and the Wâ—man whom thou gavest me c. Next Abraham Gen. 15.2 And â—â—raham â—â—â—d Lord God what wilt thou give me Chap. 17.18 O that Ismael might live before Thee And when he would make his Servant swear by the True God Chap. 24.3 he did not distinguish him as one in three but says he I will make thee swear by the Lord the God of Heaven and the God of the Earth Also when the Servant several times in this Chapter directs his Prayer to this God he doth not distinguish him personally in three but says O Lord God of my Master Abraham I pray thee send me good speed Then for Jacob when he tells his Father Laban how his Substance came to be increased Gen. 31.42 he doth not say the God subsisting in three Persons but says he the God of my Father the God of Abraham c. and Chap. 32.10 I am not worthy of the Mercies and all the Truth which Thou hast shewed me Ver. 11. Deliver me I pray thee And thou saidst I will surely do thee good In short in several places he distinguishes him verbatim as God discovered himself to Abraham viz. God Almighty but not one word of God in three Persons Next Moses Exodus 5.23 For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Thy Name he hath done evil to this People Neither hast Thou delivered thy People at all Chap. 15.1 Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel this Song unto the Lord He hath triumphed gloriously the Horse and his Rider hath He thrown into the Sea And in this Song you have the Terms he thee thy thou thine him repeated no less than 35 times and yet neither you yours they or them once mentioned respecting the most High Thus have I briefly run over the sum of the most remarkable Instances of persons paying their Devotions to the most High in the Old Testament and I might have instanced David Solomon Daniel and many others yea down to Zechariah's days and it appears as if they were all agreed to conceive of and acknowledg an undivided single Essence and its Properties But no Footsteps do appear of their distinguishing the Essence in three persons in their Conceptions And if the Israelites ever had any such conception of God methinks it should not be lost and if not lost it is strange Josephus should not mention it since he gives an account of things as far back as Moses even from the beginning and often speaks of God and his essential Properties describing the true Object of the Jews Worship and yet always speaks of him as one in Vnity of Essence but hints not a word of divers Persons And as Josephus then so the Jews now acknowledg no such thing as Mr. Monk says page 70. he says the Doctrine of the Trinity is contrary to the Blindness of the Jews who do affirm an Essence altogether without distinction Now I say 't is strange if this were understood amongst them especially as so material a thing as is now supposed that then both the Jews now who yet profess the true God and are zealous of the Mosaical Law and Josephus so long ago should yet be ignorant of so remarkable a matter In the next place I come to the New Testament to see whether we may judg it the Will of God that we should worship and adore his Essence as subsisting in one Person or in three And first I will consider the Apostle Stephen what he says of the most High Acts 7.2 he calls him the God of Glory and ver 32. he cites and describes the antient Description without enlarging viz. I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. And ver 48. The most High dwells not in Temples made with Hands Herein is a discovery of God's Greatness but no distinguishing his Persons And remarkable it is that Paul about to instruct the ignorant Athenians in the knowledg of the true God as the Object of their Worship Acts 17.23 24 25. first lets them know that they ignorantly worshipped the unknown God and that him he would declare unto them And accordingly says God that made the World and all things therein seeing that he is Lord of Heaven and Earth dwells not in Temples made with mens hands as though he needed any thing seeing he giveth to all Life and Breath and all things Herein the Apostle very notably sets forth his most glorious Attributes and invisible Being by his creating and preserving of all things But says not one word of the distinction of Persons Now if tâ—e Knowledg of this were so necessary to be known in order to Salvation as is imagined Paul had no less need to instruct these ignorant Athenians therein as much as in the Knowledg of the Essential Properties and Power Next we will consider Eph. 4.6 There is One God and Father of all who is above all Here you see a plain discovery of the Vnity of the Godhead and his Supremacy but the Description of Persons is still wanting To this I will add 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but One God the Father of all things Here again the Object of Worship is described as the first Cause and Foundation of all things of whom are all things 2. The Inseparableness and Oneness of his Being is asserted but One God 3. He is so far from directing us to fix our Conceptions on him as distinguished into three Persons that he solely centers him in One even as subsisting in the Father Now what rational Man can conclude from hence but that we are to conceive of the Object of Worship as intirely subsisting in and to be called by the Appellation of the Father and so to be worshipped That is in plainness that we are to conceive that all that we believe to be God most High whether Essence Attributes or Persons whatever we may think of its various subsisting in our selves yet it is to be adored and distinguished by the Person of the Father where we all say that 't is all and whole But further I shall add the Authority of him who cannot err John 4.22 23 24. Ye worship ye know not what We know what we worship for Salvation is of the Jews But the hour cometh and now is when the true Worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth for the Father seeketh such to worship him God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth From this pertinent place I note as follows First That it contains a Discourse of our Saviour directly concerning Worship 1. Blaming and describing the ignorant false Worshippers Ye the Samaritans worship ye know not what 2. Describing the true Worshippers 1. By the manner how in Spirit and in Truth 2. The Matter or Object what and that described two ways 1st His Essence a Spirit 2dly The Person who viz. the Father the true Worshippers shall worship the Father Further from this Text
I observe 1. They cannot be true Worshippers that worship they know not what 2. They that worship the Father as the proper Object of Divine Worship are not such as worship they know not what but such as know what they worship 3. They that worship the Father conceiving of him as containing the glorious inseparable Essence or Spirit being worthy above all things to be worshipped these I say are not the false but the true Worshippers of God and provided they perform their Worship spiritually shall be accepted by him because he seeks such to worship him 4. That it is the Will of God and Direction of Christ that of all the Persons believed to be in the Deity God the Father is to be conceived as the most proper Person for us to direct our highest Adoration to 5. That he that conceives that the Godhead and all its essential Properties subsist in the Father as the proper Object of Divine Worship conceives not amiss because according to Christ's Rule he is a true Worshipper 6. That we may lawfully have Communion with any such Persons if that be all their fault because they are true Worshippers and with better we cannot well join 7. I observe that when Christ describes the Object of our Worship he is so far from distinguishing or teaching us to distinguish the Persons in that Object that he contains all under the denomination of one only Person even the Father Next I shall cite the Instruction of our Lord expresly injoining us to pay Adoration to God the Father and acknowledg all to be his Mat. 6.9 After this manner therefore pray ye Our Father who art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name thy Kingdom come thy Will be done in Earth as 't is in Heaven c. for thine is the Power and the Glory for ever Amen From this I observe 1. That it is the Will of God as declared by Christ that the order we should observe in our Conceptions of God Almighty and in pouring out our Desires to him is positively and directly to pray to God the Father as the proper Appellation and Object of our Prayers 2. That he that prays to God the Father prays in that respect aright and to the true God 3. That it appears not that in our Prayers we are injoined to distinguish the Persons if we regard and eye by Faith the Being or Essence we worship 1. Because if such a thing as distinguishing the Persons in Prayer were a Duty or material our Saviour would have inserted it in his Directory since he here gives an account of all the material Points of Prayer 2. Because on the contrary he expresly injoins us to direct our Desires not to three but to one Person even the Father withal teaching us to use such Expressions as are most proper to a single Person viz. three times thy and once thine 4. I observe that our Lord directs us to render and ascribe such Excellency full Power Soveraignty Protection Sacredness Bounty Clemency Glory to the Father as are only proper to be given to the whole and only Godhead which still shews that the proper glorious Object of Divine Worship is the whole Godhead as truly subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father and under that Appellation to be worship'd And as I have hitherto treated of positive Directions in this case I shall briefly cite some Examples of Christ and his Apostles as our Pattern to follow whereby it may further appear most agreeable to Scripture to worship one Person First Christ's Example Mat. 11.25 I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth Here he pays the duty of Thankfulness to the Father and owns him as supreme Soveraign Mark 14.36 And he said Abba Father all things are possible to thee take away this Cup from me nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt Next I shall cite the Apostles Rom. 8.15 Ye have received the Spirit of Adoption whereby ye cry Abba Father Rom. 15.6 That ye may with one Mind glorify God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Gal. 4.6 God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your Hearts crying Abba Father The next Instance shall be the Adoration of Paul to this single Person Eph. 3.14 For this cause I bow my Knee to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Jam. 3.9 Therewith bless we God even the Father 1 Pet. 1.17 And if ye call on the Father c. And indeed it were tedious to cite all those Texts that give Testimony to this thing These Gleanings are set down that ye might believe that the proper Object of Divine Worship is the one most High God as truly subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father And believing it that ye might direct your Adoration to him accordingly and also have Charity towards all those who have no other material fault but worshipping the Father as the proper Object Nay methinks there is no Point of Divinity in the Holy Scriptures more clear than this thing as any indifferent Eye may see 't is not a thing drawn from doubtful Consequences but plainly revealed often repeated and never contradicted but confirmed by the universal Practice of the Prophets and Primitive Saints and also by Christ and the Apostles namely That the most High is to be worshipped as a single impartible Essence in one single Person without the Worshippers being obliged at the same time to distinguish three distinct Subsistings and Denominations And on the other side there is not one Instance to be given where any Man is recorded in the word of God our only Rule and Guide to adore the most High God under the apprehension of one Essence in three Persons that is I mean did direct his Prayers or Thanks to three Persons And here I must take occasion moderately to check some of my worthy and beloved Brethren useful in the Ministry who a little heated with an inordinate Zeal for the Doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead fearing they may prejudice the Doctrine it self by yielding too much to its opposite do on the other side as much overshoot the Mark and form their Petitions quite beyond all Scripture-Injunction and Example And tho no Examples nor any thing like them can be given yet they must conclude their Prayers To thee O Lord Father Son and holy Spirit three Persons one eternal God be Honour Glory Praise c. What shall one think of this but that those Men think if they should not direct and form their Prayers to the Almighty better than Abraham Jacob Moses the Prophets of old and Christ and his Apostles did their Prayers would be very defective and not accomplished as they ought Truly to be zealous in a good thing is commendable and that 's a good thing for which we have Precept or Pattern but for this there is neither Now when we take the liberty to add to Divine Worship however agreeable to our Opinions and however well-meaning
There is none of you do question whether this be he that moved upon the Waters in the Creation or whether he be holy or whether this be he that descended on our Lord Jesus Christ or whethat that he declares and makes known the very Mind and Will of God or no or whether his Operations may be properly called the Works of God or no or whether it be he that our Lord Jesus Christ said should come or no or whether his Assistance be helpful to mortify Sin and perform Duties towards God with acceptance nay not only in this but about all his Actions in the Saints which I shall not stand in particular to name both respecting the Manner Matter and Magnitude of them I do think you both agree So then still the dâ—fference lies here whether he himself be the Essence of the most Hiâ—h from Eternity a thing no where required to be known that I know of in the whole Book of God But admit it â—e so that the Holy Spirit is in himself the most High God then must it follow that he as the most High created the Heavens and the Earth and so still preserveth the Creation Then it follows that he that worships the most High God that created the Heavens and the Earth and still preserveth the same according to that Knowledg attained of him in his Word he I say then worships this Holy Spirit as much as he that particularly names him altho in respect of his Oâ—fice he looks upon him differing from this most High God and verily if we will heed the Scriptures so we must all for what he is in respect of his Essence is not there expresly declared but as he is manifested to us under the Notion of the Holy Spirit he is declared to be different from the most High God and therefore so to be believed in John 16.13 For there it is said of him That when he comes he speaks not of himself but what he hears sure not from himself but from another that he speaks From whence it iâ— plain that in respect of his Office which is the thing signified by the denomination of Holy Spirit he is distinguished from the most High God and a Messenger sent from him and verily I think it highly necessary that every Christian should so conceive of him for it is the Spirit that maketh unutterable Groans and Intercession for us unto the most High God and not the most High that maketh Intercession to the most High He then that believes in and of the Holy Spirit according to those Articles wherein you are agreed I think his Faith in him is sufficient and according to the Scriptures AN APPENDIX CONTAINING A Short REPLY to a Book Intitul'd A Brief Inquiry whether they who assert and they who deny the Divinity of our Lord Jesus may have Communion together at the Lord's Table written by Mr. Joseph Taylor HAVING finished the precedent Sheets before I saw Mr. Taylor 's Book I could not therein take notice of it Mr. Taylor is one who for his Ingenuity I have long time highly esteemed tho we were never much personally acquainted The reading his Book puts me in mind of what I mentioned in my Epistle to the Reader concerning those little Buckets of Oil frequently starting forth from the Press upon us to increase and inflame our Contentions and I cannot forbear comparing this to one of those fiery Bombs charged with such Matter that in whatsoever Church it falls and fires that Church is in danger of being rent and torn in pieces I think every body ought to set to their hand according to their ability to prevent the fatal Consequences of so mischievous a thing At first sight I believed that a Reply thereto would be a very sutable Appendix to my Book but I shall be very brief and not follow him into all particulars partly because I would not swell this Piece too much and partly because I have heard that it is expected that a more full and distinct Reply will come from another hand First I observe that Mr. Taylor 's main Arguments are originally French and first appeared to the World in that Language however they are now adorned with an English Face and Tongue and tho they were foreign by birth yet they are now naturalized by the Act and Deed of an English Hand and Pen. Mr. Taylor confesses page 14. That he fâ—llows Monsieur Abbadie in his French Treatise of the Divinity of our Lord and I can assure you that the manner and matter of Mr. Taylor 's chief Arguments stand so fair and orderly and in some places almost verbatim in Monsieur Lamoth's Discourse of the Divinity with the Texts of Scripture as they stand in Mr. T 's Book in their order cited and imprâ—ved that at first sight I began to think I had got another Impression of Mr. Taylor 's Book in my hand However this Conclusâ—on I quickly came to that one must needs in great measure at least be the Father of the other and because Lamoth's bears date 1693 I concluded that his was senior However it be I wish Mr. Taylor e're he undertook this Task had well considered that we had already but too many English Incendiaries and therefore that there was the less need to call in those French Refugees to help pull down the Peace of our Churches about our Ears But to proceed the design of Mr. Taylor 's Book as he tells us is to shew and evince that those who assert and they who deny that Christ is God of the same Essence of his Father ought not to have Communion together at the Table of the Lord. This he endeavours to demonstrate from ten Reasons so called But first I must own my Ignorance of Mr. Taylor 's meaning by that Expression which he often uses Christ is God of the Essence of his Father by which I think he must mean one of these four things First That Christ's Divinity is an Essence flowing from or begotten of the most High the same in kind tho distinct in number Or secondly That his Divinity is a part of the same Essence that is in the Father Or thirdly That his Divinity is all and whole of the Divine Essence it self Or fourthly That he intends none of the Divine Essence or eternal Being neither in part nor whole but only the second Person If he means the first that the Divinity of Christ is of the same kind with the Essence of the Father but another distinct intelligent Being and that this is also God most High then this destroys the great Article of one Substance wherein so joint an Agreement is And God will then be no longer one but unavoidably two intire distinct intelligent Beings and so we shall have two Gods two most Highs two Almighties two Alknowing ones all which is nonsense beyond the fourth degree as well as untruth But sure he doth not intend so Therefore secondly suppose he intends the same Essence of
of God be good yea a necessary thing in its place yet it is not saving except sanctified and joined with the internal Knowledg of God Which is the second thing or kind of Knowledg I am to speak to and that is that mentioned and intended Mat. 11.27 All things are delivered to 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 This Knowledg properly dwells in the Heart and is attained by the Exercise of saving Faith wrought by the Spirit of Christ it flows from an inward spiritual Communion the Soul hath with God through the Mediator by which the humble Soul sees the Almighty passing by blotting out and pardoning its Sins and ready and willing to pour into its Bosom all necessary good things of all kinds from whence are nourished Hope Peace Joy and Love This Knowledg is saving and it is as soon attained by Persons of weak and mean Judgment that sincerely seek it as by any whatsoever as appears in Mat. 11.25 where Christ thanks his Father in that he had hid those things from the Wise and Prudent and had revealed them unto Babes SECT II. Concerning God most High what he is IN this Section you have a Description of God most High respecting his Essence Being or Substance and his Essential Properties and first in the Negative Secondly in the Affirmative and that first according to plain Texes of Scripture secondly according to several Authors In which Discourse are included these following useful Particulars viz. First How far the contending Parties are agreed Secondly wherein they differ the Case and the Controversy betwixt them fairly propounded examined opened and explained In which are these things following observable 1. That those things concerning the Knowledg of the most High wherein they are agreed are very plain from Scripture and Reason but the controversal paâ—t very obscure not only to Reason and the Unlearned but also to the Understandings of the most Profound and Learned 2. That the things wherein they are agreed are plainly in words at length declared both in the Old and New Testament as matters to be owned and believed and therefore absolutely necessary to Salvation But the controversal part is not pressed as a thing to be understood or necessary to be believed by the Worshippers of this God In the Old Testament hardly any Footsteps of it appear and 't is asserted only by and from consequences from the new Testament 3. That both Orthodox and Hereticks so called are agreed in all the Essentials and necessary parts of Truth respecting the Knowledg of the most High God harmoniously and unanimously owning and teaching the same things of his Essence and essential Properties The Hereticks so esteemed owning and worshipping the same God and no other that made Heaven and Earth and appeared to Abraham Gen. 17.1 not denying but firmly owning all and whole and every part of the same Essence and all and every essential Property thereof according as the above-named Orthodox do 4. That the great Controversy and Difference concerning God betwixt the above-mentioned Parties is not essential but only circumstantial viz. about the manner or Mode of its subsisting and not about the Divine Essence it self As touching the Knowledg of God I shall treat first negatively He is not any graven Image or Device of Man's Hands Acts 17.29 nor no Man because Man is mortal but God cedureth for ever Psal 136.13 nor no Angel first because they are made secondly are Messengers Heb. 1.7 14. But he is without beginning and above all therefore not created nor sent But Secondly In the affirmative God is a Spirit or Spiritual Substance John 4.24 Not a created Spirit as the Angels but an infinite independent intire invisible Essence the first Cause of and soveraign highest Power over all things Infinite incomprehensible unsearchable in Glory in Power in Strength in Wisdom in Knowledg in Justice in Love in Mercy in Bounty in Goodness in Purity in Compassion in Eternity in Truth and Perfection These are the essential and inseparable Properties of the Divine Essence or Being of God most High the immediate Object of Divine Worship There may be and Scripture shews there are some who in a subordinate manner bear the name of God because he allows it them as ruling from and under him and therefore as Viceroys or chief Magistrates under God in their places they bear tho less properly the name of God to give an instance or two in the room of many of this kind or sort are Angels of whom Paul speaks 1 Cor. 8.15 where he saith There he that are called Gods in Heaven who surely could not be false Gods for they could not get to Heaven therefore Angels through the Excellency of their work obtain that honourable Name and so do men John 10.35 But to pass this only he that hath thâ—se essential Properties is God most High on which Properties I 'll inlarge a little If he be invisible then it is not safe for me to form any shape of him in my Apprehensions any otherwise than a Glorious unwordable Being If he be independent then he stays only on himself and all things stay on him If he be infinite in Power and Perfection then he is a single uncompounded Essence only one in Number and Being For it is morally impossible that there should be two infinite Beings for if one be infinite the other cannot and it is alike impossible that there should be two most Highs for if they are equal neither of them both can say that he is the most High because there is another as high as he Also it alike argues Imperfection for if one Most High be sufficient then another is needless and where there is more than needs it is Imperfection Again if one most High of himself be not sufficient without another that argues Imperfection Therefore they that worship the true and most High God must and ought to conceive of him as a single impartible Being or Essence one in Power in Will in Thought in Knowledg and in all things belonging to his Essence And so hath God directed us to conceive of him in his Word Deut. 6.4 Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is one Lord. Isa 44.6 Besides me there is no God Mark 12.32 There is one God and there is none other but he 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but One God There is none other God but one Ephes 4.6 There is One God and Father of all who is above all Thus far am I come safely no body having any thing to contradict or gainsay that is no body that owns the true God But on all hands we are agreed about the Eternal Essence and Divine Properties These things as undeniable all Christian Men believe the Scripture proves and God's Works manifest This Description is necessary for me to understand in order to direct me how to
place and exercise my Faith in God aright how to pay my Duties and Worship to him and consequently to my Salvation But now I am arrived at the Borders of the Controversy betwixt the Trinitarians and the Vnitarians the Athanasians and nick-nam'd Arians But to pass my Task 't is requisite to give yet a further Description of this One most High God which following Description is said to be drawn from Scripture consequences but is much more plainly set down in words at length in other Authors 1. I shall first cite the Athanasian Creed on this Subject The Catholick Faith is this That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance 2. The Nicene Creed says thus I believe in One God the Father Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible and in one Lord Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God begotten of the Father before all Worlds God of God Light of Light very God of very God begotten not made of one Substance with the Father by whom all things were made And in the Holy Spirit the quickening Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son and in like manner is adored and glorified with the Father and the Son and who spake by the Prophets 3. Next I shall cite the first of the 39 Articles of the Church of England There is but One living and true God c. and in Unity of this Godhead there be three Persons of one Substance Power and Eternity 4. Next I shall cite Mr. Joseph Wright in his Book intitul'd Brief Animadversions on five Articles pag. 2. So that we did then and do hold that there is One only true and living God the Father Son and Holy Spirit all three of the very same Divine Nature and Being And in the same Book pag. 3. lin 28. When we say these three are one we did and now believe that the Father Word or Son and Holy Spirit are all three of the same Divine Nature and Being from everlasting to everlasting the Creator and Governor of all things One only true and living God in three distinct and undivided Divine Persons Thus far Mr. Wright 5. Next I shall cite Dr. Owen in his Book intituled The Doctrine of the Trinity vindicated printed An. 1669 pag. 29. In the Declaration of this Doctrine unto the edification of the Church there is contained a further explanation of the things before asserted as proposed directed and in themselves the Object of our Faith namely how God is one in respect of Nature Substance Essence Godhead or Divine Being How being Father Son and Holy Ghost he subsisteth in these three distinct Persons And Pag. 112. The distinction which the Scripture reveals between Father Son and Holy Spirit is that whereby they are three Persons distinctly subsisting in the same Divine Essence or Being Now a Divine Person is nothing else but a Divine Person upon the account of an especial Property subsisting in an especial manner as in the Person of the Father there is the Divine Essence or Being with its Property of begetting the Son subsisting in an especial manner in the Father and because this Person hath the whole Divine Nature all the essential Properties of that Nature are in that Person Page 122. Seeing here that the name of God supplies the place of a Species tho it be singular absolutely as it respects the Divine Nature which is absolutely singular and One and cannot be multiplied yet in respect of communication it is otherwise it is communicated unto more 6. I shall cite next Mr. John Preston in his Book intitul'd Life eternal or a Treatise of the Knowledg of the Divine Essence fourth Edition printed 1034 page 48 49. If there be two things in God then there is Multiplication now all Multiplication ariseth from some Imperfection from some want and defect for if one would serve two would be needless if one Medicine would cure two would be unnecessary so in all things else So that the reasâ—n of Multiplication is because one will not serve the turn Therefore God being all-sufficient it is not needful yea it cannot be that a breaking in two should be admitted in him and consequently he must be most simple without all composition a pure and entire Essence full of himself and nothing besides And a little further thus Wheresoever there is any composition there must be two or three things so that there may be a Division they are separable tho not separated But where Division is there may be a Dissolution and so Destruction though it never be But of God we cannot say that this may be and consequently there cannot be two things in him but what he is he is One most simple most pure and most entire Being without all Composition and Multiplication If God be not simple there must be parts of which he is compounded but in God blessed for ever there are no parts because then there should be Imperfection for every part is imperfect I shall cite one Author more and then make some use of the whole 7. Mr. Thomas Monk in his notable Book of the Trinity intituled A Cure for the cankering Error Pag. 55. has these words Not to the end it should make a Multitude of Gods or divide the Essence but to distinguish the Persons because tho there be one Person of the Father another Person of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost yet the Father is not another thing or another God distinct from the Son and the Holy Ghost neither is the Son another thing or another God distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost neither is the Holy Ghost another thing or another God distinct from the Father and the Son because the Nature of God is but one and indivisible although the Father be one the Son another and the Holy Ghost another and therefore they are not of divers natures of another and divers Substance not conjoined or knit together in one Substance as Men which have one common Essence not only of the like Substance but of one and the same Substance have the same Essence the same Eternity the same Will the same Operation c. And page 57. ' Qu. Be there any parts or kinds in God Answ None at all because he is a most simple Essence which doth admit no Composition or Division and simply and in every respect of Unity one Having given you this Description of the Most High God both from the Holy Scriptures and those Authors I shall now come to make that use of it which at first I promised and intended and that is to shew that there is no essential but only a circumstantial difference in the Apprehensions of the Parties before named concerning the Most High God and the Description here given of Him Only note that that which concerns the difference about the Son and Holy Ghost will be here spoken unto but occasionally and in short
another is incomprehensible and unutterable in this Life And for my own part I shall much rather chuse to admire the matter than to illustrate my explanation and I will add with Mr. Monk in the aforesaid page to be wise above what is written is not Wisdom but perilous Sin and Folly And it will not out of my Head but that it had been much better for every body to have left off at the Description of the most High even there where we on all hands were so well agreed rather than to have run further for a plainer Description till we have almost lost our selves And now a word by the way to my Bâ—ethren who for distinction sake I call of the Athanasian Perswasion Many or most of you are not ignorant of the bitter Words and Deportment that have dropt from the Tongues and Pens of many against their Brethren because of their differing Apprehensions about the most High God and now thus far are we come scanning the difference and it remains in this narrow Corner for all are agreed that that Glorious Eternal Being whose Throne is in the Heavens or the Heavens is his Throne whom the Heaven and Heaven of Heavens cannot contain whose Presence fills Heaven and Earth even that this Glorious Being or Essence and he only from everlasting to everlasting is the one and only most High God the Original of all Power Authority Wisdom Life Light Knowledg Nature Perfection Goodness Bounty Mercy Justice Love Action and Being And further you are all agreed that this very Essence is an impartible uncompounded Essence So that our differing Brethren own the same most High the same Essence for Number Nature and Kind owning all and whole of the Divine Essence and essential Properties as full in all respects as we our selves not abating one of them no nor any part of one of them worshipping it with the same and as much Adoration and Respect as we our selves owning the very same Substance and no other So that the difference is not about Substance Matter or Properties but only about a certain Manner or Mode of subsisting yea yet further both agreeing that whatever is God most High whether Essence or Property tho improper to distinguish it is all and whole in the Person of the Father This none of us all dare deny for then we shall throw down our own Opinion Root and Branch Nay further it is jointly agreed b◠〈◊〉 that whatsoever is God most High whether Essence Attribute or Person it is all in every one and consequently in the Father See Mr. Monk pag. 38. Because a Person signifies both the Essence and its Relative Property all the Persons having one and the same Essence it followeth that in respect of the Essence one person is in another Thus all amounts to thus much You say that Essence and all that we properly call God and worship is in the Person of the Father and so say they only you require them to confess that the Essence subsisteth not only thus but also in two other distinct Manners or Modes This is all And truly methinks it looks like a very hard case that our Brethren should own the whole Essence with all its Royal and Essential Properties and likewise own all his mighty Works of old and now whereby he hath made himself known and likewise reverence and honour it as highly as our selves and yet we must exclude them Communion at the Table of the Lord only and meerly for a Circumstance that is a differing Manner or Mode of subsisting which yet also is so dark and dubious that not one of us durst once touch it with our Peâ—â— to explain it Shall we then be so positive so highly conceited of our own Judgments in so intricate so mysterious a Matter which yet at most is but a Circumstance viz. a Mode or Manner of subsisting not any part of the thing it self the Essence it self Shall we censure condemn and stigmatize our good Brethren every way else as able for Parts Knowledg Purity of Manners and zealous for God and his Ways as our selves Shall we represent them Denyers of the true God Broachers of Heresies nay damnable Heresies Surely no Be it far from us lest it be thought that an evil Mind hath had dominion over us more especially since admitting their Sentiments to be in this case circumstantially erroneous for a Heresy I will not allow it yet it hinders not at all or is no Impediment to our paying Adoration or Worship to the most High as I shall come to shew in the next Section But first let me observe unto you that all those things respecting the Essence and essential Properties wherein we and all our Brethren are agreed both Scripture and Reason in all plainness teaches But this controversal part concerning the treble Manner or Mode of the subsisting of the Divine Essence is neither taught by Reason nor found in or is Scripture-Language I say it is not Scripture-Language but only drawn from some Inferences and Consequences of and from the holy Scripture I say when we have only Consequences to foot upon in a case of this nature and difficulty still it calls for the more Moderation and Tenderness towards persons of differing Apprehensions in such a tender point who withal are as orthodox in the main every way as our selves But now I come to the next point SECT III. Concerning the manner how we ought to pay our Worship and Adoration to this one most High God IN the creating of this I shall include and resolve this following Question Whether it be the declared Pleasure of the Almiâ—hty that his Subjects should pay their Adoâ—ation to the Matter subsisting or the â—â—â—â—r oâ— suâ—sisting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ully thus Whether it be the 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—sure of the Almighty that his Subiects should pay their Adoration unto him with and under the Conception and Appellation of One Supream Soveraign single Substance unseparable in Essence and Divine Properties subsisting in one Person Or whether it be his pleasure it should be paid unto him under the notion and appellation of a single Essence subsisting in three distinct Manners Modes or Persons In the resolving of this Question I shall premise this by the way That the Order Manner or Mode of paying our Adâ—ration and our Conceptions of the Object of Worship in the Act of Worship ought not to be regulated by our Conceptions but to be decided merely by the Directiâ—n and Rule God is pleased to give us about it in his Word For it is not what we think fit but what he saâ— is most proper and our Duty And therefâ—re I take this fâ—r granted that the Hâ—ly Scrâ—ptures are our only whole sufficient Rule to â—uide us in all points of Faith and goâ—d Manners respecting Salvation to guide us in the understanding of the Object and Act of Worship and in our conception of the Object in the Act thereof And for want of keeping close to this Rule so many
our Intentions may be yet if our Device want Authority from sacred Record we mar instead of mending for as there is a time for every Purpose so is there a Rule for every Practice God is the God of Order and the supreme Giver of a Rule in all Institutions and Worship and when beyond the express Rule we shall foist in any Formality in Duty we cast Dishonour on them of old to wit the Prophets and Apostles yea Christ and God himself as if he had been short in giving sufficient Rules or Christ and his Followers short in understanding him And thus indeavouring to mend Formality beyond Rule or express Precept or Example has as I hinted before occasioned all or most of the Innovations in Institutions and Forms of Divine Worship As for example because Christ saith Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of God and drink his Blood ye have no Life in you therefore as if persons were bound to take more care for their Children than God himself directed for many Ages they gave them the Lord's Supper tho they had no express Scripture for it Likewise because the Apostle says Make melody to the Lord and rejoice and again I say rejoice and the like therefore without rule some have invented Organs as proper to heighten Rejoycings Likewise because the Scripture saith Confess your Faults one to another therefore the Roman Church hath invented Auricular Confession And truly tho I would be sparing in comparisons yet I would have all my Brethren see that it is dangerous to add Devices of our own and that it is hardly sufficient because the Scripture says There are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one that therefore we must say in our Prayers Father Son and Holy Spirit three Persons and one eternal God when we have no precedent that ever any did so who yet knew how to pray as well as we having the first Fruits of the Spirit And as I said before were the distinction of Persons in that one Essence as plainly discovered by Scripture and Reason as the Oneness of that Godhead is which yet I must confess it hardly is yet the manner of our Conceptions and our Expressions to and Appellations of the Object of Worship in the Act of Worship must depend upon God's Will and Christ's Direction and not our own Device And now according to my promise concerning the Knowledg of the most High and paying Worship to him I hope I have convincingly shewn the joint Agreement on all hands among the Parties above-mentioned and that at most there is but a circumstantial difference between them and no material one seems to be in their thoughts either concerning God or Worship unto him both believing in the very same God that created the Heavens and Earth the very same Essence all and whole the very same that was and is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob the same God and no other that is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus the very same God that Christ directs us to call Father owning all his essential Properties Power and Prerogatives each believing him to subsist all and whole in the person of the Father and under that Appellation most proper to be worshipped only there is a little difference about this threefold manner of subsisting a thing as has bin shewn that God and Christ have at least been sparing in declaring at any time when he made discovery of himself in all Ages And therefore I hope the Belief of it not to be look'd upon so binding or the ignorance of it so damning as to be the Test of Communion And now according to my promise I shall come to speak of the second Person of the Trinity viz. the Christ of God CHAP. II. Concerning the Christ of God THIS Chapter containeth four Sections First shewing that we are all agreed about the Person of Christ who he is The second treateth of his Offices therein also shewing that we are agreed The third answers this Question Whether or no it be required that in order to our right believing in and worshipping of the Person of Jesus of Nazareth we must worship him as the most High God The fourth treateth particularly of his human Nature Sect. I. Shewing that we are all agreed about the Person of Christ who he is GReat have been the Mistakes of many about the Person of the Messias There seem to be in all Nations such Sparks of Light as inform them they have need of some one to be their Friend to appease Divine Wrath and speak to the most High for them to which purpose the Jews adhered to one Benchochab in the Reign of Adrian who pretended to be the Messias but came to nothing Likewise in 1666 they followed one Sebastius Sevi And after that one More pretending to be Christ who both came to nothing And they now look for a Messias to come tho not Jesus of Nazareth The Persians rely on Haly the Turks on Mahomet and the Quakers say it is something within viz. a Spirit or spiritual Substance And there shall yet come especially in the last times many Pretenders calling themselves Christs which shall be found Liars But our Brethren and we all agree that he and no other that was born of Mary called Jesus of Nazareth nailed to the Cross by the order of Pontius Pilat in the days of Tiberius Cesar that he I say was and is the Christ of God the Saviour of the World And why we should cry out upon one another that such a one denies the true Christ and believes in another Christ I see no Reason since we all agree that that one Person born of Mary was and is the true Christ 'T is true their Sentiments and ours may not be alike about his Substance in his preexisting before his Incarnation but as that is a Mystery hard for the Ignorant to understand and Men of the greatest Parts commonly lose themselves in it so I do not find the Apostles press it as material to be believed in and understood their main design seemed to be to prove that he was the same Person the Prophets spake of and to open the Power and Efficacy of his Death and Sufferings but were very sparing in talking of his preexisting which yet if it had been necessary to Salvation it seems to me they would have opened it as well as other Points But supposing our Brethren mistaken in their Conceptions concerning Christ what he was before his Incarnation yet have they the same Respect and Love for his Person as we have believe him to be the very Christ of God as much as we believe his Death to be available and look upon him to be as sufficient a Saviour as we do and since they pitch on the very same Person that we do I cannot think that they believe in a false or another Christ Sect. II. Concerning the Offices of Christ shewing also
that we are therein agreed HIS Name Jesus signifies a Saviour and Christ is in English Anointed so that this Person we speak of is the Anointed of God to save Mankind His principal Office is to mediate between the most High offended and the Lump of Men offending 1 Tim. 2.5 Now concerning his Mediatorship our Brethren and we agree both believing that he is truly Man having the Actions and Passions of Men as eating drinking sleeping c. And that he had a reasonable Soul that he is to be accounted our Prophet Priest and King that his Death and Bloodshed is sufficient to ransom the World that there is no Remission of Sins without him that he now fits at the right hand of the most High that he shall one day judg the Quick and Dead that he has now all Authority in Heaven and Earth that he is the true Son of God that he is above the Angels that his Flesh is the true Heavenly Bread that whosoever eats thereof shall live for ever that his Blood received by Faith is Drink indeed that he bare our Sins in his own Body on the Tree In these things touching the Person and Offices of Christ and in other material Points of like nature there is an Agreement and why there should be such a falling out I cannot guess unless thro Pride we will have all Men see as we see and in such things as seem not to be preached by the Apostles as necessary Sect. III. Treating on and answering this Question Whether or no we are required in order to our right believing in and worshipping of the Person of Jesus of Nazareth to worship him as the most High God BEfore I come directly to answer this Question I shall first speak of the Worship and Adoration due to him as he is the Christ of God and in that Capacity to be sure subordinate and subject to the Father Now I think it is on all hands allowed that Glory and Honour is to be given to Christ as he is the Mediator And the Reason why all Glory and such Honour is to be given to him is because all Power in Heaven and in Earth is given to him Mat. 28.19 Now I observe that Divine Honour is never to be given to the most High because of a Power given him for the most High gives all things but no Power or Authority can be given to him he has it all originally in himself Now the Power here spoken of was a Power given unto him therefore he had it not as most High but as Christ a confessed Subject and received it of the Father Moreover it is said John 5.22 23. For the Father judgeth no man but hath committed all Judgment unto the Son that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father And vers 26. For as the Father hath Life in himself so hath he given unto the Son to have Life in himself From hence I note that there is an Honour to be given to Christ as to one invested with Power by and from another and that God the Father hath given and bestowed on him Power and Judgment partly on purpose that Men should pay him this Honour And tho Comparisons as we use to say will not run on all four yet for Illustration sake I will instance the Case of Joseph Pharaoh was King yet says he to Joseph Gen. 41.40 Thou shalt be over my House and according unto thy Word shall all my People be ruled see I have set thee over all the Land of Aegypt and they cried before him Bow the Knee A Badg of Homage and Honour very probably given to the King when he rode amongst the People Here you see tho Pharaoh were King yet the Execution of the Power and the Honour of the Government is given unto Joseph So altho the Father or the Most High be he that hath Authority originally yet the Honour of it and the execution of it in Heaven and in Earth is given unto the Son and he shall keep it and execute it until he hath subdued all his Enemies and then shall deliver it up to God even the Father 1 Cor. 15.24 25 26 27 28. Now about this Honour and Power there is no Controversy that I know of every one of either Party granting that Christ hath not this Power and Honour as he is essentially God most High because then he could not receive it nor yet ever deliver it up again as in all plainness he is said to do And this kind of Advancement and Power and Prerogative is intended Ephes 1.20 21 22. where it is said God hath set him far above all Principalities and Powers and Might and Dominion and every Name that is named not only in this World but also in that which is to come and hath put all things under his Feet The like is mentioned and intended Phil. 2.9 10 11. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him and given him a Name which is above every Name That at the Name of Jesus every Knee should bow of things in Heaven and things in Earth and things under the Earth and that every Tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the Glory of God the Father The like also is intended Heb. 2.5 6 7 8 9. and in many other places is this kind of Dignity spoken of But as aforesaid this matter is not controverted but the Knot of the Question is Whether over and above this Honour which is to be given unto him as Christ and a principal Officer and Representative of the most High I say whether over and above this Honour we are not bound to worship him as the most High himself that is not as one deserving Honour and Obedience because of Dignity and Power given him but as one deserving and requiring it having originally all Power and Dignity dwelling essentially in him and he the only supream Giver of it to others To this weighty Question with all Modesty and Submission to better Judgments from whom if occasion be I expect Information I humbly answer No that such Worship is not formally to be paid to the Person of Christ as he is the Christ of God Mistake me not let none suppose that I hereby deny the Person of Christ to be essentially God But I say allowing that yet it follows not from thence that we are to pay our Devotion to Christ as to the most High My Reasons for it are as follows First Because when the Apostles preached and discovered him unto the World they seem to discover and preach no such Belief and Practice And first for Peter's first Sermon to the Multitude Act. 2. which caused the Plantation of the first Christian Church he preaches Salvation through the name of Christ vers 21. he let them know that Jesus of Nazareth was no Impostor but a man approved of God by Miracles Wonders and Signs ver 22. he speaks of his Death and Sufferings ver 23. his Resurrection v. 24.
his Exaltation ver 33. and v. 36. concludes Know assuredly that God hath made the same Jesus whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ Here you see Peter omits no material thing he speaks of his Merits They that call on him shall be saved his Death Resurrection Exaltation receiving Empire and Honour God hath made him Lord but not one word of his being essentially God and so on that account the Object of Divine Worship which yet had it been so material a Point as is now thought did deserve as much to be preached as any of the other Likewise in his second Sermon Acts 3. he preaches Christ from Vers 13. to the end yet not one word of his being essentially the most High The like iâ— to be observed in the fourth Chapter Manâ— places I might run over but for brevity sake I shall only take notice of two more one is where Peter iâ— sent to tell Cornelius what he ought to believe and do Acts 10. vâ—rs 36. he lets Cornelius know that Jesus waâ— Lord as before he told the Jews God had â—ade him both Lord and Christ He tâ—â—ls him that God had sent the Message of Peace by him he tells him he was the Anointed of God he tells him he was a Miracle-Worker which shewed that God was with him he tells him of his Death and Resurrection he testifies him to be the same the Prophets prophesied of to come he preaches Remission of Sins through Faith in his Name he declares him to be ordained Judg of Quick and Dead but not one word that he is to be worshipped as essentially God Most High which had it been a point of Faith would surely have been told Cornelius and the Gentiles Likewise when Paul informs the ignorant Athenians Acts 17.31 after he had described the true God he describes Christ distinct from God as the ordained Judg of the World but speaks not of his Godhead My second Reason is Because as he is Christ he is distinguished from God and an Officer under him and therefore so as he is Christ to be believed in saying of himself his Father is greater than he and than all the Scriptures that direct us in our Faith in Christ direct us to understand his Office but seem to be silent concerning his Essence Neither doth Christ any where require us to worship him as the most High but we are to pray to give thanks and perform our Homage to the most High through Jesus Christ as the new and living way consecrated for us But thirdly nothing is Christ but what is anointed for Christ in plain English signifies anointed Now the Divine Essence was not anointed nor incarnate for who should anoint it unless we will say the Divine Essence anointed the Divine Essence with the Divine Essence Some will say that that is absurd and verily except we have a mind to fall into the contradictory ridiculous Opinion of the Quakers I think we can plead at most for no more than this viz. that the second Person of the Trinity was incarnate and anointed and not the Divine Essence it self And if ye will not believe me believe Mr. Tho. Monck in his Cure for the cankering Error pag. 98. where he tells you we always distinguish betwixt the Essence of the Son and the Person saying the Essence is one with the Father but not his Person Therefore we say his Person was begotten not his Essence and we also say his Person took Flesh of the Virgin Mary not his Essence and therefore it was the Person of the Son that was born of her not the Father nor the Spirit for tho the Essence of the three be one yet the Persons be distinct and pag. 114. he reckons up the Absurdities will else follow viz. that the Father was he that took Man's Nature upon him was tempted of the Devil suffered Hunger and Thirst was buffeted and scourged of the Jews and put to death by wicked hands is greater than himself sent himself into the World he gave himself a Seat at his own Right Hand he is the express Image of himself c. and many other Absurdities he reckons up these may suffice Now I humbly conceive Divine Homage and Adoration is to be given to the Essence of the most High and not to a particular manner of its subsisting to wit to a Person which yet is all which is or was anointed according to Mr. Monck's Opinion But then I know it will be said that each Person and so the second Person contains in it all the Essence Let it be so I will allow that in the Person of Christ dwelt all the Fulness of the Godhead bodily according to Col. 2.9 But then it must also be allowed that the Essence dwelt there as something distinct from the Anointed and not as the Anointed it self It must also be allowed that the most High dwelt in Christ incognito as some great Princes appear in foreign Courts and Places incognito that is tho they are personally present yet they decline to receive those Royal and Princely Honours due to their Character receiving them only or chiefly in their Palace Royal. So tho the Almighty dwell in the Person of Christ yet we are not taught to say our Father who art in the Person of Christ but our Father who art in Heaven which Expression he desires we should use while the Person of Christ was on Earth And we have before shewn that we are to worship the Divine Essence as subsisting all and whole in the Person of the Father neither are we any where commanded or directed to say our Son who art in Heaven or our Spirit who art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name but only our Father And since the Divine Essence seems not to desire us to worship him under the Denomination or in the Person of the Son I think it safest for us to worship him as truly and wholly subsisting in the Person of the Father and under that Denomination Besides the Names of Son and Spirit howsoever with respect of Essence they are believed to be God yet I say these Names seem to distinguish them from God and do denote them as Officers under God Therefore it is said the Father is greater than I and than all the Son knows not the Day and Hour of Judgment but the Father only Likewise the Spirit when he comes he shall not speak of himself but what he hears that shall he speak From the whole I conclude that the Christ of God ought in our Faith concerning him to be distinguished from God himself and that whatever may be said of the Divine Essence dwelling in Christ yet nothing was Christ but what was anointed and that only the Person was anointed or was incarnate according to Mr. Monck's Opinion And further that whatever Divine Essence dwelt in Christ or was Christ yet the proper place to pay Adoration to it is in the Person of the Father and that he that worships the Father
I mislike the fashion of this Reason 1. I do not approve the Expressions of Idolatry and Blasâ—hemy being too gross to be bestown so liâ—erally on Persons so nearly united in the Faith of the true God and the true Christ and â—is Laws as I have in the foregoing sheets shewn they are Milder Constructions and Expressions better become the Cause 2. This manner of arguing seems to me too desâ—erate Mr. Tayâ—â—r takes this Weapâ—n pointâ—d at both endâ— and ventures to set one point at his own Breast trusting in the strenâ—th of the â—kin of his own Cause and so makes a thrust at his â—râ—thren Altho Mr. Taylor be a fallible Man yet he is so conâ—â—dent that his Conceptions are certainly right in this confessed Mystery and Controversy that hath puzled the most learned Men in all Ages and sadly divides them at this time that he ventures to proclaim it to the World that in case he be mistaken he is an Idolater and leaves himself so upon Record to Posterity I have heard of some who would hazard the loss of one of their Eyes rather than their Neighbours should enjoy both theirs Mr. Taylor will run the hazard of being accounted an Idolater in case he be in the wrong rather than his differing Brethren shall go without the Imputation of Idolaters and Blasphemers Secondly I see no ground for that Clause in his Reason viz. That they that disbelieve Christ to be essentially God are Idolaters I take Idolatry to be giving Divine Adoration and Worship to any Object as if he were the most High God when it is not the most High God Now these Unitarians that do not believe Christ to be essentially God most High do not worship him as such but as one receiving Power and Authority from another But if Mr. Taylor be of the opinion that it is Idolatry for any Reason to give Worship and Honour to any Creature as he seems to say pag. 23. therein I dissent from him for altho to worship any Creature as the most High when God allows it not that is when it doth not immediately represent him be Idolatry yet when Creatures shall and do immediately represent God mâ—st High and receive Authority from him I see not but we may without Idolatry worship them for else first we shall in a manner impute Idolatry to Abraham Moses David John and others f r I remember Abraham boâ—â—d his Head Gen. 18. whâ—n the three Angels came to him and maâ—â—â— intercessiâ—n tâ—â—ne of them for Sodom â—iâ—ing him the Denomination of my Lâ—rd I suppose nâ— body thinks this Angel was essentially God for then Aâ—raham could not have seen him Likewise Moses is commaâ—ded to pull off his Shoes in honour to the aâ—pearance of God by his Angel in the Bush Likewise David fell on his Face to the ground befâ—re the Angel and seems to direct his Prayer unto him 1 Chron. 21.10 17. Likewise Coâ—nelius gives the Denomination of Lord to the Angel Acts 10.4 Likewise John the Divine falls at the Angel's Feet Rev. 1.17 for tho the Revelation was Christ's which God gave him yet the discovery to John was made by the Angel Chap. 1.1 But again Mr. Taylor allows himself and others to worship a Creature without the imputation of Idolatry namely the human Nature of Jesus Christ which in his own Opinion is a Creature only yet it was worshipped when it was on Earth and Men begged Mercy of it It is and ought to be worshipped now and shall be worshipped hereafter But if Mr. Taylor reply that this is for this particular reason viz. because it is personally joined unto the Diâ—ine Nature and therefore is not a Creature only I answer 1st That if we may for any Reason give worship to a Creature without being Idolaters then at least his first Posâ—tion is not universally true viz. That to worship any Creature is Idolatry But 2ly Suppose what Union you will in an orthâ—dox Sense yet the Divine Nature is no part of the human Nature nor the human any part of the Divine Nature but they are really distinct therefore the human Nature and every part thereof is a Creature only And 3ly Holy Scripture if you 'l believe and heed that doth not any where say that we are to worship the Man Christ because it is personallly joined to the Divine Nature but the Reason given why we should worship it iâ— because it hath received and God hath given and committed unto it Power Authority and Judgment The principal Reason for so doing is that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father Likewise Phil. 2.9 10. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him and given him a Name which is above every Name that at the Name of Jesus every Knee should bow both â—f things in Heaven and things in Earth But thirdly I further reply to Mâ— Taylor 's first Reason That altho in case he be mistaken he hath wilfully thrust himself into the numbâ—r of Idolaters and therefâ—re deserves but little pâ—ty yet out of Charity I will help him a little and endeâ—â—our to shew him that tho he should be mâ—â—â—ken yet he is no Idolater nor yâ—t the othe◠〈◊〉 My reason fâ—r it is this He dirâ—â—s Adoration and Worship to the whole Divine Eternal Being that created all things the true God allowing also in him all the essential Attributes Now he that worships the true God cannot be an Idolater It is true if Mr. Taylor be mistaken he iâ— in an Error because he worships this Essence in the wrong place to wit in the Person of Christ when it should be in the Person of the Father only in Heaven but sâ—ill it is the same Essence he intends that and no other than he who iâ— the God of Abraham And on the other hand if the Unitarians be mistâ—ken yet they intend to worship the same Essence all and whole and no other they belâ—eve it tâ— be in the Person of Christ â—ut not to be anâ—inted They conceive it tâ— be an intire Being subsisting in the Father yet still the very Essence that we worship and no other Therefore neither can they be Idolaters I will conclude my Answer to this first Reason with this Argument They that worship all and whole of the Diâ—ine Essence of the Eternal and Supream beinâ— who is the true God are not therein nor cannot be Idolaters or Blasphemers But both Trinitarians and Unitarians worship all and whole of the same Divine Essence of the Eternal and Supream Being who is the true God Ergo neither Trinitarians nor Unitarians are Idolaters or Blasphemers Thus I hope his first Reason is mortally wounded His second Reason is pag. 5. Because they that deny Christ is essentially God most High deny the Person of the Son of God and thereupon deny the true Christ and bring another in his stead He endeavours to prove this bold Assertion thus If the Persâ—n of Christ consist both of a divine and human Nature