us by Revelation, and of which, when revealed, we know only the Reality and not the Manner. It is fome Doctrine or Article of Faith, which, upon the Teftimony of GOD, we affent to or believe in the general or at large, though we cannot comprehend all the Particulars. As far indeed as we believe or affent to it, we conceive and underftand it; (for there is no Believing, or giving our Affent to, what we do not underftand;) but then we perceive that there is fomething more which, either for want of Divine Revelation, or elfe through the Narrowness of our present Capacities, we know nothing of, and which therefore to speak properly, we neither believe nor disbelieve. Thus the Doctrine of the Trinity is what we call a Myftery; because, though we believe, upon the Testimony of Revelation, that there is a Trinity of Perfons in the Unity of the Godhead; yet we do not pretend to comprehend or conceive in what the Distinction of Perfons confifts, or in what Manner they are fo united as all to make but one Being, But now, even in this Myftery, we do not profefs to believe any farther than we under ftand. We understand that there is a GoD, and that GOD is one: And we farther understand,

t

SERM.

III.

SERM. derftand, from the Holy Scriptures, that, in
III. this Godhead, there are three Subfiftences,"

which have each of them Perfonal Characters
ascribed to them: And all this, because we
understand it, and because the Scriptures have
clearly revealed it, we affent to, or believe.
But as to the Modus or Manner, either of
their Union, or Distinction; fince neither
Reafon nor Scripture difcovers any thing to
us, we therefore do not profefs to believe
any thing about it.
And this is all that we
mean by a Mystery: Which therefore, even
in our Sense of the Word, does not fignify a
Doctrine, in which we believe what we do
not understand, (as our Adverfaries would
reprefent ;) but it fignifies a Doctrine or an
Article of Religion, which implies fome Par-
ticulars which we do not comprehend, though
all that we affent to, or believe, in it, we do.
It is a Doctrine about which fome Questions
may be asked, which we cannot refolve:
But then those Questions we do not make a-
ny Part of our Faith, which is only concern-
ed about the Questions which we are able to
prove and explain. Nothing farther there-
fore, I prefume, is neceffary to compleat the
Subject of this Difcourfe, than to fhew that
it is no Objection to the believing of any Ar-

ticle of Religion that it implies fomething in SER M.

it which we cannot comprehend: For this will make good what I propofed for my

II. SECOND General Head, viz. to prove that it is no Objection to the believing fuch an Article that it has what we understand by Mysteries in it. And to do this in as clear and as familiar a Manner as I am able, I shall shew,

First, That Men always did, and always muft, and will, believe many Things, which imply fome Particulars beyond their Comprebenfions, or above their Reason.

Secondly, I fhall fhew that nothing that we profefs to believe in any Article of our Religion is contrary to Reafon. From whence,

Thirdly, It will follow that it is no Objection to the Belief of any Article, that it implies fomething that is incomprehenfible, or above our Reafon. And,

First, I am to fhew that Men always did, and always muft, and will, believe many Things which imply fome Particulars beyond their Comprehenfion, or above their Reafon : i. e. There are many Things which Men do, and muft, and will, believe, as to the Reality of their Existence; which yet, as to their VOL. I. Caufe,

H

III.

SER M. Caufe, or Manner, or Mode of Exifting,

III.

they own they can neither declare nor con

For

ceive. An Obfervation fo trite that the com-
moneft Effects of Nature confirm it.
how many Things are there in the World,
the Truth of which we are convinced of, be-
yond the Power of Contradiction; and yet
why they should happen in this or that Man-
ner, the profoundest Philofopher no more can
tell us than a meer Ideot or Fool?
"We

"know not the Nature of any one Thing
"under the Sun, but by gueffing at it from
"the Effects which we fee it produces. Our

Knowledge is nothing but Obfervation. "We see Trees grow and produce their "Like: We find fuch and fuch Virtues in "Herbs and Minerals: But we know not "the Reason of any of these Things; no, "not of a fingle Pile of Grafs, as why it is "of the Colour, Shape or Virtue we see it " is *." r In a Word, were we to believe nothing that exceeds our Reason, we must not believe that we have any Reafon : For we muft deny even that we think, because we know not how we do fo, or by what secret Springs our Thoughts are excited and put in

Leslie against the Socinians, Dial. 1. p. 4. 4to.

to

incon

to Motion. And if there be fo many ceiveable Things in the Works of Nature,. and in the Operations of our own Minds; how much more muft we expect to meet with them, in Things that belong to another World? Should we fuffer, for Inftance, our Thoughts to foar to the Divine Being him felf; how many Truths will our Reason fug geft to us, which yet at last it cannot fully comprehend? We are forced (for Example) by an undeniable Chain of Arguments to ac knowledge a firft Cause that exifted from Eternity, and from which all other Things have received their Being. And yet who is able to comprehend how a Being should be self-existent; how there fhould be any thing which never had a Beginning, that was never produced, nor owed it's Being to any o ther? Again, Who is not loft when he thinks of Eternity, either past, or to come? And yet who will deny either one or the other? Who can name the Time before which there was no Time or Duration; or tell us when Time or Duration fhall be no

The Learned Dr. Clark fets this Argument in an admirable Light: That fomething (faith he) has really existed, &c. p. io. ad are not easy to be answered, p. 11. Sermons at Boyle's Lecture, 3d Edition, p. 10, 11 H 2

more ?

SERM.
III.