HATH this Church, the Church of England, at this Day need of Eye-Salve? it appears by the many Errors, concerning the Tri­nity, which go abroad in Print, that it hath: yea, that it hath need of more Epistles yet from him who walks betwixt the Can­dle-Sticks, and holds the Seven Stars in his right hand. Wherefore, choo­sing to be under Hherem rather than Suffer the Truth to fail, for Sion's sake I shall not hold my Peace. Once have I written, and twice will I do it, making only this Apology for saying so little on a Subject controverted so much, that the less is said of it, if it be enough, it is so much the better. So, Aspirante Spiritu Sancto, into the Deep I lanch forth, craving leave, in Or­der to what I shall say, to premise this little,

That, as I do, and must grant, that there is but One God, which we are as sure of, as that there is but one Sun to rule the Day, and One Moon to give light in the Night; So, it be granted me likewise, that there were two more, before the Worlds were made, what ever we may take 'em to be, WITH THIS ONE GOD.

This will be granted me, I presume, by all, because he that denies it, owns not Revelation, and 'tis Confest by the Arrian. So that, The Questions to be regarded by us are, whether he, who is said to be begotten, the Other, who is said to proceed, in Scripture, from the One God, be truly, and properly, each of 'em, Themselves God? Further, whither these Two are, together with him, who is call'd in Scripture the Father, THE ONE GOD, or no?

What, (to let go Socinus,) does the Arrian say to this? He, Poor Man, (I call him so, because he's a follower of Ebion,) denies, it utterly, yet in my Eye, not without reason, because of the Scandal that's given him. For, he knows as well as any man, that to say, that Three Distinct Infinites are one Single Infinite, as he is told, Implies, and is false; that, to say, a Mode, [Page 2] a property, or Faculty can Constitute a Distinct Person, as he's told likewise, Obtrudes on him an Impossible Notion. He says therefore, The Son, and the Holy Ghost cannot be God, which, we are sure, is false if the Holy Scriptures be true.

What next does the Authour of the Considerations, mention'd in the Title-Page, Say? He likewise, seeing the same Absurdities as the Arian doth, and very well perceiving the Son, and Holy Spirit's Characters in Scripture, Concludes, because he dares not go against his Creeds and Litany, that they are Persons; but that they are not so distinct as Three Angels are, &c. No; Saith he, it's an Impossible thing this.

What, lastly, say I now? truely, what he averr's I cannot possibly grant him. Here, my Author wants Eye-Salve. Consequently, in Opposition to what he Contends for so Earnestly, as if 'twere the Faith once deliver'd to the Saints, I lay down this for Truth.

First, that the Father Son and Holy Ghost are Persons, and that, as Di­stinct as three Angels Persons, or as the Persons of Peter, James, and John, are. Secondly, That the Son, and Holy Ghost (Persons as distinct as I've Express'd 'em to be) are, in the Concrete, truely, and properly, God, and that each of 'em is Infinite. Thirdly, Forasmuch as the Godhead, in the Abstract, is, and can be but One, That the Son, and the Holy Ghost (their Personal Distinction notwithstanding,) are, together with the Father, ONE, and the SAME GOD.

Will some say, (perhaps startling) is this the Truth? I answer that 'tis for certain the Mistery, and must be maintain'd, if any thing may be done, to Convince our Modern Arians, who are so rooted, and Confirm'd in their Misbeleife, that 'tis hard to move 'em; in regard they are so much poison'd by that Miscreant Bernardin: Odhinus, the Authour of MO-CHRI MA, call'd so amongst his Freinds, but set out under the Name of his Labyrinths; as also by that Spawn of his lately set out by an Anonym, who wrote Notes on the Creed of St. Athanasius; which by the way, is not, as, some would have it to be, falsly so call'd, but truely; witness that Arian, who wrote that Pestiferous Sheet, himself: he (viz.) tells us that the Greeks (meaning Arian Bishops, no Question,) said, that the Holy Father was drunk when he made his Creed, (then that he made it is plain,) Quoting for it Gennadius Bishop of Constantinople in his Catul. Illustr. vir. per [...] Schol. A. which Gennadius lived in the next Century after the Death of Athanasius.

It will be Objected here, must we then Maintain a Substantial Trinity? distinct Persons, we all Know, are distinct Intelligent Substances, and may we say, they are one Substance agen? here's the Riddle, here's the Knot; is it to be unty'd by us? Yes, say I. For the Nature of Spiritual Sub­stances is such, that, if they are Intimately in Unity, they may truly be said to be Ʋnius Substantiae, and are, sure enough, Ʋnum Totum Spirituale. If Spirit, Soul, and Body, for being in Unity, are one Individual Man, why should not the Persons in the Holy Trinity, being much less Different from each other, as all will acknowledge, than Spirit, and Body are, be One Indi­vidual God?

[Page 3] Surely, Dr. Sherlock, the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls, in that he assert's a Substantial Trinity, is in the Right; what he is wrong in, is this; that he asserts the three Persons in the Trinity to be three DISTINCT INFINITES. For herein he is false, the Difference is so wide, that it Constitutes Tri­theism.

For my part, I deny Absolutely, that they are three DISTINCT Infinites, yet that they are each of 'em Infinite, I as positively affirm. Is it a Con­tradiction this? No such matter. St. Athanasius tells us, that the Godhead of the three Persons is but One, and that the Son, and Holy Ghost, are Co, that is to say, WITH GOD: Here is Distinction▪ then plainly, how can they be With God else? but then, he tells us also, that they are Equal with the Father: How, I pray, may this be? he says, for having the Father's Glory: So also that they are Co-eternal; how agen? for having he says, the Eternal Majesty of the Father: Is not this plain? surely, granting the Unity, (that the Son is begotten in Unity; that the Holy Ghost Pro­ceeded in Unity with the Fathers Glory, and Majesty,) I do not see how it is possible they should not be God Themselves, and the Same God, seeing that each of 'em is [...] cleerly; for, what, I pray, is [...]? It is, if we take the word, as the Nicene Fathers, (not as Paulus Saemosa­tenus) understood it, [...]; which is as much as, Another Person having the Unbegotten Substance of the Father Undivide­ly, or, having the same Substance, which the Father hath, together with his Own.

What's the sequel of all this? is it not, that they are, after the same Manner, Co-Infinite too, as they are Co-Eternal, and Co-Equal? surely Yes. Therefore, say I, The Father is Infinite: The Son is Infinite: And the Holy Ghost is Infinite: And yet there are not three Infinites, but One Infinite. The reason is, because they are all three Infinite, not by sundry, or diverse Infinities, peculiar to each Person One; but, by One, and the same Infinity, Common to 'em All.

The Convocation at Oxford should have taken Notice of This, when they Issued out their Decree irrespectively to what is suggested. Had they so done, they might have Escaped the Censure of those, who say, they trusted not their own Judgments in the sence of their Creeds, but Abetted only the Hypothesis of a Reverend writer, whose Learned Book no Man need be at the pains to Answer, because he has Answer'd what he himself writ, solving the Mistery at last by Modes, whereas before he had deter­min'd it (I wonder it was not Spy'd,) to be altogether unintelligable, and past the reach of human Understanding. But,

To come close the Authour of the Considerations, are the three Persons so distinct indeed, as three Angels, or, three mens Persons are? No, saith he; take heed of saying it, here's a manifest Implicat, so it's an impossible thing, and false. Is it so? we are undone if it be; but praise be to God, it is not so. I confess, it seems a Riddle somewhat difficult; but 'tis not so difficult, for all that, but it may be Explicated: I shall distinguish there­fore between a Person, and it's Shechinah.

[Page 4] What's a Person first? it is an Intelligent Substance, is it not? it is so. Is every Angel a Person therefore? it is surely. And is not a Soul, tho' di­stinct from the Body, a Person too? it is likewise. Yea, a Soul, tho' se­parate by Death, I aver to be a Compleat Person, tho' it be not a Com­pleat Man. For Man is a Person in Unity with Earthly Substance; he is Maden, or Man'e, that's his Root, for which he's call'd Man. Shall we call the Soul, being separate from the Body, but a peice of a Person? God forbid. What is wanting to make it a Person? is it not Substance? is it not Intelligent? It must be granted this. A Person therefore it must needs be, or, we are to seek for it's Definition, yea, it is nothing at all.

What's a Shechinah next? it is that which a Person dwells in, is it not? it's the very same. For it cometh from Shachan, the English of which is, He Dwelleth, and the Constant word it is in Scripture, when the Sub­lime Mysteries of our Faith are spoken of there: yea, if rightly, and well Understood, I conceive, it would solve all Mysteries clearly. For that which I say, I shall referr, at present, only to the Eighth Chapter of the Proverbs of Solomon, where Wisdom, the same whom St. Paul calls the Wis­dom of the Father, says thus: Ani Chochmah Shachanti Cnormah, ('tis a Me­taphor taken from the Mathematicks, the Hebrew Gnormah seeming to an­swer Norma in the Latine, which shews that the Divine Counsel is the Rule of all things made,) I wisdom dwell in Skill; or, (because in the Latine 'tis in Consilio,) I wisdom dwell in Counsel. From which I argue, that by Shechinah we are to understand the Tabernacle, or Dwelling of a Person; in a word, that Substance which a Person is strictly in Unity with, or, dwells in by an Unitive Tye intimately, that's it's Shechinah.

What follows hereupon? verily it is that the three Persons in the Holy Trinity are truely as distinct as the Persons of three Angels: yea, as the Persons of Peter, James, and John are, and that these last differ in this Re­spect, that the Persons of Peter, James, and John have distinct Shechinahs, whereas the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have but one only, Singular, and Com­mon Shechinah. Now applying this Eye-Salve to our Eyes may we not see, that Peter, James and John (being both for Person, and Shechinah distinct) cannot pos­sibly be one man, and yet that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (tho' as distinct Persons as they) can be one God? see it we may plainly, forasmuch as the Everlasting Substance of the Father, which neither is nor can be Multiply'd, is their common Shechinah, for which it can't be otherwise. Not otherwise? No. For before the worlds were made, there was, as the learn'd Jews speak, but One Place, which they call, with an [...] Emphaticu [...] Hammakom, The Place, meaning by it that there was but one Ʋbi, and that a Repletive Ʋbi having no distinct Rooms, no Apartments for [...] Person to be in. That which follows, Consequently, is, that a Person, if Produced before the Worlds, must of necessity be in Unity with the Divine Substance, or, which is the same thing, in Unity with the Godhead of the fist Person, or else be no where. Is it so? then follow it doth again, that if the Unoriginated Substance cannot be Enjoy'd per partes, that is to say, by Parcels, Parts, or Portions, in Regard it is Repletive, and [Page 5] fixed Substance, it must be Enjoy'd, if at all, whole, and so I affirm't to be, as thereunto directed by St. Paul. For so he speaking of the Second Person, the Son, says, in Him dwelt ( [...], and Shachan are the same) [...], All the fullness of the Godhead, as much as, the whole Godhead of the Father, the will, and Understanding only of the Father, which are his own, not the Son's, Excepted. I add the Last words, because the Distinction is only Personal, the Son's Person, tho' emerging, in it's begetting, out of the divine Counsel, and will, yet abi­ding still in his Fathers Substance, and Bosom: Not emerging (tho') per modum Facturae, or, Creationis, which is of things ad extra, and belongs to creatures, but per modum Resultantiae, resulting just as the image of a Man's face does from a Mirrour, yet Substantially, as if he were his Fathers Ef­figies, for which he's call'd [...], and [...], the express, and engraven Image of God, himself saying of himself, he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.

And have we not here found the true Alkaist? in my Conceit, we have; for the word is to be Understood, without peradventure, Symbollycally only. Gods Substance, we may be sure, is the only Substance that may be call'd fix'd. Therefore, with Reverence, may we not say, that when God begat his Son, he volatlised the fix'd, and fix'd the volatlised agen? It may be said, as it seems to me, rationally enough. Lo then! Here's the true Alkaist, the true Tree of Life, the leaves of which are for the Healing of the Nations. But, to return; the Coelum, or, Domus Sacro Sanctae Trinitatis is the Everlasting Hammakom, Place, or Ʋbi, as aforesaid, and because that's the Blessed Trinity's mutual, Common, Shechinah, or, Dwelling, therefore are they, all three, but One only Everlasting God.

That such as this was the sence of the Ancient Homoousians, or, Nicene Fathers I am very well assured, consequently, that the Primitive Church may bring the present Church out of Errour, I shall endeavour to prove what I assert from Antiquity; that I may do what I say, laying down, among multitudes, three clear, and manifest Testimonies.

The first shall be taken (that I may go upwards,) out of Venerable Bede, who in his Ecclesiastical History, lib. 4. Ch. 17. tell's us of a Council of Bishops held here in England about a thousand years since under Theodorus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and says that all of 'em to a Man Unanimously agreed, according to the Nicene Faith, as his Book will shew, propersonis Con­substantiallibus, and, which is accurately to be observ'd, that they declared the Father alone to be sine Initio, and the Son, with the Holy Ghost, to be ante Secula only. An unbegotten Son, we see, was not in their thoughts in the least, but they confess'd clearly, to beleive in an only-Begotten Son, as he, who is the word, is call'd by both St. Johns. Which accordingly Pamphilus the Martyr would never depart from, having It alwaies in his mouth, viz. I beleive in the only Begotten Son of God, for which we have the Testimony of Valesius. Vid. Vales. in Vit. Euseb.

[Page 6] The Second Testimony shall be of Synesius Bishop of Cyrene, who in his Hymn on the Holy Trinity has such words as these,

An Intellectual Section, or, Division is spoken of here, inferring Distinct Persons, or, Understandings plainly: One of which he supposes to be the Birth of the Fathers Intellect, yet, Remaining in his Spiritual Bosom, to wit, the Son; the Other, viz. the Holy Ghost to be a substantial Spent, or Aporrhaea, as of a precious Oyntment filling All Room, All Place, yet, abiding still in the great Name, even as the Scent doth in the Oyntment from which it flow's. Made good in both these is the [...], and [...] of Synesius; the Two Persons, consider'd as distinct, being separated from the first, but consider'd as Con-Substantial, still, or, [...], yet, undi­vided. Here then, First, we have Hagneliôn, as in the Title-Page, as much as to say, the Most Highest, (viz. for Person,) that is the Father. Se­condly, We have Jechidathô, his begotten, or only One, which is the Son in his Fathers Bosom. Thirdly, We have Ruahh, or, Shemen Turak, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Scriptures call Unction, or, the Oyl of Glad­ness, tho' power'd out, yet remaining in the Godhead of the Father also. Lastly, We have Jehovah Ehhad, because the Son, and the Holy Ghost are uncut off from the Fathers Substance, who with him consequently, are but one Lord. It is for this that St. Paul call's the Second Person [...], the Beam of Gods Glory; being as a Beam of the Sun, which, tho' divided, is not cut of from the Body of the Sun.

The third Testimony is of the First Christian Emperor truely August, by name Constantine, who, speaking, in his Orat. to the Convent. of Saints, of the [...], (which however the learned think of it, seems to be nothing else but the Translation of Mijmro in the Targum,) says, that in the Mystery of the Trinity there is a Disjunction-Conjunction: he means, as the following words shew, a Disjunction perform'd Intellectually only, not Locally; or, a Disjunction of Two of the Persons abiding in Conjunction with the substance of the First; I say, abiding in it, as Eusebius speaks, (in which he accords with Synesius,) without Abscission, or, without Disruption.

Many more Testimonies might I produce to like purpose, but I forbear, because I suppose these are enough. Yet forasmuch as many, with Erastus▪ and Hobbs, have more kindness for the Sacro-Sanctity of human Laws, that they have for the Holy Cannons of the Church, I shall add one Testimo­ny more out of the Civil Law. It is in an Edict of Theodosius the Great call'd Filia ejus Primogenita, because set forth the next year after his Baptisme, and it is, Ʋt, secundum Apostolorum Disciplinam, Evangelicamque doctrinam Patris, Filij et Spiritus Sancti Ʋnam Deitatem sub parili Majestate, [...] sub pia Trinitate credamus. Is not here Paritis, an Equal Majesty? Is no here, Pia, a Godly, or, divine Trinity? and is not here Ʋnica Deitas, be One Godhead all the while? Let them Judge, who cry out so much, 'tis [Page] Law, 'tis Law, which is the worst of the Two, in Earnest, Outlawry from the Civil Sanction, or, Excommunication from the Eclesiastical. And,

What now, since these Testimonies make out the Mystery, so plainly, the way that I take, can we see any reason why we should check at the Subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the Holy Ghost to the Father, and Son? For my part, I see none. What tho' the Arian says, impudently enough, 'tis a Derogation to one who is God to be an Un­derling, adding, how come the Son, and Holy Ghost to be sent, to be put in Office, to Minister? why is One said to be the Son of the Highest, the Other to be the Power of the Highest? if we anoint our Eyes with Eye-Salve, we shan't be long without an Answer to this. For, that Two of the Persons are Subordinate (quà Persons) we may acknowledge freely, having sufficient warrant for't from the word of God. For why? The Son himself says, I came into the world, not to be Minister'd unto, but to Minister; and, St. Paul, speaking of the Gospel, calls it the Ministration of the Spirit. Besides, we find, that as the Son Ministers to the Father only because He is of the Father alone; so the Holy Ghost is call'd, some­times, the Spirit of the Father, sometimes the Spirit of the Son, because, as he Proceeded from both, so he Ministers to Both. I say therefore, that they are capable of Mission, and Commission; consequently, may be put in Office, tho' as in Unity, they are really and truely God. The rea­son of this we may Conceive well enough. For,

We are taught by our Saviour himself, when we pray, to say, Our Fa­ther which art in Heaven. May we say therefore, that the Father's God­head, which is the place of the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is the Place of all Spirits too? for my part, I dare not do't, least I should seem to Deify the Devils. With Aquinas, rather, Deitas est immobilis, say I; for where it is now, it ever was, will be, and Is immovably; of the God­head there is no going forth, it is Quiescence, it is Everlasting Sabbath. The Totsaoth, or Goings forth are of the Son, and Holy Ghost only, and they as they may, so they have, as the Prophet speaks of the Son, their Egressions, or, Out-goings indeed; and, Blessed be God's holy name, we see the Effects of all, of their Subordination, I mean, and comings forth in our Redemption, and Sanctification, wherein they Minister to the Father for our Salvation. Accordingly I shall lay down Two Querae's to be consider'd of.

Whether the Second Person, the Son, be not the Illustrious Prototype of the Souls of Men, who beget their Like?

Whether the Third Person, the Holy Ghost, be not also the Illustrious Prototype of Coelestial Wights, or, Angels, proceeding, in their Creation, all at once?

So it seems to be. First, because there are but two sorts, or kinds of Rational Beings to be call'd Persons besides the Trinity. Secondly, because any kind of Person, if it be Con-Substantial, or, in Unity with the Godhead, must needs be God of God.

[Page] To speak of the Son first. If it Be not so, I ask, why is he said to be Begotten? why, as Adam, is he call'd the Son, and the Image of God? Why, as a nurse Child, or Foster-Babe, is he, long before God's Made­works, said to rejoyce, and to have his delight in the Sons of Men; and, when Incarnate, why did he call men, and women Brothers and Sisters? yea, since the Father, and Holy Ghost could not so be, by reason of the Ones Immensity, the Other's Ubiquity, why is He only Prophesy'd of to be a man, whom a woman, or rather a Virgin should Compass? and how could he say, I came from the Father into the World, and now I leave the World, and go to the Father? And, what tho' he be as the Arian says, but the Son of the Highest? I can tell him, that he notwithstanding is most High too, yea, as High as the Highest; for so the Holy Church in her Hymn at the close of the Communion Service Sings, Thou only, O Christ, with the Holy Ghost, art most high; ask we how? She says, In the Glory of God the Father. What is't I hear? O Depth of Wisdom! O Abisse of Love, tho' faintly, yet, someway Comprehensible ! On it, because he that is Gods fellow, (being made man,) is my fellow also, my heart Exults, and Re­joyceth in Hope, that he'l be as kind to me, as to any Sinner else, and keep my wretched Soul from Hell. Whether this be true, or no, it seems to be a suitable, sweet, ravishing, and lovely Contemplation; for which, if I had Solomon's Wisdom, I would Compose another new Song of Songs, and, as an Higgajan, (which comes from Hagah mporting meditari, and Elo­qui both,) with heart, and Voice sing it to my Beloved. For, what tho' he came forth from the Father, into the World, so, left his Glory behind him for a while, and appeared as a meer Man? 'twas in love to me, and such as I. But, was the Unity dissolved by it? no, nor did he thereby cease to be God. For the Holy Ghost, who is an Ʋbiquitary Spirit in Hea­ven and in Earth at once, and was Vinculum, & Nexus Ʋnitatis, as the Fa­thers tell us, came along with him, abiding with the Father at the same time. It was by the Overshadowings of the Holy Ghost that the Son was conceived, and from him afterwards he never departed. Now,

Next, to the Holy Ghost himself. He also seems to me to be the Illustrious Prototype of Heavenly Wights, or Angels. Is it ask'd, why? I answer, because, as the Son is call'd [...], the Only-begotten one, to di­stinguish him from men who are created Sons; so is the Holy Ghost call'd, with three dictinctive Articles, [...], The Spirit The Holy of The God, to distinguish him, as it seems to me, from Created Angels, who are call'd by St. Paul [...] only, and in their na­ture are such. If so it be not, why are they call'd Ruchoth, i. e. Spirits, as the Holy Ghost is call'd a Spirit? Why are they said to be Gibbore coa [...]h, great in Power, and Strength, as, He the power of the Highest? And why Elohym, mighty Powers? for so are they call'd too, and by this Stratagem, I conceive, (Sc: fallacia aequivocationis,) did Satan deceive Eve, telling her, that She should be like Elohijm, meaning by't, like himself, and his forlorn Partners, the fall'n Elohijm, whereas she thought of none else, but Jeho­vah [Page 9] Elohijm, counting that she should be more like her God than she was before, so by that means was deceived. In short,

Whatsoever sort, or kind of Persons the Son, and the Holy Ghost may be thought to be, they are God for being in Unity with the Divine Sub­stance, by which they have all the Noble, and Supereminent Attributes of the Father, over, and above the Communicable ones, which meer men, and Angels have, and these being as the Taches of the Curtains of the Taber­nacle of the most High, they are One most High God, together with the Father.

And here now I freely profess, that if the Papists could argue for their Hypothesis of Transubstantiation so rationally as I have done for this Mystery of Mysterys, I would not seperate, for that at least, from their Commu­nion. But, tho' I can easily conceive, that the Body of Christ can be present to Beleivers in the Sacrament, Mediante Spiritu Sancto, that is to say, Spiritually, just as he is present, as Head, to his Mistical Body the Church, the Holy Ghost dwelling in him, and the Members thereof; for which I except not so much against the Lutherans, who say indeed, that the Body is Ʋbiquitary, but say withall, 'tis Supernaturally, or, illocally, as the Holy Ghost makes it be: yet, since I cannot conceive, how Christ's na­tural Body should be every where, or, in all parts, and places of the Church and be whole, and intire in all such parts, and places, they of the Roman perswasion must pardon me, if I except against Them, notwithstand­ing the pretence of Tradition so much urg'd for it; and I cannot suffici­ently admire at Mounsier Malebranch, for that, having laid down his Excel­lent Rule, not to grant a full Assent to any thing, whilst Reason Checks, yet himself, reluctante ratione, gives Assent to the Doctrine of Transubstantia­tion upon such Tradition as is not Ancient, much less Apostolical. Is he a Protestant in this point? if not, it must be Interest, or, Fear that sways him; That Christ's Body is present in the Sacrament, I sincerely beleive; 'tis what the Martyrs of our Church, before they suffer'd, acknowledged freely, in their Disputes with Cox Oglethorp, &c. yea they said, Ipsissimum corpus Christi est in Sacrimento Eucharistiae, as appears in Dr. Willet's Centu­ry's, but then they added still, that the Modus is Spiritualis, and, is it not true this? it is, and we must take heed of saying otherwise, tho' the Definitions of the Counsil of Trent for the Capernaitical way, are in no­wise to be allow'd. For, if the Church be the Body of Christ, because the Holy Ghost is with it, and in it, why should not the bread together with the wine, as the New-Testament Shechinah, be the Body, One; the other the Blood of Christ, for the Holy Ghosts being with Him, and with the Signs, and Symbols at once? is the Church the Mystical Living Body of Christ, for such reason, as Consisting of living Wights, living Members? why then should not the Sacrament, after the like manner, be the Mystical Dead Body of Christ, as by liveless Elements represented? such an Ʋbiqui­ty of Christ's Body if the Lutherans are for; such change of the Elements if the Papist will agree to, I am heartily with Them, and as the Jews call'd [Page 10] the Paschal Lamb the Body, so will I call the bread I eat at the Sacrament the Body too, even of Christ; (for Mystically or Spiritually it is so,) and, without making every [...] of the Father's a Dogma, as they of Rome do, we may do it well, and truly enough. And,

Here I shut up, hoping that this Eye-Salve of mine, which for truths sake, and with perfect Charity I have presum'd to offer to the world, will be accepted by it, because 'tis wholely Compounded of Scripture, and Anci­ent Records going no further then Revelation lead's, within which Bounds I've taken care to keep, as my Duty is. For secret things belong to the Lord, but things Reveal'd only to us, and our Children; and I humbly ac­knowledge, Let Arians flout at the [...] as they please, that the manner of the Son's Generation, and of the Holy Ghost's proceeding a Patre Filioque, as not reveal'd, are above mine, and, as I beleive, all others Comprehen­sion.

It is as Usual as 'tis pious to Conclude Discourses of this kind with Prayer. Therefore, with hearty good wishes to all whose hands this lit­tle somewhat shall fall into, I shall do the like, adding this short Prayer following, and Recommending it to the Devotion of such as are disposed to use it.

O Almighty God, and most merciful Father in Jesus Christ, most hum­bly I beseech thee, for thy Mercys sake, and for that great lover of Souls sake, thy Only Begotten Son, in whom thou art well pleased, to open the Eyes of all those among us, who have imbib'd false Notions of thy most Holy Faith, that, all Scandals being removed and cast out of the Church, and perfect Charity planted in it, Heresy, and Schism may be put an end to amidst thy People; and also, that Millions of Thousands, according to the Blessing on Rebecca, of Jews, Turks, Heathens, Infidels may come into thy Holy Church, and being made One Flock, together with us, Under the One great Shephard of the Sheep, may obtain the End of the Hope of all the Faithful, even the Salvation of their Souls, and, at the last Day, rise out of the dust, to Sing with Angels, and Saints, everlasting Halleluijahs to Thee, O Holy Father, with thy Son, and the Holy Ghost One God, blessed for evermore, Amen.

• Father Jehovah.
• Son Jehovah.
• H. Ghost Jehovah.

Je is the sign of a Proper Name, Proper Names are of Persons, Hovah is that Necessary Being, which is the Father's Originally; the Son, and Holy Ghost are God for being Consubstantial, or in Unity with the Sub­stance of the Father, which substance being but one, they are all Three One God.

[...]