Watts - BX5200 .W3 1813 v.6

374 THE ARIAN INVITED TO ORTHODOX FAITH. the word person, yet do by no means make it necessary : And. there have been some who have rather disliked the word than approved it. St. Austin himself, who uses the term with great freedom, declares, " It is not because he finds.it in scripture, but because the scriptures do not contradict it, and that we use it by a kind of necessity, as labouring under a want of words," libro vii. de trinitate. And as Calvin has cited him, " Institu- tionum, libro i. capite 13." he declares, " It is not so much to express what is the real divine distinction, but that we might not be utterly silent how the Father, Son and Spirit, are three." Since therefore, neither scripture itself applies the term person to the 'Word or Spirit, nor the elder nor later writers of the church, have confined themselves to the use of this term, I, can see no necessity of the confinement of ourselves, or others to it, when we are speaking of the pure distinctions in the divine nature. And when we, are endeavouring to explain them in a rational manner, and to form and adjust our clearest ideas of them, I think we may use the term divine properties, or rather divine powers, for this end : Perhaps this word powers comes nearest to the genuine ideas of things, so far as we can apply human words to divine ideas; and this word powers makes the distinction greater than properties, and I think it is so much the better: But we have several precedentsfor the use of both these terms among ancient writers. And yet after all, since the scripture has represented the Father, the Word, and the Spirit in a personal manner, and exhibited these divine ideas to us asthree distinct personal agënts concerned in the works of creation and salvation ; and since it has been the general custom of the christian churches, for above a thousand years, to apply the word person to the sacred three, I thinkwe may infer, that it may be safely and conveniently used in discoursing on this subject. Perhaps an introduction of any new terms into our common and popular discourses on this doctrine, would give a greater uneasiness and confusion to the minds of christians, than would be easily counterbalan ced by the advantages we might expect from any unusual words, which might be introduced under a pretence of clearer ideas. It is true, that when we are constrained by opposers of the truth, to explain these things in a rational and philosophical manner, we may then distinguish names more accurately : We may then shew how the term person maybe more properly and literally understood, when it is applied to God the Father, or to the complete person of Christ, the Mediator; as the scripture, perhaps, has applied hypostasis and prosopon : But that the same term person may be metaphorical and figurative when applied to

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=