# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/727097563:0019
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/727097563:0019?run=74
# Title: A Discourse In Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity (shelfmarks ZEN Leibn. Marg. 40; Leibn. Marg. 40)
# Folio XIII, page id 727097563:0019
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=727097563&page=19
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/727097563/jpgs/default/00000019.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 34 lines, status machine
# Lines: 34 recognised, mean confidence 0.92
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

The DR F F AC F.
The question is, WWhether those they calt
Nominal Trinicarians, are liable to the
charee of Sabellianim; the ansiver is, That
they cannot, because they assert far more
than three NammeS, 2i2. Thac cach Per-
Pon hath che divine Nature distincly be-
lonsins to him. But say they. Thele animado.
Perlons are bue mere MOdes. NO, sap P. 29r.
the other; We donor lar that the Perlon
15 oniy a Modus, but chat it is the divinc
Nacure, Or Crochead sublisting under luch
a Modus, (o chat the Crodhead is RiIl in-
cludedinir, jornedtoit, and diltinguistr
ed by it. Crant aIl thus, the 2nitarians
reply. vet nhere chere is the lame indiri-
dual Substance, the Perlon can be onlv a
Modus. T0 Wvhich et is ansiver d, That
this individual Substance hath threo di- Fricheism
cinet mars ot subsistins, accordino co
Wrhrich it sublicts distinetly and difterentiy
in cach ot the chrec divine Perlons. So
that here lies the main point, whether il
be Sabellianilm, to assert the same indivi-
dual Substance under three such different
Modes of Subsistence. IF it be, the most
learned and judicious of the Fathers did
not tnou what Sabellianim meant (as I
chareed, P.
306.
have seu d at large in the follovine Dis. Chap. VII.
course) for ther utterly disouned Sabellia-
nim, and vet asserted, That the several
Hypoctales