The Growth of Error, Chapter 4 · Section 8
SECT. VIII.
An Account of the Italian Combination entred into, to bring the Doctrine of the Trinity into Doubt. The Chief of 'em Aſſert Three diſtinct Eſſences, to introduce the Pre-eminence of the Father, and a Subordination in the Eſſences of the Son and Holy Spirit. Theſe things cleared out of the Writings of Gentilis and others. The late Aſſertion of Three Eſſences the ſame with that of Gentilis, &c.
ALthough the Engliſh Socinians do, in ſome Inſtances, ſo very much differ from them beyond the Seas, that an exact Deſcription of them cannot be given out of the Writings of the Pratres Poloni, yet it muſt be yielded, that they are nevertheleſs of the Off-ſpring of that Faction. For which Reaſon, I will conſider what Combinations have been amongſt them, what Shapes they have formed themſelves into, and what Principles they advanced, to the end they might ſubvert the bleſſed Doctrine of the Trinity.
There was in Italy a ſtrong Combination entred into by near Forty, who form'd themſelves into a Society, had their Colleges and Conferences, where they conſulted how to bring the Doctrines of the Trinity, and Chriſt's Satisfaction, into Doubt.
This was, ſaith Wiſſowatius, about the Year 1546. The chief of their Number, mention…d by Sandius, Narrat. Comp…nd. Biblioth. Antitrin. p. 18.were, Leonardus Abbas Buſalis, Laelius Socinus, Bernardinus Ochinus, Nicholaus Paruta, Valentinus Gentilis, Julius Treviſanus, Franciſcus de Ruego, Jacobus de Chiari, Tranciſcus Niger, Darius Socinus, Paulus Alciacus, &c. who continued together till their Deſign took Air: at which time they being ſeverely proſecuted, ſome of 'em went into Helvetia, others into France, Britain, Holland, Germany, and Poland, and ſome into the Turkiſh Territories, where they had their Liberty; only Julius Treviſanus and Franciſcus de Ruego were taken and executed: and Jacobus de Chiari, as Lubienieſcius ſaith, died a natural Death.
Theſe Men, where-ever they went, took all Occaſions to inſtil their Errors; which they did, by offering Objections againſt the Truth, that, as was pretended, they might be the more firmly eſtabliſhed in the Faith, and be more able to defend it. And having ſear'd their Conſciences with fraudulent Subſcriptions, and Perjury, they formed themſelves into ſundry Shapes, not ſcrupling to ſubſcribe and ſwear to what they neither Believed nor Intended: nor did they care what Methods they uſed, might they thereby ſubvert the Doctrine of the Trinity and Chriſt's Satisfaction.
That they were ſet at work by t…e Papiſts is no way improbable; eſpecially, if we conſider how at Lyons the Papiſts d…ſch…rged Valentinus Gentilis ſo ſoon as they und…rſtood his Deſign was to oppoſe Calvin, and how ſafely Servetus, Lubie…. Hiſt…r. P…ſ…, Po…o…. l. 2. c. 5. p. 1…. &c.notwithſtanding his Blaſphemies, lived amongſt them
The Principle wh…ch at firſt they advanced, as what was moſt l…kely to bring the Doctrine of the Trinity into …ontempt, was their turning the Three Perſons into Three diſtinct Eſſences, and their appropriating a peculiar Preheminence to the Father.
Servetus, who is by Staniſlaus Lubienieſcius, in his Hiſtory of the Polonian Deformation, Lubi…n …bi ſup. p. ….highly applauded for his Diligence in Conſulting the …lcoran of Mahomet, out of which he extracted the Opinions he held about the Trini…y, having by his Sufferings gotten a Reputation, it became the Province of Valentinus Gentitis, and Alciatus, a…ter the Diſperſon of theſe deſigning Incendiaries, to go to Geneva, and try what they could do towards the carrying on that Work, which Servetus had with ſo much Labour and Travail begun And that their Succeſs might be the greater, 'twas the Care of Gentilis to clear himſelf as much as poſſibly he could, from the Charge of being a Favourer either of Arius or Servetus; and therefore pretends a Zeal for the True Trinity, as he expreſſes it in a Letter to Copus, Raymundus, and Henocus, learned Miniſters in Geneva, explaining his Notion thus.Ca…e T…. Th…. p…. 6…0, 6…. The Father is that one only Eſſence, that is from it ſelf. The Word is the Brightneſs of the Glory of God, the expreſs Image of his Subſtance, and in this reſpect diſtinct from the Father▪ who is (as Chriſt himſelf ſaith) the only True God, the Eſſent…tor, that is, the …nformator Individuorum. The Word is the Son, and alſo he True God, and yet not Two Gods but one and the ſame. God. Or, as Aretius, in his Brief Account of Valentinus Gentilis: A True Trinity ought to conſiſt of Three eternal diſtinct Spirits, differing from each other eſſentially, rather than perſonally. The Father he ſtiles foreign God of himſelf, as he is more eminently, truly, and properly God: But the Eſſence of the Son is not (ſaith he) of himſelf, but an Eſſentiatum, derived from the Eſſence of the Father, and is a Secondary God.
And what ſaith Servetus of this Notion?Deus p…ſt Chriſtum man…e …atum, in ties Eſſentias Diviſus, maneat tamen Un… Deus: …ia haec Diſpenſ… …io nihil …o mutat. Trac…. Theo…. p. 657. Calvin tells … That he holds the Deity to … divided into Three Eſſences, and yet there is but One God. For the Socinians greater Satisfaction, I will giv… Servetus his Senſe,Hiſt… for. Poton. l. 2. c. 5. p. 9… &c. out of a Diſcourſe he delivered ſome time before his Execution … publiſhed by Lubieni…ſcius, from the Auto…raph; In which he having oppoſed the Opinion of them who affirm Three ſubſtantial Perſons to be j… God, by Nature equal to one another, which he looks upon to be Blaſphemy, and an execrable Impiety, he freely gives us his own Sentiments, to this effect.
1. That the Name [God] is Appellative, ſignifying one to whom all Power, Dominion, and Superiority doth properly belong, who is above all, the chief of all, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, from whom all things are, and on whom they depend. The Name [God] taken leſs properly, may be applied to ſuch Creatures as have Power and Superierity given them of God, as Moſes and Cyrus had, &c. who were Gods not by Nature but Grace. —
2. That the Lord Jeſus Chriſt is called the True Son of God; and God, becauſe he received his Deity from God the Father, is True God of True God: God of all Creatures; not God of the Father, who ſubjects all things to him. — Moreover, the Father himſelf, who alone is by Nature God, from himſelf, is Lord and God of the Son, as the Son himſelf expreſſeth it, John 14.28
— The Son is fall of the Deity, and yet the Superiority the Father hath over the Son remains; whence, tho the Son is made to us by …e Father, Lord and God and our Head, yet the Father is God and Head of the Son, and the Son as our God and head …ognizeth the Deity and Superiority of the Father over him. See then▪ how the Scriptures do conſtantly diſting… between God and the Son of God! If we diligently ſearch, we ſhall find, that excepting in three or four places, the Scriptures do ſimply and abſolutely call the Father God, and Jeſus, his Chriſt, and Son. — The Divinity of the Son differs from that of other Gods: He is the True, Natural, and in a proper Senſe, the Son of God; we the Adoptive Sons of God: To him the Deity was given without meaſure, to us in meaſure. The Deity, Power, and Glory of the Son, is adequate to that of the Father, and equal with it; but received from the Father, not equal with reſpect to the Father, but equal with the Father with reſpect to the Creatures: This Equality the Son will not abuſe by turning it into Tyranny or Rapine, Philip. 2.
The Agreement then, between Valentinus Gentilis and Servetus, lies in theſe Points: They both affirm Three diſtinct Eſſences to be in the Trinity; that the Father only is foreign; that the Eſſence of the Son is not from it ſelf, but from the Fathers; that there is but one moſt High God: ſo that although Gentilis would cover himſelf under a Vizor, that it might not appear, he was an Embracer of Servetus …s Errors, and therefore took a different way to explain himſelf; yet it's plain enough, that their Notions, for ſubſtance were the ſame: and notwithſtanding their pretended Zeal for the Unity of God, they were a ſort of Tritheiſts.
However, it muſt be acknowledged, that their deſigned Obſcurity was ſuch, that it's not eaſie to underſtand what Principles Servetus would ſubſtitute inſtead of a Trinity of Perſons in the God head: only, they generally pleaded for the Preheminence and Superiority of the Father…s Eſſence above the Son's, as it had a neceſſary Tendency towards the Subverſion of the Trinity: and to this very end, Servetus, Talentinus Gentilis, and Goneſius a Polonian Tritheiſt, againſt whom Zenchy wrote, urged it.
This Goneſius, Biblioth. Antitri…. p. 41.as Sandius obſerves, was the firſt that oppugned the Doctrine of the Trinity in Poland, and as Wiſſo…atius, he aſſerted the Preheminence of the Deity of the Father above that of the Son,Nurat. Compead. for the moſt part according to the Placita of Servetus and Gentilis: Stoinius, in his Epitome, affirms the ſame of Geneſius, and ſo doth Lubienieſcius, adding, that in a Synod held Ann 1556 he owned it: and out of Sim…er, Hiſt. Ref. Pol. l. 2. c. 6. p. 111. 116Lubienieſcius tells us, That as in Tranſi… vania, Franciſcus Davidis was Servetus Illuſtratus, ſo Goneſius was in Po…and Kazonovius and Farnovius were of the ſame Mind with Goneſius.
But, that they might be the more ſucceſsful, they took another Method to introduce Three Eſſences into the Trinity, ſtill finding that to be the moſt likely way to expoſe the Faith of the Orthodox touching this bleſſed Doctrine which was thus managed.
Stankarus, perhaps of the ſame Faction with Gentilis, and his Diſciples, ſtarted a peculiar Notion about Chriſt's Mediatorſhip, affirming, That the Word [God] in Scripture ſignified Trinity; that when 'twas ſaid, There is one God, the Meaning is, there is Ʋnus Deus Trinitas: for which Reaſon, if Chriſt be Mediator, as God, the Trinity (ſaith he) muſt be the Mediator, or Chriſt muſt be God of a diſtinct Eſſence from the Father, and inferiour to him And the Orthodox believing Chriſt to be Mediator, as God-Man, were accuſed by Stankarus for being Arians.
This Notion occaſion…d Great Diſtractions amongſt the reformed in Poland, as appears from what ſome of …em wrote to Calvin, craving his Thoughts of it; and from what Felix Cruciger, Gregorius Pauli, Staniſlaus Latomirski, Paulus Gilovius, Martinus Crovitius, Franciſcus Liſmaninus, and Sundry others, who met in a Synod at Pinczow did Anno 1562. ſend to the Profeſſors of Divinity, and Paſ…ors of the Church at Argentine, where was a particular Account of Mankarus his Errors with a Confeſſion of the True Faith; But as (Calvin ſeared) Bl…ndrata, and his Partizans, pretending a Great Zeal for the Doctrine of the Trinity, did, in a ſeeming Oppoſition to Stankarus, own the Conſequences he had ſa…ed on the Doctrine embraced by the Orthodo…, as what did naturally flow from Chriſts being Mediator, as God-Man; and a Table was ſoon publiſhed,Ta… …am nuſ… Po… Edi…am, quae Chriſtum & Spiritum Sanctum alios a Patre Deo facit, no… ſine moerore inſpexi. Calv. Tract. Theol. p. 683. in which they declared Jeſus Chriſt, anc the Holy Ghoſt, to be Two Gods, diſtinct from the Father; and that the Three Perſons were Three diſtinct Eſſences.
This Table, as Calvin apprehended, was written by Blandrata; but Sandius ſaith, that Gregorius Pauli, in an Epiſtle to the Tigurine Miniſters, owns himſelf to be the Author of it. For tho' Gregorius Pauli, Latomirſki, Liſmaninus, and many others ſubſcribed a ſound Confeſſion of Faith in Oppoſition to the Errour of Stankarus, yet did they fall in with Blandrata, and tho' Calvin ſent them an Admonition, in which he dehorted them againſt taking the Three Perſons to be Three Eſſences, leaſt they ſhould Frame to themſelves Three Gods: yet it was, ſaith Beza, to very little purpoſe: For the Polonian Miniſters, Epiſt. 81. p. 363.being bewitch'd with Blandrata's Hypocriſies, were generally enſnared to a Cloſure with his Errors. And Blandrata himſelf Obſerving how efficaciouſly this Engine wrought,An docuit te Dei verbum multiplicari poſſe Dei Eſſentiam. Epiſt. Bez. ad Pet. Stator. call'd in the Help of Valentinus Gentilis, and Petrus Statorius, who with Matthaeus Gribaldus, and others, were indefatigable in their Labours to eſtabliſh a ſort of Tritheiſm, as the moſt Effectual Means to Introduce their Samoſatenian Hereſies: And their Succeſs this way was Anſwerable to their Induſtry and Expectations; for in a little time, to the Admiration of the Orthodox in other Parts of Europe, many of the Reformed in Poland were inſnared into a Cloſure with Socinianiſm.
Plures Deos, ſi non ve. bo, Re ta…en ipſa prof…tentes, Epiſt. 19. p. 129. Vid. Epiſt. 81. p. 361, &c.That their firſt Effort againſt the Trinity was a ſetting up of Tritheiſm; not avowedly, but Clandeſtinely, is Affirmed by Beza. In the beginning, (ſaith he) they were, for the moſt part, Tritheiſts, transforming the Three Perſons into ſo many Eſſences; Then did they Appropriate the Appellation of the One True God unto the Father, to whom they alſo aſcribed an Hyperoche, a Preheminence, or Superiority above the Son. This was the Principle, which at firſt they advanced, as moſt likely to bring the Bleſſed Trinity of Perſons in one undivided Eſſence, into contempt. Againſt which, Calvin, Zanchy, and the Reformed, did ſet themſelves, as againſt a moſt Pernicious, and Hurtful Hereſie, as undoubtedly it is; For, it being affirm'd, that every Perſon hath a Peculiar Subſtance of his Own, there muſt be as many Subſtances or Eſſences, as there are Perſons, which being of the ſame Nature, muſt be as many Gods as they are Perſons; which is Tritheiſm. Three Diſtinct Infinite ſubſtances, or Three Eternal Spirits, cannot be leſs than Three Gods.
But▪ tho' its affirmed
(1) That it is groſs Sabellianiſm to ſay, That there are not Three Perſonal Mands or Spirits, or Subſtances.
(2) That a diſtinct Subſtantial Perſon, muſt have a diſtinct ſubſtance of his own; Proper and Peculiar to his own Perſon; yet if it be owned, that there are not Three Gods, but One God, or One Divinity which is intirely and Inſeparably in Three diſtinct Perſons, or Minds; it cannot be Hereſie: As a very Learned Perſon avers, becauſe in this caſe (ſaith he) the Fundamental Article is Believed, and the Error is only a Miſtake in the Explication.
However, the Doctrine of Three. Diſtinct Subſtances hath been, not only Learnedly as well as ſharply charged with Tritheiſm; but Condemned for being Impious and Heretical. I will therefore, it lying ſo much in my way, venture, humbly to Offer what inclines me to Conclude, that this turning the Three Perſons into Three Eſſences is Heretical. For tho I am far from Hereticating every one that differs from me in Matters of Moment; or from making every Erroneous Explication of a Fundamental Article to be Hereſie; yet I am perſwaded, that the Doctrine of the Trinity of Perſons in one undivided Eſſence is of ſuch a Nature; that many, in their explicating it, have fall'n into divers Hereſies; and that thus it is in the Preſent Caſe.
The Doctrine condemned for Heretical is a makeing the Perſons in the Bleſſed Trinity to be Three Dictinct Subſtances, or Individual Natures; which is as Direct a Contradicton to the One Intire, and Indiviſible Nature of God, as can be. Three Individual Eſſences are as much Oppoſed to one Individual Eſſence, as Three Perſons are to one Perſon; and Three Perſons may be as well One Perſon, as three Individual Eſſences be one Individual Eſſence.
The Author therefore of this Notion cannot, in Reaſon, be ſuppoſed to Believe theſe Contradictory Propoſitions to be both true: and being ſo vehement in his Aſſerting Three Individual Natures as to make the Denial thereof to be Hereſie and Nonſence, we muſt be ſo Civil to him, as to ſuppoſe, that he doth not Believe the Eſſence of God to be one Intire Indiviſible Eſſence; which I do the more readily ſuppoſe, becauſe it's ſo Common for Tritheiſts to do ſo.
It is owned, That Photius grants that Conon, and his Followers, held a Conſubſtantial Trinity, and the Unity of the God-head;Phot. Bibl. Cod. 24. and ſo far were Orthodox; but then adds, they were far from it, when they Aſſerted Proper and Peculiar Subſtances to Each Perſon.
I have not that Bibliotheke by me, but Suicerus, in his Account of the Tritheiſts, ſaith, they held Three Subſtances and Natures in all things alike, and yet would by no means own Three Divinities or Three Gods; and refers to the Bibliotheca Photij, where it's thus; Theſe men [vid. Severus and Theodoſius▪ ] ſpake many things excellently well;Cod. 24. p 16. as, that there was a Conſubſtantial Trinity, of the ſame Nature; and but one God, one Divinity; foreign, &c. But they Blaſphemed, when they ſaid, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghoſt, had their Proper Natures and Divinities, or Particular Subſtances, and ſo contradicted themſelves as well as the Truth, &c. So that their aſſerting the Conſubſtantiality of the Trinity, and it's being of the ſame Nature, could not ſecure their making the Three Perſons three Diſtinct Subſtances, from being Blaſphemy.
But what I moſtly Preſs, is this Conſideration; that if the contradictory Affirmation of three Individual Eſſences being but one Individual Eſſence, will clear the Notion from being Hereſie, then Valentinus Gentilis, Liſmaninus, Blandrata, and the many other Propagators of the Socinian Abominations, muſt be alſo for the ſame reaſon cleared from Hereſie.
I will begin with Gentilis, who held,Lubien. Hiſtor. Ref. l. 2. c. 5. p. 107. that there were three diſtinct Eternal Spirits or Minds in the Trinity; that the Son was Begotten from Eternity [Ante Saecula in Latitudine Aeternitatis,] Thus much Lubienieſcius: And Gentilis himſelf, in his Epiſtle to the Miniſters at Geneva, was Poſitive, that the Father only is true God, and the Son alſo true God;Tract. Theol. p. 660, 661. and yet not Two but One and the ſame God, becauſe Chriſt hath one and the ſame Eſſence with the Father, and therefore (ſaith he) I am neither Arian nor Servetian, Liſmaninus, and Blandrata held the ſame for Subſtance with Gentilis. To clear thus much, I muſt Obſerve what Lubienieſcius reports of Laelius Socinus, who was one of the forty Italian Combinators; It is to this Effect. Laelius Socinus (ſaith he) travelled firſt into Helvetia, then into Italy, Britain, and Germany; and about the year 1551. he got into Poland; from whence, after he had inſtill'd his Errors into the Hearts of Liſmaninus, and many others, he went into Moravia, and then returned to Helvetia. That in Moravia, Paruta, Gentilis, Darius, and Alciatus, of the ſame Combination with Laelius, did their Part to ſpread their Notions, ſending into Poland their Theſes about the Trinity, and doubtful Phraſes in the Holy Scriptures.
There were near twenty Theſes about the Trinity, Ubi ſup. l. 3. c. 1.which they did put into the hands of their Friend Proſper Provana, who committed them to the Care of Budzinius. He no ſooner Read 'em, but gave them unto Johannes Puſtelnecius from whom Staniſlaus Lutomirskius got a Copy, which being communicated to ſundry others, the Controverſie about the Trinity had there its Riſe; ſome firmly adhering to the Faith, received from the Lord Chriſt and his Apoſtles; others, enſnared by the Objections raiſed againſt it by the Italian Combinators, vehemently oppoſed the Truth: not that they did it openly, but (as our Vindicated Author) diſpleaſed with the Old, offered their New Explications, in the very ſame manner He hath done. Amongſt others, Liſmaninus and Blandrata were very active.
Liſmaninus, who was firſt infected by the Endeavours of Laelius Socinus, and confirm'd in his Hereſies by George Blandrata, falling into Suſpicion, takes Heart, and in a Letter to Staniſlaus Ivanus Karninſcius, boldly defends Blandrata. But, that he might do his part to remove all grounds of jealouſie touching his Orthodoxy, he Prefaces his Epiſtle with a ſhort Prayer to God the Father, from whom are all things, through the Lord Chriſt, by whom are all things, Conſubſtantial and Co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Ghoſt. And, in the Epiſtle it ſelf, he gives a ſummary of his own Faith, and of the Faith of them who dwelt at Pinczow, in theſe words. We Believe in God the Father, from whom are all things, who is Infinite without beginning, and from whom, not only all Creatures are, but alſo the Divinity and Bonity of the Son and Holy Ghoſt; as Nazianzen teacheth in his Apologie.
We Believe alſo in our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, the Son of God, who is the Incarnate Word, God-man, God of God, Light of Light, True God of True God, Conſubſtantial, Co-eternal, and Coequal in Eſſence, or Nature, Power, Glory, Authority, and Honour, with the Father. And,
We Believe in the Holy Ghoſt the True God of the Father and the Son; or, as the Greek Doctors teach, in an unutterable manner, from Eternity, proceeding from the Father by the Son, Conſubſtantial, Coeternal, and Co-equal with the Father and the Son, in his Eſſence, Power, Majeſty, Glory, Authority, and Honour.
Blandrata in a Synod at Xianſia, Anno Dom. 1562, declared his Belief,Lubien. Hiſt. Ref. Pol. l. 2. c. 6. p. 130. In one God the Father, in one Lord Jeſus Chriſt his Son, and in one Holy Ghoſt; each of which is Eſſentially God: A Plurality of Gods I Abhor (ſaith he) for with us there is but One God only, whoſe Eſſence is Indiviſible: I do confeſs that there are Three diſtinct Hypoſtaſes; that the Deity of Chriſt, and his Generation, is Eternal; and, that the Holy Ghoſt is True and Eternal God, proceeding from both.
In theſe Confeſſions, there is the Denial of a Plurality of Gods and a Profeſſion, that the Son, and Holy Spirit are of the ſame Eſſence, Conſubſtantial, Co-eternal, Coequal with the Father; in words, as full as its Poſſible for the Vindicated Author, (who holds the Perſons of the Trinity to be Three diſtinct Eſſences) to expreſs it; Howbeit theſe Men were juſtly Charged with the Tritheiſtical Hereſie. Peter Martyr, as Lubienieſcius reports, doth in a Letter Anno Dom. 1558,Hiſt. Ref. Pol. l. 2. c. 6. p. 126. ſpeak of Blandrata's bringing into the Deity a Certain kind of Monarchy, denying the Eſſence of the Father and the Son to be the ſame, from whence a a Plurality of Gods, doth follow, which thing, as he was told, Gribaldus, did in expreſs words Aſſert. In like manner Lubienieſcius himſelf tells us, That Liſmaninus, and Blandrata, Agreed in this, that unleſs it be ſetled,Ibid. pag. 131. that God, who in the Holy Scriptures, is called the Father of Jeſus Chriſt, is the moſt High God, no ſatisfying Anſwer can be made to Stancarus; nor can that Worſhip, which is due unto the moſt High God, he given him, for Chriſt himſelf doth ſay, my Father is Greater than I.
Theſe Men, and their Followers, notwithſtanding theſe Confeſſions, were ſo far from believing the Father, Son and Holy Ghoſt, to be Coeſſential, Coeternal, and Coequal, that as Gentilis made the Father to be the Eſſentiator, and the Son and Spirit to be the Eſſentiati; ſo theſe were Poſitive; that there was a Preheminence of Cauſality in the Father above the Son and Holy Ghoſt; that the Eſſence of the Son and Holy Spirit was not Ʋnoriginated, Ʋncauſed, and from it ſelf only; but from the Eſſence of the Father, that is to ſay, the Father was the Eſſentiator, and the Son and Spirit the Eſſentiati; and making the Eſſence of the Son, and Spirit ſo very diſtinct from the Eſſence of the Father they were for three Eſſences in the Trinity; Three diſtinct Eſſences, and therefore were call'd Trideitae, which is not only the Obſervation of Beza, but the Confeſſion of Lubienieſcius, who ſaith, That they were injuriouſly by the Adverſary called Trideitae, tho' nothing more manifeſt than that they being the Worſhippers of God the Father by Jeſus Chriſt the only mediator, were therefore in Tranſilvania, called Ʋnitarians.
The Notion then of Gentilis Liſmaninus and Blandrata was, that the Son and Holy Ghoſt were Conſubſtantial, Coequal and Coeternal in Eſſence with the Father; they were of one, and the ſame Nature, and yet three Infinite, and Eternal diſtinct Eſſences, and Spirits; which is the ſame for ſubſtance with what our Vindicated Author ſo Vehemently Contends for; whence I argue, If our Authors Aſſerting one Individual Eſſence, or Deity will ſecure his Three Infinite Eſſences, or Minds from Hereſie, it muſt alſo clear Gentilis, Liſmaninus, Blandrata and their diſciples; ay Severus, and Theodoſius too, from the ſame Charge: But if it won't clear them from being Heretical, it cannot ſufficiently Vindicate Him.
But this Tritheiſm is not only, as I have already intimated, an Hereſie; But the ſame, that the Italian Hereticks pitched on to Introduce their Samoſatenianiſm; and whoever will make a cloſe ſearch, will ſee, that it hath a Tendency thereunto, not only as hereby a Trinity of Perſons is made a Trinity of Gods, to the ſetting the Minds of many againſt the Truth it ſelf; but as this their Principle leads its Embracers to take into their Faith, the ſeveral Conſequences, which Naturally, and Neceſſarily flow from it. For, Anſwerable to the various Capacities, Inclinations, and Intereſis of them, who will have it that the Perſons in the Trinity are three diſtinct Eſſences, Sundry Errours do ariſe. But … to inſiſt upon them; to eſcape the Blaſphemous Abſurdities, which flow from their a…erting Three diſtinct Infinite Eſſences, Spirits, or Minds, As for inſtance, their making them Three diſtinct Infinite Co-equal Gods; they aſcribed unto the Father an Hyperoche, a Preheminence and Superiority above the Son, and Holy Ghoſt. But then the Inequality, which did immediately follow from the Preheminence, and Superiority, aſſigned to the Father being ſuch, as was in every Bodies Judgment, inconſiſtent with the Sons and Holy Ghoſts being Conſubſtantial and Co-equal with the Father they were at a loſs how to Explain themſelves. An Inequality, as to the OEconomy, Diſpenſation, and Office, they look…d on as inſufficient. The Arians and Samoſatenians therefore ſay, it muſt be an Inequality of Eſſence. But this being ſo Groſs a Contradiction to the Son's and Holy Ghoſt…s being of the ſame Nature, and Co-equal with the Father, Server us, Gentilis, with the Pinczovians, would not at firſt expreſly allow of more than an Inequality as a Cauſe or Principle; making the Eſſence of the Father to be the Principle or Cauſe of the Eſſence of the Son and Holy Ghoſt; affirming, that tho the Eſſence of the Father was Ʋnoriginated, and from it ſelf; yet ſo was not the Eſſence of the Son, and Holy Ghoſt: Theſe Eſſences, they ſaid, were Cauſed; the one by an Eternal Generation from the Father, the other thro an ineffable Proceſſion from the Father, by the Son. Thus by a deriving diſtinct Eſſences from the Eſſence of the Father, they rejected the Autotheiry of the Son and Spirit, and with their Cauſalities brought in ſuch dependencies of the Son and Spirit on the Father as interfered with a being abſolutely Infinite in every Perfection; and thus, in a more Artificial manner, they ran the ſame length with the Arian and Socinian as to the Inequality; For that Eſſence which is not of it ſelf is not, cannot be, in a ſtrict Proper Sence, God; for the Eſſence of God is only from it ſelf, uncauſed, unoriginated; an Eſſence that hath a beginning, and is cauſed, cannot be Abſolutely Eternal; for what is Abſolutely Eternal, never had a beginning, never was cauſed, never receiv'd its Eſſence from another.
There is a Great difference between Cauſing a Diſtinct Eſſence, and a communicating the ſame Individual Eſſence to another; for though the cauſing another neceſſarily implies that the Cauſed Eſſence was from another, a communicating it doth not ſo. The Father's communicating his own Eſſence unto the Son, doth not argue the Son's Eſſence is from another, for 'tis ſtill the ſame it was before it was communicated. But the Father's cauſing an Eſſence diſtinct from his own, imports Imperfection in the Cauſed Eſſence, even the want of a truly proper and abſolute Eternity and Independence, and neceſſarily infers an Inequal…ty of Eſſence, which is the thing the Arians and Samoſatenians ſaw and aſſerted, and the Pinczovians intended; who, as they obſerv'd their Diſciples prepared to embrace this Error, inſinuated it.
This appears from Blandrata's Endeavour in an Epiſtle which Beza had of his,…p…ſt. 81. p. 364, …. to perſwade Gregorius Pauli, a Tritheiſt, to cloſe with the Opinions of Samoſatenus, and from what Petrus Statorius, a Companion of Blandrata, when he dwelt at Pinczow [from which Place the Tritheiſts had their Name of Pinczovians, with whom Franciſcus Liſmaninus, Martin Crovicius, Schomannus, Gregorius Pauli, …relius, Biblioth. Antitrin. p. 48.Triceſſius, and (as Sandius obſerves) Ochinus, Stancarus, Alciatus, &c, had their Habitations] did offer in a Synod at Pinczow, about the Inſufficiency of the Anſwer which a Synod, held in the ſame place, did ſome time before give unto Remianus Chelmius about what he wrote againſt the Invocation of the Holy Ghoſt. The Story is thus:
Remianus Chelmius ſent to a Synod held at Pinczow the 12th of November An. 1559, a Letter, in which ſeveral things were objected againſt the Invocation of the Holy Ghoſt. Peter Statorius, who,Biblioth. Antitrin. p. 48. as Sandius ſuggeſts, inſtilled this Opinion into Chelmius, doth with Gregorius Pauli and others move, that the Doctrine of the Trinity might be diligently examined, and tryed by the Holy Scriptures. An Anſwer is ſent from this Synod unto Chelmius. But Statorius, in a Synod held at the ſame place November the 19th 1561. declared, that Chelmius was not ſatisfied with the Anſwer ſent unto him. The Synod therefore obliged him to return a fuller one, which he did, but in ſuch a manner,Epit. Hiſt. Orig. Unit. in Pol. that no one could tell what it was he himſelf held. Stoinius, who was Grandſon to Statorius, repreſents matters of Fact thus. In this Synod Anno 1561, Statorius was directed to write an Anſwer unto Chelmski, which he did, but ſo, that it did not appear what he himſelf believed of it: He only ſaid, that Blandrata was Repreſented by Calvin as one who had drank in the Poyſon of the Serverian Impiety. As for the Opinion which he propoſed to the Synod, 'twas acceptable to all, but Queſtion'd by him, whether the Relief, that the Father was one Ʋnbegotten, and the Son Begotten, did not infer a Plurality of Gods. But all they (they are Statorius his own Words) that dwell with Blandrata are ſuſpected for holding ſome Hereſies. But if they are Hereticks, who according to the Holy Scriptures Believe the Father, Son and Holy Ghoſt, I do chearfully (ſaith he) acknowledge my ſelf to be of that Number, &c.
Lubienieſcius, paſſing by what Regenvolſ…ius in his Hiſtory of the Sclavonian Churches ſaith of Statorius, doth out of Budzanius tell us, That Statorius ſucceeding Paulus Orſacius in the Government of the School at Finczow, Profeſſed the True Faith, affirming that The Invocation of the Holy Ghoſt is Idolatry; That there is not one Text in the Holy Scripture either for the Deity, or Invocation, or Adoration of the Holy Spirit, Lul…en. Hiſt. l. 2. c. 8. p. 149.or for Faith in him. That the Holy Ghoſt is not the third Perſon of the Deity, nor God, but the Power and Gift of God.
On this occaſion there aroſe ſeveral Diſputes amongſt the Learned, at which time Statorius perſwaded many to embrace this Opinion: notwithſtanding which, and altho Alexius Rodecius told Statorius to his Face, that he Learned this Principle from him; yet did he in the Year 1567, openly deny it, declaring, that the Spirit is God, and to be Worſhipped as God; and whoever taught otherwiſe was of his Father the Devil: for which Reaſon, Budzinius look'd on him as a Proteus, forſaken of the Holy Spirit. And Orphinovius ſaith, God Entruſted him with Sundry Talents, which he did not Imploy in defence of the Truth; but the Trinitarians being the ſtronger Party, he did, at laſt, turn unto them.
Thus theſe Pinczovians, vid. Liſmaninus, Gregorius Pauli, Ochinus, Statorius, Stancarus, Alciatus, &c. their Partizans, did not only ſet up Tritheiſm with a Deſign to bring in the Samoſatenian Hereſie, but formed themſelves into ſundry Shapes, and were unwearied in their Attempts, firſt to turn the Three Perſons into Three diſtinct Eſſences, inſinuate an Inequality amongſt them, aſcribing to the Father a Preheminence; and then bring the Deity of the Holy Spirit into Doubt, and make the Lord Chriſt a ſubordinate God; and thus eſtabliſh their Socinianiſm.
That Learned Doctor therefore, who hath confuted this Pinczovian Hereſie of Three diſtinct Eſſences in the Trinity, deſerves greatly from the Church of God; For, by turning his Strength againſt the Notion of Three diſtinct Infinite Eſſences, Subſtances, Spirits, or Minds he hath taken an Effectual Courſe to break thoſe Socinian Meaſures which were moſt likely to expoſe the bleſſed Trinity, and prepare the Minds of many to take in their Ʋnitarianiſm, or rather Bideiſm. And they who have condemned the Aſſertion of Three diſtinct Eſſences, or Minds, for Heretical, have done honourably to their Eternal Praiſe.
When the old Socinian Game is Playing over again, and ſome who pretend a Zeal for the Trinity walk in the ſame Path, and plead for Three diſtinct Eſſences, as the Italian Hereticks heretofore did, it is time for the Orthodox to look to themſelves: They cannot be too cautious in a matter of ſuch Conſequence; and what Perſons ſoever are induſtrious in their Endeavours to propagate this Doctrine of Three Infinite Minds, or Spirits, are juſtly ſuſpected: Eſpecially ſince it is in a caſe where Solemn Proteſtations, Sacred Subſcriptions, and Oaths, have been uſed only as a Blind to delude the Orthodox.Reſpond. ad Comp. Mat. Sladi. Seg. 104.
Conradus Vorſtius made many a Proteſtation of his Orthodoxy in this very Point, expreſsly declaring, that he was neither Arian nor Socinian. I can (ſaith he) with a good Conſcience ſolemnly Teſtify, and Declare, as in Preſence of God and Men, that I have not deſign'd the promoting either Socinianiſm or Arianiſm, &c. And in his Preface to this anſwer he ſets down a Confeſſion of his Faith; and in the cloſe of what he had ſaid of the Trinity he Declares, That the Faith of the Holy Trinity, of the Perſon and Office of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, he will by the Grace of God Conſtantly and Religiouſly adhere unto, for which reaſon (he adds) I cannot, without manifeſt Injury, be condemned for holding either the Arian, Samoſatenian, or any other ſuch Hereſie.
Howbeit he is Poſitive, That the Three Perſons are Three diſtinct Real Entia, or Beings, and that it is a Contradiction, that any thing ſhould truly Exiſt that had not its Proper Eſſence. It is therefore manifeſt, (ſaith he) that in the Trinity there are diſtinct Things; That no one can deny thus much, unleſs he doth with Praxea and Sabellius hold only Three Names, or Reſpects and Offices, &c. (as we obſerved.) Every Being hath a certain peculiar Eſſence; and it undoubtedly follows that each Perſon hath a Certain Proper Eſſence of his own: Vorſt. Apol. Exeg. c. 9. p. 37, 38. Vorſt. de Deo vid. Not. ad diſput. 3. p. 208, 220, 221.So Vorſtius, who nevertheleſs expreſsly aſſerts, that the Subſtance of God, is but one Numerical or Individual Subſtance; That he is ſo one, as to be an Individual, that cannot be Divided either into Species or Parts.
This was Vorſtius his Notion; which, notwithſtanding his Solemn Proteſtations of adhering unto the Orthodox Faith, he did his uttermoſt to propagate; he himſelf, as I have already proved, in the 70th. Page of this Diſcourſe, Living, and Dying an Antitrinitarian. And as it was thus with him ſo it may be now with others: They may Profeſs to Believe one Divinity, which is Intirely and Inſeparably in Three diſtinct Perſons or Minds, and hold theſe Three Perſons to be Three diſtinſt Eſſences with a deſign to introduce Socinianiſm. For, from what I have ſaid it's clear, that the Italian Conſult. Profeſſed to Believe there was but One God, and Pitched on the Doctrine of Three diſtinct Eſſences, that from thence they might introduce an Inequality of Eſſences, aſſign a Preheminence and Superiority to the Eſſence of the Father, and make the Son but a Subordinate God; which is the Point the Socinians would be at.
Theſe are ſome of the Methods which the Foreign Socinians have taken to expoſe the Trinity and Propagate their Hereſies; and whoever will conſult the Writings of our Engliſh Gentlemen, who are their Offſpring, will ſee, that there are a Set of Men amongſt us, who have, in Imitation of the Italian Hereticks, entered into a Combination to bring into contempt the ſame Bleſſed Truths, after the ſame manner their Predeceſſors have done.