Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A59831
|
A modest examination of the authority and reasons of the late decree of the vice-chancellor of Oxford, and some heads of colleges and halls concerning the heresy of three distinct infinite minds in the Holy and Ever-blessed Trinity / by William Sherlock ...
|
Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.
|
1696
(1696)
|
Wing S3303; ESTC R14301
|
29,861
|
49
|
therefore though there are three distinct Persons or Minds each of whom is distinctly and by himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God yet there are not Three Gods but One God or One Divinity And if they will not allow that the same One Divinity or Godhead may be entirely and indivisible and inseparably in Three distinct Persons or Minds there is an End of a Trinity in Unity of Three Persons and One God For if the whole Divine Nature cannot subsist intirely indivisibly and inseparably and yet distinctly in Three either there cannot be Three each of whom is distinctly and by himself God or there cannot be one God whereas the scripture Notion of the Unity of God is not such an Unity as is only is one Person for then it could not enjoyn the Faith and Worship of Father Son and Holy Ghost but such an Unity as can be between Three when the same One Divine Nature is wholly and intirely communicated by the eternal Father to the eternal Son and by Father and Son to the eternal Spirit without any Division or Separation and that which is communicated whole and intire without Division or Separation makes no Number for it is but One still A Mind and Mind and Mind must be three Minds or Persons by reason of their distinct subsistence which belong to them as three but God and God and God as some of the antient Father speak are not Three Gods but One God because the same One Divinity totus ex toto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as both the Latin and Greek Fathers speak concerning the Generation of the Son is whole intire indivisible inseparable in all Three and Three distinct whole inseparable sames how hard soever it may be to conceive as to the Manner of it is the most natural and intelligible Notion of three and one and this is the Catholick Notion of a Trinity in Unity I forbear prosecuting this any farther here because I shall do it at large elsewhere 4. The next Charge is that it is Disagreeing and contrary to the Doctrine of the Catholick Church I am truly sorry for this because it must unavoidably reflect on their Skill in Antiquity and the Doctrine of the Catholick Church but if the Animadverter has imposed upon them in this too they must thank themselves and take what follows I shall not multiply Testimonies in this Cause at present because I have a Treatise by me which is near finished upon this very Subject to give an Account of the Judgment of Catholick Fathers and Councils concerning a real and substantial Trinity and what their Notion of Thritheism is The Matter appeared to me so plain and demonstrable that I began to be weary of it as an unnecessary Work but this Decree has convinc'd me of the contrary and I now thank God that I am so well prepared to justifie the true antient Catholick Faith against the Pretences of those who judge of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church by Inspiration or Prophesie without knowing what the Catholick Fathers have said about it As Confident as these Heads are of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church those even of their Mind who have looked into the Fathers are not willing to stand to their Judgment in this Cause Some of the Ante-Nicene Fathers they give up to the Arians and they know not what to think of the Nicene Fathers themselves they spoke incautiously and bordered very near upon Tritheism nay some of them they think were down right Tritheists and they are in the right for they were all so to a man in this modern notion of Tritheism that I was glad to find they would own the Doctrine of the Catholick Church and put the Cause upon that issue The present Dispute is about Three distinct infinite Minds and Substances in the Trinity whether this be the Catholick Doctrine or Catholick Language now I suppose if it appear that they owned Three distinct Substances both Name and Thing there will be no Dispute about three Minds for the Substance of the Deity can be no other than infinite Mind Now this is a Wonderfull Dispute when the School-Men themselves own the Three Divine Persons to be Three Substances though they say they are not meer Relations without a Subject but relative Substances and we say so too That their Substances as their Persons subsist in an inseparable Union and Relation to each other But relative Substances Substances which are not absolute and independent but essentially related to each other as Father Son and Holy Ghost are Substances still and three distinct Substances as they are distinct Persons But this is not our present Inquiry what the Doctrine of the Schools is but what was the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers Now it is evident beyond all possibility of Denial that the Catholick Fathers one and all did assert Three substantial Persons in the Trinity against the Heresie of Sabellius who owned but one substantial Person with Three Names according to his different Appearances now besides that it is impossible to make sense of Three substantial Persons without three personal Substances for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie Three Substances had not these Fathers understood it in the Sense and Notion of three Substances they had not opposed Sabellius whose fundamental Principle was the one singular solitary Substance of the Deity They asserted indeed one Substance of the Deity against Arius but it was only in that sense in which Arius denied the One Substance He owned the Son to be a substantial Person who had a distinct Substance of his own and this the Nicene Fathers never quarelled with him for but he denied that the Substance of the Son was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Substance of the Father but perfectly of a different Kind and Nature as not begotten of his Father's Substance but made by his Power In Opposition to this Heresie the Fathers taught not one singular Substance in God which is Sabellianism but such an Oneness of Substance as we know not how to express otherwise than by a specifick Sameness and Unity tho' that does not answer the compleat Notion of the Divine Unity but this is one Way the Fathers commonly express it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and genus and such like Words as among us signifie the specifick Unity of Nature and therefore they tell us that by the Homoousion they only meant that the Son was so of the same one Substance with the Father that he is God of God Light of Light very God of very God that is true and perfect God as his Father is true and perfect God considered in his own Person as distinct from his Father that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 created out of nothing as all Creatures are but is truly begotten of the Substance of his Father and in that Sense Consubstantial or of one Substance with him as all other Sons are Consubstantial with their Fathers Now had not this been a very
Convocation is indeed Decretum Oxoniense or a Decree of the University of Oxford This is what the Animadverter called for and this he would persuade the world he has but let the Oxford Convocation look to this which may prove an ill President But I am inform'd for I confess I know not their Statutes my self that this Decree of the Heads of Colleges and Halls is so far from being the Decree of the Vniversity of Oxford that it is no Judicial nor Authoritative Decree at all not so much as for censuring a Preacher much less for declaring and decreeing Heresy Their Statutes refer such Censures to the Vice-Chancellor and Six Heads Doctors of Divinity and to one or both the Professors of Divinity but give no such Authority to the General Meeting of the Heads much less to Heads who are no Divines nor Doctors in Divinity and some such there were in this Meeting So that this pretended Decree of the Vniversity of Oxford is no more than the private Opinions of some Heads and if that be so Venerable an Authority I will undertake any day in the Year to procure a Meeting of twice as many as Wise and Learned Men to censure their Decree But supposing their Authority to be Just and Regular there is another very proper Question How far their Authority extends Whether to the declaring and decreeing Heresy Whatever the Convocation of the University may challenge this was never before pretended to by the Heads of Colleges and Halls All the Authority I can learn their Statutes give them in such Cases is to summon the Preacher who has said any thing in his Sermon contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and to require a publick recantation from him or to forbid him ever to preach again in the Vniversity Whereas nothing of all this was done the Preacher not summoned to this Meeting nor his Name as far as I can learn once mentioned in it no Recantation enjoined no Prohibition of his Preaching again But instead of this which was their proper Business they declare and decree Heresy which so many Masters of Arts might have done with as good Authority where ever they had met And they ought notwithstanding all their Zeal against Heresy to have advised with men of Skill how far such an Irregular and Unstatutable proceeding might affect them The Authority of declaring and making Heresy may be of such pernicious Consequence to the Peace of any Church that it is not fit to be intrusted with any Body of men less then a National Synod for otherwise we may have as many different and contrary Religions as there are Declarers and Decreers of Heresy In the Statute 1 Eliz. ca. 1. we find the power to order determine or adjudge any matter or cause to be Heresy restrained only to such as heretofore have been determined ordered or adjudged to be Heresy by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures Or by the first Four General Councils Or by any other General Council wherein the same was declared Heresy by the express and plain words of the said Canonical Scriptures Or such as hereafter shall be ordered judged or determined to be Heresy by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation And if the King could not grant a greater Authority than this to his High Commissioner for Ecclesiastical Affairs it is not likely that any other Body of men have it and my Lord Cook says That this is a direction to others especially to Bishops in their adjudgng Heresy 3 Instit. pa. 40. and how they have observed this Law in their Decree they had best consider Oxford Reasons have formerly had a very just Veneration paid to them and will have so still whenever they are penned with the same strength and clearness but they have a greater Opinion of their Authority than I can find the rest of the world has if they think by a meer Decree without pretending to give the least reason for it to silence all disputes and to bear down all Reasons and all Authorities on the other side But since these Heads are pleased to take part in the quarrel which one would have thought they need not have done had they not suspected the Success of their Animadverting Champion I accept this exchange with all thankfulness As for the Animadverter he might for me have writ on as long as he pleased and have railed and triumphed as much as he pleased and the world might have judged of him and his performances as they pleased His last Book I have read nothing of and could never persuade my self to read all his first Book there is such an Evil Spirit and such Venom in his Writings as is enough to give an Unchristian Tincture to those who read them He resolved never to answer any one but my self and I resolved never to read what he writ and thus there was some hope to see an end of this matter when he grew weary of writing or his Bookseller of Printing But now I hope to meet with no new Animadverters who shall all fare alike with me but with Men of Ingenuity and Candor good Learning and good Tempers who will reason without Sophistry and Misrepresentations weigh Authorities in an equal Balance and contend for Truth not for Victory and then it is indifferent to me whether I overcome or am overcome for Truth is better than Victory and will make an Honest Man triumph in being conquered Having thus considered the Authority of this Decree which the Animadverter so much glories in let us now examine the Decree it self These words Three distinct Infinite Minds and Three Substances as applied to the Three Persons of the Ever-Blessed Trinity are singled out in this Decree and parted from the Body of the Sermon without any thing to explain in what sense the Preacher used them and therefore we must conclude that these Words are absolutely condemned as False Impious and Heretical That though a Mind in this place signifies an Intelligent Person and Substance a Substantial Person and Three Infinite Intelligent Persons and Three Infinite Substantial Persons is the Catholick Faith as I doubt not to make appear yet Three Distinct Infinite Minds and Three Substances when they are used in no other sense than for three Intelligent and Substantial Persons must be condemned as Impious and Heretical These are wonderful nice Criticks to make the same Doctrine owned and acknowledged to be the same in one Form of Words to be truly Catholick and Orthodox and in another Form of Words which do and are intended to signify the same thing False Impious and Heretical This is a strange Magical Power of Words Hoc est Corpus in the mouth of a Popish Priest never were pretended to make a more Miraculous Transubstantiation I wish it at last appear that these Gentlemen do really believe Three Infinite Intelligent Persons and Three Substantial Persons in the Trinity for let them