistence. | Distinction means the connection between the essence and its attributes, or between one mode of subsistence and another, real in nature, and conceivable by the mind. Procession means the constitution and economy of the Divine Nature, in exhibiting its own per- sonality, in order to its own existence, perfection, and happiness. mi A 2 C4) Communication means the economy of the Divine Essence, in the full and perfect exercise of its own moral perfections, according to all the attributes and qualities of its nature, in the most perfect per- sonality, that the divine being may be absolutely perfect in itself. A mode, or person, arising in the Divine Essence, means the personality of that essence, exhibiting itself in the order of its own nature. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. In entering upon a subject so momentous and interesting as the following, much caution, humi- lity, and reverence, are necessary in the execu- tion; and much caution, candour, and impartial. ity, in the perusal. A subject that requires to be supported by demonstration ; which often de- mands repetition, and rigorous adherence to ab- stract reasoning and argument; and which lies so far beyond the common course of studies, — claims the attention, and patient investigation, both of the writer and the reader. PROPOSITION I. PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF THE DIVINE BEING FROM THE NATURE OF DURATION. [ Difficulty of the subject—Ewistence preferable to non- evtsience—Laistence a perfection—or the foundation of all perfection—Existence tinplies duration—Dura- tion a perfection—Duration a medium of created AS 6 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. belys—and a perfection of the uncreated—Duratin, stmple—icads to a view of an everlasting Mssence— runs through all creation—lost im the uncreated KEs- sence —-tncomprehenstbie—.cannot be an independent substance—equal in’ extent to the Essence tn which tt. inheres—-infinite—eternal, immense, and tmmutable— necessarily existeni— The Being of which wt is a neces- sary perfection, must bc every way per fect tn the exer- cise and enjoyment of all other perfections—Dur ation infers and descovers this Being—The Being, of which Duration is @ necessary perfection, incomprehensible —everliving—spuritua—imnteliigent, and immatertal— Nothing contingent can there in this Essence—Ceon- clusion of these argumenis—.A pology. | Ix the commencement, it is necessary to as- certain and prove the existence of the Divine Being. ‘This we shall attempt by a train of rea- soning, founded upon the nature of DURATION and Space. 1. Being, or existence, is preferable to non- existence. ‘The extremes between existence and non-existence are incomprehensible by the crea- ted intellect. No proportion can be found by any finite capacity between existence and non- existence. ‘These are extremes which can never meet. hat which has existence, may possess attributes and perfections, in all the extremes of created or uncreated entity, according to the ob- ject we contemplate; but no attributes can be predicated of a nonentity. Hxistence may comprehend being, either erea- ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 7 ted, or necessarily existent. But in ay sagas view, considering it applied to a necessafily-ex- istent Being, its attributes and perfections must be boundless and unlimited, extending infinitely beyond all research, either human or angelic. 2. But farther; in proportion as existence is preferable to non-existence, the former must be a perfection: the latter, a total privation of being. Ihe former must be positive, in all the extent of the sphere of its capacity, whether created ox uncreated: but the latter must be negative, with- out definition, without capacity, without attribute or perfection; untangible even by thought; and, properly speaking, it cannot be called a direct contrast to the former, because that which has not. existence, can admit of no comparison with that which has. 3. If we take*the word substance in its strict and philosophical meaning, in which sense it is used in this place, and throughout this Essay, we shall be compelled to admit, that existence, sim- ply considered, is not a substance; because, in this abstract sense, it is incapable of any inde- pendent subsistence. Simple existence is rather that radical and singular perfection which, on all occasions, distinguishes objects of thought, sub- stances, attributes, and modes, from absolute non- entities ; and it may be denominated the perma- nent and universal criterion between entity and monentity, It always necessarily supposes and A 4 $ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. implies an object or a substancé},in which it in- heres? but, in the simple abstract, it can never acquire independence. Hence it follows, that all the capacities, powers, properties, or perfections of substances,, whether created, or necessarily existent, presuppose existence, and ultimately rest on this universal basis, with respect to every thing that is, . 4. Now, the longer the period of existence continues, the more extensive that perfection is, which existence implies and constitutes. This view may be followed through all the gradations in creation, and applied to all the different ob- jects comprehended in matter, and to matter it- self, as an independent substance. It may also be followed through all the gradations of mind, from that of the smallest animated being, visible by the microscope, to the very highest order of created intelligence; and to mind itself, as an independent substance. Now, as duration is a perfection, and not a substance, we may consider it, when applied to the created or the uncreated being, just as we do life, moral excellence, and moral perfections. Thus we may speak of life, created or uncreated ; moral excellence, created or uncreated ; wisdom, power, goodness, veracity, created or uncreated, in the same manner we may speak of duration, created or uncreated, ac- cording as we view it a perfection in the created er uncreated being; and as uncreated, it is in VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. As 9 itself eternal, immense, and immutable, it must necessarily inhere in some necessary, uncreated Essence, which, every way like itself, must be eternal, immense, and immutable. Or we may say, that duration proves itself to be a perfection, because it is absolutely necessary to the existence Sof every created being. And duration is consti- tuted a perfection, because of its connection with, and inherence in, the necessarily-existent and eternal Substance. And as there can be but one Being to which these attributes can be applicable, there can only be but this one Essence, in which the perfection of uncreated, eternal, immense, and immutable duration inheres. And as this ‘Essence, with all its attributes and perfections, must he. self.exist- ent, or necessarily existent, uncreated, and every way independent, it must be the great First Cause of all things, and must be an Sidtelfingat Spirit. Now, if we raise our speculations from aes and created spirits, to this infinite, self-existent, and uncreated Spirit, and explore, with cautious investigation, this necessarily-existent Being, or Substance, we may range through unlimited and boundless existence, until we are altogether lost in the view of the unlimited and uncreated dura- tion of this divine and absolutely perfect spiritual issence. And this method of ascending from the perfections of moral created spirits, to the 10 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. moral uncreated, is perfectly legitimate, because the former are created after the image of the lat- ter, in moral perfections. : 5. Whatever is necessary to the existence if any object, or of any independent substance, must itself certainly exist ; because that which neither does nor can exist, can be no way essential to the being of that object, or of that independent sub- stance. With respect to created objects, or created substances, the great, adorable, and necessarily- existent Being, which uncreated duration pre- sents to our view, is alone the sovereign, and ab- solute judge, of every capacity, power, or per- fection, necessary to the existence of that object, or of that substance, whether dependent or inde- pendent with regard to its end in creation. But in relation to the selfexistent and uncreated Sub- stance itself, no judgment is necessary to pre- scribe the existence of this Being, because if un- — created duration be one of its necessary perfec- tions, then this Being must include in its own nature every necessary, essential, absolute, per- fection. 6. Whatever is necessary to the existence of any dependent object, or any independent sub- stance, and without which that Being could have no capacity, power, property, or perfection, must necessarily exist, and stand primarily connected with that object, or substance ; or must be a me- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 11 dium of the continuance of the powers, proper- ties, or perfections of that dependent object, or of that independent substance. In this view also, we see creation, both matter and mind, in all gradations, throughout the boundless universe, in the hands, under the authority, and at the sovereign disposal, of the great self-existent, un- created First Cause, of which, we say, absolute duration is an essential perfection. 7. AAs duration is a perfection considered ab- stractedly, and a necessary medium of finite ex- istence, duration must itself actually exist, both as a perfection, and with respect to creation, and all created things, as a necessary medium of being. Many of the excellencies, both of created dependent objects, and created independent sub- stances, rest altogether on this medium of being, and, in proportion to the extent of their nature, they may be said to partake of this perfection. But as this perfection stands far back, before the existence of created beings, and runs far into futurity, beyond the period of the existence of created things, it is evidently a perfection far above the capacity of finite creatures. In surveying this perfection in all its extent, we see all created beings comprehended in un- created duration, and, as such, under the autho- rity of the great necessarily-existent First Cause, of which, we say, uncreated duration is an essen- tial perfection ; and they entirely depend on this A iy. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. First Cause for their continuance in this medium of their existence, or for the perfection of dura- tion; which is shorter or longer, according to the sovereign will of this necessarily-existent First Cause, which, as it has created, must also govern, all things. But with respect to this great First Cause itself, absolute and uncreated dura- tion must be considered as a necessary perfec- tion, essentially inhering in the uncreated Es- sence, and, as such, must have no limitation—no beginning, no end. 8. Proceeding in this train of speculation, and reasoning upon this subject of absolute uncreated duration, we find, that it is in itself indivisible, simple, absolute, and uniform, in its nature; and therefore, with respect to itself, duration, in the abstract, is incapable of diversity of existence. —We see it measuring the existence and periods of created beings, in all gradations, from that of a moment, to future eternity. But still, duration itself is incapable of diversity of existence ; and it must be prior to creation and providence, in its abstract acceptation: it must be uniform throughout all periods of creation and_provi- dence: it must still remain simple and undiver- sified: it must still remain absolutely the same, from everlasting to everlasting, without the least regard to creation and providence; at once defy- ing all bounds and limits, attempted to be set by finite intelligence. — re VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 15 And pursuing the investigation, our views are directed from finite to infinite existence; and in— infinite existence, duration shines as a perfection, through all the infinite attributes of the necessa- rily-existent Being. | | _ 9. Whatever abstract uncreated duration is any where, the very same it must be every where; because it is simple, absolute, uniform, indivisible, and incapable of diversity of exist- ence. Abstract duration, therefore, in its meta- physical signification, is the same with respect to its own existence, in every created being, whether material or spiritual, throughout the immensity of the universe, so long as that being exists. The periods of uncreated duration may be said to vary, not with respect to unceasing continu- ance, but with respect to the individual existence of that being in which a change takes place ; and change of periods can only take place with re- spect to created beings. In contemplating the uncreated, necessarily- existent Being, duration must be considered as unceasing, and without variation; the same from everlasting to everlasting, immensely and immut- ably. And, tracing the necessary existence of the great First Cause, uncreated duration pre- sents itself to our view, in its most perfect ab- stract. signification ; and we view it in its uniform and boundless extent, without variation, or sha- dow of turning. 14. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 10. Duration, as it is necessarily and essentially connected with the existence of every finite being, clearly shows itself to be a perfection of that being. Yet absolutely in itself, duration is entirely independent of every created being; and it is in itself proved to be a perfection, merely because it is thus necessary and essential to the very existence of creation and providence, and to the existence ‘of all the beings therein indivi- dually. Nevertheless, abstractedly considered; it is absolutely independent of them all; and as it is uniform, simple, and absolutely incapable of diversity, 1t must be a perfection wherever it ex- tends; and the longer the period of its continu- ance, the greater is that perfection which it con- stitutes. How many beings derive excelleney from the duration of their existence? It would be neediess to exemplify this with regard to both matter and mind. But when we consider dura- tion in the foregoing view, as a perfection with respect to all created beings, yet, abstractedly, wholly independent of them all, we must consider it as a perfection both created and uncreated, as has been already done ; and with respect to crea- ted beings, necessary to their existence only, and without which they could neither be what they are, nor remain in continuance through any dis- tinct periods. Keeping in view duration as a twofold perfection—the one as a perfection in- hering in a created being, the other as a perfec- so. : J ; 7 ; i VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 15 tion inhering in the uncreated. Considering the first as created duration, the second as uncreated, by way of distinction, as has been already done ; to created beings it is a necessary medium of their existence, and without it they could not continue to be what they are at any time: to the uncreated, it is an essential perfection, and far exceeding the comprehension of created capacity. In comparison of this divine essential perfec- tion in all its unbounded infinitude, all creation shrinks into nothing, and the whole periods of providence, through which creation rolls. . And yet still duration is unceasing, eternal, and im- mense in itself, before all creation, through all creation, beyond all creation, immeasurable, bofindless. This perfection raises our view as far above creation and providence, as the heavens are high above the earth, and leads to infer, with the most undoubted conclusion and certainty, that the necessarily-existent Essence, which we have al- ready ascertained, must be the substance in which duration inheres, and as a necessary and essential perfection, and which must be, like du- ration, uncreated, unceasing, infinite, absolute, from everlasting to everlasting the same.—How glorious must that Substance be, in all its other attributes and perfections ! 11. Duration, as an essential perfection of this most glorious Substance, is every where ; because 16 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. it is boundless and unlimited, simple, uniform, and unceasing. ‘This is evident in every eddie tion and imagination which the human mind can form concerning it, without involving a contra- = diction, or even a paradox; therefore it must be, from all past etern ity, to all future eternity, unis formly, without variation, without limitation, infi- nitely, the same, and unceasing. This view still leads our speculations far, very far, above and. beyond ‘creation and providence, and launches our thoughts into a great First Cause, not bound- ed by time, space, or the capacity of created in- tellect, but soaring far beyond the bounds of the imagination of men and of angels; and in this great, necessarily-existing Cause, duration must inhere’as an essential and necessary perfection ; and points out to us, that there isa necessary and self-existent Being, who is above all, and through all, and beyond all, the myriads of created sys- tems ; 1n the investigation of which, language and thought both fail, and leave us silent in the pur- suit of an endless researeh. ‘ 12, Absolute duration being a perfection in it- self every way boundless, and beyond creation and providence; in this view it can only be an essential or necessary medium of existence to every created substance, whether matter or mind. Notwithstanding it must be entirely independent of both, and of all created beings ; yet it can have no abstract, absolute, independent existence VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Ly of itself; for then it would be a perfection, either of nothing, or of itself; which would make it a perfection, and not a perfection, at the same time, which is absurd ; and would introduce diversity in- to its nature, and thereby destroy its simplicity and uniformity. Therefore, we must still consider it as a perfection ; and, pursuing this perfection of such unlimited magnitude, we are led to con- clude, that there must be some glorious, pure, simple, everliving, and necessarily-existent Sub- stance, in which boundless duration, as an essen- tial and necessary perfection, must inhere. This substance can only be what we call the Divine Being—this can only be God. 13. According to this reasoning, then, if dura- tion be in reality a perfection, as we have already proved it must be, we see clearly, that it must be a perfection of some substance ; for a perfection must ultimately inherein some substance, because the contrary is impossible. And as duration, in all its uncreated, absolute extent, cannot inhere, as an essential and necessary perfection, in the essence of any created being, it must inhere, as a perfection, in the essence of an uncreated and necessarily-existent Being. And this uncreated Being, ia whose essence duration necessarily in- heres, and is thereby constituted a perfection, must be every way as extensive, unlimited, and boundless, as this perfection is: therefore there can be but one, and only one, uncreated, neces. B is VIEWS GE THE TRINITY. garily-existent Essence, in which this infinite and uncreated perfection inheres. i4, That substance, or essence, of which dura- tion is an essential and necessary perfection, ac- cording to the foregoing reasoning, cannot be finite; because duration, in the full, perfect, and abstract meaning of the word, is, in all respects, infinite. For, if that substance, of which duration is an essential and necessary perfection, be finite, and duration, its perfection, be infinite, then the per- fection must be more extensive than the essence, or substance, in which it essentially and necessa-’ vily inheres; which would make a perfection without a substance, in those regions where that substance is not, and where it cannot possibly be, according to the supposition, because of its fint- tude, which is absurd. Therefore, though dura-— tion be, in reality, necessary to the existence of finite substances, as a medium of being, which we have already argued, yet we cannot affirm, that it is an essential and necessary perfection inhering in finite substances, in any other way than as it proves itself to be the medium of their existence, and yet, in its utmost acceptation, eX- ternal to them, and independent of them; and would be the same that it really is, uniformly and unceasingly, notwithstanding created and finite substances, whether matter or mind, had never existed; and would continue still the same, were they for ever struck out of being. ~ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. “19 Perhaps we may say, in this view, that it points out the distinction between a created and un. created substance; or that it is one of those criteria which draws a line of distinction between the contingent and the necessarily-existent Sub- Stance. In the one case, it proves itself a per- fection ; in the other, it is constituted a perfec- fant: * | 15. vAbsolute duration being an eternal, im- mense, and immutable perfection, proves, with demonstration that admits of no doubt or con- ‘tradiction, the certain existence of an eternal, immense, and immutable Substance. And, ar- guing from the perfection to the essence, this Substance must be incomprehensible by created beings, however perfect and extensive their in- tellectual capacities may be. By duration, we are taught humbly to look up, and reverently adore, that Essence, whose perfection it is; and, ‘overwhelmed with the boundless magnitude of this perfection, and of that Essence in which it ‘inheres, we are lost in admiration, filled with wonder and awe, and called upon for ever to ex- ‘plore the other incomprehensible perfections, and glorious majesty, of this great First Cause of all ‘things. 16. ‘This eternal, immense, immutable, and ne- “cessarily-existent Substance must be every where, absolutely, simply, uniformly, and indivisibly ; because absolute duration, which is one of the 2 2G VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. essential and necessary attributes of it, exists every where, necessarily, absolutely, simply, unt- formly, and indivisibly ; and therefore the Sub- stance in which this perfection inheres, must necessarily do the same. And this Substance must be, as already argued, the great, eternal, independent, and necessarily-existent Cause of all things. : ' By a careful investigation of duration, as an essential perfection of this necessarily-existent, self-sufficient, and all-perfect Being, how majes- tic, how sublime, how inscrutable, how unutter- able and glorious, must this divine, spiritual, in- telligent, and self-existent Substance be, of which duration is an essential perfection! ‘The minds of all created intelligences united together, and endeavouring to assist each other to find out this ineffable Being, in all its boundless periections, anust fail in the attempt, and sink before the divine presence of, this glorious Substance, like un atom before the universe. 7. Vhis great, this glorious, and incompre- hensible Being, of which duration is an essential perfection, must necessarily possess all rts other perfections, in full and perfect exercise, wherever it is, and that must be in every point through the wide-extended and immeasurable universe, and still farther beyond the universe than manor angel can conceive or imagine; in short, through every point of eternity and immensity 5 ; otherwise VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 2a the absent perfections would be essential and not essential at the same time, which is a contradic. tion; and would argue imperfection, and prove, that a substance, and its essential attributes, do not necessarily exist together, which is absurd and impossible. Duration, then, with respect to this ineffable Substance, and considered as an essential perfection of it, admits of no limits, periods, epochs, seras, or measurement, or limita.‘ tion of any kind, but is omnipresent and unceas- ing. All creation is enveloped in this unlimited duration, and encompassed by it, as with a boun- dary. 18. This eternal, immense, and immutable Sub- stance must necessarily have all its essential per- fections, in full and perfect exercise every where. None can be separated from it; none can be wanting ; none can cease to exist; but, through- out eternity and immensity, in every period, and every point, this necessarily-existent Being must be perfectly the same. No defect, no variation, can belong to it; but whatever it is any where, that it must absolutely be every where, without limitation, without bounds, all together infinite ; perfection infinite, energy infinite, morality inf. nite. 19. This uncreated and mysterious substance cannot partially exist, or have a beginning in duration, or an end, like created objects, or crea- ted substances, whether matter or mind ; because B 3 Ze VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.- duration being one of its essential perfections, : necessarily inheres in it: and no substance cam, partially exist in any one of its own essential per fections. Therefore duration, as it measures the existence of all created beings, cannot measure the existence of the necessarily-existent Being, as it does theirs; neither can it comprehend that adorable Substance in which it inheres, as it does: ‘theirs; but with all its unceasing and unlimited progression, backward and forward, only shows more of the unlimited grandeur, majesty, and glory of that mysterious Essence, of which it is only one perfection. 20. Lbis mysterious Substance cannot increase or decrease; neither can it move progressively in duration, like created beings, whether of matter or of mind; for then it would be temporary and eternal at the same time, which is a contradic- tion, and absolutely impossible. But it must be all duration, all eternity, all immensity, all im- mutability, all unceasing perfection, both natural and moral. In pursuing such greatness as this, the human soul, losing its way, must stop in its eareer,. and look forward to the unlimited pros- pect that presents no boundary to the view, and admire, with reverence and adoration, what it will never be able to comprehend. 21. This eternal, immense, and immutable Substance must be immaterial, spiritual, intelli- gent, morally excellent, and everliying: this can VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 93 be demonstrated in the most satisfactory manner. If it were material, were created, hada beginning or an end, or ever ceased to live, it must be cir- eumscribed by some bounds, however remote. It is NO contradiction to affirm, that matter is finite: the human mind ieels no reluctance in making the assertion; but it is the most absurd contra- diction to say, that absolute, unceasing duration can be terminated, either with respect to the past or the future. And were it not altogether unne- cessary, it could be fully demonstrated here, that this necessarily-existent Substance, of which ab- solute duration is an essential perfection, must he everliving and immortal. 22. According to every view of the foregoing reasoning, it evidently appears, that duration, as a necessary divine perfection, never had a begin- wing; and it is equally evident, it can never have an end; and being, in all respects, a positive and absolute perfection, it undeniably follows, that the immense, immaterial Substance in which it inheres, must also be without beginning, ané without end, eternal and immutable: the source, if we may so speak, of eternity itself; the source of immensity; the source of all perfection, natu- ral and moral; altogether unlimited, bound- Jess, and incomprehensible ; every way absolute ; every way perfect; every way uniform; and un. changeably the same, from everlasting to ever- lasting. Bt O4, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 23. From the whole chain of the foregoing reasoning, taken in connection, it evidently ap- pears, that nothing contingent can be an essen- tial perfection of this great, this glorious, and all- perfect Substance. Whatever this incomprehen- sible Being is, in point of existence, that it is necessarily and essentially ; and, therefore, all its perfections, whatever they are,-—-however nu- merous, however mysterious,——must be necessary and essential to its nature, and must absolutely and necessarily inhere in its essence. CONCLUSION. Now, surveying the whole foregoing reasoning, from first to last, it plainly appears, that duration, which we have supposed to be a perfection, and which we have traced so far, by the fairest and most conclusive reasoning and induction, as ne- cessarily inhering in a Substance every way cor- responding to it, in the most unlimited and ex- tensive application, proves clearly the incompre- hensibility both of itself, and of the Substance or Essence in which it inheres, and leads us, by the most cogent demonstration, to the conclusion, that this ineffable Substance, in which duration, as a necessary and essential perfection, inheres, must be what we call God ;—the great, the eter- nal, the almighty, the all-perfect, the necessarily-_ existent God; comprehending the whole divine essence and perfections in the spirituality, in- ee ee a VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 29 telligent, self-existent, and immortal nature of the Divine Being. It is hoped, that the whole fovea bie steps of reasoning are legitimate and unsophisticated.— Lhe repetitions which are unavoidable in demon- strative reasoning, will assist the plain reader; while the learned, knowing that they are neces- sary to perspicuity, will overlook their redundan- cies, and, passing the pleonasms, will directly fol- low the chain of proof. And it is presumed, with becoming submission, that the arguments taken in cumulo, fairly, cogently, and conclusive- ly ptove, a priori, from the nature of duration, the existence of the Divine Being. For the satisfaction of the reader, and as a far- ther illustration of this mode of reasoning,-—to shew how extensive this subject is, and how far it may be followed, with increasing perspicuity and demonstration,—we may argue another ex- ample taken from the nature of space. And we presume to preface this example, by the obser- vation, that every train of reasoning of this kind, founded upon existence, and argued, a priori, must, in spite of all ingenuity, be similar in its steps, and must be expressed in similar language, from the very nature of the subject. Every example of this kind is like the radius of a circle, leading directly from the centre to the circumference in a strait line. The number of radii adds nothing to the strength of the reason- 26 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ing upon one, yet still the number, considered one by one, adds greatly to the strength of con- viction, and shows that the same absolute cer- tainty will infallibly hold good with respect to each individual radius; and it presents to the mind such a combination of truths, established so strongly upon infallible demonstration, as pro- duces the most satisfactory conviction, and fills the mind with the most absolute certainty; dis- pelling every doubt, removing all hesitation, and fixing the whole rational powers in the most con- fidential and unshaken stability of belief. Such is the mode of reasoning here followed ; and so fair the conclusions already drawn, that full proof appears abundantly evident; so that it may appear superfluous to the reader to add any other example: the one already argued, being of itself sufficient. Yet we may add another; and he may peruse the whole, or, if he please, he may add new and similar proofs of the same doe- trine from his own ingenuity; for many other examples might be added.* * See Note A. on the preceding Propositian ee ee ee ee VIEWS OF THE -TRINITYS ys “PROPOSITION «II. PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF THE: DIVINE, BEING FROM THE NATURE OF SPACE. [ Proofs from Space—The more extensive the extsience of any object or substance; the more per ‘fect—Space exists —Indivistbhle—every where the same—must tnhere tn an infinite Substance—ts eternal, &c.—cannot be an wndependent substance—must be a perfection—'The Lissence of which it isa perfection, infinitte—an ade- quate perfection of the Substance in which tt necessarily wnheres——implies omnipresence-——The B emg of which tt as a perfection, must extst in the full and per fect exer~ cise and enjoyment of all tts other perfections—must do so through every point of immensity and eternti iy must be ever-ltwving, spiritual, and immatertal—must be ne- cessardy existent—niust be eternal, tmmense, and tm- mlable— Nothing contingent can necessarily tnhere tn this Substance. ] ue chain of reasoning, in this example, may run as follows : 1. Simple existence is preferable to non-exist- ence. ‘This is evident from creation and proyi- dence; from the rank that rational moral beings hold in the scale of creation in this world; from their hopes of immortality in the next; and more particularly, from the necessary existence of the Divine Being itself; which has been clearly proved an the foregoing proposition. 8 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 2. In proportion as existence is preferable to non-existence, the former must be a perfection, the latter an imperfection: the former positive, the latter negative. Simple existence is not an independent substance ; but it distinguishes en- tity from nonentity: that which is positive, from that which is negative. It always presupposes an object, or an independent substance, in which it inheres ; therefore it is the necessary foundation of all being and perfection, and must itself neces- sarily be a perfection. This position may be ar- gued in a variety of ways; but still the foregoing conclusion will hold good, and appear infallible. 8. Simple existence cannot be an independent substance, because bare existence, in the abstract, is absolutely incapable of selfsubsistence, and can have no attributes or perfections. But though not an independent substance in itself, yet it al- ways supposes and implies some object, or some substance, and thus it may be said to comprehend all beings whatever; and thus far it must be con- sidered as a perfection in every substance. 4, The more extensive the sphere of existence is, the more extensive is that perfection which existence implies, and really constitutes. This is evident from the extended influence of a man of great wealth, or a man of great authority : wealth, and power, may be said to extend the existence of their possessors. Something like this may also be argued from longevity; and the oa VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 29 wliole may be exemplified by a king, a judge, a commander-in-chief, and, in a lower degree, the head of a family. 5. Whatever is necessary to constitute exist- ence, must certainly exist, because that which does not or cannot exist, can be noways ueces-. sary to being, and can have no relation to an ob- ject, or to an independent substance ; for if it could, existence and non-existence could be uni- ted in the very same being at the very same time, which is absurd and impossible. 6. Whatever is necessary to constitute exist- ence must be a perfection, either inhering in the. being that exists, or inhering in some other being, or substance, which is the cause of that existence, aud upon which the former being must depend ; and that in proportion as this perfection is neces- sary to existence, and also because this perfection actually exists. : 7. Space is necessary to finite existence: all finite beings, whether material or spiritual, must exist in space: therefore space must exist, and it. proves itself to be a perfection, so far as it is necessary to finite existence, although, in its ab. stract universal acceptation, it may not necessa- rily and essentially inhere as a perfection in any created being. In this view, we may consider space in the same manner in which we do know- ledge, perception, conception, abstraction, as standing connected with a created or uncreated 30 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY- intelligent being. Knowledge, ina created being, may be called created knowledge: the same may be said of perception, conception, abstraction, standing connected with a created being; these powers or faculties of the created mind may be denominated created. So space, standing con- nected with a created bemg, may be called crea- ted space ; and standing connected with the un- created being, may be called uncreated space. And as far as space is necessary to the exercise of knowledge, perception, conception, abstrac- tion, by a created being; in like manner it is necessary to the exercise of knowledge, percep- tion, conception, abstraction, by the uncreated Being. Created space, therefore, is necessary to the existence and operations of created beings; and uncreated space is necessary to the existence and operations of the uncreated Geng. Hence, so far as it is necessary to finite existence, it must in- here either in finite substances, or in a Substance upon which finite beings depend for their exist- ence. ‘They cannot exist without it, but it may exist independently of them. 8. Abstract, uncreated space is indivisible, ab- solute, simple, and uniform in its nature; incd@- pable of variety, or of diversity of its own exist- ence. Wherever we suppose space to be, in its absolute and abstract existence, it is always the same. Whatever thought we form of its exist- ence, we find it always the same. Whatever Se ee ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 31 view we take of its existence, it is always the same; and whatever speculations we form con- cerning its existence, we still find it the very same; reaching farther than thought can ex- tend, and defying limitation by finite intelligence. 9. Whatever space is at any one point, the very same it is at every other point. Whatever it is any where, that same it must be every where ; because it is uniform, simple, absolute, indivis- ible, and incapable of a diversity of existence, except in the view we have already taken of it as created and uncreated. This is as plain and certain as any demonstration, and presents an unbounded field to intellectual research, and ex: iibits a vast region to metaphysical investigation. 10. Space, we have already observed, proves itself to be a perfection, because it is necessary to the existence of finite beings ; and it is con- stituted a perfection, because it is necessary and essential to the existence of the Infinite Being. And this perfection, or medium of finite exist: ence, must primarily and necessarily inhere in finite objects, or finite substances, or in an infi- nite Substance, upon which all finite beings de- pend. And being uniform, indivisible, simple, and incapable of a diversity of existence abstract- edly in itself, it must be a perfection wherever it exists; and in its own nature a perfection, ex- tending in all directions without limitation. This carries the thoughts far beyond the sphere of 32 VIEWS. OF THE TRINITY. creation, and directs the views into boundless immensity. 11. No reasoning is necessary to. prove that space is every where, because no bounds, no limits can be set to it, even by the utmost stretch of the most lively and vigorous imagination, with- out involving a contradiction. If we direct our thoughts in pursuit of it to past time, there are no bounds: if we keep them upon the pursuit of it in present time, we are lost. If we direct them to futurity, endeavouring to find its limits, they vanish from our view, and leave us in the pursuit of that which we shall never find; therefore space is eternal, immense, and immutable. 12. Space being only a perfection, can have no abstract independent existence by itself; for if it could, then it would bea perfection of nothing, or of itself, which would make it a perfection and not a perfection, at the same time, which 1s im- possible ; and would introduce diversity into its nature, and totally destroy its simplicity, which is also impossible. If it were an independent substance, it must either be matter or mind; for at present we know no independent substance, except one or other of these. It will not be con- tended that space is matter, until it can be proved that it is tangible; neither can it be affirmed that it is mind, until it can be proved to have life and intelligence; and no sober judgment ever as- cribed either of these to it. And being neither VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 33 matter nor mind, so far as we know, it cannot be an independent substance. Therefore it follows, that it must be a perfection, and if so, it must inhere in some substance, greater by far, than the wide-extended and boundless universe. 13. ‘Thus it undeniably follows, that space must: be a perfection of some supreme, grand, and in- comprehensible Substance. For in nothing but a necessarily-existent, independent, and uncreated Substance, can a perfection so boundless ultimate- Jy inhere. And this perfection, every. way infi- nite, must inhere in a Substance every way infi- nite. ‘This Substance is the great First Cause of all things. It comprehends all things,—sustains all things: itself comprehended by none,—sus- tained by none: itself far exceeding all conceiv- able bounds, and incomprehensible in all its other attributes by any, or by all created intelligences ; for they all exist in space,—that immeasurable attribute of this immense and immeasurable Sub- stance. 14. ‘This Substance, it is plain, of which space is a necessary perfection, cannot be finite; be- cause, in this case, the perfection would be more extensive than the substance in which it inheres, which is a contradiction; and would make a per- fection without a substance, in those regions where this substance is not, which weuld be still absurd and impossible. That Substance, then, in which space necessarily and essentially inheres, c SA VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. as a perfection, must be infinite, eternal, and un- changeable; and every way as immeasurable as space itself. Language is no way adequate to express the inconceivable and uncreated great- ness of this Substance. Thoughts are unable to extend themselves to the bounds of its dimen- sions; and the rational enquirer, who would at- tempt to explain all that may be known of it, finds himself lost in immensity. ; 15. Space being an immense perfection, proves undeniably the existence of an immense Sub- stance in which it inheres. And thus immensity measures immensity ; infinity extends to infinity 5 and that which is boundless, corresponds with that which is boundless; and both the perfection and the substance defy the united investigation of angels and men to find out, or comprehend, the utmost extremities of their extent. 16. ‘This immense Substance must exist every where, because space exists every where; and this Being, one of whose necessary perfections space is, cannot be created—cannot be material ; but must be necessarily existent, eternal, and independent—everliving, and indivisible. No limits can either duration or space set to this uncreated Substance; but every where, immen- sity and eternity unite their mfluence to exhibit to intelligent creatures the glory and greatness of this eternal Being. | 17. This great and incomprehensible Substance ~ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 35 ©. must necessarily possess the full and perfect ex- ercise and enjoyment of all its perfections, what. ever they are, and however numerous they may be. For, if not, we might ascribe imperfection to it; and, supposing it to have perfections ab. sent from itself, of which it is not at all times and in all places in the full and perfect exercise, we must consider its absent perfections as essential and not essential at one and at the same time, which is a downright contradiction, and entirely inconsistent with absolute perfection, and must be altogether impossible to a necessarily-existent and independent Being. 18. It therefore follows, that this immense, necessary, and self-existent Substance, must ne- cessarily possess the full and perfect exercise of all its essential perfections, in every point of eternity and immensity, filling all things, pervad- ing all things, comprehending all things,—itself altogether incomprehensible. 19. ‘This infinite Substance cannot fill space, as matter does, because space is one of its essen- tial perfections, and must inhere in its essence ; and no substance can fill any one of its own per- fections in the way that matter may be said to occupy space. ‘Therefore, however far we may investigate space, this Substance; though im- mense, is still invisible, and must be immaterial, and must be spiritual and everliving. 20. We may confidently affirm, that this im- Sap 36 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY« mense and mysterious Substance must be spiritual and immaterial ; and, were it necessary, this could be easily proved. For if this Substance fill space like matter, while matter inheres in it, then this Substance and this perfection must mutually pe- netrate each other; both must contain, and both must be contained, at the very same time, which is absolutely impossible. Therefore this Substance must be immaterial, spiritual, and everliving. 21. As this ineffable Substance must be spiri- tual and immaterial, so must all its essential per- fections, natural and moral. And as it is eter- nal, immense, and immutable, so must they.— This Substance, then, must be uncreated; must be necessarily existent ; must possess all uncrea- ted perfection within itself; and must be every way adequate to its own existence, pasar and happiness. 22. We may also add, that space never had a beginning, and never can have an end; and, therefore, this immense and immaterial Substance must be without beginning and without end; from everlasting to everlasting; through all past eternity, through all future eternity, unceasing. 23. Nothing contingent can be essential to this glorious Substance. Whatever it is with respect to existence, it is so necessarily: it has no author of its being, perfections, enjoyment, and happi- ness; therefore it is in itself absolutely and necessarily existent, and all its perfections are VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 39 natural, necessary, and essential to its own exist. ence and enjoyment. This great, exalted, and incomprehensible Being is perfection itself, in all uncreated, original, necessary, and never-ceasing extremes: 1 is most certainly what we call God.* * See Note B. on the preceding Proposition. 38 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. aa PROPOSITION III. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE OF _THE. DIVINE EFFICIENCY. [the Divine Being must, in its own nature, be a neces- sary principle of spiritual life, intelligence, moral ea- cellence, and effictency—must necessarily possess all perfections, natural and moral—must necessarily com- prehend within tiself perfect efficiency—The sense in which the word efficiency ts used in this Essay—Agree- ment aboti ihe term ad extra—Difference respecting w ad intra—Upon these two views, different opinions respecting the doctrine are founded—JIntelligent effi- ciency tnhering mm the Divine Essence—must be ac- twe, energetic, operative, and en fluential— The Divine Essence must necessarily partake of these also—No exertion or manifestation of the divine effictency, ad extra, can be adequate to the whole extent of tts nature —-There must then be a way in which tt can be exerted to the very uitermost, ad intra, or vz cannot be exerted to the very utiermost at all—If it be not, this implies wmperfection—If tt be, this implies a plurality of modes. of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections —Sf it be granted that the Divine Being can, in qny one mstance, from all past eternity, through all future elernity, exert or manifest the divine efictency, in all vis extent, the a: gument ts gained— Inference drawn from Reid’s view of power—Reid’s theory cannot be applied, in ws fuilest extent, to the divine eficiency— Proof of the doctrine farther established by the activsty of the divine nature, or the principle of life, intelli~ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 39 gence, and moral excellence—LKarther proof from the nature, power, and will, of the Divine Being—A pecu- liar law of the constetution and economy o of the Divine Lissence and perfections undeniably establishing alt this—Upon no other principles can finite intelligence have just conceptions of the Divine Being.) From the foregoing reasoning, founded on the nature of duration and space, as necessary and essential perfections of the Divine Essence or Substance, we clearly see, that this Divine Being, whatever it is, must, in its own nature, be a necessary principle of spiritual life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency; since it can easily be proved that it is the great First Cause of all created things. Now it has been already proved, that this great lust Cause must be eternal, and, being eternal, it must be immense and immutable; and being so, it must be independent ; and being indepen- dent, it must be necessarily existent; and being necessarily existent, it must comprehend within itself absolutely, and without regard to any other being whatever, all perfections, natural and moral, and all sufficiency for its own existence, and for its absolute perfection, enjoyment, and happiness ; and that without the smallest dependence upon, or the least regard to, any created being, either in time or eternity, as contributing any way whatever to its existence, or to its consummate perfection, or absolute, uninterrupted, and ever- C4 40 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. lasting enjoyment and happiness in itself; and whach we must consider as, in all respects, neces- sarily existent, necessarily perfect, and necessarily happy, of and from itself. 2. Now, a Being that is necessarily existent, and all-sufficient, and infinitely happy, must necessa- rily be spiritual, everliving, morally excellent, and efficient ; necessarily possessing and compre-: hending within itself, activity, energy, and opera tion, and all attributes and perfections consistent. with self-existence, moral excellence, and happi-: ness ; and being a necessary principle of spiritual life, it must necessarily be intelligent ; and being necessarily intelligent, it must possess perfect moral excellence ; and possessing necessary mo- ral excellence, it must necessarily possess within itself absolute, perfect, and underived, existence, and all perfections, natural and moral, necessary to self-enjoyment and happiness: It must, there- fore, necessarily comprehend within itself, abso- lutely, and exclusive of all other beings, perfect efliciency, consistent with self-existence, spiritual. life, intelligence, and moral excellence. ~~ Our primary notion and conception of ihis great lirst Cause, that is consistent with reason, must be that of a moral mode of necessary exist-. ence, independence, eternity, immensity, and immutability, comprehending necessary life, in- telligence, moral excellence, and efficiency.; and, hy the meral economy of its ows nature, of itself VIEWS OF THE TRIvITY. Ay naturally constituting the personality of its own es- sence and perfections. For we can have no idea of life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, but as they subsist in personality. And uponacare- ful investigation of the economy of necessary life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, ac-= cording to their own nature, possessing unde- rived activity, energy, and operative iufiuence, they must subsist in personality, which is natu- rally and necessarily constituted by this economy of its own essence. We have no reason to con- clude that this first mode is all the modes of necessary personality which may subsist in that essence. And from the nature or law of neces- sary life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efii- ciency, which is that of activity, energy, and operation, and from the economy of the Divine Essence, with all these inhering in it, we have the strongest reason to conclude, that there must be more modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections than one. This will be farther illustrated in the investigation of the divine efficiency. 3. By the word efficiency, in this Essay, we are not to understand causation, when speaking of the Divine Being, ad intra; nor are we to understand the beginning of motion; though motion must originally be the consequent of the divine efficiency, in many instances in creation and providence: for creating efficiency is only a 42 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. certain modification of active energy; yet we must consider, that without the least respect to creation and providence at all, the divine effi- ciency, ad intra, must have been exerted naturally and necessarily in the Divine Essence, seeing life and moral excellence naturally tend to ener- getic operation, as.well as efficiency ; and this must have been so as actively and as perfectly: before creation and providence, as since:. And from the very nature of these divine perfections, they must be active, or influential, in the Divine Essence now ; and, for the same reason, they must be so, through all future eternity. ‘Therefore we must consider the divine efficiency as ener- getic, and necessarily exerted within the Divine Essence itself, in a way consistent with necessary existence, perfection, and happiness. | 4. With respect to intelligent efficiency, in the particular modifications of it exhibited in the work of creation and providence, exerted, ad ex= ira, there is no difference of opinion between those who believe the doctrine of the ‘Trinity, and those who oppose that doctrine; because it is admitted, on all hands, that all the works of the Deity. ad extra, are the operation of one sim- ple undivided Being. “ And although creation, has not been from all eternity, yet it does not follow, that there ever was in God the absence of any ability to display a creative polver. The creative power of God is certainly only a parti- VIEWS. OF THE TRINITY. 43 cular modification of active energy, which, in- stead of implying that previous absence of omni- potent power, clearly demonstrates the certainty of its being, and proves it to be inseparable from the Divine Nature. Creative power was un- doubtedly displayed in creation; but this work being accomplished, that mode of active energy, by which it was performed, must have been with- drawn ; while permanent omnipotence must have remained to support existence; and a new mode of providential power must have been exercised, to support the various relations of what had been called into existence.’ 4 5. But with respect to the same everliving efficiency, ad intra, the opinions of those who be- lieve this doctrine, and those who do not, are very different. And in arguing the point of dif- ference, it is necessary, in the commencement, to lay aside all views of creation and providence, and to contemplate this glorious Being, of which we have argued, that duration and space are necessary and essential perfections, without be-: ginning and without end, before creation and providence were called into being. And in this remote and far-extended view, looking before creation began, we must consider the Divine Being as absolutely perfect, and every way ade- quate to its own existence and happiness. And having necessary life, moral excellence, and effi- ciency, as essential perfections of its own nature; | 44, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and these perfections, naturally and necessarily in themselves energetic, influential, and opera- tive, they must naturally and necessarily act from everlasting to everlasting, according to their na- ture. In this view, it will be found, upon the fairest principles of reasoning and argument, that the Divine Being must have been as perfect and as active as it now is, or ever will be; and that it must have comprehended within itself all that 1t now does: and it must for ever continue to do so, without any dependence upon any creature, and without the least possibility of growing bet- ter or worse; without the least possibility of being more or less happy in itself; and without the least possibility of beginning or ending, in any of its perfections; and without the least pos- sibility of change. 6. Now, if the Divine Being does in reality exist necessarily, and does in reality possess and comprehend within itself everliving, absolute, eternal, immense, and immutable efficiency, this efficiency must be necessarily operative; because it is essentially connected with absolute and per-_ fect life, which, from its very nature, is energetic and operative; and perfect underived life is a’ necessary and essential perfection inhering in the Divine Essence: and because it is essentially connected with absolute and perfect moral excel- - lence,—and moral excellence, from its very na- ture, is energetic and operative: and perfect and VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 45 supreme moral excellence is necessarily and es- sentially inherent in the Divine Essence. Now efficiency, from its very nature, is also energetic and operative ; and the most perfect and super- lative efficiency is a necessary and essential per- fection inhering in the Divine Essence: and it is perfectly evident, from the very nature of these divine perfections, that it is natural to the Divine Being to exist necessarily and essentially in ener- getic and operative efficiency. ‘This active energy, therefore, is essentially inherent in the Divine Essence, in an absolute and perfect way, before creation and providence began, and must still continue to be exerted, while creation and provi- -dence exist; and will for ever continue to be exerted through all future eternity, without the least regard to creation and providence. For creation and providence exhibit only a particular mode, or particular modes, of the exercise of creating efficiency; but by no means any mode _ of the divine essential efficiency. If pertect, di- vine life be naturally operative, it must be natu. rally operative in a perfect way. If perfect di- vine moral excellence be naturally operative, it must be naturally operative in a perfect way. If. perfect divine efficiency be naturally operative, it must be naturally operative in a pertect way. ‘or, if not, this great, eternal, and necessarily- existent Being, must possess everliving, intelli- gent, energetic, and operative efficiency, which AG | VIEWS OF! THE TRINITY. never was,’ never‘can, nor ever will be, exerted or manifested in a perfect way to the uttermost; or in a way becoming the nature of this efficiency, - and all the other excellencies of the Divine Being, natural and moral: Because it is plain, without much reasoning and argument, that the divine efficiency neither is nor can be exerted or mani- fested to the very uttermost, in creation and pro- vidence; nor would it-ever be so, ad extra, not- withstanding creation and providence were ten thousand times ten thousand greater than they are, and ten thousand times ten thousand repeat- ed, at ten thousand times ten thousand intervals, as long as the present fabric of the universe shall continue; nor is it possible for the Divine Being itself to exert the divine efficiency to the very uttermost, ad extra. ‘The Divine Being cannot create any thing, whether matter or mind, as eter- nal as itself, as immense as itself, and as immut- able as itself; and uniess this were possible, which it neither 1s nor can be, the divine efficiency nei ther is, nor can, nor will, be exerted to the very uttermost, ad exira. But from a fair consider-— ation of the foregoing energetic and operative divine perfections, which clearly prove the Di- vine Nature to be operative,—and, in particular, from a consideration of the divine moral excel- lence, which is absolutely complete in ali moral perfections,—we may clearly infer, that there as some way in the Divine Essence, by which ‘the . =F = VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 47 divine moral excellence may be exerted or mani- fested to the very uttermost of its nature. “We always look for created moral excellence to be exerted by a moral being, and, in many cases, we suppose it should be exerted to the very utter- most of the power of that being. The Christian religion shows this, and, in some rare instances, we find it among the heathens, and even in the afiairs of the present life. Now, if this be sup- ‘posed necessary in a created moral being, at any time, may we not suppose it to be also necessary, in some instance, in the uncreated moral Being, where moral excellence, in all its uncreated glory, necessarily and essentially operate. Now, if we suppose it possible that, in any one instance, either past, present, or to come, the Divine Being ever has, can, or will exert, or manifest, the di- vine efficiency to the very uttermost, all that we plead for in the argument is gained: because the divine efficiency is necessarily and essentially eternal, immense, and immutable. Now, if that which is eternal, immense, and immutable, ever can, and ever be, in any one instance, exerted or manifested to the very uttermost, it must be exerted or manifested eternally, immensely, and immutably, by the necessary law of its own es- sence. ‘here must then be some way in which the divine efficiency is exerted to the very utter- most, according to its own nature, within the Divine Essence itself; and that cannot possibly 48 VIEWS OF. Life "TRINITY! be inthe way of creation and causation, but im the way of divine, mysterious energy, necessary to the existence, perfections, and happiness of the Divine Being within itself, entirely inde- pendent of all efficiency, ad eatra. Yor if this be not so, the great, the eternal, the omnipotent divine efficiency, never did, can, nor will, from all past eternity, through all future eternity, exert or manifest itself to the utmost of its own ener- getic capacity. And if so, it must undeniably follow, that the divine efficiency never was, never can, and never will be, exerted or manitested to the uttermost ; which is the same as to say, that the Divine Being possesses a necessary and essential perfection, which never was, can, nor will be, exercised in a way consistent with its own nature, the extent of the Divine Essence, and the other divine perfections. And if we admit this, we cannot tell whether the Di- vine Being is able to exert its own divine efft- ciency to the uttermost, or not, which is. the same as to say, the Divine Being may be imper- fect for any thing we know: And if we affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect, we may as well affirm that the Divine Being does not exist. We do not argue this point by the bare abstract idea of the divine efficiency only: we take in the idea of perfect divine life, intelligence, and moral excellence, as supreme and necessarily inhering in the Divine Essence, together with the divine VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 49 supreme efficiency ; and if it be admitted, in any instance, from all past eternity, through all future eternity, that the Divine Being can exert or ma- nifest life, intelligence, moral excellence, or efii- ciency, to the very uttermost of their own nature, as inhering in the Divine Essence, the argument. is at once granted; for the divine life, intelli- gence, moral excellence, and efficiency, are natu- rally active, energetic, and operative, and natu- rally eternal, immense, and immutable; and if that which is eternal, immense, and immutable, be exerted or manifested to the utmost of its own nature, in any one instance, through endless du- ration, it must, in that instance, be exerted or manifested eternally, immensely, and immutably, —and this is just what we argue. The supposition of the very existence of effi- ciency, as inhering in the Divine Essence, infers the exercise of it, according to its nature, at some time or other; and the very supposition of the exercise of it in any one instance, past, pre- sent, or to come, infers the exercise of it eter- nally; immensely; and immutably. For the per- fection of efficiency, inhering in the Divine Es- sence, infers, that it must be every way like that Essence, eternal, immense, and immutable; and, as we have already argued, if that which is eter- nal, immense, and immutable, be ever, in any One instance, exercised according to its nature, it must be exercised eternally, immensely, and D 50 WiEWS OF THE -TRINITY. immutably. ‘The divine efficiercy is eternal, im- mense, | and immutable ; therefore it must be ex- ercised eternally, immensely, and immutably. For, if not, it never can be exercised at all; and if it never can be exercised at all, the Divine Being has a necessary perfection inhering in its essence, which, if we dare say so, 1s of no use: For, if it never can be exercised according to its own nature, it must be of no use, and, by con- sequence, it must be unnecessary. But it is ad- mitted, on all bands, that it really is necessary : it cannot therefore be necessary and not neces- sary, for this is a downright absurdity: 1t must therefore be necessary, and must be necessarily. exercised, eternally, immensely, and immutably. This method of reasoning is fairly logical, and may be applied to ey yery one of the divine moral perfections. ial 7. The famous Dr. Rerp, speaking of. power, says, ** Every operation supposes power in the being that operates; for to suppose any thing to 3 operate which has no power to operate,, is, mani- festly absurd. But, on the other hand, there is no absurdity in supposing a being to,have power. to operate, when it does not operate. Thus, I may have power to walk, when I sit, or to speak, when I am silent. very operation, therefore, implies pavers but the power does not bis the operation.”’ This xeasoning applies, only to the will of « a a ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Bl created being possessed of power. But the rea- soning which we adduce, applies not to the will only, but also to the nature and power of the Divine Being, with respect to the energy or ope- ration of life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency,——perfections necessarily inhering in the Divine Essence: for Dr. Rezp’s reasoning, with respect to a created being, only proves im- perfection, and shows, that this being is not, at all times, nor in all places, in the full and perfect exercise of those perfections bestowed upon it by the Creator. -But should we venture to ar- gue, that the Divine Being, who is absolute per- fection itself, is not, at all times, and in all places, through every point of eternity and immensity, in the absolute, full, and perfect enjoyment and exercise of all the divine perfections, natural and moral, that moment we affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect: for, with respect to the Di- vine Essence and perfections, ad intra, it is not possible to conceive or imagine the smallest vari« ation or change of a temporary nature, without entirely doing away the idea of Deity. As om- nipotence is a perfection which is essential to the Divine Being, this Being must necessarily possess all possible power, not only in unlimited extent, but in all possible varieties : it must also possess that of everliving and intelligent efficiency. —— Now, as ail the perfections of this great and glo- rious Being are underived, it must have been as D 2 Loe 52 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. absolutely perfect before creation, as it is since ; and its essential perfections would remain undi- minished, even were creation to be eternally | swept aside. But if this Being be absolutely perfect in itself, it will then follow, that it must have eternally possessed the power of exercising its own efficiency, in all its eternal, absolute, and unlimited extent; and must for ever continue to do so, through all future eternity, absolutely in- dependent of creation. For since every created being must have a beginning of existence—must be finite in its nature, and limited in its extent, —it will be totally impossible that ever the divine efficiency can be absolutely exercised towards creation, in all its eternal, absolute, infinite, and unlimited extent. This exercise of the divine efficiency, ad extra, must therefore be absolutely impossible. But since the Divine Being has eternally possessed the power of exercising its efficiency in all its unlimited and absolute extent, and this exercise, ad extra, is absolutely impos- sible, it will follow, that the possibility of eter- nally exer cising this efficiency, in all its unlimited and infinite extent, must be ad intra. And, con- sequently, as the eternal exercise of this effi- ciency, ad intra, must be absolutely impossible upon the supposition of only one mode of sub- -sistence in the Divine Essence, it will most. cer- tainl 'y follow, that a plurality of modes must sub- sist in iia Divine Essence, COR eo VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, Proof of the doctrine farther established, by the actwoity of the Divine Nature, or the principle of life, intelligence, or moral excellence. This reasoning will appear still more clear and eertain, by viewing it in another light. We have already proved that life, intelligence, moral ex- cellence, and efficiency, are naturally active, energetic, and operative.—We take one example of moral excellence. This is naturally and ne- eessarily energetic and operative: this is natu- rally and necessarily inherent in the Divine Es- sence, in all absolute, uncreated varieties, and eternal, immense, and immutable extremes.— Now, if it can be exercised or manifested to the very uttermost at all, it must be so by the Divine Being, which is absolutely perfect; and if it be granted, that the Divine Being ever did, ean, or will, exercise or manifest the divine moral excel- lence in any one instance, to the very uttermost, then all is granted that we plead for in the argu- ment: for the divine moral excellence is eternal, immense, and immutable; and if that which is _ eternal, immense, and immutable, be exercised to the very uttermost, according to its own nature, it must be so eternally, immensely, and immutably. Hence the argument is fairly gained. Again; if moral excellence be exercised or manifested at all by the Divine Being, it must be D 3 54 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. manifested or exercised in personality ; for the moral economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections necessarily constitute personality 5 be- cause, as far as we know, moral excellence, whe- ther created or uncreated, if exercised or mani« fested at all, must be so in personality. Farther ; as the nature of the divine life, in- telligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, is active. energetic, and operative, and as these in- here in the Divine Essence necessarily and essen- tially, and as the Divine Essence and perfections must necessarily partake of the same nature; the Divine Essence must, therefore, naturally, neces- sarily, and essentially, be active, energetic, and operative. ‘This is the economy to which we re- fer. Moreover, as is the nature of any being, so isthe power of that being; for the power of a being is derived from its nature: the divine power must therefore be active, energetic, and opera- tive. Still farther; as is the power of any being, so is the will of that being: For the will of a being is derived from the power of that being; therefore the will of the Divine Being is naturally active, energetic, and operative. ‘Lhus the na- ture, power, and wll of the Divine Being unite, harmonize, and agree, in being active, energetic, and operative. And as the divine moral excel- lence is active, and must be manifested or exer- cised to the very uttermost by the Divine Being, ad intra, according to all the qualities and attri- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.” BS butes of its own nature; and this exercise, or manifestation, must be in personality ; and the divine nature, power, and will, all unite, harmo. nize, and agree, in this exercise or manifestation, in personality ; and this moral excellence can never be exercised or manifested in personality, - if there be but one mode of subsistence in the ‘Divine Essence :—hence, it is hoped, there never was an argument more clearly proved than this, that there must be more modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence than one. 8. It must, therefore, undeniably follow, in order to preserve the idea of the absolute, eter- nal, immense, and immutable perfection of the Divine Being, that the divine efficiency ever was, now is, and ever will be, exerted or manifested in the Divine Essence, ad intra ; without variation, change, or diminution, increase or decrease, from everlasting to everlasting, unceasingly, by the law and economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections, constituting the Divine Being necessa- rily absolute, independent, and altogether perfect within itself; and that as much so, before crea- tion and providence, as since; and would still continue to be so, were creation and providence for ever struck out of existence; otherwise the Divine Being must be mutable. We therefore argue this point with the most unshaken confidence, from the law of the active, energetic, operative, and influential nature of the D 4 56 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. divine life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency : for these divine essential pe:fections must, from everlasting to everlasting, necessarily act and operate according to their own nature. And this is still farther supported and strength- ened from the positive and established law, that. the essence of every being must partake of the nature of its necessary and essential perfections; therefore the Divine Essence must, necessarily and essentially, partake of the activity, energy, operation, and influence, of these divine perfec- tions which necessarily inhere in it, and thereby must of itself be active, energetic, operative, and influential. And as the nature of every being is, so is its power ; and as the power of every being is, so is its will: no reasoning, therefore, can be more evident, manifest, and clear, than that the divine nature, power, and will, are necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, aciive, energetic, operative, and influential; so that, without contradiction, and in defiance of all réa- soning and argument to the contrary, there must be a way in the Divine Essence itself, by which the divine efficiency actively and energetically operates, to the very utmost of its own nature; and this can only be consistent with the glory of the whole of the Divine Essence, and the divine moral perfections, considered as necessarily effi- cient. And considering this efficiency as eter- nal, immense, and immutable, and as necessary VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 57 to the very existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being, we mav, therefore, safely affirm, upon the foregoing principles, that it is a necessary law of the Divine Nature, to be active, energetic, operative, and influential ; without which, the Divine Being could not be entirely perfect and happy within itself. And this neces- sary law and economy, if we may so speak, shows, that the whole energy, activity, and influence of the divine efficiency, in the boundless and im- measurable extent of the Divine Essence and perfections, must be simply, uniformly, perfectly, unceasingly, and immutably exerted or mani- fested ; and upon these foregoing principles, from the very nature, power, and will, of the Divine Being, we are led to conceive, that the Divine Essence and perfections must absolutely, neces- sarily, and essentially subsist in distinct, though not separate modes, or in distinct persons. All that we understand by a divine person is, the Divine Essence and perfections subsisting in a distinct, moral, and incommunicable manner; which distinct, moral, and incommunicable man- ner of subsistence, we may call mode, or person, at pleasure. And therefore we perceive, that the economy of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions constitutes the first person, not voluntarily, for then it might or might not be, but naturally and necessarily. 9. Now these distinct, peculiar, and incommu- 58 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. nicable modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, within the Divine Being itself, discover to us how the Divine Being ne- cessarily subsists in the full and perfect exercise of the divine efficiency, and of all the other divine perfections, through every point of eter- nity and immensity. And upon no other prin- . ciple is it possible for created intelligence to have just and becoming conceptions and notions of the Divine Being, and of all the divine perfections, natural and moral.* - * See Note C. on the preceding Proposition. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. $9 PROPOSITION. IV. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE ACTIVE, ENER- GETIC, AND OPERATIVE INFLUENCE OF THE DI- VINE EFFICIENCY, BY THE FIRST MODE, EXERTED -OR MANIFESTED TO THE VERY UTMOST, ACCORD- ING TO THE ECONOMY, OR LAW, OF ITS NATURE, AS ETERNAL, IMMENSE, AND IMMUTABLE, NECES- SARILY COMMUNICATING THE WHOLE OF THE DI- VINE ESSENCE AND PERFECTIONS, AND THEREBY CONSTITUTING A DISTINCT, NOT SEPARATE, MODE, OR PERSON, IN THE DIVINE ESSENCE, 7 [Three great outlines of the subject—'The first, a correct view of the Divine Essence—Second, a correct view of the necessary and essential perfections of thai Essence — Third, the modes of distinct subsistence, or persons. am that Exssence—The first can only be known tn part — The second, subject of difference in opinion— Third, the great ground of difference between Trinitarians and Unitarians—This subject followed out and argued wpon the theory of the Trinitartans—A great outline, and comprehenswe view of the subject—The foregoing views brought more immediately to bear in the argu- mentation of the following part of the proposition—'The explanation of the meaning of the word Mode—TEapla- nation of the meaning of the word Subsistence—The subject brought to bear on these—Farther proof of the propostiton by comparison Another comparison, farther alustrative of the foregoing reasoning—A view of the order of the distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Eissence—Of the order of the third mode of subsisience—Of the relation in which ome mode, or per~ 60 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. son, stands to another-— Proof that there can be netther more nor less than three modes of subsistence, or per- sons, in the Divine Essence—Recapitulaivon and con- clusion. | | 1. In entering upon the demonstration of this proposition, there are three great outlines of the subject to which our thoughts must be directed ; sometimes more immediately to the one, and sometimes to the other. ‘The first of these is the Divine Essence. The second, is the essential moral perfections of that Essence. The third, is the modes of distinct subsistence, or the persons, in that Essence. a 2, Each of these can only be known in part by finite intelligence. With respect to the Divine Essence, all sober reasoning will discover to rae tional creatures their ignerance of what it really is: and in this there is a general agreement among all who study the subject metaphysically. 3. With respect to the divine perfections, some difference of sentiment will be found among those who study them abstractedly ; and this difference, perhaps, arises, in a great degree, from the talents and capacity of the respective students of the ~ subject. 4. With respect to the modes of distinct sub- sistence of the Divine Essence, which we call - persons, or the personality of the Divine Being, it is, that the greatest difference and contention arise, among those who study the Divine Being. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 61 nd the difference is, whether the Divine Being necessarily and essentially must subsist in one mode of essence and perfections, and can subsist only in one; or whether the same glorious Divine Being must necessarily and essentially subsist in three distinct, not separate, modes, or persons, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three. It is to this point the whole of this Essay is directed. 5. When we use the word subsist in this Essay, we every where mean to signify by it, a necessary and unchangeable continuance of moral perfec- tions, in the same mode of moral distinction, without beginning and without end. 6. In speaking of the Divine Being, we always keep in view the Divine Essence, the divine per- fections, and the divine modes of subsistence, or the divine persons respectively. Thus, in begin- ning the thought from the views of duration and space, we consider the Divine Being as necessa- rily self-existent, necessarily possessing life, spi- rituality, intelligence, moral excellence, and effi- ciency; and we consider these as perfections which are inseparable: And though we may contemplate them distinctly, yet we must ever Suppose them inseparable from the Divine Es- sence, and from one another, and necessarily possessing underived activity, energy, and opera- tion. In speaking of the modes of distinct sub- sistence, after showing that the Divine Essence G2 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: and perfections must subsist distinctly in three, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three ; when we fix our thoughts upon the mode, we must attend to order; and contemplating the first mode as naturally and necessarily constituted by the economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections, and having the whole of the Divine Nature in itself:—now, contemplating this, and knowing that the Divine Essence necessarily pos- sesses life, spirituality, intelligence, moral excel- lence, and efficiency, and therefore must natu- rally be active, energetic, operative, and influen- tial;—-in order that we may account for the full and perfect exercise of the whole of these, to the very uttermost of their own nature, we say,—the First Mode, according to all the qualities and attributes of its own nature, communicates the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, that they may subsist in a mode distinct, not separate, from what they do in itself; and as this communication, which is a full and perfect mani- festation or display of the divine efficiency, ac- cording to its own nature, and, together with it, the whole of the Divine Essence, and other perfections, which we have already proved to be inseparable; and as this communication is entirely founded upon the activity, energy; and operative influence of the Divine Essence and perfections, as already proved; and as the q VIEWS,OF THE. TRINITY. Om Divine Nature is thus necessarily and essentially active, energetic, operative, and influential, so is ‘the divine efficiency or power. For the divine power is derived from the Divine Nature; and as the divine efficiency is active, energetic, ope- vative, and influential, so is the divine will: for the divine will is derived from the divine power or efficiency. And thus we see, it is the very nature of the Divine Being, as subsisting in the first mode, to communicate, according. to the economy of its own nature, by the divine effi- ciency, the whole of the Divine Essence and per- feetions eternally, immensely, and immutably, that they may subsist in another distinct mode; and nothing less than this can be a full and _per- fect exertion or manifestation of the divine effi- ciency, to the very uttermost: And this com- munication of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, together with this distinct mode, necessa- rily and essentially constitute personality. Thus we discover, by demonstration, that there must necessarily be, by the law of the activity, energy, Operation, and influence of the Divine Essence and perfections, two distinct, not separate, modes — of subsistence in the Divine Essence. And _as the Divine Essence is the same in each, and in both these distinct modes of subsistence, it must necessarily partake of each and of both; and as this distingtion is in personality, the Essence must necessarily partake of personality from each and toi VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. from both, and from each and from both alike ; for the distinction is in nothing else but person- ality. Therefore, we discover a third mode of distinct Subsistence, or personality, in the Divine Essence; and thus we clearly demonstrate both distinction and union of personality, necessarily and essentially in the Divine Essence, according to its own nature. Another method of argument. 7. But we may sometimes use a different way of reasoning upon this great and important sub- ject; and, after proving that there must be a dis- tinction in the modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence, and keeping this distinction in’ view, we may say, that from the activity, energy, and operative influence of the Divine Nature, there necessarily arises another mode of subsistence in the Divine Essence and perfections. And thus, from the very economy of the Divine Essence itself, we discover the second mode of subsist- ence, or the second person. And still pursuing the view of the Divine Es- sence, after having proved the distinction of the two modes, necessarily and essentially subsisting; and also having argued that the Divine Essence is simple, indivisible, and uncompounded, and therefore must necessarily partake of this distinc- tion, already ascertained, we may say, that it must partake of this distinction in personality, VIEWS. OF THE TRINITY. 65 alone; and therefore another mode arises in the pe Essence, constituted by that Essence, partaking of each and of both these two distinct modes alike ;. and thus we discover a third mode of the distinct subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections: and therefore we perceive, from the nature of the distinction and union, three modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence. Great outline view of the sulject. 8. The reasoning would be equally accurate, if we should fix our view entirely upon the Di- vine Essence; and, admitting it to be necessa- tily and naturally active, energetic, operative, and influential, and thereby necessarily constituting personality, consistent with moral distinction, and considering: it as subsisting in personality: and admitting what has been already proved, that it must necessarily subsist in distinction, it would be just as fair and legitimate reasoning to say, that it necessarily proceeds by the natural law of its OWN activity, energy, operation, and influence, from the first to the second mode of subsistence ; and still keeping the thought fixed on the Es- sence, and considering it as necessarily subsist- ing in distinction, by this necessary and natural economy proceeding from the first to the second mode of distinct subsistence: and farther consi- dering this distinction as natural and necessary ate) VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being; and farther, admitting the Divine Es- sence to be still simple, absolute, indivisible, and uncompounded, yet naturally and necessarily par- taking of this distinct subsistence in two modes,. the essence must partake of that which is neces- sary and natural to it; and we have proved, that distinct subsistence, in two modes, is natural and necessary to it. It must, therefore, partake of this distinct subsistence in two modes; and this distinction consists wholly of personality, and nothing else: the Divine Essence, therefore, par- taking of each and of both these distinct modes of personality, must naturally and necessarily subsist in a third mode, constituted by the union of the Divine Essence in the distinetion of per- sonality already ascertained and proved. And thus we may say, the Divine Essence proceeds necessarily by the law of its own activity, energy, operation, and influence, from the first and second modes of distinct subsistence, in its own uniform, undivided principle, to a third. And thus we discover three ways of handling this great and mysterious subject: the one, by what we have called communication; the other, by what we may call the first and second mode spontaneously arising ; the third, by what we may call the natu- ral and necessary law of the procedure of the Divine Essence and perfections, from the first mode to the second, and from the first and second VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 67 to the third. We have handled the subject more particularly by the first of these methods. 9. Unless these foregoing arguments be ad- mitted, and it be granted that the Divine Essence subsists in three distinct, not separate, modes and persons, it is absolutely impossible for finite capa- city to conceive or imagine, and to prove, by sober reasoning and ar gumentation, how it 1s possible for the Divine Being either to create or govern the universe, or to recover any of the human race from a state of sin and misery, to 2 state of salvation and blessedness. The Divine Essence, absolutely as such, can- not condescend, unless it change. If there be but one mode of subsistence in the Divine Es- sence, it must either condescend, or change, be- _ fore creation, providence, or redemption, could take place. But if there be three distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, the glory, the majesty, the dignity, the eternity, and immutability of it can be supported by one ; and the great works of creation, providence, and redemption, can be effected, consistently with the whole of the divine perfections. The foregoing views brought more immediately to bear in the argumentation of the following part of the proposition. 10. The divine efficiency cannot possibly be exerted or manifested in any way adequate to E 2 GS VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. to the whole extent of the divine perfections, eternally, immensely, and immutably, except by natural and necessary communication of the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, by one distinct and incommunicable mode of subsistence of the same Divine Essence and perfections in personality, so that they may naturally subsist in personality in another mode. And from the very nature of the life, intelli- gence, moral excellence, and efficiency, and these | being eternal, immense, and immutable, it is ab- solutely impossible that this communication can be temporary, or have either beginning or end- ing. ‘The very nature of the activity, energy, operation, and influence of the Divine Essence, precludes such a notion. ‘This communication, therefore, according to the law of the sponta- neous activity of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, must be necessary and essential to the very na- ture, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being. By mode, we understand a continuation of the Divine Essence and perfections in moral distinc- tion; and this distinction immutable and abso- lute, and standing in an incommunicable relation to the same Essence and perfections, as subsist- ing in another mode of the same Essence and perfections, distinct, though not separate, from itself. And these modes of moral distinction, or persons, must be conceived without confusion, composition, or mixture, without multiplication VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. * 69 or division, without creation or causation, in the Divine Essence. And by subsistence, we mean, a distinct, not separate, incommunicable manner of continuance, without change in the same mode, identically without variation or mutability, Now, that there must be distinct modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, within the Di- vine Nature itself, is clearly evident and unde- niable from the following arguments. It is evident from the pike perfections of Lifes intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, which naturally and necessarily inhere in the. Divine Essence, and as the Divine Essence must partake of the nature of its own necessary per- fections, and as these perfections are necessarily active, energetic, operative, and influential, the Divine Essence must be so too; and as the Di- vine Essence is the source of the divine power, aud the divine power the source of the divine will,—therefore the Divine Essence, power, and will, must all unite, harmonize, and agree, in activity, energy, operation, and influence. Now, if the Divine Essence, power, perfections, and will, never operate according to their own nature, which is eternal, immense, and immutable, it must either be for want of power, or for want of will. But the foregoing reasoning shows it can- not be for want of either; therefore the Divine Wssence must act in a manner corresponding with E 2 Lf v0 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. its own perfections, power, and will; and if we but grant that it can do so in any one instance, from everlasting to everlasting, without beginning and without end, it must do so eternally, im- mensely, and immutably: for that which is eter- nal, immense, and immutable, must act accord- ing to its own nature; and the divine perfec- tions already mentioned, are eternal, immense, and immutable: they are also active, energetic, operative, and influential. ‘They must, there- fore, act according to their nature; and if they do, this can only be by one mode of the subsist- ence of the Divine Essence and perfections com- municating, by the divine efficiency, the whole of the same Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in another mode, according to their own economy, distinct from that which commu- nicates; and this communication corresponds with the full and perfect exercise of the divine efficiency, to the very uttermost, according to the law of the activity, energy, operation, and influ- ence of the divine perfections, essence, power, and will; and this communication constitutes a second mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, distinct from that of the first. : | Now, should we suppose the divine efficiency absolutely and necessarily exerted or manifested in the foregoing manner, as we must, in order to admit the existence, perfection, and happiness of VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. rin i the Divine Being within itself: then if we argue, that there is but one mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, and that there can be no more than one,—it follows, that the divine life, spirituality, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, can never be exerted ~ to the very uttermost, according to their own economy, notwithstanding the divine nature, power, and will, are necessarily active, energetic, operative, and influential, which implies a direct contradiction, and leads to an absurdity. 11. Nay, upon the hypothesis that there is but one mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, it is absolutely impossible reason- ably to conceive or imagine, how any of the di- vine moral perfections, the Divine Essence, or the divine efficiency, in the same mode of sub- sistence, could be exerted or manifested upon it- self, or could be both agent and object in eter- nal, immense, and immutable communication. ‘Therefore, we must conceive or imagine, that the Divine Essence and perfections subsist in the mode or person communicating, after a different manner from that which they do in the mode or person constituted by this communication; for essence, perfections, and distinct mode of sub- gistence, constitute personality: and this peculiar subsistence must necessarily continue in an in- communicable relation the one to the other of these modes. ‘This, and this only, founded upon E 4 Vid | VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the active economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, can account for the necessary, abso- lute, and full manifestation, in a way becoming the Divine Being. And without such a commu- nication, we cannot account for the whole of the divine efficiency being manifested, from everlast- ing to everlasting, necessarily, essentially, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably, within the Di- vine Essence itself. | At the same time, this manifestation must be conceived or imagined without multiplication, division, composition, or confusion of the Divine Essence and perfections. And, supposing these two modes of subsistence to be distinct, not sepa- rate, and necessarily to continue in an incommu- nicable relation the one to the other, we are able to follow out a rational demonstration of the necessary and absolute perfection of the Divine Being, within itself; and that by carefully follow- ing up and investigating the divine perfections and essence, power and will, according to their active, energetic, operative, and influential nature. Larther proof of the proposition by comparison. 12. The same doctrine admits of demonstration by a comparison of the human soul with the Di- vine Being, as far as lawful to compare the crea- ture with the Creator. It is undeniably evident to metaphysicians, that there is a distinction, though no separation, between the essence and * VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. yes) the essential perfections and properties of the human soul: and from this we argue, with sub- missive reverence and caution, that there must be a distinction between the essence and perfec- tions of the Divine Being. _ Now, as our knowledge of the perfections and. properties of the human soul is clear and evident to a certain extent, notwithstanding we know nothing at all of its essence; this ignorance of the essence arises entirely from the subsistence of the human soul in one mode only. Were it so constituted, in its original formation by the Creator, that it could subsist in three distinct modes, and could see itself within itself, aiid dis- cover itself to itself, by three distinct subsist- ences of its own essence and perfections, entirely within itself, it would then be more independent than it is with respect to its intelligence: its in- tellectual perfection would be far greater than it is; its knowledge would be more correct; its perfection more invariable; its happiness unim- paired ; and its standing in the favour of its Crea- tor firmly secured. From this we may fairly argue and infer, that it is as necessary and essential to the Divine Being to subsist in distinct modes of personality in the Divine Essence, as it is for the Divine Being to exist; and that, from these distinct modes of the Divine Essence and perfections, taken in connection with the law of the activity, Vi? VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. energy, operation, and influence of the divine nature, will, and power, arises the necessary, es- sential, and absolute consummation, of the per- fection and happiness of the Divine Being within itself, by communication. And by these distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the same un- created Essence, the Divine Being knows itself by itself; loves itself by itself; is perfect in itself by itself; has each of its own perfections, natural and moral, in necessary, full, and perfect disco- very to itself by itself; and thereby has a neces- sary and essential image of itself within itself. And, by consequence, it can acquire no perfec- tions; ‘for all are necessarily, essentially, and ab- solutely, inherent in its own essence, and unde- rived within itself. It can experience no necessary, essential addi- tion or diminution in any of its perfections, natu- ral or moral; and all this must be without mul- tiplication, division, alienation, separation, com- position, or confusion in any way whatever.— Hence we may infer, that it absolutely possesses within itself its own existence, perfection, and happiness, altogether independently of creation and providence. And as there must necessarily be a distinction, though not a separation, in the subsistence of the modes and persons in the Di- vine Essence, as has been fully proved, this dis- tinct subsistence arises, naturally and necessarily, from the peculiar law of the activity, energy, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. q> operation, and influence of the divine perfections, essence, power, and will, exercising or manifest- ing themselves, by their own economy, from ever- lasting to everlasting, by the eternal, immense, and immutable communication of the Divine Es- sence and perfections, by one mode of subsist- ence, so that they may subsist distinctly in ano- ther ; and all this in a certain mysterious order, constituted by a certain incommunicable relation of one mode to the other: so that one distinct mode possesses naturally, without beginning and without end, all the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, natural and moral, as well as the other; and is, in all respects, the very same in nature as the other, except distinct subsistence in an in- communicable relation to the other. Now if these things be not so, then the Divine Essence, perfections, power, and will, can never, from everlasting to everlasting, in one instance, act according to their nature. Ilor if it be granted that it is possible they ever can, in any point of duration and space, the argument is gained.— And if the Divine Essence and perfections can never, in any one instance, act according to their nature, the Divine Being must be imperfect; and if we affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect, we destroy all correct notions of Deity ; which is contrary to reason, and absurd in the highest de- gree. ‘hese things, therefore, must be as we have argued, 76 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 13. If, then, the divine efficiency must be ex- erted or manifested to the very utmost of its own nature, as eternal, immense, and immutable, in order to establish the existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being; and if this effi- ciency must be eternally, immensely, and immu-. tably exerted or manifested within the Divine Essence itself; and if the divine efficiency be everliving, spiritual, and intelligent,—it must be *éxerted or manifested consistently with the divine and perfect intelligence, and that within the Di- vine Essence itself. ‘This view of the divine effi- ‘ciency, according to the law of the foregoing premises, brings us at once to the conclusion, that there must be in the Divine Essence, more distinct modes of subsistence of this divine intel- ligent efficiency than one; or, in other words, from the law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, there must be more distinct modes of subsistence in the Di- vine Essence than one. JI’or, as we have already proved, upon the supposition that the Divine iussence and perfections must subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, then the divine efficiency never could, nor ever can, in any one instance, throughout eternity, be ex. Y> erted or manifested to the very uttermost, accor- ding to its own active and operative nature, and. if it cannot, neither can any of the divine ener- getic perfections; and the contrary has been re= / VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. v7 peatedly proved. And it is certain that no human ingenuity can conceive or imagine, upon this hy- pothesis, how the divine active perfections can operate according to their own nature. All fair reasoning upon the subject will prove this. - Another comparison, tllustrative of the reasoning. 14. If there be one self-existent Being, and only one, removing creation and providence outs of view, and arguing upon the hypothesis that — this one Being subsists in.one mode only; it is out of the power of man to shew, by any mode of reasoning, that this Being could act at all, or know itself at all. For example, no created being,—should we suppose it solitary in the im- mensity of space, without any other created being whatever,—could act in any way, or exer- cise the smallest knowledge, or ever obtain any knowledge of itself by its own native energy, without the divine assistance, in such a forlorn situation. And, arguing from the intelligent creature to the Creator, which is the only stan- dard of reasoning we can use in such cases, we are reduced to the impossibility of conceiving how the Divine Being, suppose it solitary, and in one single mode of subsistence only, could ever act at all, or know itself at all; for it, asa necessary self-existent being, must necessarily act within itself; and know itself within itself, Vibe} VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. before it could act without itself, or hii any beings without itself, Supposing one human being, as we have al+ ready done, entirely alone in the immensity of space, without any other created being what- ever; and supposing this human being in the most perfect state of maturity, it could neither exercise the faculties of body or mind without instruction and example, or without the imme- diate presence and direction of the Creator. It could use no language, and, by. consequence, could exercise no rational thought; for language is the medium of rational thought in human beings: And exercising no rational thought, it could never know the powers and faculties of its own soul and body, but must continue speech- less, thoughtless, and ignorant of itself. It might live, but never could exercise reason or judg- ment; of consequence, it must be altogether in- capable of motion or energy, either of mind or body. And according to the standard of reason- ing which we must use, rising from the rational creature to the Creator, and arguing upon the hypothesis of one solitary mode of subsistence in the Divine Essence, we are unable, by any in- dustry, by any efforts of human reasoning, to make it appear how the Divine Being could act, or know itself at all. It must therefore follow, upon the most undoubted evidence of absolute necessity, that there must be in the Divine Es. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. VQ sence more distinct, though not separate, modes of subsistence, than one; otherwise it is evident and certain, that the Divine Being could neither act at all, nor know itself at all. A wiew of the order of the distinct modes of sub« sistence, or Persons in the Divine Essence. 15. Now, presuming, with becoming reverence, to contemplate these distinct modes of subsist- ence, we may reason as follows.—In these dis- tinct, though not separate, modes of subsistence, we argue, there must naturally be order; and we must direct our researches in a regular method, that we may conceive aright of the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being in these modes. Now, as there must be order, and order only, without superiority or inferiority; without dis- tinction of time, beginning or ending; without pre-eminence of dignity, nature, causation, or creation ; we may, consistently with reason, say, that as there must be order in the distinct modes - of subsistence in the Divine Essence, so there must be three, and only three, distinct modes of subsistence in that order. Thus we contemplate the first mode of subsist- ence, having all the Divine Essence and _perfec- tions, according to the economy of the same Es- sence and perfections, necessarily constituting personal distinction, and exerting-or manifesting §0 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the divine efficiency to the very uttermost; and this exertion or manifestation is both natural and necessary, according to the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the life, intelligence, moral! excellence, nature, power, and will, all in. union and harmony; in activity, energy, opera- tion, and influence, as has been repeatedly proved. And by this necessary exertion, or manifesta- tion, communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from itself; and these perfec- tions, this essence, and mode of subsistence, by this communication, constitute this second mode of subsistence distinct from the first; and this communication, according to its own nature, ma- nifests or displays the divine efficiency, and all the other necessary divine perfections, to the very uttermost of their nature, from everlasting to everlasting, unceasingly. _ For, as we have already. frequently proved, that, if it be barely granted that the Divine Being can, in any one instance, throughout unlimited eternity; it is al- so granted, that the Divine Being naturally and necessarily possesses a power of doing so; and if it possess this power, and it be granted that it ever, in any one instance, does so, all that we plead in the argument is granted. And if it never does so, it has a necessary perfection for which there is no use. For, as we have often said, the divine efliciency is necessary, eternal, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. g1 immense, and immutable; and if that which is necessary, eternal, immense, and immutable, be ever exerted, in any one instance, to the utter- most, it must be exerted or manifested eternally, immensely, and immutably ; so that the argu- ment is, in all respects, fully gained. And we farther argue, that this communica- tion is not in the way of alienation, separation, composition, multiplication, division, causation, or creation; for this is impossible: But it con- sists in ta only ; and thus we discover the natural order between the first and second modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence. Of the order of the third mode of subsistence. 16. Now, it is evidently certain, that, notwith- standing the distinct subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, which we have clearly demonstrated, they must still retain their natural! _ and necessary activity, energy, operation, and in- fiuential principle. ‘Their nature is not in the least changed : the divine life, intelligence, moral excellence, elliciency, and will, continue invari- ably the same, in all their natural properties notwithstanding these two distinct modes of their subsistence; and, if so, this natural and neces- sary law of the Divine Essence and perfections, must continue to operate, eternally, immensely, and immutably, according to its essential and ‘natural economy. It must either do this, or lose iy 82 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. its natural and necessary activity, energy, Opera~ tion, and influence; and if it lose these, it must entirely cease, which is impossible. If, then, it must necessarily retain its essential nature, it must as necessarily continue its active economy, in energy, operation, and influence; and as it is simple, absolute, and indivisible, it must do so in each and in both of these distinct modes alike; and hence, in the most perfect consistency with the foregoing reasoning, both these distinct modes, already ascertained, must exert or mani- fest this active, energetic, operative, and influen- tial principle of life, intelligence, moral excel- lence, efficiency, and will, of their nature and perfections, which is the very same essentially in both: the distinct subsistence no way affects this principle or necessary law. __ And if these two distinct modes exert or ma-~ nifest this active principle of the divine efficiency, according to the nature of the Divine Essence and perfections, which is the very same in both, they must exert or manifest it by the communi- -eation of the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a manner distinct from what they do in each and in both. And this communication of the Divine Essence and perfections constitutes personality: for if these persons do not, it must be because they have nei- ther power nor will to do so; but we have proved, that, by the very Jaw of their nature, they have; VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. S3 and if they have, and do not, they must act con- trary to their nature, which is impossible. They must, therefore, act according to this peculiar, energetic law of their nature: For as their nature is operative, so is their power; and as their power is Operative, so is their will; and as the functions and economy of their nature, power, and will, are evidently energetic and operative, if it be granted, that ever, in any one instance, from eternity to eter- nity, they can act according to their nature, all is gained that we plead for: Because the peculiar, active law of the divine efficiency is eternal, im: mense, and immutable, from everlasting to ever- jasting, unceasing; and if that which is eternal, im- mense, and immutable, be ever exerted or mani- fested in any one instance, it must be exerted eter- nally, immensely, and imm utably. If not, it must never be exerted at all. We then clearly see it is possible that these two modes of distinct subsist. ence in the Divine Essence, must, im one joint principle, by the law of’ their nature, communi- cate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, so that they may subsist in a manner distinct from what they do in themselves: And as it is impossible for them to act contrary to their na- ture, they must, eternally, immensely, and im- mutably, exhibit such a communication 3; and, as we have already proved, this necessarily consti« tutes personality. We clearly perceive, theres fore, according to the law of the constitution and EZ 84 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, a third mode of subsistence, distinct, in order, from each and from both the two which we have ascertained. ‘ay Therefore demonstration shows, that there are three distinct modes in the order of the subsist- ence of the Divine Essence and perfections. _ Of the relaiion in which one mode or person stands to another. 17. Now, as we plainly see by the foregoing reasoning, the order of the subsistence of the divine modes, or persons, we may briefly con- template the incommunicable relation in which they stand one to another. Beginning our spe- culation, we perceive, that there must be two distinct modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections; and each mode having all the Divine Essence and perfections subsisting distinctly, though not separately, in itself. This distinction must necessarily possess an incomnuunicable relation or property of its own, which cannot be communicated. The incommu- nicable relation in which the first stands to the second, is, to be constituted in personal distinc- tien by its own nature, and to communicate, by a necessary law of the divine efficiency, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in distinction from what they do in itself; and this distinct subsistence, by this com- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 85 munication, constitutes the personality. of the second. | ~The incommunicable relation or property of this'second, is, to be necessarily constituted by the distinct subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, as necessarily and essentially - communicated by the first, according to the law of the economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections: therefore, the incommunicable relation ef the first, is naturally, necessarily, absolutely, eternally, immensely, and immutably, to be self- constituted in personality, and to communicate ; —the incommunicable relation of the second to the first, is, to be naturally, necessarily, absolute- ly, eternally, immensely, and immutably consti- tuted in personality by that communication ; and we must observe, the LTissence and perfections are, in all respects, absolutely and necessarily the same in each: the nature is the same in all re- spects. ‘The mode of subsistence in this incom- municable relation constitutes a distinction, but nothing else. As the communication which we have demon- strated, is according to the law of the active energy and operation of the divine life, intelli- gence, moral excellence, nature, power, and will, with respect to these two modes, there cannot be i the least superiority or inferiority, nor the least “pre-eminence of time, dignity, or nature, nor eausation of any kind: the law of the consti FS 86 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. tution of the economy of the Divine Essence and perfections proves and demonstrates, that this communication, and this distinct incommunicable relation, never had a beginning, and never can have an end,~~is eternal, immense, and immut- able,—but is as natural and necessary as the very existence of the Divine Being itself. Therefore, these two modes of the distinct subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections are naturally and necessarily, in all respects, co-eter sie co- ieeeriie and co-immutable. And hence, still farther, the incommunicable relation in which the first and second stand to the third, is, that they, according to the law of ‘the constitution and economy of the activity, energy, and operation of the Divine Essence and perfections, by this principle of their nature, com- municate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a manner distinct from what they do in themselves: it is, therefore, the incommunicable relation of the first and second, in one simple, active principle, to communicate ; and it is the incommunicable relation of the third, to be constituted by this communication. Here we may observe, that this communication is neither by the first nor the ‘second, in itself, but by both, in one joint, active principle. And farther, this communi- cation neither implies nor constitutes superio- rity or inferiority between the first, second, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 87 ‘and third modes, or persons; nor the least pre- éminenice in time, dignity, nature, or causation ; nor yet the idea of beginning and ending ; nor any-thing like separation, alienation, multiplica- tion, or division, of the Divine Essence and per- fections; but by the law of the life, intelligence, moral excellence, nature, power, and will, of the Divine Being, is as natural and necessary as the divine existence itself. So that these three dis- ‘tinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, are co-essential, co-eternal, co- ‘immense, and co-immutable. Proof that there can be neither more nor less that three distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, im the Divine Essence. 18. As the whole of the Divine Nature must be considered as absolutely perfect in the first mode of subsistence ; and equally perfect in the gecond, and also in the third: And as the Divine Nature is simple, absolute, and indivisible, and equally perfect in each of these distinct modes, there being no difference in the Divine Essence, but that of the distinct modes of subsistence in the incommunicable relation in which the one stands to the other, and all this founded upon the necessary law of the constitution and eco- nomy of the Divine Essence and perfections ;— these three modes, considered in the incommuni- gable relation in which they stand to one another, gE 88 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. shut up all farther views of any other communi- cation, or of any other mode of subsistence; be- cause the Divine Essence and perfections are wholly and entirely, by the economy of their na- ture, constituted, in moral distinction of person- ality, in the first mode of subsistence 5 and the first mode, by the necessary law, already men- tioned, communicating the whole of the Divine Hissence and perfections eternally, immensely, and immutably, that they may subsist in a second, in order to the constitution of the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being within itself,—the very same essence and perfections subsisting dis- tinctly, not separately, in the second, and that in an absolute and incommunicable relation to the first, there is an absolutely perfect distinetion, constituting an absolute and perfect personality by the law of the natural constitution and eco- nomy of the Divine Essence and _perfections all exercised and manifested in full perfection. We perceive natural and necessar y perfection in this distinction. | | And as the Divine Nature is perfect in this distinction, so far as it goes, and being in itself simple and indivisible, and acting according to the law of the natural constitution and economy of its essence and perfections; and this active principle, exercised or manifested to the full by these two distinct modes, and thereby constitut- ing a third mode of subsistence in union,—we VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 8&9 now perceive the same Divine Essence and per- fections consummated in union, and discovering perfection in distinction, and perfection in union, by demonstration, it is both unnecessary and pre- sumptuous to look for any more modes of distinct subsistence in the Divine Essence. Besides this — distinction in union, it is absolutely impossible there can be any more distinct modes of subsist- ence in the Divine Nature. For, as the Divine Being could not be perfect without this distinc- tion and union of personality in the Divine Na- ture, so it could not be perfect were there any more modes of subsistence, or persons, than three, in the Divine Essence. For if the Divine Nature subsist wholly in the first, and, by a necessary and absolute law of perfection, it be communi- cated wholly to constitute a second, without be- ginning and without end, eternally, immensely, and immutably; and subsisting wholly in the second, after a different manner; then the es- sence and perfections of these modes are co- essential, co-equal, co-eternal, co-immense, and co-immutable. And by reason of the Divine Nature, necessarily and essentially, subsisting in each and in both, it must partake equally of each and of both, because it is equally perfect in both ; and as both consist of personality, it must partake of personality, equally alike from each and from both. ‘Therefore a third mode of personality is necessarily constituted ; and because these three SB VIEWS OF THR TRINITY. modes neceséarily subsist in a distinct atid inéém. municable relation to each other, the first neces. sarily communicating all; the second necessarily constituted by that communication ; and again, the first and second necessarily communicating all, and the third necessarily constituted by that communication; it is absolutely impossible theré ean be any more, without composition or confu- sion of these distinct simple relations, For inté ‘however many more modes or persons we might suppose the active efficiency of the Divine Es- sence and perfections to operate by communica. tion, we could never conceive or imagine any that would not be comprehended in distinction and union: this variety must ever circumseéribé all that we could enumerate. Now this variety we have already found in absolute simplicity, consummating the perfection of the Divine Being. Hor we have clearly demonstrated simple distinc. tion and union already ; and any farther distine- tion would not be simple distinction; and any farther union would not be simple union; and compound distinction would destroy the simpli- eity of the distinction already demonstrated ; and compound unien would destroy the sitnplicity of the union already demonstrated ; so that any far- ther distinction would have no other tendency than to eclipse, embarrass, and destroy the dis. tinction and union already ascertained and dé- monstrated: and this would intrediice multipli- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. G3 cation, division, composition, and final destruc. tion, into the activity, energy, operation, and in- fluence of the Divine Essence, perfections, power, and will; and, if so, a total annihilation of the Divine Being would naturally follow,—which is absurd in the extreme, and altogether impossible. There must, therefore, be three, and there can be neither more nor less than three, distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence. For here we discover the Divine Being necessarily complete in its own self-existence 3; necessarily perfect within its own essence; ne- cessarily adequate to its own happiness and en- joyment, and altogether absolute, and entirely independent in itself, from everlasting to ever- lasting, without beginning and without end.—~ And as at the same.time, this Divine Being is absolutely perfect and happy in itself, and this perfection and happiness consisting of the Divine Nature subsisting in three, and neither more nor Jess than three, and distinct, though not separate modes, or persons; revelation expresses these three distinct modes by three distinct terms, Fa- ther, Son, and Holy Spirit, signifying thereby, the order of the subsistence of these distinct per- sons, as in Scripture the divine attributes and perfections are ascribed to each, without the least intimation of superiority or inferiority, or the least pre-eminence in. time, in dignity, or in nature, but simply conveying the idea of order. §2 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, Recapitulation and conclusion. 19. In the whole of the foregoing reasoning; which, it is hoped, will be found fair, legitimate, and conclusive, we have followed, with vigilant eircumspection, and attentive investigation, the nature of those divine perfections upon which we have founded the whole of our argumenta- tion. We have not presumed to launch into vain and unfounded hypotheses, or romantic theories. But, keeping close by watchful demonstration, we have followed the natural guidance of the divine perfections and essence, and by them ex- plored the perfection of the Divine Being, as subsisting in three distinct modes. Following up this same principle, we have ascertained the order of the subsistence of these divine modes; and, by the very same daéc, have fully demon- strated that there must be Three, and can be nei- ther more nor less than Three, distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence; and have seen, that this is the way that the Di- vine Being presents itself most naturally to our contemplation, and the way which is most con. sistent with the Scripture representation of the terms, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as applied to the Divine Being. * See Note D. on the preceding Propositien. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 93 PROPOSITION V. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE OF THE DIVINE INTELLIGENCE, {Intelligence ts a perfection of the created mind—There must be a corresponding perfection necessarily tnhering in the uncreated Mind—If not, we cannot know how the Divine Being can be the moral governor of the universe _ —The disparity between a created moral perfection, and a corresponding uncreated one—The operations of the divine intelligence stated in comparisons ascending from the creature to the Creator-—The necessity of dis- tinct oljects subsisting in the Divine Essence, accord- ang to the economy of the Diaine Nature— These can- not possibly be upon the hypothests of one mode only in the subsistence of the Divine Essence-—Mistakes of some of the ancient philosophers-—-The human mind cannot know tiself perfectly—Upon the hypothesis of only one mode of subsistence, tt 1s imposstble for us te concewe how the Divine Mind could exercise its own intelligence. | 1, Havine considered the Divine Being by the assistance of the perfection of efficiency, and from this essential perfection of the Divine Es- sence, it is humbly presumed, that by fair and direct reasoning and argument, we came to the undeniable and demonstrative conclusion,—that there must be three, and neither more nor less than three, distinct, not separate, modes of sub- 94 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. sistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, stand- ing in an incommunicable relation the one to the other, each having the whole of the Divine Na- ture in itself, and each co-essential, co-existent, co-eternal, and co-equa! in the divine perfections, natural and moral, with the other--we come now to view the same doctrine in another light, and to confirm and prove the foregoing theory by another chain of reasoning, founded upon the nature of the divine intelligence. And here it is laid down as a principle, that as is the nature, so is the intelligence, and as is the intelligence, so is the knowledge, of every rational being. In- telligence is derived from the nature, and know- ledge is derived from intelligence. 2. When we speak of intelligence with respect to the human mind, we say, it is that perfection of a created rational spirit, by which it knows when it is acted upon, or when it receives com- munications from external objects; by which it knows its own thoughts, or is conscious of what passes within itself; by which it receives sensa- tions, agreeable or disagreeable, and acts in con- sequence of these; by which it arrives at. the knowledge of itself and of other things; and by which it makes progress in knowledge. Notwithstanding it is undeniable that the hu. man. mind is radically endowed with innate ideas, which it is most probable every created rational spirit is to a certain degree, yet it is well known VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 85 to metaphysicians, who study the human mind philosophically, that this stock of knowledge is but small, though, perhaps, it may be the foun- dation of all progress in knowledge; and it is certain, that the human mind obtains by far the greater part of its knowledge from sensation and |Teflection : and by many able philosophers these — ‘ are considered as the only sources of the know- ledge of the human mind. Intelligence operates by these mediums. But without disputing this point, itis well known, that, properly speaking, mind can only be acted upon by mind; and as this is strictly true, it is fairly and legitimately inferred, that were there only but one created mind in the universe, it could not exercise its in- tellectual endowments, nor make the smallest progress in the enlargement of knowledge, nor could it make advancements in mental experi- ments, or improvements of any kind whatever, unless if were acted upon, or were receiving communications from the great uncreated mind. 8. Hence it is evident, that as the created mind is capable of progressive attainments, and of increasing enlargement in knowledge, it is constitutionally intelligent, dependent, and social. It is formed to receive external information, and external communications and influences, either from other created minds, or from the great un- created mind, which we have already ascertained to be necessarily existent, independent, and the 36 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. first cause of all things. Or, the created mind is capable of receiving information both from a ereated mind and from the uncreated, and in this way it arrives at the knowledge of itself, and of ‘all things within the sphere of its intelligence. Without this property or perfection, which is called intelligence, it is absolutely impossible that ever the human mind could arrive at the know- ledge of itself, or of other things, in any degree ; nor could it ever be recipient: but it must re- main stationary, and unpr gtk pa in perceptive improvements for ever. 4. Now, as intelligence is an essential perfec- tion of the human mind, as a moral being, a per- fection which, in a certain sense, may be said to comprehend reason itself, and all its perceptive powers and faculties, and which may be said to comprehend one half of its capacity, and extend through all the powers and faculties of its under- standing; we must, therefore, consider intelli- gence as an essential perfection of the human mind, and a most noble and dignified endowment bestowed upon it by the Creator. 5. Now, seeing intelligence is an essential and necessary perfection of the created mind, a ne- cessary and essential perfection corresponding to it must naturally be in the uncreated Mind, in all the unlimited and absolute extent of a divine perfection ; because man is created after the im- age of the Divine Being. For though the Creator aire oe ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 97 might withhold from the creature a perfection, which may be essentially in the Divine Essence, yet it is absolutely impossible for the Creator to impart or bestow an essential perfection upon the creature, which is not necessarily inherent in the Divine Essence. - Therefore, as it is undoubtedly evident, that intelligence is an essential perfection of the crea- ted mind, it is as undoubtedly and undeniably evident, that a perfection corresponding to crea- ted intelligence must necessarily and essentially inhere in the uncreated mind, and must every way correspond to the whole of the divine per- fections, natural and moral, in all their uncreated, unlimited, and self-existent excellence. And, by consequence, we argue, that if we exclude intel- ligence from being an essential perfection of the Divine Mind, we can have no becoming notion ot the Divine Being, as the moral governor of the universe. But, on the other hand, so clear, cogent, and legitimate, and so naturally and un- deniably evident is the force and conviction of this reasoning, that even conscience, the noblest power of the human mind, without the assistance of revelation, argues with itself, and argues most convincingly to itself, that the Divine Being is the moral governor of the universe ; and approves of right, and disapproves of wrong; and punishes vice, and rewards virtue, in the conduct of every created moral agent. Thus conscience, by the o §8 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. light of nature, supposes the uncreated Mind to be intelligent, and to be moved disagreeably with vice, and agreeably with virtue, in the moral con- ‘duct of the created mind; and thus it attributes intelligence to the Divine Being, even without the assistance of revelation. - 6. It may be objected, that there are necessary powers and faculties found in the human mind, that cannot be ascribed to the Divine Being, such as memory and reasoning ; but to such objections it may be fairly answered, that memory is nothing else than a power of recalling past ideas: and were the mind able to transport itself to the ori- ginal circumstances of the ideas recalled, or to transport these circumstances back to its imme- diate presence, the issue would have been the same. Memory is a part of human knowledge. Now, with respect to the Divine Being, suc- cession of time cannot take place, neither can absence of circumstances. Omnipresence and omniscience supply the place of memory: there- fore there is found in the Divine Being a perfec- tion, corresponding to memory in the human mind: we may call this either omnipresence or omniscience, as we please. And as reasoning in the human mind‘is nothing else than a substitute for intuitive knowledge, it will not be denied, that the Divine Being knows all things intuitively; and thus a perfection is found in the Divine Being, corresponding to rea- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 79 es son in the human mind. It may be necessary to observe, that, in reasoning from any of the per- fections of the human mind, to a corresponding perfection in the Divine Mind, we do not mean, that the uncreated perfection is, in all respects, similar to the created; but only, that it must be - corresponding in such a degree, that the created can lead to the contemplation of the uncreated— but nothing more: the real disparity is as great, as between eternity and time; between infinitude and finitude; between immensity and locality ; between immutable and mutable; and, in a word, between the Creator and the creature. We do not pretend to draw a parallel, or to make the creature a standard in all respects; but, being created after the divine image, merely as aftord- ing a faint glimpse, which finite intelligence would reverently presume to follow, to the un- created blaze of eternal day. ‘ Lhe operations of the divine intelligence. 7. As tar as we know at present, intelligence, in the created mind, is active, and operates three ways in the attainment of knowledge: first, by \ consciousness ; second, by its perceplive powers ; ‘third, by innate ideas, or intuitively. We may explain these briefly —Consciousness is that power which the mind has of attending to its own thoughts, as they pass within itself; and Gio mol 108 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. thereby it knows its own operations.—Percep- tion, taken in its largest acceptation, or the per- ceptive powers, are those by which the mind at- tends to objects without itself, and thereby knows what passes in the creation, as far as the sphere of its own intelligence extends.—Innate ideas are those which the mind possesses constitutionally, and by which it intuitively knows necessary truths within the reach. of its comprehension: such as, that a spring-well is not the ocean; that a mole- hill is not a mountain; that a deer is not am eagle; that the sound of a trumpet is not a piece of gold; that the taste of sugar is not the smell of a rose; that the hardness of a rock is not a scarlet colour; that the heat of the fire is not the point of a sword; and all axioms and necessary truths within the sphere of its comprehension. Now, if the human mind can exercise its intel- ligence by consciousness, by its perceptive powers, and by its innate ideas; it is perfectly evident, that if the Divine Mind subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, then the Divine Being cannot exercise its own intelligence as perfectly as the human being can; nor can the Divine Mind, on this supposition, exercise its own intelligence in any way but by conscious- ness only. And it is evident, the Divine Mind “cannot exercise its own intelligence by any per- ceptive powers at all; nor yet by its innate ideas, ior want of objects distinct in itself. For, before VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 101 ¢reation and providence, there could be no ex. ternal objects for the Divine Being to perceive ; and yet the Divine Being must have exercised its own intelligence as perfectly before creation, as since. Now, on the supposition of one mode only of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and — perfections, it is impossible for the Divine Being, strictly speaking, to perceive any thing, or to know in any way at all, by perceptive powers: and, in this case, it is also plain, that the Divine Mind cannot be as perfect as the human, though created after its image; which is the most gross absurdity. But if the Divine Essence and per- fections subsist in more distinct modes than one, the Divine Being can know itself by itself, in these distinct modes of subsistence. Again; if the Divine Mind subsist in one mode only, it cannot exercise its own innate ideas intuitively : for it will be found, upon fair examination, that all the operations of intuitive intelligence are founded upon the comparison of two objects, one way or another. Now, what was to constitute a comparison before creation? Yet the innate ideas of the Divine Mind must have operated as perfectly before creation, as since. And there is no way by which the divine innate ideas could act intuitively, but by comparison, and no com- parison could possibly be found, ad eztra, and equally impossible is it for any comparison to be found, ad intra, if the Divine Mind must subsist G 3 102 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. in one mode only: therefore the Divine Mind must subsist in more modes than one, in order that the Divine Being may exercise its own in- telligence perfectly, according to its nature.— And this reasoning is fully and evidently sup- ported, by the necessary connection of the divine intelligence with the divine efliciency. It has. been fully proved, that the Divine Essence and perfections must subsist in three distinct modes, in order to the perfect exercise and manifestation. of the divine efficiency; and if the divine effi- ciency and the divine intelligence cannot be separated the one from the other, although they may be distinguished in thought,—then, by fair conclusion, it clearly follows, that the Divine Essence and perfections must subsist in three dis- tinct modes, in order to the perfect exercise or manifestation of the divine intelligence. Created minds, we know, receive external com- munication, information, and influence, from one another; and they can do so from the great un- created Mind, and they are thereby actuated to operate intelligently. But it bas been already proved, that intelligence is an ‘essential perfec- tion, necessarily inhering in the Divine Mind, which must have been as perfect before created minds, whether human or angelic, ever existed, as it has been since; and would still continue to be as perfect as it now is, should all created minds be annihilated ina moment. In this case, ‘YIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 103 still the Divine Mind must necessarily retain its essential perfection of active intelligence. How then can we suppose this divine active intelli- gence could operate? It surely could not be, in consequence of any information communicated, nor any influence which it could receive from any created being, whether mental or material, in the whole compass of creation and providence, seeing we now suppose them extinct; and still it 1s evi- dent, that there must be intelligence in the Di- vine Mind: and upon no other principle can we reasonably suppose this to be, but that of intellec- tual or perceptive powers, necessarily and essen- tially inhering in the Divine Essence itself, with. out the least regard to creation and providence. 8. Now it is absolutely impossible that we can reasonably suppose intellectual or perceptive powers to be necessarily and essentially inhering in the Divine Mind, without the least regard to creation and providence, upon any other prin- ciple than this, that the necessarily existent, un- created, eternal, and intelligent Mind, must sub- sist in distinct, not separate, modes, or persons, within its own essence ; by which the divine per- fections exhibit themselves intelligently, accord- ing to the Divine Nature, in mutual display, and in reciprocal manifestations. Upon this prin- e ciple, and upon this only, is it possible for created intelligence reasonably to conceive how the Di- vine Being can know itself perfectly. Gg 4 104 ,VIEWS OF THE. TRINITY. 9. If, therefore, there be intellectual powers necessarily inhering in the uncreated Mind, of which there cannot be the smallest doubt, ac- cording to the foregoing reasoning, then, these divine perceptive powers, as has been stated, must be necessary to the absolute consummation of the perfection of the Divine Being, and must therefore be essentially necessary to the existence and happiness of the Divine Mind within itself, But we must exclude from the divine intellectual powers every idea or notion of sensation; for sensation, as such, can only be the effect or con- sequence of material organization. The intellec- tual powers, therefore, which we humbly pre- sume to ascribe to the Divine Mind, must be entirely those of knowledge, arising from what we may cail necessary self-sufficiency, self-know- ledge, self-love, and complacency. | These intellectual or perceptive powers cannot possibly act, in the Divine Mind, from any influ- ence of created mind, or created matter, which, at present, we suppose to be entirely done away ; and, besides, the created being cannot contribute to the essentially necessary, positive, and abso- lute self-sufficiency and self-knowledge of the uncreated ; otherwise, the necessarily-existent, independent, uncreated Mind would be imper- fect, which is absolutely impossible. ‘T herefore, the intellectual or perceptive powers of the Di- vine Mind must be derived entirely from itself, WIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 105 -~from its own constitution; and they cannot, possibly act in the Divine Mind, upon the hypo- thesis that 1t must, necessarily and absolutely, subsist in one single mode or person only: Be- cause, upon this hypothesis, it would be every way impossible: whence could they find objects of knowledge? ‘They could not find them, ad extra ; for this would be considering the Divine Mind as receiving knowledge from the creature ; which is altogether impossible. ‘They could not find objects of knowledge, ad intra; because these naturally and necessarily belong to con- sciousness, and not to the perceptive powers. If, therefore, the Divine Mind subsist in one mode only, the Divine Being cannot exercise or manifest any intellectual or perceptive powers, according to its own nature, if the reasoning be conclusive, which is founded upon the intellec- tual or perceptive powers of the created mind, and ascends to the uncreated. 10. And, perhaps, it was such a view of the Divine Being as this, that led some of the an- cient philosophers to very inadequate notions of the Divine Being; as if altogether inactive, and totally careless, if not altogether ignorant, about the affairs of the creation; and keeping in view the hypothesis of one mode of subsistence only, they were naturally led to such conclusions.— For, upon this principle, how could the divine perfections act or operate to the production of 106 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. | the universe? Or, how could they act or operate “to the preservation of it, when produced ? seeing, upon this hypothesis, they must inhere in the Divine Essence, without any operation of the divine efficiency, or the divine perceptive powers, —since no one perfection could act on another, as such, in the one simple mode of subsistence. For no one perfection can be absolutely inde- pendent of another; otherwise, the independent ones might exist separately, and, if so, the Di- vine Essence must be divisible, whieh is alto- gether impossible. And, placing the argument in another point of view, the very same identical perfections of the very same identical mode of subsistence, or person, could not directly recoil upon themselves, nor act, by directly recoiling upon themselves, being both agent and object at the very same time. Yet they must do so, upon the supposition of only one mode of subsistence ; although this is every way exactly contrary to rea- ‘son and experience, in the activity and operations of the perfections of the human mind. 11, Let us push the argument a little farther, by an example taken from created mind. No created mind could act, without external com- munication, information, or influence; and even with all the assistance that it can receive in this way, cannot know itself perfectly ; nor can it ever, in the present state, nor will it ever be able, in a future state, to arrive at the full and perfect VIEWS OF THE TRINITY; 107 knowledge of its own essence and perfections, in all their extent; and this, because it cannot take a corapass round itself, from the first moment of its existence, through all future eternity, and re- turn back to the first moment of its existence; and because it has no standard within itself to | compare itself by, for it subsists in one mode on- Jy; neither can it make another created mind a standard to compare its own perfections by, hav- ing no immediate, continued, and immutable communication therewith. Hence we say, in the present state, there is no way for a created mind to know itself in all respects, and to become perfectly acquainted with the whole extent of its ewn being. ‘ And what it does know of itself} can only be by careful observation from without, and atten- tive reflection from within; neither can it know its own immateriality and immortality but by the most attentive investigation, the most correct comparison, made with the most careful and la- borious efforts. ‘This is well known to metaphy- sicians. Now, by parity of reasoning, and as far as law- ful to follow the perfections of the created mind, up to those of the uncreated, it is absolutely im- possible for us to conceive, upon any rational principle, how the Divine Mind can know itself, as eternal, immense, and immutable, by the exer- cise of its own intellectual or perceptive powers, 108 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. if it subsist in one mode only, for want of objects suited to these powers, and for want of objects suited to its intuitive decisions, in the pursuit of the knowledge of itself. Perceptive powers re- quire objects distinct from the percipient agent : intuitive decision, by innate ideas, requires dis- tinct objects to decide upon. Now where can these be found in one mode of subsistence only ? It will appear, upon a fair examination of the in- tellectual powers of the human mind, that they all require objects external to the mind, in onder to the exercise of intelligence, perception, me- mory, conception, abstraction, association, judg- ment, reasoning, all require objects external to the mind, in order to the increase of knowledge. And does not the intellectual powers of the Di- vine Mind require objects, distinct in itself, in order to the perfection of the divine know- ledge? | 12. It will be found, upon a fair examination of the innate ideas of the created mind, that they are mostly, if not always, exercised by intuitive judgment, and that they ever have necessary truths, or first principles, as the objects of this ” intuitive decision; and it will farther be found, whether we examine the axioms of mathematics, or the axiomatic principles of any other art, or science, or necessary truths, or first principles, that the intuitive decision of the human mind upon these, is pronounced by comparison, either ——S— se a VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 109 drawn from innate ideas, or from the decisions of the different senses. And if we dare follow our reasoning from the created to the uncreated Mind, we have no way of accounting for the knowledge of the uncrea- ted Mind, but by supposing something similar, though far more perfect, than the exercise of the innate ideas, or the organs of sense, of the crea- ted mind. ‘This must either be granted, or the Opposers are required to give some reasonable account of the exercise of the innate ideas, and the perceptive powers of the uncreated Mind. Hor it is impossible even for the Divine Being, supposing only one mode of distinct subsistence in the Divine Essence, to take a compass round itself, from all past eternity, through all future eternity, and return to where it set out, in order to ascertain the necessary and everlasting dura- tion, and the immensity of space comprehending its own essence and perfections. Or, in other words, it is impossible for eternity to compass eternity, and for immensity to encompass immen- sity, in one simple mode of subsistence, or in one person only. No being, whether created, or necessarily existent, can travel round itself; upon the margins of its own existence; and unless the Divine Being could encompass itself thus, which reason says it never can; or unless it could find a distinction in the modes of the subsistence of its own essence and perfections. forming a stan- 110 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. dard of comparison within itself, there is no way that we can reasonably conceive or imagine how it can know its own eternity and immensity.— And it is equally impossible for finite intelligence to conceive how the Divine Being can exercise its own innate ideas, or its own perceptive powers, in order to know itself in all respects perfectly, but upon the supposition that the Divine Essence: and perfections subsist in three distinct, not sepa- rate, modes, iu order to the full and perfect exer- cise of the divine intelligence, to the very utter- most of its nature, as well as the divine efliciency. For, if not, the divine intelligence must be imper- fect, and if the divine intelligence be imperfect, the Divine Being is imperfect, which is absurd and impossible.* * See Note E. on the preceding Propesition. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ill PROPOSITION VI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE WAY IN WHICH THE DIVINE BEING KNOWS THE ETERNITY OF ITS _ OWN WISDOM, AND THEREBY OF ALL ITS OTHER PER FECTIONS. [The Divine Being knows the eternity of tts own wisdom, and of all ats other perfections, by the exercise of its entellectual or perceptive powers—It vs fair and legitt- mate reasoning to rwe from the perfections of the ra- _ tional moral creature, and ascend to the perfections of the wncreated moral Essence—But the Creator, in viewing one of tts own perfections, cannot descend to a corresponding one tn the moral creature—The law of the activity of the divine tntelligence—The manner tn which the modes arise, or the way by which the second and third are constituled—A view of the relation of the diwine intelligence in each of the modes—'The Divine Being could not be what is, without distinct modes of sub- ststence mm the Divine Essence—'The wmpossibility of _ there being etther more or less than three divine modes, objects, or persons, in the Divine dissence-— inference and conclusion. | 1. We now pursue the subject, by endeavour. ing to shew how the Divine Being exercises its own intellectual or perceptive powers, and also its innate ideas, in the knowledge of the eternity of its own wisdom. We suppose the divine wis- dom to be the object of the divine innate ideas, er the divine perceptive powers, in order to know 12 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. its full, perfect, and unlimited extent, in dura- tion. On such a supposition, how can the Divine Being know the eternity of its own wisdom, seé- ing we have proved, that if the Divine Mind sub- sist in one mode only, it cannot know itself by the exercise of these powers? And if it know itself perfectly, or any of its own perfections, it must be by the exercise of these powers; and that requires an object distinct from the object exercising them, in order to draw a comparison either for intuitive or perceptive decision ; and it is plain, in this case, no comparison could be made with created wisdom, either human or an- gelic; for there can be no standard of compari- son between that wisdom which is uncreated and necessarily existent, and that which is created ~vand contingent. | It may be observed, that, in several places of this Essay, we have reasoned, by rising from the creature to the Creator: and why not reason by descending? In answer, we reply, that the me- thod of reasoning by ascending, in the view we have taken in every part of this treatise, is fair and legitimate. The creature, because it 1s crea- ted after the divine image, may rise to the Crea- tor, by following up any of the necessary pertec- tions bestowed upon it by the Divine Being, to the original source. But it is equally evident and conclusive, that in presuming to consider the Divine Being as contemplating any of its own a VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 113 perfections, it cannot descend to trace it down to the creature, in order thereby to view this divine perfection in all its uncreated glory and extent. The Divine Being is necessarily existent, eternal, immense, and immutable: the created being is temporary, finite, and changeable. Should we suppose that the Divine Being would trace one of its own communicable perfections to the creature, how partial and imperfect would the view be to omnisicence, eternity, immensity, and immutability ! What view could the Divine Being have of the perfections communicated to the crea- ture, before it was created, and before creation began? Thus it is fair and legitimate reasoning for the finite, intelligent creature, to rise to the Creator; but it is every way inadmissible to pre- sume, that the Creator could reason, if we dare say so, from itself to the creature. We wish this to be understood through the whole of this Essay. Now, if the Divine Mind subsist in one mode only, where or how could it find an object for the exercise of its own perceptive powers? Or where could it find objects to draw a comparison by its own innate ideas, in order to ascertain intuitively, if we dare say so, the eternity of its own wisdom? We have presumed to suppose, that the Divine Being can only know the eternity of its own wis- dom, by the exercise of its perceptive powers up- _on distinct objects, every way corresponding to the extent of that wisdom; or by the exercise of HH j14 VIEWS OF THE ¥RINITY. its innate ideas, in decision upon distinet objects. But if the Divine Mind subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, distinct ob- jects, adequate to the whole extent of the divine wisdom, cannot be found; nor can distinct ob- jects be found, by which its innate ideas could intuitively decide upon comparison. 2, Such distinct objects cannot be found im creation; such a comparison cannot be made, ad _ extra: there must, therefore, be such objects within the Divine Essence itself; and such a comparison must be made, ad intra, or such ob- jects cannot be found at all, and such a decision, by comparison, cannot be made at all; and, if not, the divine intelligence cannot act according to its own nature, and the Divine Being cannot know itself perfectly; and if the Divine Being cannot know itself perfectly, it must be imper- fect; and if it be imperfect, this is the very same as to deny that it exists, which is both absurd and impious. . Of the law of the activity and operation of the divine intelligence. 3. Now, these distinct objects, and this com- parison, cannot possibly be found in the Divine Essence, except upon the principle of a plurality of modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections. And as it is necessary that the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. IL5 Divine Nature should. subsist in. two distinct modes, standing in a distinct incommunicable relation to each other, in order that distinct ob- jects may be found.in the Divine Essence, where- by the Divine Being may fully and perfectly comprehend, by the exercise of its intellectual powers, perceptively and intuitively, the absolute eternity of its own wisdom, and of all its other perfections ; so it clearly follows, that as the Di- vine Nature must, necessarily and essentially, subsist in two distinct, not separate, modes, in order that the divine intelligence may act, or operate, according to its own nature. It is equally evident, that, as the Divine Essence and perfections are the very same in each of these modes, the Divine Nature must, necessarily and essentially, partake of.each and of both these modes; and so must the divine intelligence: And if the Divine Nature, necessarily and essen- tially, partake of each and of both these modes, and the divine intelligence do the same, it can only do so in personality; for this distinction consists only in personality: and if the Divine Nature and intelligence subsist in each of these distinct modes, it must partake of personality from each and from both; and from each implies distinction, and from both implies union: there- fore, from these two distinct modes, there must arise a third, in the Divine Essence, subsisting in a distinct and incommunicable relation toe each H 2 116 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and to both, and partaking of the Divine Nature and intelligence, as subsisting in personality, it each and in both these two first modes. Or, in other words, the Divine Nature being simple, absolute, and indivisible, and the divine intelligence being the very same, and having an active and operative tendency, these two first modes must, necessarily and essentially, im one active intelligent principle, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in each of themselves, and standing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both ; and this communieation, by these two distinct modes, in one active intelligent prin- ciple, constitutes a third mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, distinct from each and from both, and standing in an in- communicabie relation to each and to both: And as we have already argued upon the topic of the divine efficiency, so we now argue, upon the di- vine intelligence, that this communication, whe- ther considered by the first to the second, or by the first and second to the third, implies no supe- riority or inferiority among the divine modes or persons, nor any pre-eminence in time, dignity, or nature, but only a simple distinction of order; -—all the persons having the Divine Nature, each in itself, and all being co-equal, co-essential, co- eternal, co-immense, and co-immutable, the whole VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. li? founded upon the peculiar law of the constitu- tion and economy of the Divine Essence and in- telligence ; and the communication being neces- sary, essential, eternal, immense, and immutable, corresponding with the activity, operation, and influence, of the divine intelligence.—We need not push the argument farther, but refer to what is said on this head, in the Proposition on the nature of the divine efficiency. | A view of the relation of the divine intelligence in each of the modes. 4. Now, as the Divine Essence and intelligence subsist in distinction in the two first modes, and in union in the third, there can no farther dis- tinction and union be found in the Divine Es- sence, but that already ascertained. ‘This dis- tinction and this union is necessary, essential, and natural, to the activity and operation of the divine intelligence: and all farther distinctions are impossible; the distinctions already found, being simple, and any other must be cempound, because of the relation in which this distinction and this union stand to each other. The dis- tinction of the two first stands in the incommu- nicable relation of the first communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in itself: the essence, perfections, H 3 118 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and mode, thus communicated, constituting the second: the second stands in the incommunt- cable relation of being constituted the second, by the necessary, essential, eternal, immense, and immutable communication, without begin- ning, and without end, according to the law of the activity, energy, operation, and influence, of the divine life and intelligence, as already proved in the Proposition on the nature of the divine efficiency. And the two first stand in the in- communicable relation to the third, of communi- cating, in one joint, active, intelligent principle, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, including intelligence, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from each and from both them- selves, and by this communication of the essence, perfections, and mode, constituting a third per- son in the Divine Essence. And the third stands in the incommunicable relation to each and to both the two first, of being constituted by this communication; which is also necessary, essen- tial, eternal, immense, and immutable, and also founded upon the law of the constitution and economy of the activity, energy, operation, and influence, of the divine life and intelligence.— We farther refer to what is said on 1 this head, in Proposition V. 5. Now, as these incommunicable relations of _ these distinct modes of subsistence, are as abso- intely necessary and-essential to the divine exist. _ VIEW3 OF THE TRINITY. 119 ence, and the full and perfect exercise of the divine intelligence, according to the nature of the Divine Being, within itself, as any of the divine perfections, whether natural or moral; so, the Divine Being could not be what it is, with- out these distinct modes of the perfect exercise of the divine intelligence; and contemplating these modes as distinct, not separate, objects in the Divine Essence, implying neither superiority nor inferiority of the one distinct object or per- son, to the other, and the incommunicable rela- tions in which these distinct objects or persons stand to each other, implying no priority or pre- eminence in time, dignity, or nature, but only a priority of order, and nothing more. And such is the law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, that these three distinct objects or persons, and. these incommunicable relations in which they stand to each other, are natural and necessary 3 these distinct objects being co-equal, co-eternal, co-immense, and co-immutable with one another, and with the existence of the Divine Essence it- self, in order to the perfect exercise of the divine §ntelligence, and to the absolute consummation of the existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being within itself, and as independent of all created beings. And thus we demonstrate that there must be three, and that there can be neither more nor less H 4& 120 © VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. than three, distinct objects or persons in the Di-, vine Essence, in order to establish the full and. perfect exercise of the intelligence of the Divine Being, in the knowledge of the eternity of its own wisdom, and of all other divine perfections. And from a full and fair investigation of any of) the divine perfections, it is humbly presumed, this doctrine will always appear the same. A wiew of the impossibility of there being either: more or less than three divine modes, oljects, or* persons, tn the Divine Essence. 6. Whatever perfection of the Divine Esseuce we investigate, the modes of distinct subsistence will appear, before it is possible for us to take a full, perfect, uniform, and extensive view of that, perfection in all its bearings, as far as our capa-. city can reach. The modes will present, them- selves, first, in distinction, and, secondly, in union; and after these modes, the incommuni- cable relations in which they stand to each other,. will necessarily appear, and fix the number of. these modes so exactly, that it is impossible they. can be either more or less than three... We clearly perceive the first mode, necessarily con-, stituted in personal distinction, by the economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, and com-: municating, from everlasting to everlasting, the whole of the Divine Essence. and perfections, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 128" td according to their own law, that they may sub- sist in a mode distinct from what they do in it- self; and this mode of the essence and. perfec-: tions constitutes the personality of the second. The first and second communicating, according to the foregoing law, in one joint, active, neces- sary principle, that they may subsist in a manner distinct from each and from both: each implying distinction, and both implying union; and this communication being according to the law fre- quently mentioned, and the essence and perfec- tions, together with this mode of distinct subsist- ence, constituting personality. Thus the third arises wholly from the first and from the second, and can arise from nothing else but the first and second distinct subsistences in the Divine Essence alone... Or, the first and second, in the united, simple, active principle of the divine intelligence, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and, perfections, that. they may subsist in a third, distinct from each and from both themselves ; and thus the third is constituted. And this com- munication being necessary, essential, eternal, immense, and immutable, as now represented, can neither vary nor change, any more than the Divine Nature itself can. For it constitutes a necessary and essential property of the Divine Nature, in order to the consummation of the existence and happiness of the Divine Being. 122 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Inferences and conclusion. 4. Now, from these distinct modes of subsist. — ence, objects, or persons, in the Divine Essence, and from the incommunicable relation in which they stand to each other, and from their number being neither more nor Jess than three,—-we may fairly infer, that the Divine Being, by the full and perfect exercise of its own intellectual powers, fully knows the eternity of its own wisdom, and all its other attributes ; and upon this principle, each mode of distinct subsistence, or distinct ob- ject or person, having all the Divine Essence and perfections subsisting distinctly, not separately, within itself, sees and knows, by its own intelli- gence, or perceptive powers, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, as subsisting dis- tinctly, not separately, in the other mode, object, or person. And thus one mode, object, or per- gon, is a standard to the other, and affords a com- parison for the intuitive decision of the innate ideas, or for the decision of the intellectual powers of the Divine Essence, subsisting dis- tinctly in each, and being the very same in each; each being co-equal, co-eternal, co-immense, and co-immutable, with the other; and, in all re- spects, the very same with the other, except dis- tinct subsistence, in an incommunicable relation to the other. And thus a full, absolute, necessary, and per- fect discovery of the Divine Essence and perfec- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 123 tions has been made, by the Divine Being, to it- self, within its own essence, by the distinct modes of its subsistence, entirely independent of all created beings; and was so from everlasting, and will be so to everlasting, without beginning and without ending, according to the economy of the intelligence of the Divine Essence, as self- existent, active, and every way inadequate to the knowledge of itself; and to its own perfection and happiness. s. And hence, farther, it is as plain as demon- stration can make it, that the eternity, and all the other attributes of the divine wisdom, can only be fully and perfectly known to the Divine Being, by the exercise of the divine intelligence, in three distinct modes of subsistence, within the Divine Essence itself; and this can only be done, ad intra, by one distinct mode or person compar- ing itself with another, in all respects, necessarily and essentially, the very same, from everlasting to everlasting. Therefore, demonstration makes it appear, with the most legitimate, clear, cogent, and irresistible conclusions, that the divine intel- ligence must subsist. in three, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three, distinct modes or persons in the Divine Essence, in order that the Divine Being may fully know, and perfectly comprehend, the absolute eternity, and all the other attributes of its own wisdom, intuitively. And thus the eternity of the Divine Essence and perfections can only be known by the Divine 124 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Being itself, according to the doctrine of three distinct modes or persons, co-equally, co-eter- nally, co-immensely, and co-immutably, subsist. ing in the Divine Essence, standing in an incom- municable relation the one to the other; and, by direct consequence and conclusion, the active operation of the perfect, absolute, and ever-living intelligence of the Divine Being, can only be de- monstrated on the same principle. According to this principle, both the modes of distinct subsistence, and the order of the incom- municable relation in which they stand to each other, and the activity, energy, operation, and influence of the divine perfections, and the effi- ciency and the intelligence of which we have treated, should be all kept under the view at once. For whatever is true concerning the dis- tinct subsistence of the divine efficiency, is equal- ly true concerning the distinct subsistence of the divine intelligenee; and whatever is true con- eerning the distinct subsistence of the divine modes or persons, is equally true concerning both; and thus the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, and persons, and efficiency, and intelli- gence, subsist in three distinct modes, necessa- rily, essentially, eternally, immensely, and im mutably, in an incommunicable relation the one to the other; which relation can neither vary, change, nor cease, more than the Divine Being ‘itself can. * See Note F, on the preceding Proposition. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 325 PROPOSITION VII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE EXERCISE OF THE DIVINE INTELLIGENCE, IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE IMMENSITY OF THE DIVINE GOODNESS, AND ALL OTHER DIVINE PERFECTIONS. [ The Divine Mind cannot know tts own tmmenstty, tf tt subsist in one mode only—A brief explanation of the intelligence of the human mind—A comparison between the exercise of created and uncreated tntelligence— The modes must subsist in personality—A view of this, tun ways—A view of the equairty of the distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, tn the Divine Essence—The evercise of the divine intelligence never had a begin- ning, and never will have an end—The impossibility of more than three persons-—Another method of demon- stration. | 1. Havine investigated the intelligence of the Divine Mind, with respect to the full and perfect knowledge of the eternity of its own wisdom, and having, it is hoped, clearly and satisfactorily proved, that this knowledge can neither be rea- sonably conceived nor imagined to be upon any other principle than that of the subsistence of the Divine Essence in three, and in neither more nor less than three, distinct, not separate, modes or persons,—we shall now attempt to prove the same doctrine, by the investigation of the intelli. 126 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, gence of the Divine Mind, with respect to its knowledge of its own immensity. A similar train of reasoning to that already Jaid down, with proper variations, will prove no Jess clearly, that, as far as we can understand, it is impossible for the Divine Being to know the immensity of its own goodness, and of all its other perfections, if there be but one, and can be no more than one, mode of subsistence, or person, in the Divine Essence. Arguing that there is one, and only one, we are compelled, upon this hypothesis, to consider the Divine Being as necessarily and absolutely solitary be- fore creation and providence; and supposing it as subsisting in one solitary mode, we are not able to conceive how it could know the immen- sity of its own goodness. We have already shewed in what sense we are to understand the reasoning which ascends from the creature to the Creator: and we fully admit, that there can be no absolute comparison between the created and the uncreated mind ; yet, as the perfections of the created intelligent being are derived from the uncreated, they afford us a ray by which we may venture to glance at those uncreated perfec. tions, in all their boundless and unlimited extent and glory. | Now, intelligence is surely a very high and distinguishing perfection inhering in the created mind, By it, the created mind is conscious of VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 127 its own thoughts, and all their inward operations: by it, the created mind receives notices, influ- ences, and communications, from without, and obtains what knowledge it has of immensity. When observing the way by which the human mind arrives at the notion or idea of immensity, we perceive that it is by the exercise of its intel- lectual powers, making comparisons, and stretch- ing its efforts, from one attainment to another. | All experience proves this, and all abstract re- searches upon the subject confirm this experi- ence. Now, we venture humbly to presume, that, as intelligence is an essential perfection of the crea- ted mind, there must be a perfection necessarily and essentially inhering in the uncreated Mind, answering to this, and every way corresponding to the whole extent of the Divine Essence, and the other divine perfections. For we argue, as we have already done, that the Divine Being may withhold a perfection from the creature, which may be necessarily and essentially inher- ing in the Divine Essence: but it is absolutely impossible, even for omnipotence, to bestow up- on the creature a perfection which is not neces- sarily in itself. We therefore argue, that the Divine Mind possesses underived intelligence, as a necessary perfection. But though we plead, that intelligence is a perfection, necessarily in- -hering in the Divine Essence, we do not presume 128 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. to argue, that the Divine Mind exercises its ints tellectual or perceptive powers, in the knowledge of its own immensity, by Jaborious efforts, in all respects the same way, that the created mind does: we only plead, that, as the created mind exercises its intellectual powers upon external objects, in arriving at the knowledge of immen- sity, the Divine Mind exercises its intellectual powers, according to its nature, by one mode to- ward another, subsisting in a mode distinct, not separate, from the mode immediately exercising the divine intelligence, in the knowledge of the divine immensity. 2. And supposing the divine intelligence, by its exercise in one mode distinct from another, to comprehend self-knowledge; and keeping self- knowledge, as our present subject, in view, we have no other way of ascertaining, upon rational principles, how the Divine Being can know its own immensity, but by one mode or person in the Divine Essence exercising the divine intelli- gence upon another, distinct, not separate, from itself; and possessing the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, as well as itself. In this view, we can reasonably perceive how these modes can exercise the divine intelligence reci- procally, and thereby have a perfect knowledge of the immensity of the divine goodness, and all other perfections. Now, if there be one, and only one, mode of VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 129 subsistence, or only one person, in the Divine Essence, it is absolutely impossible that ever another mode, distinct from that one, can be found; and it is absolutely impossible for that one to exercise its intellectual or perceptive powers in any way but that of consciousness alone; and not being able to exercise these powers upon a mode or object in distinct subsist- ence from itself, and every way equal to itself, it could never arrive at the knowledge of the im- mensity of its own goodness, and all its other per- fections. We may reverently presume, that even omniscience itself could not do this. 3. ‘The Divine Being cannot compare itself with the created being: this is impossible, as al- ready shown; for no standard or comparison could hold here. The creature is but of yester- day: the Divine Being is necessarily existent, independent, and eternal. And the divine im- mensity must have been as perfect before crea- tion and providence, as it has been since; and would be as perfect as it now is, were creation and providence for ever struck out of existence. And the Divine Being must have known its own immensity before creation and providence began, as perfectly as it does since, and as it ever will. . And upon the hypothesis of only one mode of subsistence, or only one person, in the Divine Essence, it is absolutely impossible for us reason- ably to conceive or imagine, how the Divine I 130 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Being could know its own immensity, unless we should suppose, as has been already done, that it could make a circuit around itself, wholly exte- rior to itself; and this would argue the divisibi- lity of the Divine Essence, which is unreasonable and absurd. This would be immensity, in one simple mode of subsistence, encompassing im- mensity; the very same mode of that which is infinite, encompassing itself,—which is a direct contradiction, and absolutely impossible. 4. Still, however, we must suppose, that the Divine Being knows itself, and this can never be upon the hypothesis of only one single mode of subsistence. There must, therefore, be distinct modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence, by which one mode can see and know itself in ano- ther, and compare itself with another. And this is absolutely impossible upon any other principle than the doctrine of the Trinity, which proves, that the Divine Essence and perfections must subsist in three distiact modes or persons. This principle removes all difficulties, and presents a way of demonstration to the truth of the doc- trine; fully satisfies the most rigorous investiga. tion, by fair and legitimate inductive reasoning ; and corresponds exactly with revelation. 5. Take for an example the divine goodness,— and suppose this goodness, according to the fore- going law of the Divine Nature, subsisting dis- tinctly, not separately, in two modes or persons VIEWS ‘OF THE TRINITY. 131 in the Divine Essence: And suppose these modes or persons subsisting in an incommunicable rela- tion to one another; then we must suppose that, in one mode or person, the divine goodness sub- sists distinctly, not separately, from that in which it subsists in another: And suppose each of these modes or persons having the whole of the divine goodness subsisting in itself, in a manner distinct from that which it does in the other; and sup- posing each standing in an incommunicable rela- tion to one another ;—in this view, we perceive the divine goodness, together with the Divine Lssence and perfections, distinguished, and dis- tinguished only, not separated, in personality. And as the Divine Essence is simple, uniform, and indivisible, and the divine goodness the very same, subsisting in distinct personality, according to the economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections ; the Divine Nature must partake of each and_of both these distinctions equally; and it clearly follows, that so does the divine good- ness. And, partaking of each and of both, it can only do so in personality: distinction implies two, and union implies one. Thus, in person- ality, there must necessarily and naturally arise a third mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, or a third person. Or, which is the very same, the Divine Nature subsisting in distinction, and partaking wholly of that distinction, in each and in both the modes r 9 A Aol 132 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. of distinction, it must necessarily and naturally partake of each and of both, equally, and thus subsist in a mode distinct from each and from both the other two, and stand in an incommuni- cable relation to each and to beth. ‘ Or, we may say, with equal truth, and force of reason, that as we perceive the Divine lssence must subsist in two distinct modes, and this Hs- sence being simple, uniform, and absolute, and the divine intelligence, as well as goodness, being active and operative in its principle,—these two distinct modes communicate, in this simple, ac- tive principle, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from each, and stand in an incommuni- eable relation to each; and the Essence, perfec- tions, and mode, thus communicated, constitute personality ; and thus we perceive ‘a third mode of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence: so that there are three, and there can be neither more nor less than three, distinct modes of sub- sistence, or persons, in the Divine Fssenee, stand- ing in an incommunicable relation to each other. And these distinct modes of subsistence, or per- sons, are as necessary to the existence, perfec- tion, and happiness of the Divine Being, as any of the divine perfections are ; and constitute the absolute consummation of the Divine Being. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 133 A view of the equality of the distinct modes of sub- sistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence. 6. These modes are constituted, necessarily and essentially, by the peculiar law of the con- stitution and economy of the activity, energy, operation, and influence, of the life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, of the Divine Essence and perfections: therefore these modes or persons bave neither superiority nor inferiority among themselves; nor is the priority which we observe in reasoning, a priority of time, of dig- nity, excellence, or nature, but merely a priority of order ; each mode or person being co-essen- tial, co-equal, co-eternal, co immense, and co- immutable, in all respects, with the other: the whole subsisting distinctly, not separately, by the necessary law already mentioned, in order to the exercise of the divine intelligence, in the know- ledge of the immensity of the divine goodness, and in order to the self-existence, perfection, and. happiness of the Divine Being. 7. Now, upon the principle of the doctrine of the T'rinity, we can demonstrate, and reasonably conceive, how the Divine Being can know the immensity, and all the other attributes of its own goodness, according to its own nature; for, each of these modes or persons, subsisting distinctly, aa an incommunicable relation to the other, by 13 134 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the exercise of the divine intelligence, sees, if we may so speak, and knows the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, both natural and moral, as subsisting in the other, and partaking of the same nature as subsisting in itself; the goodness of the Divine Nature subsisting in each, in all its absolute immensity. And thus objects or per- gons are found in the Divine Essence, upon which, each mode or person can exercise’ the divine intellectual-or perceptive powers, in the full and perfect knowledge of the divine perfec- tions, natural and moral; or a comparison can be found in’ the Divine Essence, upon which, each mode can intuitively know the whole divine -perfections, natural and moral. Hach of these modes or persons, necessarily, mutually, and re- ciprocally beholds itself in the other, and that, according to the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, consistent with the full and perfect exer- cise of the divine intelligence, and consistent. with the consummation of the very existence, - perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being.” . The exercise of the divine intelligence never had a beginning, and never will have an end. 8. There never was a time when the exercise of the divine intelligence, by these distinct modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence, began ;-—— VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 155 there never will be a time when it will end: it is co-equal, co-eternal, and “co-immense, with the existence of the Divine Essence and perfections themselves; and arises, necessarily and essen- tially, out of the peculiar law of the constitution and;economy of the activity, energy, operation, and influence of the divine life, intelligence, mo- ral excellence, and efficiency of the Divine Es- sence, as subsisting in these distinct modes.— And it is just as absolutely necessary and essen- | tial to the Divine Being, as it is to exist. And it is as necessary for each of the divine distinct persons to exercise the whole of the divine intel- lectual or perceptive powers, to see and to know the whole of the divine goodness in the other, and in itself, mutually, reciprocally, co-equally, and co-eternally, in order that the Divine Being may have a full and perfect knowledge of the immensity of its own goodness,——as it is for the Divine Being to exist. 9, And reason, carefully investigating the di- vine goodness on the foregoing principles, clearly perceives, that it subsists in the first mode or person, in a manner distinct from that in which it subsists in the second, in all its immensity, and stands in an incommunicable relation to the second; and reason, surveying the divine good- ness, as subsisting in the second mode, discovers, that it subsists in a manner distinct from what it does in the first, and stands in an incommuni- I 4 136 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. cable relation to the first. And because the Divine Essence is simple and indivisible, reason, pursuing this subject of the divine goodness, ac- cording to the foregoing laws, as subsisting dis- tinctly in each of these two first modes, discovers, that the Divine Essence must partake of each and of both these modes of subsistence; and; partaking of each and of both, it must do so in personality: distinction implies two, and union imples one. ‘Chus, in personality, a third mode or person must necessarily and. essentially arise in the Divine Essence, subsisting in a manner distinct from each and from. both the other two, and must stand in an incommunicable rela- tien to each and to both, | All this appears every way consistent with reason, and points out that there must be three, and that there can be neither more nor less than three, divine persons in the Divine» Essence. For besides this third mode or person, there can-. not possibly arise any other in the Divine Essence. Lhe impossibility of more than three. _ The second person necessarily and essentially arises in the Divine Essence, as well as the first, according to the law already mentioned, each being co-essential, co-equal, co-eternal, and co- immense, in the Divine Essence ; or, according to the foregoing law, which is absolutely neces- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 137 sary to the very existence of the Divine Being, because it is a peculiar perfection of the Divine Essence—the first, being necessarily constituted, consistently with real distinction of personality, by necessarily communicating the whole of the Divine Essence, together with the whole of the divine intelligence and goodness, in all immen- sity, thereby constitutes the.second. Now, it is plain, that the first could communicate no more than the whole of the Divine Essence and per- fections, natural and moral; for more there can- not be in the Divine Being: and it could com- ‘municate no less, except the Divine Essence were divisible, which is impossible: and it is equally plain, that as the Divine Essence and perfections are distinguished in the first and se- cond persons, and as the Divine Essence is sim- ple and indivisible, it must partake of this dis. tinction, which is necessary and natural to itself, and if it naturally partake of this distinction, it must do so in personality, for the distinction con- sists of nothing but personality ; and the essence naturally partaking of this distinct personality, or distinct modes of subsistence, a third person must naturally, necessarily, and essentially arise inthe Divine Essence. Or, the first and second naturally and necessa- rily communicating, according to the foregoing Jaw, in one joint, active principle, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, together with 138 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the whole of the divine intelligence and goodness, in all their immensity, and by this communica- tion naturally and necessarily constituting a third, they could communicate no more: for what can be more than eternity, immensity, and immuta- bility; and they could communicate no less, ex- cept the Divine Essence were divisible, whiel 18 absolutely impossible. And as one person could communicate neither more nor less, and.as the two persons could com- municate neither more nor less, and as this com- munication, by the two, is in one joint, absolute, active principle, and by this communication’ the Divine Essence and perfections subsist distinctly in the third, from that in which they do m each and in both the first two, a final union, if we may so speak, of personality is necessarily, essentially, and. naturally established in this third person; and a final or eternal close, or termination, if we may so speak, is put to all farther communica- tion of the Divine Essence and perfections in this third: so that the third could not communi- cate the Divine Essence and perfections by it- self, nor could it join in the very same principle with the two first; that principle being absolute- ly united in itself, in personality, in the third, ali farther communication of the Divine Essence and perfections is for ever sealed, and shut up. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. i39 Another method of demonstration. 10. It will be observed, that we have all along proved that the principle of the communication of the Divine Essence and perfections, is founded upon the peculiar law of the constitution and’ economy of the Divine Essence and perfections.. According to this law, communication must be- gin by some of the persons, and that by whom it begins, we call the first. And it is evident, that this mode or person can neither communicate it- self, nor be communicated by another, without’ being destroyed, because it is the source or origin of communication itself. And it is to be ob- served through the whole of this reasoning, that that which is communicated, cannot be commu- nicated again, without destroying the person constituted by the first communication.—Now, if the communication of the Divine Essence and perfections, which constitutes the third mode or person, were made either by the first or by the second, individually, it is plain there might be a communication to a fourth also: but after the communication by the first, which constitutes the personality of the second, this is impossible ; for after that communication, the Divine Essence and perfections must necessarily and naturally subsist im distinction. Therefore it is absolutely impossible that any other communication of the essence and perfections could be made by one 140 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.~ person individually, and without regard to the other, without destroying that other. For not- withstanding the communication by the first, the essence and perfections are the very same in the second, that they are in the first. They are in no respect diferent, except in the distinct mode of subsistence. Therefore whatever perfection is exerted or manifested by the one, is also ex- erted or manifested by the other, equally at the . very same time. for example, we suppose in- telligence,—and as the divine intelligence is the very same in each, and in all respects the very same, except the distinct mode of subsistence,— if it be exercised or manifested at all, according to its own nature, it must be by each and by both, at the very same time, in communication ; and this necessarily constitutes a third mode of the subsistence or personality of the divine intel- ligence, constituted by partaking of personality trom each and from both the other two, and comprehending personality in union, in one dis- tinct mode of subsistence. 3 And after this necessary communication by each and by both the two first, which constitutes the personality of the third, it is absolutely im- possible that any other communication could take place, without destreying this union of per- sonality in the third; and if you destroy this union of personality in the third, you destroy the third person entirely; and if you destroy the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 141 { third person, you destroy the Divine Essence and perfections entirely, which is impossible to be admitted, because it is absurd, and contrary to all reason. While we contemplate personality as distinct, in the two first, we perceive it pos- sible, and even natural, to be united in the third; but after we contemplate it as necessarily united in the third, it is also absolutely impossible for us to conceive, how that which is necessarily and naturally united, eternally, immensely, and im- mutably, could be separated; for if it be sepa- rated, it must be separated eternally, immensely, and immutably, and thus the union and separation would destroy each other completely: and with- out a separation, there could be no communica- cation to a fourth. It is, therefore, as clear as demonstration can make it, that there can be no communication of the Divine Essence and _per- fections made, so as to constitute a fourth mode of subsistence, or person, in the Divine Essence, without entirely destroying the Divine Being al- together, which is the height of absurdity; there- fore, there must be three, and there can be nei- ther more nor less than three, divine persons in the Divine Essence. And thus we prove and demonstrate, that it is as absolutely necessary for all communication of the Divine Kssence and perfections to terminate and cease for ever in the third person, as it is for the Divine Being to exist. And this termina- 142 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. tion, and final close of all communication of the Divine Nature in the third, presents us with a view of the Divine Being, as subsisting in three distinct modes or persons; the very same doc- trine which revelation teaches, and which the holy Scriptures call the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. And demonstration proves, that these three are one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory. And the divine in- telligence, necessarily subsisting in each of these modes, and necessarily exercised by each of them, according to its own nature, sees and knows, if we may so speak, the divine goodness, in all its immensity, in the other, mutually, reciprocally, co-equally, co-eternally, co-immensely, and co- immutably, by the necessary law of the Divine Essence and perfections. Hence it is as evident as demonstration can make it, that the Divine Being, by the exercise of its own intellectual or perceptive powers, intuitively knows its own goodness, in all immensity, and all the other divine perfections, natural and moral, in the ful- lest extent of the Divine Nature; and the excel. lency, the majesty, and the glory of its own being, only on the principle of the doctrine of the Trinity. | 11. And hence, as all the knowledge of a crea: ted being is derived from the Creator, so all the knowledge of the uncreated Being is derived from the source of its own internal self-sufficiency; VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 143 which is every way adequate to its own being, perfection, and happiness. So that, whilst the intelligence of the created mind is the great me- dium of its knowledge and enjoyment, the intel- ligence of the uncreated and necessarily-existent Mind, is the only medium of the divine know- ledge and enjoyment, arising entirely from the. ineffable source of the Divine Essence and per- fections, as subsisting in three distinct modes or persons. 12. Hence we may venture to presume, with due caution, that the ideas of the Divine Mind, or the intelligence of the Divine Being, by which it fully and perfectly knows itself, are necessary, innate, eternal, immense, and immutable, upon the principle of the doctrine of the Trinity only ; and, with due respect to the reader, it is humbly presumed, that it is not possible for human inge- nuity to represent the Divine Being as necessa- rily and perfectly knowing its own perfections, natural and moral, in all the extent of their un- created glory, upon any other principle. In a review of all that has been said on this Proposition, it will be observed, that we have rested the whole force of reasoning and argument upon the peculiar and necessary law of the con- stitution and economy of the activity, energy, operation, and influence, of the divine life, intel- ligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, of the divine perfections, as necessarily inhering in the 144 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Divine Essence, and constituting the different distinct modes or persons, by communication ; and upon the modes thus constituted, and the incommunicable relation in which they stand to each other, in distinct personality,—and upon the distinct personality,--we have rested the whole weight of the reasoning and arguments proving that there must be three, and that there can be neither more nor less than three, divine persons in the Divine Essence. ‘The necessary and natu- ral activity of the divine perfections inheres also in the Divine Essence; and upon this natural and necessary activity, the whole arguments and reasoning of the communication of the modes are rested; and upon the modes, as comprehend- ing the essence and perfections, the reasoning and argument supporting the personality, are rested; and upon the distinction and union of the personality, the reasoning and arguments are rested, which support the impossibility of a fourth person in the Divine Essence; and thus the whole reasoning is linked together, and forms a connected chain, that refuses to be broken, or separated.* * See Note G. on the preceding Proposition. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY; 145 PROPOSITION VIII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE EXERCISE OF THE DIVINE INTELLIGENCE, IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE IMMUTABILITY OF THE DIVINE VERA- CITY, AND ALL OTHER PERFECTIONS. [Identity in the created mind, and immutability in the uncreated, corresponding—The created mind cannot know itself perfectly, for want of @ source of self-know- ledge within ttself—'The Divine Mind cannot know tts oun inmutabrlity, if tt subsist in one mode only— The Dwine Essence must subsist in distinct modes, ti order that the Dwine Being may know tts own immutability —This exemplified by the divine veracity—A brief view of the distinct modes, objects, or persons—The necessity of subsisting in three distinct modes or persons wm another view—None of the divine persons can by tt- self communicate the Divine Essence and perfectwons twice, without destroying the other, or uiself, or both. | 1. In farther directing our researches into the natural and moral perfections of the Divine Being, we shall find the same doctrine fully established, by reasoning upon similar principles with respect to the divine immutability. Perhaps it may be lawful, and consistent with metaphysical accuracy, to suppose, that immuta- éility in the uncreated Being, and identity in the created being, are similar. Since identity is an essential perfection of the created mind, and K 146 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. necessary to its constitution, as being the same, both in this life, and that which is to come. If, therefore, identity be an essential perfection be- stowed upon the created mind by the Divine Being, we may, with the strictest accuracy of reasoning, infer, that there must be a perfection necessarily inhering in the Divine Mind, corre- sponding to it; which perfection can be no other than immutability. And that this must be so, is undeniably evident, because the divine self-exist- ent Mind, the great First Cause of all things, must necessarily possess all perfection; and be- cause the Divine Being may withhold from the created being a perfection which is necessarily inhering in the Divine Essence, but can bestow no essential perfection upon the created being, which it does not necessarily and essentially pos- sess in itself. There must, therefore, be immu- tability in the uncreated Mind, as a necessary and essential perfection. 2. Now there is no way by which a created mind can come to the knowledge of its own identity, but by memory and comparison; and were there but one created mind in the universe, and that one mind had existed ten thousand years, it could never come to the knowledge of its own identity, because it could not exercise its own intellectual powers upon itself, in the way of selfknowledge. But if that created mind were so constituted, as to subsist in more distinct VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ky modes than one, it could arrive, with certainty, at the knowledge of its own identity, did it sub- sist in three distinct, not separate, modes; be- cause it would then have a source of selfknow- ledge within itself. But, as by its present con- stitution, it can subsist in one mode only, it has not a source of self-knowledge entirely within itself; therefore it can only arrive at the know- ledge of its own identity by pees exercised it Comparison. 3. Now, by the fairest induction that we can form, and clearest inference that we can draw, if the Divine Mind subsist in one single mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, we presume, upon this hypothesis, to affirm, that it cannot know its own immutability. How is it possible that it could? It could not be by me- mory: it could not be by comparison: it could not be by these united. Where could memory begin? where could it end, in that which is necessarily immutable? It could not be by com- parison with things external to itself, which has been already proved. For what can be external, in a certain sense, to that which is necessarily immense? Nothing. There can be nothing ex- ternal to that which is infinite. And, in the way of comparison, there can be none between that which is uncreated, and that which is created. This is absolutely impossible. How then shall we suppose, upon the hypothesis of only one KZ i148 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence, that the Divine Being really could know its own immutability. It is impossible for the created intellect, however improved, either to conceive, imagine, or explain this. All that the created mind can do in such researches, upon this hypo- thesis, is only to ascertain the existence of the Divine Being. Bui how to account for the way in which that Being knows itself, upon this hy- pothesis, the created mind has no capacity. All that it can do, after ascertaining the necessary existence of the Divine Being, the great First Cause, is to stand amazed at the discovery ; quite overwhelmed with the view of some of the divine attributes, discoverable by a process of reasoning from the effect to the cause. And after the dis- covery of the Divine Being, and some of the divine perfections, in this way, the created mind must conclude, that the Divine Being must be absolutely complete in all natural and moral per- fections, and necessarily and absolutely happy in itself; and that as much so, before creation and providence, as since; and that it would still be as much so as it now is, were the whole uni- verse for ever extinct. 4, And surely we must conceive it as contri- buting to the divine enjoyment, that the Divine Being should know itself perfectly ; and, of con- sequence, that it should know its own immuta- _ bility, as well as all the other perfections of the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 149 Divine Essence, both natural and moral. And — as no created being can understand how this can possibly be, upon the supposition of only one mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections ; and as reason still argues that, it would contribute to the divine enjoyment, for the Divine Being perfectly to know itself; and that this perfect knowledge of itself’ must exist upon the principle of distinct objects of compa- rison; and as these distinct objects cannot be found, nor this comparison be made, with any objects external to the Divine Being ;—there- fore, these distinct objects, and this comparison, must necessarily be found within the Divine Essence itself. Hence it is only, ad intra, that we can look for the real source, and the perfect exercise, of the divine knowledge. And it is only upon the principle of the Divine Essence and perfections subsisting in more modes than one, by an incommunicable relation of one of these modes to the other, that we can reasonably account for the possibility of these distinct ob- jects as a standard of comparison, ad intra. And this is the only way we can possibly conceive or imagine, that the Divine Being perfectly knows its own immutability. 5. According to this reasoning, there must be more distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, than one, in the Divine Essence, otherwise the Divine Being could not perfectly know its own KS 150 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, immutability. And if there be more distinct modes than one, of the subsistence of the Divine issence and perfections, this can only be, upon the principle of communication, already so un- deniably established. This is the very same as to say, that one distinct mode of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, being it- self constituted by the foregoing law, necessarily and naturally communicates the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist distinctly, not separately, from that in which they do in itself: and thereby, naturally and necessarily, from everlasting to everlasting, constituting a second person, standing in an in- communicable relation to itself. And as the Divine Essence and perfections must subsist in distinct modes, and as the Divine Nature is sim- ple, uniform, and indivisible, it must partake of each and of both these distinct modes; and, par- taking of each and of both, it must do so in per- sonality, because the distinction is in nothing else but personality. And if it do so in personality, distinct from each and from both, there must subsist in the Divine Essence a third mode or person, having in itself the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, subsisting in a mode different from what they do in each and.in both the two first, and standing in an incommunicable relation te each and to both the two. first: Or, by another mode of reasoning, we say,—as_ there VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, idl must be two distinct modes or persons, and as the Divine Essence must be simple, uniform, and absolute, in the activity and energy of its own nature, in life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efliciency, according to the law of these, the two first modes, in one joint, active principle, must equally communicate the whole of the Di- vine Essence and perfections, that they may sub- sist in a mode distinct, not separate, from what they do in each and in both themselves, and standing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both; and this communication, which never had a beginning, and never can have an end, according to the law already mentioned, constitutes a third mode or person. 6. Now, it is upon the principle of these three distinct, not separate, modes of the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections, or these three distiact objects or persons, that the Divine Being can exercise its own intelligence, in fully and perfectly knowing its own immutability 5; and it must be remembered, as already stated, that this does not imply any inequality among these divine persons, in any way whatever; but it ar- gues, that it is as necessary and essential for the Divine Essence to subsist in these three distinct modes or persons, as it is for the Divine Being to exist. And the priority here mentioned, is not a priority of time, of dignity, or of nature, but enly a priority of order; and by the exercise of RK 4 152 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: the divine intelligence in this order, the Divine Being knows its own immutability perfectly. — Suppose the divine veracity as the example upon which the distinct modes‘of subsistence, objects, or persons, exercise the divine intelligence ;— upon the principle of three distinct modes of subsistence, objects, or persons, in the Divine Essence, the one mode, object, or person, dis- tinct, though not separate, from the other; and seeing and knowing the divine veracity to be the same in the other that itis in itself, absolutely, simply, and invariably ; and this act of the exer- cise of the divine intelligence seeing and knowing itself, being essential and necessary to the exist- ence of the Divine Being: Of consequence, this seeing and knowing the divine veracity, by one mode of subsistence, or by one person in another, never had a beginning,—never will have an end, —never will have limitation,—never will cease ; but is commensurate, n all respects, with the Divine Essence and perfections. From this, at once, we discover a way by which we can con- ceive of the Divine Being, as perfectly knowing its own immutability, and that upon the fairest, most satisfactory, most cogent, and convincing train of reasoning and argument. For each of these divine modes, objects, or persons, seeing and knowing the divine veracity, in its absolute _and perfect immutability, in the other, and in it- self, mutually and reciprocally, by the law of the ‘VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 153 activity, energy, and influence, of the constitu- tion and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, the intelligence of the Divine Being ig exercised in the fullest and most perfect know- ledge of its own immutability; and upon no other principle than this are we able to conceive, how the Divine Being can know its own immu- tability. 7. Hither, then, the Divine Essence and per- fections must, necessarily and essentially, subsist in three distinct modes, objects, or persons, ne- cessarily standing in an incommunicable relation the one to the other, or we are not able to con- ceive how the Divine Being can know its own immutability. | And it is equally plain and evident, as we have already proved, and shall, in another method, shortly prove again, that as there must be three, so there can be neither more nor less than three, distinct modes, objects, or persons, in the Divine Kssence ; and that these three subsist distinctly, not separately, and in an incommunicable rela- tion to each other, as necessarily as the Divine Being itself exists. A brief view of the distinct modes, objects, or persons. The first mode has all the Divine Essence and perfections, together with the immutable veracity subsisting in itself, in the distinction of personal- p54 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ity, and stands in the incommunicable relation of the first in order. The second, being necessarily, naturally, and eternally constituted, by the communication of the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, together with immutable veracity, from the first 5 and the second, being thus naturally and necessa- rily constituted, subsists in the distinct and in- communicable relation of the second in order. And by reason of the unity and indivisibility of the Divine Essence, because these two distinct modes necessarily stand in this incommunicable relation to each other, and the Divine Essence par- taking of that distinct subsistence in relation, there must, necessarily, essentially, and eternally, arise a third mode or person, partaking of personality from each and from both the two first ; and stand- ing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both, and having all the Divine Essence and per- fections, together with immutable veracity, sub- sisting in itself, and standing in the incommuni- cable relation of third in order: Or, proving the fact by another method of reasoning, upon the principle of the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the activity, energy, and opera- tion, of the Divine Essence and perfections ;— the first and second modes or persons, in one joint, active principle, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from that in which VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 155 they do in each and in both themselves. Now, we may observe, that no one of the two first, by itself, could communicate the whole of the Di- vine Essence and perfections to the third; the active principle being the very same in. both, though distinct in the order of subsistence, can neither be exercised by the first, nor by the se- cond, individually. If the principle act or ope- rate at all, it must be by each and by both alike: and if it operate at all by each and by both alike, this operation must constitute a third mode or person, and farther it cannot go in personality. It may be farther observed, that the second can- not recommunicate back to the first, without de- stroying itself, which is impossible; and it is equally certain, the third cannot recommunicate back to the first and second, nor to either, nor to both, without destroying itself, which is impos- sible. In the two first, the personality of the ‘Divine Essence is in distinction: in the third, this distinct personality of the Divine Essence is im union; and sunple distinction, and simple “union, constitute all the modes of distinct sub- sistence in the Divine Essence, and is all that the human mind can conceive, consistent with rea- son; for this third unites in itself the distinction which subsists between the: two first, and thus necessarily, essentially, and naturally closes, and shuts up for ever, all farther communication of the Divine Essence and perfections. — 156 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.~ And these distinct modes, and these incommu- nicable relations, are necessary and essential to the existence, perfection, and happiness, of the Divine Being; and by them the intelligence of the Divine Being is exercised, necessarily and naturally, without beginning and without end, in the perfect knowledge of its own immutable vera- city, entirely independent of all created beings. 8. Hence, as it is impossible, upon the hypo- thesis of one mode of distinct subsistence only, in the Divine Essence, to discover, either @ priort, or @ posteriori, that the Divine Being has a full and perfect knowledge of all its own natural and moral perfections, so it is equally. impossible, a priori, to prove, that the works of creation and providence are the effects of an in- telligent First Cause. And hence it undeniably — follows, that all reasoning and arguments, a pos- teriori, proving the Divine Being to be intelli- gent, ought to be considered, each and every one an particular, as clearly supporting the doctrine of the Divine Essence and perfections, to be, necessarily and essentially, subsisting in more distinct modes than one, and that these distinct modes or persons stand in an incommunicable relation the one to the other, so that they can be neither more nor less than three. For intelligence can act in no other way in the Divine Essence, as far as we know, either in volition or operation, according to the nature of the Divine Being; VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 157 for intelligence must act according to the nature of every being possessed of it ; and if so, it must act in the Divine Being, upon the principle of the doctrine of the Trinity, because the Divine Nature subsists in three distinct modes or per- sons, as already clearly demonstrated. If the Divine Essence be a necessary principle ef spiri- tual life, that life must be intelligent, for all created life is more or less so; and the divine life must be every way absolute, perfect, inde- pendent, and adequate to its own existence, per- fection, and happiness; and must, therefore, ne- cessarily and essentially, possess intelligence, according to its own nature; for intelligence is derived from the nature, and knowledge is de- rived from the intelligence, of every being pos- sessed of it. No reasoning can be more legiti- mate than this. | Intelligence, in some degree or other, being absolutely necessary to the existence and enjoy- ment of every created, animated being, created beings continue their existence by their intelli- gence, and enjoy their portion of happiness by external assistance or influence of one kind or other. | Now, it is not possible for us to conceive, how a created intelligent being could enjoy all the happiness of which it is capable in the present life, were there no other intelligent beings in the universe, but itself alone. And if we may sup- £58 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. pose this being, human or angelic, it could not enjoy happiness in the world to come, nor evetr -eontinue in existence, without the immediate agency, influence, and support, of the Creator and Preserver of all. In such a solitary situation 28 we now suppose, the human soul could never arrive at the knowledge of its own powers and faculties, nor experience that engi of Lid jwise it is capable. Pige h 9, Whatever Buleedtion we may ascribe to the Divine Being, as a necessary principle of intelli. gent life, every way adequate to its own exist- ence, perfection, and happiness, contemplating’ at before creation and’ providence, we must ‘cott- sider it as solitary, whatever eternity, immensity, or immutability, we may ascribe to it. Still, m this view, we must consider it as alone; and if to this we add the affirmation, that it must sub- sist in one mode only; upon this hypothesis,” no created ingenuity can conceive or imagine ra- tionally, how it can be adequate to its own exist- ence, perfection, and happiness, or how it can perfectly know its own unity and simplicity, and all its own perfections, natural and moral, in all their unlimited and uncreated immensity. For as is the nature, so is the intelligence, and as is the intelligence, so is the si lacie of ovary being possessed of it: | Now, it is the nature of the Divine Being to subsist in: three distinct modes; and according VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 153 to this nature, the divine intelligence must sub- sist in the same; and according to this intelli- gence, the divine knowledge must be underived, and exercised in three distinct modes of subsist- ence. Now, if any man will deny this, and affirm that the Divine Nature subsists in one mode on- ly; that the divine intelligence does the same; and that the divine knowledge must act and ope- rate in this one mode only,—we leave that man to the enjoyment of his opinion. 10. It is not possible that the Divine Being could know itself in the same way that created rational beings arrive at the knowledge of their own unity, powers, and faculties. For this, crea- ted minds could never do, without external influ- ence and assistance; and surely, external influ- ence and assistance, the independent uncreated Mind could never have. For creation and pro- vidence, with all their varieties, never could, nor ever can, contribute, in the smallest degree, at any time, either to the intelligence or knowledge of the Divine Being. This glorious, this great, and exalted Being, must, therefore, necessarily and essentially, pos- sess within itself, entirely independent of all crea- ted beings, the perfect knowledge of itself, of its own essence, and of its own pertections, natural and moral; and, by clear consequence, its own eternity, immensity, and immutability ; and this, we venture humbly to presume, it cannot do, up- 160 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. on the hypothesis of only one mode of subsist- ence, or only one person, in the Divine Essence. The necessity of subsisting in three distinct modes or persons, demonstrated in another way. i1. The Divine Essence must, therefore, in order to the full and perfect knowledge of its own perfections, natural and moral, subsist in three, and in neither more nor less than three, distinct modes or persons, standing in an incom- municable relation the one to the other. Ar- guing that there can be neither more nor less than three, we reason thus :—We first of all sup- pose the Divine Essence and perfections must constitute distinction, consistently with their nature, but according to the law of the consti- tution and economy of the activity, energy, ope- ration, and influence of the life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency of the Divine Essence and perfections: we clearly and fully demonstrate, that this Essence, and -its perfec- tions, must subsist in three distinct modes, in an incommunicable relation to each other. ‘Then, after we prove, according to this foresaid law, that the first of these modes, itself being natural- ly constituted, must, necessarily and naturally, eternally, immensely, and immutably, communi- cate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, that they may subsist in a mode distinct VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 161 from what they do in itself, and thereby, neces- sarily and naturally, constitute the second mode er person, it is absolutely impossible for this first again to communicate, by itself alone, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in itself, and in the second, and thereby con- ~ stitute a third mode or person, without destroy- ing the second. For, having once communi- cated all, it cannot communicate all a second time, without communicating that which has been communicated already, and thereby de- stroying its original mode of subsistence.—A gain, after we ascertain that the second mode or per- son Is, necessarily and naturally, eternally, im- mensely, and immutably constituted, by the com- munication from the first, it is absolutely impos- sible that this second, by itself, and without re- gard to the first, could communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, according: | to the foregoing law, that they might subsist in a mode distinct from that in which they do in itself, and thereby constitute a third mode or person, without destroying the first, and, by con- sequence, destroying itself. To communicate the source and original of communication, is en- tirely impossible, and contrary to reason. The first, therefore, necessarily communicating, and thereby constituting the second, cannot possibly, by itself, again communicate, and thereby con- L 162 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. stitute a third. It is equally impossible that the second can by itself communicate, and thereby constitute a third, without destroying the origi- ginal source of communication ; and yet, accord- ing to the foregoing law, it is absolutely neces- sary that communication should be continued to the very utmost extent of its own nature in the Divine Essence and perfections, eternally, im- mensely, and immutably. And after the distine- tion of the first and second, the first cannot, by itself, and the second cannot, by itself, and yet it is necessary to be done, until absolute impos- sibility, even for omnipotence, prevents. It there- fore may, and must be done, by the first and second in one joint, active principle; and this we have already clearly demonstrated to be the case, and consider it still asa necessary principle.— Therefore, the first and second having, according to the foregoing law, naturally and necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, communi- cated, and thereby constituted a third mode or. person, it is impossible, even for the first and second, in one joint, active principle, or in any other way, to communicate the whole of the Di- vine Essence and perfections, so as to constitute — a fourth, without destroying the third ; for that which is communicated already, and has constt- tuted the third, cannot possibly be agaiu commu- nicated to a fourth, without destroying the third, which is impossible. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 163 Farther; after the third is constituted, by the communication of the first and second, in one joint, active principle, it is absolutely impossible for this third, by itself, to communicate the whole Divine Essence and perfections, and thereby con- stitute a fourth, without destroying the first, by communicating the source and original of commu- nication, and without destroying the second, by communicating that which has been communi- eated already, and, by consequence, destroying itself—all of which are abselute impossibilities ; so that no reasoning, by the mind of man, can be more clear, cogent, and conclusive, than that there must be three, and that there can be nel- ther more nor less than three, modes of distinet subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence. CONCLUSION. Now, upon the foregoing principle, the Divine Being has the true, real, absolute, eternal, im- mense, and immutable source of its own intelli. gence and knowledge, necessarily and essentially within itself. And, upon this principle, it can see itself within itself, and know itself by itself, and that not by any temporary or terminated volition, or repeated acts of intelligence and -knowledge; but one mode of distinct subsist- ence, necessarily and naturally, sees and- knows all that isin the other, and thereby all that is in L 2 164 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. itself, And each of these sees and knows all that is in both, respectively, mutually, and recipre- cally, and also all that is in the third. And this third, necessarily and naturaily, sees and knows in each and in both the other two, and thereby in itself, respectively, mutually, and reciprocally, all the divine perfections, natural and moral, in- their pure, simple, eternal, immense, and immut- able extent. Intelligence being the very. same in each, and in all the modes or persons, respec- tively and distinctly, and standing in an incom- municable relation to each other, in all volitions and operations, the nature being the same,—the intelligence the same,—-the knowledge the same, and the will the very same, in each and in alk: —-the divine knowledge may therefore be con- sidered as threefold perfect, if we may so speak. 12. The divine persons must have the divine intelligence the very same in each; because the Divine Esserice and perfections, both natural and moral, are the very same in each, only subsisting distinctly, not separately, and standing in an in- communicable relation to each other. ‘Lhere- fore, the distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, must have a perie.t know- ledge of each other, and thereby a peifect know- ledge of themselves respectively, and also of the whoie divine perfections, in their uimost infini- tude, by the intellectual influence of divine knowlenge, exercised intuitively, mutually, and VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 165 reciprocally. So, in these distinct modes, and by these alone, the Divine Being fully knows, and perfectly comprehends, its own unity, its ewn perfections, natural and moral, its own es- sence, and its own personality. Irom the mutual! and reciprocal exercise of the divine intelligence, in the way of knowledge, by these three distinct modes of subsistence, in their incommunicable relation to each other, the Di- vine Being fully and perfectly comprehends with- in itself, both necessarily and essentially, the ra- tional, unceasing, eternal, immense, uncreated source of its own intelligence, knowledge, and understanding, and thereby the source of its own enjoyment and happiness; and that by the neces- sary, eternal, and immutable law of the constitu- tion and economy of the Divine Essence and per- fections, with respect to intelligence. We do not say that any one of these distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, ever began, or ever ended, or ever will begin or end, any ener- getic or operative act of the divine intelligence or knowledge. No; we affirm the rational, ener- getic intelligence and knowledge of the Divine Mind, to be absolutely necessary and essential to the very existence, perfection, and happiness, of the Divine Being. We use the word act, in this Essay, merely for want of a term to express the energy, operation, and influence, of the divine intelligence. L 3 166 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. In these three distinct persons, respectively and unitedly, by which the Divine Being, neces- sarily, perfectiy, and intuitively knows and un- derstands itself, its essence, perfections, attri- butes, and operations, altogether independently of any creature; and this is as necessary and essential to the Divine Being, as existence itself. And we affirm, that is absolutely impossible, as far as the powers of the human mind can reach, in research and investigation, for the Divine Being to know itself perfectly, upon any other principle whatever, but that of three distinct, not separate, modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, standing in an incommuni- eable relation to each other, according to the foregoing reasoning,* * See Note H. on the preceding Proposition, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 167 . PROPOSITION IX, PROVING THE DOCTRINE BY THE MORAL PERFEC- TIONS OF THE DIVINE BEING—THE IMMEDIATE EXAMPLE IS THAT OF GOODNESS. [The works of creation and providence are passed by, and the divine perfections themselves taken as the guide—. Livemplified tn goodness-——The divine goodness could not be manifested or displayed in the whole extent of ws own nature, in creation and providence, in any way that the human mind can coacewve or tmagine—If at be not manifested or displayed, according to its own f nature, the Divine Being must be imperfect—It must, therefore, be manifested or displayed in the Divine Essence ttself—Ii cannot be man*fested in the Divine dissence ttself, upon the principle of one mode of sub- sistence only— Therefore there must be a Trinity of persons tr the Divine Essence—One divine person must necessarily communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in itself, and thereby the personality of a second ws constituted— This us en- tirely according to the economy of the Divine Essence and perjections. | i. Havine surveyed the natural and moral perfections of the Divine Being, so far, and found, by a careful and rational investigation, that by them we can demonstrate, in the most cogent and convincing manner, that there must be three, and that there ean be neither more nor less than three, distinct modes of subsistence, or L 4 168 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. persons, in the Divine Essence, standing in an incommunicable relation the one to the other, in order that. the Divine Being may be absolutely perfect, independent, and happy, in itself, and also may fully and perfectly, in all respects, know itself ;—-we come now to survey that excellence which we have so often quoted, as it is manifest- ed in the moral perfections of the Divine Being ; more particularly, to see whether, by the nature of these perfections, we can demonstrate the same truth; and, if so, then more fully to establish the foregoing theory, that the doctrine may appear still more clear, more satisfactory and convincing. 2. In attempting to explore the momentous and interesting subject of a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence, we lay it down as a funda- mental principle, that we must keep steadily in view the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the activity, energy, operation, and — influence, necessarily inhering in the life, intelli- gence, excellence, and efficiency, of the essence and moral perfections of the Divine Being.--And while we must never lose sight of these, we must rise, as far as possible, above the imperfect hints, and superficial views, of the doctrine, discover- able by general speculation on the works of crea- tion and providence; and then endeavour, with the most careful attention, and steady persever- ance, to lay hold of the divine moral perfections themselves, as the only certain, direct, and ibe VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 169 erring guide to such rational and demonstrative conclusions, as finite capacity is enabled to ascer- tain, by the cautious and laborious efforts of ab- stract reasoning. The goodness of the Divine Being, considered as a necessary and essential moral perfection of the Divine Essence, affords us very ready assist- ance, in the important and sacred pursuit, both of discovering, and satisfactorily ascertaining, a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence. And as goodness is an essential perfection of the Di- vine Essence, considering it as a moral perfection of the Divine Being, it must be every way as eter- nal, immense, and immutable, as the Divine Es- sence itself. ‘This is evidently plain from the necessary and essential coanection of a moral Es- sence, and one of its essential perfections. 3. After the most careful research, and the most extensive survey, of this divine moral per- fection, as exhibited to our investigation by the knowledge we have of the Divine Essence, we clearly perceive that, in its own nature, as a moral excellence, it must be active, energetic, operative, and influential; for morality, in its very nature, must be considered as operative, and must be exercised by a moral agent,—other- wise, we are not disposed to call it morality— And if it be exercised by the moral creature, how much more perfectly must it be by the Crea- tor? ‘[his moral perfection must also be consi- 170 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. dered as corresponding to the Divine Essence, in eternity, immensity, and immutability. And we farther perceive, from a careful consideration of the infinitude of the Divine Essence, as bemg eternal, immense, and immutable, that the whole works of creation and providence, in all their bearings, as far as we are able to trace them, and in all the extent we may incline to suppose them to possess, however great, however numerous, however often they.may be repeated, do, by no means, afford us a full and perfect discovery of the absolute, boundless, and unlimited manifes- ‘tation or display of the divine goodness, -in all the complete and perfect extent of the eternity, immensity, and immutability of its own nature. And if creation and providence could really and truly exhibit it in such a view, then the Divine Being must, necessarily and essentially, be im- perfect. ' ‘ Because creation and providence, considering them in their very utmost extent and variety, however far we may incline to stretch the view, or however numerous we may suppose the sys- tems to be, must, after all, be finite; because the Divine Being cannot create any system, or number of systems, whether of matter or of mind, that could be infinite; and that which is finite, or limited in any way whatever, can never be commensurate with that which is necessarily eter- nal, immense, and immutable. | VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 171 It is, therefore, perfectly and undeniably evi- dent, that the whole of creation and providence, -were they ten thousand times ten thousand great- er and more numerous than they are, and were they repeated ten thousand times ten thousand, at the distance of periods as long as the present system of creation and providence shall last, nei- ther could nor would comprehend or contain the absolutely full and perfect: manifestation or dis- play of the divine goodness, in all its uncreated extent and influence, as inhering in the Divine Essence, and as a necessary moral perfection of the Divine Being. 4. Farther; if goodness be a necessary and essential perfection of the Divine Essence, and if it necessarily partake of the activity, energy, operation, and influence inhering in that Essence, which cannot be disputed, then, as we have al- ready showed, it undeniably follows, that this ac- tive perfection, from the very nature of the Di- vine Essence, was as absolute, perfect, eternal, immense, and immutable, in its natural, energetic operations, before creation and providence began, as it has been since ; and it is no less certain, that it would be as perfect as it now is, were creation and providence entirely removed out of being, and for ever cease. The divine goodness can be no more perfect in its own nature, by the continuation of them, than it was before they began to exist, and must neces- hee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. sarily continue for ever to be. And it is to be carefully observed, that they exhibit only a par- ticular, not a full and natural, manifestation of it. From this it is evident, that creation and provi- dence do neither represent the whole of the divine goodness, nor manifest it in all its natural and uncreated eternity, immensity, and immutability. Nor can creation nor providence, as such, in any way whatever, exhibit a perfect representation of it, as co-equal, in eternity and immensity, with the Divine Essence. 5. Therefore it clearly follows, that this divine, moral attribute, being as perfect before creation and providence, as since, must either have been manifested or displayed before what we call time, began, in some other way, according to the whole perfection of its own nature, than in creation and providence, which exhibit only a particular mani- festation of it. And, even at present, it must be manifested in some higher and more perfect way, according to the perfection of its own nature, than it can be in the whole extent of the uni- verse. or if it were not, a necessary and essen- tial perfection, inhering in the Divine Kssence, remained before creation and providence, and continues to remain since, without a full, abso- lute, and perfect manifestation of itself, according to its own nature, from all past eternity, until creation began; or that, at creation, when this divine perfection was displayed, it was not dis- VIEWS OF ii TRINITY. 173 played in all the eternity, immensity, and immu- tability of its own nature. 6. Should we suppose the first, that the divine goodness never was manifested by the Divine Being, in any way whatever, before creation and providence, according to its own nature, then it follows, that a necessary and essential perfection of the Divine Essence, inhered and remained in that Essence, from all past eternity, without af- fording the least enjoyment, or, if we dare say so, without the least use to the Divine Being itself; which is surely contradictory to reason, and ab- surd, and seems directly to impeach the Divine Being with defect and imperfection—a sentiment which we dare not utter. The exercise of moral goodness affords enjoy- ment to created beings; and goodness, without exercise, whether human or angelic, could not _afford that enjoyment of which the rational moral nature is capable. If, therefore, the benevolent exercise of goodness contributes to the happiness of ‘he rational moral creature, surely in reasoning from the created to the uncreated self-existent Being, the benevolent exercise or manifestation of the divine goodness, according to its own na- ture in all its uncreated extent, would contribute tothe divine enjoyment. We must then, with reverence, presume, that there is a way in the Divine Essence itself, by which the divine goodness must necessarily be 174 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. manifested or displayed to the very utmost extent of the eternity, immensity, and immutability of its own nature. For, if not, it must have re- mained, contrary to its nature, without activity, operation, energy, or influence, in any way what- ever, within the Divine Essence; and this could not afford enjoyment to the Divine Being, in the exercise of its own perfections, according to its own nature,—which is downright absurdity, and directly contrary: to all correct views of the Di- | vine Being. Should we suppose the second of these hypo- theses, viz. that when the divine goodness did begin to operate, and. was manifested or display- ed by the Divine Being, in the particular modifi- cation of creation and providence, that it was not then displayed’according to its nature, in the ut- most extent of its eternity and immensity, as al- ready proved ;—upon this position it follows, that we see a manifestation of an essential perfection of the Divine Essence, which is manifested only imperfectly, and in a particular manner, but not according to all the qualities of its own nature; and from this display, we can never infer, by any conclusive reasoning, that this divine perfec- tion is absolutely and perfectly eternal and im- mense, even in the Divine Essence itself; which leaves us still in a greater dilemma and embar- rassment. Now, careful reasoning and investiga- tion, upon the mechanism of the universe, and VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 175 the constitution and tendency of the material world, show, that it may be possible for creation and providence to cease; and of this we are fully assured by revelation. If, then, there be no other way in which this divine perfection can be manifested and display- ed, in the eternity, immensity, and immutability of its own active and operative nature, we must conclude, that the Divine Being never did, nor ever can, manifest and display one of its neces. sary and essential perfections, according to its own nature, in all its boundless and unlimited extent; which must surely be absurd, and di- rectly contrary to all just notions of the Divine Being. We do not argue, that because we see the divine goodness in part, and imperfectly mani- fested, in a particular way, in creation and pro- vidence, that therefore this goodness is not, ac- cording to its nature, necessarily and essentially perfect, in activity, energy, operation, and influ- ence, and eternal, immense, and immutable, as inhering in the Divine Essence. On the con- trary, the argument stands,—that as goodness is a necessary and essential perfection of the Di- vine Essence, it must therefore derive its nature from the law, constitution, and economy, of this Kssence, and be every way corresponding to it, in activity, energy, operation, and influence; and in eternity, immensity, and immutability. And 176 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. because it is but imperfectly manifested, in a particular way, in creation and providence, it evidently follows, that, according to the law of the constitution and-economy of the Divine Es- sence, it must be actively, and energetically, per- fectly, absolutely, eternally, immensely, and im- mutably displayed, or manifested, according to its own nature, in some other way. And, from the foregoing reasoning, it is abundantly evident, that it can be manifested or displayed in no other way, according to the foregoing qualities of its own nature, but in the Divine Essence alone. And if it be manifested, exercised, or displayed, in the Divine Essence, in all the extent of its own nature, in its activity, energy, operation, and influence, and its eternity, immensity, and immutability, this can only be upon the principle ° of a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence. For, upon the hypothesis that there is but one mode of subsistence, or one person only, in the Divine Essence, how is it possible for us to con- ceive, upon any rational principle, in what man- ner one mode or person could manifest itself to itself? Can this one mode be both agent and ob- ject at the very same time? No human reasoning | _ can possibly show how this can be. ‘Therefore, if the divine goodness be manifested according to its nature, it must be upon the principle of more than one mode of subsistence, or person, in the Divine Essence, which will lead directly to VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 17? ‘the doctrine of the Trinity. The very nature of moral goodness supposes exercise or display by communication, as we have all along argued and proved; and this can never be, even in the Di- vine Essence, if there be but one mode of the subsistence of that Essence. And if the divine goodness be not manifested according to the very utmost of all the qualities of its own nature, in the extent of the Divine Essence, the enjoyment and happiness of the Divine Being must be im- perfect; and, if'so, we may as well deny the ex- istence of the Divine Being altogether. 7. Vhe exercise and manifestation of goodness contributes much to the enjoyment of a created moral being. Were there no created moral beings in the universe but one, that one could have no enjoyment in the exercise or manifestation of its own goodness. It could not exercise its good- ness towards itself: it could not manifest its own goodness to itself: it could communicate nothing to its Creator, by the exercise of its own good- ness; for the creature cannot profit the Creator. the creature derives all from the great Cause of its being. Now, upon the same principle, as far as human reasoning can go, if the Divine Being, necessarily and essentially, subsists in one mode or person only, and can subsist in no more, with reverence we may affirm, that it is impossible for this one mode or person to exercise its own good- ness toward itself, or to manifest and display its M LFS VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. own goodness to itself, according to all the qua- lities of its own nature; and upon this principle, we cannot conceive how the Divine Being could be absolutely happy in itself, by the exercise or manifestation of its own goodness, according to all the qualities of its own nature. If the exercise, manifestation, or display, of the divine goodness, according to all its own necessary qualities, contribute to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being, this goodness must be, necessarily and essentially, manifested and displayed, according to its own nature, in the Divine Essence, in order to the happiness of the Divine Being; and, if so, the Divine Essence must subsist in a distinction, not separation, of modes or persons; and, if so, we clearly discover that there must be, necessarily, essentially, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably, two distinct modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence; and that, by the necessary law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Kssence, for the perfection and happiness of the Divine. Being within itself. 8. Or, m other words, the first notions or con- ceptions that we form of the Divine Being, if they be correct, always imply, that this Being must subsist in personality ; therefore we may pre- sume, that as the Divine Being must subsist in personality, and as we have proved that there must be a distinction of personality in the Divine eo a ae ee ae ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 179 Essence, in order to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being; it evidently follows, that one mode or person, being necessarily constituted by the foregoing economy, communicates, ac- cording to all the attributes and qualities of its own nature, the whole of its own essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a manner different, or a mode distinct, from what they do in itself; and that, not in the way of alienation, separation, creation, or causation; nor yet in the way of multiplication, division, or composition 5 but, according to its own nature, merely in that of distinct subsistence, as natural, neces. sary, and essential, to the perfection and hap- pmess of the Divine Being, as its own exist- ence; and without this, the Divine Being could not be what it is: and this communication con- stitutes personality, according to all the attri- butes and qualities of the Divine Nature, in a second mode. his divinely natural communi- cation never had a beginning, and never can nor will have an end. It is as necessary in the Di- vine Essence, as its own existence itself; and implies neither superiority nor inferiority, but merely order of distinct personality, according to the Divine Nature. | And as it is evident from all fair reasoning on the subject, that the Divine Essence must subsist in distinction of personality, according to its own nature, in order to the full, perfect, and absolute, M 2 189 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. manifestation of its own goodness, within its owi essence, and that thereby the Divine Being may manifest its own goodness to itself, according te its own nature; and so, considering this distine- tion of personality in the Divine Essence, and considering the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Nature, in the acti- vity, energy, operation, and influence of the divine life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency ; and farther considering, that the Di- vine Nature must partake of this distinction, and as it must, partake of this. distinction, it must par- take of it in personality ; and partaking of this distinction in personality, it must do so from each from both alike, and in relation to each and toe both the divine persons which we have already ascertained, and perceive to be distinguished.—— Hence there must, naturally, necessarily, and essentially arise, in the Divine Essence, a third mode of distinct subsistence, or a third person, standing in an equal relation to each and to both the two already distinguished. Or, which is the very same, the two already distinguished, accord- ing to the foregoing law of their own nature, must communicate, in one joint, active principle, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, to the very utmost of the Divine Nature, until com- munication terminate in absolute and immutable. perfection, that they may subsist in a manner dis- tinct from what they doin each and in both them- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 18) Selves; and thereby a third mode or person must necessarily be constituted in the Divine Essence. And this communication, like the former, is en- tirely according to the Divine Nature, and im- plies neither superiority nor inferiority, nor the smallest priority in time, dignity, nature, or ex- cellence of any kind. Neither does it imply separation, multiplication, division, composition, or causation, in the Divine Essence; but merely the natural order of subsistence, arising wholly from a necessary, absolute, and eternal law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence, that the Divine Being may be perfect and happy m the exercise or manifestation of’ its own good- ness, according to the whole extent of its own nature, within its own essence, necessarily, and altogether independently of any creature what- ever. And as we said of the former communi- cation, so we say of this, there never was a time when it began; there never will be a time when it will end: it is entirely according to the law of the Divine Nature. It is as necessary to the per- fection and happiness of the Divine Being, as its own existence. 9. And thus, upon the principle of the doctrine of the Trinity, the divine goodness is necessarily manifested and displayed, according to the very utmost of all the qualities of its own nature, with- in the Divine Essence itself, entirely independent wf creation and providence. And these divine | M 3 182 ' VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. modes of subsistence, or persons, stand in such an absolute and incommunicable relation the one to the other, that there must be three; and it is impossible there can be either more or less than three, divine persons in the Divine Essence. A manifestation and display of the divine goodness, and indeed of all the other divine per- fections, according to their own nature, must necessarily be made in the Divine Kssenee, ac- cording to the principles already laid down; and nothing but a divine person, necessarily. consti- tuted by the foregoing law, could make a neces- sary, eternal, immense, and immutable manifes- tation of the divine goodness, according to all the qualities and attributes of its own nature ; and nothing but a divine person could be neces- sarily constituted by such a full and perfect ma- nifestation of the divine goodness, together with, the Divine Essence, according to all the qualities of its own nature. No creature could, no crea- tion could, be constituted by such a communica- tion ; however great, however numerous, the sy- stems, or however often. we may suppose creation to be repeated, at intervals of the most distant periods... herefore, a divine person; must be constituted: the economy is altogether the eco- nomy of the Divine Nature. eft Heri New, we have proved, that the, divine: good- ness must be exercised, manifested, or displayed, according to all the qualities of its own nature, vIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 183 and in order to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being within itself’: and that exercise or display can only be made by a divine person, and can only constitute a divine person, within the Divine Essence, because it is entirely accord- ing to the law of the Divine Nature: And the divine goodness being distinguished in the Divine Egsence, into two distinct modes of subsistence, or persons; and the Divine Nature being simple, uniform, indivisible, and active,—must partake of the divine goodness in this distinction; and partaking of the divine goodness in this distinc- tion, it can only do so in personality, because distinction consists only of personality ; and do- ing so in personality, a third person must thereby be constituted in the Divine Essence, partaking of the Divine Nature, as it subsists in each and in both of these two distinct modes of subsist- ence, or persons, and standing in an incommuni- cable relation to each and to both; or, which is the same, these two distinct modes of subsistence, according to the foregoing law, communicate, in one joint, active principle, the whole of the Di- vine Mssence and perfections, according to all the qualities of their own nature, and thereby consti- tute a third distinct mode of subsistence, or per- son. And these divine persons must stand in the incommunicable relation of making this dis- play, according to their own nature, in one joint, active principle, and thereby constituting the Md | 184 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. third person. And this third person must stand in the incommunicable relation of being consti- tuted by- this communication from the two first. 10. And, farther, the first must not only, neces- sarily and immutably, stand in the relation of the first to the second, but also, according to the foregoing law of the Divine Nature, in the rela- tion of necessarily communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, so as to con- stitute the second, and also necessarily possessing the whole of the very same Essence and perfec- tions, in its own distinct mode of subsistence, at the very same time. And this relation of the first, necessarily communicating, and necessarily possessing, must be considered as the law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence, according to its own nature, and must continue, by the fixed law of that Essence, necessarily, eter- nally, immutably, and incommunicably, as distin- guishing this first person, hi | Again; the relation of being constituted by the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, thus naturally communicated, and necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, possessing the divine goodness, according to all the qualities, of its own nature; and, at the same time, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, thus communicated, is the relation of the second to the first; and being thus constituted, and pos-. sessing the whole of the Divine Essence and pers VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 185 fections, according to their own nature, is also the necessary law of the constitution and eco- nomy of the Divine Issence and perfections, and is without beginning and without end, eternal, immense, and immutable, forming the relation of the second to the first. Again; the first and second, in one joint, ac- tive principle, naturally communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, so as that they constitute a third, and yet, at the very same time, possessing the whole, ‘each in its own dis» tinct mode of subsistence, forms the relation of the two first to the third. And the relation of being constituted by the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, thus naturally communicated by the two first, and of necessarily and essentially possessing the whole in its own distinct mode of subsistence, without all possibility of farther com- munication to any other mode of subsistence, or person, forms the relation of the third to the two first. So that no other person can have all the relations of the first, and no other all the relations of the second, and no other all the relations of the third. Nor can any of these have the rela- tions of the other: nor can any other person be- sides these, have any of these distinct modes of subsistence, nor any other mode of subsistence in the Divine Essence; therefore there can be no more and-no fewer distinct modes of subsist- ence, or persons, standing in these peculiar in- 386 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. communicable relations, or in any other relations, in the Divine Essence. ; According to the law of the Divine Essence, so often mentioned, communication, in the Di- vine Essence, must be considered as entirely ac- cording to the nature of that Essence, and not a particular modification of any. kind, but altoge- ther natural and spontaneous. And, if so, as the whole of the Divine Nature subsists entirely in the first person, the communication, by the first, must be entirely according to the whole of the Divine Nature, consisting of essence, perfections, and mode, in the whole extent of the properties’ and qualities of Deity.k—And, upon the same principle and law, the whole of the Divine Na- ture, as subsisting distinctly in the first and in the second, the communication, in one joint, ace tive principle, by them, must be according to the whole of the Divine Nature, consisting of essencey perfections, and modes, united in this joint, ace tive principle: then, as the modes aré united in! this. communication, according to the whole of the Divine Nature, in all its qualities and proper- ties, the communication is, to the very utmost extent, terminated in eternal, immense, and im- rautable perfection ; so that omnipotence itself is exhausted, if we may so speak: therefore it is not possible that communication can go any fare ther; no other mode can possibly-be'! constituted in the Divine Essence, Therefore, the persons VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 187 in the Divine Essence are, naturally, necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, three, and neither more nor less than three. Now, if it be admitted, that the imperfect communication of the divine goodness, parti- cularly exercised and manifested according to the divine will in creation and providence, con- tributes to the divine glory; how much more must the natural, necessary, complete, perfect, eternal, immense, and immutable exercise and manifestation of the divine goodness, according to all the properties and qualities of its own na- ture, in the Divine Essence, contribute to the divine glory, perfection, and happiness? 11. No where can there be a natural, neces- sary, complete, perfect, eternal, immense, and immutable capacity to receive the manifestation of the whole of the uncreated, infinite; and im- measurable goodness of the Divine Being, ac- cording to all the qualities of its own nature, but in the Divine Essence itself. In this Es. sence, therefore, there must be found a person. every way. capable of communicating, and a per- son every way capable of being constituted by the whole of the divine goodness communicated according, to its own nature; and distinct per- sons, in one joint, active principle, naturally, necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably communicating; and. a person constituted by this communication in union, distinet from each 1s8 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and from both; and each of these, co-eternally and co-essentially, subsisting with one another: and co-equally, co-essentially, and co-eternally, in distinct modes, or personality, possessing the whole essence, and all the perfections of the Di- vine Being, both natural and moral, and, by con- sequence, this divine goodness itself, according to the qualities of its nature; for, if not, the Di- vine Being must be imperfect, which is impossible. Vor, if the Divine Being necessarily exists, which has been ‘clearly demonstrated, then it must necessarily exist in the full and perfect exercise of each and of all its own perfections and attributes, according to its own nature, every moment, from all past eternity, through all future eternity. And could we conceive the Divine Being to exist, without the full and per-_ fect exercise and manifestation of each and of ail its own perfections and attributes, according to their own nature, every moment, without ,be- ginning and without end, according to the fore- going law, we could at once conceive that the Divine Being is imperfect, which is surely im- possible, and contrary to all correct notions of Deity. Therefore the divine goodness must be fully, perfectly, and absolutely, exercised and manifested, according to all the qualities of its own nature, from everlasting to everlasting, in- the Divine Essence itself, sieeeernes independent of creation and providence. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 189 And by reason of the unity and indivisibility of the Divine Essence, as there is a distinction between the first and the second mode, so there must be a union in the third. Therefore, this first and second naturally communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in each of themselves, and thereby constitute a third. And, by consequence, the eternal, im- mense, and immutable goodness of the Divine — Being, is, by the foregoing law of communica- tion, necessarily, fully, absolutely, eternally, im- mensely, and immutably exercised, manifested, and displayed, in the inconceivable extent of its own nature, without beginning and without end, unceasingly, by these divine persons in the Di- vine Essence. And thus the divine efficiency, intelligence, and goodness, as moral perfections, prove the same doctrine.* : * See Note I. on the preceding Proposition. * j + i390 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION X. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE OF THE DIVINE LOVE. | Argued ta a way similar to the foregoing Proposition— No creature, nor all the creatures that ever were, ares | or shall be, could receive the whole influence of the divine love—A divine person cannot communicate the divine love twice by uself, and without any regard to another divine person, otherwise the Dwine Essence would be multiplied, which is impossible—The commu- gicaiton of the diwine love must be exactly according to the Divine Nature, eternal, immense, and immutable, and therefore can have neither beginning nor end— ‘the relation tn which the divine persons stand to each other, ts incommunicable—They can be netiher more nor less than three—'The same mode of reasoning %s applicable to every one of the divine morai perfecitons. | 1. Ir, from the perfection of goodness, we turn to an investigation of the perfection of love in the Divine Being, by the nature of this divine moral perfection also, the doctrine of the Trinity is no less capable of being fully proved, and esta- blished by demonstration: And in the commence- ment of the chain of reasoning upon this per- fection, we lay down our general premises as the great foundation upon which the whole doctrine rests,—-which is, the natural, necessary, and eter- nal law of the constitution and economy of the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 191 activity, energy, operation, and influence, of the life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency of the Divine Essence and perfections. We may assume, what cannot be denied, that this perfection, or attribute, necessarily inheres in the Divine Essence, and, like this Essence, it is active, energetic, operative, and influential; — eternal, immense, and immutable, and represents the Divine Being in the most amiable point of view. We therefore pursue our position, which affirms, that this perfection, when fairly and fully investigated, discovers, reveals, and proves, the doctrine of a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence. It will be proper to keep in mind the. general or universal distinction between a particular mode of the exercise or manifestation of the divine love, and the natural and necessary manifestation of it, according to all the qualities of its own nature. 2. We follow the foregoing train of reasoning, and*presume, that no created being, however great, however glorious, or however exalted, we may suppose it to be, can be capable of expe- riencing the whole influence of the divine love, according to its own nature, in all its eternal, immense, and immutable energy. Nor ail the moral creatures that ever were, or ever shall be, whether in the heavens above, or in the earth beneath, were they ten thousand times ten thou- sand more than they are, have been, or shall be, 192 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. however often we may suppose creation and pre- vidence to be repeated, at intervals as distant as the period of the duration of the present universe, yet all taken together, are entirely incapable of receiving the whole immeasurable influence of the divine love, according to the activity and energy of its own nature, which is necessarily eternal, immense, and immutable. Created be- ings, however numerous, can only participate in a particular modification of the divine love; and they can only do so partially, however long they may exist in future eternity, merely because they are creatures. Indeed it is absolutely impossible that the uncreated love, in all the extent of its own nature, could be communicated to creatures. Created beings can only partake of the particular manifestation of created love, suited to their na- ture; but they can by no means partake of the necessary and absolute manifestation of it, ac- cording to all the qualities of its own nature. 3. Now, according to our general plan of rea- soning, we argue, that the divine love was as perfect in the Divine Being, in its own nature, before any creature ever had a share in the par- ticular modification of it, manifested or exercised in creation and providence, as it has been since, and would still continue to be so, in its own na- ture, had no creature ever tasted of any particu- lar modification of it; and though all the crea- tures that ever were, have, or shall partake of VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 198 any particular modification of it, were entirely removed out of being, and reduced to their pri- mitive nonentity. For, seeing that creatures, as such, are finite and limited, and this love is un- created, infinite, eternal, immense, and immut- able, it must undeniably follow, that creatures can never experience the whole of it, according to its own nature; and to suppose they could, would at once reduce the Divine Being to im- perfection, which is both impossible and absurd. It will not be denied, that, in creation, the divine love is exercised’ and manifested, by a particular modification, suited to creatures which are finite, and imperfect, and limited, both with respect to duration and space. Now, we have clearly proved, that the divine love must neces- sarily have been, in its own nature, ‘as perfect before creation and providence, as since, and that it would necessarily continue to be as per- fect as it then was, notwithstanding creation and providence were for ever removed out of being. And it is equally evident, considered in all the extent of the qualities of its own nature, it can- not possibly be displayed or manifested in crea- tion and providence. Either, then, there must be a way in the Divine Essence itself, by which the divine love, in the activity, energy, operation, and influence of its own nature, is necessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably manifested and displayed, according to the law so often ee 194. VIEWS GF THE TRINITY. mentioned; or the Divine Being must be im- perfect, which can never be admitted. 4. And such a manifestation of the divine love can never be made, upon the hypothesis that the Divine Essence and perfections must and do subsist in one single mode or person only, and neither can nor do subsist in more. For, upon this principle, how is it possible for the divine love to be exercised upon itself, or mani- fested to itself, in one single mode of subsist- ence? Can it bé both agent and object at the same time? Impossible. Were there but one created moral agent in the wide region of crea- tion, how or where could this moral agent mani- fest or display its own love? Toward the Creator its love, might be directed, but, even then, the creature could not manifest or display its own love, from any natural principle of its own. It must be from a supernatural principle, derived from the Divine Being; and it would return to- ward the Divine Being again, in a supernatural way, merely. by. the assistance of divine influence, --but manifest itself in a natural, way it never could. | | Again; did this solitary moral agent subsist in more modes within itself than one, we suppose three, itis manifestly clear, that its love could be exercised by one mode toward another, within if- self; but in no other way could it possibly do so, wnless there were more moral agents in existence, _ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 195 of the same kind with itself. And were this the case, it is plain that this moral agent could natu- rally exercise and manifest all its love toward another like itself. _ And considering the benevolent and affection- ate nature of love in the abstract, every view of it shows us, that it uniformly and unceasingly aspires after its own enjoyment in an adequate object; it is perfectly clear, that this solitary moral agent could not be happy for want of this enjoyment. Now, if we may venture to presume, that the attributes of divine love are similar, though divinely surpassing those of created love, —~we mean uncreated love in its own nature, every way corresponding to the Divine Essence, and that particular modification of love, corres- pondme to the essence of the creature in its. most perfect state,—then it follows, ist, That the divine Jove, upon the foregoing hypothesis, could never, at any time, either past or future, be manifested in the Divine Essence, according to its own nature. And, 2d, that the Divine Being could not be perfectly and abso- lutely happy in itself, for want of such a manifes- tation of its own love, because it could not be agent and object at the very same time. And, 3d, because the creature can exercise and mani- fest all its love, according to its own nature, to- ward an adequate object of the same nature with itself.—Now, if one divine mode of subsistence; N 2 196 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. or person, Cannot exercise or manifest its owf love, according to its own nature, towards an adequate object within the Divine Essence itself, then the creature is more happy in its own na- ture, which is derived and dependent, than the Divine Being is in its own nature, which is un- derived and independent. And this is contrary to all sound views of reasoning upon the subject. And if the divine love never was, can, nor will be, manifested and exercised, according to all the qualities of its own nature, the Divine Being must be imperfect in its enjoyment; and if we consider the Divine Being as imperfect, in any way whatever, we destroy all just notions of Deity. Should we affirm, that the Divine Es- sence and perfections subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, we will in- evitably be led into the doctrine of Aristotle concerning the Divine Being. Should we affirm, on the other hand, that if the first mode does, according to its own nature, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from that in which they do in itself, and thereby con- stitute a second mode of subsistence ; and also, that this first mode could, by itself, without re- gard to the second, communicate the whole eg: sence and perfections again, so that they might subsist in a mode distinct from that which they lo in itself; then it is clear, that the first might VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 197 wommunicate the whole to a fourth, to a fifth, to a sixth, and so on, ad infinitum. Or, should we affirm, that the second could, by itself, with- out any regard to the first, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, so that they might subsist in a mode distinct from that in which they do in itself, and thereby con- stitute a third; then, upon the same principle, it might communicate to a fourth, a fifth, a sixth, and so on, ad infinitum. Or, should we affirm, that the third, by itself, without any regard to the first or second, could communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, so that they might subsist in a mode distinct from that in which they do in itself, and thereby constitute a fourth; then, upon the same principle, it might commu- nicate to a fifth, to a sixth, to a seventh, and so on, adinfinitum. And thus we would be led inte the doctrine of the Gnostics, the Brahmins, and Polytheism, without limitation: Because it is evident, the communication we here treat of, necessarily infers the multiplication of the Divine Essence ;_ but this is not the commnnication _ which is accerding to the Divine Essence, in its own nature. Lor this always implies communi- cation, to the whole extent of the Divine Essence and perfections, in all the qualities of their own nature. ‘This, if we may so speak, according to the law already mentioned, begins at. the first, and must necessarily end in the second, in the N 3 198 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. first view of communication, because the whole is communicated, exactly aceording to the Di- vine Nature, in all its own attributes and perfec- _ tions ; and, as we have already fully demon- strated, that the first could not, by itself, without regard to the second, communicate to a third, without destroying the second, by communicat- ing that which was before communicated, and thereby constituting the same person twice, in two different and separate modes, swhich is im- possible; and, as we have also proved, that the second could not, by itself, and without regard to the first, communicate to a third, without de- stroying the first, by communicating the source and origin of communication: And farther, as the law, upon which we have all along rested our demonstrations, still supposes the Divine Essence and perfections to retain all their energetic and operative influence, notwithstanding the commu- nication by the first, which constitutes the se- cond; and as we have also proved, the first can- not communicate, by itself, to a third; and the second cannot communicate, by itself, to a third ; and yet the Divine Essence and perfections re- tain all their activity, energy, and operative’ in- fluence. ‘Therefore, the first and second, neces- sarily and naturally must, in one joint, active principle, according to their nature, communi- cate the whole, and thereby constitute a third ; and, as we have already clearly demonstrated, . VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 199 this third could not, by itself, and without any regard to the first and second, communicate to a fourth, without destroying both the first and second, by communicating that which was before communicated, and also the origin of communi- cation, which can never be. Neither could the first and second, in one joint, active principle, communicate to a fourth, without destroying the third, by communicating that which was before communicated, and confounding the union al- ready constituted, by constituting this same per- son twice, which is impossible. Hence we dis- cover, upon the principles of demonstration, that communication must continue, until it terminate in the third, in absolute and immutable perfec- tion, and that all farther communication is for ever shut up in the third, in eternal, immense, and immutable perfection. 5. And, pursuing our subject, if we argue, that the Divine Being must be necessarily and per- fectly happy in itself; independent of all created beings, and that the Divine Being cannot be so, without the necessary, full, and perfect manifes- tation of the divine love, as well as all the other divine perfections, to the utmost extent of the Divine Nature; and that this manifestation can- not be made, even in the Divine Essence itself, upon the hypothesis that it must necessarily sub- gist in one mode only ;—it evidently follows, that either the Divine Essence must subsist in more N 4 206 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, distinct modes or persons than one, or the Di- vine Being cannot be absolutely perfect and happy in itself. But this it must be: therefore the Divine Essence must subsist in more distinct modes or persons than one; and this can only be, by supposing distinctions in the Divine Es- sence, constituting personality. And if we sup- pose a distinction of personality in the, Divine Essence, which we either must do, or suppose the Divine Being imperfect, we may presume, that this distinction is constituted, by one mode of subsistence, or person, communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and _perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in itself, and standing in an incom- municable relation to itself, and thereby consti- tuting another distinct mode or person in the Divine Essence. And this distinction of the modes of subsist- ence, or this communication of the Divine Es- sence and perfections, constituting personality, does not imply superiority or inferiority, either in time, dignity, or nature, but merely order, according to the divine personality. There never was a time when this distinction or communication began—there never will be a time when it will end; but it is as necessary and essential to the nature of the Divine Being, as its own existence, perfection, and happiness ; and wholly arises from the natural law of the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 204 constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, in order to the absolute perfec. tion and happiness of the Divine Being within itself, before creation began, and entirely inde- pendent of creation. Tor as it is eternal, im- mense, and immutable, according to the Divine Nature,—when could it begin? or when could it end? Now, we clearly discover a necessary and na- tural distinction of the modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence. And yet, at the very same time that we are convinced of this dis- tinction, we must suppose the Divine Essence simple, and entirely incapable of multiplication, division, or composition: we must suppose that the Divine Essence partakes of this distinction, which we discover, and which must be between the divine persons. And if the Divine Essence partake of this distinction, it must do so wholly according to its own nature, in all its extent ; and if it do so wholly according to its own na- ture, it must do so in personality, because the distinction consists of nothing but personality ; and if it do so in personality, it must do so equally from each and from both these modes of subsistence, or persons, already ascertained ; and if it do so in relation to each and to both, in per- sonality, there must, naturally and necessarily, arise, in the Divine Essence, a third mode of subsistence, or person, distinct from both, and 202 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and standing in an incommunicable relation te each and to both the other two. Thus we discover the Divine Essence naturally subsisting in distinction of personality: and we farther discover this distinction as naturally sub- sisting in union of personality. Or, which is the very same, the two divine modes of subsistence, or persons, which we have already ascertained, according to the law of the Divine Nature, com- municate, in one joint, active principle, the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, so that they may subsist in a manner distinct from what they do in each of themselves, and thereby natu- rally constitute a third mode or person; and this natural union of distinct personality in the third, or this necessary communication, by the first and second naturally constituting the third, is without beginning and withort end, and does not imply superiority or inferiority cf any kind whatever, either in time, dignity, or nature, but merely the law of order, as necessary and essential to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being, as its own existence. For as this communication is, according to its own nature, eternal, immense, and immutable,—when could it begin? or when could it end? / 6. And besides these three distinct modes of subsistence, it is absolutely impossible that there canbe more. ‘This impossibility is founded upon the incommunicable relation in which these divine ViZWs OF THE TRINITY. 263 persons stand to one another. ‘The first 1s origi- nally constituted by the Divine Nature, and pre- sents itself naturally to the intelligence of the rational creature. ‘The second is constituted by the law of the Divine Essence and perfections, operating according to their own nature, in com- munication by the first. The third is constituted by the same law operating in communication by the first and second, according to their own na- ture. And by reason of the union of personality mM one joint, active principle, in this last commu- nication, which is according to the whole of the Divine Nature, in all its extent, any farther com- munication, or any other personality, is absolute- ly impossible; because personality is necessarily, eternally, and immutably, united in its own na- ture, and shut up in the consummation of the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being. While we keep our attention fixed upon the first, as exhibiting an imperfect view of the. Di- vine Being, considered merely in itself, and abso- lutely without any respect unto the others, we can never have a full and satisfactory view of the Divine Being, according to its own nature, ma- nifested in the law which is the foundation of all our reasoning, according to the doctrine of the Trinity. On the other hand, considering that law, which indicates the necessity of the modes of distinction within the Divine Essence, in or- der that we may have a perfect view of the Di- 204 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. vine Being, we are led to conceive the second, as, according to the Divine Nature, constitution« ally arising in the Divine Essenee, distinct, though not separate, from the first. Or the first, natu- rally communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, that they may subsist in a mode distinct, though not separate, from what they do in itself, and thereby naturally consti- tuting the second, and yet retaining the whole in a distinct mode; and considering the second as constituted by the necessary communication from the first, and yet retaining the whole in a distinct mode in itself; and all this as corres- ponding to the Divine Nature, as necessarily existent, eternal, immense, and immutable, we perceive a relation between these two, which is natural and necessary, and impossible to exist in another way. And considering the third, as necessarily aris- ing in the Divine Essence, according to its own nature, in ail respects equally with each and with both the two first; or considering these two, according to the foregoing law, naturally com- municating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, and thereby constituting the third, it is absolutely impossible that any other mode or person could stand in the same relation to each and to both the two first, which the third naturally does; and that, whether we consider it necessarily and naturally arising in the Divine WIEWS OF THE TRINITY. B05 Essence, or whether we consider the two first, naturally and necessarily, communicating the whole, so as to constitute this third. The Divine Being cannot be perfect without these three distinct modes of subsistence, or per- sons, in its own essence. And it is absolutely impossible that these modes or persons can be either more or less in number, because it is abso- Jutely impossible that the relations in which they stand to each other, can be either communicated or changed. And upon the principle of these three, we discover very evidently how the divine love, in all the uncreated perfection of its own nature, can be manifested by these divine per- sons, one to another, mutually, reciprocally, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably; and thereby the Divine Being is absolutely perfect and happy in the enjoyment of itself, from all past eternity through all future eternity, unceasingly ; and al- together independently of any created being, and without regard to the universe, whether material or spiritual. Thus the doctrine of the Trinity is fully established, on the basis of reason, by the most perfect and legitimate demonstration. And considering the distinction of order in the divine modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence, and at the same time considering the incommunicable relation in which they stand to ‘one another, we discover clearly the force and import of the language of Scripture, in the terms 206 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, applied respective: ly to each of these distinct modes of subsistence in their order. 7. The very same mode of reasoning and de- monstration may be used with proper manages ment, and suitable application, to the hnowledges wisdom, power, holiness, justice, which, as inher- ing in the Divine Essence, constitutes the, inflex- ible rectitude of the Divine Nature, veracity, and every other moral perfection of the Divine Being, respectively. Every one who is able to follow the foregoing reasoning upon the goodness and Jove of the Divine Being, can be at no loss ta discover and trace the force of the argumenta- tion, as applicable to every divine moral perfec- ition, with proper limitation and due regard to the nature of each. ‘Fhe whole of the divine moral perfections, in united harmony, by fair investigation, exhibit the very same doctrine, and demonstrate, beyond dispute, that the Divine Essence and perfections naturally and necessarily subsist in three distinct, not separate modes or persons, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three. And thus the efficiency, intelligence, goodness, and love, con- firm and establish the three distinct modes of subsistence. And these three distinct modes of subsistence are founded upon the law of the con- stitution and economy of the Divine Nature its self; so that the whole rest upon the nature of VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ayy the Divine Being itself.—Never was reasoning more clear; never were conclusions more accu- rate: the law of the Divine Nature being the premises of the whole.* * See Note K. on the preseding Proposition, 2H8 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE BY SOME OF THE POWERS OF THE HUMAN SOUL, WHICH ARE CALLED SO- CIAL, AND IN PARTICULAR THE POWER OF EX- PRESSING A COMMAND. f Distinction between the social and the solitary powers of the soul—A human being created at full stature could not exercise the powers of its own soul, in particular the soctal, were there no other huwnan being in the unr- verse but tiself—The transition from the moral to the social powers 1s natural and easy— The social powers more immediately enumerated, are those by which the soul can give a command—express a promise—bear winess—'There must be perfections corresponding to these, necessarily inhering tn the Divine E-ssence—Jf nol, the creature is more perfect than the Creator, which as impossible---The Divine Being cannot give a com- mand, or express the divine will, according to ats own nature, if there be but one mode of subsisience, or per-~ son, in the Divine Lessence—There must therefore be a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence—As ts the nature, so is the power; and 1s the power, so ws the will, of every being—The divine will is the same in each of the three divine persons—If this be not so, there can be no tmage of the divine perfections, in consistency with the Divine Natwre---Some objectwons answered. | 1, Bestpes the foregoing reasoning and de- ‘monstrations, founded upon the nature of the essence and perfections of the Divine Being, there are others equally cogent and convincing, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 209 which clearly support the foregoing doctrine, and which are founded upon some of the perfections or powers bestowed by the Divine Being upon created moral agents. Some of these may be taken from the nature of man, as a moral agent, and they refer directly to some of the essential powers of the human soul. The powers to which we immediately refer, are some of those which metaphysicians call the sociaL. An extensive and accurate investiga- tion of the various powers and faculties of the soul of man, will enable even an ordinary capa- city to discover the difference between the soli- tary and the social powers. That the social powers of the human soul are constitutionally original and primary, and not subordinate or secondary, will appear evident from this, that the _ powers of every being, whatever they are, must partake of the nature of that being, and must be derived from it. Therefore, as is the nature, so is the power, or powers, of every being. Now the nature of man is social, and therefore that nature must have social powers necessarily inhe- ring in it. A human being created in full perfection, and at full maturity, might have the use of the exter- nal senses, in a certain degree, and, as a rational being, might think, reason, and will, in some de- gree, ss yjoen very imperfectly. Were there no other human beings in the universe but itself a) Cat) VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. alone, it might know that it was alive, but it could not provide for itself, nor support its own existence. However, were there no other, it is allowed by the ablest metaphysicians and reason- ers on the subject, that such a human being never would exercise its social powers, or speak. The social powers of the human soul are not in- dependent of one another, any more than the solitary. They cannot be separated, but they may be distinguished. And had the soul of man no social powers in its original constitution, it would be absolutely impossible for him to speak 5 so that we may, upon the fairest principles of reason and argument, affirm, that the social powers, and speech, infer each other, and yet they are distinct; but they are so closely united with one another, and so constitutionally con- nected in their essence, that they cannot be sepa- rated from it, nor from one another; yet they may be distinguished, and therefore require our attention and consideration distinctly. 2, As the connection between the moral and social powers of the human soul is so very inti- mately interwoven, and so constitutionally en- twined together, the transition from the moral to the social, is natural and easy, and will afford additional stability, strength, and consistency, to the doctrine already advanced. As the social powers of the human soul are both necessary and essential to its original con- v ye - VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. P11 stitution, as well as the solitary, the arguments which they afford are equally strong, by the light of reason and demonstration, and equally power- ful and convincing, from philosophical investiga- tion, to support the doctrine of a Trinity of per- sons in the Divine Essence; therefore they are legitimate, and pertinent to our present Pps ove: We only mean to consider some of them. 3. The social powers of the human soul, on which the present train of reasoning and argu- ment is founded, are those by which it can ev- press a command, make a promise, and bear wit. ness. Now, the nature of each of these, respec- tively, proves distinctly, by its own native force and evidence, that it supposes some other rational and intelligent human being or beings, to whom, in social intercourse, a command is or may be given——a promise made—a testimony addressed. Now, if the powers of the soul, necessary to perform these and other social acts, be in reality considered as necessar y and essential to its origi- nal constitution and present state, then we may affirm, with certainty, that they contribute to the consummation of its perfection, and are in reality essential perfections; and without them, it would be imperfec: and defective in its present state. 4. ‘Taking these things for granted, and sup- posing the social powers as contributing to the perfections of the soul, and in themselves perfec- tions respectively, then we may infer, with safety, yee OTe VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. é that, seeing man is created after the image of the Divine Being, some perfections, corresponding with, or answering to, the social powers of the human soul, must be found in the essence of the Divine Being, according to its own nature, as necessary and essential to the existence, perfec- tion, and happiness of Deity; and in a way be- coming each, and all the other divine perfec- ‘tions. For, as we have all along argued, the Divine Being may withhold from the creature, in the original formation of its constitution, a per- fection which may be in the Divine Essence; according to its own nature, in all uncreated ex- tremes; but it is surely consistent with the most legitimate reasoning and argument to suppose, that the Divine Being, though omnipotent, and every way perfect, can bestow no essential per- fection upon a created being, of a moral nature, which is not necessarily inherent in the Divine Essence itself. Now, as the Divine Being has bestowed social powers upon the human soul, in its original for- mation, which are necessary and essential to its present state of perfection ; and as man is created after the divine image, therefore, there must be some perfections inhering in the Divine Essence, as necessary and essential to the absolute perfec- tion and happiness of the Divine Being, as the social powers of the human soul are to its per- fection. And these divine perfections must cor- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 233 respond to the social powers in the created being, in a way becoming all the other divine perfec- tions and attributes. Jor if they do not, then it undeniably follows, that the creature has a social. moral perfection, to which the Creator has no- thing corresponding ; which is most absurd. 5. Now, it is evidently clear by experience, that the rational creature can express a com- mand, corresponding with all its own powers and perfections, to another being like itself. ‘Chere- fore, if the Divine Being cannot express a com- mand, or express the divine will, corresponding with all the unlimited extent of its own perfec- tions, natural and moral, then it must be so far imperfect, which can never be admitted. Again; all the intelligent moral creatures in the creation, in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, were they millions of millions of times more than they are, and were creation, in all its extent, millions of millions of times re- moved out of existence, and again brought into being, at intervals as distant as the periods allow- ed to the present state of things, in a manner like that which we understand’ by the day of judgment; yet, admitting even all this, the in- telligent moral creatures neither were, are, nor would be, able to comprehend the whole extent of one single expression of the divine will, cor- responding with the Divine Nature, in its extent, without beginning and without end. How much O'S poate VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. less, then, the whole of the commands of the di- vine law, in the fullest extent of its absolute per- fection. The intelligent moral creature, how- ever exalted, is circumscribed by time, with re- spect to the past and the future, and by space, with respect to the present, and therefore is but finite. The Divine Being, on the contrary, is necessarily existent, and therefore, from eternity to eternity, equally perfect, at all times and in all places, without limitation. G. Now the ‘divine Jaw, which may, with all propriety, be called a transcript of the divine per- fections, must be like the Divine Being itself, without beginning and witbout end, eternal, im- mense, and immutable, and entirely absolute in its divine perfections; and a divine command must correspond every way with the divine will, and every way with the divine law, and every way with the Divine Being itself, in the whole extent of the divine perfections, natural and mo- ral. Hence it follows, that as the rational moral creature is finite, and the divine will and com- mand infinite, that which is finite can never com- prehend, in all respects, that which is infinite. Those, therefore, who deny the doctrine of the Trinity, are reduced to the denial of the eternity of a divine command. fof 298 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. of creation and providence, or interestingly in- vestigate the far more glorious work of redemp- iron. 2 According to this doctrine, providence contt- nues its exercise, if we dare say so, in perfect consistency with all the necessary perfections of the Divine Being ; for every work and every act that we can rationally investigate, in creation, providence, and redemption, are all conducted upon this principle. | 12. Following up every work and every act to the Divine Being, in the Divine Essence, by fair investigation, we discover a perfection, corre- sponding to the social powers of the human soul, by which the divine will may be expressed, by one person to another, in the Divine Essence ; and also by which, a divine person, necessarily equal in all divine perfections, may receive such an expression, and may farther sustain and dis- charge an office inferior to the other; and by which, a third person, in the Divme Essence, every way necessarily equal to each and to both the other two, in all divine perfections, natural and moral, may undertake and sustain an inferior office. And while in sucha view as this, the plan and economy of redemption are perfectly obviousy yet is the Divine Essence no way robbed of its necessary and essential glory; nor are the divine perfections, natural and moral, in the -smallest VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PIG degree, eclipsed. But, on the contrary, the Di- vine Being is every way exalted, magnified, and glorified ; and all the divine works shine forth, both as worthy of the Divine Being, and consist- ent with, though far above, the comprehension of reason, to fathom the whole.—Hence, accord- ing to all the rules of reasoning and argument, by the peculiar law of the Divine Nature, laid down as the foundation of every proposition, the Divine Essence and perfections must subsist in three, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three, distinct persons. This is demon- strated by the divine efficiency, intelligence, goodness, love, and the perfection or power of expressing the divine will, or signifying a divine command, according to all the qualities of its own nature, ontirely independent of all created beings.* a my ~ Shs * See Note L. on bs. oreceding Proposition. 339 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XII. PROVING THE SAME DOCTRINE FROM THE POWER WHICH THE HUMAN SOUL HAS TO MAKE A PRO- MISE. [This power ts both moral and social, and mfers more moral beings existing together than one—There must be a perfection corresponding to this, inhering m the Divine Essence—If not, the Divine Being cannot make a promise, according to tis own nature, im all the evtent of the Divine Essence, and therefore must be smperfect—The modes of personality in the Davine Essence must be three—Distinction and union of per- sonality are all the radical mode of perfection—The work of providence could not be carrted on, were there not three distinct persons in the Divine Essence— Neither could the work of redempiion.| ~ 1. Pursurne the same subject, upon the prin- ciple of the social powers of the human soul, a fair chain of reasoning and argument will prove, with equal force of demonstration, that there must be a Trinity of persons in the Divine Es- sence. By the social powers bestowed upon the human soul, it is capable of making a promise ; and this it could not do, without both moral and social powers. It is equally evident that the soul could not do this, unless there were some other rational, intelligent, and social being or beings, within the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 234 sphere of this associating principle; because, were there but one rational and intelligent being in the universe, although it were endowed with social powers, yet it could never call them into action, as has been already clearly proved; and as it could never exercise its social powers, so it could never make a promise. But as things are now constituted in the moral world, by the Divine Being, it is undeniably evi- dent, that the human soul has a power of making % promise, according to the qualities of its own nature; and this power is, necessarily and essen-. tially, social; and the exercise of this power con- stantly infers, and goes upon the principle, that some other rational and social being or beings ex- ist, capable of receiving that promise, according to itsown nature. Thus, both the power of making, and the power of receiving, a promise, infer the sociability both of the agent and object engaged in that promise. Hence it is perfectly evident, from the nature of things as they now are, that it is absolutely necessary and essential to the perfection of the human soul, that it should con. stitutionally possess an inherent power of making & promise; and it is equally necessary, that there should be more intelligent and social created beings, similarly constituted in their rational po- -wers and faculties than-one. 2. Now, if the social power by which the buman soul can make a promise, be necessary P 4 232 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and essential to its original constitution and per-- fection, then it clearly and undeniably follows, with demonstrative force and conclusion, that there must be, in the Divine Essence, a perfec- , tion answering to, and corresponding with, the moral power of making a promise, inhering in the essence of the human soul. For it has ever been taken for granted, by the light of nature, admitted in the schools of philosophy from the earliest ages, that man is created according to the image of the Divine Being. And this is fully confirmed by revelation. Hence, as it has been already argued, by the fairest principles of inductive reasoning, that the Divine Being might withhold from the rational moral being, a perfec- tion necessarily and essentially inhering in the Divine Essence, yet still, as it has been argued, it is absolutely impossible for the Divine Being to bestow upon a created being, formed accord- ing to the divine image, a moral perfection, ne- cessary and essential to its constitution, which is not necessarily and essentially inhering in the Divine Essence, and every way corresponding with each and with all the divine perfections, natural and moral: for, if so, then man 1s not created after the image of the Divine Being.— Upon this principle it clearly follows, that there must be in the Divine Essence a necessary and essential moral perfection, capable of making a promise ; and this perfection must be conceived VIEWS OF TRE TRINITY. Pilg Yo or imagined, according to its own nature, as every way corresponding with the Divine Es. sence, in eternity, immensity, and immutability. 3. And as all the moral intelligent creatures of the universe, however high, however exalted, are yet, after all, finite, and limited with respect to the past and the future, by duration, and with respect to the present, by space; and whereas the Divine Being is necessarily existent, eternal, immense, and immutable,—it is perfectly evident to the weakest capacity, that no one finite crea- ture, nor all the intelligent social beings in the universe, were they ten: thousand millions of mil- lions of times more numerous than they are, and were creation and providence ten thousand mil- lions of millions of times removed out of eXist- ence, and brought into it again, at the intervals of certain periods, however long extended,—even all these taken together, could neither perfectly receive, nor fully comprehend, the absolute ex: tent of the eternity, immensity, and immutability of one divine promise, in all the extent of its own nature. For as the Divine Being is necessarily exist. ent, from everlasting to everlasting, without va- riableness or shadow of turning, eternal, immense, and immutable; so a divine promise must, in its own nature, be like the Divine Being, in all the unlimited and uncreated immensity of the divine perfections, both natural and moral. And the 2354 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. yational intelligent creatures, however numerous, being still but finite, and the Divine Being abso- lutely and perfectly infinite, it is sufficiently evi- dent, that what is finite, can never comprehend that which is infinite. A finite rational creature may, with the divine assistance, comprehend so much of a divine promise, according to the parti- cular modification of it, made known to account- able beings, as can answer all the purposes of comfort here, and happiness hereafter. But what is this to the eternity and immensity of the divine promise, according to all the qualities of its own uature, in the Divine Being? It is not so much, in comparison, as a drop to the ocean; a single grain of sand, to all that encompasses the shores of the mighty deep; or the clow-worm, to the innumerable luminaries that blaze in the lofty firmament. 4, Again; as the Divine Being is necessarily existent, immense, and immutable, and was as perfect before any rational intelligent creature had existence, as since, and would for ever con- tinue to be as perfect as it now is, should all the rational intelligent creatures throughout the unt- verse, in the heavens above, and in the earth be- neath, be reduced, in a moment of time, to their primitive nonentity, and never again called mto existence ;—it must therefore follow, that the Divine Being had the perfection and means Ca- pable of making a promise, according to all the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 235 ”~ qualities of the Divine Nature, as necessarily and absolutely before creation and providence, as since. And seeing the whole of the rational, in- telligent creation, however multiplied and varied, never could, can, nor will, be able to receive and comprehend a divine promise, according to its own nature; created beings can only receive a particular modification of that which is uncrea- ted, and even this but imperfectly, and in part. It follows, then, as certain as demonstration can make-it, that either the Divine Being could not make a promise, according to all the qualities of its own nature, before creation; and if so, the great First Cause must be imperfect in itself; or that, since creation, the Divine Being could only make a promise, according to a particular modifi- cation, to rational, intelligent creatures, who could only receive it in part, and comprehend it imper- fectly. And this is the same as to affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect, and never, at any time, could, nor can, make a perfect promise, according to its own nature. But surely, as the power of making a promise is a social perfection of the human soul, and as there is a perfection in the Divine Essence, corresponding to this power, the one created, the other uncreated, (for man is created after the image of his Maker ;} the Divine Being must for ever have possessed a perfection capable of making a promise, accord- ing to its own nature, and adequate to the whole 330 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. eternity, immensity, and immutability of the Di- vine Essence. | And if this perfection be necessarily inherent in the Divine Essence, the Divine Being must possess the full and perfect exercise of it in every point, throughout the unlimited regions of eter- nity and immensity. 5. But this perfection it is impossible the Di- vine Being could exercise in this manner, if the Divine Essence and perfections subsist in one single mode only, and can subsist in no more than one. For as we have already proved that the created social being could not exercise its social powers, were it alone and solitary in the universe ; so, presuming to argue from the crea- ture to the Creator,—from the particular modi- fication of the image, to the real substance,—it is impossible to form any adequate notion how the Divine Being could exercise the perfection corresponding to the social power of the human soul to make a promise, according to its own na- ture, if the Divine Essence must subsist in one mode only. For how is it possible that the Di- vine Being could make a promise, according to its own nature, every way adequate to the Divine Essence and perfections, upon this hypothesis? Surely the same individual mode of subsistence, or person, could not be both agent and object : the very same acne ale the promise by itself to itself, And the same mode of subsistence, or per VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 237 son, could not make a promise, according to its own nature, to the created moral being, in all the necessary extent of eternity and immensity. Lhe argument then stands thus: either the Di. vine Being has no such perfection as we now speak of,—and this is contrary to reason; or if it has, and must subsist in one mode or person only, it never could nor can exercise this perfection, according to its own nature, in all the extent of the Divine Essence, and the other divine perfec- tions. Or, if we argue that this perfection must be exercised, then, upon the principle we have just laid down, it must exercise this necessary, eternal, immense, and immutable perfection, eter- nally; and this is impossible. Now, as each of these conclusions, if admitted, must prove the Divine Being imperfect, it is absurd, and con. trary to all just notions of Deity. Then, the only other principle, that it is pos- sible to assume, consistent with reason, is, that the Divine Being necessarily must, and does, subsist in three distinct modes or persons, accor- ding to all the attributes and qualities of its own nature, within its own essence, as the demonstra- tions of the foregoing Propositions clearly esta- blish. 6. And this conclusion evidently proves, that there, necessarily and essentially, must exist, first, a necessary and-perfect distinction of personality, in the modes of the subsistence of the Divine 238 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Essence and perfections; and, secondly, a neces- sary and perfect union of the personality of the Divine Essence and perfections: And hence it will follow, that as a distinction of personality requires two modes, and an union of personality requires one, the aggregate will amount to three distinct modes of personality. And as a distine- tion and union will include all the radical modes which are within the compass of possibility, it is absolutely impossible that there can be more than three distinct modes of personality, even in the Divine Essence. Now, upon this principle ‘of the doctrine of the Trinity, we discover a distine- tion of the modes of subsistence, or persons, in the Divine Essence. And we see a way clearly, by which the one mode may express or signify a promise, according to its own nature, every way adequate to the eternity, immensity, and immu- tability of the Divine Essence and perfections ; and we see a way also, how another mode can receive this divine promise, according to its own nature, every way adequate to the necessary eter- nity, immensity, and immutability of the Divine Essence and perfections. For the promise, like the Essence, subsists in distinct modes; which may be conceived as making, receiving, and rati- fying it, according to the order of distinct subsist- ence; and in this manner, the promise is every way adequate to the nature of the Divine Being. WIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 239 Another method ‘of argument. Or, arguing the position in another way, we may say—the first distinct mode of subsistence, according to the qualities of its own nature, ne- cessarily, eternally, immensely, and immutably, communicates the Divine Essence and perfec- tions; and, in the same manner, expresses the divine promise, that they may subsist in a mode distinct, not separate, from what they do in it- self, and standing in an incommunicable relation to itself, and thereby constitutes another mode of subsistence, distinct from itself. Now, whether we consider this distinction necessarily arising in the view of the making and receiving the divine promise, or necessarily arising from the order of subsistence, in the expressing and receiving the saine promise, according to its own nature, the conclusion amounts to the very same, and proves, that the divine promise subsists exactly in ‘the order of the persons in the Divine Essence. And this does not imply any superiority or inferiority, nor any priority in time, dignity, or nature, among the divine persons, but only a priority of order; and it arises from the necessary law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Es. sence and perfections, in order to the necessary and absolute consummation of the perfection and. happiness of the Divine Being, according to its r 240 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. own nature, entirely within itself, and is every way as necessary to. this, as the very existence of the Divine Being. As among men, the expres- sing and receiving of a promise, imply no in- equality of nature among the persons thus en- gaged, so neither does this necessary expressing and receiving the divine promise, imply the smal- lest inequality, in any way whatever, among these divine persons. And it is perfectly ob- vious, that where the nature of man is perfect, in the constitution of the mind, and configura- tion of the body, according to nature, there can be no inequality. Upon this principle, all in- equality among men, must arise from some acci- dental cause: from nature it cannot. And as among the divine persons the essence and per- fections are precisely the same, and all acciden- tal causes of inequality for ever excluded, it is absolutely impossible that there can be any in- equality among them. 7. Again; as by fair investigation and legi- timate reasoning, we clearly discover, that the Divine Essence and perfections must necessarily subsist in distinction of personality, in order that the Divine Being may, from everlasting to ever- lasting, exercise the perfection of making a pro- mise, according to its own nature, every way adequate to the Divine Essence and perfections, within the Divine Essence itself, altogether in- dependently of creation; and as the Divine VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. SA Nature is simple, absolute, and indivisible, yet subsists in distinction, in order to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being; the Divine Nature must partake of this distinction; and, partaking of this distinction, it must do so in personality, for the distinction consists in nothing but personality; and doing so in personality, a third person necessarily exists in the Divine Es. sence, partaking of the distinction in each and in both the other two, and necessarily and absolute- ly uniting in itself, in personality, the perfection of giving and receiving a promise finally, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably; itself stand. ing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both the other two. Argument by communication. Or, according to another method of demonstra- tion, we say—the first and second modes of dis- tinction, or persons, in one joint, active principle, according to their own nature, necessarily, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably, communicate the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, with this perfection of giving arid receiving a promise, according to its own nature, every way adequate to the Divine Essence and peffections, natural and moral, that they may subsist in a manner distinct from what they do in themselves, | and thereby constitute a third mode or person; fs) % ie) be VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. standing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both themselves. And whether we con- sider this third person necessarily arising in the Divine Essence, from the union of personality, in giving and receiving a divine promise ; or whe- ther we consider the necessary communication by the first and second, in one joit active prin- ciple, constituting the third ;—neither the one nor the other of these views implies the smallest inequality among the divine persons, as we have often argued: for the whole, according to the foregoing Propositions, is founded upon the law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, every way necessary to the absolute consummation of the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being, within its own essence, before creation and providence began, and entirely independent of all created beings. And as the divine goodness is the same in the mode or person making the promise, which it is in the mode or person receiving the promise, and the same which it is m the mode or person re- ceiving the joint communication of the promise from the other two; and these persons stand in the distinct and incommunicable relations to one another, already mentioned ;—therefore, by this train of reasoning alse, the Divine Essence must, according to its own nature, subsist in three, and ean subsist in neither more nor less than three, distinct, not separate, modes or persons. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 243 8. Now as, in the foregoing Proposition, it was satisfactorily proved, that there must be a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence, in order to the creation of all things; so, upon the very same principle, we argue, that it was impossible that the work of providence could be carried on upon any other principle; and revelation clearly sup- ports this—‘* The Lord is high above all nations; and his glory above the heavens. Who is like unto the Lord our God, who dwelleth on high ; who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven and in earth? And as provi- dence could not be carried on without the sub- sistence of the Divine Essence in three distinct persons, so it was impossible that redemption could have been effected upon any other prin- ciple. Ifthe divine promises have been revealed to the human race, according to a particular mo- dification in the divine moral government, they are only the small glimpses of those necessary; eternal, immense, and immutable promises, which; according to'\their own nature, are signified by one divine person to another, from everlasting to everlasting, every way adequate to the Divine Nature, before creation and providence began. And hence it undeniably follows, that, unless the Divine Essence necessarily subsist in three co- equal, co-eternal, co-immense; and co-immutable persons, it was, and would have been, for ever impossible for the Divine Being to have made Q 2 244, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the smallest revelation of itself to the sons of men. How strikingly does revelation correspond with this! «* No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. All things are delivered unto me of my Father, and no man knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.” 9, It is upon the principle of the doctrine of a ‘Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence, that the plan of redemption shines forth in all its glory. And-we observe particularly the relation it has to this divine perfection, which is capable of making, receiving, and ratifying a divine pro- mise, according to its own nature, in the Divine Essence, without beginning and without end, un- eeasingly. Hence the mysterious scheme of re- yelation has been exhibited among the sons of men, and the interesting plan of redemption made known in the glorious prophecies and promises of the sacred oracles. Every view of this Proposition, taken in con- nection with all the foregoing, is consistent with reason, with revelation, and with the necessary and essential perfections of the Divine Being. Therefore it must be true; and it evidently esta- blishes the doctrine of the Trinity, in defiance of all opposition, from whatever quarter. The reasoning which we have used, it is hoped, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 94% will be found legitimate ; and the grand scope of _ this Proposition is, both to establish the doctrine of the ‘Trinity, and the plan of redemption, ac- cording to that doctrine. Whatever establishes the one, establishes the other; and we rest the whole force of all upon the divine efficiency, intelligence, goodness, love, a power of expres- sing the divine will, and of making a promise.* — * See Note M. on the preceding Proposition. Qs 246 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. " PROPOSITION XIII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE POWER WHICH ‘THE HUMAN SOUL HAS TO BEAR WITNESS. [Some of the organs of sense were given for the purpose of bearing witness— There must be in the Divine Essence. a perfection answering to, or corresponding with, the power of bearing witness—If not, the Divine Being %s amperfect— Tus perfection must have been as absolute, an tts own nature, before creation, as since, and would for ever continue perfect, were creation and providence anntihtlated—If the Divine Being could not exercise one of its own necessary perfections, according to tts own nature, before creation, then this perfection, ~ before creation, was of no use—The very same mode of sub- sistence cannot bear witness to tiself—It cannot be both agent and object mm the very same act—Unless there were three distinct persons in the Divine Es ssence, the ratzonal intelligent creatures could render no worship to the Divine Being. | ae 1. Axx the foregoing Propositions are still more strongly supported, and more fully and clearly established, by another train of reasoning, founded upon the social powers ef the human soul; and, in particular, upon that power which it has of bearing witness. That this is an essential power in the constitu- tion of the human soul, will not be disputed.— Dearing witness, in a certain sense, is a moral VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 24.7 duty; and the human soul has a moral principle inhering in its essence, by which it is capable of performing this moral duty. This power is some- times called Conscience—a power more sacred than reason itself: and when, in addition to this, we consider some of the outward senses, we see they correspond exactly with this power, and are remarkably fitted for its exercise. The mouth, and the power of speech, the ears, and the power of hearing, discharge the duties of this moral power in wonderful harmony. Were the mouth and speech given to man, merely to address in- animate or irrational beings? No: the chief pur- ‘pose was to worship the Divine Being, and to converse with intelligent social creatures. Were the ears, and the power of hearing, given to man, ‘merely to hear the sounds of the inanimate or ire ‘rational parts of the creation? Were they given ‘merely to hear the singing of the birds, the low- ing of the cattle, the roaring of the seas, the howl- ‘ing of the winds, or the louder peals of the terrt- fic thunder? No; besides these, they were given to hear the voice of social creatures in articulate accents, conveying communications from soul to soul; and thus upon the social nature, the morai principle of conscience, the faculty of speech, and of hearing, all constitutional in the human being, we found the power of bearing witness. Upon a general view of human nature, there- fore, and a fair analysis of the powers and fatul- Q +4 24S VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ties of the human mind, it is abundantly evident, that this power is peculiar to it: none of the low- er creation possesses it, but man alone. Other living creatures may have a mouth and ears, but they have not a power of bearing witness. It is no less evident, that this power is social, and that it constantly infers more rational and intelligent beings, similarly constituted, and possessing this power also. For were this not the case, this power would be entirely useless to an intelligent rational creature, were there none such but itself alone in the wide creation, unless this one solitary social being were so constituted, as to subsist in three distinct modes within itself. Upon this principle it might exercise this power, but upon none other. Were it so constituted, then it might exercise its social powers within itself, en- tirely independent of any other created being. But if this individual solitary being, which we now contemplate, were not created so as to sub- sist in distinct modes within itself, then it follows, that there must be other social beings, similarly constituted without itself, in order that this power of bearing witness might be exercised mutually and reciprocally. Hence it follows, as has been abundantly proved already, that a solitary human being, in the state now mentioned, might perhaps think, reason, judge, and exercise its solitary powers a little, in _ some very low degree; but still, were there no VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. DAD other but itself, it neither could nor would exer- cise any of the social powers, nor yet the power of speech; and, by consequence, neither could nor would bear witness at any time, nor in any sense. ® 2. But it is undeniably evident, that a rational being can bear witness in a moral sense; and the power of doing so, must be considered as bestow- ed by the Creator, in the original constitution of its essence. And if this power be considered as necessary to the consummation of the perfection of the human soul, in its present state, and if this power be considered originally as the gift of the Divine Being, then it clearly follows, that there must necessarily be in the Divine Essence a per- fection answering to, or corresponding with, the power of bearing witness in the human soul; and this perfection of the Divine Being must be con- sidered as, like the Divine Nature, necessary, absolute, eternal, immense, and immutable, and every way becoming all the other perfections and attributes of Deity. For, as we have already argued, if the power of bearing witness be neces- sary and essential to the consummation of the perfection of the human soul, then this power must have been bestowed by the Divine Being, in the original creation of the essence of the hu- man soul. er And though the Divine Being might withhold from the intelligent creature, in its original for- — 850 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. mation, a perfection that may be necessarily in- hering in the Divine Essence, yet it is altogether impossible for the Divine Being to bestow or confer upon the rational intelligent being, created according to the divine image, a moral perfection, which really does not necessarily inhere in the Divine Essence. And as we have rested the argument so strong- ly upon the original constitution of the human essence, as being social, and upon the power or principle of conscience, as formed to bear witness to the truth; and farther, upon the organs of speech and hearing, as constituted to discharge the office of conscience, in this moral duty ; and rising from the moral being, created according to the image of the Divine Being ;—-the conclu- sion is fair, extending from the creature to the Creator, that the power of bearing witness is a perfection inhering in the essence of both: in the one, created after a particular modification; in the other, uncreated, according to the Divine Nature. There must, therefore, necessarily be in the Divine Essence a perfection, corresponding to the power of bearing witness in the human soul ; and that divine perfection must be considered, both as necessarily inhering in the Divine Es- sence, and as every way absolute, and becoming all the other divine perfections and attributes. And if 30, then it follows, with undeniable de- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 254 monstration, that this divine perfection must every way, necessarily and essentially, inhere in the Divine Essence, from all past eternity, and must, necessarily and essentially, continue to in- here, through all future eternity, altogether in- dépendently of creation and pr avideiide: It is also abundantly evident, that this perfec- tion must have been as necessary and absolute in the Divine Essence, before creation and provi- dence began, as it has been since; and it would continue absolutely the same, were creation and providence for ever done away. 3. From these views and arguments it is unde- niably evident, that there must necessarily be in the Divine Essence, a perfection or power of bearing witness within itself, independently of creation. And it is no less evident, that this per- fection must be every way absolute, and equally necessary with the other divine perfections. Now, considering this perfection of the Divine Being as necessary, eternal, immense, and im- mutable, it plainly follows, that all the rational intelligent creatures that have been, are, or shall be, were they thousands of millions of millions of times more than they have been, are, or shall be, to the end of time, admitting creation to be repeated ever so often, at intervals ever so dis- tant, to whatever extent we may incline to sup- pose,—these beings, all taken together, could not receive, understand, or comprehend, the whole 252 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: extent of the divine testimony or witness: be- cause this is necessarily infinite, eternal, and im- mutable; and the intelligent creatures are finite and limited; and that which is finite can never comprehend that which is infinite. No process of reasoning is necessary to prove this. 4. And it still farther follows, as has been clearly demonstrated in the reasoning upon the foregoing Propositions, that if there be a perfec- tion or power of bearing witness, necessarily in- hering in the Divine Essence, it was as real and perfect before creation, as since; and therefore it evidently follows, that the Divine Being was as perfect before creation, as since; and this di- vine perfection of bearing witness, must have been exercised before creation, according to its own nature, in its full, absolute, eternal, im. mense extent; otherwise the Divine Being must have existed without the use or exercise of one of the divine perfections, according to its own nature. And if this perfection must, necessarily and essentially, inhere-in the Divine Essence, and if the Divine Being existed before creation, without the use of one of the necessary and es- sential perfections of its own nature; then it may be clearly argued, that the Divine Being might not have existed at all before creation: for if the Divine Being could really exist at any time, with- out the use or exercise of one of the divine per- fections, necessarily inhering in the Divine Es- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 2453 sence, then it might easily be proved, that as it could have existed without the use of one of the perfections necessarily inhering in its own Es. sence, it might as well, at that very time, have existed without the use or exercise of two; and if so, of three; and if of three, it might also of four, and of the whole of the divine perfections ; and this is the very same as to affirm, that the Divine Being could have existed and not existed at the very same time, which is a downright con- tradiction, and altogether impossible. Now, if it be granted, that this perfection really does neces- sarily inhere in the Divine Essence, then it must be granted, that the Divine Being might exercise it; and if ever the Divine Being could exercise it, in any one instance, according to its own na- ture, from all past eternity, through future eter- nity, then the argument is gained; for this per- fection must be like the Essence in which it in- heres, eternal, immense, and immutable; and if that which is eternal, immense, and imrautable, be exercised in any one instance, it must be ex- ereised eternally, immensely, and immutably ; and if this be granted, all is gained that the argu- ment implies. And yet the reasoning will clear- ty stand, that if the Divine Being could have ex- isted, without the exercise of one of the perfec- tions necessarily inhering in its own essence, so much as for a single moment, then it might have existed without the exercise of the same perfec- 254 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. tion for an hour; and if for an hour, then for a day ; and if for a day, then for a month; and if for a month, then for a year; and if for a year, then for acentury ; and if for a century, it might exist without it for ever. And if the Divine Being could exist without the use and perfect exercise of one of the divine perfections altoge- ther, this at once does away the perfection of the Deity. And if the perfection of the Deity be done away, this at once destroys the idea of the existence of the Divine Being; which is at once both impious and absurd. 5. Therefore, the Divine Being must have necessarily existed in the full and perfect use. and exercise of each and of all the divine perfec- tions, and must necessarily continue to do so, from everlasting to everlasting, through every point of eternity and immensity; and if so, it must necessarily exist in the use, and.in the full and perfect exercise, of witness-bearing, as well as of every other perfection inhering in its own essence; and if so, then there must be a ‘Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence: Because, if the Divine Essence and perfections subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, it follows, that either the Divine Being could not bear witness before creation began: for how could the same individual mode of subsistence in the Divine Essence bear witness to itself? How could the very same mode of subsistence, or pers VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 255 son, be agent and object in the very same act? it is impossible. Or, seeing. this cannot be, if the Divine Being really did exercise this perfec- tion before creation, it was exercised to nothing, and to no purpose, which is equally absurd. Or, if the Divine Essence and perfections must sub- sist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, it farther follows, that as the Divine Being could not exercise this perfection before creation, so neither could it exercise this perfec- tion since creation, except imperfectly: for as we have already proved that no creation, which limited intelligence can conceive or imagine, could ever receive a full and perfect manifesta- tion of the witness-bearing of the Divine Being ; and since it has also been proved, that the Divine Being must exist in the full and perfect exercise of every one of the divine perfections, through every point of eternity and immensity ;—~it fol- lows, as clear as the noon-day sun, that, in order to the full and perfect exercise of this divine per- fection, the Divine Essence must, necessarily and essentially, subsist in more distinct, not separate, modes or persons than one. And if the Divine Essence must subsist in more distinct modes or persons than one, there, necessarily and essen- tially, must be a distinction in the Divine’ Es- sence, whereby one mode or person can bear witness to another. ) \ And as both the essence and the veracity of eS 56 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: the Divine Nature is absolute and indivisible, this distinction of one mode of subsistence bear- ing witness to another, implies neither superiority nor inferiority of personality, nor any priority of personality in time, dignity, or nature, but only a priority of order; for these distinct modes or persons, necessarily and essentially, bear mutual and reciprocal witness the one to the other, eter- nally, immensely, and immutably ; and this arises from the necessary law of-the constitution and economy of the: Divine Essence and perfections; which constitutes the absolute consummation of the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being, entirely within the Divine Essence itself, before creation and providence began, and as long as they shal! continue, and after their dissolution in the general conflagration, through all future eter- nity. Now, as we fully ascertain two distinct neces: sary modes-of subsistence or persons in the Di- vine Essence, we see clearly the divine perfec- tion of bearing witness, subsistipg also in the same distinction. And as the Divine Nature is simple, indivisible, and uncompounded, and the divine perfection of bearing witness subsisting in distinction, while the divine veracity and the di- viné nature is simple and absolute, the Divine Nature must, in its veracity, partake of this pers fection of bearing witness, as it subsists in the distinction of each and of both the modes or per- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 25 bess <3 sons already ascertained. And if it partake of _ the distinction subsisting in each and in both, it must do so in personality, because the distinc- tion already ascertained consists only of person- ality. And if the Divine Nature partake of this distinction of personality from each and from both the other two, a third mode or person ne- cessarily arises in the Divine Essence, partaking of the nature of each and of both the other two, and standing in an incommunicable relation to each and to both. And this implies no superi- ority nor inferiority between these three distinct modes of subsistence ; the nature and perfections being absolutely the same in each. It is 1m pos- sible there can be inequality. The distinction of order can never comprehend inequality, when the essence and perfections are precisely the same; and the circumstance of order arises en- tirely from the law of the constitution and eco- nomy of the Divine Essence, and is as necessary to the perfection and happiness of the Divine Being, as the existence of the Divine Being it- self. 6. And as it has been already proved in the foregoing Propositions, that it is absolutely im- possible there can be either more or less distinct modes of subsistence, ot persons, in the Divine Essence than these three, because of the incom- municable relation subsisting between each of them, therefore, the harmony between the exer: R 25% VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. cise of the divine perfections, according to ali the qualities of their own nature respectively, by the adorable persons in the ever-blessed Iussence, and that particular manifestation of the same glorious perfections, revealed to rational and in- telligent creatures, so conspicuously appear.— For we must ever take into consideration, the vast difference there is between the reality of things as they are in the Divine Essence, accord- ing to their own nature, and as they are modified in manifestation or revelation to intelligent crea- tures. ‘The latter leads up to the former, which are reserved for a different manifestation in the future state. In the mean time, the particular modification, revealed according to the plan of redemption, answers all necessary purposes in the present state. And unless the modes or per- sons in the Divine Essence were in reality three, and neither more nor less than three, and in each this perfection of witness-bearing, according to the revelation made in the ‘sacred Scriptures, it would be absolutely impossible for created intel- Sigent beings to perform any worship, or religious service, acceptable to the Divine Being; because _ it is only according to the particular way that the Divine Being has manifested itself, or bears wit- ness of itself to the rational moral creature, that any warrant can be found, or any rule of worship observed, by the moral creature. It cannot wor- ship according to the nature of things, as they VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 259 are in themselves in the Divine Hssence, but it must worship according to the modification or representation made of them to it, by the Divine Being itself. The general works of creation af. ford no-rule of worship of any kind; neither do the works of providence, as such. It is the reve. lation made in the holy oracles, by which the Divine Being ‘bears witness of itself, that a pro- per mode of worship can be established. ‘This js plain from the mode of worship in the Jewish church. But, above all, the representation of the divine perfections, and of the divine will, manifested in the Saviour of men, by which the Divine Being bears witness of itself, in the very highest degree, to the rational intelligent creature, that the clear, unetring, and infallible rule is found and esta- blished, by which the rational creature can ap- proach in worship ‘and religious service to the Creator, in an acceptable manner. Hence it plainly follows, from every view of reason, and from every possible point of areu- ment, that the Divine Being must either not éx.. ist ‘at all, or that there must be inbering in the Divine Essence a perfection capable of bearing witness; and this perfection must be every way adequate to the Divine Essence, and all the other divine perfections; and must be considered as necessary, essential, absolute, eternal, immense, and immutable, and exercised by one divine pers 266 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. son to another, in the Divine Essence, altogether independently of creation. And these divine persons must be considered as co-equal, co-essen- tial, co-eternal, co-immense, co-immutable, and every way adequate to give and receive a divine testimony, according to its own nature, or bear witness in all the extent of the divine perfec- tions, natural and moral, according to the pecu- liar law so often mentioned, mutually, recipro- eally, and unceasingly. And because’ a divine person can only bear witness, according to its own nature, in a divine and perfect manner, becoming all the divine per- fections; and a divine person only is adequate to receive divine testimony, according to its own nature, in all its eternity and immensity; there- fore it follows, with the clearest and strongest force of demonstration, that there must be a Tri- nity of persons in the Divine Essence, co-equal and co-eternal in all respects. 1, Ehus, from a correct investigation of some of the social powers of the human soul, and by fair induction, extending the reasoning from the creature to the Creator, the doctrine of the (Ltie nity is established, by the firmest, clearest, and most undeniable demonstration. ‘The Propositions we have brought forward, exhibit the doctrine, each in particular, and all in general; and many others might be adduced, equally strong ; so that a host of arguments from. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 261 every quarter, rush together, with united force, to prove, convince, and demonstrate, that the doctrine of a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence is perfectly consistent both with reason and revelation.* * See Note N. on the preceding Proposition. R 3 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. wR o> oe PROPOSITION XIV. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE. OF THE POWER OF SPEECH. [No animal except man has the power of speech—Speech consummates the perfections of all the other faculties of the human soul—Except moral purity, tt ws the haghest perfection of the soul—Something corresponding to aw must be found asa perfection in the Divine Being—If so, there must be a plurality of persons in the Divine Essence—-If not, tt 73 impossible that the Divine Being can have such a perfection—Ié 1s necessary to the per- fection and happiness of the Divine Being. | 1. Besrwes the foregoing arguments contained in the Propositions discussed, puhichie it is hoped, are conclusive, and demonstratively evident, and prove, clearly and satisfactorily, the doctrine of the Trinity, another, equally cogent and convin- cing, and also taken from the powers of the hu- man soul, presents itself.. This is the power of speech. That speech is a power or faculty of the human soul, cannot be denied ; and that it is a power, ennobling, distinguishing, and peculiar to human beings, is perfectly clear and manifest ; and that it dignifies and exalts the human soul, even above that which the power of reasoning does, will appear very certain, by a little consi- deration and reflection upon the nature of it. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. * 963 Something like reasoning is found in the tribes and classes of the animated irrational creation ; but nothing can be found in them that approaches to articulate speech, or continued language. Neo one truly articulate sound, as such, ever was, or ever can be uttered, except by the human organs. No animal that ever existed, ever uttered ‘so much as a single word of four syllables, with dis- tinct and perfect articulation, so as to be under- stood by another animal, except man alone.— Speech, then, being a power of the human soul, inhering in it by its original constitution, raises man farther above the level of other animals, than any other power of the human soul does. The other powers and faculties are all subser- vient to it, so that we plainly perceive it may be considered as that power which raises man nearer to. the resemblance and image of the Divine Being, than any other power or faculty either of his body or mind. 2. A brief survey of these perfections and at- tributes of the Divine Being, uready treated of in this work, will set this argument in a clear and conspicuous light. We know, that a particular modification, and faint resemblance, of the divine goodness, love, knowledge, wisdom, power, holi- ness, and veracity, as they are perfections of the Divine Being, are found respectively in man; so are the social powers already treated of: And we know, from fair investigation, that all these, R 4 : BGA VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. and every one of them in particular, are subser- vient to speech in the human soul. Nay, not one of them can be exercised or manifested by_ the human soul, to:the utmost of its capacity, without speech. How could one human being: communicate all the goodness which it possesses, to the very utmost extent of its nature, in a social way, to another, without speech? It is clear this is impossible. » Without speech, some- - thing of this goodness, in the perfection of its communication, by one human being to another, is and must be imperfect. The same thing may be affirmed of love. How imperfect would love in the human creature be, without speech, in comparison with what it is by that power! Look at the exercise of all the benevolent affections — between parent and child,—between the sexes, -—between one human being and another, in their friendly and social intercourse,——and see how 1m- perfect and defective the whole would be, with- out the power of speech. i | As for knowledge, we need scarcely make mention of the argument. What attainments could human beings make in knowledge, without the power of speech? We may venture to an- swer, None, that would be of general utility to society. ‘The very same thing may be affirmed concerning wisdom. Without the exercise of the power of speech, the wisdom of man would appear little above the level of some of the brute creation, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 265 Where would the wisdom of practical jurispru- dence, practical religion, practical arts and sci- ences, and practical industry of every kind, be discovered, without the power of speech? To what purpose would power itself, considered ab. stractedly, be to the human soul without speech? As for the social powers already investigated, they could be of no advantage whatever to hu- man beings, without the exercise of the power of speech. | 3. If, then, speech really be the consummation of the perfection of goodness, love, knowledge, wisdom, power, judgment, reasoning, and the social powers, as well as of every other power and faculty of the human soul, it plainly follows, that the power of speech is the very highest, the most distinguishing, the most exalted ornament, next to the moral principle, to moral purity, and to immortality, bestowed by the Divine Being upon man. Hence it farther appears, that speech is the grand and finishing social perfection of human nature; and that there is something cor- responding to it in angelic nature, there is no doubt, because it is the highest social perfection in moral beings. Now, if it be such a glorious perfection in human nature, may we not pre- sume, on fair grounds of reasoning and argument, that there must be a perfection corresponding to, or agreeing with it, in the Divine Nature. It is surely natural and fair to conclude, that what is 266 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. so high and distinguishing a perfection in the rational intelligent being, must also be found in the Divine Being; in a degree as much higher, and as far surpassing that in the creature, as the Divine uncreated Being excels the created. And this perfection must inhere in the Divine Essence, in a manner becoming all the other divine. per- fections, both natural and moral. 4. We have all along reasoned, on the fairest and soundest principles, that there may be a per- fection in the Divine Essence, which is not be- stowed upon the rational creature in the original - constitution of its essence; but we still argue as, confidently, that no necessary and essential per- fection can inhere in the original constitution of the human soul, which does not, necessarily and essentially, inhere in the Divine Essence, in a way becoming the majesty, and glory, and nature, of the Divine Being. The Divine Being may withhold from the rational moral creature a per- fection which the Divine Essence may necessa- rily possess, but cannot bestow upon the crea- ture the modification of any necessary and essen- tial perfection, which does not, necessarily and essentially, inhere in the Divine Essence itself. And the idea that man is created according to the divine image, after a particular modification, establishes this beyond dispute. Therefore, if the Divine Being lias communi- cated to the human soul the power of speech, as VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 267 necessary and essential in its original constitu- tion, according to the present state of things in the moral world, there must be found in the Di- vine Being an yncreated, necessary, and essential perfection, corresponding to this. Because the fairest reasoning runs thus—If the Divine Being _ has bestowed upon the human essence the power of speech, as the highest social perfection, and if the Divine Being cannot bestow upon the human essence what it has not in itself, in a way be- coming its own nature; then demonstration fully proves, that there must be in the Divine Essence a perfection corresponding to the power of speech in the human soul. But still it must be under- stood, that the divine perfection excels the hu- man, as far as the Creator excels the creature. But as the human is formed after the image of the divine, still our argument is legitimate and conclusive. ; 5. Now, if there be in the Divine Essence a perfection corresponding with the perfection of speech in the human essence, and if that perfec- tion in the Divine Essence, be corresponding _ with ali the other divine perfections, natural and moral,—then, from a fair abstract investigation of the power of speech in the human essence, an argument arises, which, when traced in all its bearings, irresistibly proves, that there must be a plurality of persons in the Divine Essence. And if thete be a plurality of persons in the Divine 268 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Essence, without any perfection in that essence answering to, and corresponding with, the power of speech in the human soul, then there cannot possibly be any communication, in the way of in- tellectual intercourse, among these divine persons. 6. Again; if there be in the Divine Essence a necessary perfection, corresponding with, and answering to, the power of speech in the human essence, and if there be not a plurality of persons in the Divine Essence, then the Divine Being possesses a perfection, for which, if we dare so speak, it has no use, and which never has, can, nor will be exercised. ‘This is the same as to affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect, be- cause a perfection inheres in that Essence, which never was, has, nor shall be exercised, by the Divine Being, from eternity to eternity. That is, the Divine Being has a perfection which is of no use; and this is the same as to do away the idea of the Divine Being altogether, which is both impious and absurd. For perhaps we can entertain no lower nor more dishonourable view of the Divine Being, than to suppose it possible for the divine perfections either to remain for ever inactive, or to be exercised merely toward created beings, which are imperfect. This would be the same as to affirm, that the Divine Being is indeed perfect, but never has, can, nor will, from everlasting to everlasting, use or exercise any one of the divine perfections, according to VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 263 its own nature, in all its uncreated and absolute energy. And this is surely, at best, but con- ceiving of the Divine Being as imperfect, which is not only directly contrary to reason, but highly dangerous. Again; as we have already proved, from an abstract view of the divine necessary perfections, that there must be a plurality of persons in the Divine Essence, so we now argue, from the full and perfect exercise of the divine perfection un-. der consideration, that we can have no idea of the divine counsel, nor the divine procedure, in the government of the universe, in consistency with those perfections we have already explored, and with the perfection now under consideration, if there be not a plurality of persons in the Di- vine Essence. ‘To conceive of all the divine goodness, in its uncreated and absolute extent and influence; as communicated in the Divine Essence, without any thing corresponding to the power of speech, is to conceive of the perfect communication of the divine goodness, without the enjoyment of that perfection, in all its abso- lute and unlimited extent, which is absurd. Still more strongly is this principle supported, by the argument taken from the perfection of love. If this perfection be exercised in the Divine Es. sence, according to its own nature, in consist- ency with all its unlimited, eternal, immense, and immutable extent, by one divine person te 270 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. another, without any-thing corresponding to the power of speech, we must conccive of the Divine Being as either altogether wanting a perfection, which contributes so much to the happiness of the rational intelligent creature; or, if ‘it ‘be ar- gued that this perfection really does inhere in the Divine Essence, then it may be answered, ‘that, upon the hypothesis of only one person subsisting in the Divine Essence, ‘it is impossible that the Divine Being could ever use or exercise this per- fection; and this is the same as to affirm that the Divine Being is imperfect, which is impossible. There must, therefore, be im the Divine Essence a plurality of persons, according to the foregoing reasoning, or there must not inhere in the Di- vine Essence a perfection corresponding to the power of speech in the human soul. Should we argue from the exercise of the pet- fection of knowledge, we cannot conceive how the uncreated knowledge, in its divine perfec- tion, can be communicated by one divine person to another, necessarily subsisting in the Divine Issence, without, at the same time, conceiving the use and exercise of a perfection correspond- ing to the power of speech in the human soul. The same mode of reasoning will still apply and hold good with respect to the exercise of wisdom, power, love-——perfections corresponding to the social powers of the human soul, and all the divine moral perfections.. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. are | 7. Therefore, as the exercise, manifestation, and display of every one of the divine moral per- fections in the Divine Essence, must at the very same time be accompanied with the exercise of a perfection corresponding to the power of speech an the human soul, or else they must be exercised imperfectly, which is impossible; therefore, from the power of speech in the human soul, the doc- trine of three distinct persons, subsisting in three distinct incommunicable relations to one another in the Divine Essence, may be fairly proved, and fully established. The first person is necessarily constituted by the economy of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, according to personal distinction, having this perfection necessarily, and in all respects con- sistent with the nature of Deity, and subsisting as the first. The second having it in all respects the very same, and subsisting as the second. The third must also have it in all respects the very same, and subsisting as the third. Therefore, while we must conceive of the Di- vine Being as everliving, spiritual, ‘intelligent, moral, and possessing existence, and perfection, and happiness in itself, we must conclude, from such a view, according to the force of the fore. going reasoning, that the doctrine of the Trinity is both rational, and consistent with the neces. sary existence, independence, and happiness of the Divine Being, B72 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. And thus, resting upon the law of the consti- tion and economy of the Divine lssence and perfections, as found in the efficiency, intelli- gence, goodness, love,—the power of expressing a command, of making a promise, of bearing wit- ness, and of speech ;—the Propositions hang up- on each other; the arguments run into one ano- iher; and the whole form a combination, stu- pendous, grand, and impregnable, supporting and defending the doctrine of the Trinity.” * See Note O, on the preceding Proposition. aD “I 5. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, \ PROPOSITION XV. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE DIVINE BEING, [ The very existence of the Divine Being, and the law of the Dwwine Nature, prove this—The divine persons must not be confounded, but only distinguished— The procession of the Divine Essence and perfections ts not voluntary, tt a3 necessary—The Divine Essence and perjections can subsist in no other way than in distinct personaliiy— The Divine Essence cannot proceed, ac- cording to tis own nature, so as to constitute a created Person in the Divine Essence ; and yet, by the law of tts own economy, it must proceed— Therefore, tt must procecd, so as to constitute an uncreated person in the Divine Essence—The same reasoning may be applied to each of the divine moral perfections, one by one— the divine love proves the same doctrine— The same} Divine Essence and perfections, in consistency with the economy of their own nature, must substst in a mode of personal distinction—and, according to the same eco-~ nomi, nust proceed from this first person to a second —and from this first and second, to a third. | 1. From the foregoing reasoning, in each of the Propositions, viewed as a great whole, it plainly appears, that there must necessarily be a plurality of persons in the Divine Essence; and so far as our views have extended in this most important of all subjects, the plurality consists of three, and neither more nor less than three, dis S 27 4 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. a vine persons. And the reason which proves that there are three, and neither more nor less than three, is first founded on the unity, simplicity, indivisibility, eternity, immensity, and immuta- bility of the Divine Essence: this stands as the grand foundation, upon which the whole super- structure of the doctrine rests ;-—and, secondly, on this foundation we lay the peculiar law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, as this law appears in the acti- vity, energy, and operation of the ever-living and self-existent Essence, and the perfections of life, intelligence, moral excellence, and efficiency, in- hering in that self-existent Essence. ‘This esta- blishes the necessity of the procession of the Di- vine Essence, by which the second and third persons are respectively constituted. And, third- ly, above these two, we rest the incommunicable relation in which the three divine persons stand to each other. And, for the sake of perspicuity and argument, we may call them, as we have already done, the first, second, and third; and it is perfectly evi- dent, from the nature of the unity and simplicity of the Divine Essence, and from the reasoning already advanced, that these divine persons, though distinct, are the very same in essence, and in all perfeetions, natural and moral; and, therefore, are not separate, as we have all along ‘sisted, but enly distinct, and standing in an in- - VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 27a communicable relation to one another ; and must, according to the nature of the Divine Essence, have an inbeing, if we may so speak, in each other. No reasoning is necessary to prove that every being must exist according to the nature of its own essence, Now, the nature of the Dj. vine Essence is, according to the law laid down. all along as the foundation of our reasoning, ac- tive, energetic, and operative; and as the Divine Being is self-existent, and entirely independent of any creature, its own nature must act aceord- ing to the law of its own essence and perfec. tions; and if'so, as has been abundantly proved, that nature must subsist in three distinct modes within its own essence; because the first, being constituted by the economy of the Divine Na- ture, procession from the first must be to the ut- Most extent of all the properties and qualities of its own nature, and can neither be less nor more, and by which a second mode or person must ne- cessarily be constituted, in all respects exactly according to the same nature; and as the Divine Nature is still active, energetic, and operative, notwithstanding a second mode is constituted by procession, according to the law of-the Divine Nature; for this activity, energy, and Operation, must continue, according to all the qualities of its own nature, until no farther procession can possibly take place; and as the activity, energy, and operation are precisely the same, in both the 8 2 as 946 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY» , first and second modes, and must still continue, aceording to their own nature, this can only be by the union of these distinct modes in this very same active and operative principle, in joint pro- cession, to the very utmost of all the qualities and properties of its own nature, and can neither be more nor less, by which a third mode or per- son must be constituted in all respects exactly according to the same nature; and this third mode, or person, shuts up all farther procession, as we have already proved. And on account of the incommunicable relation in which these three modes stand to each other, and which is necessa- rily formed and established by the procession just mentioned, these modes or persons must not, and ought not, to be confounded, but only distin- guished. And it must be farther considered, that as they are the very same im essence and perfections, both natural and moral, they are the very same in will, majesty, and glory, because they are the very same in nature; but still, they must be considered as distinct, on account of this incommunicable relation to each other, in which they subsist. Hence it will appear, upon a full investigation of the Divine Essence, that the divine efficiency, intelligence, goodness, love, knowledge, wisdom, power,—perfections answer- ing to the social powers, and the power of speech of the human soul, and all other perfections, na- tural and moral, must be considered necessa- ge ee VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. one tily, naturally, co-equally, and co-eternally, tlie same in each, otherwise the Divine Being could not exist; for all this is according to the law of the Divine Nature already laid down; and it is impossible for the Divine Being to subsist in any other way but according to its own nature. 2. We are not to consider these modes or per- sons as merely voluntary. The personal distinc- tion of the divine perfections, which constitutes the first, is not voluntary—it is natural and ne- cessary; nor are we to consider the procession from the first, which constitutes the second, to be merely voluntary—it must be and is necessary and natural; neither are we to consider the pro- cession from the first and second, which consti- tutes the third, as merely voluntary, and that it might or might not be: No; we must consider it-as necessary and natural. The first person is naturally and necessarily constituted by the economy of the divine perfections; and the whole of the procession, from first to last, is ac- cording to the necessary law of the constitution and economy of the Divine Essence and perfee- tions. Thus, if the first person has the whole of the divine perfections, natural and moral, by the law of their own economy, subsisting in itself dis- tinctly in order, and in order only, as the first: and if the essence and perfections, natural and moral, subsist in the second person, exactly ac- ‘cording to the law of their own economy, the : s 3 278 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. same as they do in the first, except in the order of distinct subsistence ;—we see the essence of the second person necessarily and essentially the same with the essence of the first; and, there- fore, the existence of both must be the same, be- cause the essence and the perfections are precise- ly the same. And if the essence and perfections, both natural and moral, be the same in the second that they are in the first, except only in distinc- tion of subsistence, after a different incommunt- cable manner in each; then, whatever arguments will prove the existence of the Divine Being, will hold equally good when applied to the second, as well as when applied to the first. And whatever arguments will prove the perfections of the Di- vine Being, natural and moral, will hold equally good when applied to the second person, as well as when applied to the first. And whatever ar- guments will prove the happiness of the Divine Being, will hold good when applied to the se- cond, as well as to the first, for the existence, perfection, and happiness of both are precisely the same. And in every train of reasoning, we must constantly keep in view, that the Divine Essence and perfections have only a distinct sub- sistence in an incommunicable relation, not a separation in the second person from the first. Now, removing creation and providence quite out of view, and contemplating the Divine Being as necessarily existent, perfect, and happy, with- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 279 in itself, from all past eternity, through all future eternity, and naturally independent, without the least regard to creation and providence. If, then, . it be absolutely necessary, according to the pecu- liar law of the Divine Nature, that there should be a full, perfect, absolute, eternal, immense, and immutable procession of the whole Divine Es- sence and perfections, from the first mode of sub- sistence or person, according to the foresaid law of the Divine Nature, that they may subsist in a mode distinct from what they do in the first, and thereby constitute a second mode of subsistence, standing in an incommunicable relation to the first; and as the Divine Essence is simple, abso- lute, and indivisible, yet, according to the fore- going reasoning, necessarily subsisting in two dis- tinct persons; from these two distinct persons the Divine Essence, in all its perfections, must necessarily proceed, in one joint active principle, and thereby constitute a third mode of subsist- ence, or person, which is neither the one nor the other of the two first, but distinct from each and from both, and proceeding from each and from both, because of the law of the activity and energy of the Divine Nature, already mentioned, and because of the simplicity ef the Divine Es- sence. For as each of the two first persons has the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections subsisting distinctly, yet in an incommunicable Felation the one to the other; the law of the ac« & 4& 280 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. tivity of the Divine Nature, and this incommu- nicable relation, are the source, if we may so speak, from which the procession, which consti- tutes the third person, arises, because of the ab- solute union of the Divine Essence in simplicity and indivisibility ; and yet because of these two distinct modes of subsistence, so that the one is not the other, therefore, the Divine Essence, with all its perfections, must proceed, in one joint, active principle, from the first and from the second, equally, to a third mode of subsist- ence, equally distinct from each and from both, and partaking of the same essence and perfec- tions from each and from both, in absolute union, and that from everlasting to everlasting, without beginning and without end. Therefore, the necessary and essential proces- sion of the divine goodness, which is the very: same with the procession of the Divine Essence and perfections from the first and second per- sons, in one simple, active principle, so as to con- stitute a third mode of subsistence, or person,— is of such a nature, that the divine goodness sub- sists in the third person, as necessarily proceed- ing from the first and second, in the very same active principle, partaking of the Divine Nature, proceeding from both, and therefore subsists in this third person, as from both the two first; and therefore equally partaking of the divine good- ness, as it subsists distinctly and respectively m VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 28t each and in both the two first ; and that, neither as it does in the first, nor as it does in the se. cond, but as it does in each and in both, and in a manner distinct from both. Hence the divine goodness 1s the very same in the third, that it is in each and in both the two first. And this pro- cession, in one joint active principle, from the two first to subsist in the thid, is not a procession of priority in duration, in dignity, nor a priority of causation, nor even a priority of nature,—for the nature is the very same in all; but it is mere- ly a procession of order. For when could eter- nity, immensity, and immutability, begin or end? Now, according to the foregoing reasoning, if the divine goodness, as subsistingin the first person, according to its own personal distinction, could not, according to its own nature, proceed, so 2s to constitute a creature in the Divine Essence; neither could this divine goodness, as subsisting in a second person : therefore, according to the law of the Divine Nature, we argue the necessity of the procession of the whole of the divine good- ness from the first and second, by the law of their nature, in one active principle, so as to constitute a third person in the Divine Essence, in order to the very existence of the Divine Being. Yor the Divine Being can exist in no way, but according to its nature, which reason demonstrates to be ia three distinct modes of subsistence. And the Divine Essence, with all its perfections thus pro- a6 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ceeding from the two first, and thereby consti- tuting the third; we perceive it subsisting dis- tinctly in the first, in a manner peculiar to the first; and in the second, in a manner peculiar to the second; and in the third, in a manner pecu- liar to the third. And besides this third, it is impossible that there can be any other procession of the Divine Essence, or any other distinct mode of subsistence, because procession is entirely per- fected in the three divine persons. And these three divine persons can subsist in no other man- ner than in the three distinct modes of incom- municable relation already mentioned. And it is impossible that the Divine Essence, or any of the divine perfections, simply, can subsist in any other way than in the three persons already as- certained; for this is exactly according to the law of the Divine Nature: and it is impossible that the Divine Nature can subsist m any other way than according to its own law. For if it be necessary and essential to the very existence of the Divine Being, that the divine goodness should, according to the economy of the Divine Essence,—according to all the qualities and pro- perties of its own nature,——proceed from the first mode to subsist in a second, and thereby consti- tute a complete and adequate object, capable of receiving all its influence; and that, because it is necessary to the existence and happiness of the Divine Being, so that the whole of the Divine VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 283 Essence, with all its goodness, should naturally proceed from the first in such a manner as to subsist in a distinct mode, and thereby constitute a distinct person, adequate to receive the whole of the divine goodness, according to its own na- ture. This shews that the Divine Nature re- quires to subsist in distinct modes; and we see a very cogent reason, because the Divine Nature cannot proceed, so as to constitute a creature in the Divine Essence, and because that all the ob- jects in creation, however numerous, neither are nor can be adequate to the reception of the whole of the divine goodness ; and if it be equally as necessary that the Divine Essence and perfec- tions should, in all respects, be the very same in the second person that they are in the first, only subsisting after a moral distinction; then, from the very distinction of these two persons in the Divine Essence, it is in all respects equally ne- cessary and essential to the very existence of the Divine Being, that the divine goodness should, according to the fixed law of the Divine Nature, proceed from the first and second, in one active principle, that it may subsist in a mode distinct from what it does in the two first, and thereby constitute a third person, every way divine, every way perfect, every way adequate to receive the whole of the divine goodness, from the first and second; and this is absolutely necessary, because the divine goodness could not proceed from the 284 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. first and second, so as to constitute a created person in the Divine Essence; and, according to the foregoing law, it necessarily does proceed. it must, therefore, constitute a third divine per- son, and that because all created objects, how- ever numerous, neither were, are, nor ever shall be, adequate to receive the whole of the divine goodness. Therefore, according to the nature of the divine goodness, the doctrine of three dis- tinct persons in the Divine Essence, by a full and fair investigation, is clearly and undeniably demonstrated. | The very same train of reasoning may be used, to prove the necessary, essential, and eternal pro- cession of the divine love, knowledge, wisdom, holiness, power, truth, and ail moral perfections ; and the perfections answering to the social po- wers; and the perfection corresponding to the power of speech in the human soul,—one by one. All these, and many others, may be investigated, and clearly proved to proceed, according to the taw of the Divine Nature, from the first mode or person, to subsist in a second ; and from the first and second, in one active principle, to subsist in a third; and that by the uniform, fixed; and im- mutable law of the activity, energy, and operas tion of the Divine Essence, in order to the very existence of the Divine Being, according to its own nature in all respects. And thus, upon the principle of the procession of the Divine Essence, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 285 - with all its perfections, it can be clearly proved, by demonstration, that there are three distinct persons in the Divine Essence; and by reason of the simplicity, unity, and indivisibility of this Es- sence, these three divine persons are the very same in substance, equal in power and glory, and all perfections, natural and moral. ; Again; as we have proved in the foregoing arguments, by reasoning clear and satisfactory, founded upon the law of the procession of the Divine Essence and perfections, and, in particu- lar, that of goodness, that the doctrine of the Trinity is really consistent with reason; and rea- son may be fairly applied to it, so far as to satisfy rational creatures, that the doctrine is certainly true, and that reason and revelation fully harmo- nize in this doctrine ; because every one of the moral attributes of the Divine Being affords an ample proof of the doctrine. 5. We may, for farther satisfaction, investigate the divine perfection of love, as we have done that of goodness, and exhibit an additional proof of the same thing. Taking our view of this di- vine pertection before creation and providence began, and contemplating the Divine Being as necessarily existent, it clearly follows, that this Being must continue unceasingly the same; the same eternal, immense, and immutable Being ; and, by consequence, must be self-sufficient, and every way adequate to its own existence, perfec- 286 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. tion, and happiness; and, therefore, must have been as perfect before creation and providence as since, and wouid still continue perfect, were creation and providence removed out of being, and completely extinct, as we have all along sup- posed. And being absolutely perfect in and of itself, it must possess the perfection of love, ne- cessarily and essentially. And as we have rea- soned upon goodness, so we reason upon love, the Divine Essence and perfections, in consist- ency with the economy of their nature, must subsist in a mode of personal distinction ; there must be a necessary and essential procession of the divine love from this mode to another, or from the first person to the second, in order that the divine love may be exercised or manifested, according to all the qualities of its own nature; and in order to this, it must subsist in the second person in a manner distinct from that in which it does the first; and that the Divine Essence, and all other divine perfections, may do the same, so that the second is every way co-equal to the first, and not separate, but distinct only. Whatever is necessary and essential as a perfection in the first, is equally necessary and essential as a per- fection in the second, except only the distinct mode of subsistence. And, as we have proved, there must be a necessary and essential perfec- tion of the divine love, from the first person to the second, which is an adequate object to re- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 287 ceive, and capable of returning, the whole of the divine love; and this procession is necessary, ac- cording to the law of the nature of the Divine Essence, because all the creatures in the universe, however numerous we may suppose them to be, never were, can, nor will be, adequate to receive, or capable to return, the expression of the divine love, according to all the qualities of its own na- ture. ‘Therefore, we continue to argue, that the Divine Essence and perfections are, necessarily and essentially, the same in the second person that they are in the first, but with this difference only, that they subsist in the second in a mode distinct from what they do in the first. _ 6. This at once presents us with the idea, that there must be a procession of the divine love, as well as of the Divine Essence, from one mode of subsistence to another, or from the first person to the second, in order that this love may be mani- fested or displayed in the Divine Essence, accord- ing to all the qualities of its own nature, and that it may operate consistently with its own nature. Now its own nature is living, intelligent, moral, and energetic: therefore, according to the law of its own nature, so often referred to, it must proceed from one mode of subsistence to another, accord- ing to all the qualities of its own nature; and as the essence, perfections, and mode of subsistence, con- stitute personality, it must proceed so as to consti- tute divinepersonality, otherwise the Divine Nature 288 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. would be imperfect; and as this law is exactly according to the Divine Nature, this procession from one person to another, must, like the Di- vine Nature, be eternal, immense, and immut- able: And as by this procession we discover a distinction of personality in the Essence, as well as in the love; and as the Divine Nature is ex- actly the same in each of these modes or persons, excepting only the distinct manner of subsist- ence; this nature must partake of the distinct modes of the stibsistence of its own essence, and according to its own law immediately referred to, as it is equally active, energetic, and operative, in each of these modes of distinction, and at the same time partakes of each and of both these modes of distinction, in personality ; it must, by the law of its own nature, proceed from each and from both these modes of distinction, and from each and from both alike, so as to constitute a third mode of distinct subsistence, in persona- lity, according to all the qualities of its own na- ture, otherwise the Divine Nature is imperfect, which is impossible. Therefore it follows, with conclusive evidence, that as the Divine Being must necessarily exist, it must no less necessarily subsist according to its own nature; and its own nature being active, energetic, and operative, the law of its own nature pronounces, that it must subsist in a Trinity of personality,—first, in dis- tinction, and, second, in union. And farther it VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 289 cannot proceed, and that merely because the procession must be according to personality ; and if it proceed first to distinction of persona- lity, and then to union of the very same persona- lity, it is absolutely impossible there can be any farther procession; for that which is indivisible /and distinguished, cannot be distinguished again, ‘~ without multiplication and division; and that which is indivisible in union, can neither be united, nor distinguished again, without compo- sition or confusion. . Let any person, if he can, turn aside the force of this reasoning. For it is undeniably evident, that if the Divine Essence and perfections have proceeded, according to the Jaw of the Divine Nature, from one mode of per- sonality to another, it is absolutely impossible that it can proceed to a third, without respect to these two, unless multiplication take place in that which has no parts, which is impossible. And if the Divine Essence proceed, in one prin- ciple, from distinct personality in two modes, to distinct personality in one, it is impossible that it can proceed from this one, in union, to any other, without introducing multiplication or division in- to that which has no parts,—all of which prove a downright impossibility. The Divine Essence, therefore, cannot proceed to a fourth mode of subsistence, upon any principle of reasoning what. ever. ‘Therefore, there must be three, and can be neither more nor less than three, persons in t a 290 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the Divine Essence: And hence it is as neces- sary that the Divine Nature should exist in three distinct modes of personality, as that it should exist at all. So that the very existence of the Divine Being, when fairly followed out, proves undeniably the doctrine of the Trinity. The Divine Being must necessarily exist, and must necessarily exist in three distinct modes of sub- - gistence. | And thus, taking a retrograde survey of the divine efficiency, intelligence, moral excellence, the powers answering to some of the. social po- wers of the human soul, all taken in connection withthe economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, and manifested in procession, prove, that the very nature of the Divine Beg is to exist in three distinct modes of personality. The ehain of proof forms links which run into one another naturally, and exhibit a combined view, consistent with reason, and the most accurate demonstration.” * See Note P. on the preceding Proposition. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY; 89} PROPOSITION XVI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE oF THE PERFECTION OF THE DIVINE BEING. [Lvemplified by wisdom—First, negatively ; second, post éwvely—All the divine moral perfections may be exem= plified in a similar way—'The supposition of a moral perfection inhering in the Divine Essence infers the exercise of tt—The exercise infers the procession of wu from one mode io another—The procession infers the modes of distinct subsistence—The third mode wmfers the consummation of the Divine Essence and per ‘fects tions-—_Nothing more nor less than a divine person can be consttiuted by the necessary procession of the Divine Essence and perfections from one mode, to subsist in another— Procession ts for ever shut up in the third person. | The Divine Being must exist in the perfect exer- cise of allits own moral perfections. 1. Now, having proved, it is hoped, that the Divine Being necessarily exists in three distinct modes of subsistence, or in three distinct persons, the argument assumes a new aspect, and attempts to prove, that the Divine Being must exist in the full and perfect exercise of all its moral perfec- tions, without beginning and without end. This is equally as necessary as that the Divine Being should exist at all. And as we now assert that T 2 292 | VIEWS GF THE TRINITY. the Divine Being must necessarily exist in the full and perfect exercise of all its own moral per- fections, this can only be upon the principle of communication, so repeatedly proved in the fore- going Propositions ; or upon the principle of procession, now the immediate object of notice. And the chief force of the argument rests upon two great outline principles of evidence.—The first is, that as the Divine Being is necessarily existent, and possesses necessarily all moral per- fections: And as morality is ever active and ope- trative, in its very nature, in that modification of it bestowed upon the creature, it is surely still more so in its own divine nature in the Creator; and if this be so, which is surely a fair conclu- sion, if we should suppose the Divine Being for one single moment without the exercise of any one of its moral perfections, suppose wisdom, goodness, veracity, love, or any other moral per- fection whatever, then the Divine Being must be supposed that moment to be without that per- fection.~—We shail take wisdom as an example. If we can suppose, for a single moment, the Di- vine Being without the full and perfect exercise of its own wisdom, that same moment we suppose it to be without wisdom ; andif the Divine Being exists for a moment without wisdom, that mo- ment, with reverence, we may say, it is uNWiISe 5 and if unwise for a moment, it may be so for 2 minute; and if for a minute, it may be so for an VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 293 hour; and if for an hour, it may be so for a day, a week, a month, a year; and if so, for everlast- ing. And this would strip the Divine Being of wisdom entirely, and rob it of one of its neces- sary perfections. God, without the full and per- fect exercise of wisdom, for a single moment, would be no God at all. The same reasoning. will hold good with regard to the perfection of veracity, goodness, and love, or any other moral perfection we may incline to exemplify.—The second argument upon which we rest the force of our reasoning is, that if it be granted that, in any one instance throughout eternity, past, pre- sent, or to come, the Divine Being can exercise any one of its own moral perfections for a single moment, it must for ever be in the full and per- fect exercise of that perfection.—-Suppose love. The divine love, in its own nature, is eternal, immense, and immutable; and if that which js eternal, immense, and immutable, be ever, im any one instance, for a single moment, exercised according to its own nature, it must be exercised eternally, immensely, and immutably. The’ Di- vine Being, therefore, must be in the full and perfect exercise of its own love, eternally, im- mensely, and immutably. These two arguments ' chain the subject (if we may so speak) with rivet- ted bolts. ‘The first proves that the Divine Being cannot exist a single moment without the full and perfect exercise of each and of all its own moral T 3 BOA VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. perfections. The second proves, that if the Di- vine Being exist in the full and perfect exercise of each and of all its moral perfections for a sin- cle moment, it must exist in the full and perfect exercise of all its moral perfections, eternally, immensely, and immutably. And this can only be, according to the law of the activity, energy, and operation of its own essence, and moral per- fections, as naturally and necessarily proceeding from one distinct mode of subsistence to another distinct mode of subsistence; and in one joint active principle, proceeding from these two, equally, to subsist in a third mode, where all divine perfection is consummated. If, therefore, reason can get a hearing, the Divine Being must exist in the full and perfect exercise of each and of all its moral perfections, through every point of eternity and immensity ; and this is absolutely necessary to the consummation of the perfection of the Divine Being. For the very existence of each and of all the divine moral perfections, sup- poses the exercise of each and of all: and the exercise of each and of all, for a single moment, supposes the full and perfect exercise of each and of all, eternally, immensely, and immutably. And the supposition of the full and perfect ex- ercise of each and of all, eternally, immensely, and immutably, supposes the full and perfect procession of the Divine Essence and perfections from one mode of subsistence to another, eter- aan VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 2Y9e nally, immensely, andimmutably. And the sup- position of the procession of the Divine Essence and perfections, from one distinct mode to ano- ther, eternally, immensely, and immutably, sup- poses the procession of the Divine Essence and perfections, in one joint, active principle, from these two distinct modes of subsistence, to a third; and this consummates the procession of the Divine Essence and perfections, and thereby consummates the perfection of the Divine Being. Whatever may be said to the contrary, these ar- guments will bear their full weight, in a cool and dispassionate investigation of the subject, and - satisfactorily prove, that the Divine Being must exist in the full and perfect exercise of each and and of all its own moral perfections, in order te the absolute perfection of its own nature; and that, in order to the absolute perfection of its own nature, if must subsist in three distinct modes or persons, and can subsist in neither more nor less than three. Another method of arguing the sulject, founded up- on the necessity of a final termination of the pro- cession of the Divine Essence and perfections im the third person: 2. It is necessary to ascertain the final termi- nation of procession; and this can only be in the third person. And unless that we can prove che Nae hy ZIG VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. a final termination of it in this third person, we cannot tell to how many persons it may extend, or whether there may be any termination of it, ad infinitum. And we set out upon the principle of the simplicity, unity, and indivisibility of the Divine Essence, and we argue, that the proces- sion of it, with all its perfections and attributes, from the first mode of subsistence, can only con- stitute another mode of subsistence, every way _ equal to the first: for the whole must be equal to the whole, in whatever mode it may: subsist. And considering the whole to proceed from one mode to subsist in another, the procession must be necessary, eternal, immense, and immutable, every way corresponding to the extent of the Divine Essence; for no other kind of procession could possibly exist in the Divine Nature, with- out composition, division, or multiplication of that which is necessarily simple, and without parts. We argue, therefore, that this procession is not that the Divine Essence may be compound- ed, divided, or multiplied, but simply that it may subsist after a different manner. And by the procession of the very same essence and perfec- tions, In one active principle, from the first and second, to subsist in a third mode, distinct from the other two, the Divine Essence is neither compounded, divided, nor multiplied, nor chan- ged in any way whatever, for this is absolutely impossible ; but only, by the necessary law of the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 297 perfection of the Divine Being, it proceeds from the first and second, in one joint, active principle, which can only constitute a third mode of distinct subsistence, or person, standing i in an incommu- nicable relation to the other two. And as. this necessary procession is, and can only be, from one divine person, to constitute another divine person; and as this necessary procession from the two first persons is, and can only be, in one joint, active principle, to constitute a third divine person; this necessary procession must. termi- nate in this third: because it is impossible that the Divine Essence and perfections can proceed from the first two to subsist in any but one divine person. For no more can proceed but the Di- vine Essence and perfections; and no less can proceed, without composition, multiplication, or division of that which has no parts. Besides, the whole subsisting in the first mode only, consti- tutes one person; and the whole subsisting in the second only, constitutes one person ; Sere fore, the whole subsisting in the third, can only constitute one person: and the economy of the very same essence and perfections constitutes these three respectively, so that with respect to essence and perfections they are the very same -—they are one. If the whole, in the first mode, constitute but one, and can neither constitute more nor less; the whole proceeding to consti- tute another, according to its own nature, can 298 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. constitute but one, and neither more nor less. Let this subject be argued as it may, upon the _ fair principles of reasoning, procession is shut up for ever in the third. We can discover no possi- - bility of procession again, in one joint principle, from the three, to constitute a fourth: for it is impossible the third could unite with the other two, in one active principle, seeing they are uni- ted in the procession which constitutes the third, and seeing the Divine Essence and perfections subsist in this third, in a mode distinct from what they do in each of the other two; so that it is impossible that any farther union, in one princi- ple, can take place, in the way of procession from the first and the third, or from the second and the third, or from all three together; unless uni- ting that which is absolutely united already, and thereby introducing confusion into the Divine Mssence. So that in whatever way we argue the _subject, upon the fair principles of reasoning, the conclusion always must be, that there must be three, and there can be neither more nor less than three, divine persons in the Divine Essenee. ‘The demonstration is so evident, that he who denies these conclusions, may as well deny that ever the sun shone upon the sons of men. If the Divine Being be perfect, it can only be perfect upon the principles of the doctrine of the Tyri- nity. And thus another link is added to the fore. ’ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 299 coing chain of Propositions, naturally, and con- sistent with every view of the doctrine from first to last. Whether we contemplate the divine moral excellence, the divine existence, or the divine perfection, harmony pervades the whole, on the principles of sound reasoning, and fairly demonstrates the doctrine of the Trinity.* * See Note QO. on the preceding Proposition. * 380 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XVII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE NATURE OF THE HAPPINESS OF THE DIVINE BEING. [ The exercise of morality constitutes the happiness of the human being—By parity of reasoning, wt may do so 11 a sublime mystervous way to the Divine Being—If the Auman soul does not exercise the virtues with which tt as endowed, 2 ts the very same as tf t were not endow- ed with them——If the Divine Being do not exercise tts moral perfections in a way becoming their own nature, at as the same as tf they did not inhere in tts essence— Procession must, necessarily and immutably, terminate en the third person—At cannot proeeed to a fourth per- son ; this ts both unnecessary and impossible—Proces- sion, to subsist in the second and the third, ts as neces- sary as the very existence of the Divine Being. | 1. Havine attempted to prove the doctrine of the ‘Trinity, from the nature of the existence of the Divine Being, and also from the nature of the perfections of the Divine Being, we shall now endeavour to establish the same conclusions, by a similar train of reasoning and arguments, found- ed upon the nature of the happiness of the Divine Being. | It is well known, and fully admitted, that the exercise of pure morality contributes greatly to the enjoyment of a moral being; and, after a o? careful consideration, it will be admitted, that s VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. SOL the exercise of goodness, love, Knowledge, wis- dom, the social powers, and the power of speech, contributes greatly to the enjoyment and happi- ness of the human soul, even in its present state. And if we may presume to reason from the hu- man to the Divine Being, we may affirm, that the exercise of the moral perfections of the Di- vine Being contributes to its own enjoyment and happiness. Perhaps it is not too much to say, that this really constitutes the happiness of’ the Divine Being. Ifthe human soul does not exercise that good- ness with which it is endowed, it is much the same as if it were not endowed with goodness at all. We may affirm the very same of love, of knowledge, of wisdom, of the social powers, and of the power of speech. For example, if a man be endowed with the power of speech, and yet never exercise that power, it is the very same, to all intents and pur poses: as if he had been born dumb. 2. Now, on presuming’to reason from the hu- man to the Divine Being, the conclusions of the arguments upon all the divine moral perfections will be perfectly similar to the conclusions we have just now drawn, elise man is created af- ter the image of his Maker. For example—sup- pose the Divine Being necessarily endowed with knowledge, in all the extent of the uncreated Essence; and if it should not exercise its own S02 ViiWs OF THE TRINITY. knowledge, even for a single moment, in that moment it would be without its knowledge; and if it can be without its knowledge for a single moment, so it might be without it for an hour, a day, a week, a month, a year, and for ever. And God, without knowledge, is an ignorant God 3 and God, without the full and perfect exercise of one of its own necessary perfections, is no God at all. Therefore, the very idea of the Di- vine Being without the full and perfect exercise of its own knowledge, so much as for a single moment, leads to the destruction of the very idea of the Divine Being. And if the Divine Being be without its knowledge, it must be without its existence, its perfection, its happiness. If you destroy the idea of the full and perfect exercise of the divine knowledge for a single moment, you destroy all this. Therefore, the Divine Being, without the full and perfect exercise of its own knowledge, so much as for a single mo- ment, cannot be happy. Varther; if the Divine Being, in reality, be - the only source and origin of all truly moral and spiritual goodness, and yet neither exercise that goodness, according to all the qualities of its own nature, in the Divine Essence, nor toward the creature (and toward the creature, it is impos- sible, as has been clearly proved), then, from the divine uncreated goodness, which is necessarily and essentially inherent in the Divine Essence, Ye VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 303 the Divine Being cannot have perfect enjoyment or happiness; and this is the very same as to affirm, that there is no. goodness in the Divine Being at all. For, from the very nature of moral goodness, it must contribute to the enjoyment of every being endowed with it, whether created or uncreated ; therefore, if we suppose the Divine Being does not necessarily possess perfect moral goodness, according to its own nature, and does not exist in the full and perfect exercise of that goodness,—this is the same as to affirm, that the Divine Being does not exist at all, which is ab- surd, and impossible. But if, on the other hand, the Divine Being, necessarily and essentially, possesses all truly spiritual and moral goodness, according to all the qualities of its own nature, and also the full and perfect exercise of this un- created goodness; then the Divine Being has real enjoyment in the exercise of its own good- ness; and if it is clear and evident that this Di. vine Being cannot exercise its own uncreated goodness, according to all the qualities of its owt nature, toward creation and providence, because the creatures therein, however numerous, or how- ever often we may suppose creation and provi- dence repeated, are not all adequate to receive the whole manifestation of this goodness, accord- ing to its own nature; and if, in the perfect ex- ercise of it, the Divine Being has enjoyment, and if this perfect exercise cannot be toward the crea- 504 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ture, then there must be in the Divine Essence itself, a way for the perfect, full, everlasting, and unceasing exercise of this goodness, according to its own nature, in order to the full enjoyment and happiness of the Divine Being within itself, and without any regard to the creature. And if such a necessary exercise of this divine goodness can only be in the Divine Essence itself, accord- ing to the economy of the Divine Essence, upon the principle of the necessary, eternal, immense, and immutable procession of this goodness, from the first mode of subsistence in the Divine Es- sence, to subsist in a second mode, after a differ- ent manner from what it does in the first, and farther according to the same law of the Divine Essence ; there must also be a necessary, eter- nal, immense, and immutable procession of the same goodness, in a way becoming its own na- ture, and all the other perfections and attributes of Deity, from the first and second modes of subsistence, in one joint active principle, to sub- sist in a third mode, in a manner different from what it does in either the first or second; and if there can be no other procession of this goodness, according to its own nature, so as to subsist in a fourth mode or person, as has been fully proved, then it plainly appears, by the most accurate and careful investigation of the divine goodness, with respect to the happiness of the Divine Being, that there are no more than three distinct. per- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 5605 sons in the Divine Essence. And upon the prin- ciple of the procession of the divine goodness, or, which is the very same, of the whole of the Di- vine Essence and perfections, from the first per- son to the second, and from the first and second, in one. active principle, to the third, and this being absolutely necessary to the perfect enjoy- ment and happiness of the Divine Being within itself; and farther, that this procession, in the twofold view already taken, fills up every idea that we can possibly conceive or imagine, in con- sistency with the perfection and the happiness of the Divine Being ;—then it clearly follows, that as, according to our limited capacity, we must conceive order in the beginning of this necessary procession, so we must conceive order in the end of it, if we may so speak; and we conceive such an order in the end of it, as is every way adequate to the very enjoyment and happiness of the Di- vine Being within itself; because the union of personality constitutes the termination of pro- cession, every way consistent with necessary hap- piness. We must, therefore, conclude our re- search where our subject necessarily terminates ; and we conclude, with all satisfaction, and full assurance, that there can be no farther process sion, and that there can be no other person iti the Divine Essence, besides these three already ascertained ; and all this we have found in out reasoning upon the three divine persons brought oy cy 506 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. under consideration. And, therefore, we con- clude, with perfect conviction, arising from the clearest demonstration, that there must be three, and that there can be neither more nor less than three, persons in the Divine Essence. . 3. For should we suppose a fourth, then we suppose a person more than is necessary, accord- ing to every view of demonstrative reasoning, upon the existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being. And to suppose more than is necessary to the existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being, is downright ab- surdity and impossibility, and leads directly away from correct views of the Divine Being altoge- ther. For if, after we have fully and clearly as- eertained what is necessary to the existence, per- fection, and happiness of the Divine Being, we should go beyond what is necessary to the full and perfect proof of our position, and suppose that there is a fourth, and at the very same time must be convinced that this fourth is no way necessary to the existence, perfection, or happi- ness of the Divine Being,—we may, with equal propriety, suppose a filth, because we suppose what is not at all necessary to the support and full proof of our position, and which can never be proved. And if we may suppose a fifth, why not a sixth? and if six, why not sixty? and if sixty, why not six hundred? and if: six hundred, why not six thousand? and sd on, ad .infiniéum ;-— VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 507 which is the height of absurdity, and at once dges away all correct views of the Divine Being, and leads to the utmost extravagance and im- piety. ‘Therefore there must be three, and there ean be neither more nor less than three, persons in the Divine Essence, according to the position founded upon the principle of the happiness of the Divine Being. 4. Besides, the very nature, and necessary law of the procession of the Divine Essence and per- fections, from the first mode or person, to subsist in the second, and from the first and second, in one active principle, to subsist in the third, com- pletely shuts up all farther views and ideas of procession. For as the Divine Essence is one, simple; uncompounded, and indivisible, there can be no more communication to any other besides the third. Because, as the Divine Essence and perfections, both natural and moral, wholly and entirely proceed from the first, that they may subsist in the second, in a mode distinct from what they do in the first, and this procession being as necessarily existent as the Divine Being itself, and that without beginning and without end; though in speaking of it, for want of suit- able terms, we are obliged to use terms that might be distorted, and interpreted as implying beginning and ending, yet such ‘limitations are by no means intended, notwithstanding, from the poverty of language, we are obliged to use the . U 2 308 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. words best adapted to general use, and miosé expressive, according to our finite capacity. And as we mean that the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, natural and moral, pro- ceed from the first and second, in one active principle, that they may subsist in the third, in a mode distinet from what they do either in the first or second, this procession must be considered just as necessary, natural, and unceasing, as the very existence of the Divine Essence itself. It is, therefore, impossible that there ean be any farther procession, because the principle of pro- cession, from the first and the second, being ne- eessarily united, necessarily simple, indivisible, and uncompounded, it is absolutely impossible: that even the third could unite with the first and second, or with either one or other of them; for that which is naturally and essentially necessary, can admit of no alteration, addition, or diminu- tion, but must continue eternally the same, unt- form and invariable. | It is, therefore, no more possible that, from the. first and second, im one necessary simple princi- ple, it can proceed to any other mode of subsist- ence, or person, from the third, than it is possible for the Divine Being to change, or cease to exist. And it is no more possibile that, from the first, se- cond, and third, it can proceed to unite in one ne- cessary principle of procession to a fourth, than it is for the Divine Being to change, or cease to exist; VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 309 because the Divine Essence and perfections sub- sist in the third, in a mode distinct from what they do in either of the two first. ‘Therefore there can be no other principle of union among the divine persons, in any farther procession to a fourth.” We argue, that the first and second are united, in one simple, absolute principle, in the procession to the third; because such an union is absolutely necessary to the very existence, per- fection, and happiness of the Divine Being. But no such necessary principle of unien m proces- sion can be found, between the third, and either or both of the other two. .For supposing the first and second in necessary union, as we have done, how can we suppose the third in the same neces- sary union, seeing the subsistence of the Divine Essence and perfections exist in the third, in a mode distinct from what they do in either the first or second? And as the first and second are considered as necessarily united, this necessary union can neither be altered, augmented, or di- minished: there cannot, therefore, be a principle of union between the third and the ether two, in procession to.a fourth. 5. And to suppose a principle of necessary union between the third and any one of the other two, in procession to a fourth, must leave out a divine person; and this must divide the Divine Essence, which is absolutely and necessarily in- Mivisible,—a contradiction too glaring to admit U 3 310 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. of hypothesis. There cannot, therefore, be a principle of necessary union among the three, in procession to a fourth. Anda principle of union between any two of them, without the third, in procession to a fourth, must either compound, multiply, or divide the essence, which no man, in sober reasoning, will ever be able, for a single moment, seriously to admit. . 9D TpSm myn 7. 434) sy. Maw. Finan NBN MeN APN po mex Tb myn op pn Munn? ; Ryn Von sy Ox, « But oh that God would speak, and open his mouth against thee! and that he would shew thee the secrets of wisdom, that they are double to that which is! Know, there- fore, that God exacteth of thee less than thine ry é VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 39 iniquity deserveth. Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the mance un- to perfection ?”’ That the word M78, in each of these quota- tions, signifies a divine person, and is in the sin- gular number, requires neither illustration nor proof; and that it signifies a divine person, and is in the singular number, in many other pas- sages of this book, the learned reader will be fully satisfied, by consulting chap. xii. 6. xv. $ XVi. 20, 21. xix. 6, 21. xxii. 12, 26. xxvii. 8,10. XXIX. 4, XXXi. 2. XXXili. 12, 26. xxxiv. 12. 5. Now, that the book of Job is of very an- cient date, if not the very first part of inspired writing given to the church, is fully proved by a learned Dissertation in the end of a book, en- titled, Zhe Origin of Laws, by the famous Pre- sident De Gogue ; in which the stars and con- stellations mentioned by Job, were examined with astronomical accuracy by the author: and these observations appear to fix the date of this book very early. And farther, the same word is used in the singular number, as signifying a divine person, by Moses himself, Deut. xxxii. 15, 17. “But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked: thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness: then he forsook (77%) God who made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation, 17. They sacrificed unto devils, and not to (7°) God; to gods whom 398 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. they knew not, to new gods that sprung newly up, whom your fathers served not.” And other inspired writers, of a much later date than Job and Moses, use the same word in the very same sense, as signifying a divine person in the singu- lar number.—Psal. xviii. 32. “Y759 MOK 9 SAIN oY oC mrp, « For who is God save the Lord? or who is a rock, save our God? See also Psal. |. 22. and cxxxix. 19. and Prov. xxx. 5. After a fair examination of the Hebrew word MVWON, used in these texts, nothing can be more evident than that it is in the singular humber,-—= nothing more certain than than that it signifies a divine person; and we argue, with cautious re- verence, that it signifies the first blessed person in the Divine Essence; and this shews the pro- priety, and indeed the necessity, of considering ENN as plural, and as signifying and expressing the adorable persons in the Divine Essence.— And as we have now ascertained a word that signifies the first divine person, so we turn to examine another word, which we presume, with becommg caution, signifies the second person in the Divine Essence. 6. Following out this principle, we say, there is another word in the Hebrew langnage, which is equally significant and expressive of a divine person; and which, with becoming reverence we presume, points out the second person in the Divine Essence. Jt is "29. Many who have VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 399 fully believed the doctrine of the Trinity, have been greatly puzzled to find a word in the He- brew Scripture corresponding to the word Aczvoc in the Greek, which is sometimes used to ex- press the second person by the writers of the New Testament. And this word acyoc has been ‘frequently quoted by those who deny the doc- ‘trine of the Trinity, as having nothing corre- ‘sponding to it in the Old Testament- This, however, is not the case. As the word E2Y0°X is plural, and as we have found already a word in the Hebrew Scriptures, which signifies and ex- presses a divine person, so we find a word in the Hebrew Scriptures which exactly signifies and expresses the same divine person which the word Aoyvos does in the Greek; and this is the second person in order in the Divine Essence. For the sake of both the fore-mentioned classes of read- ers, we shall now examine this Hebrew word: "27 is exactly correspondent and significant of the same import with the Greek word Asyoc, in many instances. That other Greek words may sometimes be used to translate this Hebrew word, we do not deny; but that the word Acyos is used with great propriety and exactness to express the meaning and import of the Hebrew word 75%, we positively affirm; and, not willing to rest up- on bare assertion, we shall examine some evi- dences in support of the fact. 7. ‘The learned Calasio, whose Concordance 400 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 4 of the Hebrew Bible is one of the most laborious and able performances we have on the Scriptures of the Old Testament, explains the word thus: *«*"3% nomen, sermo, verbum, doctrina, consi- ‘lium, mandatum, rei geste narratio, quiquam ** exponetur—unde =" loquitio, loquela, sermo. «« ft 7352 eloquium vel colloquium.” Lhe author proceeds much farther in his explanation of the -meaning of this word, which the learned reader may consult if he please. The old lexicographer, Schindler, gives very nearly the same explanation of this word. Sto- Kius, and Robertson in his ‘Thesaurus, respec- tively use very nearly the same words in their explanation of "31; and, among other meanings, the laborious Parkhurst, in his third paragraph in the explanation of it, speaks thus: “ Asan. «5 is used for the celestial fluid or light, on ‘** account of its activity, whether operating with «¢ that mild influence which melts the ice, or with ‘¢ that resistless impetuosity which, in lightning, ** bears down every thing before it. Psal. cxlvii. ‘18. ‘ He sends forth his ice like morsels: who ‘« can stand before his cold? He sendeth out his «© (42%) word, and melteth them; he bloweth « with his wind, the waters flow.’—Hab. iii. 4, 5. **¢ Andsthe brightness (was) as the light. Be- “ fore him went ("27) the word, and (QM) a “ flashing fire went forth at his feet.’ (See Bates « Crit. Heb. p. 126-7.) VI. nv 735, The Werd VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. AOl “of the Lord, a title of Christ the true lieht ; ““ (comp. sense iii.) ‘For no man knows the *« Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever “the Son will reveal him. Matth. xi. a7. ““comp. John i. 18.’? Now, as the Hebrew word EDWIN js plural, and used in the very first verse of the book of Genesis, as performing the whole work of creation, and as we have found one word, signifying the first person in the Divine Kissence, and now bring forward the word “D5 as signifying and expressing the second person in the Divine Essence; and this word is interpre- ted or explained by the Greek word Acyoc, and the same work is ascribed to this second divine person, which is ascribed to the first 3——there is a harmony between the first of Genesis and the first of John, which deserves our particular no- tice. 8. Let us now adduce a few quotations of the Old Testament, in support of our argument that the word "27 signifies and expresses a divine per- son, and that the second in order in the Divine Kssence.—Gen. xv. 1, 4, 5. "ORM coon sane Senos nox) nes cone Se a sot on TST TIA IND PST sw 7? op von con PPD NST WN COND PY Tee > spd wb ayes TUDO #3 VOR AON TSA IAN ess PTO MI mr 1319 sores con o> Osi res covasisn sep yr, “« After these things, (729) the word of the Lord came unto’ Abram in’a vision, saying, Cc A(yZ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Fear not, Abram, I am thy shield, and thy exs ceeding great reward.” Now, that Abram un- derstood that this was a divine person that ad- dressed him, is clearly evident from the reply he makes in the following verses, and in particular, from his answer in the fourth. Thus—* And, behold, (935) the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels, shall be thine heir.” | Now, that a divine person actually appeared to Abram upon this occasion, is no less evident from the circumstances mentioned in the follow- ing verse. ‘ And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them; and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.” The attentive reader will readily perceive that, through the whole following verses of this chap- ter of Genesis, a divine person carried on: this intercourse with Abraham. So the holy patri- arch believed at the time; so Moses, the inspired penman, believed at the time he wrote; and so it is the will of the Holy Spirit that every reader should believe, in all ages of the church: And this same word is used to signify and express @ divine person, in many other places of the Old ‘Testament.--Example, 1 Sam. iii. 7. “ Now Sa- muel did not yet know the Lord, neither was (735) the word of the Lord yet revealed unto VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 403 him. Ver. 21. And the Lord appeared again in Shiloh ; for the Lord revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by (739) the word of the Lord.” No person who reads these verses without prejudice, can for a single moment doubt that "27 is used to signify a divine person. In chap. xv. 10. the same word is used to signify and express a divine person; and so it is 1 Kings xiii. 9, 17. and xix. 9. and also Psal. cvii. 20. Now, that this is a full, fair, and just interpretation of the word, is clear from the New ‘Testament, where the Greek word Avsyoc is used to signify and express the very same divine person, that is, the second glo- rious person in the Divine Essence; 1 John v. 7. and Rev. xix. 18. John i. 1—5. 14.3 where it is applied by the inspired penman to signify our Redeemer in his divine nature, It is wonderful to observe how fond those who deny the doctrine of the Trinity are to use the Greek word Aovyog instead of voc, not aware that, in most instances, these words are used by the inspired writers to signify the very same thing. The laborious and pious Cruden, in his excellent Concordance, speaks in the following manner. 9. “ In Hebrew 735 dabar, in Greek psjuce OF Aovos, rhema or logos, signifies, 1. the eternal Son of God, the uncreated Wisdom, the second person of the glorious Trinity, equal and con- substantial with the Father. ‘The evangelist John (chap. i. J.) more expressly than any other, cc2Z AQ VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. has opened the mystery of this word, when he tells us, ‘ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.’ ‘‘ Christ Jesus is ealled the Word, (1.) In re- spect of his person; he being the oy ess image of the Iather, as we are told, Heb, i. 3,3 just as our words are of our thoughts. (2.) Ke respect of his office; because the Father made known his will to the church in all ages by him, as we declare our minds to one another by our words, John iii. 34. (3.) Because the Messiah was cal- led 727, « the Word of God,” by the Jews. The Chaldee paraphrasts, the most ancient Jewish writers extant, generally make use of the word MEMRA, Which signifies «the Word,’’. in those places where Moses puts the name, ‘| Jehovah.” And it is generally thought, that under, this name the paraphrasts would intimate the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity. Now, their testimony is so much the more consider- able, as, having lived before Christ, or at the time of Christ, they are irrefragable witnesses of the sentiments of their nation concerning this article, since their Targum or explanation has al- ways. been, and still is, in universal esteem among the Jews.. And as they asscribe to Memra all the attributes of the Deity, it is concluded from thence that, they believed, the divinity of the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 40% Word. They say that it was Memra or %55, the Word, which created the world; which appeared to Moses on Moutit Sinaig which gave him the law; which spake to him face te face; which brought Israel out of Egypt ; ; which marched be- fore the people; which wrought all those mira- cles which ate recorded in the book of Exodus. Tt was the same Word that appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre; that was seen of Jacob at Bethel, to whom Jacob made his vow, and whom he acknowledged a as God; Gen. xxviii. 20. ‘If God will be with me, and keep me in this way that I go, &c. thien shall the Lord be my God.’ ’”’—Now, that the writers of the Targums were judges of the signification of Hebrew words, and of the Hebrew language, will not be disputed by any who know their histor y's and that they com- posed the Targums before Christianity, as para- phrasti¢ illustrations of the Hebrew text, is equally certain; and tfiatéroré at the time they wrote, they could have no other view or design i in these compositions, than to enable the people to under- stand the Hebrew Scriptures more correctly. All who can read the Targums will readily admit the force and conclusion of these argu- ments, and almost all writers who have treated of the subject have unanimously done so. 10. A learned and pious writer of the present day, speaking concerning the Asyes or Word of God, from the Chaldee Taroums, expresses him- Cc cS 406 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. self thus:—‘* The person here styled the Acyoc, is called “1 “35 debar yehovah, “the Word of Jehovah,” Gen. xv. 1, 4. 1 Sam. iii. 7, 21. xv. 10. 1 Kings xiii. 9,17. xix. 9, 15. Psal. cvii. 20:5 and the Targums, or Chaldee paraphrases, fre- quently substitute " 892% meymra d’ yay, the “* Word of the Lord,” for ‘* Jehovah.” Thus the Jerusalem Targum in Gen. iii. 22. And both that and the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel, in Gen. xix. 24. And Onkelos, on Gen. ili. 8. for *‘ the voice of the Lord God,” has, * the voice of the worn of the Lord,” The Jerusalem Tar- gum on Gen. i, 27. for, ‘* And God created man,” has, ** The worn of Jehovah created,’ &c. Compare Targum Jonathan on Isa. xlv. 12. xlvil. 13. Jer. xxvii. 5. And on Gen. xxii. 14 that of Jerusalem says, ‘* Abraham invoked,” TINTON Taw beshem meymra d’ yay, in the name of the worp of the Lord, and said, Thou art Jehovah.” So Onkelos.--Gen. xxvii. 20, 21. “‘ If the worp of Jehovah will be my help,— then the woxp of Jehovah shall be my God.” ——See Parkhurst under the word ACTOS. ‘* After a serious reading of the Targums, it seems to me evident, that the Chaldee term 82" meymra OY WORD, is taken personally in a multi- tude of places in them. When Jonathan ben Uzziel speaks of the Supreme Being as doing or saying any thing, he generally represents him as performing the whole by this AJeymra or worp, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Ay? which he considers not as a speech or a word spoken, but as a person distinct in the Divine Essence, and to whom he attributes all the ope- rations of the Deity. ‘To attempt to give the word any other meaning than this, in various places throughout the Targums, would, in my opinion, be a flat opposition to every rule of construction; though, like the Greek word Ac- ‘voc, it has other acceptations in certain places. See Lightfoot.”—Clarke’s Bible. The reader will find great satisfaction by con- sulting the fore-mentioned authors. What strong- er arguments can be adduced than the foregoing, to prove that the Hebrew word “%3", does really and truly signify and express a person in the Divine Essence, and that the second. That the word may have other meanings in other passages, is not disputed; but that it has this meaning al- $0, as one, cannot be denied by any who wish to abide by sober reasoning, and fair interpretation. Thus far we have proceeded in our reasoning to demonstrate the plurality of persons in the Divine Essence, by the words “NX and 727 and any unprejudiced person who will read what is said upon these words, will perceive, with great satisfaction, that if the doctrine of the ‘Trinity be not understood, it is not because it is not plainly taught in the Old Testament, as well in the New. From this view of the word, which is frequently CCG 40S VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. used in the Old Testament to signify the second person in the Divine Essence, we now proceed _ to conclude our reasoning and arguments on this head of the subject, by an examination and. in- vestigation of another Hebrew word, which sig- nifies and expresses the third person in the Di- vine Essence. This word is [, spirit, whose meaning, according to Calasio, is, ‘« Latus dila- “« tatus, recreatus, refectus, refrigeratus, refocil-. “* Jatus, expatiatus fuit, quievit, requievit, pausa- ** vit, convaluit, ‘respiravit, refrigerium habuit. “< [1,1 est spiratus, ventus, flatus, &c. anima ‘‘ hominis et angelus et Deus.” 7 Now that this word signifies that person in the Divine Essence,. which, the Scriptures. call the Holy. Spirit, or which we have in the foregoing _ Propositions called the third.person, is perfectly, evident from the following quotations. Gen, i. 2, ‘And (S78 mM) the Spirit. of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Some translators and critics, very eminent for learning and abilities, translate this phrase, “a mighty sweeping wind,”’—-** a tremendous tempest,”? and the like. . That the single word ™, does. signify wind, and bas other significations besides, is not denied ; but it is most positively denied that ever, in any one instance, the phrase, or the two. words” XM, in the whole.of the Old Testament, signify wind, or that ever it has been understood to do, so by any. of the early. translators. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.: 409 Again, Gen. xli. 38. «* And Pharaoh said unto his servants, Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom (C2778 NM) the Spirit of God is.”” We submit to the sober reader, what connection a mighty sweeping wind could have with the phrase 778 1 in this verse: and yet it might have been as well translated so in this verse, as in the second verse of the first of Genesis. Sec also Nxod. xxxi. 8. “ And I have filled him with (PARK M) the Spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all man- ner of workmanship.”—-Numb. xxiv. 2. “ And ~“Balaam lifted up his eyes, and saw Israel abiding in his tents, according to their tribes; and ‘Gn SIN): the Spirit of God came upon him.?— See'also'1 Sam. x. 10. and xi. 6 and xix. 20; and, 2-Chron. xvi. 1. and xxvi. 20. | 12. Again, the same word is used to ex. press the third person in the Divine Essence, in other passages.—Judg. vi. 34. « But (7 min) the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gideon, and he blew a trumpet; and Abiezer was gathered after him.” ‘That this was a divine person whe influenced Gideon, is evidently plain from the account of the miracle wrought, in the end of the chapter.—See also Judg. xi. 29. © Then ‘Gas mw) the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jeph- thah,” &c. ‘Fhe same phrase is found chap. Mill, 25. and xiv. 6. and 1 Sam. x. 6. xvi. 14, 2. Sam. Xxill. 2. 1 Kings xxii, 24. 1 Chron. xii 410 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 18. Isa. xi. 2. xxxiv. 16. In all these places the phrase is the same, and must be translated the same; and in every place it points out a divine . person.—Isa. xi. 1, (UD IN NY) «The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,” &c. In the Gos- pel of Luke, iv. 18. our Lord applies these very words to himself, ** The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,” &c. And in the first verse of this fourth of Luke, we read, ‘ And Jesus being full (Mvevpa]@ ‘oyiz) of the Holy Ghost, return- ed from Jordan, and was led (N) God said, We shall make man in our image, after our likeness; and they shall have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” That the plesed persons in the Divine Essence are here represented as in consultation, previous to the creation of man, the last, the noblest, the highest part of the works of the Divine Being here be. low, the representative of the Divine Being a- midst these works,—has always been understood. The language expresses plurality of persons, and is quite unintelligible and improper in every other point of view. After the divine consulta- tion and purpose, then follows the execution.— « So ([278) God created man in his own im- age, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” In these words, Dd 4 ADA VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: we discover the second person in the Divine Essence executing the divine design, and _ crea- ting man according to the plan fixed by the ado- rable persons in council. ‘This cannot fail to attract the attention of the reader; to awaken his emotions of admiration and wonder; and to turn his attention to the study of the subject.— «« And (°7°X) God blessed them, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” In this, the attentive reader will naturally discover the third person in the Divine Essence performing that part assigned, in order to ratify, approve, finish, and complete the wonderful work of creation, and at the same time graciously bless the newly created man in all the solemnity and glorious majesty of the di- vine perfections. And thus man was perfected in all the powers and faculties of his soul and body, and also blessed by the Holy Spirit. A similar use of the name ™', we find in the book of Numbers, expressly appointed by the Divine Being as a standing form for the priest to bless the children of Israel——-Numb. vi. 22, «« And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 293. Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, On this wise shall ye bless the children of Israel, say- ing unto them, 24. (77) The Lerd bless thee, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 495 and keep thee; 25. (7) The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be’ gracious unto thee; 26. (7) The Lord lift up his Ae Seip nance upon thee, and give thee peace.” The repetition of the word Lord in these verses, evi- dently shows design; and no other design can be conceived, with any rational consistency, but that of expressing the distinct persons in the Di- vine Essence: for though the word M7 used here, signifies the Divine Essence and perfec- tions more particularly, yet it does not exclude personality, as already proved. The threefold repetition of the word, therefore, is very striking : the one expressive of the first, the other of the second, and the other of the third person in the Divine Essence. The very same use of the word is found in Isa, xxxtii. 22. “ For (™) the Lord is our judge, (7) the Lord is our lawgiver, 7") the Lord is our king: he will save us. How are we to account for this repetition? Shall we call it tautology? Surely not. If we believe the ~ inspiration of the text, we dare not ascribe tauto- logy to the Holy Spirit. It is evident that the design is the same with the foregoing example, and is intended to point out the glorious persons of the blessed Sa aie same sentiment is taught in Isa. vi. 3. * And one cried unto ano- élier, and said (MXS¥ Ms ep emp wp), Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of Abst the 4.26 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. whole earth is full of his glory.”’ Surely the threefold repetition of the same adjective to one noun, is significant, and shows design; which can only be, to point out the three distinct per- sons in the Divine Essence. A similar phrase- ology is used in the New Testament.—Reyv. iv. 8. ‘«¢ And the four living creatures had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within ; and they rest not day and night, saying, CAyiG, ‘Ayi@s ‘Ayi@y Kupi@ ‘9 QcGry (9 WayTon- PATE) 0 My Karl O Wy KHL 0 coryopev@)s Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.” Exemplified in the second chapter of Genesis. s. From these views we plainly discover, that the doctrine of the Trinity is taught throughout the whole of the first chapter of Genesis, and, in a similar manner, in the passages just quoted ; and by pursuing the subject, we shall discover that the same doctrine is as clearly taught in the second chapter as language can expressit. [We have quoted the language of this chapter more literally than our present version, and shall do so throughout; not that we find fault with the pre- sent translation, or wish to insinuate any thing disrespectful with regard to its merits: we only use that freedom which a more rigidly literal translation will bear.]}—We read, Gen. jet. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 427 ** These are the particulars of the heavens and the earth, in the day that (TON mm) the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” These two names or terms by which the Divine Being revealed itself at first to man, and which continue joined from that time to this, as exhibited in the holy Scriptures by the divine inspiration of the sacred penmen, turn the mind of the reader at once to the solemn, the important, the myste- rious contemplation of the Divine Essence, and the divine persons subsisting in that Essence, at one and the same time. Every reader acquainted with the Hebrew language, must see and admit, that the word (7) Jehovah, here rendered Lorp, is singular, and signifies the Divine Es- sence and perfections, as necessarily existent, necessarily living, intelligent, spiritual, eternal, immense, and immutable. And at the very same time, every reader of the Hebrew Scriptures must _ as evidently perceive, and fully admit, that the word S°?N, here rendered God is plural, and ‘must be considered, when applied to the Divine _ Essence, as significant, and expressive of the dis- tinct modes of subsistence or persons in that Es- sence. No tortures of criticism, no labours of prejudice, no interpretation of parties, are able to turn aside the full and perfect view,.both of the unity of the Divine Essence, and the plurality of persons subsisting in that Essence, represented, signified, and expressed by these two words, which 428 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. we may call names or terms comprehensive of the Divine Being, wholly and in all respects, royON i, the Lord God, or the Divine Being, in essence and perfections, natural and moral, in personality. It is this Divine Being that is here said to have made the earth and the heavens. This glorious Being, expressed in the foregoing chapter by the single word cnx, God, in the work of creation, according to the part proper to each divine person, in order only, in that great work; not in superiority or inferiority either in time, dignity, or nature, but in order only. And in this chapter, in the verse now quoted, we are presented with the glorious persons in the one undivided Essence. The word (77) Lorp, applicable to each, and actually in the Seriptures of the Old Testament, very frequently applied to each of the three divine persons distinctly ; there- by intimating and signifying, that each is neces- sarily a partaker of the Divine Essence and per- fections, in distinct subsistence of personality with the other two. It is never doubted that the word | (i) Lord is applied to the first person in the Divine Essence, and is expressive of the Father ; and it is fully proved by quotations innumerable, that the same word (777) signifies and expresses the second person in the Divine Essence, or the Son. And it is no less clearly proved by the Scrip- tures of truth, that the same word (7) Lord, represents, signifies, and expresses, the third per- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 429 son in the Divine Essence, or the Holy Spirit. He who wishes to see this word thus explained and proved, by the clearest force of Scripture criticism, will find many examples, and ample satisfaction on this head, in Searle’s Horm Soli- tari, a work well deserving attention from every student of the doctrine of the Trinity. 9. We find the same two words joined toge- ther as significant, and comprehensive of the Divine Being in essence and perfections, natural and moral, in the 5th verse of chap. ii, While we read in the first chapter, ver. 26, 27, 28. that (='8) God, the three distinct persons in the Divine Essence, after divine consultation, crea- ted man in the order of their distinct subsist- ence, according to the part chosen by each, in consistency with the order of their subsistence ; —-iIn this second chapter, ver. 7. we read, ** And (PN I) the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils _. the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” Here the Divine Being is represented and ex- pressed by these two words, both with respect to the Divine Essence, and all perfections natural and moral, and also with respect to the divine persons distinctly subsisting in that Essence. The -Divine Essence is one, simple, absolute, necessarily existent, and indivisible: the divine persons subsist distinctly, not separately, without superiority or inferiority, either in duration,, dig- 430 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. nity, or nature; and are in all respects co-equal, co-eternal, co-immense, and co-immutable ; each partaking of the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections alike. How mysterious, how glorious, and sublime, the view of that Being who created man! It would be needless to pro- ceed farther to quote these words as joined toge- ther by the inspired penman of this chapter: they are found in ver. 8, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21. repre- senting the same glorious and adorable Being in the mysterious view of Unity in Trinity, and Dite nity in Unity: and this may be observed as an universal rule, and it will direct to the proper understanding of these two words wherever they occur throughout the whole of the Old Testa- ment. Fyeany where they signify the same Dt1- vine Being both in essence and persons ; and wherever they occur, some one of the divine per- sons is more immediately represented ; while, at the very same time, the other two are understood and implied. There is no separation of the bles- sed persons in their essentiality ; there is only distinction: and thus the most pleasing satisfac- tion is afforded to the pious reader. ‘The glorious Trinity, the greatest and most mysterious of all subjects, is presented to his meditation and con- templation ; sometimes more immediately by one one divine person, and sometimes by another, according to the order of their distinct subsist- ence,.and according to the part chosen im council VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 431 and design by each, in the grand displays of creation, providence, and redemption, And by each and by all these great and interesting works, as well as by the holy oracles of inspiration, we are called daily to the study and to the know- ledge of our God, as he is revealed in each. And in every chapter and in every verse where these two words, or either of them, occur, the doctrine of the Trinity is comprehended and in- » ¢eulcated throughout the whole of the Old Testa- ment; and for want of such a view and consider- ation as this, the doctrine has been greatly mis- understood, and much neglected; whereas there is no doctrine more plainly taught, nor more fre- quently presented to the mind of the reader of the Hebrew Scriptures. And the reader of our English version may profit much from the fore- going view, and learn the doctrine from the trans. ’ lation of these words. He can be at no loss to understand the doctrine of the Trinity, from what is already submitted to his consideration, as often as he reads the word God, or the two words Lorp God, or the word Lorp, when applied to the Divine Being in the established version. 10. The third chapter of the book of Genesis, which records the very solemn and interesting event of the fall of man, and which also merci- fully points out and teaches the way of his reco- very, a8 comprehended in the divine promise, and the divine appointment of sacrifice, exhibits 432 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the very same doctrine, as often as the words marx mi, «the Lord God,” occur; and it 1s very remarkable that these words occur fre- quently together, and the word mann, «¢ God,” occurs frequently by itself in the compass of this chapter, and even in the bounds of the very first verse. “© Now the tempter was more subtle than any living creature of the field, which (SON ry) the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath (778) God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” In this verse the sacred penman, by inspiration, tells us, that (eanox mm) the Lord God had made the beasts of the field. And in chap. i. ver. 25. the game writer, with the very same authority, tells us, that (2°78) God made every beast of the . field. : ; Now what can we understand by the difference or variety of the expressions of the inspired pen- man? Surely nothing else than that the word mim, « Lord,” which signifies the Divine Es- sence and perfections, natural and moral, must also comprehend the divine persons ; and that the word Kou eDavyray ev ‘aurn ‘nt “Ager, Kou “4 LoDiay naxt moAuPeoy “Arecneta. . “ And there appeared in this Triad, (meaning the Triad expressed in the foregoing lines,) Vir- tue, and Wisdom, and Truth, that know all things.” Though these three hypostases are afterwards styled principles, and though, in this respect, the Chaldaic philosophy appears to blend 12 500 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. itself with the Cabbalistic theology, the first Sephi- roth, or (19>) Kether; the crown is doubtless alluded to by, Ap:ry, or virtue. ‘The second ap- pellation is still more remarkable ; for the (AIDEN) Cochma of the Hebrews, Scio, or wisdom, may ~ be termed an exact literal translation. The third appellation agrees no less exactly with (795) Bi- nah, or intelligence. No language can convey more accurate conception than is to be met with in the word roavOpwy Arepxeters multiscia veritas, the Spirit of truth, full of celestial wisdom, referring ultimately to that omniscient Spirit who “ trieth the reins, and searcheth the hearts of the children of men.” That these three hypostases, or per- sons, are in the latter part of this section denomi- nated principles, is not a little singular ; and, at all events, is a mode of expression perfectly con- sistent with the three first Cabbalistic Sephiroth. In the very next section of these oracles of Zoroaster, remarkable for its singular title of tlarye meu Nec, or the Father and the Mind, that Father is expressly said to perfect all things, and deliver them over to Nw deuregis the second Mind. All this is highly consistent with the Rabbinical doctrine of the Trinity ; but could only originate in theological conceptions of a purer nature, and be descriptive of the office and character of a higher Mediator, even the eternal Ao) @ ~The whole runs thus; | : VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 501 Tavre nyotp eEersAcocs TIATHP, xe: NO TOLQEDCUTLEg AETTEPO ‘oy Tr pLdTov HANICET ELL Tay yEey@r ‘cuySpteve “‘ The second Mind,’’ it is added, “ whom the nations of men commonly take for the first.?-—— This is, doubtless, very strongly in favour of the first and second persons in the Christian Trinity, © and shews a wonderful coincidence between the doctrine of Zoroaster and the doctrine of sacred Scripture on this article. In the third section of the Chaldaic oracles, as arranged by Patricius, in that immediately fol- lowing, a still wider range is taken in the physi- cal and intellectual world, where we find the primordial source of Cabbalistic theology, and of those speculative notions, which probably formed the basis of the Pythagorean and Platonic philo- sophy ; it is observed, with singular conformity to this Hebrew doctrine of a certain plurality’ existing in the Divine Essence: t «, "Yoro Ovo vowy “y CuoyorG rnyy mepienerane Vu as Kat ‘0 rorytye ‘oc, AUT SOY ON, TEXTNVATO KOT [LOVs ¢ F Os voos “exBoos T pT Gre “* Under two minds is contained the life-generat- ing Fountain of souls; and the Artificer, who, self-operating, formed the world—he who sprang out of that mind.”’—-The allusion to the two first persons in the Divine Essence, is very striking in ‘these words in the doctrine of Zoroaster, and 113 ~ 502 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. wonderfully agrees with the words of inspiration. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” The following passage, cited by Proclus from these oracles of Zoroaster, is no less indubitably decisive in regard to the third sacred Hypostasis, than the preceding passages are, in regard to the first and second. | Mate 6: moaripnas Lstecvorors Lung esa vats Opus Dunyeon To WavTe. That is, ‘* next in order to the Paternal Mind, I Psyche dwell; warm, animating all things.’ — Thus, after observing in the first section, the Triad, or ro ©zioy, the whole Godhead collectively displayed, we here have each distinct Hypostasis separately and clearly brought before our view. The persons themselves are sometimes confound- ed, and their respective functions mistaken by unenlightened Pagans; but Christians, who are in possession of this doctrine by a renewal of divine revelation, ought rather to be penetrated with pity than struck with wonder at this. Upon a careful and strict investigation of the original parts of the Jewish Cabbala, with what may be supposed the radical parts of the doctrine of Zoroaster and the doctrine of the Hindoos VIEWS OF THE TKINITY. 403 upon this article, the most prominent features of all appear to unite and display themselves in the following passage. Tay] TIYPOX ‘ENOX enyevyatora ** All things are the ofispring of one fire.”’——In other grand points found in the Cabbalistic, the re mean and the Hindoo mythology, may be > observed the following remarkable passages. Enta cEwyuurs Tarnp oTepeopeate KOO PLU. That is, ‘the Father hath congregated seven firmaments of worlds.”-—By which, undoubtedly, are meant the seven last circles in the Cabbalistic cosmogony; the seven planets in the Chaldaic; and the seven Boobouns of the Indian. And as these were supposed to be animated, or to be the habitation of animated beings by these nations respectively, a similar sentiment occurs in the following line. € e Zesty 03 Trcvepreveay vDESnney ST THOOe “‘He (the Father) constituted a septenary of erratic animals.” : Lo this might also be added sentiments con- cerning the Metempsychosis, and the state of departed souls in the world beyond the grave. But these we do not follow,—only merely state the coincidence of these points of doctrine, all harmonizing one with another, among the Cabbal. E14 504 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. ists, the Chaldeans, and Hindoos; which add great weight to the conclusions already drawn upon the doctrine of the Trinity. And it is per- fectly clear, that though much abuse of the doc- trine of the Trinity has crept in among the later Cabbalists, Chaldeans, and Hindoos; yet the early teachers of this doctrine seem to have understood it, in some measure, correctly, and all to have agreed in harmony upon this point. The fair conclusion, then, is,—the early Chal- deans received the doctrine from the family pre- served in the ark, and retained it more or less pure by tradition, until the present day. It is, therefore, fair to adduce the foregoing oracles of Zoroaster and his followers, in proof of the docs trine of the Trinity among the Chaldeans. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 505 PROPOSITION XXIX. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, IN PERSIA. Havine begun to trace the doctrine of the Trinity, by tradition, in India, east of Chaldea, and then fixed upon Chaldea as the original resi- dence, in the postdiluvian world, of Noah and his descendants for a time, and, of consequence, of all religion and science; from this, as the fountain or source, the streams of religious know- ledge and human science have flowed, more or less purely, wherever the sons of men have di- rected their course to every part of the habitable globe ;—we come now to Persia, west of Chaldea, and follow the stream of the doctrine, running, though muddy, from the sacred fountain, through all parts where the inhabitants of that empire have extended their influence. In Persia, we find very early traces of it, though greatly de- based, pervading the religious opinions which ‘they had of their chief deities Oromasdes, “Mithra, and Ahriman. And notwithstanding the Persians considered the two last as inferior to the two first, yet our argument does not stand so much in the pure preservation of the doctrine, as in ascertaining the fact that they really enter- tained a belief of a Triune Deity, and to shew 506 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. that this is radically interwoven with the theolo- gical systems of every country, kingdom, and empire of Asia;—that quarter of the elobe in which this most sublime of’ all doctrines was re- vealed, and where it was first obscured and de- based. Still, however, the Divine Being has overruled the hearts of the inhabitants of Asia in such a way, as to preserve some knowledge of the doctrine, more or less clear and srtegd among the inhabitants of this quarter of the globe, amidst all their apostacy and departure from the true religion. The first striking feature of the doctrine of the Trinity in Persia, is found in the character ase signed to Mithra, the second person of their triad. ‘To him they ascribe the character of mediator. Now the doctrine of a mediator is as oid as the fall of man. The declaration made to the tempter in the way of threatening, but to our first parents in the way of promise,—and the institution of sacrifice, appointed by God him- self,—are the grand foundations of this doctrine, which was brought into the new world by Noah, though by tradition greatly debased in the course of time, yet still faintly preserved by the Persians in the character of their Mithra. This doctrine supported the patriarchs and real believers in the true church, amidst all the perils and persecutions through which they pas- sed; and even the heathen world betook them- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 507 selves to it, though only known to them by tra- dition, and much obscured and deteriorated with the blinded fictions of their own imagination. Indeed, either in truth or in error, the doctrine has been the refuge of fallen man in every age and in every country till the present day. And the very institution and practice of religious rites, of whatever kind, whether true or false, both imply and hold forth the doctrine of a mediator. He who presides in religious service, of whatever kind, whether true or false, represents a medi- ator in his respective class, whether of truth or error. Add to this the doctrine of the Metem- psychosis, and that of the fire-worship, and we can easily account for the worship of the heaven- ly host, among the Gentile nations. If the fire ‘was made the representative of the Divine Being on earth, the luminous orbs would still more pro- perly symbolize him. And the doctrine of the Metempsychosis would readily infer the presence of the departed to be in the happy abode of the Divine Being, in the orbs. The idea of him who presided over religious rites on earth, would rea- dily blend with the idea that the same would still presideover religious thingsi in the shining spheres, which were mistaken for the abode of the divine presence; and hence the strong inducement to worship the sun, moon, and stars,—both because their worshippers supposed they were the abode of the god whom they adored, and also of the 508 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. departed whom they counted dear to them.— Maimonides, Diodorus, and Pausanias, all agree m this, that it was not the orb, as such, that the heathens worshipped, but the Divinity Sup Heo to reside in it. Pausanias relates, that the Beotians held a grand festival to Apollo every ninth year, called the AcQyyPopx, in which they represented the whole planetary system by globes fixed to an olive branch, very richly decorated, and carried through their assemblies by a noble youth, in all the magnificent solemnity of divine worship.— But besides the character of mediator, the Per- sians ascribed perfection to their god Mithra. ‘They called him tgmAac:@, or triplicate. Thus, in general, whatever personage the ancients thought proper to deify, they always invented three properties or qualities belonging to that individual, which made a distinguishing emblem of the divinity they thus consecrated. They sometimes deified the world, and ascribed a tri- nity of parts to it, viz. the sensible, the aerial, and the etherial divisions. These, again, they divided into three, by the properties of figure, light, and motion. And these, again, they divi- ded into three—matter, form, and energy. And, what is equally remarkable, the Persians repre- sented Oromasdes, the chief of their Triad, as having triplicated himself. Thus Plutarch writes, i's ev ‘Opomacig TONG “SaUTOY avenouga—s Oromasdes, in VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 509 reality, thrice increased himself.””—And it is no less true, that they ascribed a threefold character to Ahriman. ‘They called him the preserver, the destroyer, and the regenerator of all things. The reader will at once perceive the striking analogy between Oromasdes, Mithra, and Abri- man; and Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva. Now if we farther take into consideration, the natural. and astronomical history incorporated more or less with theology by the whole of the Asiatic nations, the matter appears to be nothing more than their endeavours to account for the good and evil in the moral, and light and darkness im the natural, world. The original light, before the creation of the heavenly bodies, the Persians personified by Oromasdes. The created light and influence of the heavenly bodies they perso- nified by Mithra. Evil and darkness . desolate and destroy: these they personified by Ahriman. In the very same manner, the Hindoos have per- sonified their Trinity. Goodness and light create and preserve; therefore they are personified by Brahma and Vishnu: and evil and darkness, in common with the Persians, are personified by Siva. The Chaldean Trinity, which lay be- tween these two triads of India and Persia, is more pure than either. It consists of Virtue Wisdom, and Truth, each personified. ‘The strange view the Persians took of their zodiac, led them to assign the summer signs to Oro- 510 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. masdes and Mithra; and the winter signs to Ahriman. The other eastern nations took a similar view of their zodiac; and this was a fruit- ful source of imaginary influences and operations. It was undoubtedly this mixture of physical and astronomical calculations, and the continued imaginary contests of these two adverse cham- pions, viz. light and darkness, blended together with some obscure traditions of the revolt of the angelic bands, of the fall of man, and the con- tests of the great patriarchal families of Shem and Ham for the empire of the infant world,— that gave birth to the celebrated doctrine, so widely spread through the Oriental world, of the two principles of good and eval! This doctrine appears to have been very gene- rally received in the heathen world among all classes, whether philosophers, priests, poets, or common people. The views we have taken, es- tablish, in a very high degree, the authenticity of those verses of the Chaldean oracles, which have been handed down to us by men who were either enemies to, or ignorant of, the true doc- trine of the Trinity. Plutarch, a heathen philo- sopher, writes thus: ‘* Zoroaster is said to have made a threefold distinction of things; to have assigned the first and highest rank to Oromasdes, who, in the Oracles, is called the Father; the _Jowest to Ahrimanes; and the’middle to Mith- ras; who, in the same, is called soy dcvrepoy vey, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Bil ‘the second Mind.’ 7 ——Now, this quotation de. serves particular notice, seeing Plutarch was born in the first century, in a city of Boeotia, and must have had it from some other source. than the Gnostics professing Christianity. And it will be found, upon careful examination, that the doc- trine of Zoroaster spread through India, Persia, Greece, and, in one form or another, over all the - heathen world. As the true doctine of revelation was lost, philosophy supplanted it; and yet in philosophy, tradition still preserved the faint traces of the truth. Irom the foregoing view of the doctrine of the Trinity, preserved by tradition in Persia, and incorporated with the philosophy of Zoroaster, received from Chaldea, the inference is fair, and the argument logically conclusive, that the true doctrine of the Trinity was still preserved, though very much darkened and debased by tradition, in the lapse of time. If the remains of the true doctrine be still found there, whence could they come? Ifit be answered,—from India; whence did it come to the Hindoos? If it be answered, —from Chaldea; whence did it come to. the Chaldeans? If it be answered,—from the Cab- bala; whence did it come to the authors of the Cabbala? No answer can be given to this, but—— from true revelation. Thus the argument runs up to the fountain of truth, by whatever stream we trace it. 512 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XXX. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, IN SCY- THIA, COMPREHENDING THIBET, TARTARY, AND SIBERIA. Havine traced the doctrine, by tradition, through the vast regions of India and Persia, the one on the east, and the other on the west, of Chaldea,—we now direct our eyes northward to the extensive empires of Tangut and Thibet, and over the wild domains of Siberia; and in the whole of this immense tract of country, we find the doctrine recorded by tradition, more or less perfectly. Parsons, on the remains of Japhet, treating of Tangut, records, from authority which is thought good, that the Deli Lama, who sus- tains the character both of patriarch and king, gives medals, with the emblem of the Triune Deity whom they worship, stamped upon them ; some to be suspended around the necks of the worshippers, and some to be suspended in the chapels where they perform their devotion. The same author informs us, that the Roman Catholic ‘missionaries, when they arrived in that country, found that the inhabitants already possessed some imperfect views of this fundamental doctrine, and actually worshipped an idol, fabricated to resemble, as nearly as they could conceive, a Trinity of persons. : VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 513 And. with respect to the Tartars and Siberians, Van Stralenberg informs us, that all the nations north of ‘Lartary, observe a profound veneration for the number three ; and adds, a race of Tar- tars called Jakuthi, who are idolaters, and the most numerous people of all Siberia, adore one indivisible deity under three different denomina- tions, which, in their vernacular tongue, are cal- led Artugon, Schugo-Teugon, Tangara::. the first of which, is translated by Colonel. Grant, creator of all things ; the second, the god of armies’; and ‘the third, Amor ab utrogue procedens, the spirit of heavenly love proceeding from the other two, And the celebrated Siberian medal published by Dr. Parsons, is now deposited in the valu- able imperial cabinet. of St. Petersburg, on one side of which is engraved the figure of a triune deity, and on the other side a Thibetian, inscrip- tion illustrative of the, event on which it was struck ; it was found in the ruins. of an old cha- pel, together with many ancient manuscripts, near the river Kemptschyk. The image itself corresponds exactly to the Indian triad, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, and plainly inculcates the wor- ship of a’triune deity, in the mythological per- sons of Odin, Frea, and Thor, the god of the northern nations. ‘The Edda, that venerable re- lict of Runic mythology, represents this triple deity as sitting on three thrones, each person of the triad having a crown on his head. Dr. Percy Kk 514, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. gives an account of it out of the Edda, thus :— ** The character Gangler being introduced into the lofty hall of Odin, the roof of which was formed of brilliant gold, behind, three thrones raised one above another, and upon each throne. sat a sacred personage. Upon asking which of ‘these was the king, the guide answered, He who sits on the lowest throne is the king ; his name is Har, the lofty one: the second, Jarnuar, equal to the lofty one: he who sits on the highest throne is called Trini, the third.’ Those who have seen the drawings of the Trinity by Roman Ca- tholics, representing each person sitting on a throne, will at once recognize the affinity or re- semblance of the Scandinavian and Roman Ca- tholic representations of the same great doctrine ; the one guided by tradition from the patriarchs immediately after the flood; the other, by the records of immediate revelation. How surpris- ing to see these great extremes meet! And what adds to the wonder is, that the Jewish Rabbies themselves, in the Talmud on Daniel, speak of the thrones set, but can give no explanation of them; so ignorant do they appear of the true principles of their own Cabbala. From this view of the tradition of the doctrine of the Trinity, through the whole region of Asia, north of Persia, and brief glance of it in the northern nations, taken in connection with the idea that all the places we have mentioned have VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 515 been peopled by migrations originally from Chal- dea, the inference is fair, and the conclusion strictly inductive, that the descendants of Noah and his family must have carried the knowledge of the doctrine of the Trinity with them, com- municated either immediately by the first family _after the flood, or by tradition from succeeding generations. Hence our position 1s sufficiently | supported. | Kk? HIG VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XXXI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, IN ~* CHINA. ie oN As Ceylon, Japan, and China, are all originally , peopled by the same race of men,, the direct his-. tory of the doctrine of the Trinity, from tradition, | in any one of them, may answer for them.all.— _ Martinius, who resided ten years in China, and learned the language, and made himself acquaint- ed with the religious doctrines and worship of the empire, affirms, that they originally, in the pure period of their religious creed, worshipped only one supreme God, a spirit, and had no images in their temples, nor figures of any kind to excite devotion, nor idol to be seen in all their empire in early times; but in their places of worship they had the following inscription, in letters of gold, in their own language, THE sANc- TUARY OF THE SPIRITUAL GUARDIAN OF THE CITY. And their pure worship of the Divine Being, whom they called Xanertr, or Tyen, continued uncorrupted till the days of Confucius. It is remarkable that Confucius, the most divine philosopher of the Pagan world, should, after all, have been the innocent occasion of leading the Chinese into idolatry. At his death, he uttered the following prediction, as if moved by inspiration, Sr Iam Yeu Xim Gry—** In the west, the Holy One will appear.” His dis- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 517 eiples concluded that he intended the god Bhood of India, and instantly introduced the worship of that deity, with all the other idols and idola- trous worship of the Hindoos; and from that time the Chinese became idolaters. Yet still it would appear, that originally they believed the doctrine of the Trinity, and even held the doc- trine of mediation, or the necessity of pacifying the Divine Being by human sacrifice of royal descent, as the following quotation will abun- dantly shew.—‘ A most amiable and virtuous monarch, Ching Tang, the founder of the second imperial dynasty of China, bearing the denomina- tion Xang, was called upon by the public voice, at a period of national distress, to be.the propiti- atory sacrifice of offended Heaven. An univer- sal barrenness, arising from continued drought, having, for seven years together, desolated the kingdom, and thinned the inhabitants, Ching Lang was told by the priests, who interpreted the will of Heaven, that its vengeance could only be appeased by a human sacrifice; and he rea- dily became the devoted victim of that venge- -ance.. The aged king,” says Martinius, “ having laid by his imperial robes, cut off the venerable _ grey hairs of his head, shaved his beard, paired his nails, and subjected himself to other prepara- tory ceremonies, esteemed indignities in China, “barefooted, covered with ashes, and, in the pos- ‘ture of a condemued criminal, approached the KE 3 % 518 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. altar of sacrifice, where, with suppliant hands, he entreated Heaven to launch the thunderbolt of its wrath, and accept the life of the monarch, as an atonement for the sins of the people. The Chinese histories add, that, after he had finished his prayer, and for some time devoutly waited the awful stroke, which was to crush the sove- reign, and save the nation, (a stroke which Hea- ven, in remembrance of his piety and resignation, torbore to inflict,) the sky became suddenly black with clouds, and the rain descended in torrents, - go that the sterile earth shortly resumed its wont- ed fertility, and unbounded plenty reigned over the whole empire.’’—-The Chinese annals record this fact to have happened in the eighteenth cen- * tury before the Christian sera, and the same cen- tury in which Usher, and other able chronolo- gists, place the seven years famine of Egypt. | It is most likely that the Chinese derived their knowledge of the doctrine of the Trinity, and of a Mediator, from Noah, who originally founded /their empire, as their own records will prove, at whatever time we become fully acquainted with them. The Chinese, like other Pagan nations, are divided into two sects: the one who hold nearest to their original creed, and the other who have become quite gross. The purer sect still retains the doctrine of the Trinity, and worships a triform idol, as recorded by a missionary, after many years residence among them.—‘ This same Pe VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 519 sect (of Foi) has another idol they call San Pao. It consists of three, equal in all respects. This, which has been represented (by the Roman Ca- tholics) as an image of the most blessed Trinity, is exactly the same with that which the Chinese worship; and the missionary says, it 1s exactly like that which is on the high altar of the Trini- tarians at Madrid. If any Chinese whatsoever saw it, he would say, the San Pao of his country was worshipped in these parts.”’—And to this may ~ be referred the Chinese dragon, (compounded of a bird, a wild beast, and a serpent,) to which the emperor and his mandarins pay a deep worship, by prostrating themselves to it often, with their faces quite to the ground, and burning incense and other rich perfumes upon its altar.—Con- cerning the sect of the Chinese who have pre- served the doctrine by tradition, nearest to purity, we add the following quotation: ‘ The first and most ancient of these sects is called the sect of immortals, and the founder of it was Lao-Kiun, - who flourished before Confucius, about the year 600 preceding the Christian era. ‘They are cal- led immortals, say those writers who treat of the subject, from a certain liquor which Lao-Kiun invented, and which he affirmed would, if drank, make men immortal. It was the leading feature in Lao-Kiun’s system of philosophical theology, and a sentence which he continually repeated as the foundation of all true wisdom, that Tao, the KE 4 520 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. _élernal reason, produced Onn; One produced Two; Two produced Turer; and ‘Turne pro- duced all. things; a most singular axiom for a ‘heathen philosopher; and as Le Compte, from whose Memoirs of China the above sentence is copied verbatim, observes relative to it, a very evident proof that he must have had some ob- scure notions of a Trinity. | «« Among the ancient Chinese characters which have been preserved, we find the following, A, like the Greek delta. According to the Chinese Dictionary Kang-hi, this character signifies union. ' According to Choue-oun a celebrated work, A is three united in one. ‘The Lieou chou tsing hoen, which is a rational and learned explanation of ancient characters, says,—* A signifies intimate union, harmony, the chief good of man, of the heaven, and of the earth: it is the union of three.’ The book See-ki says,—* Formerly the emperor made a solemn sacrifice every three years to the Spirit, Trinity in Unity.’-—-ehin san ¥Y. The word Tao, in ordinary discourse, signifies rule, law, wesdom, truth, way, word. In the text of Lao Tse, it signifies the Divinity. ‘Yao (says he) is an abyss of perfection which comprehends all beings. ‘The Yao which can be described, is not the eternal Zao. The Yao is its own rule and model. ‘The Zao preserves the heavens, and sustains the earth. It is so elevated that none can reach it; so deep that none can fathom it; - so immense that it contains the universe; and VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 5? 1 notwithstanding it is complete in the smallest things.’ | , ‘«‘ He who is as invisible, yet cannot be seen, is denominated lieou ; he who can be heard, and yet speaks not to the ears, i; he who is as tangible, yet cannot be felt, is named ouc?. In vain do you consult your senses concerning these three ; your reason alone can discourse of them, and it will tell you that they are but one: above, there is no light; below, there is no darkness. He is eternal. There is no name which can de- signate him. He bears no similitude to any cre- ated thing. He is an image without form, and a * form without matter. His light is encompassed with darkness. If you look upwards, you cannot see his commencement: if you follow him, you cannot discover his end. What the Zao has al- ways been, such he continues to be; for he is eternal, and the commencement of wisdom. «* One of the missionaries at Peking, who wrote the letters from which I have made the above extracts, takes it for granted that the mystery of the Trinity was known among the ancient Chi- he, “nese, and that the character A was its symbol.— Lettre sur les Characters Chinois, 4to. Bruxelles, 1773.”--( See Dr. Adam Clarke’s Bible.) The inference from the whole foregoing part of this Proposition, is fair and decisive,—that the Chinese have believed the doctrine of the ‘Trinity ‘either more or less purely, from the very first commencement of their empire. $22 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XXXII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, . IN EGYPT... Havine traced the doctrine of the Trinity from tradition in Chaldea, Persia, and Scythia, it was not necessary to treat of it in Syria, Phoeni- cia, and Palestine; for the same theological te- nets with respect to a triad of persons in the Divine Essence, prevailed over all the countries and kingdoms of Asia, with shades of variation introduced by time. And as history records that the Phoenician Taut migrated into Egypt, and introduced his religious tenets there, we have reason to believe that there was little difference between the Phoenician and the Egyptian sys- tems, because both countries were originally peo- pled by two sons of Ham. The theology of the Lgyptians was at one time so awfully sublime, that their priests and philosophers concealed from the vulgar such doctrines as they thought should not be communicated to them, under the veil of hieroglyphics, and wrapped them up closely in ’ the shades of allegory. Now, the chief of these ‘secret tenets was the doctrine of the ‘Trinity. This they at first symbolized in their hierogly- phics by a czrcle representing the Divine Essence, and by a triangle representing the divine persons. The greatest personage of their triad they called VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 523 “IY, Oser Osiris, which signifies helper or helping, most gracious, kind, and beneficent helper. He was considered the Father of all, the primordial source from which the other two emanated.— The inhabitants of Thebais held the purest views of the doctrine in the earliest times, and worship- ped one pure spirit, whom they called Creru (93>) wing, that is, shelter, safety, protection — How significant! They represented Cneph by the figure of a serpent, and added to his body a hawk’s head, emblematical of eternity and omni- ~ science, and venerated this image with the most profound adoration. ‘They used to say of him, if he open his eyes, he fills the universe with light in his first-born region: if he wink, it is darkness. | They also affirmed that the winged Cneph pro- duced the god Phtha (179), the persuader, the allurer, the captivator. And thus (Uy) Osiris, (932) Cneph, and (7M®) Phtha, composed the true Egyptian triad of deity. The name Osiris was afterwards applied to the sun, Cneph to the winp, the Yuyy xocnez, the soul of the world animating and pervading the whole: and Phtha was applied to the fire which issued from the solar orb through the wind (or atmosphere. )-— These names and qualities ascribed by the Egyp- tians to their triad, and the other names and qualities which they ascribed to their triune ob- yect of worship, clearly prove to the reflecting 524, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. enquirer, that the Egyptian triad was in reality nothing but the’ Hindoo triad, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, under different names. Farther; Plutarch informs us, that the Egyp- tian theology was divided into two classes, the spiritual and the physical. The first was secret, and revealed to the initiated only: the second was made known to the vulgar, as better suiting their capacity. The second or vulgar triad, was CW) Oser, Osiris, considered as the sun; (WS) 4sh, Isis, the fire; (8) Or, Orus, the light. In Thebais the primitive doctrine of the Tri- nity was kept longer pure than in other parts of Egypt. And it is remarkable, that both in the pure and in the adulterated view of the doctrine, sometimes the worshippers ascribed all perfec- tion to one person of their triune deity, and sometimes to another. Thus, for example, Cneph or Isis is often represented with the whole attri- _butes of divinity, without the least regard to Osiris or Phtha. At other times, the same is done with Osiris; and at other times with Phtha or Orus. And the second Hermes Trismegist writes thus concerning the triad: “ Una sola lux Juit intellectualis, ante lucem intellectualem, et fuit semper mens mentis lucida; et nihil alind fuit hujus unio, quam spirifus omnia connectens.”— ‘There hath ever been one great intellectual light, which hath always illuminated the mind; and their union is nothing else but the spirit, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 525 which is the bond of all things.’——-Upon the whole, the first symbolic representation of the E- gyptian triad, when fairly considered, is far more Significant and expressive than at first sight one would think. Osiris is symbolized by a globe, —the most perfect figure. Cneph, by a serpent, significant of eternity and wisdom; and. Phtha, by wings, significant of spiritual influence. ~ , Taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration, and, moreover, adding the sojourn- » ing of Joseph and the other, descendants of Jacob ' so long in Egypt, there can be no doubt that the Kgyptians were instructed in the sublime doc- trine of the Trinity, both by tradition, which we have alread y traced, and by immediate oral infor- mation by the worshippers of the true God, who had the knowledge of this most important doc- trine, and who sojourned so long in that strange land... The inference, therefore, is both logical and conclusive, that the Egyptians had the know- ledge of this doctrine. from a very early period after the flood, and retained it .all along more or Tess pure, R26 VIEWS. OF THE TRINITY. PROPOSITION XXXII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, AMONG THE GREEKS. In tracing the doctrine of the Trinity by tra- dition in Greece, we must attend to Orpheus, the great founder of the Grecian mythology.— Who he was, lies under a veil of darkness, which no human efforts can either penetrate or remove. And it is most likely there were more of the same name than one, who had shone conspicu- ously in mythological studies, during succeeding generations, among the Greeks. Therefore, the only rational way of accounting for Orpheus, is that of the principle of the Metempsychosis, ac- cording to which the ancients supposed, that the soul of the first person who was eminent for any pursuit whatever, had entered into, and inspired all others, famous for the same turn of mind. Thus we have accounted for the many Zoroas- ters, and for the different Hermes’ of the Egyp- tians; and thus we may account for the succes- sion of persons of the name of Orpheus. But whoever the first Grecian Orpheus was, it is generally allowed that he derived his religious knowledge both from the Chaldeans and Egyp- tians, and brought the secret stores of their reli- gious systems along with him into Greece. His VIEWS Of THE TRINITY. 527 graud principle of both the Trismegistic and Or- phic religion is thus recorded by Proclus: Ny) Zeus usDaany LZevg fAsroa® AiG do ex waytee rersvMToxt. « Jove is the head and middle of all things: all things were made out of Jove.”—And this is per- fectly consistent with the Indian doctrine upon the same important topic. tb | The great difference between the Brahminical system of theology and that of the Grecian phi- losophers, consists in this,—that the former were too much inclined to spiritualize, the latter to materialize, every thing: with the former, all is ATMA, spirit, and Mata, illusion ; in the mind of the latter, for the most part, sensible objects pre- dominate, and the universal phoenomena were resolved into matter and motion. By Timotheus, Suidas, Cedrenus, and Eusebius, the whole my- thological doctrines of Orpheus have been pre- served; and, according to Cedrenus, Orpheus believed and taught the unity of God. Ajjje:ov0- ov AT XVTOWYs HAL AUTOU TOV aifeo@, HAL WAVY Twy ah auroy toy ai9epa, * the Creator of all things, even of ether itself, and of all things below that ether.’ And this account goes farther, and states that this supreme AnuioveyG is called 63, BOYAH, ZON, light, counsel, and life. And Suidas, con- firming or supporting the whole of this, adds, THUTH Ta Tote CVOLAT CA IAtary, Suver pty ameDyyaro, these three names express only one and the same power. 528" VIEWS OF THE TRINITY.’ And Timotheus concludes his account, by aflirming that Orpheus, in his book, declared, le T PLY AUTWY OVOMAT OY fetes GeorntG TH qroty] oe EN/EYSTOy ar out@» cote ra wavta,—that all things were made by oxE GODHEAD, 72 THREE NAMES, and that this God is ALL THINGS.—Now, the three distinctions of light, counsel, and life, evidently refer to a triad. in the Divine Essence, according to the know- ledge of these Christian philosophers. But let | us hear the same doctrine coming through the medium of a heathen philosopher. Proclus, upon the Timsus of Plato, presents us, among others, with the following verses, as the genuine produc- tion of Orpheus, which are as express upon the unity, as another passage is upon the trinity, or a triad of npposiagedi in that unity. “5 US Basins KS Zsue ari “OT AVT WY HOX,IVE ybASrs | ‘Ey HEAT S>s “as Secs pucuy YEVTOy MEY OE ao, ATE AYE ' Jupiter is the hing ; Jupiter himself is the original © source of all things: there is ONE POWER, ONE GOD, and one great ruler over all. The other passage is from the same acitlaiey who, in the course of his commentary upon the -Timeous, having noticed the divine triad of Ame- lius, a Platonic philosopher, cotemporary with Plotinus, as consisting of a threefold Demiurgus and Opifex of the world, or, to use his own words, € Noug T DELS BaciActs TeetS TOV OVTHy TOY Ex ovrey TOY Ope Tas $ that is, three minds, three kings, him that is, him VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: 529) that hath, and him that beholds ; most remarkable expressions, surely, to fall from the pen of. a hea- then writer. Immediately after, in terms as re- markable, he subjoins,—Tourouc ey TEAS yee aed Oy Miseyss umoriferal, mat T8o TW TAd]av Teekg Baciksas HAL TSC mae. OoGe Tes PANHTA, nat OT PANON, xaz KPONON, xa: ‘o Paso Toe au] w An iLsery Ge» ‘0 Pavys ésuve—~( AMELIUS. )—— Therefore, supposes these three minds, and these three Demiurgic principles to be the same, both with Plato’s three kings, and Or- pheus’s Trinity of (32) Puanns, (MR) Uranus, and (“p) Curonus; but it is Puanes who is by him supposed to ve principally the Demiurgus.— And Cudworth, spéaking of an unpublished. trea- tise of Damasius, entitled Tee apywy; Says,+—that philosopher, giving an account of the Orphic philosophy,:among other things informs us, that Orpheus introdticed TetnopDov Geor,, a triform deity: All these. views! of Orpheus are as direct toward the truth-as could be expected from, knowledge. handed down by tradition. . It will readily occur to every,reader, that there was a very great: dis- tinctionsbetween the truly philosophic.and/-the popular views of this grand doctrine, known by tradition in Greece in early times. ee 530. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY» PROPOSITION XXXIV. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE SENTIMENTS AND OPINIONS OF THE GREEK PHILOSOPHERS WHO HAD VISITED CHALDEA, PERSIA, INDIA, ANP EGYPT, AND WHO TAUGHT THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY AFTER THEIR RETURN TO GREECE. _ Arrer the numerous proofs in the preceding pages from philosophers, legislators, and priests, the most eminent in the Pagan world ; proofs which demonstrate that these teachers of reli- gious tenets were strongly impressed with notions of the important doctrine of the Trinity, similar, though greatly darkened, to those taught by di- vine inspiration 3 we shall, perhaps, be excused from swelling these pages with an infinite num- ber of other’ proofs that might be selected from the works-of Pythagoras, Plato, Parmenides, and others. © And we may be permitted to assert, that it was frou the fountains of India, Chaldea, Per- siay and Egypt, that those Grecian sages, as well by the channel of Orpheus, as by their own pet- sonal travels in those countries, derived: that co- pious stream of theological knowledge which was afterwards, both by themselves and their disciples, so widely diffused through Greece and Italy. It may, with truth, be affirmed, that there was scarcely one of all the celebrated philosophers who established the several schools of Greece, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY: E31 distinguished: by their names, who had not res sided, for a considerable period, either in one or other of the countries just mentioned. The eVi- dence of this will, perhaps, be satisfactory. We shall commence with the travels of Pytha- goras, who flourished in the sixth century before the birth of Christ. According to the account of ‘his disciple Jamblichus, the first voyage of Pythagoras in pursuit of knowledge, after the completion of his academical exercise at Samos, was to Zidon, his native place, where he was early initiated into all the mysterious rites and sciences of Pheenicia, the country whence the elder ‘Laut emigrated into Kgypt, and where the profound Samothracian orgia, and the Cabiric rites, were first’ instituted. From Pheenicia our philosopher travelled into Egypt, and there, with unabated ‘avidity after science, as well as with unexampled perseverance, continued under the severest possible discipline, purposely imposed upon him by the jealous priests of that country, during two and twenty years successively, to im- bibe the stream of knowledge at Heliopolis, at Memphis, and Diospolis, or Thebes. _ Astonished at his exemplary patience and ab- stinence, the haughty Egyptian priesthood re- jaxed from their established rule of never divulg. ing the arcana of their theology to a stranger; for, according to another writer of his life, Dio- genes Laertius, he was admitted into the inmost, L 12 532 VIEWS! OF THE TRINITY< adyta of their temples, and there was taugh those stupendous truths of their mystic philoso- phy which were never before revealed to any foreigner. He is said even to have submitted to circumcision, that he might more rigidly con- form to their dogmas, and leave no point of their most recondite’ sciences unexplored. It was du- ring this long residence and seclusion amidst the priests of Thebais, that he arose to that high proficiency in geometrical and astronomical know- ledge, to which*no Greek before him had ever reached, and few since have attained. - But all this aggregate of Egyptian wisdom could not satisfy the mind of Pythagoras, whose ardour for science.seems to have increased with the discouragements thrown in the way of his obtaining it. He had heard of the Chaldean and Persian Magi, and the renowned Brachmanes of India, and he was impatient to explore the hallowed caves of the former, and the consecrated groves of the latter. While he was meditating this delightful excursion, Cambyses commenced his celebrated expedition against: Egypt, which terminated in the plunder of its treasures, the slaughter of its: priests, and the burning of its temples. During the remainder of his abode in Egypt, he had the mortification to be a spectator of all those nameless indignities which his patrons and instructors: underwent, from that subverter of kingdoms, and enemy of science. Pythagoras VIEWS: OF THE TRINITY. 553. e himself was taken prisoner, and sent with other captives to Babylon. The Chaldean Magi, how- ever, at that metropolis, received with transport | the wandering son of science. All the sublime ar- cana inculcated in the ancient Chaldaic oracles, at- tributed to the elder Zoroaster, were now laid open to his view. He renewed, with intense ardour, those astronomical researches in which the Baby- lonians so eminently excelled; and learned from them new ideas relative to the motions, power, pro- perty, and influences of the heavenly bodies, as well as their situations in the heavens, and the vast — periods they took to complete their revolutions. Babylon must have been, at that particular period, the proudest and most honourable capital upon earth; since it is evident, from Dr. Hyde, that both the prophet Ezekiel, and the second Zoroaster, the friend of Hystaspes, whom Por- phyry calls Zaratus, (a name exceedingly similar to the Oriental appellation of Zeratusht,) resided there at the sametime. ‘The former, attached to the man who had submitted in Egypt to one fun- damental rite prescribed by the Jewish church, instructed him in the awful principles of the He- brew religion: the latter made him acquainted with the doctrines. of the two predominant prin- ciples in nature, of good and evil, and’ unfolded to his astonished. view. all the stupendous myste- ries of Mithra. ‘Twelve years, according to Por- phry, were spent’ by. Pythagoras in this renowned Lig Bod VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. capital; from which, when he had remained his liberty, determined to complete his tréastiré of Asiatic literature, he sought the distant but celée- brated groves of the Brachmans of India. Among that secluded and speculative race, he probably carried to the highest point of perfection attain- able in that age, those astronomical investigations to which he was so deeply devoted: by them he was probably instructed in the true system of the universe, which, to this day, is distinguished by hisname. Among them he greatly enlarged the limits of his metaphysical’ knowledge; and from them he carried away the glorious doctrine of the immortality of the soul, which he first divul- ged in Greece, and the fanciful doctrine of the Metempsychosis. It. will scarcely be contested that Pyehsber borrowed from the Egyptian priests, who were so deeply involved in symbols and hieroglyphics, that symbolical and enigmatical way of instruct- ing his disciples as to ethical and theologieal sub- jects, which he so universally adopted. Nearly all his most famous symbols have their origin, not in Grecian, but in Oriental ideas aid man- ners. ‘The same is true with respect to his vene- ration for sacred mystic numbers; for the ‘ten numerical characters of arithmetic were well known in India before they were known at all by the Arabs. It was in India that Pythagoras became such’ a master of mathematical know: VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 535 ledge. The tenet also held by him, by Socrates and Plato, relative to the agency of a good or an evil demon attending every individual, he derived: from the Chaldaic Theurgy. This ancient sage styled the supreme. Deity. ‘To ‘vy the Unity, and Moz, the Monap; a term by which Pythagoras doubtless intended to express his conceptions of the simplicity as well as purity of the divine nature. He likewise named the Most High, to aya%o, the chief good. From this eternal Monad, however, from this primeval Unity, according to Pythagoras and all his disciples, there sprang an infinite Duatity. Considering these expressions in their plain and native import, they convey to us the idea that Pythagoras believed the doctrine of the ‘Trinity, according to the instructions he had received concerning that doctrine, either from the prophet Ezekiel, or from the priests of those nations where he resided to attain knowledge. Besides, Dr. Cudworth informs us, that Pythagoras fol- lowed the principles of the Orphic theology, whose Trinity, we have seen, was we, BeAns Zan 5 or Licur, Counsex, and Lire. It cannot rea- sonably be doubted that he adopted this among the other doctrines of Orpheus. Therefore he both believed and taught the doctrine of the Trinity according to the knowledge he had of it. Parmenides was a disciple of Pythagoras. He was born in Elea, a city of Magna Grecia. The LI 4 536 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. city gave its name to the Eleatic sect to which he belonged. He flourished in the 89th Olym- piad. Neither he nor his doctrines are much: known. ‘They were written in verse, and pre- served by Plato, who studied the writings of this philosopher. But it is to Simplicius and Plotinus that posterity is indebted for the best explanation of the precepts of his philosophy; and the ves- tiges of the doctrine of the Trinity, though ob- scure, are yet to be found in his writings.. Of his philosophical theology, the great and funda- mental maxim was, that the Deity is ‘v xa: ronAa, or, ONE and MANY; which words, if they do not allude to the unity of the Divine Kssence, and the plurality of persons in that Essence, it is diffi- ~ cult to ascertain what they mean. Simplicius, who preserved the doctrine of this philosopher, as quoted by Cudworth, informs us, that Parme- nides wrote, not concerning a physical element, but concerning the true Ens; and the true Ens was no other than the Jehovah of the Hebrews. And Plotinus, commenting on Plato’s Parmeni- des, represents him as acKne eda g THREE dl- vine unities subordinate : 10 mewroy ‘ev to HUpLOITEpay ‘By NAL Seurepoy ‘ EY TOAAGs Asywy Hal TQLTOVs “EY HAL TOAAY ¢ . the first unity being that which is most properly and perfectly ONE; the second, that which is called by — him ONE-MANY 3 and the third, that which is by him expressed ONE AND MANY. Plotinus then adds, yee cup Diy@- "ST @P Kat avt@» ess Taig tow; SSO VIEWS. OF» THE: TRINITY, . 537 that he himself also (Parmenides) agreed in the acknowledgment of a triad of archichal bypos- tases.”’ ft ttiod | Plato was born at Athens in the 8th Olym- piad, or about 430 years before Christ. Socrates was his early tutor in philosophy. After the death of Socrates, he made himself master of the. Pythagorean philosophy in Italy, where he con- ferred with Kurytus, Philolaus, and Archytas.— These were the most celebrated of the followers of Pythagoras, whose doctrine was then become famous in Greece; and from these the Pytha-. goreans have affirmed that he had all his natural philosophy. \ He dived into the most profound and mysterious secrets of the Pythagorean doc- trines. After this he travelled into Egypt, to study mathematics, and the theological specula- tions of the Egyptian priests. He pursued the studies of geometry and astronomy with enthu- siastic ardour. For after all-he had learned in Greece, he found himself no more than a disciple of the priests of Thebais. From them he also learned the immortality of the soul. And his doctrines shew that he carefully studied the writ- ings of Hermes Trismegist. It would also appear that he had attentively perused the writings of Moses ; and most likely in the Hebrew language : for he must have understood the Egyptian lan- guage; and it being only a dialect of the He. brew, there is no improbability that he-had read 538 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. the writings of Moses in their original dialect. And besides this, such a multitude of Jews flock- ed to Egypt a little before and about the time he was there, that he could easily have learned the Hebrew language from them. And so certain was Numenius, a Pythagorean philosopher of the second century, that when he read Plato, accord- ing to Clemens Alexandrinus, he exclaimed, z yp ESI TlAaray, 7 Mwoeg oct] miley «© What is Plato, but Moses conversing in the language of Athens?” Now, that Plato taught the doctrine of a Tri- nity, has never been doubted by any who un- derstood his writings. ep The three hypostases that formed the Trinity of Plato, are ro ayafov, vous, OF Aoy@», (for he uses either the one or the other of these words to ex- press the second hypostasis of his Trinity,) and Vungn xocpe. When he calls the first hypostasis ‘9 T owt Gy 4-G, and ‘o pyc @& @zwy, and uses terms which mark a kind of subordination in his Tri- nity, it is scarcely possible to mistake an allusion so plain to the higher tr1ap for which we con- tend. The countries through which he travelled, and the people from whom he learned this pecu- liar doctrine, all point out the original source from whence it was derived. And from the Phee- nician, the Egyptian, and other Oriental dialects, intimately connected with the sacred language, Plato derived the term AOTO=, which expresses the second hypostasis in his Trinity. For AO- VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 539 POX, as has’ been before observed, is thé literal translation of the Chaldaic Mymna, the sacred appellation by which the ancient paraphrasts in- variably understood the Messiah. Now, as we have already pointed out Chaldea as the mother country of the human race, and of all human knowledge after the flood, the idea of the term AoyG», as originally expressing the second hypos- tasis in the Divine Essence, as being originally derived from that country, is both correct and satisfactory, and shews the propriety of its being used by the Targumists, by the apostle John, arid by Plato, who had it all fromthe same source, though in different ways. And so directly did the Platonists understand: the Aoy@-, as taught by their master, to mean the second hypostasis in their Trinity, that when Amelius read the first verse of the Gospel by John, he exclaimed « By Jupiter, this barbarian agrees in sentiment with our Plato, and, like him, constitutes the ACTOS of God in the rank of a first principle.” Those who wish to see the doctrine of Plato concerning the Trinity at full length, will receive great satis. faction by consulting Cudworth and Dr. Ogilvie on the subject. These writers have laboured with great ingenuity, and very considerable suc- cess, to shew, that the Trinity of Plato corre- sponded almost in every respect with the sacred - ‘Trinity of divine revelation. Perhaps they have both been somewhat sanguine in their efforts, by 5A0 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. not pushing their enquiries a little farther to the source from which Plato derived his knowledge of the doctrine in all its bearings. Indeed, until Maurice published his Antiquities of India, which work has appeared but lately, it was almost im- possible ‘to do justice to the. subject : But that author has traced it to its true source in the hea- then world, and shewn, with great perspicuity, where all the philosophers of Greece derived their knowledge of it; and he is the guide we have chosen to follow, without derogating from Cudworth or Ogilvie. a And it is perfectly evident from the foregoing, and from what may be farther found in Plato’s own writings, and from the writings of those who have commented upon them, that he held the doctrine of a Trinity, in his theological senti- ments, with as much accuracy as could be ex- pected, all things considered. 3 Another of the most express and clear of the ancient philosophers on this subject, was Nume- nius, a Pythagorean, who flourished in the second century, and who, if Eusebius has rightly inter- preted his sentiments, wrote directly concerning » triune sovereign Deity. He made the second hypostasis of his trinity the son of the first; and, by a mistaken view, as might be expected from his theory, the third the son of the second. Plotinus followed Plato very closely in his views of the Trinity. The first hypostasis of his Trinity WIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 54} consisted of to ‘sv, the onE; the second, yee, the MIND; and the third, Wuyi, the souL, 0” SPIRIT. These sentiments are remarkably striking: and he farther denominates the persons of his triad, Tests apyimag vrosacsicy * three archichal or prin- cipal hypostases.”’ The trinity of Amelius, who was cotemporary with Plotinus, was a trinity. of persons, for he styles them reac Baciras, na Se one makes them all dyuigeyec, “ creators.’ ged Porphyry calls the first hypostasis in High tri- nity, in a striking conformity to the notion of Christianson that doctrine, roy wareoa, the lather ; his second was ysc, the Mind; but he differed from all that went before him in his view of the third, and called it a soul or ee acidity above that of the world. } cst From these views of the theological sentiments of many of the’ most famous philosophers’ of Greece, from the days of Pythagoras all along down to the Christian wera, there is the clearest evidence that, as far as circumstances would per- mit, and from the fame of Pythagoras and Plato, and their followers, on this tenet, we clearly see, that the Greek philosophers incorporated their sentiments of the Trinity into the body of their theological tenets: and we may naturally expect that many of the Roman philosophers — “ester in that opinion. | 542 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, PROPOSITION XXXV.. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, AMONG | | THE ROMANS. ’ Febtenitnirtel the doctrine as handed down by tradition in Italy, it is most natural to suppose, that the opinions of the Greek philosophers upon that subject, would readily find their way among the Romans. This will account for the doctrine being known by many of the Italian erati, long patie any thing like it was known among ailie vulgar. | | Niobe eh Another anit en ji the desuiue having ‘ean handed down by tradition in Italy, is not to be omitted. ‘This is the circumstance of the Cabiri being very early established in the island of Samothracia. Herodotus tells us, that there was a temple of the Cabiri, E32, (the great, high, excellent, surpassing ones,) in Memphis; and so sacred was that edifice, that none but the priests were permitted to enter it. ‘The history of the Cabiri is involved in many inextricable difficul. ties; so that we must be content with less direct information than could be wished upon that sub- ject. Cicero tells us they were in number three, and that their names were Tretropatreus, Eubu- Jeus, and Dionysius. ‘The most we can ascertain concerning them is, that they were considered by VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 543 their worshippers to have been the THREE MIGHTY GUARDIAN GENII Of the universe. They were held very sacred, and worshipped with great solemnity in Samothracia, and with rites and ceremonies the most profound of any that antiquity can boast. ‘They were sometimes called Aysnzs ; and there was a yearly festival held sacred to.them which was called Avaxeo. And Potter tells us, that the sacrifices offered to them. were called Eauc 201, because those deities were £zyo:, or stran- gers; and these sacrifices consisted of what were called zea The worship of a triple power un- der the former name, Dr. Horseley is of opinion, was carried from Samothrace into Phrygia, by Dardanus, so early as the ninth century after the flood. ‘The Trojans imported it from Phrygia into Italy; and he asserts, that vestiges of this acknowledgment and adoration of a Trinity are visible in the joint worship of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, the triad of the Roman capital. Now, if these views of the learned bishop be correct, as they appear very evidently to be, then it fol- jiows, that all ranks of the Romans held some opinions concerning a Trinity, more or less per- fect; for all ranks acknowledged the supremacy of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva: and though they, like the Greeks before them, degenerated from the foregoing view, yet it is clearly evident, that originally the doctrine of the Trinity was handed down by tradition among both nations. The 54k VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Romans ‘had particular respect for the number three. The fates were three; the furies three; the graces three; and the celestial muses, ac- cording to Varro, were originally included in the’ same solemn and mysterious number, three.—’ Their mythology, when traced to the original, proves this. And thus the doctrine of the Tri- nity is found, by tradition, to have been known among the Romans. | | * VIEWS OF THE TRINITY, 545 PROPOSITION XXXVI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, AMONG THE GERMANS. In treating of the doctrine of the Trinity as found handed down by tradition in Germany, we may observe, that as the system of Druidism pre- vailed all over Germany, as well as the other northern nations, so we may expect a view of the doctrine in Germany, similar to that we have found in them. And if so, then Oden, Frea, and ‘Thor, formed the triune deity of the ancient Germans, as well as of the Scandinavians, at a very early period. It is admitted on all hands, that the Druids inhabited Gaul: and Montfau- con, treating of the Gaulic antiquities, presents us with several assemblages of little deities in triple groups. And Gruter shews us groups of triple deities exactly similar; so that we find the doctrine brought from Scythia into all the nations of the north by the Druids, the offspring of Scy- thia. The triple deities of the ancient Germans were called Muairw; and one is thus described: ‘In honorem Domus diving Diis Mairabus,” ‘ In honour of the divine house to the goddesses Maire.’ These goddesses were, indeed, rural deities, as well as the triple Suleve and Vacallin- che of the Hetrusci; but this notion is easily to Mm 54.6 VIEWS OF ‘THE TRINITY. be accounted for, in the debased theology of those who made the earth the grand primeval deity, and adored it under the female form of Cybele, the mother of gods.and men. And we may evi- dently trace, throughout all periods of antiquity, a wonderful disposition of dividing every thing into three, which they either considered sacred, or an object of worship. And whence could this arise, except from a mutilated tradition of a tri- une God. The very circumstance of the Druids infers, that the ancient Germans believed the doctrine of the Trinity taught by these sacred societies, aS well as the other northern nations where these’ societies took up their abode. VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. Pay PROPOSITION XXXVI. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION, AMONG “THE ANCIENT AMERICANS. Wir respect to the aborigines of this vast continent, there are various conjectures. The immense distance of almost every part of that quarter of the globe from any of the other three, and the certainty of inhabitants being found in it when first discovered, give rise to various theories upon this interesting subject. Some suppose that South America was at first peopled either by the Pheenicians, the Egyptians, or the Carthaginians: those ancient commercial powers of the Asiati¢ and African continents, whose maritime adventurers, overtaken by tem- pests, or impelled by other causes, shot across the Atlantic ocean, upon the shores of the new world, to their own astonishment and wonder.— This is plausible, but uncertain. Others suppose that in the very early and un- settled state of human society, when hordes and tribes wandered without any fixed place of abode, a race may have migrated from the fcisinberniced of Caucasus, or from other parts of Scythia, and ~ pursuing their course toward the northern conti- nent, had passed the small chain of islands now known to exist between the two continents, at Behring’s Streights, and contributed their pro- Mim 2 . 548 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. portion towards the population of the new world. Some circumstances in their customs and man- ners seem to establish this fact. The Americans, according to the custom of the early Asiatics, called their emperors or kings by the title of the Children of the Sun and Moon. In particular, their worship of the sun, their belief of the doc~ trine of the Trinity, and that of the Metempsy- chosis, (which doctrines, we know, originated in Asia,) and these titles of the rulers, and these doctrines, have been found in America from the very earliest period. The historian Hornius would incline to per- suade us, that the word Manca or Mancu, re- corded in the traditional books of the ancient Peruvians, has reference to Manchew, the ceneral name of the race of Tartars, and that Masatecsz, one of the four nations of New Spain, and Massa- chuseta, a colony of New England, and the an- cient Massagetee, are originally the same. But this is left to the decision of the learned. The mere sound of words is not altogether sufficient to establish their legitimate etymology; and bare etymology is not sufficient to establish the cer- tainty of religious doctrines. ‘The similarity, how- ever, of the horrible sacrifices of human victims, practised both by the ancient Scythians and Mex- icans, taken in connection with the conjectural emigrations, the coincidence of the worship of the sun, the etymology of words, and the human VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. hA9 sacrifices, go a great way to establish facts. The shocking account of these sacrifices given by Acosta, in his authentic History of South Ame- rica, cannot be read without horror; and to this day a striking similarity is found in many parti- culars which relate to religion, among the idola- trous inhabitants of Asia and America. ‘That portion, however, of the theological system of the ancient idolatrous Americans, to which we wish to direct the more particular attention of the reader, is contained in the following passage, where Father Acosta, in pious indignation, ac- quaints us, that ‘the Devil, after his manner, hath brought a Trinity into their idolatry ; for the three images of the sun, called Apomii, Chu- yunti, and Intiquaogui, are terms that signify £a- ther and Lord Sun, the Son Sun, and the Bro- ther Sun. In like manner, they named the three images of Chuquilia, which is the god that rules the region of the air.’’—-But, according to this writer, they go a step farther than the ac- knowledgment of a mere triad of deity, and wor- ship a direct trinity in unity: for “in Cuquisaco there is a certain oratory where they worship a great idol, whom they call Zanga-tanga, which signifies one in three, and three in one.’’* Of these three triads, the first very much re- sembles the Triplasios Mithras, or threefold power Mm 3 é' # Acosta’s History of the Indies. 550 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. of God in the sun, adored by the Persians; and the second is parallel to the Jupiter Pater, Jupiter Soter, and Jupiter Ultor, of the Greeks and Ro- mans; or if the reader chooses rather to under- stand it physically, in respect to the etherial ele- ment, this American Eendra may be the Jupiter Tonans, Jupiter Serenus, and J upiter Pluvius, all which names are respectively conferred upon him by ancient writers: but the third is an evident perversion of the dogma of a purer theology, handed traditionally down through a channel jong since forgotten, from those holy patriarchs to whom the eternal Father was pleased to re- veal the awful secrets of that nature, which, with- out such a revelation, it is utterly impossible for finite beings to fathom; the stupendous mystery of'a trinity of hypostases in the unity of the Di- vine Essence.* : * ‘Throughout the last. part, which treats of the doctrine by tradition. in the heathen world, Maurice has been the chief guide, and his. language often used without quotation. The author thinks it but fair to make this public acknowledgement as a tribute due to the merit-of that work, VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 3 PROPOSITION XXXVIII. PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE SENTIMENTS OF THE CABBALA, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS OF DIRECT EVIDENCE, BESIDES THE SCRIPTURES, OF ITS BEING KNOWN IN THE CHURCH FROM THE EARLIEST PERIODS UNTIL THE PRESENT DAY. Havine traced the doctrine, by tradition, through the different quarters of the globe, we now proceed to trace it in a direct line from the earliest periods until the present day, by argu- ments different from any that have been hitherto adduced, that the reader may be satisfied that the doctrine has been held by the church in all ages. The view of the doctrine which we have al- ready taken in the foregoing part of this Essay, when treating of it according to revelation, traces it from Adam to Noah, and from Noah to Moses, and through the Scriptures from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the book of Revelation. But the view we now take of it is by another medium, so that the one argument will strengthen the other. This last view is according to the sentiments of the authors of the Jewish Cabbala upon the doctrine; a work held very sacred among the Jews in every age, and to which they | at present pay the most profound deference. Ehis work, called the Cabbala, is the oldest / human composition among the Jews, and is evi- Mm « 552 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. dently the ground-work, next to the Old Testa- ment, of all their theological and philosophical tenets. And, indeed, in most instances, they set more value upon it than they do on the Old Tes- tament. _ The foundation of the Cabbala is a book called Zohar. ‘The period in which this book was writ- _ten, has not been fully ascertained ; but it is al- lowed on all hands to be the most ancient unin- -spired production among the Jews. The doctrines of which it treats, say the Rab- bis, were taught by Adam to his sons, and by them to their sons, and were brought by Noah into ‘the. postdiluvian world, and by Shem were taught to Abraham, and by Abraham to Isaac, and by Isaac to Jacob, and by him to his sons, and by them in succession until the days of Mo- ses, who, on Mount Sinai, received new and far- ther revelations concerning it; and it was kept in the church to the days of Solomon, who greatly enlarged it; and that Ezra put the finishing hand to it. But without following all that the Rabbis and Jews have said concerning this work, a care- ful perusal of it will satisfy the reader, that it attempts to display a complete cosmogony,—ac- counts for the creation of all things upon such philosophical principles as were known by the compilers of it,—-endeavours to account for the elementary principles of the universe,—to draw the distinction between matter and mind,—tae VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 553 treat of the soul metaphysically,—to treat of morality,—and the immortality of the soul; and, what is most astonishing, rests all upon the doc- ’ trine of the Trinity. Many of our readers will be struck to be informed of this; but true it is. And this is one of the most powerful arguments against the Jews, next to those drawn from the sacred oracles. | : It is perfectly evident that the Cabbala is com- posed upon astronomical principles. And though we need not go into any fabulous account of it, yet it seems to be as ancient as the Chaldean astronomy. It holds principles similar to those of Zoroaster concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. Without enlarging upon the history of this work, we may refer the reader to the book itself, as translated by Christian Rusenroth Knorr, in 1677 and 1684, consisting of three very thick quarto volumes, and is entitled by this translator, Kabbala Denudata seu Doctrina Hebreorum tran» scendentalis, et Metaphysica atque Theologica.— The work is chiefly valuable for the view it gives of the philosophy and theology of the Jews al- most in every period. And it is hard ‘to say, whether the Chaldean astronomy was founded upon the principles of this work, or it upon the principles of the Chaldean astronomy. However this may be, the Cabbala affords the strongest ar- guments in favour of the Trinity that can be found in any uninspired book whatever. It goes 554 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. upon the principles of the solar system, as far as was known in the days when it was written, and arran- ges the universe under ten grand outlines, called m72D, Sephiroth, numerations, splendours, hiero- glyphical representations. ‘These sephiroth were drawn by the composers of the Cabbala in ten circles, one encompassing the other, representing all things, somewhat in imitation of a figure re- presenting the solar system. But it is remark- able that the first three were considered of a nature entirely peculiar to themselves, and quite distinct and entirely independent of the other seven. The first three were called “>, the ring, or the crown; 25M, wisdom; 3, understand- ing. Knorr, treating of these sephiroth, in his_ explanation of the first, speaks thus: ‘* Coeterum Kether porro a figuree uniformitate, talis enim annulus est sive Corona, quae corona hic potius quam annuus vocatur quippe quod ad ipsum apicem summitatemve universitatis rerum perti- neat, symbolum etiam est wniiatis, primeve hy- postaseos triados Platonicse, quam ro ‘sy appellant. Que unitas iterum significatur per Kether ab: ipsa vocis derivatione, a “> nempe, quod est cingere, quod constrictionem quandam innuit rerumque continentiam in unum :’?—¥‘ Moreover Kether,: from the uniformity of the figure; for it is sucky a ring or crown which is here rather called crown than ring, because it refers to the very apew or summit of the universe of all things: itis alsa the VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 555 symbol of unity, or the first hypostasis of the Platonic triad, which ‘they call the one; which unity is signified by Kether, from the very deri- vation of the word “M3, which signifies to sur- round, encompass, and points out a certain cone struction and comprehension of all things in one.’ —Again, in explaining the second of the Sephi- roth, he says thus: “ Jam vero secundam Sephi- ram quod attinet, illius cum secunda Platonic: Triados Hypostasi convenientia tam manifesta est, ut celari non possit. Illud enim quod hic Chochma (i. e. Sapientia), appellatur, ab ipsis. etiam appellatur yee, et coi, uti etiam AorvGe Quze duo posteriora, nomina etiam sunt secunde Hypostaseos in Trinitate Christiana. Adeo, ut nihil necesse sit diu his immorari. Cognomina etiam hujus Sephira, multa eorum valde consona sunt tum Christanis tum Platonicis titulis secunds Hypostaseos ut Principium, Esch, Ens, Essentia, Cy aArndun coOie serie nou ‘y ‘aAn9ivn sori coPic, In- quit Plotinus,) et primogenitura. Philo appellat Toy Wewroyovoy Ge¥ vioy, primogenitum Der. WVerum haec adeo obvia sunt ut nullam prorsus habeant difficultatem :’’—* With respect to what belongs to the second Sephira, its resemblance to the second person of the Platonic triad is so obvious, that it cannot be concealed. This which is here called Chochma, wisdom, is by them called yx, mind, and cofia, wisdom, and also AoyG, the word. These two latter are titles of the second 556 VIEWS OF THE TRINITYs hypostasis in the Christian Trinity. So that it will not be necessary to insist longer on these. Many of the epithets of this Sephira likewise answer to the titles of both the Christian and Platonic second hypostasis, as beginning, exist- ence, being, essence, (being the essential wis- dom, and that which is essential being wisdom, says Plotinus,) and the first-born. Philo calls it the first-born of God. But these are so obvious that they have no farther difficulty.’ _ Farther, in explaining the third of the Sephi- roth, he expresses himself in the following lan- guage.—‘ Hane hypostasin Platonict Psychen seu animam appellant, perinde ac Kabbalistae, anime gradum superiorum. Quem Platonict vocant cxy Gay Yuyv, que Spiritui Sancto in Christianitate respondet. Cujus proprius character est. Amor, quemadmodum et ipsi scholastics notarunt fe ‘The Platonists call this hypostasis Psychen, Spirit, or Mind, in the same manner as the Cab- balists call it the highest perfection of mind; which perfection the Platonists call the Divine ‘Spirit, (and) which corresponds to the Holy Spirit in Christianity. The proper character of this is LOVE, as also the scholastics have observed.’ After farther illustration and explanation of these Sephiroth at great length, the learned author uses the following sentiment: ‘ Quamobrem cum haec conspicua sit congruentia inter primam hane -— JTriadem Sephirotharum et tum Christzanam tum VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. 557 Platonicam trinitatem, concludere debemus, quan: quam haud ita distincte in hac tabula indicetur, quod in his eterna divinitas consistat, quee quan- tum ad se ipsam semper eadem est sive ulla crea- tura existat sive non :””-~—* Wherefore seeing there is this evident agreement between this first triad of the Sephiroth, and both the Christian and Pla- tonic Trinity, we conclude, although it is not so distinctly pointed out in this table (figure, ) that in them, viz. the three first of the Sephiroth, the eternal Divinity consists, which, with respect to itself is eternally the same, whether any crea- ture exist or not.’ Here we get a threefold view of the doctrine of the Trinity, exhibiting the belief of it by the compilers of the Cabbala, by the early Christians, and by the Platonists. Thus among the Jews, in the earliest times, the doctrine was known, be- lieved, and taught, by every one of their learned men. This could be fully proved. Among the early Christians, the doctrine was known, be- lieved, and taught, both according to the tenets of the Jewish church concerning it, and accord- ing to the language of the Old and New Testa- ment; and, as we have seen, it was known, believed, and taught by the philosophers and priests of the Pagan world. How, then, can the opposers of the doctrine presume to affirm, that it was only introduced into the Christian church 558 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. by the agitation of the Arian controversy? Nay, from what has been advanced, the doctrine has’ been known, believed, and taught in the church in every period of the world. Were it necessary farther to confirm the foregoing statement of Knorr, we might adduce the authority of his co- temporary and correspondent, Dr. Henry More of Cambridge, considered the most learned: man of his day, in his Catechismus Cabbalisticus, a work both accurate and profound, who establishes the doctrine of the Trinity with the most clear and certain evidence, upon the principles of the Cabbala, so that all the Jewish Rabbis, in every age, who have either studied or understood their own Cabbala, have believed the doctrine of the Trinity. And nothing but the most perverse obstinacy or ignorance of those very writings, which they receive as the ground of their faith, prevents the Jews from acknowledging the doc- trine of the Trinity, taught by the early fathers of their church, both inspired and uninspired: A catalogue of the Rabbis, and quotations from their own writings, in full proof of the foregoing position, might be here adduced. The author would adduce both the Rabbis, and their writings alluded to, were it not that a work expressly on this subject has been in the press long before the present Essay; and as the author wishes to encourage every honest effort to VIEWS OF THE TRINITY; 559 promote the doctrine, he thinks it but fair to leave this topic to the pen of the Rev. Mr. Oxley, the author of that work. We might here adduce large quotations from the writings of Philo the Jew in support of the belief of the Jewish Rabbis in the doctrine of the Trinity. But as this is done at length by Dr. Adam Clarke, in his Commentary upon the Bible, in the first chapter of John, we refer the reader to that work. | _ As we find the doctrine so generally known by revelation in every period of the Jewish church, and so firmly established throughout the whole of the heathen world by tradition, it is perfectly natural to think, and quite logical to infer, that the doctrine is fully established in the Christian church, seeing her benefits and privileges were still more extensive, spiritual, and clear, than. those of the former dispensation; and still far- ther, seeing the second person in the Divine Es- sence, God in our nature, was her founder and head. | When the Arian controversy took place, the doctrine had been known, firmly believed, and taught in the church: hence the denial of it by Arius was counted heresy. In the council of Nice, the doctrine was firmly approved, and fully ratified and established as a doctrine to be be: lieved by the faithful. It was a doctrine always 560 VIEWS OF THE TRINITY. preserved by the church of Rome, and by the Waldenses, through all the dark ages. It was a doctrine fully believed and taught by the Re- formers from the days of Luther. It was a doc- trine held by the church of Geneva, and every Protestant church in the world; and still conti- nues to be both believed and taught by almost every denomination of Christians. After all the foregoing authorities, how any can venture to deny the doctrine, is left to judgment, reason, the common sense*of mankind, and the world at large, to determine. | NOTES. ~~ emg. - Note A. Tue difficulty of proving the unity of the Divine Essence; arises from ignorance of, or inattention to, the natural perfec- tions of that Essence. By contemplating only the moral per- fections of that Essence, the unity does not so clearly and con- vincingly appear ; for the natural perfections are the sure guide to the unzty, and the moral perfections are the sure guide to the personality and trinity of the Divine Essence. Now, by proving the existence of the Divine Essence from the nature of duration and space, the absolute unity, simplicity, and indivisibility of that Essence, clearly appear, and may be easily demonstrated, if denied. For the Essence must necessarily par- take of the properties and qualities of its own necessary perfec- tions : and as duration and space are both necessary perfections of the Divine Essence, and both simple, uniform, and indivi- sible,—therefore that Essence in which they necessarily inhere, must be naturally simple, uniform, and indivisible. Again; as life and moral excellence in all uncreated va- rieties are necessary perfections of the Divine Essence, and both active, energetic, and operative, in personality ; therefore, that Essence in which they necessarily inhere, must naturally be active, energetic, and operative, in personality. ' As existence is positive, and always implies an object or sub- stance created, or necessarily existent, so existence always im- plies duration: therefore, existence and duration always infer one another. Duration exists, and exists eternally ; and, as it is a perfection, leads directly to an eternal Substance in which it inheres; so while duration continues, existence continues ; and as duration continues eternally, so existence continues eter- NR 562 NOTES. nally ; and as existence is a perfection, it leads directly to en eternal Substance in which it inheres. Note B. In speaking of created duration, or created space, we only consider the words relatively, as they stand connected with created objects. With respect to space, the word itself, com- prehending only what logicians call a simple idea, is incapable of definition. And though we speak of it sometimes as empty _ space, and full space, yet these are rather a description than a definition of the word; for still, properly speaking, we can only affix one simple idea to the word, which must be understood in the same sense by every one who speaks or treats of space, he would at all comprehend the meaning of the word, For as we cannot define colours to a blind man, neither ean we define space to the man who does not understand the idea represented by the word. The same thing may be said concerning dura- tion. What renders the meaning of these words so difficult, and liable to controversy, is, that they are abstract nouns Capa- ble of adjective signification, but have no adjectives to express” their adjective meaning. The adjective white has. a general signification, and is generally understood ; but is never under- stood without inhering in some substance. When applied to snow, we say, the snow is white; we speak also of the whiteness of snow. Nov, both the adjective white, and the abstract noun whiteness, have a cognate meaning; and though they are dis- tinct parts of speech, yet are they nearly synonymous. Had we adjectives cognate with duration and space, the meaning of the words would be more readily and generally understood. | The variety used in the propositions A. and B. was intended to assist the capacity of general readers; not of the learned, who, it is taken for granted, can follow the reasoning without such helps. ‘Phe difference between bow space is. proved to be a perfection, and how it is constituted a perfection, will readily appear to him who can reason abstractedly. And be will be at no.loss to apply the same to duration. NOTES. 563" In the famous controversy between the two great philoso- phers, Leibnitz and Clarke, the subject of space is handled with very uncommon enlargement of mind on both sides. The one inclines to suppose it an attribute or perfection: the other, to be an independent substance. Had they first determined whe- ther space was matter or mind, they would at once have come to an amicable conclusion and agreement: for it is evidently clear it is neither matter nor mind ; and, therefore, cannot be an independent substance, as we know of no other but one of these: and if it be not one of these, it must be a perfection ; and if it be a perfection, it must either be a perfection of some substance, or of itself. Of itself, it cannot be: therefore it: must be of some substance ; and fair reasoning will prove, that this substance can be nothing else than God, N. B.—After the reader has consulted these two Propositions, which, it is hoped, prove the existence of the Divine Being, he is requested to read p. 139—144, and 185—189, of the Essay, which will lead him, without much fatigue, directly into the subject, and will probably prepare him for a patient perusal of the whole, from the beginning of Prop. III. Note C. Tan great design of this Proposition is to prove that the Divine Being is every way adequate to its own existence, per-. fection, and happiness, and that this arises from the moral as well as the natural perfections; and that the moral perfections are in themselves wholly underived, self-existent, and inde- pendent, as well as the natural: and though we have exempli- fied the reasoning by the efficiency of the Divine Essence, as exercised by the first person, in communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, and thereby the second » constituted, and the first and second, in one joint active prin- ciple, communicating the whole, and thereby the third consti- tuted ;—-we did not mean to exclude the idea of the whole of the Divine Essence and perfections, naturally and necessarily proceeding from the first to the second mode of subsistence, Nug B64 NOTES. and from the first and second to the third mode: nor yet did we mean to exclude the idea of the second person, as naturally and necessarily arising in the Divine Essence as the first; and of the third, as naturally and necessarily arising as the first and second. We only took one of these ideas as being simplest, and most easy for the plain reader, and every way answering demonstra- tion; but by no means ever intended to exclude the other two, each of which admits of demonstration by itself, as well as the first: and though each of the three be really true, yet all of them together comprehend the subject more fully, and are better adapted to the enlarged powers of the learned metaphysician. The life and moral excellence necessarily inhering in the Divine Essence, are the grand, necessary, and eternal sources of the communication, procession, and arising of the distinct persons in the Divine Essence ; and that, whether we study the subject by the divine efficiency, energy, or operation. Each, if fairly followed out, according to its own uncreated and underived na- tare, will infallibly demonstrate the doctrine of the Trinity. Bet we are always to keep in mind the distinction between the operations according to their own nature, and the operations according to a particular modification. It may be farther ob- served, (p. 51. Prop. II.) that it is affirmed that the Divine Being must, at all times, and in all places, through every point of eternity and immensity, be in the full and perfect enjoyment and exercise of all the divine perfections, natural and moral.—- For the proof of this, we refer to p. 53. 80, and other places of the Essay, all confirmed by the last axiomatic principle. P. 57, 58. In speaking of mode, as applied to the persona- lity of the Divine Essence, all that we mean is, that such is the perfection of the divine life and moral excellence, that it is as. natural and necessary for the Divine Essence to subsist in three ‘distinct, not separate, modes, as it is for that Essence to exist; ‘and the reader will readily perceive that the buman soul car subsist in one mode in the womb; in another, after birth; in another, after death; and in another, after judgment: In alt these distinct modes it can subsist, though not at the same time. NOTES. 565 All we would prove by this is, that the very same identical im- material being can subsist in distinct modes; though we would mot venture to draw a comparison between the created and the uncreated immaterial Being. It is the absolute perfection of the Divine Essence which is the foundation of its own distinct personality. We presume it is not possible to prove, by fair reasoning and demonstration, that absolute and underived self-existence and perfection, both natural and moral, can subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one: and we presume, most respectfully, to call for a proof. If, by fair reasoning and demonstration, we have proved that the Divine Essence must necessarily subsist in distinction and union, we hope that those who deny it, will favour us with demonstration equally clear; and venture to presume, that they will not be able to prove that absolute and uncreated perfection, both natural and moral, must subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one. _ Note D. Ir the reader will consider, after the perusal of this Proposi- tion, the three great outlines of the subject particularly laid before him, and try to proceed from one idea to another, he will discover the grand economy of the Divine Essence to be glori- ously displayed in the doctrine of the Trinity, and that it can be displayed upon no other principle. He will perceive that it is the nature of the Divine Essence to display itself in persona- lity ; according to its own nature, to preceed from personality in one mode, to personality in another; and to proceed from these two, to personality in a third. Or, having discovered personality in the Divine Essence, and by considering the eco- nomy of that Essence, he will perceive that another mode of personality must naturally arise to his view; and by pursuing this economy, he will discover that a third mode of personality must naturally and necessarily arise in the Divine Essence. So ahat if we contemplate the moral economy principally, we shall non 3 566 NOTES. be led to the idea both of communication, procession, and the arising of personality in the Divine Essence. Note E. | Ir intelligence be according to the nature of every being possessed of it, it must be so in the Divine Being; and if the Divine Being subsist in one mode only, the divine intelligence must also subsist in one mode only; and if the divine intelli- gence subsist in one mode only, the divine ideas must all be directed in one way only ; and if the divine ideas be directed in one way only, it is impossible for the Divine Being to be omniscient: because the divine intelligence could not operate in all directions, the very same moment, ad eréra and ad intra. But grant that there are three distinct modes of subsistence or persons naturally and necessarily in the Divine Essence, and at once we discover how it is possible for the Divine Being to be omniscient. Hence, the perfect exercise of omniscience leads _ directly to the doctrine of the Trinity. f Note F. Tue idea of eternity embraces both past and future, and is simple and indivisible, and if fully comprehended, must be com- prehended al] at once, which the Divine Being cannot do, if it subsist in one mode only; for one mode only of subsistence can trace one idea only, in one way, at the very same moment.—- Therefore, if the Divine Being subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, it cannot comprehend its own eternity. But grant that the Divine Being subsists in three dis- tinct modes, and immediately we perceive it possible for the Divine Being to comprehend its own eternity ; therefore, there must be a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence; or the Di-+ vine Being cannot know its own eternity. Hence, the full and perfect knowledge of eternity, leads directly to the doctrine of the Trinity. | Note G. _ Tue idea of immensity embraces a boundless circumference, and is simple and indivisible; and if comprehended fully and NOTES. 557 perfectly, it must be comprehended all at once. Now if the Divine Being subsist in one mode only, and can subsist in no more than one, it can direct its thought only in one way at the same moment; and, therefore, cannot perfectly comprehend its own immensity. But grant that it does subsist in three distinct modes or per- sons, and we instantly discover that it can exert the same thought in all directions at the very same moment, and thereby perfectly comprehend its own immensity.—There must, there- fore, be a Trinity of persons in the Divine Essence, otherwise the Divine Being cannot perfectly comprehend its own immen- sity. Henee, the perfect knowledge of immensity leads di- rectly to the doctrine of the Trinity. Note H. Tue idea of immutability is perfectly simple and indivisible 5 and when applied to that which is eternal and immense, em- braces all directions at once, and must be comprehended all at once, if comprehended perfectly. And if the Divine Being subsist in ene mode only, it can direct its thought only in one way at the same moment, and therefore cannot perfectly com- prehend its own immutability. But if it subsist in three distinct medes er persone, it can direct its thought from all the extremes of eternity and immen-. g sity in the very same moment, and thereby perfectly compre- hend its own immutability.—Therefore, ‘there must be three persons in the Divine Essence, otherwise the Divine Being can- not perfectly comprehend its own immutability. Hence, the full and perfect knowledge of immutability leads directly to ihe doctrine of the Trinity. | These four Propositions run directly into one another, and support the general argument with the most clear and conyinc-; BD ‘ing evidence. Note f. Tue enjoyment arising from the perfect exercise of the divine goodness, according to its own nature, is not to be considered ag un 4 568 NOTES. experienced by any one of the divine persons, exclusive of the other two; but it must be considered as experienced by the Divine Namie wholly and absolutely : : and if so, then it must. be experienced by each of the divine persons alike; for each is an equal partaker of the whole Divine Nature, nas by conse- quence, an equal partaker of the existence, perfection, and happiness of that nature. Keeping the Divine Nature as the object of thought, no difficulty can arise from the views we have taken in this Proposition. It may be objected, If we cannot conceive of any moral .at- tribute of the Divine Essence, without supposing its full,and perfect exercise through every point of eternity and immen- sity, how then can we conceive of that glorious attribute, . Mercy? The answer is, We must make a distinction between the exercise of any of the divine perfections, according to their own nature, and the exercise of the same perfection, according to a particular modification. Of this latter kind is the exercise of'mercy... * | Note K. WueEn we speak of the communication of the Divine Essence and perfections by the fitst person to the second, and by the first and second, in one joint principle, to the third, we must at the same time consider, that communication is essential to the Divine Essence, and not voluntary on the part of a divine per- son, so as that it might be, or might not be, according to volition. ‘For though volition accompanies it, yet it is both natural and necessary to the very existence, perfection, and happiness of the Divine Being. We are not to suppose. that the second person can commu- nicate back the Divine Essence and perfections to the first; for — this would be unnecessary, as we must ever consider the bret as possessing the whole; and farther, this would destroy the second person, itself, and would at the same time also destroy the first, by inverting the law of the economy of the Divine Essence and perfections, : . i NOTES. 569 Upon the same principle, we are not to suppose that the third person can re-communicate the whole of the Divine Essence to the first and second ; for this would not only destroy itself, but also the first and second, and, according to the foregoiug prin- ciple, by consequence destroy the Divine Being altogether. For if we may suppose communication back, we must either suppose it simultaneous with communication, or posterior to it: if simultaneous, communication and re-communication must de- stroy one another inevitably ; if re-communication be posterior to communication, then it must have a beginning, and if so, it must be considered as temporary ; for that which has a begin- ning is temporary, and, by consequence, cannot be essential to the Divine Nature. Therefore it is impossible that either the second or third person could re-communicate back the Divine Essence and perfections. Note L. Ir the will of a Divine Being be at all executed, it must be executed by a divine person, and must either be executed neces- sarily, according to its own nature, or contingently, according to a particular modification. “Now, as is the nature of every being, so is the power ; and as is the power of every being, so is the will: therefore, if the divine will be exercised according io the Divine Nature, it must be exercised necessarily in the Divine Essence ; and if it be exercised in the Divine Essence, " according to its own nature, it can only be by one divine per- son communicating the whole of the Divine Essence and perfec- tions, so that they may subsist distinctly in another person ; and this is absolutely essential to the Divine Essence, and may be called the full and perfect exercise of the divine will, according to the divine power and nature. But a particular modification of the divine will, such as all temporary acts in creation, providence, and redemption, can only be exercised or signified by one divine person, and exe- cuted by another. The same divine person cannot express of signify a particular modification of the divine will, and alsa “> 570 NOTES. execute that particular modification. Therefore, in every par- ticular modification of the divine will, one divine person must express, and another execute it. For one divine person must sustain the dignity of the Divine Essence and perfections, and another execute the particular modification of the divine will. As the Divine Essence naturally and necessarily subsists in distinct personality, so the divine will naturally and necessarily nt subsists in distinct personality ; and were this not so, it would be utterly impossible for any particular modification of the divine will ever to be exercised or executed ; but as the divine will, though the very same in each divine person, yet sub- sists in the second in a mode distinct, though not separate, from what it does in the first; therefore it can both be expressed and executed by the second, in a mode distinct, though not contrary from what it is in the first ; and hence the possibility of a particular modification of the divine will. And as the divine will, exercised according to its own nature, must be ex- ercised within the Divine Essence, without beginning and with out end; therefore, as the same will subsists in the second per- son, in a mode distinct from that which it does in the first, by virtue of this distinct mode of subsistence, the second person can execute the divine will, according to a particular modifica- tion. . : ‘tae : Note M. Tar divine promises must either be necessary, and according’ to the extent of the divine nature, or according to-a particular modification ; and by consequence must be fulfilled according to both these sources. The one is fulfilled only in the Divine Essence ; the other fulfilled only ad extra. The first never had a beginning, and never can have an end; the second, in a strict sense, is only temporary, for they had a Bagtilntie with respect to the creature, and many are fulfilled in this life, and therefore temporary with respect to their end. Now the divine promises, | according to their own nature, are like the Divine Essence ;_ and as the Divine Essence subsists in distinet personality, so NOTES. 571 must the divine promises; and if they did not subsist in natural and necessary distinction within the Divine Essence itself, ac- cording to their own nature, it would be absolutely impossible | that there could be any particular modification of them revealed to the rational creature. This natural and necessary distinction is the foundation of the particulat modification ; therefore they are both fulfilled at the very same moment. One divine person fulfils those within the Divine Essence, according to all the extent of their nature: another fulfils those according to a par= ticular modification, Both are worthy of the Divine Bees and none but a divine person could fulfil either. ~ Note N, Tue economy of the Divine Pcie ad intra, must be every way natural, absolutely necessary, and according to the perfec- tions and properties of that Essence. The economy of the Di- “vine Essence, ad extra, must be different, and according to a certain modification of the same Essence, agreeably to the divine will. The one is natural, necessary, and unceasing: the ether ts particular, contingent, and temporary. And as the very same Essence and perfections display themselves in these very opposite extremes in the very same moment of time, they can do so only in personality.——-There must, therefore, be a plu- rality of persons in Hite Divine Essence, _ Note QO, Eacn of the divine perfections manifested, whether in creas tion of matter or mind, leads us to infer, by the particular mo- dification of the perfection thus exhibited, that there must be a’ natural and necessary distinction of that perfection in the Dj- vine Essence itself, otherwise it would be absolutely impossible that ever a particular modification could be manifested. The natural modification is the foundation of the particular; and without the natural, it would be absolutely impossible for the particular ever to take place, 572 ; . NOTES. Note P. SELF-EXISTENCE, Or necessary existence, infers absolute per- fection ; for nothing can be absolutely self-existent, that is not absolutely perfect ; and absolute perfection infers both natural and: moral perfection. Again; absolute perfection infers a power of making a display or manifestation of itself, after a particular modification ; and a display after a particular modi- fication, infers a distinct and necessary subsistence of that per- fection so displayed in the essence of that being who makes the manifestation after a particular modification ; for if there were no necessary distinction of that perfection, there could be no contingent distinction in creation, Therefore, self-existence, or necessary existence, when fully investigated, fairly infers the doctrine of the Trinity. . fa Note Q. | ; ~ Axsouure perfection must be constituted both by unity and distinction. Neither of these, taken by itself, can possibly con- stitute absolute perfection. Absolute unity, without including absolute distinction, cannot possibly operate in any way what- ever,—neither according to its own nature, nor according to a particular modification of it. The very idea of absolute unity prevents the idea of any operation whatever. For the moment that absolute unity would operate, that moment it would change its absolute simplicity in one way or another ; and absolute distinction, without comprehending absolute unity, cannot ope- rate in any way whatever—neither according to its own nature, nor according to a particular modification. The idea of abso- lute distinction would entirely prevent all union in operation, — Therefore, nothing but absolute unity, and absolute distinction, comprehending each other, can possibly constitute absolute and necessary perfection. Absolute perfection infers and compre- hends a particular modification; and a particular modification infers a necessary distinction in the essence of that being that makes the particular modification ; for if there be not a neces-. , NOTES. 573 sary distinction in the essence of the being that exhibits a pare ticular manifestation of any one of its perfections, it is abso- lutely impossible that any such particular modification could be made by that being; because this would infer that that being could make a modification of one of its perfections, contrary to its own nature, which is impossible.—Hence absolute perfec- tion, when fully investigated, clearly infers the doctrine of the Trinity. Note R.° Assouvute happiness comprehends the exclusive possession of underived natural and moral perfection, in all uncreated and necessary extremes. Absolute natural and moral perfection is constituted by unity and distinction, inseparably comprehend- ing each other. Unity is necessary to exclude all possibility of multiplication, division, or composition, and to establish abso- lute simplicity and uniformity. Distinction is necessary to ex- ercise absolute moral excellence, according to its own nature ; for absolute and simple unity admits of no exercise of any kind. Therefore, absolute distinction must be inseparably compre- hended in absolute unity, in order to the full and perfect exer- cise of all moral perfections; and the full and perfect exercise of all moral perfection, at all times, and in all places, constitutes the absolute happiness of a necessarily perfect moral being.— Hence the full investigation of the happiness of that being, ex- clusively possessing underived and uncreated Sah beng: leads directly to the doctrine of the Trinity. These nine Propositions run into one another, and hang to- gether by inseparable links, and add strength to the foregoing. Note S. SELF-EXISTENCE, or necessary existence, implies a power of communicating contingent existence ; and a power of commu- nicating contingent existence, implies a distinction of power in the being communicating contingent existence ; for necessary existence infers necessary power, and contingent existence in- 574 NOTES, fers contingent power. And as necessary power and contingent power are evidently distinct, the one from the other, that being who possesses the distinction of power into necessary and con- tingent, must first possess a distinction of necessary power with- in itself, before it can exert contingent power. Absolute power, or necessary power, comprehends unity ; but the exertion of necessary power comprehends necessary distinction of the unity of that power; and the communication of contingent power infers the communication of necessary power, though in a dif- ferent way. Because if power can operate according to a certain modifi- cation, it surely can operate according to its own nature. For if not, it cannot be absolutely perfect; but necessary power must be absolutely perfect: therefore it can operate according to its own nature in all. the extremes of absolute perfection ; and if it can operate according to its own nature, it can operate according to a certain modification. Hence necessary power infers self-existence ; and self-existence is constituted by an underived competency to necessary perfection and necessary happiness: and we have shewed that these both infer the doc- trine of the Trinity. Therefore, self-existence, when fully in- vestigated, leads directly to the doctrine of the Trinity. Note T. Necessary perfection infers a power of communicating con- tingent perfection. For necessary perfection implies underived natural and moral excellence; and natural and moral excellence ‘infers personality.. And a power of personality, of communi- - ‘eating contingent perfection, infers a distinction of power in the being communicating contingent perfection: for necessary perfection implies necessary power, and contingent perfection implies contingent power; and as necessary perfection and con- tingent perfection are evidently distinct the one from the other, and as necessary perfection comprehends absolute unity, and contingent perfection comprehends absolute distinction, the being who possesses power, both necessary and contingent, musé NOTES. . 575 ‘comprehend both in perfect union, within its own essence, and must first possess power necessarily distinct, according to its ‘own nature, within its own essence, before it could exercise power in the great extremes of necessary and contingent. It is, therefore, perfectly evident, that the necessary distinction of: power inhering in the essence of that being, must be the foun- dation of the contingent distinction of power exercised without that essence. Hence necessary perfection, when investigated in all its bearings, clearly leads to the demonstration of the doctrine of the Trinity. Note U. Necessary happiness infers all underived self-existence and perfection, both natural and moral: a necessary perfection, both natural and moral, infers necessary personality ; and neces- sary personality infers a power of communicating contingent personality ; and a power of communicating contingent perse- nality, infers a distinction of power in the being that communi- cates it. That distinction, therefore, includes natural and neces- sary power, according to the nature of the essence of that being, and also a distinction according to a certain modification of that power in the beimg who communicates contingent personality. And distinction of power into necessary and contingent, infers absolutely perfect personality, necessarily constituted in the essence of that being in which this necessary distinction of power inheres ; and absolutely perfect personality includes both distinction and union. because union and distinction comprehend all the possible modes of perfection: unity of personality does. not, and cannot, by itself, because necessary and absolute unity can perform nothing. For, the moment we conceive that abso- lute unity moves or operates in any way whatever, that moment the absolute nature of unity disappears. And it is equally true that necessary and absolute distinction of personality, does not, and cannot, by itself, operate in any. way whatever, because without absolute union, the absolute distinction would operate separately ; and that moment we conceive of absolute distinc- 576 NOTES, tion operating separately, that moment this distinction presents us with as many independent substances as we please to com- prehend in the distinction. Therefore, absolute unity and ab- solute distinction, naturally and necessarily comprehending one another, naturally and necessarily constitute the absolutely per- fect personality of that being who can communicate contingent personality ; and an absolutely and necessarily happy essence must comprehend absolutely perfect personality, in distinction and union. 3 Hence, absolute and necessary happiness, when fully inves- tigated, fairly leads to the doctrine of the Trinity. These three Propositions also run into one another, and form a chain of proof which hangs together by natural conclusions, and unites with the whole of the foregoing. In these Notes we have endeavoured to illustrate the Propost- tions by a train of arguments and reasoning considerably differ- ent from those in the body of the Propositions, in order that the illustration might be more perspicuous and striking: so that the Notes, taken by themselves, form a chain of proof of the doc- trine, and may be read with considerable advantage either before or after the Propositions. May saving illumination, and all spiritual advantages, for ever rest upon every reader t THE END. ‘Ernara,— Page 111 line 18, for what is, read what it is 166 — 9, for that is, read that it is. ——. 180 — 16, for from both, read and from both —- 208 — 22, for and is, read and as is 501 — 3, for contributes, read contribute. ——— D. Chalmers & Co. Printers, Aberdeen. ev