It is a curious fact, that the definition given of the trinity in the Shorter Catechism, although taught to children and catechumens, and represented in common with the rest of that Catechism and the Confession of Faith, as a summary of divine truth, does not accurately exhibit the belief of not a few ministers belonging to the Presbyterian church? If the doctrine of the trinity be clearly and expressly taught in scripture, it seems wonderful, that the united wisdom of a large body of ministers has neither enabled them to exhibit it in the language of scripture, nor in language, which they are prepared to defend, or disposed fully to adopt. I have never yet met with a trinitarian divine, who did not admit, that to assert that there are three persons in the Godhead would be incorrect, unless, at the same time, it were perfectly understood, that the word person was not to be taken in its usual and popular sense, but only as denoting a distinction. That is, there are three distinctions in the Godhead; at the same time it is maintained, that to each of these distinctions the personal pronouns, I, thou, and he, may be applied; that is, as I understand the matter, these distinctions are personified.

But is this the great doctrine of the trinity, on which so much stress has been laid by polemics, and which is said to be so clearly taught in scripture? Why then is it so ambiguously taught in an authorized and popular catechism, and in the public standards of churches claiming to be sound in the faith? Why are children and young persons directed to repeat words, which are not calculated to convey a correct impression to their minds of a doctrine said to lie at the foundation of christian truth, and the right apprehension of which is regarded as essential to an acceptance with God? Why so much proscription and denunciation, so many harsh speeches,

and such professions of painful solicitude? Is the be lief in three distinctions, supposed to exist in regard to the Supreme Being, an essential prerequisite to the supreme love of God, and the love of our neighbour as ourselves? Does it furnish a better or surer test of discipleship, or of loving one another agreeably to the spirit of our Lord's new commandment, and the model exhibited by bis illustrious example? Many more reflections offer themselves, but I leave it to every intelligent, serious, and inquiring reader to supply them.

In the mean time, if this doctrine be so exceedingly plain in the Scriptures, it is not a little remarkable, that many of the most learned trinitarians have laboured so hard to find it there, and that many others have given up the search in despair, and acknowledged their favourite doctrine to be supported by no other authority, than that of the church. I will state a few facts relating to this subject, beginning with the Fathers.

Theophilus, the good bishop of Antioch, and the first who used the word trinity to denote the three persons in the Godhead, found this doctrine in the three days, which preceded the creation of the sun and moon. These three days, he observes, "are types of the trinity, of God, his logos, and his wisdom."

It was a device as early as Tertullian to find the trinity in the language employed respecting the creation of man. "Let us make man in our image," implies, it was said, a plurality of persons. These persons, it was inferred, must be three in number, though we are not told why three should be supposed in preference to two, or four, or ten. Austin refined upon this discovery, and ascertained, that notwithstanding there are three persons, they are nevertheless one. Were it not so,

he observes, it would have been, "Let us make man in our images, and not in our image.”* Basil was pleased with Austin's improvement. Glycas, the annalist, was still more fortunate, and went so far as to discover the particular office, which each person of the trinity performed in the creation of man. "Who said," he asks,

"Let us make man? The Father.

Who took the dust

of the ground for that purpose? The Son. And who breathed into him the breath of life. The Holy Spirit." Austin found another proof of the trinity in the account of the creation. This was completed in six days, and six is twice three. Hence, according to Austin's logic, there are three persons in the trinity.

Cyril of Alexandria found a proof of the trinity in the dimensions of Noah's ark, which he sagaciously remarks was three hundred cubits long, and thirty high.t

Novatian supposed it was the Son, and not God the Father, who came down upon the tower of Babel, for as the Almighty fills all space, he cannot be said either to descend or ascend.

According to Austin, the three angels, who appeared to Abraham, were the three persons of the trinity; and the two who went to Sodom, he says, were the Son and Spirit, because they were sent, and the Father is never represented as being sent. This latter was also the opinion of Cyril and Athanasius. Glycas tells us, that it was the trinity, who entered the tent of Abraham, and

* Non diceretur ad imaginem nostrum, sed ad imagines nostras. + Aspice ergo quæso, quemadmodum in trecentis cubitis, quod arcæ longitudinem esse assignavimus perfectio sanctæ trinitatis consecratur. Opera Vol. i. p. 17. He enlarges upon this thought, and shows how the several dimensions of the ark represent the three hypostases [tres hypostases] of the trinity.

cheerfully partook of the things which were provided for them.*

Moses said to the people, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord." In this text, which was intended as an express declaration of the unity of God, Austin discovered the trinity, because the name of the Lord is three times repeated. Audi Israel Deus, Deus tuus, Deus unus est.

Cast

Such are the proofs of the trinity adduced by the Fathers from the Pentateuch. When you come to the Psalms and prophetical books, they are more numerous, and if possible more strange. "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. me not away from thy presence, and take not thy holy spirit from me." Psalms, li. 10, 11. In this text, says Origen, the Father is the principal spirit, the right spirit is the Son, and these two, with the Holy Spirit last mentioned, make the three persons of the trinity.-"A threefold cord," saith the Preacher, "is not quickly broken." Eccl. iv. 12. Paulinus considers this a proof of the trinity."Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts." According to Ambrose, and to other trinitarians down to the famous Jones of Nayland, the word holy repeated three times here denotes the three persons in the trinity.

* These opinions were not suffered to go to rest with the Fathers. After mentioning the change of Abraham's name, Lightfoot writes thus. "Some three months after this, the three persons in the Trinity dine with Abraham, and foretell the birth of Isaac again. The Son and Holy Ghost go down to Sodom; but the first person in the Trinity stayeth with Abraham, and condescendeth to his prayer, as long as he asketh." Lightfoot's Works, 1684, vol. i. p. 19. Jeremy Taylor observes, however, that "It may be the three angels, that came to Abraham, will signify no more than the two that came to Lot, or the single one to Manoah, or St. John," Sermons, vol. iii. p. 243.

Cyprian perceived emblems of the trinity in the three hours of prayer observed by Daniel in his captivity, and in his three friends, who were rescued from the fiery furnace by the hand of God.

Austin has a short argument to prove, that Christ was more than human. No man, says he, was ever equal to Solomon, and yet Christ says of himself, "Behold a greater than Solomon is here."-The text, I and my Father are one, was first used by the Sabellians against the trinitarians. But it was afterwards turned to another purpose, and became at length one of the most favourite arguments for the proper divinity of Christ. Origen interprets it as implying, that the Father and Son are two hypostases, and that they are one only in consent, harmony, and union of will.* Ambrose, in addition to this, discovered, that Christ mentioned his own name first, "lest it should be imagined, that he was inferior to the Father, whereas it could not be supposed, that the Father was inferior to the Son."

The text, My Father is greater than I, Basil says is a proof, that the Father and Son are of the same nature, "because things of a different nature are not so compared."

The Apostle says of God, that of him, and through him, and to him are all things, which Gregory tells us relates to the trinity.

Chrysostom proves Christ to be equal with the Father from the text, we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." Did a deputy," he asks, “ever presume to say, I and my king give orders?" After this, no one can be surprised at the manner in which

* Εν δε τη ομονοια, και τη συμφωνία, και τη των τοτητι το βελήματος.