An end of doctrinal controversies which have lately troubled the churches

§. 5. Some thinking it hard, that for 4000 Years the World should have no Existent Mediator, and that an Existent Faith in the future Mediator, should be more necessary than an Existent Mediator ⟨p. 89⟩and his Work, and thinking withal that it would solve many Textual Difficulties objected by the Arians, and explain the Appearances of Christ to the Patriarchs, have conceived that Christ hath a threefold Nature, viz. The Divine Nature, a created Super-Angelical Nature to which the Divine Nature was united before the Incarnation, and the Humane Nature assumed at the Incarnation; and that so we had an Existent Mediator from the time of the Fall. But whatever conveniences this Opinion may seem to have, I find no satisfactory proof of it in Scripture, nor that the Christian Church did ever hold it. And it is overmuch boldness to take up so great a Doctrine as a third Nature in Christ, which the Church of Christ was never acquainted with. And the Texts that seem to be for it, are capable of the common Exposition.

§. 6. If any think that this was the Judgment of abundance, yea, the most of the Ancient Writers, before the days of Arius, because they have such unhappy expressions of Christ, which the Reader may find truly Collected to his hand by Petavius de Trinitate, and that it is fitter to Expound them as speaking only of Christ's second Nature, than to account them all Arians, or to honour the Arians by making them on their side, I answer, I leave every Man to his own judgment upon perusal of the Fathers words, allowing all Charity that hath sufficient ground: But I cannot perceive, that these Writers talk of any more Natures in Christ than two, and pious ends must be served by no Fictions and Untruths: I think that we must rather gather with Petavius there that the Votes in the Nicene Council tell us, that ⟨p. 90⟩then the greater part of the Church were against Arius, and therefore they were so before, because they held (in so great a point) the Faith which they had received from their Fathers: And that the greater part of Writers, might differ from the greater part of the Church. And withal, these Writers having more than other men to do with the Heathen Philosophers and Orators, who were prejudiced against the Doctrine of the Trinity, did shun their Offence by too much stretching their speeches to that which they thought they could easilier digest, which gave Arius his advantages. The Conclusions either way are harsh and sad; but I leave others better to avoid them.