A divine antidote against a devilish poyson, or, A scriptural answer to an anti-scriptural and heretical pamphlet entituled A designed end to the Socinian controversie, written by John Smith answered by Francis Gregory, D.D. and rector of Hambleden in the county of Bucks.

SECT. XXXII.

2. THat the Holy Spirit is indeed a Divine Person is very evident from the Authority of the Scripture, which being rightly understood, is the Testimony of God; and therefore, tho' it deliver some things above the reach of humane Understandings; yet since 'tis infallible, we stand obliged to be∣lieve it's Truth. Now, our Evidences thence are these:

1. The Scriptures do once and again connumerate and conjoin the Holy Spirit with God the Father, and God the Son.

So doth our blessed Saviour himself in his Form of Baptism, Baptize them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; here we have a clear distinction of three glo∣rious Subsistences in the Godhead, who are mention'd as Persons of the same Order, Dignity, and equal Objects of

Divine Worship; for why else did our Lord unite them in this solemn and sa∣cred Institution?

St. Basil mentions some Hereticks, who made bold to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That the holy Spirit ought not to be ranked with the Father, and the Son, as being, in their opinion, of a different Nature, and lower Dignity. Their thought was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that the Holy Spirit should be reckoned, not together with the Father, and the Son, but under both. But saith St. Basil, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; do not these Men manifestly oppose the Command of God? hath not our Lord charged us to join them all three together in the use of this Holy Sacrament? and what may we thence inferr? doubtless the Equality of the Holy Ghost, with the Father, and the Son; for, as the same Father observes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It becomes Persons of the same Honour to be ran∣ked together, but Men of inferiour Note to be placed below them.

Tertullian indeed stiles the Holy Spi∣rit, Tertius Majestatis gradus: But he did not mean, that there is any Ine∣quality betwixt the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in point of Dignity; but where three Persons are named toge∣ther, there must be a first, a second, and a third; but such a distinct enu∣meration doth necessarily import a priority and posteriority, not of excel∣lence, but of order only. According∣ly doth Gregory Nazianzen thus affirm, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Spirit is of the self same substance and equal Honour with the Father, and the Son.

And this Equality of these three glo∣rious Persons, did the Ancients partly gather from their conjunction in this Form of Baptism; so did the same Fa∣ther, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: we believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who are of the same Substance and Glory; and to prove them so, he subjoins this Reason, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In them our Bap∣tism hath its consummation. Baptism, which he calls 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Confession of their Divinity.

Theophylact in his Comment upon this Forth of Baptism: In the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, tells us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Name of the three Persons is but One; and what is that, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 'tis God, each Person being so.

Nay, Arius himself did once pre∣tend that he believed, even as we now really do, in the whole Trinity, and why he did so, he gave this account in that Creed of his, which he presented to Constantine the Great; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, we have received this Faith out of the Holy Gospels; and he particularly in∣stanceth in this Form of Baptism, as the ground of his Faith. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Our Lord saying to his Disciples, Go, teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Fa∣ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. The conjunction of these three Persons in this sacred Institution, im∣porting their equal Dignity, prevailed with Arius to believe in them all. And that this Faith of his was then sincere, he added this solemn Protestation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. If we do not thus believe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. If we do not truly acknowledge them, as the whole Catholick Church, and the Scriptures, the which we assert in all things, do teach us, God is our Judge at present, and will be so, when the Great Day comes. Thus did Arius himself from the Conjunction of these three Persons in this Form of Baptism conclude, and that with reason, that the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are of equal Dignity with the Father.

But this is not the only Text, where∣in we find these three glorious Per∣sons thus conjoined; St. John tells us, There are Three that bear record in Heaven; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these Three are One: One what? not one Person, for then they could not be Three, but what Three are they? not three Names only, for 'tis not Names, but Persons or Things, that can bear record, and why any one Person only should subscribe himself, as a Witness, under three di∣stinct

Denominations, I think, no good reason can be assigned.

That St. John means three several Persons may well be took for a granted Truth; and if so, since the Father, who is the first Witness here named, is by our Socinians owned to be God; the Word, and the Holy Ghost, who are joined with the Father as two other Witnesses of equal Credit, must be God too; because, within a Verse or two, the joint Testimony of all Three is expresly called, the Witness of God. And therefore Oecumenius well con∣cludes; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In this Text by the Word, Spirit, God is meant, for the Spirit also is God.

Again; St. Paul joins these three glorious Persons together in that Peti∣tion of his for the Church of Corinth: The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Love of God, and the Communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. That these words are a Prayer, I think, no Man will deny; as such doth Theophy∣lact and Oecumenius own it, and St. Chrysostom expresly saith of St. Paul, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he doth here end his Discourse with a Prayer. And if it be a Prayer, to whom doth St.

Paul direct it? either to no body, or to the whole Trinity in Conjunction. For, as Grotius observes, sunt hic, ut & in Baptismo, apertè nomina 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The whole Trinity is here expresly na∣med, as it also is in the Form of Bap∣tism; so that if St. Paul doth here pray at all, he prayeth to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost too.

And since St. Paul did direct his hum∣ble Petitions for spiritual Blessings to none but God; we may from this Re∣quest of his very justly inferr the Do∣ctrine of the Trinity, so thought seve∣ral Interpreters of this Text: Hoc loco distinctè nobis insinuantur tres in Divinis Personae; so one: and thus another, Notant hic significari sanctissimam Trini∣tatem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, consubstantialem, eam scilicet ejusdem esse naturae, Potentiae, operationis, &c. And from this place doth Gregory Thaumaturgus draw an Ar∣gument. Quod venerabilis est sancta Trinitas, non separata, nec alienata: Hence also doth St. Chrysostom, and af∣ter him Theophylact, break out into this expression, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; where now are they, who slight the Spirit, as if he were not God; since St. Paul himself doth here address his solemn Petition, as well to the

Holy Spirit, as to the Father, and to the Son?

Indeed that Observation of Gregory Nazianzen is true, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Things, which are not of the same substance, Nature and Dignity, are sometimes numbred together; So∣lomon tells us, There be three things, which go well; a Lion, a Grey-hound, an He-goat. These three sorts of Beasts, though here reckoned together, are yet no way like to one another, they agree in nothing, save only their Ge∣nerical Nature, as being all living and irrational Creatures. But altho' things of different Natures are sometimes rec∣koned together, yet this doth no way weaken my present Argument, which is, that the Conjunction of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in several Texts, doth evidence the Equality of their Dignity, and prove each Person to be truly God.

So thought the same Father; for, in the same Oration, amongst other Ar∣guments, whereby he proves the Deity of the Holy Ghost, this is one, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he is connumerated and ranked together with the Father, and the Son; and that in such Texts, wherein they are all mention'd as Persons of one and

the same Authority, and equal Objects of Divine Worship. But,

2. The Scriptures do once and again ascribe to the blessed Spirit, the Name and Title of God, and that in such a manner, and upon such accounts, as prove him to be a Divine Person in∣deed.

True it is, that the bare Name of God, nakedly considered, is not enough to prove every one that bears it, to be a Divine Person. It was given to Mo∣ses; I have made thee a God to Pharaoh: 'Tis given to Magistrates; I have said, ye are Gods: 'Tis given to Pagan Idols; There are Gods many: 'Tis given to the Devil; for, even he is called, The God of this World. But all these were only Titular Gods, reputed Deities; or Gods by deputation, improperly and Metonymically so stiled. But 'tis not thus with the Holy Ghost, who is called God, and really is so.

Consider we that expression of our Lord: If I with the Finger of God cast out Devils, &c. but what means our Lord by this Finger of God? another Evangelist explains it thus; If I cast out Devils by the Spirit of God. And why the Spirit is here called the Finger of God, Theophylact gives us this rea∣son:

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Because as the Finger is of the same Substance with the whole Body, so is the Spirit of the same Substance with God the Father, and God the Son.

This casting out of Devils St. Chry∣sostom calleth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Work of the greatest Power; and yet the Jews ascribed it to Beelzebub, and that our Lord called, a Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, and pronounced it a Sin unpardonable; but why un∣pardonable, if the Holy Ghost be, as some vile Wretches have imagined, a Creature, and not truly God?

Again, St. Paul saith, The Body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost; and surely Temples ought to be dedicated to none but God; and such is the Holy Ghost; for the same St. Paul saith elsewhere, ye are the Temple of God; and again, the Temple of God is holy, which Tem∣ple ye are: The sanctified Bodies of good Men, which one Text stiles, the Temples of the Holy Ghost, the other two do expresly call the Temples of God, and is not that an undeniable Argument, that the Holy Ghost is God?

So thought Athanasius; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 'Tis not possible that the Spirit should be a Creature; because every one, who re∣ceives the Spirit, is called the Temple of God. And that the Spirit is God in∣deed, he thus proves elsewhere; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. They, in whom the Spirit resides, are by him made parta∣kers of the Divine Nature; and if so, we cannot doubt, but that the Nature of the Spirit himself, is indeed the very Nature of God.

Of the same mind was Great St. Ba∣sil, who from these words, your Bodies are the Temples of the Holy Ghost; or, which is all one, ye are the Temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you, urgeth thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; If God be said to dwell in us by his Spirit, is it not manifest impiety, to say that the Spirit himself is void of Divinity? and again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; If the Spirit make vertu∣ous Men like to God, how can he, who imparts the Divine Nature to other Persons, ever be presumed to want i•• himself?

But that the blessed Spirit is indeed a Divine Person is further evident from that Speech of St. Peter to Ananias▪ Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lye 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost? thou hast not lyed unto Men, only or chiefly unto Men, but unto God; well, and what may we in∣ferr from thence? we may conclude, as many Interpreters do; Ergo spiritus sanctus est Deus, Therefore the Holy Ghost is God: for Ananias did not lye to Men alone; but, since he lyed to the Holy Ghost, he did, for that very rea∣son, lye to God also.

This Text is so clear a Proof, that Gregory Nazianzen bespeaks every one, which knoweth this Scripture, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; what a very dull sot art thou, and how great a stranger to the Spirit, if notwithstanding this and o∣ther Texts, thou doest still so much as doubt the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, and yet needest a Teacher to inform thee about it.

Gregory Nyssen, expounding this Text, writes thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: St. Peter, saying that Ananias lyed to the Holy Ghost and to God; doth by these two Words, the Holy Ghost and God, declare to all pious and intelligent Souls one and the same Person.

Accordingly St. Hierom tells us thus, referring to this very Text: Ut sciamus ••ennem, qui exasperat spiritum sanctum, Deum offendere, Petrus Apostolus signifi∣cantius loquitur, &c. That we may know that every one, who exasperates the Holy Spirit, doth offend God, the Apostle Peter very plainly declares, when he tells Ananias, who had lyed to the Holy Ghost: Thou hast not lyed unto Men, but to God.

From the same Text doth St. Austin also inferr the Godhead of the Holy Ghost; for thus he demands: Quid? spiritus sanctus non est Deus! What? is not the Holy Spirit God? he an∣swers; Planè Deus, 'Tis plain that he is God; but how doth he prove it? thus: Audi Petrum Ananiae fraudatori improperantem, &c. Hear Peter repro∣ving that Cheater Ananias thus: Why

hath Satan filled thy heart to lye to the Holy Ghost? Thou hast not lyed unto Men, but to God; and hence St. Austin draws this Conclusion; Ecce & spiritus san∣ctus Deus; Behold the Holy Ghost also is God.

To these Authorities I shall add no more, save only that of Epiphanius, who writes thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Touching the Deity of the Holy Ghost, St. Peter doth secure us; but how? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Saying to Ananias, Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lye to the Holy Ghost? thou hast not lyed to Men, but unto God; but how is that proved? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Because the Spirit is from God, and doth not differ from him.

I conclude this Argument with the words of a late and learned Bishop of our own Church: To lye to the Holy Ghost is not to lye to Men, because the Holy Ghost is not Man; It is not to lye to any Angel or any Creature, because the Holy Ghost is no Angel, no Creature; but to lye to the Holy Ghost is to lye to God, because the Holy Ghost is God: So he is both in Name and real Being.

3. The Scriptures do ascribe to the Holy Ghost such Attributes, as are pro∣per

and peculiar to a Person, but to such a Person only, as is Divine.

To prove the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, Gregory Nazianzen, and Great St. Basil have collected abundance of Epithets and Characters, which the Scriptures bestow upon him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. And so Gregory Nyssen, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. the Psalmist stiles him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the good spirit, essentially and infinitely Good; and such a good Being there is but one, that is God. But of those many Attributes, which are ascribed to the Holy Spirit, I shall insist but upon these Three, his Omni∣potence, his Omnipresence, and his Om∣niscience; each of which is enough to prove him God.

1. 'Tis evident from the Holy Scri∣ptures, that the blessed Spirit of God is Omnipotent; and there are three things in sacred Writ ascribed to him, which prove him so, For,

1. The Scriptures do ascribe to the Holy Ghost, the Creation of the World, and that is a Work which requires an Almighty Power.

Moses tells us, God created the Hea∣ven and the Earth; and so again, The Lord made Heaven and Earth; 'Tis he,

whom the Evangelical Prophet stiles, The everlasting God, the Lord, the Crea∣tour of the Ends of the Earth. And in∣deed it must needs be so; for, since Crea∣tion is, productio Entis ex non Ente, the Production of something out of nothing, there being a vast distance betwixt these two Terms, it must be the effect of an Infinite Power, and such Power there is none, save only that of God.

Upon which account St. Austin tells us, Nec malos, sed nec bonos Angelos f•••• est putare Creatores: 'Tis not lawful to think that evil Angels, no nor good ones, can be Creators. And if not Angels, much less any other Creatures; so say the Schools, Nullam Creaturam posse instrumentaliter concurrere ad Crea∣tionem, so Bellarmine; and before him Aquinas, Impossibile est quòd alicui Crea∣turae conveniat creare, neque virtute pr••∣pria, neque instrumentaliter, sive per Ministerium; 'Tis impossible for any Creature to create any thing, either by its own Power, or as an Instrument in the hand of another. 'Tis the Judg∣ment of these and other learned Men, that a creating Power, through the Incapacity of Creatures to be the Sub∣jects of it, is absolutely incommunica∣ble.

Now, if we may conclude that there is no creating Power but in God alone, then must we also conclude, that the Holy Ghost is God; because the Scriptures tell us, that he was the Creator, and still is the Conservator of the Uni∣verse. Moses, describing the very be∣ginning of the Creation, writes thus; The Spirit of God moved upon the Face of the Waters; the question is, what is here meant by the Spirit of God, and by the word Moved? The word in the Original Language, which we render Spirit, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which as Aynsworth tells us, signifieth any Spirit, Ghost, Breath, or Wind; but in this Text it cannot sig∣nifie the Wind, because there was no Wind as yet created. But that by this Spirit of God, is here meant the Holy Ghost, is the general Judgment of In∣terpreters. So saith Pererius, est inter∣pretatio fermè omnium Patrum, tam Grae∣corum, quàm Latinorum, per spiritum Dei hoc loco significari spiritum sanctum, quam sententiam secuta est Ecclesia Catho∣lica. Almost all the Fathers both Greek and Latin, do here by the Spirit of God, understand the Holy Ghost, and so doth the Universal Church. Nay, Aynsworth cites some Ancient Rabbines for the same opinion; as the Thargum of Hie∣rusalem,

which renders this Text thus▪ The Spirit of Mercies from before the Lord; and R. Menachem, who inter∣prets it thus, The Spirit of Wisdom, cal∣led the Spirit of the living God; or, as an∣other expresseth it, The Spirit of the Mes∣sias.

And indeed it could be no other Spi∣rit, save only the Spirit of God, consi∣dering the Work, which is here and elsewhere ascribed unto him. The Text saith, The Spirit of God moved upon the Face of the Waters? but what means that? 'tis a Metaphor: the He∣brew word, Rachaph, signifying, as Cri∣ticks tell us, the hovering of a Bird over her young ones newly hatched to cherish them; and so it here imports St. Chrysostom's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; or, as Pererius words it, efficaciam vitalem; which our Assembly of English Divines express thus, The effectual quickning Power of the Holy Ghost, which upheld, sustained, and gave vertue to that great and general heap, the newly created Chaos.

And as this blessed Spirit was thus concerned in the Work of the first Day's Creation, so had he an hand in the Work of the other Days too. For, Job tells us, By his Spirit he hath gar∣nished

the Heavens; some Criticks think the Praefix כ which we render, By, to be Redundant, and accordingly Vata∣blus reads the Text thus; Spiritus ejus ornavit Coelos, His Spirit hath ador∣ned the Heavens with Sun, Moon, and Stars. But what means he by this Spi∣rit? Quo cuncta creavit, saith Drusius; that Spirit by whom he created all things. 'Tis that which Job acknow∣ledgeth as to himself: The Spirit of God hath made me; Spiritus sanctus, Dei ma∣nus altera, quae cum altera, i. e. cum verbo, hominem creavit; or, as the same Au∣thor speaks elsewhere: Filius atque spi∣ritus sanctus cum Patre creaverunt ho∣minem, The Son and Holy Ghost with the Father created Man. And not only Man, but all other Creatures too, of whom the Psalmist saith, Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, and they are created; hence St. Hierom argueth thus; Si spi∣ritus creat, ergo Deus est; ita enim cre∣at, quoniam & Pater: If the Spirit cre∣ate, then is he God, and create he doth, because the Father also doth so.

From these and some other like Texts, did the Ancient Fathers collect the creating Power of the Holy Ghost; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and so again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Spirit together with the Son created all things. And the same Father elsewhere saith of St. Paul, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. He ascribes to the Spirit the efficacious Operation of God. Accor∣dingly another Father calls the Holy Spirit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, him that enlivens all things; and the same Au∣thor in another place writes very Dog∣matically concerning Christ and his Ho∣ly Spirit, and of both he speaks thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That the Word of God, and the Spirit of God are Powers substantially subsi∣sting, the makers and upholders of all created Beings, is very evidently decla∣red in those Scriptures, which were written by Divine Inspiration.

There is a Tradition, that Gregory sirnamed Thaumaturgus, received a Sy∣stem of Faith by Revelation; a Creed embraced, saith Gerard Vossius, both by the Eastern and Western Churches. In this Creed, as it is recorded by Gre∣gory Nyssen, the blessed Spirit is stiled, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Life, and the Cause of all things living.

In short, Epiphanius speaks thus of our Lord, and his Holy Spirit; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. These two are invested with an unceivable Power and Dominion, and create all things co∣operating with the Fathor throughout infinite Ages.

Now then, from these forenamed Texts, and these Authorities of Judici∣ous Men grounded thereupon, we may safely conclude that the Holy Spirit is possest with a creating Power, which being Omnipotent and Essential to him must needs prove him God.

2. The Scriptures do ascribe to the Holy Spirit the Resurrection of the Dead, and that is a second Work, which re∣quires an Almighty Power, and suppo∣seth his to be so.

There are so many difficulties in, and such strong Objections against the Doctrine of the Resurrection, that the Learned Men of the Heathen World, though some of them granted the Im∣mortality of the Soul, yet the Resurre∣ction of the Body they thought to be not only needless and inconvenient, but altogether Impracticable too. Such an opinion there was in St. Paul's time,

who demanded a Reason for it: Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the Dead? Such were the general thoughts of the Pagans; accordingly Celsus in Origen calleth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a thing impossible; and again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a thing, which God neither will do, nor can.

The same opinion was crept in a∣mongst the Jews. The Sadduces say that there is no Resurrection: It was also found, if not in the Church, yet at least in the Town of Corinth. How say some among you, that there is no Re∣surrection of the Dead? Now, the rea∣son, why this great Article of our Faith was so generally denied, must be the consideration of those Intricacies which are found in the Nature of this word, there being much to be said against it, but nothing for it, save only the faith∣ful Promise, the Infinite Wisdom, and Almighty Power of God.

Now, that the Holy Spirit hath an hand in the raising of the Dead, is evident from that of St. Paul: If the spirit of him which raised Jesus from the Dead, dwell in you; he, that raised Christ from the Dead, shall also quicken your mortal Bodies by his spirit, that

dwelleth in you: from these words a learned Interpreter raiseth this Infe∣rence: Hinc patet spiritum sanctum in nobis inhabitantem esse causam Resurre∣ctionis & vitae gloriosa. Est enim hic spiritus in se vita, omnia animans, ve∣getans, & vivificans, &c. Hence 'tis manifest, that the Holy Spirit, who dwells in us, is the Cause of our Re∣surrection; and that glorious Life, which doth attend it; for indeed this Spirit is Life in himself, a quickning and enlivening Spirit. And accor∣dingly St. Chrysostom, mentioning this glorious Work of the Resurrection, stiles this blessed Spirit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Author of this so great an Honour. And thus Calvin, Si potentia spiritûs Dei Christus excitatus est, ut spiritus aeternam retinet potentiam, eandem in nobis quoque exeret; since Christ was raised by the Power of the Divine Spirit, and since that Spirit doth still retain the same Eternal Power, he will exert it in our Resurrection too.

And upon the same Account did Gregory Nazianzen stile this blessed Spirit thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Spirit that made us; and the Spirit that doth and will re-make us; but how so? he re-makes the Soul of Man 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by our Baptism, and he will re-make the Body of Man, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by our Resurrection. As he did at the first create our Flesh out of dust, so will he at last re-create the same Flesh out of the same dust again.

Now then, if from the Authority of God's Word, and the Testimonies of learned Men built upon it, we may con∣clude that the Resurrection of the Dead hath been, and will be the Work of the Holy Ghost; we must also conclude that his Power is Omnipotent, and that Omnipotence must speak him truly God.

3. The Scriptures do very often a∣scribe to the Holy Ghost the Regenerati∣on of Souls, and that is a third Work, which requires an Almighty Power, and proves his to be so.

When Saul was newly converted, and instead of persecuting began to pray, 'tis said of him thus: Behold, he prayeth; the expression intimates, that the Conversion of this Man was a Work of wonderful Power, why else is it ushered in with this Note of Ad∣miration, Ecce, behold, he prayeth? The Conversion, Sanctification, or Regene∣ration of Mortal Souls is a matter so exceeding difficult, that the Scriptures

compare it to such Works, as can be wrought by no hand, but that alone which is Omnipotent. 'Tis compared to the Resurrection of the Dead; so the Apostle, You hath he quickened, who were dead in sins. 'Tis compared to Works of Creation; so intimates the Psalmist, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Create in me a clean Heart, O God. St. Paul tells regenerate Souls, Ye are created in Christ Jesus; and again, If any Man be in Christ, he is a new Creature, and this new Crea∣ture is the Workmanship of Infinite Power; St. Paul calleth it, The excee∣ding greatness of his Power, according to the working of his mighty Power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead. The truth is, tho' all works be equally easie to an Omnipotent God, yet in their own Nature they are not so; the making of this new Crea∣ture is in it self an harder Work than the making of the old ones; the Psal∣mist tells us, He spake, and it was done. In making the World God met with no opposition, but in this new Creati∣on he meets with much; for, as St. Paul saith, the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit; this Work of Grace is so much opposed, that he spake not much a∣miss, who said, Difficili••s est Peccato∣rem

justificare, quàm Coelum & Terram creare, It is an harder Work for God to justifie a Sinner, than it was to cre∣ate Heaven and Earth.

Now, this gracious Work, which of all Works seems to be the most diffi∣cult, do the Scriptures very frequently and very plainly ascribe to the Holy Spirit; so doth St. Paul, Ye are sancti∣fied, ye are justified; but by whom? By the spirit of our God. Our Lord him∣self intimates as much; Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, &c. by vertue of these and the like Texts, do the Greek Fathers familiarly stile the Holy Ghost, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Sancti∣fier, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Re-creator. And because every regenerate Man is born of the spirit, he is for that very reason said to be born of God; for, since this Work requires an Almighty Power, he who doth it, must needs be truly God. But,

2. 'Tis evident from the Scrip∣tures, that the Holy Ghost is Omnipre∣sent, and that is a second Attribute, which proves him God.

'Tis certain that all Creatures, being finite Substances, are definitivè vel cir∣cumscriptivè, so determined, limited, or confined to such or such a particular

place, that none of them, the Humane Nature of Christ not excepted, can ever be at the same time in more pla∣ces than one. But the Divine Nature being infinite and immense, 'tis God's Prerogative, and his alone, to be every where at once; for, as his Eternity is commensurate with all Successions of Time, so is his Immensity commensurate with all distances of Places, wherein he is Repletivè, per Essentiam, Poten∣tiam, & Praesentiam, by his Essence, Power, and Presence, as the School∣men speak.

And the certainty of this Divine Ubiquity, we may learn from that de∣mand of God mentioned by the Pro∣phet. Can any hide himself in secret places, that I shall not see him, saith the Lord? do not I fill Heaven and Earth, saith the Lord? This Question the Psal∣mist thus resolves, If I ascend up into Heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in Hell, behold thou art there, &c. Certainly there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a great Gulph, a vast distance betwixt Heaven and Hell, and yet God is at once in both. In short, Deus nullo loco includitur, ex∣cluditur nulle. God is neither shut in nor out of any Place whatever, but is Omnipresent.

And such a Person is the Holy Ghost; such an Intimation hath the Psalmist left us, whither shall I go from thy Spirit? This Text doth Athanasius plead as an Argument to prove that the Holy Ghost is no Creature; for thus he writes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. All creatures are in distinst places, the Sun, Moon, and Stars in the Firma∣ment, Clouds in the Air, Men on Earth, Angels move from place to place even as they are sent; but the Holy Spirit fills all places, and is in the midst of all at once. So saith the Wisdom of Solomon, the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and again, Thine incorruptible Spirit is in all things. And if so, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, saith Athanasius, 'tis certain that the Spirit is no Crea∣ture, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he is a Person far above the Nature of Angels, and no Person is so, but God alone.

But, besides the Authority of these Texts, for the Omnipresence of the Holy Ghost we may plead an Argument from those Promises of Christ to his Apostles; the Spirit shall guide you

into all truth, and again, the Holy Ghost shall teach you all things; not at once, but as occasion should require; and that he might be with them upon all Emergencies, their Lord gave them this assurance, I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of Truth. Now, since these Apostles, to whom these promi∣ses were made, were, by their Lords own Command, to be dispersed through∣out all Nations, how could these pro∣mises be made good? how could the Spirit be to every one of them, being apart and separated in several King∣doms, a ready guide and constant as∣sistant, were he not Omnipresent? but since these Texts and these Promises do prove him so, they must likewise prove him truly God. Once more,

3. 'Tis evident from the Scriptures that the Holy Ghost is Omniscient, and none is so, but God alone.

The only Intelligent Creatures are Men and Angels, but none of these are, or even can be Omniscient: as for the generality of Men, we are so far from understanding all things, that we do certainly know very little; nay, the Text saith, we are but of yesterday

and know nothing: So it is with Man in common. And as for Men that were inspired, St. Paul saith, we know but in part, no more than God was pleased to reveal to them.

The School men indeed do give to the blessed Angels the name of Intel∣ligences in the Abstract; and yet of some things even they are Ignorant; nay, our Lord, as Man confessed him∣self to be so, of that day and hour know∣eth no man; no, not the Angels of Heaven, neither the Son. And if our Lords own Humane Nature was not Omniscient, then can no Created under∣standing ever be so.

But as for God, that is truly affir∣med of him, which can be so affirmed of none besides, His understanding is infinite: To him, saith St. Paul, all things are naked and open; so they are to him, and to him alone; and yet so they were, are, and ever will be to the Holy Ghost. What else doth St. Paul mean, when he saith, the Spirit sear∣cheth all things, yea, the deep things of God; and again, the things of God kno∣weth no man, but the Spirit of God. The Spirit indeed is here said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to search, which Phrase, when applied to Men, imports something of present

ignorance; for what need a Man search after that, which he knoweth already? but here 'tis otherwise, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or as another words it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. This search of the Spirit doth not suppose any Ignorance in him, but his exact knowledge and full comprehen∣sion. For the same Phrase is elsewhere applied to God the Father, who is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to search the hearts of men, as being one 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that knoweth the depths which are therein; so here, the Spirit is said to search the deep things of God, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as one taking much pleasure in the Contem∣plation of the Mysteries of God. To the same purpose writes another thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 'Tis te∣stified of the Spirit, that he searcheth all things, even the deep things of God, but not as one, that was at any time Igno∣rant of them, but as one always high∣ly pleased with such a Speculation.

'Tis the saying of an Ancient Father 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Holy Spirit cannot be Ig∣norant

of any of the things of God; for, if he himself had not known them, how could he have revealed them un∣to the World? St. Paul told the Elders of the Church; I have not shunned to declare unto you all the Counsel of God. But how came St. Paul himself to be acquainted with it? that he tells us, (though in a modest expression) I think that I have the Spirit of God. And in∣deed he might do more than think so; for, as Athanasius justly demands 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; what is it that hath and doth Communicate the knowledge of God and his Counsels, except the Spirit? Who was it, that revealed to the Pro∣phets future Events of things, not on∣ly contingent, but very Improbable; nay, as to the common Course of Nature utterly Impossible too? The Prophet Isaias several hundred years before the Incarnation of Christ, foretold his Birth, though it were so Miraculous, that many would not believe it, no, not when he was actually so born, Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, Mater & Virgo; that a woman should be a Mother, and yet a Vigin too, was one of St. Bernard's three great wonders.

But how came the Prophet to un∣derstand that certainly it should be so? who was it that informed him? to this St. Paul hath left us a very Satis∣factory answer: Well spake the Holy Ghost by the Prophet Isaias. And not by him alone, but by all the other Prophets too, of whom St. Peter saith, the Spirit of Christ was in them, and a∣gain, holy men of God spake, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, now then, since the Blessed Spirit is that Person, who revealed the will of God to all his Prophets; who certainly foretold things to come; and such things, as were far beyond the comprehension of Men and Angels; since it was he, who, accor∣ding to our Lord's promise, did guide his Apostles into all Truth, and brought all things to their Remembrance, we may safely conclude, that he knoweth all things, even the deep things of God.

And from this Consideration doth St. Hierom rightly inferr the Deity of the Holy Ghost; for thus he writes, praeclarum hoc adversus Haereticos, qui Creaturam Spiritum Sanctum dicunt. Unde hic ostendit non Solum Creaturam non esse, verum etiam quod ipse solus in∣teriora

Dei & profunda rimetur, quippe ut ejusdem naturae at{que} Substantiae sit cum Christo. This Text is a very clear Argument against those Hereticks, who affirm the Holy Ghost to be a Creature. For in as much as the Spirit is here said to search even the deep things of God, i. e. exactly to know them; it sheweth, not only that he is no Creature, but that he is of the same Nature and Substance with Christ, who is God the Son; his know∣ing even the deep things of God, im∣ports his Omniscience, and that is ano∣ther Attribute, which evidently proves him to be a Divine Person; one who is truly God.

But to enervate these Arguments, and to elude those Texts, upon which they are grounded, our Socinians tell us, that such Texts are Figurative, that there is in them a Prosopopoeia; whereby Personal Actions are often ascribed to things or qualities, which are not Per∣sons. St. Paul saith of Charity, It beareth all things, it believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. These and other Personal Actions are attributed to Charity, which yet are proper to the Person only, in whom that noble Grace resides. So in our

present case, they tell us, that those Divine Actions are Figuratively ascri∣bed to the Spirit, not that this Spirit is a Person subsisting in Co-operating of himself; but because he is the Power of God the Father, who thereby doth the works: So they. To which we an∣swer.

This pretence of a Prosopopoeia, as if those Personal Acts were really done by God the Father, which are only imputed to the Spirit, as being no more than the Power by which the Father works, will appear very absurd and ridiculous, if we can find some personal operations ascribed to the Spirit, which can never be ascribed to the Father. As for instance; the Holy Spirit is said to come, as being sent, but by whom, can God the Father be sent? the Holy Spirit is said to receive, but from what Donor's hand can God the Father be a Receiver? the Holy Spirit is said not to speake of himself, but who prompts and puts words into the mouth of God the Father? the Holy Spirit is said to make Intercession for us, but can God the Father become an Intercessor? if he can, let our Socinians tell us, with whom he interceeds. These

Instances are enough to evince, that the holy Spirit is not a quality; not that Energetical Power by which the Father acts, but a Person really subsisting in himself, since such Personal operati∣ons are Attributed to him, which can∣not by any Prosopopoeia be ascribed to God the Father.

2. My next and last work is to prove that the Holy Spirit is not only a real Person, but a Person so distin∣guished both from the Father and the Son, that he is neither the one nor the other.

To prove this truth, as it is easy, so is it now become very necessary too, be∣cause this licentious age hath produ∣ced some Men, who have revived the old Heresie of Noetus, of whom St. Au∣stin writes thus, Docebat Christum Eundem esse ipsum Patrem & Spiritum: and so Epiphanius 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He dreamed and taught that the Fa∣ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, were but one and the same Person. After him arose Sabellius, who promoted the same opinion, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That the Father, Son, and Holy Spi∣rit

are not three distinct Persons; but only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, three different denominations.

This Heretical opinion is so repug∣nant to so many express Texts, that it is in the Language of Epipha∣nius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 easie to be Confu∣ted; for,

1. 'Tis very evident from the holy Scriptures, that the blessed Spirit is a Person distinct from God the Fa∣ther.

For the Spirit is said to proceed from the Father; and therefore he cannot be the Father; for no Person can pos∣sibly, proceed from himself. Again, the Spirit is said to be sent by the Father, and if so, the Person sending, and the Person who is sent, cannot be the same. Nay more, the Spirit is said, to be sent from the Father; and if so, can any Person be said to be sent from himself? these Texts are sufficient to prove, that the Holy Spirit is not, cannot be, the Father.

2. 'Tis evident from the Holy Scri∣ptures that the blessed Spirit is a Per∣son distinct from the Son.

For when our Lord was newly Bap∣tized, the Holy Ghost descended upon him; and if so, the holy Ghost, who did de∣scend, and our Lord on whom he descended, cannot be the same. Be∣sides, our Lord told his Apostles thus, I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, even the Spirit of truth. Here doth our Lord put a clear difference betwixt himself and his Holy Spirit, whom he calls 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 another, and therefore not himself.

But to name no more Texts, we find a plain distinction betwixt all three Persons in the Form of Baptism, which must be administred, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: If these three here mention'd, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are allowed to be, what they certainly are, the three Persons in the God head, then is this Form of Bap∣tism very consonant to its self, and Intelligible to us: but if not, if, ac∣cording to the Socinian Hypothesis,

the first here nam'd be a Person, and that Person God; if the second be a Person, and that Person no more than a meer Man; and if the third be no Person at all; then must this Form of Baptism be thus Interpreted: Baptizing them in the name, i. e. by the Authority, or into the Religion and Worship of the Father, who is God; of the Son, who is a Creature; and of the Holy Ghost, who is nothing else but a Po∣wer, a Quality inherent in the Na∣ture of God.

And is it imaginable that our bles∣sed Saviour, who is the Wisdom of God, who spake as never man spake besides, should institute such an uncouth, in∣coherent, and absurd Form of Baptism, as this must be, if so interpreted? Is it imaginable that our Meek and Humble Jesus, had he been no more than a meer Man, would ever, in this sacred Institution, have joyned himself with God his Father, as if his Authority were, and his Worship ought to be, the very same with his; nor can we conceive, that our Lord would here have made a distinct men∣tion of the Father and the Holy Ghost, if

the Holy Ghost were not a distinct Per∣son, but only the Power of God, for his Power, and all his other Attri∣butes, though we frame to our selves distinct Ideas and various Concepti∣ons of them, yet they are not really distinct from his Essence, they are himself.

And thus have I examined all this Man's pretences, and answered all his Arguments against the Doctrine of the blessed Trinity; and notwithstanding all that he doth, or ever can, object against the Divinity of Christ and the Personality of the Holy Ghost, I shall conclude this discourse with the words of a far better Author, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Holy Spirit always was, is, and will be, without Begin∣ning, without End, Co-ordinate and reckoned in the same rank with the Father and the Son. To which I shall add only that Epiphonema of Epiphanius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Trinity is really perfect, the Father perfect, the Son perfect, the Holy Ghost perfect; one Divine Nature, one God, to whom be Glory, Honour and Dominion for ever and ever.

Amen.

Notes

• Basil. M. de Sp. S. c. 10. p. 166
• Basil. M. de Sp. S. c. 17. p. 185.
• Id. cap. 10. p. 166.
• Id. cap. 17. p. 186.
• Tert. adv. Prax. p. 558
• Greg. Naz. Or. 20. p. 365.
• Naz. Or. 32. p. 521.
• Theoph. in Matth. 18.19.
• Socra. Hist. Eccl. l. 10. cap. 26.
• 1 Joh. 5.7.
• 1 Joh. 5.9.
• Oecumen. in locum.
• 2 Co. 13.14
• Theoph. Oecumen. Chrys. in loc.
• Grotius in loc.
• Estius in locum.
• Gr. Thau. in Exp. Symb. p. 101.
• Greg. Naz. Or. 37. p. 604.
• Pro. 30.29
• Greg. Naz. Or. 37. p. 610.
• Exod. 7.1.
• Ps. 82. 6.
• 1 Cor. 8.5.
• 2 Cor. 4.4.
• Luk. 11.20
• Mat. 12.28
• Theoph. in Luk. 11.20
• Chrysost. in Mat. 12.28
• 1 Cor. 6.19.
• 1 Cor. 3.16, 17.
• Athan. in Epist. ad. ad Serap. p. 12.
• In Epist. ad Ser. Sp. S. non esse Creat. p. 198, 199.
• Basil. M. adv. Eun. l. 3. p. 83.
• Acts 5.3, 4.
• Lorinus in locum.
• Greg. Naz. Or. 37. p. 611.
• Greg. Nys. in Or. de Deitate Fi∣lii & Sp. S. p. 910.
• Hieron. in Esa. c. 63.
• August. de Temp. Bar∣barico T, 9. p. 215.
• Epip. Haer. 59. p. 500.
• Pearson in Exp. Symb. Apost.
• Greg. Naz. Or. 37. p. ••10. ••••sil. M. adv. ••••∣no•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. ••5. Gre•• Nyss. de T••in. p. 441. Ps. 143.10
• S 〈…〉〈…〉
• Gen. 1.1.
• Exod. 20.
• Isa. 40.28.
• August. de Trin. l. 3. c. 8. T. 3.
• Bellar. de effectu Sac. l. 2. c. 11. p. 156. Aquin. 1. par. qu. 45. Art. 5.
• Gen. 1.2.
• Aynsw. in locum.
• Pererius in locum.
• Chrys. Pe∣rer. & En∣gl. Annot. in locum.
• Job 26.13.
• Vatab. & D••usius in locum.
• Job 33.4. Pi••eda in Job 33.4. & 10.8.
• Ps. 104, 30. Hieron. in locum.
• Greg. Naz. Or. 44. p. 714. Id. Or. 37. p. 610.
• Id. Or. 24. p. 431.
• Greg. Nyss. adv. Eun. p. 62.
• Greg. Nyss. in Or. Ca∣tech. c. 4. p. 481.
• Ger. Vos. in noris in opera Gre. Tnaumat. Greg Nyss. in vita Gr. Thaumat. p. 978.
• Epiphan. Haer. 74. p. 896.
• O••ig. con∣t•••• Cels. l. 5. p. ••40.
• Matt 2.23.
• Mat. 15.22
• Rom. 8.11.
• Corn. à lap. in loc.
• Chrys. in Rom. Hom. 13.
• Calvin. in Rom. c. 8.11.
• Greg. Naz. Or. 37. p. 610.
• Acts 9.11.
• Ps. 51.10.
• Eph. 2.10.
• 2 Cor. 5.18
• Eph. 1.17.
• Ps. 33.9.
• 1 Cor. 6.11.
• Joh. 3.5.
• Epi. Haer. 74. p. 901. Naz. Or. 37. p. 610.
• Jer. 23.24.
• Ps. 139.8.
• Ps. 139.7.
• Athan. ad Serap. Sp. S. non esse Creat. p. 201.
• Sap. 1.7. Sap. 12.1.
• Joh. 16.13.
• Joh. 14.26
• Joh. 14.16
• Joh. 8.9.
• 1 Cor. 13.9.
• Mar. 13.32.
• Ps. 147.5.
• Heb. 4.15.
• 1 Cor. 2.10, 11.
• Chrysost. Theophyl. & Oecum. in locum.
• Theophyl in locum.
• Grig. Naz. Or. 20. p. 362.
• B••sil. M. adv. Eu∣nom. l. 4. p. 101.
• Act. 20.27.
• 1 Cor. 7.40.
• Athan. Contra Maced. di∣al. 1. p. 271.
• Isa. 7.14.
• Act. 28.25.
• 1 Pet. 1.11. 2 Pet. 1.21.
• Hieronym. in pr. Ep. ad Cor. c. 2. v. 10.11.
• 1 Co. 13.7.
• Joh. 14.26.
• Joh. 16.13, 14.
• Rom. 8.26.
• August. Haer. 36. Tom. 6. p. 4. Epiphan. Haer. 57. p. 481.
• Idem. Haer. 62. p. 513.
• Idem. Haer 57. p. 482
• Joh. 15.26
• Joh. 14.26
• Joh. 15.26
• Matth. 3.16.
• Joh. 14.16
• Matt. 28.19.
• Greg Naz Or. 44. p. 711.
• Epiph. in Exp. fidei T. 2. l. 3. p. 1101.