tive Men, that they love to forfake the safe SERM. and common Road, and affect to travel in IV. an unbeaten Path, though hereby they bewilder their Reason, and are misguided by thofe falfe Lights, and blinded with that Duft which themselves have raised.

2. A SECOND Reason, why learned Men err fo much in their ExplicationsTM of this Article of our Faith, is, because they make Use of School Terms and Diftinctions without fixing any fettled and determined Notion to them ; for there is no where more Reafon to make Ufe of the Apostle's Caution to beware of vain Philofophy, than in the Difcuffion and Explanation of this Article; because to scan the Being of a God, by the Maxims of the Schools, is not to make Ufe of our Reafon, but to abuse it; it is to go exactly contrary to that first and fundamental Rule of Reason, i. e. to try only thofe Things by Reason, which Reafon itself tells us are properly the Objects of it. But when Men, to conceal and hide their own Ignorance, fhall make Ufe of fuch Terms and Distinctions as they themselves have no fettled Notion of, and as are not adequate nor applicable to the Object; this is to give us Words inftead of Sense, it is Ludere cum facris, to trifle and make Sport

SERM. with the most facred Things in the World, IV. and fo far from playing the Philofophers, that it is ftooping themselves below the Dignity of Men, and falling fhort of common Senfe.

PHILOSOPHY is certainly the Handmaid to Divinity, and therefore it is very commendable to make Use of it in the moft facred Things; it is the Voice of right Reason, and the Dictate of Nature, which is the Voice of God. But it is certainly a very great Abuse of Reason, under the Pretence of Philofophy, to introduce fuch Terms into Divinity as are not intelligible, and fuch Diftinctions as have no difcernible Difference; to make Use of them in explaining the Mysteries of Religion, and defending those Paradoxes which they themselves have formed, to be a fure Shelter and Place of Retreat, when they are preffed by an Argument, under the Umbrage of which they may conceal their own Ignorance; fo that, though they have nothing to reply, yet they will have always fomething to fay.

IT is very certain that the Art of Reafoning and the Terms of School Divinity may be of very good Ufe to learned Men: They may be hereby affifted to

difpofe

difpofe their Thoughts in the better Or- SERM. der, to discover the Force and the weak IV. Side of an Argument, and where the Fallacy lies, and by the Ufe of proper Rules and Distinctions, to avoid Confufion of Thought and the Taking one like Thing for another; but it is as certain that no Part of Learning has been more intolerably abused, and made to ferve Purposes more different from those it was at firft defigned for; to render the most plain Things difficult, to cloath Ignorance in the fpecious Garb of Knowledge and Science, and to render those Things of which we have diftinct Notions confufed and unintelligible.

To apply this to the Point in Hand, when the Holy Scripture has taught us, that there is one God, and that there are three Divine Perfons in the Godhead, and has given us only a diftant View of this Mystery, without explaining it to us: How vain and foolish then is it for Men to endeavour to explain either by the Rules of Reafon, or Terms of Art, what they confefs they cannot comprehend, or form any diftinct Notion of? Would it not be much better to lay our Mouths in the Duft, to acknowledge our Ignorance, and to make G 2

Our

SERM. our useless and unprofitable Curiofity give IV. Place to Admiration and Devotion?

3. ANOTHER Reafon, why learned Men err fo much about this Article of Faith, is, because they are so intent upon one Part of the Queftion, that they do not fufficiently confider the other; and, whilst they are follicitoufly careful to avoid one Abfurdity, they fall into the contrary Extream. Thus, fome Writers are so intent to preferve a Trinity of Perfons and a real Difference between them, that they frame an Hypothefis which is altogether inconfiftent with the Divine Unity; whilst on the other Hand there are others, who are fo careful to fix the Notion of the Unity of the Godhead, that they utterly evacuate the Notion of the Trinity. Were both thefe more cool in their Purfuits, and more moderate in their Cenfures, they would find, that the chief Subject of their Difpute is agreed on all Hands, and that it is the Modus or Manner alone, which is controverted: The first is neceffary to be believed, because plainly revealed; the other not so, because left undetermined in the Holy Scripture.

4. A FOURTH and principal Reason, why learned Men wander fo far from Truth in their Difquifitions concerning

this Article of their Faith, the Trinity in SERM. Unity, is, because they draw fuch Con- IV. clufions and Confequences from the Opinions of their Adverfaries, as they never thought of, and do deteft. For a Man may affirm a Thing, and not be answerable for all the Confequences, much less for fuch Confequences as others make for him. And therefore, no Man ought to be charged with the Confequences of his Opinions, unless they are fuch as naturally and evidently flow from them, and which, it may rationally be prefumed, he was conscious of; (for a Man may lay down a Pofition without attending to the Confequences of it; and fo great is the Imperfection of our Underftandings, that we cannot attend to many Things at the fame Time, nor take in any great Compafs of Thought; nay, we are forced to take Things in Pieces, to look upon them in a different Light and Pofition, in order to understand them) and therefore it is but just that we should give the most candid and charitable Construction of other Men's Opinions, that they will bear; and lay nothing to their Charge which they difown, if it will admit of a more favourable Interpretation. There is nothing more common, than,

G 3