Religion and reason adjusted and accorded, or, A discourse wherein divine revelation is made appear to be a congruous and connatural way of affording proper means for making man eternally happy through the perfecting of his rational nature with an appendix of objections from divers as well as philosophers as divines and their respective answers.

Answer.

I do not say in the cited places, that Knowing and Loving are two essential Acts in God; I say there (and no where else to the contrary) that they are God himself diffe∣rently related or relatively opposed to him∣self; so that, in my sense, the Trinity of Per∣sons in the Ʋnity of Essence is the very self∣same pure essential Act and simple Being under distinct Relations to it self (in the manner set forth, sec. 2. par. 4, 5, 9, 10.) For wheresoever there is a Relative Opposition, there is of ne∣cessity a Distinction (Relatio being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, si∣ve habitudo vel respectus unius ad aliud) and yet nevertheless it is not necessary, that where there is such an Opposition, there should be always different Subjects separate from each other, wherein that different op∣posite Relation should abide. For since Sci∣entia and Scibile are Relatives; where Know∣ledg

is the Knowledg of ones self, there is a Relative Opposition, and yet but one Subject to sustain the same. And the like is also true in respect of Love, where it is to ones self. Whence, seeing there are no Acci∣dents in God (sect. 1. par. 6.) it must be, that the Divine Relates are all of them sub∣stantial, and not otherwise distinct from the simple Essence of God, but in regard of their Relative Opposition to each other.