oblige us to believe any thing which does not agree with the Reason of our own Minds, and the Philofophy of Nature. Those who understand the Mystery of Modern Infidelity, know that these, and fuch like, are the wife Reafons for which they reject and ridicule all Revealed Religion, and endeavour to rob and spoil men of one of the greatest Bleffings in the World, A Divine Revelation. So that Infidelity is refolved into these vain Pretences to Philofophy, that Men will understand how to make, deftroy, and govern the World better than God.

2. As these men oppofe Reafon and Philofophy to Revelation, so others either deny the fundamental Articles of Christianity for the fake of fome Philofophical Difficulties, or corrupt the Doctrines of Christianity by a mixture of Philofophy. The Gofpel of our Saviour is the plainest Revelation of the Will of God that ever was made to the World; all its Doctrines are easily understood, without Art and Subtilty; and yet there is not a more nice, intricate, perplext thing in the World, than what fome men have made the Chriftian Faith: All the Subtil Difputes of Philofophy are brought into the Church; and Plato and Ariftotle are become as great Apoftles, as St. Peter, or St. Paul: As to give fome few Inftances of it; for time will not permit me to difcourfe it at large.

What are the Arian, Socinian, Pelagian Controverfies, but meer Philofophical Difputes, with which thefe Hereticks corrupted the Catholick Faith?

There is nothing more plain and exprefs in Scripture than the Faith of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or the Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity; and that great Art and Subtilty which has been used,and to fo little purpofe,to pervert thofe Texts of Scripture, wherein this Doctrine is contained, is an evident proof, That this is the plain, natural obvious sense of thofe Texts, fince it requires fo much Art

and

and Criticism to put any other fenfe on them; and that will not do neither, till men are refolved rather to make any thing of Scripture, than to find a real Trinity there. If then this Faith be fo plainly contained in Scripture, what makes all this difpute about it? What makes thofe, who profefs to believe the Scripture, fo obftinate against this Faith? Truly that which makes fome men Infidels, makes others Hereticks, that is, a vain pretence to Philofophy.

The first Philofophical Difpute is about the Divine Unity: We all own with the Scripture, that there is but One God; but we say further, as the Scripture teaches us, That there are Three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, each of which is true and perfect God. This they fay is a Contradiction; and if it be fo, there is an end of this Faith, for both parts of a Contradiction can't be true: But to be Three and One upon different accounts, and in different fenfes, is no Contradiction; for thus Three may be One, and One Three; and this is all the Scripture teaches, or that we profefs to believe, whatever the Myftery of this Diftinction and Unity be: But this will not fatisfy these Philofophical Wits, unless they can comprehend how Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, are really and diftinctly Three, and effentially One, the manner of which the Scripture gives no account of, and therefore this is no Difpute in Faith, but only in Philofophy.

Another Objection concerns the Divine Generation, how God can beget a Son of his own Subftance; which the Arians thought inferred a divifion of the Divine Subftance.

And a Third Objection concerns an Eternal Generation; how it is poffible that the Father fhould beget an Eternal Son; that the Son fhould be begotten without any begin

ning of Being; and that the Father should not be at least some few moments before the Son, and consequently the Son not Eternal. Now we all grant that we can give no Philofophical account of this, no more than we can of the fimple Divine Effence, or of Eternity it felf; but we may believe that God has an Eternal Son, as we do that there is an Eternal God, without knowing how any thing is Eternal: These are Disputes in Philofophy, and fuch as none but vain men will dispute about, as being acknowledged above our Comprehenfion, and therefore no reaso nable Objection against our Faith.

Thus as for the Doctrine of the Incarnation, nothing can be plainer in Scripture, than that the Son of God was made man; That the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; That God was manifeft in the flesh: And all the disputes about this Article are purely Philofophical: Some men reject it, because they cannot understand how God and Man can be united in one Perfon: Others confound the Divine and Human Nature, as Eutyches did; or divide the Perfons, as Neftorius did; both which indeed destroy the Article of the Incarnation; for the Word is not made Flesh, unless the same Perfon, who is God, is Man too, and continues perfect God and perfect Man after this Union: But all these disputes concern the Philofophy of the Union of the Divine and Human Nature in Chrift; and if we would feparate between Faith and Philosophy, fuch difputes might foon be ended.

Thus most of the difficulties in the Pelagian and Quinquarticular Controversy, are ultimately refolved into mere Philofophical disputes about Fate and Prescience, Liberty and Neceffity, and God's concourfe with Creatures, or the Powers of Nature and Grace: And would time permit, it were easy to shew this in most of the Controversies of Religion, That it is not what God has revealed, and what

he

he requires us to believe, but fuch Nice Philosophical Questions as men raife about thefe matters, which occafion all thefe difputes.

It has often been propofed as a means of Union to filence all difputes, To confine our felves to Scripture-Words and Expreffions, without determining the fignification of them: But this would make only an Agreement in Words, not a Consent in Opinions; nor could it fecure the Peace of the Church, while all men knew, that under the fame form of Words, they had very different and contrary Meanings, which would ftill make them as much Hereticks to each other, as if their Words did as exprefly contradict each other, as their Faith. But would men reduce all their disputes to Scripture, and make that the only Rule of their Faith, without intermixing any Philofophical difputes with it, this would be an infallible means of Union; for it is only this vain pretence to Philofophy, which raifes all these difputes, and then tempts men to pervert the Scriptures to juftify their Philofophy.

In all these cases we are concerned to enquire what the true fenfe of the Article is; for this the Scripture teaches, and fo far our Faith is concerned; and thefe are not only juftifiable, but neceffary difputes, if the true Faith be ne ceffary: And fuch were the difputes of the Catholick Fathers with the Sabellian, Arian, and Photinian Hereticks; Whether Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, were only Three Names, or Three Appearances and Manifestations of the fame One fingle Perfon, or any other Three, but Three True, Proper, Coeternal, and Coequal Perfons: Or whether He, who is in Scripture called the Son of God, be a Creature, though the moft Excellent Creature; or a Son, and God by Nature, truly begotten of his Father's Substance: Or whether Chrift be God Incarnate, or a meer Man: And their ancient Creeds pretended to no C

more,

more, than to teach what the Catholick Faith was, not to expound the Philofophy of the Trinity and Incarnation. And thus far we must explain the Faith, as to know, and to let others know, what it is we believe; and if to affert the ancient Catholick Faith against old; and new Herefies, fhould be called New Explications, we cannot help it; for we must explain what the Scripture teaches about thefe Articles, and how the Catholick Church always understood them: But that which we are to beware of, is, Not to mix Philofophy with our Faith, nor to admit of any mere Philofophical Objections against the Faith, nor to attempt any Explications of thefe Myfteries, beyond what the Scriptures, and the Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church will justify.

Indeed the Importunity of Hereticks did very often engage the Catholick Fathers in Philofophical difputes; but this they did, not to explain the Chriftian Myfteries by Philofophy, but only to fhew, that as incomprehenfible as thefe Myfteries are, the Philofophy of Hereticks, and their Objections against thefe Articles, were very abfurd: And fuch difputes as thefe may fometimes be abfolutely neceffary, and of great ufe to fhame thefe vain Pretences to Philofophy, while we do not put the Trial of our Faith on this Iffue.

rage

up

Secondly, Let us now confider what great reafon we have to reject all the vain Pretences to Reafon and Philofophy, when oppofed to a Divine Revelation. For that is all the Apoftle intends in this Caution; not to difcou the ufe of Reafon, or the ftudy of Philofophy, which are great Improvements, and a delightful Entertainment of Human Minds, and with a wife and prudent Conduct may be very ferviceable to Religion too; but we must not fet up any Conclufions in Philofophy against the Chriftian Faith, nor corrupt the Faith with a mixture of Philofophy,

nor