fi 
 
 >^;U 
 
 '■'%,}, ?•■>;',: 
 
 
PRINCETON, 
 
 ^"o. Case, ~^\^ 
 Barapton lectures 
 
 
DISCOURSES 
 
 O N 
 
 SCRIPTURE MYSTERIES, 
 
 PREACHED AT 
 
 ST. MARY'S, OXFORD, 
 
 BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY, 
 
 IN THE YEAR 17?;; 
 
 AT THE LECTURE 
 
 FOUNDED BY THE LATE 
 
 R E V. J O H N B A M P T O N, M. A. 
 CANON OF SALISBURY; 
 
 WITH 
 
 NOTES 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE AND CRITICAL.. 
 
 ,-^ . — 
 
 BY WILLIAM "HAWKINS, M. A. 
 
 PREBENDARY OF WELLS, VICAR OF WHITCHURCH, DORSET, 
 AND LATE FELLOW OF PEMBROKE-COLLEGE, OXFORD. 
 
 OXFORD: 
 
 PRI,NTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS, 
 » . * 
 
 AND SOLD BY D. PRINCE AND J. COOKE, OXFORD ; 
 
 AND J. F. AND C. RIVINGTON, LONDON. j, 
 
 M DCC LXXXVU, 
 
IMPRIMATUR, 
 
 JOS. CHAPMAN, 
 
 Vice-Can. Ox on. 
 
 J/{g. 6. I "'87. 
 
HIS GRACE '^' '^. 
 
 ^'^^OLoqx 
 
 THE 
 
 
 ARCHBISHOP 
 
 O F 
 
 CANTERBURY. 
 
 MY LORD, 
 
 HAVING had the honour of 
 being appointed preacher of 
 the Bampton LeBures for the current 
 year, by the Heads of Colleges in 
 Oxford, I have the happinefs to intro- 
 duce them to the Public with the 
 additional great advantage of your 
 Grace's protection ; an advantage the 
 more confiderable, as it derives as 
 much from the charader, as the rank 
 of my patron. 
 
 a 2 In 
 
IV 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 la this Situation it will, I prefume, 
 become me to addrefs your Grace ra- 
 ther under the form of preface than 
 in the ftyle of dedication. 
 
 My {lender pretenfions to your fa- 
 vour are grounded in the earneft en- 
 deavour of the following flieets fully 
 and circumftantially to vindicate that 
 faith which, I need not tell your 
 Grace, is not barely attacked, but in- 
 fulted every day. The Charity which 
 is not eajily provoked muft re fen t the 
 freedom, I had almoft faid the audacity 
 which diftinguifhes the infidels of the 
 prefent generation. Thefe Gentlemen 
 affed; to be the party aggrieved; and 
 to confole themfelves at the fame time 
 with a hope, and fometimes a per- 
 fuafion of the fpeedy abolition of con- 
 feffions and fyftems, and, in confe- 
 
 quence 
 
DEDICATION. v 
 
 quence of it, the revival of evangeli- 
 cal dodlrine in its native fimplicity. 
 
 I cannot think opinions openly and 
 arrogantly hoftile to the national ef- 
 tablifhment can be juftified even by 
 their fincerity. But infidelity in ge- 
 neral is without this excufe : it has 
 been repeatedly fhewn to draw its 
 principal refources from the vigilance 
 of caption fnefs, the popularity of 
 profeflion, the artifice of diffimula- 
 tion, the confufion of things not 
 really connected, and the occafional 
 fuppreffion, or adulteration of truth. 
 To thefe I am forry, for our own 
 fakes, to add the inconfiftency be- 
 tween certain controverfial terms, and 
 the imprudence, or unwarinefs of con- 
 ceffion. Such refources as thefe are 
 indeed inexhauftible. Mr. Bamptons 
 wife and pious inftitution^ and every 
 a 3 other 
 
vi DEDICATION. 
 
 other of a fimilar nature, fuppofes as 
 much. We contend with enemies, 
 who, though with unequal forces, 
 will always be able to take the field. 
 However, my Lord, I flatter myfelf 
 I have happily chofen more advan- 
 tageous ground than many of my 
 fellow-foldiers in this warfare ; to 
 whofe names on other accounts I 
 look up with deference and venera- 
 tion. After all, the event muft be 
 left in the hands of Providence. I 
 have only to beg the fav^our of the 
 intelligent reader to perufe thefe dif- 
 courfes and the annexed annotations, 
 (which v/ill be equally neceffary,) with 
 an inclination to be fatisfied ; and in 
 that fpiric of candor and impartiallity 
 with which, I truft, he will find them 
 to have been compofed. I requeft his 
 attention throughout the performance, 
 and reafonable allowances for the in- 
 accuracy 
 
DEDICATION. viL 
 
 accuracy, or inequality that may be 
 difcovered in it. I hope he will be 
 biafled, not by fpecioufnefs of princi- 
 ple, or habit of attachment, but by 
 preponderance of argument. I fub-^ 
 mit it to his judgment, whether I 
 have in any inftance fhewn an undue 
 warmth, or unwarrantable rtfcnt- 
 ment ; and defire him finally to de- 
 termine, as he fhall upon the whole 
 be perfuaded, not of the abilities of 
 the advocate, but the merits of the 
 caufe. Open to conviction myfelf, I 
 fhall always be ready to redify an er- 
 ror, or to renounce an opinion, on 
 competent reprefentation ; but fliall 
 not pay the leafl: regard to any cen- 
 fure or animadverfion, the features of 
 which fhall manifeftly betray it to be 
 the oiFspring of prepofleffion, chagrin, 
 or malevolence. 
 
 a 4 With 
 
VIU 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 With fincereft wifhes and prayers 
 for your Grace's health and happinefs, 
 and for the peace and profperity of 
 that Church over which you fo wor- 
 thily prefide, 
 
 I remain, 
 With all duty and refpedt, 
 
 My Lord, 
 Your much obliged and 
 
 Moft obedient fervant. 
 
 WILLIAM HAWKINS. 
 
( ix ) 
 
 ExtraB from the lajl Will and 7'efta- 
 ment of the late Reverend JOHN 
 BAMPTON, Canon of Saliftury. 
 
 ** I give and bequeath my Lands 
 
 * and Eflates to the Chancellor, Mailers, 
 
 * and Scholars of the Univerlity of Oxford 
 
 * for ever, to have and to hold all and fin- 
 
 * gular the faid Lands or Eftates upon trull, 
 
 * and to the intents and purpofes herein after 
 
 * mentioned j that is to fay, I will and ap- 
 
 * point, that the Vice Chancellor of the 
 ' Univerfity of Oxford for the time being 
 
 * fhall take and receive all the rents, i^w^, 
 ' and profits thereof, and (after all taxes, 
 
 * reparations, and necelTary deductions made) 
 ' that he pay all the remainder to the en- 
 
 * dowment of eight Divinity Ledure Ser- 
 
 * mons, to be eftablifhed for ever in the faid 
 
 * Univerfity, and to be performed in the. 
 ' manner following ; 
 
 *' I dired and appoint, that, upon the firfl 
 " Tuefday in Eafter Term, a Ledurer be 
 ** yearly chofen by the Heads of Colleges 
 ** only, and by no others, in the room ad- 
 ** joining to the Printing-Houfe, between 
 
 b ** the 
 
( X ) 
 
 ** the hours of ten in the morning and two 
 ** in the afternoon, to preach eight Divinity 
 ** Lefture Sermons, the year following, at 
 " St. Mary's in Oxford, between the com- 
 '' mencement of the laft month in Lent 
 <* Term, and the end of the third week in 
 ** Aa Term. 
 
 *' Alfo I dired and appoint, that the eight 
 " Divinity Ledare Sermons (liall be preach- 
 *' ed upon either of the following fubjeds 
 «« — to confirm and eftablifh the Chriftian 
 ** Faith, and to confute all heretics and fchif- 
 ** matics — upon the divine authority of the 
 ** Holy Scriptures — upon the authority of 
 ** the writings of the primitive Fathers, as 
 *' to the faith and pradice of the primitive 
 " Church — upon the Divinity of our Lord 
 ** and Saviour Jefus Chrift — upon the Divi- 
 " nity of the Holy Ghoft — upon the Articles 
 ** of the Chriftian Faith, as comprehended 
 ** in the Apoftles' and Nicene Creeds. 
 
 *' Alfo I dired, that thirty copies of the 
 *' eight Divinity Ledure Sermons fhall be 
 *' always printed, within two months after 
 *' they are preached, and one copy fhall be 
 ** given to the Chancellor of the Univerfity, 
 ** and one copy to the Head of every Col- 
 
 " lege. 
 
( ^i ) 
 
 *' lege, and one copy to the Mayor of the 
 ** City of Oxford, and one copy to be put 
 ** into the Bodleian Library ; and the ex- 
 ** pence of printing them [hall be paid out 
 *' of the revenue of the Lands or Eftates 
 *' given for eftablilhing the Divinity Ledlure 
 " Sermons ; and the Preacher fhall not be 
 ** paid, nor be entitled to the revenue, before 
 ** they are printed. 
 
 ** Alfo I direct and appoint, that no per- 
 ** fon fhall be qualified to preach the Di- 
 ** vinity Ledlure Sermons, unlefs he hath 
 " taken the Degree of Mafter of Arts at 
 " leaft, in one of the two Univerfities of 
 ^* Oxford or Cambridge j and that the fame 
 " perfon (hall never preach the Divinity 
 ** Lecture Sermons twice." 
 
 DISCOURSE 
 

 D I 
 
 ^0^"^ 
 
 0^ 
 
 x'a 
 
 Of 
 
 S E 
 
 i 
 
 John xviil. 38* 
 Pilate faith unto him^ What is I'ruth f 
 
 np HIS queftion, of all by far the moft 
 A important, was put to our blefled Sa- 
 viour by the Koman Governour, perhaps care- 
 leflly, perhaps contemptuoufly, but certainly 
 without the leaft wi{h for information. In 
 much the fame fpirit of fcorn, or with fimi- 
 lar indifference, the fame queftion is every 
 day in the mouths, fometimes of fceptics 
 and fcoffers, and fometimes of men of a more 
 ferious caft, who aifedt to be perfuaded that 
 we cannot, and, it may be, defire not to give 
 them fatisfa6lion. Unhappily, the Chriftian 
 world is divided and fubdivided almoft infi- 
 
 B nitely 
 
2 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 nitely; it is parcelled out into fedaries of 
 a thoufand denominations. The faifl is, 
 though the righ-t of private judgment in mat- 
 ters of religion, which has been exercifed from 
 the beginning, was juftly and necefTarily af- 
 ferted by the kaders and friends of the Re- 
 formation, it mufl be acknowleged, folly, 
 perverfenefs, pride, and enthufiafm, have, by 
 feverally maintaining it, been produdlive of 
 that ftrangc multiplicity of religious fenti- 
 mcnt which we have fo much caufe to la- 
 ment ; of that fchifm, herefy, fcepticifm, 
 and infidelity, which have all along difturbed 
 the Church, but fix a mark of peculiar dif- 
 grace on the laft and prefent century. 
 
 And indeed, when it is confldered, that 
 the Scriptures are on many accounts particu- 
 larly liable to be mifapplied, perverted, or 
 mifconftrued;^^) that fome paflages are to be 
 underftood in a literal, and fome in a figura- 
 tive fenfe; that fome things are exprefifed 
 agreeably to the modes of common fpeech, 
 and fome in pure condefcenfion to the human 
 capacity ; that pafTages are to be compared 
 
 with 
 
DISCOURSE I. 3 
 
 with each other in order to a true underftand- 
 ing of them, and dod:rines to be deduced, 
 not fo much from fingle and feparate texts, as 
 from the manifeft tenor of the Scriptures at 
 larger that not unfrequently one and the 
 fame text (hall be capable of different, and 
 even oppofite conftrudion ; that though 
 moft places in holy writ are of univerfal im- 
 portance, yet fome are of temporary and oc- 
 cafional purport only j that the facred writ- 
 ings, ftridly fpeaking, are the foundation of 
 a rule of faith and manners, fuch as a 
 creed, formulary, or confeffion, rather than 
 the rule itfelf, as will, I truft, in due time 
 more fully appear j and that an affent to 
 the collective body of fcripture, as true, does 
 not imply a knowlege, or belief of all fcrip- 
 tural truths; when all this, to which more, 
 were there occalion, might be added, is fairly 
 confidered, we cannot poffibly be at a lofs to 
 account for that variety of notion, that wild- 
 nefs and abfurdity of conceit, that extrava- 
 gance, or impiety of opinion, which I juft 
 now obferved has more or lefs fo (liamefully 
 diihonoured the Chriftian name in all ages. 
 B 2 Of 
 
4 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 Of this exuberance of folly and wicked- 
 nefs Popery has ever been induftrious to avail 
 itfelf. From the acknowleged liablenefs of 
 the Scriptures to the grofTeft abufe, when in 
 the hands of fuch as are unlearned and unjla^ 
 bky (to ufe the apoflle's words,) the Church 
 of B^ome draws her moft fpecious argument 
 againft the common ufe of them ; and would 
 fain have us infer the necefTity, or the cer- 
 tainty of an infallible authority lodged in the 
 Church for the decifion of controverfies, and 
 afcertainment of a rule of faith, from the 
 confelTed convenience and utility of fuch an 
 authority, {h) But, unfortunately for her pre- 
 tenfions, as much error and abfurdity has re- 
 peatedly been demonftrated to be within her 
 pale as out of it. Wh t is truth f becomes 
 therefore with many a queftion of as much 
 difficulty as importance ; or, rather, of more 
 form than importance j feme encouraging 
 themfelves in fcepticifm from thefe circum- 
 ftances, and others blindly acquiefcing in any 
 mode of religion, or in none at all, or at beft in 
 that which is ufually called natural religion, 
 from a pretence of the utter impoffibility of 
 
 difcover- 
 
DISCOURSE I. 5 
 
 difcovering the true under fuch a complica- 
 tion of perplexity. 
 
 With points of inferior confequcnce I 
 fhall not trouble myfelf ; but to fuch as deny, 
 or call in queftion the capital articles of our 
 religion on the ftrength of the above confide- 
 rations, let me infifl: that nothing of this na- 
 ture ought to fuperfede their endeavours to find 
 the truth, and much kfs to difcourage their 
 obedience to it when found. After inquiry 
 we may in fome refped or other be miftaken, 
 but without it we are inexcufable. In fa^, 
 the very diverfity, or contrariety complained 
 of may be juftly urged in behalf of the faith 
 which is received in the Church. Were the 
 dodlrine of the Trinity, for inflance, impugned 
 from one quarter only, and by confiftent and 
 uniform oppofition, infidelity would be a 
 much more formidable thing than it is; but 
 you may as well look for one language at Ba- 
 bel as for a catholic fyftem of unbelief, if I 
 may be indulged with the expreffion. To 
 enumerate all the herefies which have at 
 different times torn and difmembered the 
 
 B 3 Church 
 
6 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 Church of Chrift, is in a manner to confute 
 them j and thefe, their common animofity 
 againfi: her excepted, are at perpetual enmity 
 among themfelves. Nay, what is yet more 
 extraordinary, we fliall find infidelity itfelf 
 abounding in myfteries, even while it repro- 
 bates them almoft with the confidence of a 
 faith which could remove mountains ! If the 
 facred theory we are to maintain be in many 
 refpe(5ls incomprehenfible, the fubftitutions 
 of human wifdom will in due time be fhewn 
 to be at leafl equally To; and to require the 
 fame degree of affent without any thing like 
 the fame foundation. 
 
 What is truthifay others among us, what Is 
 it but a fyflem of dodrines officially taught, 
 and formally tranfmitted from generation to 
 generation ? 
 
 But if doctrines are true, why not officially 
 taught, and carefully tranfmitted ? Is profef- 
 fion ridiculous, or authority contemptible, as 
 fuch ? Indeed, the queftion is not, what 
 faith the Church ? — but — what faith the 
 
 Serif' 
 
DISCOURSE L 7 
 
 Scripture? Now by Scripture, and the ear- 
 lieft antiquity, our furell; guide, and pureft 
 precedent, we are not only willing, but wifh- 
 ful to be tried. It is true the bulk of Chrif- 
 tians are not equal to this trial j in a certain 
 fenfe, they care for none of thefe things y they 
 take matters upon trull: j they are not able to 
 give an anfiver to every man that afketh a rea- 
 fon of the faith that is in thenty except that 
 they were born and bred in it, and fuppofe it 
 to be unqueftionable. It is with refped: to 
 this implicitnefs of alTent, this tamenefs of 
 acquiefcence, as it is opprobrioully called, that 
 the dodtrine of the Holy Trinity has no lefs 
 impioufly than ludicroufly been expofed to 
 contempt under the defcription of the * Tr/- 
 nity of the Mob! But this is very unfair re- 
 prefentation. Surely no argument can be 
 drawn from the incapacity, or the credulity 
 of the many, to the difadvantage of a dodtrine 
 that, with refped: to the grounds on which 
 we defend it, folicits, demands, defies the 
 penetration of enquiry, and the inquifitive- 
 
 * See p. 16, 36, 37. in Preface to Stillingfleei*s Dircourfe in 
 vindication of tlie doftrine of the Trinity, 
 
 B 4 nefs 
 
8 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 nefs of criticifm. The fpi ritual ftate of the 
 common people all over the world falls nearly 
 under the fame predicament ; but at the 
 fame time a proportionable degree of fa- 
 tisfadlion will always be derived to every man 
 from every degree of rational afTurance that 
 he is in the right way ; or belongs to a com- 
 munion wherein the truth is held in purity 
 approaching nearefl to the ftandard of primi- 
 tive Chriflianity. 
 
 fFhat is truths — Say others. We are no 
 Grangers to the doctrines publicly eftablifh- 
 ed ', to the faith aflerted in your Articles, and 
 exprefled in your Creeds j but to thefe Sub^ 
 Jcription is much more univerfal than agree- 
 ment. We can produce you names even 
 among yourfelves of perfons not a whit behind 
 the very chiefeji Divines in point of rank, 
 probity, or underftanding, who neverthelefs 
 hold that God is to be worjhipped after a way 
 which you call herefy j who preach another 
 Go/pel than that which ye have received from 
 your fathers, conjlantly affirming, or per- 
 petually infinuating, that^^ do err, not know- 
 ing the Scriptures. 
 
 Too 
 
DISCOURSE I. 9 
 
 Too true indeed it is that the principal 
 controverted points fubfifting among thofe 
 ** who profefs and call themfelves Chriftians" 
 are of the moll: ferious nature. If the tenets 
 of our gainfayers and adverfaries of many ap- 
 pellations are right and juft, the dodlrines of 
 the Trinity, and of the refurredtion of the 
 body, (which will be the objedts of the 
 enfuing difquifitions,) are herefies of the 
 moft abominable, or ridiculous tendency. 
 However, thefe are circumftances which 
 fhould not check, but ftimulate the fpirit of 
 Lnveftigation. It will be of infinite moment 
 to inquire whether we or they are the mif- 
 taken party, and on which fide error really 
 lies 'j whether our dodtrines or ti)eirs have 
 the ftrongefi: foundation in fcripture and an- 
 tiquity ^ are beft fupported by prefumptive ar- 
 gument, and corroborative evidence ; or have 
 leaft recourfe to artifice, and the pitifulnefs 
 of fubterfuge and evafion. We do not wi(h 
 to have this matter determined either vul- 
 garly by a majority of voices, or invidioully 
 by the reputation of names. 
 
 But 
 
10 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 But again, fay others, What is truth f— 
 What good purpofe is anfwered, or what ad- 
 vantage gained by this extraordinary zeal for 
 theory and eftablifhment ? What doth it but 
 gender JlrifeSi and feed the flame of conten- 
 tion ? The praftica] dodlrines of the gofpel 
 are fo forcibly, yet fo familiarly inculcated, 
 as not to be liable to mifinterpretation. Con- 
 cerning the faith tboufands have erred, but, 
 as one of' our own poets hath faid, 
 
 " His can't be wrong, whofe life is in the right." 
 
 It is well for us there is nothing argumen- 
 tative in the jingle of a couplet. I confefs 
 myfelf to be one of thofe who are hurt by 
 every effort that has a plain afpedt towards 
 refolving all religion into morality.-^- 1 con- 
 fider every attempt of this kind as an indi- 
 red: attack upon the fundamentals of Chrif- 
 tianity. According to the idea of thefe rea- 
 foners, the charader of the MeJ/iah, and of 
 the Son of Gody will dwindle into that of a 
 mere Legiflator, or moral philofopher, who 
 teaches us to live fob erly, right eoujly, and godly 
 in this prefent world.^ This text, and texts 
 
 t Tit. ii. 12. 
 
 con- 
 
DISCOURSE I. II 
 
 congenerous with this, may plaufibly be 
 urged in exaltation of good works to the ex- 
 clufion of faith : but let them be contrafled 
 with the following, he that believeth, and is 
 baptiz'd Jhall be favedr,^ he that believe thon 
 the Son hath everlajling life^ -^ &c. 6cc ; and 
 where is boafiing on the part of moral honefty, 
 or evangelical righteoufnefs ? As fpecioufly, 
 or as juftly as men may harangue in demon- 
 ftration of the excellence of piety and virtue; 
 or as loudly, or as reafonably as they may 
 exclaim againft the violence, and much more 
 the virulence,which has adluated the fpirit of 
 controverfy in too many inftances -, I pre- 
 fume, no intelligent perfon, if he is impar- 
 tial, will deny, that the faith which St. "Jude 
 tells us was once delivered to the Saints, what- 
 ever we are precifely to underftand by it, is 
 fomething entirely diftindl from mere mora- 
 lity ; that it ought earnejily to be contended 
 for, agre ably to the fame Apoftle's exhorta- 
 tion ; that it is very pollible to contend with 
 meeknefs ; that errors, and fchifms, and here- 
 fies are reprefented in fcripture as things more 
 or lefs linful, dangerous, and damnable \ and 
 
 * Mark xvi. i6. f John, vi. 47. 
 
 that 
 
12 DISCOURSE L 
 
 that confequently it is of the utmoft impor- 
 tance to our Spiritual interefls to be right in 
 principle as well as in pradlice. The petu- 
 lancy, the pride, and the malevolence of bi- 
 gots, and of dijputers of this world, as the 
 Apoftle calls them, will no doubt be brought 
 into judgment no lefs than the grofiefl immora- 
 lities ', but this will not by any means fuper- 
 fede, or retard an honeft and charitable at- 
 tempt to enquire into and afcertain the lead- 
 ing dodiines of our common Chriftianity. 
 
 Complaints sgainfl the damnatory claufes 
 of the Athanajian Creed, as it is commonly 
 called, reverberate from more quarters than 
 one. People do not feem to be fufficiently 
 aware that a right faith and a good life are 
 required by this form of confeffion under the 
 fame penalty. ** Which faith except a man 
 ** keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he 
 ** fhall perifh everlaftingly. They that have 
 *« done good fliall go into life everlafting, and 
 «* they that have done evil into everlafting fire. 
 ** This is the catholic faith, which except a 
 <* man believe faithfully he cannot be faved." 
 
 It 
 
DISCOURSE I. 13 
 
 It is plain thefe claufes are to be confidered 
 as (imply declarative on fcriptural grounds of 
 the necefTity both of faith and of good works 
 to falvation ; and at the fame time as leaving 
 all men to that infinite mercy, and thofe inef- 
 timable merits, which are fully adequate to 
 the pardon and atonement of fins, failings, 
 ignorances, and errors of integrity, [c) Which 
 few confiderations will, I apprehend, fairly 
 deliver the Creed before us from the reproach 
 of uncharitablenefs. With regard to the fe- 
 veral articles of which it confifts, I truft, they 
 will be found, in the courfe of thefe difquiii- 
 tions, to have foundation in a fully competent 
 authority j and in the mean time 1 fliall 
 endeavour to remove one general prejudice 
 againft them, and to create rather a prepof- 
 feffion in their favour, by evincing, that their 
 acknowleged myfterioufnefs and incompre- 
 henfibility does by no means unqualify them 
 for our affent. 
 
 ** Man is as fuch a rational creature;" and 
 as a rational creature he is a believing one 
 too. We can no more conceive him to be 
 
 w^ithout 
 
14 DISCOURSE L 
 
 without belief, than without fenfe, thought^ 
 or reflection. The Atheifl who^^^j- in his hearty 
 as well as with his lips, there is no God, believes 
 theie is none. He protefts againft the fup- 
 pofed folly, or extravagance of the fundamen- 
 tal article of all religion j and on the ftrength 
 of falfe conclufions, refolves every thing into 
 a concourfe of atoms fortuitoufly uniting j or 
 into the operation of an unintelligent prin- 
 ciple which we call nature -, or, in other 
 words, into an everlafting fuccelTion of caufes 
 and efFed:s. It is poffible for a man to deny 
 his own exiflence, or that there is any fuch 
 thing as motion. We have heard of inftances 
 of this fort i though properly they are in- 
 ftances, not of falfe perfualion, but of in- 
 fanity. {d) Still man is a rational creature, 
 whether he reafons well or ill ; and whether, 
 in confequence of fuch reafoning, his faith 
 be well or ill grounded. It is certain we 
 know little or nothing by intuition. The 
 mind yields aflent to many myfterious truths 
 by forming a very fmall chain of dedudions ^ 
 fuch as the immenfity of fpace, the infinite 
 progreffion of number, and eternity, as well a 
 
 parte 
 
DISCOURSE I. 15 
 
 farte ante as apartepoji, ** Space and duration, 
 ' ** fays an ingenious author, are myflerious 
 " abyfTesin which our thoughts are confound- 
 *' ed with demonftrable propolitlons, to all 
 ** fenfe and reafon, flatly contradidory to one 
 ** another. Any two points of time, though ne- 
 ** verfodiftant, are eachof themexadllyin the 
 *• middle of eternity. The remoteft points of 
 ** fpace that can be imagined are, each of them, 
 ** precifely in the centre of infinite fpace." ^^ 
 In fad:, we have no flronger, or more ade- 
 quate conception of immenfity than of om- 
 niprefence; we have no clearer idea of the 
 exiftence of Something from all eternity 
 than we have of eternal generation. Faith, 
 it is true, ftridly fpeaking, has reference to 
 religion only j-f- but, I hope, a truth or a myf- 
 tery is not inadmiflible purely on account of 
 its refpedting pradice, or implying obliga- 
 tion. This will readily be granted even by 
 infidels who deny the truths of Revelation ; 
 and much more by fuch Chriftians as have 
 
 * See Dei/m Ren^ealed. Vol. 2. p. 145. 
 t See Note at p. 3 of Honues^s Di/ccurJ'e on the abufe of the 
 lalent of Difputaiion in Religion. &c.. 
 
 called 
 
i6 DISCOURSE L 
 
 called into debate particular points of that 
 Revelation, to which in general they profefs 
 to fubfcribe. It is well worth remarking 
 that Deiils and Heretics never fail to at- 
 tack the profefTed atheift with fuch reafon- 
 ings, as, if purfued through their juft con- 
 fequences, may fairly and fuccefsfully be en- 
 forced upon themfelves. For if he affeds to 
 decry the fundamental principle of all reli- 
 gion, the Being of a God, on account of the 
 pretended inconceivablenefs of it, will not 
 they obferve, in order to confute him, that, 
 nnlefs a more complete, a more uniform, and 
 intelligible fyftem could be built on the ruins 
 of this great article, fuch his exception can 
 have no weight ? And this is the very rea- 
 foning we urge againft the principles both of 
 deifts and heretics. With the profefled atheift 
 I fhall no farther concern myfclf ^ but de- 
 fire to obferve, that deifts and heretics of all 
 denominations are agreed with us in one ge- 
 neral point, the acknowlegement of the ex- 
 iftence of God, and confequently the incom- 
 prehenfiblenefs of the Divine nature, attri- 
 butes, and operations. The primary notion 
 
 which 
 
DISCOURSE I. 17 
 
 which the human mind frames of God is 
 this general and complex, yet negative idea 
 of incomprehenfiblenefs. There is a certain 
 preeminence, if I may fo call it, in the Di- 
 vine eflence, &c. which utterly precludes in- 
 veftigation. But if fo, all myileries, whether 
 natural or religious, whether relative, e.g. to 
 the extenfion of fpace, &c. or to the nature 
 of the Deity ; all thefe, if confidered purely 
 as myfleries, will ftand upon a level in point 
 of credibility. And let a revelation be fup- 
 pofed, all adventitious truths introduced there- 
 by will be fixed upon the fame foot ; becaufe 
 faith cannot have a ftronger foundation in hu- 
 man reafon than in divine authority. This is 
 granted without difficulty ; but then as the 
 deift denies the authenticity of thofe writings 
 which we affirm to contain fuch revelation, 
 fo the heretic difputes the fenfe and fcope of 
 them. The queftion therefore is, whether 
 the opinion of the one, and the unbelief of 
 the other, is refpedively the refult of judg- 
 ment, or of paffion ; of convi(5tion, or of 
 pride ; of impartial enquiry, or of unwilling- 
 nefs to fubmit the underftanding of man to 
 
 C the 
 
i8 DISCOURSEI. 
 
 the wifdom of God? For, I repeat it, nei- 
 ther the one nor the other can, conliftently 
 with his own principles and acknowledg- 
 ments, controvert the received fenfe, or deny 
 the authority of thofe writings which the 
 Church holds to be the Word of God, barely 
 on account of myfterious truths contained in 
 them. If the Divine Effence be neceflarily 
 incomprehenfible, no Revelation can poffibly 
 make it lefs fo; fo far from it, that the very 
 idea of a Divine Revelation, w^ith refped: to 
 that elTence, implies a Revelation of myfle- 
 ries ; /. e. of truths undifcoverable, and in- 
 conceivable by our natural powers ; and ac- 
 cordingly, the credit of Revelation is rather 
 confirmed than weakened by the number and 
 importance of fuch truths. For it is but 
 natural to expedl a more ample difplay of 
 wonders, and larger difcoveries of fublime 
 and facred points of faith in this Revelation; 
 and furely God is not the lefs to be believed, 
 the more he communicates to us of his na- 
 ture, properties, and difpenfations. As far 
 as thefe remarks affed Revelation in gene- 
 ral, heretics in general will admit the juft- 
 
 nefs 
 
DISCOURSE I. 19 
 
 nefs of them j though at the very inftant 
 that they allow the writings in queftion to be 
 the fole rule of faith, they endeavour, as much 
 as may be, to reduce that rule to the meafure 
 of their own judgments and apprehenfions. 
 I am however already juftified in afferting, 
 that as much as fome people are averfe to be- 
 lieving what they do not underftand, they 
 cannot avoid believing what they do not un- 
 derftand j and that therefore, on proper au- 
 thority, it is full as reafonable to believe an 
 hundred myfleries as one. (e) And here taking 
 my leave of the deift, I would dcfire the he- 
 retic by what appellation foever diftinguiflied, 
 to recoiled:, that Revelation left human na- 
 ture as it found it ; I mean with refped: to 
 our intellectual faculties j that, Jrom the be- 
 ginning of the creation to this very hour, man 
 is to be confidered as a reafonable creature, 
 as a free-agent, as fometimes believing upon 
 competent evidence, fometimes governed by 
 paffions, and fometimes influenced by pre- 
 poffeffion. A truth which accounts in a mo- 
 ment for the multitude of perfuafions which 
 have engaged the fpeculative world. To ex- 
 C 2 pedL 
 
20 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 pedl, or require that God fhould manifeft hlm- 
 felf and his proceedings, &c. to every man 
 fully and perfonally, is to deftroy every no- 
 tion not only of faith, but of obedience 
 likewife ; and to wifh to invert the elTential 
 frame and conftitution of things. Difficul- 
 ties, unfurmountable difficulties of many 
 kinds occur to our contemplations on that 
 frame and conftitution; difficulties, on v\^hich 
 the light of Revelation darts not a fingle 
 beam. If we indulge the excurfive faculty 
 of imagination beyond the bounds which 
 reafon and fcripture have fet us, we fhall 
 find ourfelves inextricably entangled in per- 
 plexity, and fometimes in impiety too. Who 
 fliall difcover the confiftency between Divine 
 prefcience and human free-will ? Yet that 
 man ads freely, and that God foreknows 
 all events, and decrees accordingly, are equal- 
 ly truths not to be (haken by any feeming 
 irreconcileablenefs or contrariety whatfoever. 
 So again : that the moft perfed freedom of 
 agency muft be afcribed to God, cannot pof- 
 fibly be controverted ; and yet does he not 
 necejfarily foreknow his own acflions ? Does 
 
 he 
 
DISCOURSE I. 21 
 
 not neceffarily act agreeably to the eternal rules 
 of juftice, wifdom, and holinefs ? That God 
 is in no fenfe the author of evil, either natu- 
 ral or moral, every reafonable man, and much 
 more every Chriflian will maintain ; yet is it 
 not certain, that had this world never been 
 made, neither ^/z nor death could have entered 
 into it ? Human wildom has fatigued itfelf to 
 no purpofe in the ventilation of thefe fub- 
 jed:s. (y ) Many real truths, but at prefent 
 feeming paradoxes, will doubtlefs be capable 
 of future explication ; and fpiritual things in 
 general iliould rather be received with the 
 humility of reverence, than encountered with 
 the arrogance of difcuflion. There will be 
 no end to doubtful difputations while men's 
 fentiments are modified by a partial attach- 
 ment to a favourite principle; and while 
 truths, apparently oppoiite and contradidto- 
 ^, are feparately contended for, which ought 
 both to be admitttedj as ultimately they will 
 be reconciled. 
 
 What has been here advanced concerning 
 
 faith, or myfteries in general, will, I truft, 
 
 C 3 fecurc 
 
22 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 fecure at leaft a fair and earned: attention to 
 what I (liall have to offer in defence of the 
 myfleries of the Gofpel. If thefe myfteries 
 (hould be found to be real objedts of faith, 
 it will be neither right, nor fafe, to think, or 
 to fpeak of them indifferently, unhandfomely, 
 or contemptuoufly. 
 
 That the dodtrines of the Church of En-- 
 glandi the dodlrine of one God in Trinity, 
 and Trinity in Unity, and that of the Refur- 
 redtion of the Body, are as^econcileable to 
 our ideas as the confiftency of free-will with 
 neceffity, or of the Divine perfedlions with 
 the exiftence of evil, I fhould fuppofe, no 
 man can deny j and therefore the great quef- 
 tion is, whether thofe dodtrines be undeniably 
 in thofe Scriptures which all with whom I am 
 concerned acknowledge to be the rule of faith, 
 
 'i 
 
 That, with refpedl to theTrinity,the dodlrine 
 of the Church has been fo long, fo frequently, 
 fo copioufly agitated with much lefs fuccefs, 
 on our part, than might have been expedled 
 from fome of the beft Soldiers of J ejus Chriji, 
 
 the 
 
DISCOURSE I. 23 
 
 the weapons of whofe warfare have been migh" 
 ty in this fpiritual field; this, I muft confefs, 
 is a circumftance enough difcouraging j but 
 however, not without its counterbalance in 
 certain conliderations. T^he race is not always 
 to the Jwift, nor the battle to the Jlrong, 
 Matters are capable of being fet in new 
 lights ; nor will any exertion be defperate 
 which has for its objedt the honour of God, 
 and the peace of his Church. Men are 
 wedded to their errors as much as to their 
 vices ', but as we are not to be remifs, or 
 hopelefs in our labours for the reformation of 
 finners, though the whole world fliould lie in 
 wickednefs ; fo neither fhould we be impeded 
 or difheartened in our attempts for the con- 
 verfion of infidels and heretics, by that pride, 
 that prejudice, however contraded, that hard- 
 nefs, or tha.t Jlowne/s of heart, which indifpofes 
 them for the reception of truth. — After all, 
 inquiries of this nature are of very confide- 
 rable ufe and importance ; they cannot fail at 
 leafl to ftablijld, ftrengthen, and fettle our- 
 felvesj to root and ground us in i\\2it faith 
 which we fhall find to be built upon the moft 
 immoveable foundations. 
 
 C 4 That 
 
24 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 That aflertors and vindicators of this faith, 
 that champions for the Church militant, 
 might never be wanting in this place, the 
 zeal and the piety, the wifdom, and the mu- 
 nificence of our founder hath nobly pro- 
 vided. The prefent inftitution is happily 
 diftinguifhed by its location ; and, in fome de- 
 gree to anfwer and accomplifh it's end, I fhall 
 proceed with as much confidence and fatif- 
 fadion as may reafonably be fuppofed to 
 arife from a proper fenfe of obligation, a 
 full perfuafion of the truth of the great 
 dodtrines in queftion, and particularly of the 
 merits of the 'Trinitarian caufe. 
 
 DIS- 
 
DISCOURSE IL 
 
 John v. 39, 
 Search the Scriptures, 
 
 "^ O the Scriptures of the Old Teftament 
 our bleffed Saviour referred the yews 
 for fatisfadtion with refped: to his claims tQ 
 the charader in which he appeared among 
 them; and to the Scriptures of the New 
 Teftament, together with the other, I am to 
 refer for proofs of thofe great but myfterious 
 dodrines which I have undertaken to defend: 
 the dodlrines contained in the Liturgy, and 
 in the Articles of the Church of England^ 
 
 Without laying before you at prefent all, 
 or the principal texts by which the dodrine 
 
 of 
 
26 DISCOURSE IL 
 
 of the Trinity is fupported, or in which the 
 abfolute divinity both of the Son and of 
 the Holy Ghoil: is explicitly aiferted, or 
 neceffarily implied, we may previouily re- 
 mark that, fuppofing them to be authen- 
 tic, unequivocal, and intelligible, the in- 
 fidel is in fadt precluded from taking advan- 
 tage of thofe palTages which are declarative 
 either of the acknowleged humanity of Je- 
 fus Chrifl", or of the gifts and operations 
 of the bleffed Spirit: that humanity, and 
 thofe operations being things manifeflly dif- 
 tin<5l from the Divine effence, and real per- 
 fonality. What we fhall have to do therefore 
 will be to enquire, in due time and place, 
 whether the exceptions which have been 
 made againfl the texts with which the catho- 
 lic dodrine is fortified, are grounded in prin- 
 ciples of common candour and common 
 fenfe; or, in other words, whether the in- 
 terpretations of anti^trinitarians are critically 
 juft, and agreable to the rules which are ge- 
 nerally allowed to govern interpretation. In 
 the mean time, it will be well worth while 
 to examine, whether the dodrine before us 
 
 is 
 
DISCOURSE II. 27 
 
 is not proveable by evidence which, though 
 indired; and collateral, is irrefiflible. There 
 is hardly any fuch thing as framing a fen- 
 tence, or a propolition that cannot be preva- 
 ricated with ; but the tenor of a context, 
 and the weight of circumftances will not 
 eafily admit of fophiftication. 
 
 According to the Athanalian Creed, as it 
 is called, " the Catholic Faith is this; that 
 ** we worfhip one God in Trinity, and Tri- 
 *« nity in Unity; and that the Godhead of 
 ** the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy 
 " Ghoft is all one : the Glory equal, the 
 " Majefty co-eternal." But what faith the 
 Scripture ? Saith it not, in effedt, the fame 
 afo ? That the Father is the firll Perfon 
 in the Trinity, merely in order of nomina- 
 tion; the Son, the fecond; and the Holy 
 Ghoft, the third; is fufficiently demonftra- 
 ble from many confiderations. In the firft 
 place, though the three divine Perfons are 
 ufually mentioned in a manner which at 
 6rft fight feems to import an order of a dif- 
 ferent kind, yet this order is upon fome oc- 
 
 cafions 
 
28 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 cafions inverted ; e, g. in St. Faul\ often 
 quoted benedidlion to the Corinthians ; T^he 
 grace of our Lord J ejus Chrijiy and the love of 
 Gody and the commuiiion of the Holy Ghojl be 
 with you : and in the following parage of 
 the fame Apolllej there are diverjities of 
 gifts, but the fame Spirit j and there are diffe- 
 rences of adminijlrationst but the fame Lord ; 
 and there are diverfties of operations, but it is 
 the fame God which worketh all in all,^ And, in 
 other places, the fame inverfion is obfervable 
 with regard to the firft and fecond perfons; 
 Te knowy fays the Apoftle, that no whoremon- 
 ger, nor unclean pen on y 6cc. hath any inheri- 
 tance in the kingdom of Chrijl and of God.-jf 
 Now our Lord Jefus Chriji himself, fays 
 the fame Apoftle, and God, even our Father, 
 which hath loved us, comfort your hearts y &c. 
 No man, fays our Lord, knoweth the Son but 
 the Father, neither knoweth any man the Fa- 
 ther fave the Sony and he to whom the Son will 
 reveal him. % To this we may add the intro- 
 dudion of St. Paul's epiftle to the Galatians -, 
 Paul, an Apoflle, not of men, neither by man, 
 
 * 1 Cor. xii. 4. f Ephef. v. 5. % Matt. xi. 27. 
 
 but 
 
DISCOURSE II. 29 
 
 but by j'efus Chriji, and God the Father, who 
 hath raifed him from the dead, &c. From 
 thefe inflances we may at lead: draw this 
 inference, that the general priority of order 
 above mentioned imports no diihndion, or 
 preeminence of effence. 
 
 The root, ground, or fountain of eflence 
 may be acknowledged to be in the Father, 
 without the leaft prejudice to the Trinitarian 
 dod:rine, which fuppofes an eternal com- 
 munication to the Son and to the Holy Ghoft. 
 The terms root -Sind. fountain, &c. are cuflom- 
 ary indeed, bat by no means ftriftly proper, 
 or precifely defcriptive. They are familiar, 
 not to our ideas, but to our ears. When we 
 fpeak of, or contemplate the Divine nature, 
 abfolutely, and without reference to particu- 
 lar difpenfations, God the Father is generally 
 the firft in our conception, as far as he can 
 be the object of conception, but not to the 
 exclufion of the Divine nature either of the 
 Son or Holy Ghoft, In thefe difpenfations, 
 in the heavenly ceconomy, v/e have a mani- 
 feft and obvious reafon for addreffing our 
 
 prayers 
 
30 DISCOURSE IL 
 
 prayers and petitions, public and private, 
 for the mofl part, to the firil Perfon of the 
 Holy Trinity. In fhort, the terms Father 
 and Son, under which it has pleafed infinite 
 wifdom, by way of analogy, to reprefent this 
 myflerious relation to our minds 3 thefe terms 
 imply nothing more than nominal preemi- 
 nence and fubordination : if the Anti-trinita- 
 rian fhould infifl that they do imply more, 
 and aik what we mean by eternal generation, 
 or proceffion, we will anfwer him the mo- 
 ment we are told what he means bv eternal 
 elTence itfelf. (o-) 
 
 Again. The Father is commonly repre- 
 fented to us under the character of the ma- 
 ker, the governor, preferver, and judge of 
 the world ; the Son under that of our re- 
 deemer, advocate, and faviour j the Holy 
 Ghoft under that of our guide, comforter, 
 and fandiifier ; and yet thefe characfters, we 
 fhall fee, with the names, properties, and at- 
 tributes of the Deity, are frequently recipro- 
 cated. Thus, in the following places among 
 others, the office of Redeemer is afcribed in 
 
 exprefs 
 
DISCOURSE II. 31 
 
 expefs terms to the firft perfon ; or, if you 
 pleafe, to God abfolutely confidered. God 
 will redeem my foul from the power cf the 
 grave. I will raitfom them from the power of 
 the grave ; / will redeem them from death,^ 
 Myfoulfiall rejoice which thou haji redeemed.-^ 
 So likewife in numberlefs, paffages the Fa- 
 ther is ftyled Saviour. To inftance only a 
 few. T'here is no God elfe befide me, a jufl God, 
 and a Saviour. J Fauli an apnfiie, &c. by the 
 commandment of God our Saviour, § &c. We 
 truji in the living God, who is the Saviour of 
 all men. To the only wife God our Saviour be 
 glory and majefy now and ever\. And 
 again j the work of fan(5lification is indif- 
 criminately faid to be the work of Father, 
 Son, and Holy Ghoft. Thus our bodies are 
 fometimes called the temple of God, and 
 fometimes of the Holy Ghofi. The Apoftle 
 declares, that it is God which worketh in 
 us to will and to do of his good pleafure. 
 The fame Apoftle prays, that the very God 
 of peace may fanBify the T^hejfalonians ; and 
 
 * Hofea xlii. 14. f Pfalm Ixxi. 23. X Ifa. xlv. zl. 
 § I Tim. i. I. II Jude v. 25. 
 
 make 
 
32 DISCOURSE IL 
 
 make his Hebrew converts perfeSi in every 
 good work to do his will, working in them that 
 which is well- pie afmg in his fight ; and, not to 
 multiply examples, St. 'Jude addrefTes his ge- 
 neral Epiftle to thofe that are JanBiJied by God 
 the Father, and preferved in yefus Chriji, To 
 which we may add, that the Father hath 
 fometimes other titles and charaders given 
 him which belong more peculiarly to the 
 Holy Spirit, and is called the God of confola- 
 tion, and the God of all comfort ; as, accord- 
 ing to one Apoftle, all fcripture is given by 
 infpiration of God ; while we are alTured by 
 another, that holy men of God /pake as they 
 were moved by the Holy Ghoji,* 
 
 Again. We find all the great properties and 
 charaders of the firfl Perfon frequently at- 
 tributed to the fecond. In a paflage in Ifaiab 
 he is even called the {h) everlafting Father. -^ 
 And (to lay no ftrefs upon prophetic phrafeo- 
 logy) is not the firft perfon the fupreme God, 
 a felf-exiftent, independent Being, the crea- 
 tor, the governor, and preferver of the world I 
 
 * zTim.iii. i6. aPet. i. 21. 
 
 ■(■ The Father of the everlafting age. Bp. Lo^-Mth, 
 
 So 
 
DISCOURSE IL 33 
 
 So is "Jefus Chriji. For before Abraham was, 
 fays he, I am 'y% and he that came from heaven 
 is above all ; he fillet h all in all -, he is the head\ 
 and by him were all things created that are in 
 heaven y and that are in earth, vifible and invifible ; 
 &c. All things were created by him, and for him; 
 and he is before all things, andupholdeth all things 
 by the word of his power, and by him all things 
 confifi.-^ Of fome of thefe and the following 
 texts at prefent we fliall take the fenfe to be 
 granted. Is God the Father a being eternal 
 and unchangeable ? So is God the Son. For 
 he hath neither beginning of days nor end of life. 
 He is Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the 
 end, the firfi and the lafi, which is, and which 
 was, and which is to come -, the Almighty ; J 
 ye/us Chrifi, the fame yeflerday, to day, and 
 for ever. Is omnifcience an attribute of the 
 true God ? So is it likewife of him whom 
 htfent into the world . For he knew all things ; 
 he knew what was in man ; he knoweth the 
 hearts of all men ; § he it is who fearcheth the 
 reins and heart. Can any power lefs than in*- 
 
 * John viii. 58. f ColofT. i. 16. 
 
 t Rev. i. 8. § Afts i. 24. 
 
 D finite 
 
34 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 finite raife the dead ? And is it not the pre- 
 rogative of the Supreme God to judge the 
 world ? Yet to do both is the work of "Jefus 
 Chrijl, For he is the refurreclion and the life ;* 
 and as the Father raifeth up the dead, and 
 quickeneth them, even Jo the Son quickeneth 
 whom he will ; and whofo eateth his JleJJj hath 
 eternal life, and he will raife him up at the lafi 
 day.'\ In confequence of fuch refurrecftion we 
 muji all appear before his judgment feat .% And 
 once more; is not the true God invifible and 
 incomprehenfible ? So is Jefiis Chrif, For, 
 agreably to a text before cited, jio man knoweth 
 the Son but the Father. Again. The charad:er 
 and office of the Third Perfon are explicitly 
 attributed to fefus Chrif. The Apoftle's 
 wifh, or benedidiion, which we have already 
 had occafion to refer to, may be produced as 
 one inflance of this. Now our Lord fefus 
 Chrif hifnfelf, and God, even our Father, com- 
 fort your hearts, and efiablifi you in every good 
 word and work. For without Chrif we can do 
 nothing ; and he of God is tnade unto us wifdom, 
 and right eoufnefs, an dfan^ if cation, and redemp- 
 
 * John xl. V. 25. f Ibid. vi. 54. % 2 Cor. v. lo. 
 
 tion ; 
 
DISCOURSE II. 35 
 
 tton j* and he gave hhnfelf for the Church, 
 that he might fanSlify and cleanfe it i and the 
 Apoftle could do all things through Chrijl which 
 Jirengthned him. Farther ; the charaders and 
 properties both of i\iQ Jirji a.nd /econd Person 
 in the Holy Trinity are likewife many of 
 them afcrib'd to the third. Thus, in the old 
 Teftament, the work of creation feems to be 
 attributed to the operation of the Holy Ghoft, 
 as a diftindl perfonage, or agent. The Spirit 
 of God, fays Mofes, moved upon the face of the 
 waters, Thou fende/i forth thy fpirit^ fays the 
 Pfalmift, and they are created: and fob ailerts, 
 that God by his Spirit hath garnijlod the hea- 
 *oens ','\ and the Spirit of God ha smade me, fays 
 Elihu, J For whatever might have been the 
 precife notion of the antient Jews, with re- 
 gard to the Spirit, the Spii^it of God, and the 
 Spirit of the Lord, of which we find fach 
 frequent mention ; or, whatever they might 
 underftand by that parallel exprefTion, (in 
 refpedt at leaft of the work of creation,) the 
 breath of the Ahnighty, or the breath of his 
 mouth', the light of the New Tefiament, I 
 
 Cor, i. 30. f Job. xxvi. 13. % Ibid, xxxiii 4. 
 
 D 2 think. 
 
36 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 think, fufficiently direds us to the above in- 
 terpretation. Thus again, the Holy Ghoft 
 is omnifcient, and eternal ; for the Spirit 
 fearcheth all things, yea the deep things of God-,^ 
 and Chriji through the eternal Spirit offered 
 himfelf without fpot to God.f Thus the office 
 of advocate, or intercellor, is attributed to 
 the Spiritj who maketh intercejjion for the 
 Saints according to the will of God. \ Thus the 
 refurredion of our Lord himfelf is faid to 
 have been efFedled by the power of the Holy 
 Ghoji ; for Chriji was put to death in thefefi, 
 but quickened by the Spirit,^ and he that rdifed 
 up Chriji from the dead pall alfo quicken our 
 mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in us. 
 Thus again y both Prophets and Apoftles are 
 faid to be fent, or commiffioned by the Holy 
 Ghojij as v^^ell as by the Father and the Son, 
 The Lord God and his Spirit hath fent me, fays 
 Ifaiah ; the Spirit entered into me, fays £2;^- 
 kiel, and Jaid unto me, go Jhut thyfelf within 
 thy houfe ; |1 and the Holy Gbojl faid, feparate me 
 Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto 1 
 
 * I Cor. ii 10. t Heb. ix. 14. 
 
 :j: Rom. viii. 27. § i Pet. iii. 18. |1 Ezek. iii. 24. 
 
 have 
 
DISCOURSE II. 37 
 
 have called them,^ Once more. The Holy 
 Ghoft is indifcriminately called the Spirit of 
 God, and the Spirit of Chriji -, and the Gofpel 
 of God and the Gofpel of Chrif are terms 
 equivalent ; and the Apoftles are fometimes 
 {kiXQ^i fervants of God, and fometimes y^r'y^^fj 
 of Jefus Chrifi ; and the Holy Ghoft is faid to 
 make overfeers over the flock ; as God the Fa-^ 
 ther \\'Ai\\ fet fome in the Churchy firfl Apoflles, 
 &c ; and as the Son gave fo?72e, Apoflles -, and 
 feme. Prophets, Sec. And, laftly, the very 
 terms of our falvation are reciprocated. St. 
 Paul teflifled to Jews and Greeks repentance to- 
 wards God, and faith toward our Lord fefus 
 Chrifl j-f* and among the principles of the doc- 
 trine of Chrifl, the Apoftle reckons repentance 
 from dead works, and faith towards God, J Our 
 Saviour fays in one place, he that believeth on 
 the Son hath everlafling life-, and in another 
 place, he that believeth on him that fent him 
 hath everlafling life. The general fcripture 
 do(ftrine is, that we are faved hy the mercy 
 of God through the merits of our Redeemer^ 
 
 * Adls xiii. 2, f Afts xx. 21. 
 
 X Hcb. vi. I. 
 
 D 3 and 
 
38 DISCOURSE IL 
 
 and yet our falvation is fometimes afcribed 
 abfolutely to the mercy, or grace of 'jefus 
 Chrijl. Thus St. Feter declares his and his 
 brethren's belief, that both 'Jews and Gentiles 
 jloall be Javed through the grace of the Lord 
 Jefus Chrifi i* and St. Jude exhorts Chrif- 
 tians to keep themfehes in the love of God, 
 looking for the mercy of our Lord Jefus Chrifi 
 unto eternal life.-f To all this we may add, 
 \)\2.t the title of Lord, (which is one unquef- 
 tionable charader of fupremacy,) is common 
 to the three Perfons in the Holy T'rifiity , to 
 the fecond it is applied as well as to the firii: 
 in places almofl; numberlefs -, and to the third 
 beyond all doubt in the following : the Lord 
 diredl your hearts into the love of God, and into 
 the patient waiting for Chrifi ; § now Cod him- 
 felfy and our Father, (where, by the way, 
 the word — himself — does not appear to 
 be more emphatical than in the text fome- 
 time fince cited,) and our Lord Jefus Chrifi 
 direSl our way unto you ', and the Lord make 
 you to increafe, and abound in love one towards 
 another, &c j to the end he may flab liflj your 
 
 * A^s XV. II. f Jude 21. 
 
 § 2 ThefT. iii. 5. 
 
 hearty 
 
DISCOURSE II. 39 
 
 hearts unblameabk in holinefs before God, at the 
 coming of our Lord Jefus ChriJiJ^ For that by 
 the Lord in thefe texts we are to underfland 
 the Holy Ghojl, is, I apprehend, demonftra- 
 ble from thele two conliderations \ iirft, be- 
 caufe it is his peculiar pffice to direSi the 
 hearty to make us to increafe in love, and tojla* 
 blijlo our hearts unblameabk in holinefs ', and fe- 
 condly, becaufe, according to any other con- 
 ftrudtion, we fhall at beft make but very in- 
 different fenfe of either of thefe pafTages, 
 From this inverfion then and reciprocation, 
 of which we have produced fuch a number 
 of inftances, the Divinity of each Perfon in 
 the Trinity may reafonably be inferred j efpe- 
 cially as the fenfe of many at leaft of the 
 texts I have produced is obvious, and alto- 
 gether uncontrovertible. 
 
 Again ; this great point is evincible from 
 the necelTary fenfe, or natural import of cer= 
 tain paffages. Let us turn to a few of the 
 moft remarkable. 
 
 I Theff. iii. 1 1 . 
 
 D 4 The 
 
40 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 The Jin againjl the Holy Ghojl is pronounced 
 by our bleflbd Lord himlelf to be of all lins 
 the moft damnable. Ifiy unto you, all man- 
 ner of Jin and blafphemy JJjall be forgiven unto 
 men -, but the blafphemy againjl the Holy Ghojl 
 Jlmll not be forgiven unto men. And whofoever 
 fpeaketh a word againjl the Son oj^ Man it fhall 
 be forgiven him ; but whofoever fpeaketh againjl 
 the Holy Ghojl, it Jloall not be forgiven him, 
 neither in this world, neither in the world to 
 come.* Now without flaying to inquire here 
 into the precife nature of this fin, or how 
 far it may be abfolutely incapable of remif- 
 fion, or in what fenfe our Saviour's audience 
 underftood him, or he meant to be under- 
 flood, it will be fufficient for our purpofe to 
 remark, that the dodtrine of the Holy Tri- 
 nity in general, and particularly of the per?- 
 fonal exigence, and coequal divinity of the 
 Holy Ghojl with that of the Father, and of 
 the Son, is plainly and truly though covertly 
 comprehended in the above texts, and in 
 their parallels in the other Evangeiifts. For 
 ptherwife we (hall be unavoidably driven into 
 
 * Matt. xii. 31. 
 
 the 
 
DISCOURSE 11. 41 
 
 the following abfurd and execrable conclu- 
 lions, viz. that the highefl degree of impiety 
 and profanenefs againft God the Father is a 
 mere venial fin -, and that a blafphemy, or a 
 fin, a fin, humanly fpeaking at leaft, with- 
 out hope, or poffibility of pardon, may be 
 committed againft a Being lefs than the fu- 
 preme God j and even againft a kind of fpi- 
 ritual chimera, a motion, a virtue, a quality, 
 or an operation. 
 
 Again. As touching brotherly love^ fays St. 
 P«3«/, ye need not that 1 write unto you ; for 
 ye yourfehes are taught of God to love one ano- 
 ther.^ Now that by him who in this place 
 is abfolutely ftyled God, we are to underftand 
 Jefus Chriji, I have little or no difficulty to 
 pronounce, for the two following reafons ; 
 firft, becaufe, though we may very properly 
 be faid to be taught of God, when we are in- 
 ftrufted by the mouth, or by the preaching 
 of his prophets, or apoftles, or others com- 
 miffion'd by him, yet th^ dodrine of univer- 
 fal love and charity was more immediately 
 
 * 1 ThefT. iv. 9. 
 
 and 
 
42 DISCOURSE ir. 
 
 and peculiarly the docSrine of our blelTed 
 Saviour : A new commandment , fays he, I give 
 unto you, that ye hve one another ; — />y this all 
 a// men know that ye are my difciples, if ye have 
 love one to another^ j this is M y commandment ^ 
 that ye love one another-^ : and fecondly, be- 
 caufe the Apoftle feems to regard this great 
 duty as a principle recently taught, and par- 
 ticularly enforced by the precept and exam- 
 ple of our Divine Mafter. 
 
 Again. He that hath feen me hath feen the 
 Father "^y fays our Lord, and he that feet h me, 
 feeth him that fent me. Now in what fenfe are 
 thefe declarations true ? Not in the literal; for 
 the Father could not be vifible in the human 
 perfon of the Son ; becaufe God is a Spirit^ 
 and 710 ma?i hath feen God at any time-, whom no 
 man hath feen, or can fee ^: and by necelTary 
 eonfequence our Saviour hereby in effedl af- 
 ferts, that, notwithftanding his appearance 
 in the flefli, he himfelf really and truly par- 
 took of the Divine nature -, that, according 
 
 * John xiii. 34. f John xiv. g. % John i. 18. 
 
 § I Tim. vi. 16. 
 
 to 
 
DISCOURSE II. 43 
 
 to his own expreffion, the Father dwelt hi 
 bim ; or, in the language of the Apoftle, in 
 
 him dwelt all the fulnejs of the Godhead bodily, 
 or fubiliantially. 
 
 Again. In the Gofpels St. John the 
 Baptift is called the voice of one crying in the 
 wildernefsy prepare ye the way of the Lord, 
 fnake his paths Jlrait^ : but in the evangelical 
 prophet the ftyle is at once more explicit and 
 more majeftical; prepare ye ^ fays he, the way 
 of the Lord, make fir ait in the defart a high-' 
 way for our God,-\ In the courfe of the fame 
 fublime chapter fertfalejn/n called upon to 
 lift up her voice with Jirength, to lift it up 
 and fay unto the cities ofjudah. Behold your 
 God. And then the prophecy proceeds in the 
 following words. Behold, the Lord God will 
 come with Jirong hand, and his arm JJjall rule 
 for him : behold, his reward is with him, and 
 his work before him. He jhall feed his flock 
 like a fhepherd, 6cc. Now, unlefs it can be de-f 
 monftrated, that thefe paflages do not refer, 
 ultimately at leaft, to the coming, and to the 
 
 * Matt. iii. 3. t Ifa. xl. 3. 
 
 perfon 
 
44 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 perfon of the Meffiah, he is manifeftly here 
 announced under the different characters of a 
 good Jhepherdy a righteous judge, and the Lord 
 God. Befides, if there is no fuch reference, 
 the feveral apoftolical citations from the pro- 
 phet are moft impertinently ridiculous. 
 
 Once more. The firfl and fecond perfons 
 of the bleffed Trinity are exprefsly diftin- 
 guidjed, and refped:ively chara6terifed as 
 equal, in a paflage wherein the Apoftle occa- 
 lionally afTerts the unity of elience in the 
 Godhead. We know, fays he, that there is 
 none other God but one ; for though there be 
 that are called Gods, to us there is but one God, 
 the Father, of whom are all things, and we in 
 him ', and one Lord Jefus Chriji, by whom are 
 all things, andwe by him^. It may be pretended 
 indeed, that the terms under which the Son 
 is here charaderifed are not of equal weight 
 and fignificance with thofe which are d^ti- 
 criptive of the Father -, but I will take upon 
 me to aver, that the fame might have been 
 pretended, had thefe terms been tranfpofed, 
 
 * I Cor. viii. 4. &c. 
 
 and 
 
DISCOURSE 11. 45 
 
 and the paflage had run thus ; to us there is 
 but one God, the Father, by whotn are all 
 things, and we by him ; and one Lord Jefus 
 Chrijiy of whom are all things, and we in him. 
 And in many places the three divine Perfons 
 are feverally fpecified and referred to, as 
 jointly concurring in the wonderful fcheme 
 of man's redemption j particularly in the fol- 
 lowing. St. Peter infcribes his firft epiftle to 
 thQ Jtrangers fcattered through Pontus, Galatia, 
 &c. eleB according to the foreknowledge of God 
 the Father, through fanBification of the Spirit 
 unto obedience, and fpr inkling of the blood of fe- 
 fus Chriji : and St. fohn falutes the churches 
 of jyia with wiihing them grace and peace 
 fro?n him which is, which was, and which is to 
 come, and from the J even Jpirits which are be~ 
 fore his throne, and from fefus Chriji"^, I am 
 fenfible indeed that by the feven fpirits, juft 
 mentioned, interpreters do not univerfally un- 
 derftand the Holy Ghojl ; but this at leaft, I 
 cannot help remarking, may be offered in 
 favour of the fenfe in which I have taken the 
 expreflion, that it is a fenfe of which the 
 
 * I Rev. 4. 
 
 words 
 
46 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 words are full as capable as of any other 
 whatever ; and that by the prefent conftruc- 
 tion a very confiderable difficulty is removed 
 which clogs a different interpretation. For 
 admitting the Holy Ghoji to be fignified by 
 the feven fpiritSj there will be nothing fin- 
 gular or unprecedented in this inverfion of 
 the order of Perfons in the I'rinity j but why 
 cngehi according to the fenfe of fome com- 
 mentators, Ihould be mentioned before 'Jejus 
 Chrijiy (who is higher than the angels even 
 in many of our adverfaries conceptions,) feems 
 accountable only by forced and unnatural ex- 
 plications. And Hill more perplexed, and in- 
 compatible with the nature of a bleffing, or 
 a falutation in general, or with the apoftoli- 
 cal greetings and benedidions in particular, 
 the fenfe of others feems to be, who by the 
 Jeven fpirits underlland the graces of the Spi- 
 rit, or the various operations of Divine Pro- 
 vidence. (/) However, granting the paiTage 
 to be rather obfcure, I would take occafion 
 to obferve from it yet farther, that although 
 we Ihould be very cautious of deducing doc- 
 trines of faith from fymbols, or myftical ex- 
 
 preffions. 
 
DISCOURSE 11, 47 
 
 prefTions, yet types and emblems confelTedly 
 fjgnificant and charadteriftical will juftify our 
 fuitable concluiions. It may be queftioned 
 perhaps what is precifely to be underflood 
 by the /even Jpirits jud mentioned, or by 
 many other fymbols in the Revelation -, but 
 it would be excefs of perverfenefs to doubt, 
 whether the Lamb in our Apoftle's allegori- 
 cal prophecy be the emblem of yefus Chriji, 
 Whenever therefore we obferve divine ho- 
 nours plainly afcribed to the Lamby or find 
 him fpoken of in terms of equal importance 
 and majefty with thofe which are predicated 
 of him who is indifputably the true God, the 
 inference is obvious and unavoidable. How 
 then will the aiztitrinitarian evade the force 
 of fuch paflages as thefe ? And every creature 
 which is in heaven^ and on the earth, &c. 
 heard I faying, Blejjing and glory, and honour ^ 
 and power, be unto him that Jitteth upon the 
 throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever,* 
 ^he Lamb Jljall overcome them, for he is Lord 
 of Lords, and King of Kings, -f- / fiw no 
 temple therein, for the Lord God Almighty, 
 
 * Rev. V. 13. t Rev. xvii, 14. 
 
 and 
 
48 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 and the Lamb are the temple of it ; afid the 
 city had no need of the Sun, &c. for the glory 
 of God did lighten it, and the hamb is the light 
 t hereof ^\ And he fiewed me a pure river of 
 water of life, proceeding out of the throne of 
 God, and of the Lamb -f*. And the kings of 
 the earth, and the great men. Sec. hid them- 
 fehes in the rocks and the mountains, and f aid 
 unto the mountains a7id rocks, fall on us, and 
 hide us from the face of him that fitteth on 
 the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamh%. 
 If any man fhould afFecfl to make a diftinc- 
 tion betwixt him that ftteth on the throne and 
 the Lamb, or him who is faid to fit on the 
 right hand of God, in proof of the fuperio- 
 rity of the former, I would defire him to re- 
 member, that the throne in queftion is called 
 fometimes fimply the throne of God-, fome- 
 times, as in a text lately produced, the throne 
 of God and of the Lamb -, that, in another 
 place, the Lamb is faid to be in the midji of 
 the throne-, in another, to fit down in the 
 throne of the Father -, and that it is the throne 
 of the Son of God which is for ever and ever, 
 
 * Rev. xxi. 22. t Rev. xxii. i. J Rev. vi. 15. 
 
 So 
 
DISCOURSE II. 49 
 
 So llkewife, notwithftanding the diverfity of 
 conftrudiions to which the expreflion of the 
 feven Jpirits is liable, the perfonality, opera- 
 tion, and Divinity of the Holy Ghoji may be 
 demonflrated from the plain literal fenfe of 
 many places in this book which are utterly 
 void of emblematical ornament, or allufion. 
 Indeed, the whole was evidently dictated by 
 the Spirit^ by whofe mfpiration all Jcripture 
 nvas given, who 2\qv\q fear diet h the deep things 
 ofGod,^ and under whofe immediate dire(ftion 
 our Apoftle wrote this epiftle : for he tells 
 us expreflly, before he communicates his 
 Revelations, that he was in the Spirit on the 
 Lord's day \ and elfewhere, that he was car- 
 ried away in the Spirit ; and the folemn call 
 to all perfons concerned is frequently re- 
 peated. He that hath an ear, let him hear what 
 the Spirit faith unto the Churches, -f* To all 
 this we may add, that the perfonal inherency 
 of the Spirit in the eflence of the Godhead 
 is demonflrable from St. Paul's illuftration of 
 a pafTage juft now quoted from him. * I'he 
 Spirit^ fays he, fearcheth all things, yea, the 
 
 * I Cor. ii. 10. -j- Rev. ii. ii. 
 
 E deep 
 
50 DISCOURSE 11. 
 
 deep things of God. For what many continues 
 he, knoweth the things of a man, fave the 
 Spirit of man which is in him ? Even fo the 
 things of God knoweth no man, hut the Spirit 
 of God, If the confcious fpirit in man is 
 man, the Spirit of God mufl be effentially 
 God. 
 
 I defire to obferve yet farther, that nothing 
 lefs than a belief in the dodrine of the 2r/- 
 nity, as it is received in the Church, can 
 fatisfy the full demands of the terms— faith, 
 • — and my fiery, — which we meet with fo re- 
 peatedly in the New Teflament, and to which 
 there is fo much reference under the old. 
 The whole of the myfiery of the divine will 
 made ktiow?i in the difpenfation of the fulnefs of 
 times y^ the wifdom of God in a myfiery, even the 
 hidden wifdom which God ordained before the 
 world, &c ; -f* or, if you pleafe, the real cha- 
 radter of the univerfal Saviour, who was to 
 be both God and man, was a fecret from the 
 beginning. This flupendous dodlrine was 
 infinitely, and by the divine intention, too 
 fublime for the carnal conceptions of the 
 
 * Ephef. i. 10. t I Cor. ii. 7. 
 
 Jews-, 
 
r 
 
 DISCOURSE II. 51 
 
 Jews-, who, whatever they might ultimately 
 underftand by, or hope from the Mejjiah pro- 
 mifed to Adam, to Abraham, to the Fatri- 
 archsy and to others -, and foretold by the 
 Prophets in language clear and ftrong indeed, 
 but at the fame time figurative, magnificent, 
 and myfterious, expected, and primarily de- 
 fired only a temporal deliverer, who fhould 
 rejlore again, and perpetuate the kingdom to 
 Ifrael. Nay, it is abundantly evident that 
 the Prophets themfelves, thofe holy men oj 
 God who fpake as they were moved by the Holy 
 Ghofi,* had not an infight into the full fcope, 
 and whole import of the facred truths and 
 oracles which they delivered. Our Lord 
 feems to allude to this ignorance, when he 
 acquaints his difciples, that many prophets and 
 kings had dejired to fee the things which they 
 faw, and had not feen themy-^ &c. It is true 
 this was faid by way of anticipation ; becaufe, 
 as will be ihewn, it was not then even to 
 them given to know the capital myjiery of the 
 kingdom of heaven. But St. Peter is plain and 
 full upon this fubje6t, when, fpeaking, in his 
 firft general epiftle, of the falvation obtained 
 * 2 Pet. i. 21. f Luke x. 24. 
 
 E 2 for 
 
j2 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 for us by Jefus Chrijiy he proceeds in the 
 following words , of which fahatioJi the pro- 
 phets have enquired, andfearched diligently y who 
 prophejied of the grace that jhould come unto 
 you } fearching what, or what manner of time 
 the Spirit of Chrijl which was in them did fig- 
 nijy, when it tejiified beforehand the fufferings 
 of Chriji, and the glory that Jhould follow: 
 unto whom it was revealed, that not unto 
 themfelves, but unto us they did minijler the 
 things which are now reported unto you by them 
 that have preached the Gofpel unto you, with 
 the Holy Ghoji fent down from heaven 5 which 
 things the angels defre to look into.^ The ex- 
 preffions here are, I think, in themfelves al- 
 moft fufficiently decifive upon the great point 
 before us. For it is hard to conceive that 
 the Prophets, in whom, it feems, the Spirit 
 of Cliriji refided 5 and much harder that the 
 angels fhould not have a clear idea of the 
 work of human redemption -, (hould not be 
 able to comprehend what is the breadth, and 
 length, and depth, and height, (as St. Paul 
 exprelTes himfelf, with an eye, I imagine, 
 
 * I Pet, i. 10. 
 
 to 
 
DISCOURSE II. 53 
 
 to this difpenfation,) fuppofing that work to 
 have been accomplifhed by any perfon lefs 
 than very God-, but admit the Divinity of 
 ye/us Chriji, and the inquifitivenefs and the 
 incapacity of men and angels will by no 
 means be unaccountable. All this, I truft, 
 will aiford a moft ftrong argument, that the 
 faith which the Apoflles preached after the 
 afcenfion of our Saviour j the faith which 
 was firft delivered to the chriflian Saints ; the 
 faith which we are required to holdfaji iinthout 
 waveringy * and to build up ourfehes upon, -f- 
 is z faith in the incarnation of the eternal Son 
 of God i or, in other words, in the dodtrine 
 of the Holy 'Trinity, as it has all along been 
 held in the Chriftian Church. In confe- 
 quence of the removal of a popular objedion 
 againft all this, I hope in the enfuing difqui- 
 fitions to fet in a ftill clearer point of view 
 the great doctrine before us. 
 
 * Heb. X. 23. f Jude 20. 
 
 D I S- 
 
DISCOURSE III. 
 
 Acts I. 3. 
 By many infallible proofs, 
 
 THESE words immediately refer to the 
 great event of our Lord's refurrec- 
 tion, but in confequence of it to the divinity 
 of his perfon. Of this therefore I fhall pro- 
 ceed to lay more proofs before you, taking 
 firft this opportunity to obviate the following 
 popular objedion ; that, notwithftanding 
 all that has been, or can be advanced, the 
 doctrine before us is not fo abfolutely clear 
 andindifputable as we would have it thought, 
 and as a fundamental article of faith ought 
 to be ; in as much as no text can be pro- 
 duced which precifely, and totidem verbis, 
 E 4 fpeaks 
 
56 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 fpeaks the language of the firft article of our 
 Church j viz, *' in the unity of the Godhead 
 ** there he three Perfons of one fubftance, 
 '* power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, 
 ** and the Holy Ghofl ; or of the fecond ; 
 ** two whole and perfed: natures, that is to 
 *' fay, the Godhead and Manhood are joined 
 <' together in one Perfon, never to be di- 
 ** vided, whereof is one Chrifl:, very God 
 '* and very man ; or of the fifth ; the Holy 
 ** Ghoft, proceeding from the Father, and 
 ** the Son, is of one fubftance, majefty, and 
 " glory with the Father and the Son, very 
 «* and eternal God." 
 
 To all this, I apprehend, we may readily 
 reply, that if there be any real force in fuch 
 objedtions, it will operate much farther by 
 neceffary confequence than the objectors 
 themfelves can be fuppofed to defire it 
 fhould. For it will fupply the perverfe, or 
 idle caviller with pretences and exceptions 
 againft all the divine properties and attri- 
 butes, as far as they are aflerted in the firft: 
 article. There is no one pafTage in the Scrips 
 
 turq 
 
DISCOURSE III. ^y 
 
 ture which literally tells us, that ** there is 
 *• but one living and true God, everlafting, 
 *' without body, parts, or paffions, of infinite 
 *' power, wifdom, and goodnefs, the Maker 
 ** and Preferver of all things both vifible and 
 " invifible." The divine fuperintendency, 
 &c, ufually called Providence, is juftly re- 
 puted one of the capital dodlrines of reli- 
 gion. Yet, upon the principles of thefe ob- 
 jedlors, it (hould be no doftrine at all. For 
 we meet with no fuch term as Providence, in 
 the fenfe demanded, either in the old or new 
 Teftament. So that this dodrine muft inevi- 
 tably fall to the ground, unlefs it be main- 
 tained and fupported by natural inference ; 
 or unlefs we are at liberty to make ufe of a 
 proper term to exprefs our fenfe of it. He 
 who objedls to the term — Trinity — as un- 
 fcriptural, fhould confider by what texts he 
 will undertake to prove the Unity of the 
 Divine Nature ; which, in the fenfe required 
 by his argument, is a term no more to be 
 found in Scripture than the other. In fadt, 
 upon the principle of our opponents, we 
 fhall be under a neccffity of expunging a 
 
 great 
 
58 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 great part of the Apoilles Creed, and even 
 fuch parts of it as all Chriflians whatever, 
 without the leaft fcruple or hefitation, have 
 alTented to. For I defire to know by what 
 exprefs or literal authority of Scripture any 
 perfon believes in the Holy Catholic Churchy 
 or in the Communion of Saints ; or that our 
 bleiTed Lord was born of the Virgin Mary, or 
 fuffered under Pontius Pilaie, &c ? In fliort, if 
 we are to be abfolutely precluded the ufe and 
 application of proper terms and expreffions 
 in the inveftigation and expofition of Scrip- 
 ture-meaning, it will, I prefume, be impof- 
 fible to frame the mod fimple fyftem, or for- 
 mulary of Chriftian faith and dodtrine, or 
 any fuch thing as a Creed o^ any kind in the 
 Church. The holy Scripture is the fole rule 
 or meafure of every form of confeffion, &c -, 
 it is the only ted by which any dodrine, or 
 fyftem is, in all its branches, even the moft 
 minute of them, to be deliberately and ulti- 
 mately tried ; but it is not the rule itfelf ; 
 and indeed a little inquiry will fliew us why 
 the capital points of religion are not fyfte- 
 matically delivered in the facred writings. 
 
 The 
 
DISCOURSE III. 59 
 
 The do(5trine of the Holy 'Trinity, as main- 
 tained by the Church of Efigland, was the 
 do(5trine of the Catholic Church at and before 
 the time of the publication of the Scriptures 
 of the New Tejiament, or it was not. If it 
 was, the controverfy is at an end. If it was not, 
 we would fain know how to account for that 
 great variety of paiTages, and thofe numerous 
 circumftances, by which it is at lead fo plau- 
 fibly countenanced, not to fay forcibly de- 
 fended. We would fain know how to re- 
 concile with the character of the meek and 
 the lowly Jefus, any one of his expreflions 
 which is capable of being conftrued into a 
 claim to the Divinity. If this dodtrine was 
 the dodlrine of the Church previoufly to the 
 publication of the holy writings, they are 
 fufficiently full and explicit for the fatisfac- 
 tion, or confirmation of Chriftians of all 
 ages ; if otherwife, here is more than enough 
 faid to perplex and mifguide them, and to 
 lead them into errors of the firft magnitude. 
 The great queflion therefore, I take it, is, whe- 
 ther we have not all the reafon in the world 
 to infer from the very mode in which the 
 
 doftrine 
 
 ■#« 
 
6o DISCOURSE III. 
 
 dodlrine of the T'rinity is inferted and incul- 
 cated in the facred pages -, the queftion, I 
 fay, is, whether we are not authorifed by 
 this circumftance to conclude that this doc- 
 trine was antecedently received in the Chrif- 
 tian world ? For inftance ; fuppofing the doc- 
 trine of the 'Trinity to have been the ftanding 
 do(5trine of the Church when St. John {k) 
 wrote his Gofpel, we have no kind of diffi- 
 culty to encounter; but are we not very 
 much embarajJed by the contrary fuppoli- 
 tion ? In the former cafe, we may readily 
 conceive the Apoftle to be aflerting the Divi- 
 nity oi yefus Chriji in the moft exprefs terms 
 at the beginning of his Gofpel ; and, in the 
 courfe of it, to record many particulars 
 clearly declarative of the fame; not by way 
 of formal anfwer to Cerinthus, or any other 
 heretic that difputed, or denied it, but purely 
 in flat contradidlion to the novel and he- 
 terodox notions advanced and propagated by 
 them ; and to encourage and ftabliih good 
 Chriftians in the faith, as they had all along 
 been taught. What this great Evangelifl de- 
 clares at the latter end of his Gofpel, viz, 
 
 that 
 
DISCOURSE III. 6i 
 
 that thefe things were written, or, as we may 
 fay, given under his own hand, that the 
 Chriftians whom he addreffes might believe 
 that yefus is the Chriji, the Son of God, is 
 perfectly confident with their pre-acquain- 
 tance with thefe matters. Agreably hereunto, 
 and indeed in dired: confirmation of our hy- 
 pothefis, St. Luke (and many, itfeems, before 
 him,) Jet in order a declaration of thofe things 
 which moft furely were believed among Chrif- 
 tians,^ that the perfon he writes to might know 
 the certainty of thofe things wherein he had 
 been infrudled. In the fame light we may re- 
 gard thofe paffages in the epiflles which have 
 often been produced in vindication of the 
 dodtrine before us. Some of thefe epiftles 
 were, with refped: to the main end and de- 
 fign of them, entirely of a temporary nature ; 
 being written with a view to the decifion of 
 controverfies in the primitive Church, which 
 for many centuries have been out of date ; 
 and upon fcveral occafions and fubjeds of 
 little moment to fucceeding generations. Not 
 one of them however was profefTedly written 
 
 * Luke i. I, 
 
 in 
 
62 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 in defence of the dodrine of the T'riizity. Ac- 
 cording to our prefent hypothefis, a vindi- 
 cation of this kind had been abfolutely fu- 
 perfluous ; and though we cannot wonder to 
 obferve a point of this confequence fre- 
 quently mentioned, or alluded to in thefe 
 writings, yet it would be very unreafonable 
 to exped: to find it methodically or fyftema- 
 tically taught. 
 
 The grand principle of the leading op- 
 pugners of the do£lrine under confideration 
 is, that the only thing required of Chrif- 
 tians to be believed with regard to the Perfon 
 of Jefus Chrijij is, that he was the Meffiahy 
 the Perfon promlfed and fent by God to re- 
 deem men from that death which they were 
 inevitably appointed to as defcendants of 
 Adam ; and that the MeJ/iahy and the Chrijl, 
 and the king of IJracl^ and the So?2 of God, 
 are terms or titles in Scripture abfolutely 
 denoting one and the fame thing. I need 
 not tell you, that this is the favourite tenet 
 of Mr. Locke in his treatife on the Reafofia- 
 bknefs of Ckrifianityy as delivered in Scripture. 
 
 Now 
 
DISCOURSE III. 63 
 
 Now we fhall willingly admit, that the 
 Apofties themfelves were believers under 
 this idea moftly, during our Saviour's reli- 
 dence upon earth ; as 'tis certain, they had 
 not the whole myjiery of the Divine Willy the 
 grand fcheme of man's redemption, clearly 
 and fully made known to them before our 
 Lord's Afcenfion into heaven. / have many 
 things to fay unto you, he fays to them, but ye 
 cannot bear them noivv'' Sec. and in faying this 
 he had mofl probably an eye to the myjiery of 
 the Gofpel. For though he took frequent 
 occafions to aflert and prefignify, as I may 
 fay, his truly Divine Nature, either diredly, 
 or by neceffary implication, and could not 
 but have been underftood fo to have done by 
 his difciples, and by the Jews, who fought 
 to ft one him on that very account, yet, in the 
 days of his flejhy many circumftances con- 
 curred to (hake, or rather to overturn the 
 faith of his followers, with refped: to this 
 great article. This is plain enough from the 
 tenor of the evangelical hiflory. It would 
 be ridiculous to fuppofe that the Apollles 
 could believe their Mailer to be the Son of 
 
 * John xvi. 12. 
 
 God 
 
64 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 God in the highefl: fenfe, or even to be the 
 redeemer of IJrael in any fenfe, when they all 
 forfook him and fled. At the melancholy crifis 
 I refer to, they conceived no doubt very dif- 
 ferent notions of their Lord from what they 
 had once entertained of him, and afterwards 
 did, when he was declared to be the Son of 
 God with power, or to full eifedl, by his re- 
 fur region from the dead. * 
 
 The fadl is, the fcheme of human redemp- 
 tion by Jefus Chrifl, the only- begot teri Son of 
 God, in the ftridlefl fenfe, was opened gra- 
 dually, and propounded to the world as it 
 were article by article. At firfl it muft ne- 
 ceflarily have been fufficient to have believed 
 that fejus was the Chrifl, the Mejjiah, or the 
 Son of God, merely as executing a divine 
 commifTion, &c ; his refurrecftion, afcenfion, 
 and exaltation to the right hand of the Ma- 
 jefly on high, being fubfequent points of faith; 
 and accordingly we read of many that be- 
 lieved on him at different times, and in dif- 
 ferent places, long before the converfion of 
 
 * Rom. i. 4, 
 
 the 
 
DISCOURSE in. 6s 
 
 the t/jree thoiifand on the day of Pentecojl, 
 whom we cannot but confider as believers ia 
 a much higher fenfe. The faith of Chrif- 
 tians at that memorable period, and ever 
 fince, cannot with the leaft colour of reafon 
 be afcertained, or is to be meafured by what 
 is declared to hQ faith in particular inftances 
 recorded in the Gofpels. The faith which 
 made the woman whole, who had an ijfue of 
 bloody * and \ht faith th2Lt faved, i. e. reftored 
 to fight the blind man near Jericho, -f- could 
 not be that faith, the myjiery of which St. 
 Taul requires Deacons to hold in a pure con-' 
 Ccience. % In fliort, our Saviour's adual re- 
 furredion, by virtue of his own as well as 
 his Father's power, (as we fhall prefently 
 fee,) cleared up a thoufand difficulties in a 
 moment, and amounted to a full demonftra- 
 tion of his Divinity. From a thorough con- 
 vidion of this no doubt it was that his Dif- 
 ciples worjhipped him j and St. Thomas in par- 
 ticular burft into that rapture of acknow- 
 legement. My Lord, and my God ! Though 
 therefore the MeJJiah, or the Chriji, be not 
 
 * Luke viii. 43. f Ibid, xviii. 35. % ^ Tim. iii. 9, 
 
 F unfrequently 
 
66 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 unfrequently called the Son of God, as a per- 
 {onfentfrom God, as a teacher, z prophet, or 
 deliverer, &c. (as many even created beings, 
 angels, &c. and men in general are called 
 Sons of God in certain refpecfts,) yet we infift 
 that this appellation belongs peculiarly to 
 yefus, the author of our faith, as a Divine 
 Perfon likewife ; and that he is fo called vi^ith 
 reference to his nature, as well as to his 
 offices. In fome paflages of Scripture per- 
 haps, the precife import of this title may be 
 controvertible ; as when devils and unclea7i 
 fpirits call our Saviour the Son of God, and 
 the Holy Ofte of God \ and when Feter ftyles 
 him the Son of the living God. In anfwer to 
 our Lord's queftion, whom fay ye that I am? 
 the difciples, according to St. Mark, replied 
 by the mouth of Peter, thou art the Chrift^ 
 In other places the fignificance of the title 
 in queftion is difcoverable by the context ; 
 as when Nathaniel addreftes our Saviour in 
 the chara(fl:er of the Son of God, the king of 
 IfraeL But why muft all this affe(ft the fenfe 
 of any one paffage wherein the appellation is 
 given for reafons infinitely fuperiour ? T^he 
 
 Holy 
 
DISCOURSE III. 67 
 
 Holy Ghoji JJjall come upon theCy and the power 
 of the Higheji fiall overjloadow thee ; therefore 
 alfo that Holy thing which Jhall he born of thee 
 jhall be called the Son of God/^ (/) Could 
 ftronger terms be devifed to exprefs the af- 
 fumption of the human nature by the Di- 
 vine ? Is it not perfed:ly reafonable to con- 
 clude, that the facred penmen often make 
 mention of the Son of God with an eye to 
 this myfterious and ineffable incarnation ? 
 And is it not certain that the perfon whom 
 St. John, at the end of his Gofpel, calls the 
 Chriji, the Son of God, is the fame with him 
 whom, at the beginning of it, he ftyles the 
 JFord that was with God, and was God? And 
 if fo, is not the fenfe of the latter paffage 
 determinable by the preceding ? Neverthe- 
 lefs the great Philofopher above mentioned 
 leaves the introdudiion to this Gofpel, and 
 other paffages in it of equal import, entirely 
 unnoticed, as though it had no connedtion 
 with his argument; which is a piece of dif- 
 ingenuoufnefs that, one cannot avoid faying, 
 did little credit to his caufe, or to himfelf. 
 
 * Luke i. 35. 
 
 F 2 We 
 
68 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 We fhall be enabled, by fuch confideratlons 
 as thefe, to put the true confl:rud:ion on the 
 title of the So?i of God, in moft, if not all 
 the places where it occurs in the Epiftles ; 
 naturally taking into the account the many 
 clear and exprefs proofs of our Lord's Divi- 
 nity which are cited from them. Of fon^e 
 of the moft ftriking of thefe proofs, among 
 other particulars, we fhall for fatisfadtion- 
 fake take a review in proper time. What Mr. 
 Locke has adduced on this fubjedt with a 
 purpofe to invalidate thefe proofs in general, 
 will, 1 am confident, be utterly overthrown 
 by the force of the following confiderations ; 
 viz. that the Epijiles are a part of the New T^ef- 
 ment, and as efTential a part as the Gofpels ; 
 were like them, as was obferved, written oc- 
 cafionally, and after our Saviour's Afcenjimit 
 Sec ', that St. Paul, e. g. was as much a 
 teacher of the Gofpel, an infpired Apoftle, as 
 St. Matthewy or any other Apoftle who has 
 hiflorically recorded the adions, words, or 
 dodlrine of "Jefus Chriji ; and that a Creeds 
 or fyftem of faith fhould have its foundation 
 in thefe Epijiles together with the other Scrip- 
 tures, 
 
DISCOURSE III. 69 
 
 tures. The truth is, St. 'John in his Epijiles 
 aflerts the fame do(5lnne of our Lord's Divi- 
 nity as in his Gofpel. By Mr. Locke s way of 
 proceeding, viz, arbitrarily admitting, or re- 
 jecting Scripture, we may mould Chriftianity 
 into what form we pleafe -, and to this way 
 of proceeding, among other caufes, we are to 
 afcribe the various Schifms, and Herefies, 
 which have fo long, and fo deplorably di- 
 vided the Chriftian world. 
 
 We may now, I imagine, fairly date the 
 reception of the doiftrine of our Lord's Di- 
 vinity from his refurred:ion ; and we will 
 next fee whether the fubfequent accounts we 
 have of the propagation of the Gofpel be 
 not entirely uniform and confident upon this 
 hypothefis, at the fame time that they open 
 to us the whole T^rinitarian fyftem. 
 
 Let it be obferved then, that the firft re- 
 corded prayer we meet with is that of the 
 Apoflles after the Afcenjion, in which the 
 addrefs is made immediately to our Lord 
 himfelf, that he would be pleafed to JJoew 
 F 3 whether 
 
70 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 whether he had chofen Jofeph, or Matthias, 
 to fupply the place vacated by yudas the 
 traitor, whom he had originally chofen with 
 the eleven Apojiles. T^hoii, Lord, which knoweji 
 the hearts of all men, fie w whether of thefe 
 two thou haft chofen, *" It is, 1 believe, gene- 
 rally agreed that this addrefs was made to 
 fefus Chrif, and if fo, this attribution of om- 
 nifcience to him is fure as flrong an argument 
 of his Divinity as any one thing which can 
 be produced in demonftration of it. The 
 afcription is to me on any other foot unac- 
 countable. It is indeed true, that the Apof- 
 tles had not yet a thorough infight into the 
 evangelical myftery, nor had got perfedly 
 clear of the prejudices and notions, refpedling 
 the Mcffiah, which they had imbibed in com- 
 mon with their countrymen : in confequence 
 of which w^e find them aiking our Lord, even 
 after his refurredion, and after he had fpoken 
 to them, more or lefs explicitly, of the things 
 pertaining to the kingdom of God, whether he 
 would at that time rejlore again the kingdom to 
 IfraeH But that they put this queflion to 
 
 * A6ls i. 24. 
 
 him 
 
DISCOURSE III. 71 
 
 him as to one who was able to efFed: fuch 
 refloration by his own inherent divine power, 
 or, in other words elTentially partook of the 
 divine nature, muft furely be concluded from 
 this confideration ; that they could not pof- 
 {ihly now entertain the leaft doubt but that 
 all his declarations and alTurances to them 
 would be verified to a tittle; and that as he 
 came forth from the Father, and was come into 
 the world, fo he would foon leave the worldy 
 and go to the Father ; and he glorified with that 
 glory which he had with the Father, before the 
 world was. The cafe appears plainly to have 
 been this : they did not yet comprehend the 
 whole evangelical plan in the concurrence of 
 three Divine Perfons, in ** glory equal, in 
 majefly coeternal ;" they did not perfectly 
 conceive all the things pertaining to Chrift's 
 fpiritual kingdom ; the kifigdom of God in the 
 fulleft and mod exalted (q^i^q, of which he 
 had been fpeaking to them allufively forty 
 days, and with regard to which he may be 
 fuppofed to have before promifed them, that 
 xht fpirit of truth, whom he would fend unto 
 them from the Father, fhould guide them into 
 
 F 4 ALL 
 
72 DISCOURSE Iir. 
 
 ALL truth, and tejlify of him. Accordingly, 
 after the miraculous efFufion of the Holy 
 Ghoji on the day of Pentecojly we find them 
 difcovering very different fentiments, and 
 animated with fpiritual expe(ftations ; we fee 
 them calling upon the people to fave them- 
 felves from an untoward generation -^ exhorting 
 them to repent, and to be baptized for the re- 
 mijjion of fins ; (m) renouncing in an inftant 
 all honours, profits, and pleafures of this 
 world ; rejoicing that they were counted worthy 
 to fuffer jhame for the name of their Divine 
 Mafter ; and, in a word, preaching the Gof- 
 pel of fefus Chriji, the Son of God, through 
 the infpiration of the Spirit, and in the trueft 
 fenfe of the expreffion. On the memorable 
 day juft mentioned we are told, that the 
 Jlpofiles were all filled with the Holy Ghofi, and 
 began tofpeak with other tongues, as the Spirit 
 gave them utterance. What they fpake is not 
 particularly fpecified -, but in general we are 
 given to underftand, that they fpake in all 
 langnoges the wonderful works of God. On 
 the credit of what has been advanced, which 
 will be flrengthned by what will follow, it 
 
 is 
 
DISCOURSE III. 73 
 
 is moft reafonable to fuppofe, that, by the 
 works here referred to, the great work of re- 
 demption by the eternal Son of God is prin- 
 cipally intended -, the myjiery of godlinefsj ex- 
 hibited in God manifeji in the flejloy and dif- 
 played in the wonderful effulion of the Holy 
 Ghojl. 
 
 In the firft addrefs of the Apoftles to the 
 fews, and Jewifh profelytes, by the mouth of 
 Peter, on the fame day, both the humanity 
 and divinity of our Saviour are plainly and 
 diftindly alferted, or implied ; and in fuch a 
 manner as hardly to be liable to mifconftruc- 
 tion. The dod;rine of the refurred;ion of 
 fefus Chrijl, confidered as the confirmation 
 of a ftill greater dodlrine, that of his Divi- 
 nity, is ihtchiQ^ corner-f one of our Chriftian 
 Faith J and, as fuch, is particularly infifted 
 ypon by the Apoftles, who were ordained to 
 be witnejfes of it. And becaufe this moll im- 
 portant of all events could not be accom- 
 plifhed by himfelf in his mere human capa- 
 city, we find the holy writers frequently de- 
 claring that God raifed him from the dead. But 
 
 let 
 
74 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 let it be remembered, that Jefusy whom God 
 raijed up, is likewife ,as exprefsly faid to have 
 rijhi J and is ftyled by thefe very witnefTes 
 the Holy One, and the 'Jujl, and the Prince 
 of life in different places -, which beyond all 
 doubt are titles appertaining to the Supreme 
 God. Under the firft of thefe charaders, 
 God the Creator is defcribed in numberlefs 
 paffages of the Old T'ejlafiieiit j and he who 
 is the Prince, or author of life, according to 
 the marginal reading, muft be the fame, in 
 point of power and perogative, with him to 
 whom belong the ifues from death ; who ki/- 
 leth and malzeth alive -, and in whofe hand is 
 the life of every thing. Indeed the Prince, or 
 Author of life muft have life in himfelf from 
 all eternity ; muft be emphatically the life 
 and refurreclion, as our Saviour calls himfelf; 
 and therefore may as truly and properly be 
 faid to have raifed the temple of his body by his 
 own power, (to borrow his own phrafe,) as 
 to have been raifed from the dead by the power 
 of God the Father. We may fay, in fhort, 
 with equal truth and propriety, Chrijl was 
 raifed from the dead, or Chrijl rofe from the 
 
 dead. 
 
DISCOURSE III. y^ 
 
 deady according to the Scriptures -y the latter 
 alTertion importing his Divinity, the former 
 not fuperfeding it ; and therefore when St. 
 Feter told the men of Ifrael, that they had 
 killed the Prince of lifcy I fcarce know which 
 ftrikes us moft, the force of the implied 
 truth, or the keennefs of the farcafm. But 
 to return to the addrefs of the Apoftles. 
 Peter, fianding up with the eleven, fays the 
 facred hiflorian, lift up his voice, andfaid unto 
 them, ye men of fudea, and all ye that dwell 
 at ferufalem, be this known unto you, and 
 hearken to my words -, for thefe are not drunken^ 
 as ye fuppofe, &c ; hut this is that which was 
 fpoken by the prophet foel : ajid it floall come to 
 pafs in the lafi days, (faith God,) I will pour 
 out of my Spirit upon all fefi -, and your fons 
 and your daughters Jhall prophefy, &c -, and I 
 will Jhew wonders, &c ; and it fjall come to 
 pafs, that whofoever fiall call on the name of 
 the Lord fiall be faved. * Now let us com- 
 pare the promulgation or delivery of this 
 prophecy with the completion of it at this 
 period. Obferve the words of the Apoftle in 
 
 * A£ts ii. 14. 
 
 the 
 
76 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 the courfe of his harange. T^his Jefusy fays 
 he, (whom, with reference to his humanity, 
 he had jufi: before called a man approved by 
 God,) hath God raifed up, whereof we all are 
 ivitnejfes. 'Therefore being by the right hand of 
 God exalted, and having received of the Father 
 the promife of the Holy Ghoji, he hath fied 
 forth this which ye now fee and hear. That the 
 Father and the Son concurred in this won- 
 derful difpenfation of infinite wifdom and 
 power on an equal foot, it will fcarce be 
 poflible for us to doubt, when we recoiled; 
 that the, fecojid Perfon in the bleifed T'rifiity is 
 often reprefented as the giver of fpiritual 
 gifts, independently on any promife from, or 
 alTociation with the frji. I will give you a 
 mouth, fays he to his Apoftles, juft before 
 his paffion, and wifdom which all your adver- 
 faries Jhall not be able to gainfay. I am with you 
 always, fays he after his refurredtion, even 
 unto the end of the world. * Without him, he 
 tells them, they can do nothing. And, to 
 produce only one paflage more out of many 
 that might be cited, which has a manifeft 
 
 * Matt, xxviii. 20. 
 
 allufion 
 
DISCOURSE III. 77 
 
 allufion to the effufion of the Spirit on the 
 day of Fentecojl, St. Paul alTures the Ephe- 
 fiansy that mito every one is given grace ac- 
 cording to the meafure of the gift of Chrijl. 
 Wherefore^ he adds, he faith ^ when he afcended 
 lip on high, he led captivity captive, and gave 
 gifts unto men. \ It may be pertinent yet 
 farther to remark, that fometimes neither 
 the Father, nor the Son, appear to be con- 
 cerned in this matter ; the Spirit being faid, 
 of and by himfelf, to divide his gifts and 
 graces to every man feverally as he will. 
 
 But what (hall we fay to the invocation 
 implied in the clofe of the prophecy we are 
 confidering ; whofoever fiall call on the name 
 of the Lord pall befaved? Whom are we to 
 underftand by the Lord here ? This, I fhould 
 think, may be determined by the fignificance 
 of the fame words in other places. They 
 cannot be mifunderftood in the original pro- 
 phecy of Joel. And if we refer to the tenth 
 Chapter of St. Paul's Epiftle to the Romans, 
 where they occur again, they will amount 
 
 f Ephef. iv. y, i Cor. vii 1 1. 
 
 to 
 
78 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 to an irreliflible, though indired proof of the 
 point in queftion. It is apparent that yefus 
 Chriji is intended, or included however in all 
 thefe texts, is accordingly to be worfl:iipped, 
 and confequently is God. 
 
 After what has been faid, we fhall not be 
 at a lofs for the conftru^ftion to be put upon 
 the inference with which the Apoftle con- 
 cludes this firft difcourfe which we have been 
 remarking on. Therefore let all the houfe of 
 Ifrael know ajjuredly, that God hath made that 
 fame ffus whom ye have crucifd both Lord 
 and Chriji. Juft noting that in the phrafe — 
 that fame Jefus — abundance of reproach is 
 conveyed, I obferve, that thefe words fuffi- 
 ciently exprefs the two natures united in our 
 blelTed Saviour, the Chriji in his human cha- 
 radter, the Lord in his divine. But yet far- 
 ther, the Apoftle encourages his auditors, 
 (who, it feems, were pricked in the heart by 
 what he had preached to them,) to repe7it and 
 be baptized in the name of Jefus Chrift, with 
 the comfortable affurance that the promife of 
 the Holy Ghoji was unto them, and to their 
 
 , Children, 
 
DISCOURSE III. 79 
 
 ChildreUy and to all that are afar offt even as 
 many as the Lord our God fhould call. 
 Agreably to which declaration we are told, 
 that the Lord added to the Church daily fuch 
 as Jhoiild be faved ; and are afterwards in- 
 formed, that believers were added to the Lordy 
 multitudes both of men and women. Now that, 
 according to the moll: natural and obvious 
 interpretation, we are by the Lord to under- 
 hand fefus Chrift in the two laft quoted 
 places', I prefume will be admitted by every 
 candid enquirer; and if fo, it is he who is de- 
 fcribed under the charad:cr of the Lord our 
 God in the text immediately before cited. 
 When therefore we are told at the 42d verfe 
 of this Chapter, that the newly-baptized 
 converts continued fie dfaftly in the Apofles doc- 
 trine j and afterwards, that the Apoflles taught 
 and preached fefus Chrif, and fpake to the 
 people the words of this life, Sec, we may juflly 
 conclude that dod:rine to have been the doc- 
 trine of redemption, as it has fince been re- 
 ceived in the Chriftian Church. 
 
 When St. Peter and his colleagues were 
 brought before the High-Prieji and Rulers, 
 
 &c. 
 
8o DISCOURSE III. 
 
 &c, in order to be examined concerning the 
 cure of the impotent man at the beautiful gate 
 of the 'Tempki we find them again infilling 
 on the refurreSiion of their Mafler, as the 
 fundamental article which was demonftrative 
 of the truth of his mifiion and dodrine, and 
 by confequence of the Divinity of his Perfon. 
 This deceiver (as they had blafphemoufly re- 
 puted him) had faidy while he was yet alive ^ 
 that after three days he would rife again ; he 
 had affirmed to them, that as the Father 
 raifeth up the dead, and quickeneth theniy even 
 fo the Son quickeneth whom he will-y he had 
 declared to them his exiftence before Ahra^ 
 ham in the moil explicit terms. Before Abra- 
 ham was, I am ; he had faid, that God was 
 his Father, in the ftridlefl fenfe, snaking him- 
 f elf equal with God, &c, &c. Suppofing then 
 the Lord to have rifen indeed, the truth of 
 thefe feveral aflertions muft necefiarily fol- 
 low. And, in fad, that he was rifen, thefe 
 betrayers and fnurderers of the juji one, had 
 they not been fiif necked and uncircumcifed in 
 heart and ears, could not but have been con- 
 vinced by beholding the lame ?nan who was 
 
 healed 
 
DISCOURSE III. 8i 
 
 healed Ji an ding before them \ and afterwards by 
 the many figns and wonders which were 
 wrought among the people by the hands of the 
 Apoflles, who moil undoubtedly muft have 
 been endowed with fuch power from on high ; 
 or, in other words, by their now glorified 
 Mafter. 
 
 I have already in efFedl confidered the (in 
 of Ananias and Sapphira, who agreed together 
 to tempt the Spirit of the Lord, as a fin againfl 
 the T'hird Perfon in the Holy T'rinity ; and, 
 I think, we may defy infidelity to put a fairer 
 interpretation upon this portion of the Apof- 
 tolical hifl:ory. 
 
 I fhall not dwell on the two invocations 
 of the proto-martyr at the hour of death ; 
 Lord Jefus receive my Spirit-, Lord, lay not 
 this fin to their charge -, both which abun- 
 dantly imply his faith in fefus Chrifi as Godj 
 but pafs on to the account of the converfion 
 of the Ethiopian Eunuch by Philip the Deacon. 
 * ^he Angel of the Lord fpake unto Philip, 
 
 * Afts viii. 26, &c. 
 
 G faying^ 
 
82 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 faying, arife, and go toward the South , &c i 
 and he arofe, and went y and behold a man of 
 Ethiopia, an Eunuch of great authority under 
 Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, &c, who had 
 come to ferufalemfor to worJJjip, was retur?iingy 
 and, fitting in his chariot, read Efaias the pro- 
 phet, T'hen the Spirit faid to Philip, go near, 
 6cc. And Philip ran to him, and heard him 
 read, &c, and faid, underfiandefl thou what 
 thou readefi ? And he faid, how can I, except 
 fome man Jhould guide me ? And he defired Phi-' 
 lip that he would come up, and ft with him, 
 T'he place, &c, which he read was this. He was 
 led as a jheep to the faughter, &c. And the 
 Eunuch faid, I pray thee, of whom fpeaketh the 
 prophet this f Then Philip began at the fame 
 Scripture, and preached unto him fefus. And as 
 they went on their way they came to a certain 
 water -, and the Eunuch faid, fee , here is water-, 
 what doth hinder me to be baptized'^ And 
 Philip Jaid, if thou believefi with all thy heart, 
 thou may efl. And he anfw ere d and faid, I be- 
 lieve that fefus Chrifi is the Son of God. And 
 he baptized him. The hiftory is as fuccind: 
 as poflible : but why is it not as reafonable 
 
 to 
 
DISCOURSE III. 83 
 
 to fuppole, that, when Philip preached unto 
 the Etmuch yefus, he laid the whole myftery 
 of Chriftianity before him, the grand fcheme 
 of human Salvation ; and confequently that 
 he believed Jefus Chriji to be the eternal Son 
 of God, as that, when he baptized him, he 
 did fo in the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghoji ? There was no 
 manner of occafion to be more circumftan- 
 tial, fuppofing the primitive readers of this 
 hiftory to have believed in our fenfe of the 
 term. 
 
 The next particular that meets us is the 
 converfion of St. Paul* It will be proper to 
 lay it before you. * Saul yet breathing out 
 threatnings and Jlaughter againft the Difciples 
 of the Lord, went unto the high'priejl, and 
 dejired of him letters to Damafcus to the Syna- 
 gogues, that if he found any of this way, he 
 might bring them bound unto ferufakm. And 
 as he journeyed, fuddenly there Jhined round 
 about him a light from heaven. And he fell to 
 the earth, and heard a voice faying unto him, 
 
 * Ads ix. I, &c, 
 
 G 2 Saul, 
 
84 DISCOURSE IIL 
 
 Saul, Saul, ivhy perfecutejl thou me ? And he 
 faid, who art thou. Lord? And the Lord 
 faid, I am Jefus whom thou perfecutejl : it is 
 hard for thee to kick againjl the pricks. And 
 he trembling, arid ajionijhed, faid. Lord, what 
 wilt thou have me to do ? And the Lord faid, 
 Arife, and go into the city, and it fhall be told 
 thee ; and Saul arofe^ and when his eyes were 
 opened, he faw no man ', but they led him, and 
 brought him into Damafcus. And there was a 
 certain dtjciple at Damafcus, named Ananias ; 
 and to him faid the Lord in a vifon, Ananias. 
 And he faid, behold I am here. Lord. And the 
 Lord faid, Arife, and go into theflreet which is 
 called Jirait, and enquire in the lioufe of Judas 
 for one called Saul of Tarfus ; for behold he 
 prayeth -, and hath feen in a vifon a man named 
 Ananias, coming in, and putting his hands on 
 him, that he might receive his fight, 7 hen Ana^ 
 nias anfwered. Lord, 1 have heard by many of 
 this man, how much evil he hath done to thy 
 faints at Jerufalem : and here he hath autho- 
 rity from the chief priefls, to bind all that call 
 on thy name. But the Lord faid unto him, go 
 thy way ',for he is a chofen vejjel unto me. And 
 
 Ananias 
 
DISCOURSE III. 85 
 
 Ananias went his wayy and entered into the 
 boufe ', and putting his hands on him,faid. Bro- 
 ther Sauly the Lord (even Jefus that appeared 
 unto thee) hath fent me, that thou might ejl re- 
 ceive thy Jight: and be filled with the Holy Ghofi, 
 And he received fight forthwith ^ ■. nd arofe, and 
 was baptized. Then was Said certain days with 
 the difciples which were at Damafcus ; and he 
 preached Chrifi in the fynagogues, that he is the 
 Son of God. But all that heard him were 
 amazed, and faid, is not this he that defrayed 
 them which called on this name ? But Saul in-- 
 creafed the more in ftrength, and confounded the 
 yews which dwelt at Damafcus, proving that 
 this is very Chrifi. Upon this compendious 
 narrative I remark, firll, that throughout the 
 whole we muft underftand by — the Lord — 
 Jefus Chrifi : fecondly, that whether Saul re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghofi by virtue of the impo- 
 fiiion of the hands of Ananias, and previoufly 
 to his baptifm, or after it ', in either cafe, 
 the whole myftery of the Gofpel muft have 
 been communicated to him by immediate ir- 
 radiation : and, thirdly, that therefore when 
 he preached Chrifi in the Synagogues that he is 
 
 G 3 the 
 
B6 DISCOURSE IIL 
 
 tije Son of Gody he aflerted him fo to be by 
 eternal generation. Occafionally indeed, when 
 he confounded the feivs, by proving that this 
 is very Chrift^ his argument no doubt turned 
 upon what he alledged to (liew that fefus 
 Chriji was the true Mejjiah, the prophet that 
 Jhouldcome into the worlds and the king of Ifrael 
 in a fpiritual fenfe, whom they had, and did 
 expe6l under the idea of a temporal Saviour. 
 It fee ms after this Saul f pake boldly in the name 
 of the Lord Jefus at Jerufalem ; and we are 
 told, that upon his bcin g Jen t forth to Tarfus, 
 that he might be out of the reach of the Gre- 
 ciaizsy who went about to Jlay him, the Chur-r 
 ches had reft throughout all fudea, 6cc, and 
 were edified, and walking in the fear of the 
 Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy 
 Ghost, were multiplied. I recommend the 
 two lad particulars of this paffage to the at- 
 tention of every candid and intelligent hearer. 
 I add too, in corroboration of what has been 
 offered under this portion of the hiftory, that 
 as "Jefus Chrifi here tells Ananias, that Saul 
 was «2 c ho fen vefel unto him, fo Ananias tells 
 Paul, (according to the latter's account of 
 
DISCOURSE III. 87 
 
 this tranfadion in another place,) that the 
 God of their fathers had chojen him.* 
 
 The converfion of CorneUiis and his family 
 prefents itfelf next to our confideration ; and 
 the fliort, but important narrative of it is 
 pregnant with matter to our purpofe. This 
 profelyte of the gates (for fuch doubtlefs he 
 was) Jaw evidently an Angel of Govt coming 
 unto him, &c. To the voice which called to 
 Peter to rife, kill, and eat, he anfwered, not 
 fo. Lord ; for I have 7iever eaten any thing 
 that is common. Sec, While Peter thought on 
 the vifion, the Spirit faid unto him, Behold ^ 
 three men feek thee ; arife therefore, and go with 
 them, nothing doubting, for I have fent them, 
 God hath Jljewed me, fays he afterwards to 
 Cornelius and his friends, that I Jhould not call 
 any man common, &c. Now if we only fup- 
 pofe, as, I think, we can do no lefs than fup- 
 pofe, that St. Peter addrefles fefus Chrif m 
 the words — not fo. Lord, we have plainly a 
 diflindtion of three Perfons in the facred ftory. 
 The fame will be obfervable likewife in the 
 
 * A£ls xxii. 14. X. I, &c. 
 
 G 4 harangue 
 
88 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 harangue of the Apoflle upon this extraordi- 
 nary occafion. Of a truth I perceive that 
 God is no refpetier of perfons -^ but in every 
 nation he that fear eth him^ 6cc. is accepted with 
 him, lihe word which God fent unto the child- 
 ren of Ifrael, preaching peace by fefus Chriji, 
 (he is Lord of all,) that word, I fay, you 
 know, which was publified throughout all f ti- 
 de a \ how God anointed Jefiis of Nazareth with 
 the Holy Ghost, and with power, &c. 
 However, if it be objeded, that it is by no 
 means credible this devout profelyte and his 
 family (liould be converted to the Chriftian 
 Faith, in the trinitarian fenfe, by any thing 
 afTerted, or intimated in St. Peter ^ difcourfe 
 to them, we will admit the objedlion, and 
 leave our adverfaries in pofleffion of all the 
 advantage they can make of it. We may 
 venture to do fo without the leaft hefitation : 
 for I defire it may be remembered in what 
 manner, and by whom the Apoftle was in- 
 terrupted in his fermon, if it may be called 
 one. While Peter yet fpake thefe words, fays 
 the facred writer, the Holy Ghofl fell on all 
 them which heard the word. And they of the 
 
 circumcifion 
 
DISCOURSE III. 89 
 
 circumcijion were ajiojiified, for they heard them 
 fpeak with tongues, and magiiify God. ^y this 
 miraculous event therefore all farther endea- 
 vours of the Apoftle for the inftrudlion of 
 thefe people were happily fuperfeded : they 
 were, as St. Paul was, inftantaneoufly as it 
 were, guided into all truth -, and became be- 
 lievers in the fame fenfe in which he was 
 one. Agreeably hereunto, when St. Feter re- 
 hearfed this matter, and expounded it by order 
 to thofe of the circumcifon who contended with 
 him, he tells them in the courfe of his nar- 
 ration, that as he began to fpeak, the Holy 
 Ghojifell on them that heard him. After this, 
 would it not be idle to infift upon the inade- 
 quatenefs of St. Feter ^ addrefs to the purpofe 
 of converfion in its utmofl extent ? 
 
 We read in the fequel of this, and in 
 the following chapters, that the word was 
 preached, that the hand of the Lord was with 
 thefe preachers ; that /2 great number believed^ 
 and turned unto the Lord , and that the word 
 of God grew and multiplied. If thefe expref- 
 fions are compared with others fimilar to 
 
 them 
 
90 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 them in this hiftory, and with feveral al- 
 ready cited, they will be found, I prefume, 
 abundantly to coincide with our hypolhefis, 
 or, more properly, to confirm it. 
 
 But the time admoniflies me to befpeak 
 your attention to the continuation of my ar- 
 gument at the next opportunity. 
 
 D I S- 
 
I S C O U R S E IV. 
 
 Acts I. 3. 
 By many infallible proofs, 
 
 N profecution of the fubjed: which en- 
 gaged us laft Sunday, I proceed to the 
 account of St. Peters imprifonment, and 
 what followed upon it, which the facred 
 Hiftorian gives us in the 12th chapter of 
 the A^s of the Apofiles, 
 
 When Peter was put in prifon by Herod, 
 it feems, prayer was made without ceafmg of 
 the, church unto God for him'^ ', and on the 
 night before his intended execution, the Lord, 
 V^e find, fent his angel, and delivered him out 
 
 * Adls xii. c. 
 
 of 
 
92 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 of the hand of Herod, &c. Now that Jefus 
 Chrift was the Lord that fent his angel, ap- 
 pears evident enough from thefe conlidera- 
 tions. fcfus Chrijl is manifeftly defigned by 
 this title, for the moll: part at leaft, through 
 this whole hiftory. T^he Lord who delivered 
 Peter by his angel was certainly the fame Lord 
 who afterwards fpake to Paul in the night by 
 a vifon ; and who, upon another occafion, 
 food by the fame Apoille, and encouraged 
 him,&c. Nov/ we (hould be glad to know, 
 why thefe particulars are not to be regarded 
 as equivalent to the appearances, and vilions, 
 and deliverances *, which are fo frequent in 
 the OldT^efiament ', and, in that cafe, I need 
 not point out the confequences they lead to. 
 
 In the following chapter, we fee Barnabas 
 and Saul fent forth by an immediate com- 
 miffion from the Holy Ghofl. T^he Holy Ghoft 
 faid, feparate me Barnabas and Saul for the 
 work whereunto I have called them § . So they 
 being fent forth by the Holy Ghofi, departed 
 
 * See Dan. iii.. 28, and chap. vi. 22. § Ads xiii. 2. 
 
 unto 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 93 
 
 unto SekuciUj &c. The pafTage has been in- 
 troduced before, and 1 leave it to the confi- 
 deration of every attentive and impartial 
 hearer. 
 
 The next occurrence is the converlion of 
 the Deputy S. Paidus, who, we are informed, 
 was a prudent man, and called for Barnabas 
 and Saul, and defired to hear the word of God, 
 And we may reafonably fuppofe that our 
 Apoftles preached it to him at large, and 
 laid before him the great myfteries of the 
 Gofpel j and that he believed in the mofl ex- 
 ten five fenfe, and was confirmed in his faith 
 by the judgment which he faw miraculoufly 
 infli(5ted by the hajid of the Lord upon Ely- 
 fnas the forcerer 'y being, as the facred text 
 exprefi"es it, ajionified at the doSirine of the 
 Lord: the dodrine juft above ftyled the word 
 of God. 
 
 After this we find St. Paul preaching in 
 
 the fynagogue of the fews at Antioch in P/- 
 
 fdia^. Now thefe fews, though they were 
 
 * Aifts xiii. 1 6, &c. 
 
 not 
 
94 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 not immediately concerned with them that 
 dwelt 2X'Jeriifalem in the proceedings againft 
 our blefled Lord, were yet in all probability 
 conjenting unto his death ; as they could not 
 all this while be unacquainted with his 
 flory, or ftrangers to his pretenfions. The 
 Apoftle therefore adopts the fame mode of 
 argumentation which St. Peter had ufed be- 
 fore, in his fpeech to the council, and lays 
 the main ftrefs on the fundamental article of 
 the refurred:ion of our Lord from the dead. 
 From the admifiion of this, the truth of the 
 other great points of Chriftianity muft ne- 
 celTarily follow. And it fhould feem that 
 this difcourfe of our Apoftle had a confide- 
 rable effed: upon fome of his audience -, and 
 indeed that others conceived the full force 
 and import of the moft flriking particulars 
 in it : for we read, that when the congrega- 
 tion was broken up^ many of the 'Jews and 
 religious profelytes followed Paul and Barna- 
 bas ; who /peaking to them, perfuaded them to 
 continue in the grace of God. And, by the 
 way, this circumftance may well be thought 
 to imply, that the Spirit of grace had previ- 
 
 ouflv 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 95 
 
 oufly operated in their hearts to their entire 
 converfion. But the next fabbatb day, we 
 are farther told, ahnofi the whole city came 
 together to hear the word of God ; and the 
 refult was, that the jews, Jilled with envy^ 
 J pake againjl thofe things which were fpoken by 
 Paul, contradiBing and blafpheming, I would 
 juft aflcthen, whether this blasphemy does 
 not help us to a very ftrong prefumptive 
 proof of the fenfe in which thefe Jews un- 
 derftood the things which were fpoken by the 
 Apoftle ? 
 
 Let us now attend Paid and Barnabas to 
 Iconium ; and fee whether we may not rea- 
 dily infer the nature of their do6lrine from 
 the fuccefs of it there. In this place, we 
 are informed, they abode long time, fpeaking 
 boldly in the Lord, which gave tejiimojiy to the 
 word of his grace, and granted Jigns and won* 
 ders to be done by their hands'^, I would de- 
 lire you to compare the laft claufe of this 
 pafTage with the conclulion of St. Mark's 
 
 * Acl* xiv. 3, &c. &c, 
 
 Gofpel ; 
 
96 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 Go{pc\;/o then after the L,okd had fpoken 
 unto them J he was received up into heaven ^ &c. 
 and they went forth and preached -, the Lord 
 working with theniy and confirming the word 
 with Jigns following 'y and with the twelfth 
 verfe of the next chapter ; all the multitude 
 kept filence^ and gave audience to Barnabas 
 and Paul declaring what miracles and wonders 
 God had wrought among fi the Gentiles by 
 them 'y and with the following pafTage in the 
 Epiftle to ^Q Hebrews ', how Jhall we efcape 
 if we negleSi fo great falvation ; which at the 
 firft began to be fpoken by the Lord, and was 
 confirmed unto us by them that heard him ; 
 God alfo bearing them witnefs, both with 
 fgns and wonders, and with divers ?niraclesy 
 and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his 
 own will^-y I fay, 1 could wifh you to com- 
 pare thefe feveral places ; and, I believe I 
 might venture to abide by the conclufions 
 you will draw from them. 
 
 We find our Apoftles next at Lyjlra, where 
 Paul QWXQ^ the man that was impotent in his 
 
 \ Heb ii. 3, 5.c. 
 
 feet. 
 
D I S C O U R S E IV. 97 
 
 feet, &c : * on the fight of which miracle, 
 the people lift up their voices ^ fiy^^^gt ^he gods 
 are come down to us in the likenejs of men, 
 PofTelTed with this notiontXhQ priefs oi Jupiter 
 brought oxen, and would have donefacrifice, &c. 
 This no fooner came to the ears of Barnabas 
 and Faul than they rent their clothes, and ran 
 in among the people, crying out, Jirs, why do 
 
 ye thefe things ? We aljo are men of like paffions 
 with you, and preach unto you, that ye jhould 
 turn from thefe vanities unto the living God, 
 which made heaven and earth, 6cc. Sec, Now 
 this was precifely the expoftulation which 
 the occafion demanded. The exiftence of 
 the one living and true God was to be af- 
 ferted to thefe idolatrous believers in a plu- 
 rality of deities. At that time to have op- 
 pofed to their perfuafions doctrines peculiarly 
 Chriftian, would have been altogether pre- 
 mature and unfeafonable. It appears however 
 that our Apoftles had, before and after this, 
 preached thefe docflrines at Lyjlra, and in the 
 neighbourhood, with fuccefs ; though moft 
 probably, for obvious reafons, not in the 
 
 * Afts xiv. 8, &c. 
 
 H hearing 
 
98 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 hearing of thofe that would have done facrifice. 
 For we read at the fixth verfe of this chapter, 
 that, being ware of the defign of the Jews 
 and Gentiles at Iconium to ufe them deJ'pitefuUyy 
 &c. they fled unto Lyflra and Derbe, &c. and 
 there they preached the Go/pel. And after the 
 affair of the facrifice, we are told, that there 
 came to Lyjlra certain Jews from Antioch, who 
 perfuaded the people, and having Jloned Paul, 
 drew him out of the city, &c ; that neverthelefs 
 he revived, and foon after preached the Gofpel 
 at Derbe, and taught many, and returned again 
 to Lyflra, &c, confirming the fouls of the D'f- 
 ciples, and exhorting them to continue in the 
 faith, * 
 
 We meet with nothing now that hath 
 particular connexion with our argument, be- 
 fore the converfions related in the fixteenth 
 chapter. Let us proceed then to thefe. At 
 Tiro as, fays the hiftory, a vifion appeared to 
 Paul in the night ; from which he and Silas 
 ajfuredly gathered that the Lord had called them 
 to preach the Gofpel in Macedo?iia. Obferve 
 
 * Afts xvi. 1 , 
 
 then 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 99 
 
 then the account of the converfion of Lydia 
 at Philippic A certain woman named Lydia, 
 which worjhipped God, heard us : whofe heart 
 the Lord opened, that fie attended unto the 
 things which were fpoken of Paul. And when 
 fie was baptized, fioe be/ought m, fiying, if ye 
 have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come 
 into my houfe, &c. Now I would aik, whe- 
 ther we may not reafonably fuppofe the Lord 
 opened this woman's heart for the reception 
 of all evangelical truths, almofl in an in- 
 ftant ? Whether her cafe is not at leaft fimi- 
 lar to that of Cornelius ? And whether we 
 are not as much authorifed to take it for 
 granted, that the things which were fpoken of 
 Paul were the things pertaining to the kingdom 
 of God, agreeably to our fyftem, as that this 
 convert was baptized according to the form 
 in St. Matthews Gofpel ? I would juft re- 
 mark here, that this fyftem is in no wife pre- 
 judiced, either by the declaration of the 
 damfel pojfeffed with afpirit of diviniation, who 
 followed Paul and his companions, and cried, 
 frying, thefe men are the fervants of the mofl 
 high God, which fiew unto us the way of Sal- 
 H 2 I'ation ; 
 
loo DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 'vation J or by the Apoftle's exorcifm of that 
 fpirit in the following words, I command thee 
 in the name of 'J ejus Chrijl to come out of her. 
 
 But let us turn to the converfion of the 
 jailor, to whofe cuflody Vaul and Mas were 
 committed at Philippi. Sirs, what mujl I do 
 to be favedf^ is the queftion which the 
 former, in a fit of aftonifhment and terror, 
 put to the latter. And they faid, believe on 
 the Lord Jefus Chrijl, and thou Jhalt befaved, 
 and thy houfe. And they fpake unto him the 
 word of the Lord, &c. And he was baptized, 
 he and all his. And he rejoiced, believing in 
 God with all his houfe. 'To believe in God, and 
 to believe on the Lord J ejus Chrijl, appear here 
 to be convertible expreffions. In fhort, I af- 
 firm that in this, as well as in preceding in- 
 ftances, we have good reafon to fuppofe 
 the perfons preached to were made ac- 
 quainted by the Apoftle and his companion 
 with the capital truths of Chriftianity, as 
 they are taught in the Church. 
 
 * Ads xvi. 30. 
 
 Not 
 
DISCOURSE IV. loi 
 
 Not long after this, our Apoftle and his 
 fellow-travellers came to T^hejfahiiica, where 
 was ajynagogue of the Jews. * Afid Paul (as 
 the narrative proceeds) went in unto them, and 
 three fabbath days reafoned with them out of the 
 fcriptures -, ope?iing and alledging^ that Chrifl 
 muji needs have fuffered, and rifen again, and 
 that this Jefus whom I preach unto you is 
 Chriji. And fame of them believed. It will 
 be fufEcient to obferve here, that our Apof- 
 tle dealt no doubt with thefe Jews and 
 yeivijh profelytes, as he had before done 
 with others on like occafions. But the grofs 
 mifreprefentation, and fcandalous calumny 
 of the unbelieving Jews, in the city juft men- 
 tioned, is extremely worth notice. They 
 drew Jafon, as we are informed, and certain 
 brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, 
 thefe men that have turned the world iipfide 
 down, are come hither alfo j "f* and thefe all do 
 contrary to the decrees of Ccvfar, faying, that 
 there is another king, one Jfus. Now it is 
 perfectly reafonable to fuppofe, that Jafon 
 and thefe brethren proclaimed their crucified 
 
 * Afts xvii. I, &c, t Ibid. xvii. 6. 
 
 H 3 maftcr 
 
102 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 mafter king in a fpiritual fenfe ; nay, that 
 they proclaimed him the fovereign of the 
 univerfe, king of kings ^ and lord of lords-, but 
 it is clear, beyond a poffibility of doubt, 
 that they afferted no temporal jurifdidlion 
 of fefus Chriji, or faid or did any thing con- 
 trary to the decrees, or again ft the government 
 of Ccefar. 
 
 We have next an account of Paul and Si^ 
 las^s preaching the Gofpel at Berea* -, but 
 there is nothing in it w^hich difcriminates it 
 from parallel ones already fpoken to, except 
 the candid reception the Gofpel met with at 
 that place. 
 
 ' We will therefore follow our Apoftle to 
 Athens, where we find him difputing in the 
 fynagogue "with the fews, ajid others that met 
 with him. Among thefe were certain philofo^ 
 phers of the 'Epicureans afid the Stoics, who 
 encountered him ; fome calling him a babler-, 
 others, a fetter forth of Jlrange gods, becaufe 
 he preached unto them fefus and the refurrec- 
 
 ^ A^s xvii. 10. 
 
 tion<, 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 103 
 
 tion^. I mean not to infinuate from this 
 paflage, that the Apoftle is maintaining the 
 Divinity of J ejus Chrijij as it is evident 
 from the tenor of his enfuing difcourfe to 
 thofe heathen philofophers, which is fet 
 down at large, that he has here only an eye 
 to the prophetic character, or office of our 
 blefTed Lord. If you will turn to the dif- 
 courfe, you will find the great points in- 
 lifted on, to be the unity and the fpirituality 
 of the Godhead, together with the doctrine 
 of a future ftate, and the refurredion of all 
 men from the dead, in confequence of hisy 
 whom God had ordained to be the judge of 
 the world. This was a proper beginning 
 with heathens. But what effed had this 
 difcourfe upon thefe idolatrous philofophers ? 
 When they heard of the refurreSlion, continues 
 the facred ftory, fome mocked, and others 
 faid, we will hear thee again j howbeit certain 
 men clave unto, him, and believed^ &c. Our 
 Apoftle appears then to have made converts 
 zxAthensy though we do not read that they 
 were baptized, or indeed believed in the fun- 
 
 § Ads xvii. 16, &c. 
 
 Ji 4 damenta} 
 
104 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 damental articles of Chriflianity, according 
 to our hypothefis. Without doubt, thefe 
 articles, the great myfteries of faith, were 
 gradually opened to them afterwards, and 
 previoufly to their admiffion into the church 
 by baptifm. For we Ihall fee prefently that 
 thefe converts are not the only inftances of 
 perfons who were difciples, or believers in a 
 certain fenfe, though they were uninftrudled 
 in the firft principles of Chriflianity ; and 
 this too even fince the propagation of it by 
 the Apoftles. 
 
 After thefe things, we are told, Pau/ and 
 Silas — came to Corinth^ -, and Paul reafoned 
 in the fynagogue^ — and perfuaded the yews 
 and Greeks ', — and was prejjed in fpirity and 
 tejlijied to the yews that yefus was Chrijii 
 and when they oppofed themfelves, and blaf- 
 phemed) he jhook his raiment, and /aid unto 
 them, your blood be upon your own heads, &;c. 
 You will be pleafed to compare this relation 
 with that of the perverfe and unbelieving 
 
 § Afts xviii. I , &c. 
 
 yews 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 105 
 
 Jews at Antioch in Fifidia^ already taken no- 
 tiee of. 
 
 We have next an account of the conver- 
 fion of JuJiuSf (though it is not particularly 
 fet down,) and of Crifpus, and of many of the 
 Corinthians -, which contains nothing mate- 
 rial to our argument. 
 
 But after this we read of an infurrediion 
 made by the Jews againji Paul, and of a 
 charge brought againft him before Gallio', 
 which has a particular worth our notice. 
 l^his fellow, fay they, ferfuadeth men to wor- 
 flnp God contrary to the law^. Now when 
 we recoiled:, that our blelTed Saviour was 
 circumcifed, and ** obedient to the law for 
 " man ;" that himfelf and his Apoftles con- 
 formed to the religion of their country in 
 all points, and attended divine fervice in the 
 temple, and in the fynagogues ; that our 
 Apoftle circumcifed I'imothy in pure conde- 
 fcenlion to the Jews-, that, in vindication 
 of his innocence, he declared to Fejius, as 
 
 * Afts xviii. 13. 
 
 he 
 
io6 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 he had done before in fubftance to Felix, 
 that neither againjl the law of the Jews, nei- 
 ther againji the temple he had offended any 
 thing (It ally that the M(?/227V oeconomy to- 
 tally ceafed not before the final deftrudion 
 of yerufalem, when all difputes concerning 
 circumcifion, and the legal rites and obfer- 
 vances were happily terminated -, when we 
 recoiled: all this, to which more might be 
 fubjoined, it will, I conceive, be impoflible 
 to make tolerable fenfe of the accufation juft 
 mentioned, without fuppofing fomething to 
 have been fuperadded to the 'Jewijl:) worfhip 
 by the Apoftles, and firft Chriftians, which 
 gave this great offence j and what (hould this 
 be but the worlhip of Chriftians, as fuch ; 
 or, in other words, the adoration of Chrift, 
 as God ? 
 
 We will now proceed to the account 
 which the facred hiflorian gives us of Apolloi 
 in the fame chapter. * A certain 'Jew named 
 Apollosy an eloquent man, and mighty in the 
 Scriptures, (;ame to Ephefus, 'This man was 
 
 * Aifls xviii. 24. 
 
 inJiruSled 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 107 
 
 inJlruBed in the way of the Lord -, and, being 
 fervent in the Spirit, lie fpake and taught dili- 
 gently the things of the Lord, knowing only the 
 baptifm of John, And he began to /peak boldly 
 in the fynagogue. Whom when Aquila and Prif- 
 cilla had heard, they expounded unto him the 
 way of God more perfeBly. And when he was 
 difpofed to pafs into Achaia, the brethren wrote ^ 
 exhorting the difciples to receive him : who, 
 when he was come, helped them much which had 
 believed through grace ; for he mightily con- 
 vinced the Jews, and that publickly, jewing 
 by the Scriptures that fefus was Chrijl, This 
 portion of Scripture, though a little abftrufe, 
 is replete with matter for our obfervation. 
 Apollos is here faid to have been mighty in the 
 Scriptures ', to have been injlruBed tn the 
 WAY OF THE LoRD ; and to have fpoken, 
 and taught diligently the things of the 
 Lord; i.e. be)?ond all controverfy, the 
 things of the Lord Jefus Chriji. Neverthelefs 
 he is only called a Jew ; and why, but be- 
 caufe he was not baptized in the name of 
 Jefus ChriJI ? He was not a Chriilian in the 
 full fenfe of the term, as we underftand it; 
 
 he 
 
io8 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 he knew only the baptifm of yohn ; he knew, 
 as we cannot but fuppofe from this account 
 of him, he knew Jefus Chrijl to be the pro- 
 fhety the Mejjiah that was to come, whofe way 
 'John had prepared by preaching the baptifm of 
 repent ance, &c -, but he knew not the whole 
 myftery of godlinefsy the grand fecret of human 
 redemption by the Son of God, coexistent 
 with his Father, before the foundation of the 
 world. And accordingly, we may fafely con- 
 clude, that it was with refped: to this great 
 myftery, that Aquila and Prifcilla expounded 
 to him the way of God more perfectly. If 
 we do not infer from hence, that he exprefsly 
 and direiStly preached the great myftery in 
 que ft ion to thofe fews whom he mightily con- 
 vincedy &c. every difficulty under this head 
 is fairly folved by preceding confiderations. 
 
 The cafe of the difciples whom St. Paul 
 found at Ephefus is very fimilar to that we 
 have juft defpatched. Have ye received the 
 Holy Ghoji, fays he, fnce ye believed f And 
 they faid unto hitn, we have not fo much as 
 heard whether there be any Holy Ghofl. \ And 
 
 X Afts xix. 2, &c. 
 
 he 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 109 
 
 hefaid, unto them what then were ye baptized f 
 
 And they faid, unto yohns baptifm. Thefifaid 
 
 Paul, John verily baptized with the baptifm of 
 
 repentance, faying unto the people, that they 
 
 fdould believe on hijn which fiould come after 
 
 him, that is, on Chriji Jefus, When they heard 
 
 this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord 
 
 fefus. A? id when Paul had laid his hands upon 
 
 them, the Holy Ghojl came on them ; and they 
 
 fpake with tongues, and prophefied. The paf- 
 
 fage is not wholly free from obfcurity j but 
 
 we cannot do lefs than collect from it, that 
 
 thefe dijciples knew as much of ChriJI 'Jefus 
 
 antecedently to this interview as Apollos did 
 
 before his acquaintance with Aquila and Prif 
 
 cilia ; and confequently, that when they were 
 
 baptized in the name of the Lord Jefus, they 
 
 were baptized in the name of a greater per- 
 
 fon than a prophet ; and when the Holy Ghofi 
 
 came on them, and they fpake with tongues and 
 
 prophefed,\\2.di,\\]iit Cornelius and his houfhold, 
 
 an immediate infight into the profound myf- 
 
 tery of the Chriftian faith. I jufl: add that, 
 
 in the chapter before us, the name of the 
 
 Lord Jefus is faid to have been magnified; 
 
 and 
 
iro DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 and that the word of the Lord Jesus, 
 and the word of God are different modes 
 of expreffion which at firil: Tight will be found 
 to import one and the fame thing. 
 
 But to proceed. I fee nothing of confe- 
 quence enough to our argument to detain us,- 
 till we find St. Paul zx. Miletus ^ from whence 
 h^fent to Ephefus, and called the elders of the 
 Church. And when they were come to himy fays 
 the hi (lory, he J'aid unto them, ye know from 
 the frjl day that I came into Afa, after what 
 7nanner I ha've been with you ; ferving the 
 Lord with all humility ; and how I kept hack 
 nothing that was profitable unto you j tefiifying 
 both to fews and Greeks, repentance towards 
 God, and faith toward our Lord Jefus 
 Chrifi. And now behold, 1 go bound in the 
 fpirit unto ferufalem, not knowing the things 
 that fiall befall me ; fave that the Holy 
 Ghost witnejj'eth in every city, faying, that 
 afiiiSlions abide me. But none of thefe things 
 move me, fo that I might finiJJj my courfe, and 
 the minifiry which I have received of the Lord 
 
 * Afts XX. 17, &c. 
 
 fefus. 
 
DISCOURSE IV. MI 
 
 Jefus, to tejiify the Go/pel of the grace of Got), 
 
 And now I know, that ye all, among whom I 
 
 have gone pre achhig the kingdom of God, fiall 
 
 fee my face no more. Wherefore I take you to 
 
 record, that I am pure from the blood of all 
 
 men ifor I have not Jhiinned to declare unto you 
 
 ALL THE COUNSEL OF GoD. T^ake heed 
 
 therefore unto yourfelves, and to all the flock, 
 
 over which the Holy Ghost hath made you 
 
 overfeers, to feed the Church of God, which he 
 
 hath pur chafed with his own blood. For I 
 
 know this, that after my departing Jlmll grievous 
 
 wolves enter in among you, not fparing the 
 
 flock : alfo of your own f elves JJjall men arife, 
 
 fpeaking perverfe things, to draw away difciples 
 
 after them» Now if we fuppofe this Apofto- 
 
 lical charge to have been delivered to perfons 
 
 pre-inftru6led in the myftery of the Gofpel, 
 
 agreeably to our reprefentation of it, i. e. to 
 
 have been believers in the Holy Trinity, it 
 
 muft be acknowleged to contain words of 
 
 perfpicuity, truth, and fobernefs -, but on every 
 
 other fiippofition, muft not St. Paul have 
 
 been thought by his audience to have been 
 
 indeed befide hitnfelff I would recommend 
 
 the 
 
112 D I S C O U R S E IV. 
 
 the whole of this pafTage to every judicious 
 and impartial reader's thorough confideration. 
 
 We will now attend this great Apoftle to 
 yerufakm ', where we find him violently at- 
 tacked by the Jews which were of JJiay who 
 Jiirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, 
 crying out, men of Ifrael help, this is the man 
 that teacheth all men every where againjl the 
 people and the law, &c. The accufation 
 brought here againfl: our Apoftle is plainly 
 in fubftance the fame with that alledged by 
 the fews of Achaia, who accufed him of 
 perfuading men to worJlAp God contrary to the 
 law, I fhall therefore refer you to what was 
 faid on that occafion. Only I will add here, 
 that the obfervation then made is much con- 
 firmed by the circumftance of St. Paul's pu~ 
 rising himfelf at ferufalem with \k\^four men 
 who had a vow on them, agreeably to the ad- 
 vice before given by the judaizing Chriftians, 
 and in exa6l conformity to the Mofaic con- 
 ftitution. But if we turn to what the Apoftle 
 has to fay in his own defence, we fhall find 
 
 * Afts xxi. 27, &c. 
 
 his 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 113 
 
 his apology to contain an account of his con- 
 verfion, and of his Apoftolical commiffion in 
 confequence of it ; which ftrengthens much 
 what has been remarked relative to the charge 
 brought againft him. It is obfervable, that 
 St. Paul calls himfelf here a Jew in the very 
 fame breath almoil in which he avows him- 
 felf a Chriflian. He admits his hearers to 
 be zealous towards God, according to the perfeB 
 manner of the law of the fat hers y-f though he 
 plainly intimates all the while that they were 
 erroneoufly or blindly zealous, or, as he elfe- 
 where exprefTes it, that their zeal of God was 
 not according to knowlege. He does not 
 undervalue or vilify the law, and much lefs 
 pronounce it to be void, and of 72o?2e eff'cB, 
 though he profefTes himfelf a preacher of the 
 Gofpel. Neither the fews oi ferufalem, nor 
 thofe of Afia, could poflibly be ftrangers to 
 the NEW DOCTRINE which he taught under 
 that chara(fler : fo that we are not at a lofs to 
 know the nature and import of the teftimony 
 which he bore concerning his Divine Mafter. 
 Belide, we are to remember, that he was In- 
 
 t Afts xxii. 1, &c. 
 
 I terrupted 
 
114 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 terrupted in the courfe of his harangue, and 
 precluded from enlarging his fpeech, or ex- 
 patiating on his dodrine, (which otherwife 
 peihaps he might have done,) by the cla- 
 mours and outrage of a giddy and incenfed 
 multitude. 
 
 We fee him next before the chief priejls 
 and council ', in which fituation he politicly 
 takes advantage of the difference of fentiment 
 betvi'een them that compofed it : the one part 
 being Saddncees, and the other Pharifees, The 
 ApoiHe openly declares himfelf a Pharifee -, 
 in which plea his immediate view was mani- 
 feftly to his own prefervation ; though ulti- 
 mately he had doubtlefs an eye to the con- 
 verlion of the mofl confiderable and refpec- 
 table part of his audience, by tacitly at leaft 
 referring to the refurredtion of yeftis Chriji, 
 and the important confequences neceffarily 
 refulting from it. 
 
 In much the fame light we may regard 
 his apology for himfelf before Felix in the 
 
 f Ads xxiii. I, &c. 
 
 following 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 115 
 
 following Chapter. Under one article of his 
 accufation he is charged with being a ring- 
 leader of the fe5i of the Nazarenes -y-f or, as the 
 Afiatic fews had exprefled themfelves, with 
 teaching men every where againfl the law ; or, 
 in the words of the ^ews of Achaia, with 
 perfuadi?2g men to worfiip God contrary to the 
 law, and under another article he is traduced 
 as a mover of Sedition, and a difturber of the 
 public peace. Now there is fomething ob- 
 fervably dexterous in our Apoftle's reply to 
 all this ; in which he partly denies the 
 charge, profefTes his innocence, and defies 
 them to prove the things whereof they accufe 
 him-, and partly aflerts the caufe he had 
 efpoufed, and in general terms acknowleges 
 his Chriftian principles. In this, as in the 
 preceding cafe, there is fine addrefs in the 
 Apoftle's endeavour to intereft his auditors 
 on the fide of Chriftianity, by reprefenting 
 its profefiTors as holding one common tenet 
 with i\iQ Ji rait ejl and moft popular fed: of the 
 fewijld religion ; while at the fame time he 
 was indired;ly preaching through fefus the 
 
 \ Afts xxiv. 5, &c. 
 
 I 2 refurredlion 
 
ii6 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 refurreBion from the dead, and by necefTary 
 implication maintaining the great myftery of 
 the Chriftian Faith. Felix, we find, was far 
 from being unacquainted with at leaft fome 
 of the doctrines of Chriftianity, and referved 
 the matter for a farther hearing -, but in the 
 interim he, with his wife Drujilla, which was 
 a Jewefs, fent for Paul privately, and heard 
 him concerning the faith in Chriji.^ It does not 
 appear that our Apoftle on this occafion dif- 
 courfed on any one article of faith, ftridlly 
 and peculiarly Chriflian. He reafoned of righ^ 
 teoufnefs, temperancey and judgment to come, till 
 this iniquitous governor trembled-, and pro- 
 bably had proceeded to the full difplay of 
 all evangelical truth, had he not been ab- 
 ruptly difmifTed. However, if there be any 
 difficulty here, it is fuch as afFed:s not our 
 argument in particular; becaufe the very fame 
 difficulty will fubfifl:, whether we fuppofe 
 that Jefus whom Paul preached to be ** very 
 God of very God," or to be the Son of God 
 in a fecondary fenfe only, or indeed barely 
 the prophet that was to come into the world, 
 
 X Afts xxiv. 24, &c. 
 
 Many 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 117 
 
 Many of the foregoing remarks may be 
 applied to the defence made afterwards by 
 our Apoftle before king Agrippa mid Fejius J. 
 I think it unnecefTary therefore to cite it. It 
 will fuffice to obferve, or rather to repeat, 
 that, averting the dodrine of the refurredlion 
 in general, and particularly that of yefus 
 Chriji, St. Paul at one and the fame time in- 
 iinuates himfelf into the good graces of fuch 
 as were pharifaically difpofed ; and points to 
 a facfl, the admillion of which, upon full and 
 difpaffionate enquiry, muft lead all that heard 
 him, all the Jews at leaft into a train of con- 
 clufions, neceilarily comprehending the great 
 truths of the Gofpel. And that this was a 
 much more judicious mode of convidion 
 than the dired: or pofitive affertion of all, or 
 any of thofe truths could have been, I pre- 
 fume, I need not flay to prove. 
 
 When St. Paui fome time after this ex-^ 
 pounded and tejlified the kingdom of God to the 
 yews at Home, perfuading them concerning ye- 
 fus both out of the law of Mofes, and out of the 
 
 X Afts xxvi. 1, &c, 
 
 I 3 prophets. 
 
ii8 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 prophets, % we cannot fay with any precifion 
 how much of the whole fcheme of Chriftia- 
 nity he laid before them. Mofl probably his 
 ufaal difcretion dired:ed him to deal tenderly 
 with them at firft ; though when he declared 
 to the unbelieving part of them that the 
 Jalvation of God was fent unto the Gentiles, 
 the expreffion has evident reference to that 
 fcheme ; as, fuitably hereto, the hiftory of 
 the ApoJloUcal ABs concludes with an ac- 
 count of his receiving all that came in unto 
 him for two whole years, and preaching the 
 kingdom of God, and teaching thofe things which 
 concern the Lord Jefus Chriji, 
 
 This minute and circumftantial furvey of 
 the hiftory of the A5ls of the Apojiles, fo far 
 as it is connedted with our prefent fubjedt,, 
 will, I apprehend, throw much light upon 
 the fame. And it will receive additional 
 luftre from the following confideration : that, 
 as in the Holy Scriptures, fo in the writings 
 of the Apoftolical Fathers, the leading truths 
 of Chriftianity are incidentally mentioned, or 
 
 X A(5ls xxviii. 23, 31. 
 
 alluded 
 
DISC 0^*0 R S E IV. 119 
 
 alluded to, and not fyflematically, but uni- 
 formly taught. The dodrine of thefe Fa- 
 thers is delivered in the fpirit of fimplicity ; 
 it appears plainly to have been the ftanding 
 doctrine of the Church 3 nor is there a fingle 
 circumftance that will incline us to fufpedt 
 them of a defign to obtrude their own pri- 
 vate opinions, or conceits, upon the Chriftian 
 world. This to me feems demonftrable from 
 a very obfervable particular ; which is, that 
 in their writings they do not cite all, or the 
 principal texts which are adduced in main- 
 tenance of the do<5lrine of the Trinity, but 
 affert the fame in other terms, and in lan- 
 guage fully equivalent. They evidently con- 
 fldered it, not as requiring proof, but de- 
 ferving illuftration. Ignatius, in the intro- 
 du6lion to his Epiflle to the Ephefianst falutes 
 them ** according to the will of the Father, 
 *' and yefus Chriji our God." The fame Fa- 
 ther Vv'ifhes the Romans to ** permit him to 
 '* imitate the paflion of his God ;" or, of 
 Chriji his God, as it flands in the Original. 
 In the above-mentioned Epiftle to the Ephe^ 
 JianSf he takes occafion thus to exprefs him- 
 
 felf. 
 
120 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 felf. " There is one phyfician, both fleflily 
 ** and fpiritual ; made and not made ; God 
 *Mncarnate; true life in death ; both of 
 *' Mary and of God ; firft paffible, then im- 
 " paffible ', even 'Jejus Chrijl our Lord,** («) 
 In the concludon of his Epiftle to the Mag- 
 nefians, he injoins them to " be fubjedt to 
 *' their bilhop, as ^ejus Chrijl to the Father, 
 '* according to the flefh, -f- and the Apoftles 
 *« both to Chrift, and to the Father, and to 
 *^ the Holy Ghoft." This inverfion is a very 
 remarkable one. In his Epiftle to Polycarp 
 he exhorts him " to confider the times, and 
 ** expedt him who is above all time, eternal, 
 *' inviiible, &c." Were there occafion, much 
 more to the fame purpofe might be extraded 
 from this venerable Father. 
 
 Polycarp in his Epiflle to the PhilipianSj 
 wifhes them to be " fubjedl to the Priefts, 
 << 5cc. as unto God and Chrift.'* 
 
 In St. Clemenfs firft epiftle to the Corinth- 
 tans thefe paftages occur. ** The fceptrc of 
 
 f Romans i. 3. 
 
 ** the 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 121 
 
 •* the majefty of God, our l^ovd J efusChrift, 
 '* came not in the fhew of pride," &c. 6cc. 
 The fecond fedion of the fame epiftle pro- 
 ceeds in the terms following. ** Ye were 
 ** all of you humble-minded, &c. defiring 
 " rather to be fubjedl than to govern, &c. 
 *' being content with the portion God had 
 *• difpenfed to you, and hearkening dili- 
 ** gently to his word, ye were enlarged 
 ** in your bowels, having his sufferings 
 ** always before your eyes." This palTage 
 is not unfimilar to part of St. Paul's difcourfe 
 at Miletus to the elders of the church of 
 JLphefusy before fubmitted to your confidera- 
 tion. Let us fee now what this Father fays 
 in his other epiftle to the Corinthians. The 
 exordium of it is this — ** Brethren, we ought 
 «* fo to think of Jefus Chrift as of God &c." 
 In the third paragraph he quotes thefe words 
 of our blefled Saviour ; Whofoever Jhall con- 
 fefs me before j}ie?i, him will I confefs before 
 my Father, But, continues he, ** Wherein 
 ** muft we confefs him ? Namely, in doing 
 *< thofe things which he faith, &c. by wor- 
 ** flipping him, not with our lips only, but 
 
 ♦* with 
 
122 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 *' with all our heart, &c. for he faith inlfaiab, 
 ** T'bis people honour eth me with their lips, but 
 ** &c." In conformity with this good Father's 
 idea, we may afk, after the manner of St. 
 Paul, is Jefus Chriji the God of the New 
 ^ejiament only F Is he not alfo of the Old ^ 
 Tea, of the Old alfo. In the conclufion of 
 the epiftle, St. Clement exhorts the Corinth^ 
 ians to be vigilant, &c. " becaufe we know 
 ** not the day of God'j- appearing;" /. e. un- 
 doubtedly, the day when we jnuji appear be^ 
 fore the judgmentfeat of ChriJl. 
 
 It is true, as the learned tranflator acknow- 
 ledges, this fecond Epiftle, was neither held 
 in fo much reverence by- the ancients, nor 
 is fo generally received among the moderns, 
 as the firft ; and, it is certain, St. Jerome, 
 Photiiis, and Archhijhop UJher after them, 
 concur in endeavouring to reprefent it as a 
 fpurious production. But I am apt to think 
 every reader will be fatisfied with what the 
 learned Prelate has advanced in its defence ; 
 though, were the point ftill really contro- 
 vertible, as the ground of the obje(ftions» 
 
 raifed 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 123 
 
 raifed by thefe illuftrious perfonages, does 
 not lie in the dodtrine fo explicitly contained 
 ill it, and at the fame time fo confonant to 
 the fentiments of the apoftolical fathers, I 
 fee no manner of neceffity for retra<fling 
 thefe quotations. Whoever the author might 
 be, we have his clear fenfe of the matter. 
 
 The charge of credulity brought againft 
 many of the Fathers by a late celebrated 
 Author, with vehemency of zeal, and in the 
 dialecfl of virulence, even admitting it to be 
 well founded, cannot juftly be thought to 
 affed: in the leaft the validity of thefe pri- 
 mitive and plain teftimonies to the great 
 truths of the Gofpel, as they are moji furely 
 believed among us. There is not, I am confi- 
 dent, one circumilance to colour a charge of 
 this nature againft the Fathers from whom 
 we have been drawing our evidence, except 
 that of the Ph(jenix, by which, as we fhall 
 fee, St. Clement illuflrates the dodlrine of the 
 refurred:ion. And ample fatisfadion will be 
 given on that head in its proper place. (0) 
 
 To 
 
124 DISC O U R S E rV. 
 
 To thefe teftimonies we might fubjoln 
 thofe of yujiin Martyr, Athenagoras, Ire- 
 ncetis, and a number of others ; the weight 
 of whofe collected evidence will be found in- 
 finitely to preponderate all that has perverfely 
 been alledged to its difcredit from writers 
 of a fubfequent date, and minor authority. (^) 
 This in due time will fully appear. 
 
 Now, if in all this do6trine we can fee 
 nothing like a formulary, or fyftem, we fee 
 however from whence confejjions of faith 
 may reafonably be fuppofed to have origi- 
 nated, and by what at this day they may be 
 moft juflly defended. Suppofing the firft 
 rule of faith to have been purely the bap- 
 tifmal form; or, agreeing with Dr. Sykes^ 
 that the ** very fhort Creed which at firft 
 ** was deemed fufficient to entitle men to bap- 
 ** tifm, was no other than a faith in God the 
 ** Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, 
 *' and in Jefus Chrifiy his Son our Lord, and 
 ** in th^Holy Gbojii' even admitting this, we 
 cannot furely have recourfe to better or 
 founder authority than that which has been 
 
 laid 
 
D I S C O U R S E IV. 125 
 
 laid before you, in order to know exadly 
 what this fait Jj implies. It will be hard in- 
 deed if the Apoftles, and thefe Apoftolical 
 Fathers, fhould be all along teaching he- 
 refy, while they perpetually and earneftly, 
 though not formally or methodically, com- 
 plain of, and expatiate againfl it. 
 
 But I have yet farther to obferve, that 
 the fenfe of antiquity, and the faith of the 
 primitive Church, may be inferred from 
 fuch circumftantial evidence as has never, 
 that I know of, been profefTedly produced, 
 but yet, I truft, will be allowed to come 
 little if at all fhort of demonftration. 
 
 The infamous reproach which was caft 
 upon the whole Chriflian name by its iirft 
 enemies, is a circumftance of a particular 
 afped: to our purpofe. Chriflianity was called 
 emphatically The Atheism. (^) Now I own 
 I cannot help conlidering this equally horrid 
 and ridiculous imputation as neceiTarily im- 
 porting the primitive Chriftians to have wor- 
 fliipped 'Jefus Chrijl as one with the Father, 
 
 or 
 
126 D I S C O U R S E IV. 
 
 or as ** very God of very God" from all eter- 
 nity. For nothing lefs than fuch worfhip 
 will account for the charge either from "Jews 
 or Gentiles. It might naturally be confidered 
 by both as a kind of dethroning of the one 
 SUPREME CxOD. But evcry modern unbe- 
 liever will readily agree with me, that the 
 idea of inferiority and delegation, &c. is far 
 from being irreconcileable with Jewijh te- 
 nets, or with known principles of Poly- 
 theifm. (r) 
 
 According to the Apojlolical conjiitutions, 
 as we learn from an eminent author, it was 
 cuftomary for the prieft, after amen folemnly 
 pronounced by the communicants in the 
 holy facrament, to cry out with a loud voice 
 TO, ctyia, roig ctyioig — Ho/y things belong to koly 
 perfons ', upon which the people anfwered, 
 Hhere is one Holy, one Lord 'J ejus Cbriji, 
 
 The fame writer acquaints us from Ve- 
 getius, an heathen author, who flourifhed in 
 the time of the younger Falentinian, that 
 Chriftians in a military capacity were ufed 
 
 to 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 127 
 
 to fwear by Gody Chriji, and the Holy Spirit, 
 and the Majefiy of the Emperor, which next 
 to God is to be honoured, &c. * 
 
 In his Dijfertation 07i EpiBefus, Arrian 
 (as Bifhop Wilkins obferves) ** affures us, 
 " that in his time, (which was about an 
 ** hundred and tweny years after Chriil:,) it 
 ** was an ufual form in the prayers of the 
 <* heathen to fay Ky^^s iXivaof — Lord have 
 *' mercy upon us -, whereby they did acknow- 
 ** lege the u?iity of God, fays his Lord{hip ; 
 ** which claufe, he adds, is thought to have 
 ** been from that ufage taken into the Li- 
 " turgy of Chriftians." 
 
 Now, if this be admitted, I would re- 
 mark, that as the title of Lord confefledly 
 belongs to our Saviour, the Chriflians may 
 fairly be fuppofed, in their triple form of 
 ejaculatory addrefs, — Lord, have mercy upon 
 us i Chriji, have mercy upon us; Lord, have 
 mercy us; to invoke Chriji the Lord, as fu- 
 preme God : or if by Lord we are in the firfl 
 
 * Cave's Prim. Chrift. p. 86. Echard's Roman Hiftory, 
 Vol. III. p. 2. 
 
 and 
 
128 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 and third petition to underftand God the Fa^ 
 ther, iHU we muft be prefumed in the inter- 
 mediate one to addrefs the Son as eq^ual to 
 the Father 5 becaufe we fhall elfe be abfurd 
 enough to invoke ihtfupreme God and 2.fub- 
 ordinate being with the fame fervour, and as 
 it were in the fame inftant. You will fee 
 the argument thefe pious ejaculations fur- 
 nifh us with, whether we do or do not cre- 
 dit the account of Arrian. J 
 
 In confirmation of what has been offered, 
 I defire to add one or two more fads, which, 
 if I miflake not, have more weight in them 
 than is commonly apprehended 3 as, for in- 
 ftance, the appointment of the Lord's day, 
 and the flyle or iitXtYLv^iaacf. to. qitchcl by which 
 churches were in the primitive times diftin- 
 guiflied. For can we do iefs in common rea- 
 fon than worfhip him with t\\Q fiipreme God, 
 and as the fiipreme God, to whofe particular 
 honour one da^ in the week is for ever to be 
 kept holy, on whofe particular account the mofl 
 facred obfervances of religion were trans- 
 
 % See Wilkins on Nat. Relig. B. I. ch. 8. p. 42. 
 
 ferred 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 129 
 
 ferred from the feventh day of the week to 
 the Jirji ; and whofe peculiar houfe is now 
 the only houfe of fray er for all people ? 
 
 I fhall conclude this difcourfe with re- 
 minding you of a circumftance, ifpoffible, 
 ftill more decifive : I mean the Unitarian 
 do6trine which is fo copioufly, and fo em- 
 phatically inculcated in the Koran of Ma- 
 homet* Of the perfon of Jefus Chriji, m 
 his prophetical charader, this arch impoflor 
 fpeaks in terms the moft refpedlable. " God, 
 *' fays he, gave miracles to Jefus, the foti 
 *' of Mary, and ftrengthened him with the 
 " Holy Spirit, &c. Jefus faid in the cradle, 
 «« verily 1 am the fervant of God. This was 
 ** Jefus the fon of Mary, [s) the word of 
 ** truth, &c. Verily God promifeth thee a 
 ** fon, named John, (fays the angel Gabriel 
 ** to Zechariahf according to the Koran, J 
 " who fhall bear witnefs to the Word, 
 ** which cometh from God, an honourable 
 *< perfon, chafte, and one of the righteous 
 *« prophets." To do honour to the author of 
 
 * See PalTim. 
 
 K Chriftianitv 
 
130 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 Chriftianity in this capacity, Mahomet pofi- 
 tively aiTerts, that ** they (the Jews) flew 
 ** him not, neither crucified him ; but that 
 " he was reprefented by one in his likenefs. 
 " They did not really kill him, fays he, but 
 ** God took him up unto himfelf." 
 
 But with refpedl to our Lord's Divinity, or 
 equality with the Father, you have, among 
 a thoufand parallel ones, the fentiments fol- 
 lowing. " They (viz. the Chriftians) fay, 
 ** God hath begotten children ; God forbid. 
 ** It is not meet for God that he fhould have 
 ** any fon -, God forbid. BlefTcd be he that 
 ** hath revealed the Forkan, (Koran,) to 
 " whom belongeth the kingdom of heaven 
 ** and earth j who hath begotten no iffue, 
 ** and hath no partner in his kingdom, &c. 
 " Yet have they taken other Gods befides 
 ** him, which have created nothing, but are 
 " themfelves created, &c. Jeftis is no other 
 ** than a fervant whom we favoured with the 
 ** gift of prophecy, 6cc. When yefus came 
 ** with evident miracles, he faid, now am I 
 ** come unto you with wifdom, and to ex- 
 
 ** plain 
 
DISCOURSE IV. 131 
 
 *' plain unto you part of thofe things 
 «* concerning which ye difagree ; wherefore 
 «* fear God, and obey me. Verily God is 
 " my Lord, and your Lord; wherefore wor- 
 *« Ihip him. He is God, beiides whom there 
 <"* is no God, &c. Far be God exalted above 
 •* the idols which they affociate with 
 ** him. The 112th. ch. of the Koran is 
 *' entitled the declaration of God's Unity, and 
 ** the whole runs thus : Say God is one God; 
 ** ft) the eternal God ; he begetteth not, 
 *' neither is he begotten; and there is not 
 *' any like unto him. In the 6th. ch. is the 
 ** following queftion : How fliould he have 
 " ilTue, fmce he hath no confort ? '* 
 
 That thefe carnal fentiments, this grofs 
 language, (the language of infidels and fcof- 
 fers every day,) is direcftly levelled, not at a 
 7iew ovjirange thing ; not at a peculiar tenet 
 of a few enthufiafts ; or a particular fedl of 
 Chriftians; but at the leading article, the 
 fundamental principle of our religion, may 
 be affirmed in utter defiance of the united 
 powers of effrontery and equivocation. The 
 K 2 dodrine 
 
132 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 dodlrine of the Trinity was moft indifpu- 
 tably the flanding doctrine of the Chriftian 
 Church at the time this falfe prophet broach- 
 ed his impofture, in the beginning of the 
 feventh century. All thefe conliderations 
 combined, demolifh in a moment the feveral 
 forts of infidelity, in early corruptions, in 
 Monaflic fuperftition, in Gothic barbarifm, 
 Scholaflic fubtilty, and Papal innovation. (1;) 
 
 D I S- 
 
DISCOURSE V. 
 
 I John V, part of verfe 20. 
 
 l^his J is the true God, 
 
 HAVING, I truft, already beyond all 
 reafonable doubt afcertained the abfo-* 
 lute Divinity of Jefus Chrifl, by many infaU 
 lible proofs from holy writ, and by other 
 arguments of a nature little lefs demonflra- 
 tive, I fcruple not to fetthe words juft read 
 to you in the front of the prefent difcourfe, 
 as plainly declarative of this great dodrine, 
 though, fingly and feparately confidered, they 
 may not, on a critical review of the whole 
 verfe, be altogether unliable to cavil, or, if 
 
 J He is the true God — according to fame ijerjionsy and perhaps 
 defenjible ones. See Webfter ; and Scot's Chrijtian Life^ Vol. 11. 
 f. 558. See Whitby in loc, 
 
 K 3 you 
 
134 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 you pleafe, to exception. And I hope very 
 much to ftrengthen what has been advanced 
 by fljewing the repugnancy of anti-trinita- 
 rian principles to the genius and defign of 
 the Chriilian difpenfation ; or, in other 
 words, by proving that, if we folely or 
 chiefly regard our blelTed Saviour under any 
 charader inferior to that of the true God, 
 our highefl ideas will come infinitely fliort 
 both of the dignity of his Perfon, and the 
 nature and end of his Commiffion. 
 
 By affecfliiig the common appellation of 
 Umtariafjs, modern unbelievers, as well the 
 followers of Socinus as the difciples of Arius, 
 (who again may be ranged under many more 
 claffes than one,) appear in fome fort to be 
 afhamed of the leaders of their refpediive 
 herefie?, and to defert the captains under 
 whofe banners they fight. But be their fe- 
 veral motives hereunto what they may, (tho' 
 indeed they are obvious enough,) it will fuf- 
 fice, without concerning myfelf with parti- 
 cular conceit?, to take into confideration the 
 two following general perfuafions : 
 
 Firfl, 
 
DISCOURSE V. 135 
 
 Firft, that of thofe who regard our Sa- 
 viour merely as a Legiflator, or teacher of 
 morality by divine commiffion : and, 
 
 Secondly, that of thofe who profefs them- 
 felves both almojl and altogether fuch as we 
 are, his coequality with the Father excepted. 
 
 With a view to the confutation of Socinian 
 principles, I would obferve in the firft place, 
 that the title of Legiflator, or Lawgiver, is 
 by no means that by which yefus Chrijl is 
 diftinguiihed, or particularly defcribed, either 
 in the old or J2ew T'ejiament. The great cha- 
 ra(5lers of Wonderful, Coimfellor, Prince of 
 peace, the Sun of right eoufnefs, * the Lord our 
 right eoufnefs'y-\ the Mefjiah, the chofen oj God,% 
 the Chrijl of God-, of Mediator and Advocate ; 
 of Saviour, Redeemer, and High-Priejl -, of 
 Son of David, Son of God, Son of the Bleffed, § 
 Lamb of God, Lord of glory, || Prince of life. 
 Author and Captain of our Salvation i ** thefe 
 charad:ers, and more that might be enume- 
 rated, import little or nothing of legillation, 
 
 * Mai. iv. 2. t Jer. xxiii. 6. % Luke xxiii. 35. 
 
 § Mar. xiv. 61. || 1 Cor. ii. 8. 
 
 ** Heb. ii. 10. v. 9. 
 
 K 4 but 
 
136 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 but are almoft wholly fignificatlve of the 
 perfonal quality of our Saviour, and of his 
 own moral excellence, and of the value and 
 efficacy of his facrifice. He was, it is true, 
 a teacher fent from God -, but he was not fent 
 primarily in the capacity of a teacher, Toin- 
 flrudt the world in righteouliiefs was not the 
 grand and ultimate, but merely afubordinate 
 end of his appearance ; and indeed a necef- 
 fary confequence of it. 
 
 Let us fee then, in the fecond place, what 
 the Scripture, and he himfelf declares to 
 have been the more immediate purpofe for 
 which he was made jlejJj, and dwelt among us, 
 To this end was I born j * fays he, and for 
 this caufe came I into the worlds that I JJoould 
 bear witnefs to the truth. Again ; God fo 
 loved the worldy that he gave his only begotten 
 Son, that whofoever believeth in him Jhould not 
 perifiy but have everlafting life, •\. Again ; 1 
 myji work the work of him that fent me.\ I 
 cafne not to call the righteous, but fmners to re- 
 pentance. § He hath anointed me to preach the 
 
 * John xviii. 37. f Ibid. iii. 16, 
 
 X Matt. ix. 13. § John ix. 4. 
 
 Gofpel 
 
DISCOURSE V. 137 
 
 Gofpel to the poor -, he hath fent me to heal the 
 brokenhearted^ to preach deliverance to the cap- 
 tiveSf and to fet at liberty thofe that are bruifed^ 
 to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. Once 
 more ; / muji preach the kingdom of God^ for 
 therefore am 1 fent, * What the fum and 
 fubflance of our Saviour's preaching was, 
 will be remembered prefently ; and mean 
 time we fliall find his Apoftles delivering 
 themfelves in language correfponfive to the 
 above. I'he law was given by Mofesy fays St. 
 fohny but grace and peace came by fejus 
 Chrijh -f- In this was manifefied the love of 
 God towards us, fays the fame Apoftle, be- 
 caufe that God fent his only begotten Son into 
 the world, that we might live through him. 
 Herein is love ; Jiot that we loved God, but 
 that he loved us ; and fent his Son to be the pro^ 
 pitiation for our fins. % Again ; When the ful- 
 nefs of time was come, fays St. Faul, God fent 
 
 forth his f on, made of a woman y that we might 
 receive the adoption of Sons. § T^his is a faithful 
 
 fayi?2g, fays the fame Apoftle, and worthy of 
 
 * Luke iv. i8. 43, f John i. 17. 
 
 X John iv. 9, 10, § Gal. iv. 4. 
 
 nil 
 
138 D I S C O U R S E V. 
 
 all acceptation, that Chrijl J ejus came into the 
 world to Jave Jinners. * And to adduce only 
 one pafTage more, the grace of God that 
 bringeth falvation, hath appeared to all men ; 
 teaching us that denying ungodiinefs, and worldly 
 lujis, njoe Jljould live foberly , righteoiijly, and 
 godly y in this prefent world, -f- The queftion 
 then will be how, or in what manner, we 
 are taught to live thus ; or, in other words, 
 what we are to underftand by Chrifi' s reli- 
 gion, regarding it as a fyftem of morality. 
 
 I mud beg leave then, in the third place, 
 to put you in mind, that Chriflianity is not 
 a new law, properly fpeaking, but a new 
 edition, if I may fo fay, or promulgation of 
 the old -y agreeably to the exprefs declaration 
 of its Divine Author, v;ho affurcs us that he 
 came not to dcftroy the moral law, or the pro^ 
 phets, but to fulfil both. % The fa(fl is, Chrijl 
 blotted out the himd writing of carnal ordi' 
 nances, § and took out of the way the whole 
 ceremonial of Judaifm, but left every thing 
 
 * ! Tim. i, 15. f Tit. ii. Ii, &c. 
 
 ' X Matt, V. J 7. § Col. ii. 14. 
 
 which 
 
DISCOURSE V. 139 
 
 which was intrinlically holy^ and jiifly and 
 good in the law, in its full force and obliga- 
 tion. He was the mediator of a better cove^ 
 nant ; he laid the foundation of a new fyftem 
 of faith, and a purer mode of worfhip ; but 
 he repealed not a fingle law of Mo/eSy that 
 had any thing in it properly of a moral and 
 binding nature. A religion of this fort fup- 
 pofed and required reformation in the lives 
 of its profefTors j and accordingly our blelTed 
 Lord, in his excellent difcourfe on the mount, 
 and in other places, enforces the import, and 
 explains the obligation of many of the pre- 
 cepts of the Jewi/Jj lawgiver ; the full fenfe 
 and genuine meaning of which had been 
 perverted by the falfe glofles and mifcon- 
 (Irudlions of later ages, and particularly of 
 the Scribes and Pharifees. We find him perpe- 
 tually upbraiding thefe with their fubftitu- 
 tions of oral tradition in the room of the 
 written word of God -, and with abfurdly 
 and impioufly teaching for doBrines the com- 
 mandments of men. * In thefe inftances he 
 nobly refcues the Scripture from human cor- 
 
 * Matt, XV. 9. 
 
 ruptionsi 
 
I40 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 ruptions ; and faithfully difcharges the im- 
 portant office, not of a maker or prefcriber 
 of law, but of a doctor or expounder of it, 
 
 Suitabl}' to all this, our Lord cites and 
 refers to the law of Ad'ofes upon all occaiions. 
 If thou wilt etiter into life, keep the command" 
 ments, -f- viz, the commandments contained 
 in the Mofaic decalogue, was his anfwer to 
 the perfon who had afked him, what he 
 Jhould do that he might have eternal life ? 
 When the lawyer, by way of tempting him, 
 put this queftion to him, which is the great 
 connnandment in the law f J He mentions thofe 
 two capital ones, which, though not literally 
 to be found among the ten^ virtually com- 
 prehended them all, namely, the love of God 
 and of our neighbour -, at once fatisfying and 
 confounding his infidious querifl with this 
 appofite and decifive reply. Accordingly 
 when he told his difciples, that he gave 
 them a new commandment § in his particular 
 injunction to them to love one another, he 
 
 t Matt. xix. 17. \ Ibid. xxii. 35. 
 
 § John xiii. 34. 
 
 was 
 
D I S C O U R S E V. 141 
 
 was not teaching a new doBrinet or bringing 
 Jlrange things to their ears, this duty being 
 evidently implied in the love of our neighbour, 
 but only injoining a duty, by the pradlice of 
 which his followers ought to be more efpe- 
 cially diflinguifhed ; to which they had in- 
 ducements of an extraordinary nature 3 to 
 which they were bound by ties and confide- 
 rations peculiarly Chriflian, and by reverence 
 for his aftonilhingly great example, who fo 
 loved them, and wafied them from their Jins 
 in his own blood j^ 
 
 In perfed: confidence with this, the 
 Apoftles f reached the Go/pel, after their Lord 
 and Majler had left the world, and was gone 
 to his Father, They taught Gofpel truths ; 
 they infifted on, (St. Paul vnovt efpecially,) 
 they rejoiced, they gloried in their deliverance 
 from bondage under weak and beggarly ele- 
 ments j-f- they exulted in the abolition of the 
 ceremonial law, as a mere temporary efta- 
 blifhment, and fhadowy inftitution ; but at 
 the fame time they regarded the moral law 
 
 * Rev. i. 5. t Gal. iv. 9. 
 
 as 
 
142 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 as of inviolable authority, and a complete 
 ftandard of condud: ilill. When the Apoftle 
 juft now named expofes the extreme folly of 
 fuch tranfgreflbrs of the law as Hood felf- 
 condemned ; or complains of the rigour of 
 its requiiitions ; or declares the impoffibility 
 of yielding meritorious obedience lo it, and 
 confequently of obtaining Salvation under it, 
 its fubfiilence and obligation are fuppofed 
 beyond all poffible contradiction. That it 
 couM not make the comers thereunto perfeB, was 
 an argument of its own intrinlic perfedion. 
 The fame great Apoftle, prefling upon his 
 "Roman converts the duties of brotherly love, 
 and univerfal charity, recites almoft all the 
 commandments of the fecond table ; and 
 fubjoins that comprehenfive precept oi Mofes 
 juft now mentioned, which he no doubt con- 
 lidered as incluiive of every evangelical pre- 
 cept, even that of loving our enemies^ thou 
 Jhalt love thy fieighhour as thy f elf. St. James 
 calls this very precept, this great focial prin- 
 ciple, the royal law ; J and when he argues 
 againft the folly and prefumption of a partial 
 
 J James ii. 8. 
 
 obedience 
 
DISCOURSE V. 143 
 
 obedience to the divine commandments, and 
 a commuting as it were for iniquities, refts 
 his argument wholly in that lupreme autho- 
 rity by which the law of Mofes was enad:ed : 
 he that fatd, do not cotnmlt adultery ^ Jaid alfoy 
 do not kilL-^ In (hort, both our Lord and his 
 Apoftles inculcated, and enlarged upon many 
 things of practical importance, as circum- 
 ftances admitted, and occafions required j 
 but they taught nothing of this kind but 
 what was reducible to the Mofaic inftitu- 
 tions, or to fome general head of Jewifij or 
 natural morality. I add of natural morality; 
 becaufe the law of nature, the law of Mofes, 
 and the law of Chriji are, in point ot mo- 
 rality, one and the fame ; the latter illuftrat- 
 ing, explaining, enforcing, and recommend- 
 ing the two former, but neither adding to, 
 nor diminijljing from them. For the reafon or 
 fitnefs of things is abfolutely unalterable ; and 
 whatever is in its own nature morally good 
 or evil, has always been fo, and will for ever 
 continue fo to be. The moral law which was 
 once written upon tables of flojie was origi* 
 
 f James ii. u. 
 
 nally 
 
144 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 nally engraved upon iht Jiejhly tai?/es of m3.ns 
 heart, {u) To maintain or to imagine other- 
 wife, is to charge God foolijljly -, and to fup- 
 pofe both the law and the Gofpel to prefcribe 
 a practice in fome inftances unnatural and 
 unreafonable. St. Paul's defcriptions of the 
 grofs ignorance and depravity of the heathen 
 world are equally animated and juH:.'^- But 
 notwithftandingthis,theirradiationsof reafon 
 and confcience are fometimes beautifully vi- 
 lible amidfl this blacknefs of fpiritual dark- 
 nefs» We might extrad: from .the writings of 
 Pagan authors, philofophers and others, of 
 different times, and in different places, a 
 moral fyftem, againft which, collediively 
 taken, fliould lie no fair exception j and pro- 
 duce from them fentiments finely coinciding 
 with the moft exalted principles, and mofi: 
 refined dodrines of Chriflianity. 
 
 In thefe writings we find the purefi: piety, 
 the exadeft juftice, the trueft benevolence, 
 the firmed fortitude, the nobleft difintereft- 
 ednefs, and the meekeff patience, moff ex- 
 plicitly taught, and earneftly inculcated, {w) 
 
 t Rom. i. 21, &c. 
 
 Hully 
 
DISCOURSE V. 145 
 
 T^ully divides the duty of man as we do at 
 this day ; viz, into that which is due, firft, 
 to God; fecondly, to our neighbour; and 
 thirdly, to ourfelves. Hac (philojopbia) nos 
 primum ad Deorum cultum, dei?ide ad jus hotni- 
 num, quod Jit um ejl in generis humanifocietate, 
 turn ad ?J2odeJliam, magnitudinemque animi eru' 
 divit. * 
 
 The golden rule of equity, whatfoever ye 
 would that men jhould do to yoUt &c. (Matt. vii. 
 12.) -f- obtained, as many have obferved, both 
 among yews and Gentiles, and was delivered 
 by them as well negatively as politively, and 
 under various modes of expreffion. That to 
 intend wickednefs is to commit it, is the 
 exprefs dod:rine of Seneca, as quoted by Le- 
 Clerc in his note on the 12th Chapter of the 
 4*^. book of Grotius ; and, which is flill more 
 remarkable, he inflances in cafes of luft and 
 fenfuality : 
 
 Incejiti efi etiamfme Jiupro, qua cupit jluprum. 
 Even fo great a debauchee as Ovid fpeculates 
 well upon this fubjedl : 
 
 * Tufc. Q^ 1. 1. 26. t See Whitby in loc. 
 
 L ^a 
 
146 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 ^<e quianon licuit, nonfacif, illafacit. 
 Ut jam Jervaris bene corpus^ adulter a mens eft -y 
 Omnibus exclufis intus adulter erit. Ibid. 
 
 This is precilely the morality of our Di- 
 vine Legiflator. Forgivenefs of enemies, 6cc. 
 is a great point of morality which the hea- 
 thens were far from being unacquainted with. 
 According to Tlutarch, it was a prayer of the 
 hacedcemonians, that y\i^ gods would enable them 
 to bear injuries. And we are informed by the 
 fame great biographer, that Dion maintained 
 true philofophy to confift, not in fhewing 
 kindnefs to friends, but in forgiving injuries, 
 and pardoning offences. Menander is clearly 
 of the fame opinion in the following fine 
 paffage ; 
 
 Oyrcj KpctTi<^og i<r ccvrip, a Vopyia, 
 
 Some of the philofophers argued againil pre- 
 fent folicitude, and the taking too much 
 thought for the morrow^ precifely as our Sa- 
 viour does in his difcourfe on the mount. A 
 philofopher, or wife man, ought not to be 
 anxious about thefe things, 'viz. food, 5cc. &c. 
 
 * See Le Clerc's Note above referred to. 
 
DISCOURSE V. 147 
 
 ^i^oiacag fA,yi a %>? T^6<pcc^ cLv^tov — is a fentence 
 quoted by Dr. Whitby in his note on v. 25. 
 Ch. 6. of St. Matthew, The following fen- 
 timent of Plato ^ iOid^m ycoj 'zf\}]i/cov Aoyuv (^cifiij\oD,v\ 
 ^viiA,ic(,,^ is almofl a counterpart to our Saviour's 
 -—i-of every idle word that men jhall fpeak they 
 JJmll give account at the day of judgment. 1'idlys 
 notion of the fervitude of a finner quadrates 
 exadly with the dodlrine of our blefled Lord, 
 and of St. Paul after him. Whofoever com- 
 mitteth fin is the fervant of fin^ -f- fays the 
 former ; his fervants ye are to whom ye obey, 
 whether of fin unto death, or of obedience unto 
 right eoufnefs,% fays the latter j and fays C/- 
 cerOi fi fervitus fit obedientia fraSii animi, et 
 arbitrio carentis fuo, quis neget omnes imbrobos 
 ejfe fervos .^§ On the other hand, Deo parere 
 libertas eft, fays Seneca, in the fpirit of a 
 Chriftian, and the language of the Church ; 
 in one of the ColleSis of which, God's fervice 
 is called perfeB freedom. The fame philofo- 
 pher reprefents the Deity as a moft bene- 
 ficent Being who maketh his fun to rife on the 
 evil and the good, and fendeth rain on the juft 
 
 * See Plato de Leg. ]. 4. t Jo^" ^ili. 34. 
 
 + Rom. vi. 16. § Tally's Par. 5. 
 
 L 2 and 
 
148 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 and on the tmjuji -, ecce feeler a tisy fays he, 
 fol oritur, et piratis patent maria.^ And, to 
 mention only one particular more, he directs 
 us in another place to confider human afflic- 
 tions as the corre6ions of a father for our 
 fpiritual benefit. God, he fays, Jtcut feve- 
 rus pater durius educat ; -f which is almoft 
 literally the fentiment of the Apoftle. J 
 The frailty of human nature, our radical 
 difmclination to virtue, the neceffity of pro- 
 pitiation, and our want of extraneous affif- 
 tance as well as of perfonal refolution, for 
 the purpofe of a good life, are points often 
 intimated, and as often infifted upon by Pagan 
 writers. The nitimur in vetitum — of the poet 
 was a fort of ftanding thejis with many. The 
 multitude of heathen facrifices (hews a con- 
 fcioufnefs of guilt, and a folicitude for atone- 
 ment. Their fenfe of the need of a divine 
 bleffing on their endeavours in general, ap- 
 pears fufficiently from their undertaking no- 
 thing of moment, whether of a public or 
 
 * Sen. de Ira. 1 4. c. 26. de vit. beat. 15. 
 
 f See Wilkins. B. i. c. 16. % Heb. xii. 7, &c. 
 
 private 
 
DISCOURSE V. 149 
 
 private concern, without the previous obfer- 
 vance of certain rites and ceremonies ; or, as 
 P/iny exprefles himfelf in the introdudion to 
 his panegyric on T^rajan, fine deorum immortal 
 liujn ope^ conjilioy et honore. It may not be 
 eafy to afcertain what we are to underftand 
 by the Damon, or the Genius^ which, by his 
 own account attended Socrates -, but it is cer- 
 tain the notion of good and evil genii pre- 
 vailed much in the heathen world. In the 
 following lines, the warmth of divine infu- 
 fion in the human breaft is beautifully ex^ 
 prelled by Ovid-y 
 
 Eft Deus in nobis ; agitante calefcimus illo : 
 Impetus hicjacrajemina mentis hahet. X 
 
 The neceffity of fupernatural impulfe to the 
 regulation of human condu<5t has always been 
 acknowleged. T^ully fays fomewhere. Nemo 
 unquam vir magnus Jine divino affiatufuit ; and 
 Homer affirms by the mouth of Polydamas, 
 that God is the difpenfer of all our talents, 
 or endowments whatfoever : 
 
 A}^M <^' &c. &c. //. /Of. xiii. iJ. 730. etfeq, 
 
 X Sententiae illuf. ex Ovid. See Cumberland on the defeds 
 of heathen Deifm. p. 21. 
 
 L 3 Correfpondently 
 
150 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 Correfpondently with all this, philofophers 
 have reprefented the difficulty of perfevering in 
 a virtuous courfe, under the very fame meta- 
 phor which is ufed by our BlefTed Saviour 
 himfelf. Cebes affirms, that there is a little 
 gate B-vfici rif fiiKpcL* at the entrance of thepath 
 that leads to happinefs &c. and that it is a 
 path which few walk in ; in which ttolw oA<- 
 yoi TTopivovrat, 
 
 When we confider thefe fentiments and prin_ 
 ciples independently and feparately from what- 
 ever is erroneous, inconfiflent, or extravagant 
 in heathen authors, we can do no lefs than re- 
 verence them as doing credit to human nature 
 in its moll depraved ftate ; as fo many effi^rts 
 of reafon nobly llruggling to emerge from a 
 vafl abyfs of ignorance and impurity. The 
 grand ufe and advantage of the Gofpel, re- 
 garded as a moral fcheme, is not fo muc/j 
 that things are uniformly taught therein, and^, 
 delivered in confummate purity, as that they 
 are taught with proper authority, by a Legifla- 
 tor -f from heaven, and under fandlions the 
 moft efficacious imaginable. In fhort, the 
 
 * See Whitby on Matt. 7. 13. 
 
 f See Locke's Reafonab. of Chriftian, p. 269. 
 
 Chriftian 
 
DISCOURSE V. 151 
 
 Chriftian religion flands particularly difcri- 
 minated from all other inftitutions by the 
 perfonal pre-eminence of its Author, and by 
 the tranfcendent gracioufnefs, importance, 
 and fplendor of the difpenfation. 
 
 If we regard our Saviour under any cha- 
 racter inferior to that of the true God ; at 
 leaft if we regard him merely as a man, or as 
 a law-giver, we fliall find few or no marks 
 of that originality by which the founders of 
 all perfuafions, religious or philofophical, 
 are diftinguifhed. As a prophet, he was 
 like unto Mofes^ according to the exprefs 
 prediction of the latter ; as a worker of mi' 
 racles, he flood fupereminent, but not fingle ; 
 as a teacher, or inflrud:er, he followed pre- 
 cedents y his apologues and allegories were 
 agreeable to the oriental mode, and many of 
 his parables were borrowed from ihtyews-, * 
 even .that excellent form of prayer which 
 he taught his difciples was almofl entirely 
 taken out of the Jewifi liturgies j and the 
 facraments which ** he ordained in his 
 
 * See Whitby on Matt. 6. v. 9. — 13. v. 10. 
 
 L 4 Church." 
 
152 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 **Churcii" weregraffed upon a yewijh flock; 
 baptifm being a rite which \h^'Jews obferved 
 with theexactnefs of fuperftition ; and that 
 of the Lord's Supper being transferr'd from 
 their practice of eating bread a7id drinkifig 
 wine., in an euchariftical way, at the celebra- 
 tion of the Pajfover. * The great Apoftle to 
 the Hebrews feems to fet the matter before 
 us in the cleareft light. He^ fays he, that 
 defpised Mofess law, died without mercy, under 
 two or three witnejjes : of how much Jorer 
 punijhment Juppofe ye, fiall he be thought 
 worthy, — (not who hath broken the law of 
 the Gofpel, but) who hath trodden wider 
 foot the Son of God, and hath accounted the 
 blood of the covenant wherewith he was fanBi- 
 fed an unholy thing, and hath done defpite to 
 thefpirit of grace. \ Immoralities, it is true* 
 and thofe of the grofTell kind, are implied 
 in thefe words ; but they are fuch as are mod 
 provokingly aggravated by Angular contemp- 
 tuoufnefs -, and the leaft that can be inferred 
 from this pall-ige is, that a greater than 
 
 * See Patrick's Difc. on Baptifm. p. 8. Allix's Refleft. 
 V. 2. p, 177, Potter's Ch. Government, f Heb. x. 28. 
 
 Mofes 
 
DISCOURSE V. 153 
 
 Mofes is here. How does Soci?iiamfm (brink 
 before fuch confiderations as thefe ! 
 
 But it is little material which of two 
 errors may be moil plaufible, when both are 
 equidiftant from the centre of truth. Our 
 blelfed Saviour is no more half-God than he 
 is all many if I have leave fo to exprefs 
 myfelf ; nor will Arianijm fix a firmer bafis 
 of faith by its chimerical expedient of a 
 fecondary worfliip, and a gradation of Deity. 
 For this at befl will be found to be neither 
 mors nor lefs than Paganifm improved, 
 and contradled within a fmaller circle. It 
 mufl be equally idolatrous, equally injurious 
 to the honour of the Supreme Being, to ac- 
 knowlege Gods many, or Gods few, or only 
 one God befides him. Infinite almoft as the 
 number of fubaltern deities was among the 
 Heathens, there is no doubt but the wifefl 
 of them at leafl aded nearly upon Arian 
 principles ; viz. under a perfuafion of the 
 exiflence and properties, and with a refer- 
 vation of the prerogatives of the one Su- 
 preme God. According to univerfal tradi- 
 tion 
 
154 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 tion, the notion of a fupreme power, a felf- 
 exiftent, independent Being, a iirfl caufe of 
 all things, prevailed more or lefs every where 
 in the world.* The dodlrine of divine Su- 
 premacy was no fecret even among people 
 whofe religious rites and ufages were filly 
 and extravagant enough to render them ob- 
 noxious to the fcorn and laughter of man- 
 kind, thro' all ages. The fuperftitions of 
 the Mgyptians were grofs and numberlefs ; 
 and their worship of the meaneft animals, 
 and indeed of things inanimate, was beyond 
 meafure contemptible. And yet they had 
 an opinion with refpedl to God, that erred 
 even on the fide of fpirituality. For they 
 held that he is not to be addreifed by mortals 
 fo much as in vocal prayer.-f- This is at 
 once an inftance of ftrong belief, and mif- 
 taken veneration. The great attributes of 
 the Deity are afferted by writers of all forts, 
 by philofophers, and by poets, and in terms 
 of the fulleft fignificancy. His fpirituality, 
 omnipotence, omniprefence, independence, 
 invifibility, and incomprehenlible nature, are 
 
 * See Shuckfoid's Sac, and Prof. Hift. connec. Vol. i . B. 5. 
 f See Parker on Idolatry, p. 43. 
 
 fet 
 
DISCOURSE V. 155 
 
 fet in a very ftrong light by Pagan authors ; 
 particularly by PythagoraSy PlatOy AnaxagO' 
 ras, Cicero, Porphyry, Seneca, Homer, and 
 the Greek Drafnatijis. (x) I have not time 
 or occafion to produce my authorities here. 
 The truth is, n^2Lny goodly pearls of fpecula- 
 tive dodrine are to be found amongft the 
 rubbifh of Pagan antiquity ; and they ftri- 
 kingly contraft an enormous farrago of tra- 
 ditionary error, radical prejudice, vulgar 
 folly, and popular fuperftition. They are 
 the fentiments of minds that feem to have 
 been enlightened beyond the conceptions of 
 the bulk of mankind. If we feparate the 
 carnal drofs from the fpiritual bullion of hea- 
 thenifm, we fliall be able to extra(5t a body of 
 theoretic divinity homlhc old. Pagans, little 
 if at all inferior to the fineft unitarian fyftem. 
 In ihort, li Arianifm be not ftricflly polytheiftn, 
 it is not much better ; it is maintainable 
 only on much the fame ground, and by a 
 fmiilar mode of reafoning. 
 
 Surely a 'Tully, or a Plato, had as admiffible 
 an apology for his conformity to idolatrous 
 
 fervices. 
 
156 DISCOURSE V. 
 
 fervices, in general prepofleffion, and national 
 cftablifhment, as the modern unbeliever has 
 for his fecondary worihip, in any diftid;ion 
 he may affed; to make between Pagan and 
 Avian theology. For unlefs the holy Scrip- 
 tures dired: us in the plaineft manner, and 
 with all poflible cautiouTnefs of expreflion, 
 NOT to honour the Son even as ive honour 
 the Father ; if they do not clearly and uni- 
 formly diftinguifh between Jefus Chrijl, and 
 the Holy Ghojiy and the Supreme God, in 
 point of nature, or ejj'ence -, or, in other 
 words, \i Arianifm has not a moft firm foun- 
 dation in the facred pages, and in apoftolical 
 and primitive worfliip, we cannot honeftiy 
 refolve it into any thing but the pride of 
 human reafon, fabricating its own theory, 
 and rejijling the Holy Ghoji. Now the inva- 
 lidity of its pretences has, I perfuade myfelf 
 been fufnciently fhewn already ; and there- 
 fore we are to reject its hypotheiis, together 
 with that of Socitiianijm, as refpedively aim^- 
 ing to eilablifli another doBrine than that we 
 have received; as fundamentally erroneous, 
 and abfolutely repugnant to the genius and 
 fpirit of Chriftianity, 
 
 But 
 
DISCOURSE V. 157 
 
 But becaufc the Jlrength of true believers 
 may be faid in fome fenfe to be made perfeSi 
 in the weaknefs of their antagonifts, as a 
 giant appears to moil: advantage vi^hen con- 
 fronted with a pigmy, I Ihall take my next 
 opportunity for your convi(5lion, that the 
 anti-trinitarian caufe has its chief fupport in 
 difingenuous evafion, flimly fophiftry, or wil- 
 ful mifconftrucftion ; and neither is nor can 
 be defended from the Jirong holds of reafon, 
 or by weapons from the armory of Sacred 
 Writ. 
 
 D I S- 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Gal. Chap. i. part of verfe 7. 
 
 ^bere be fome that trouble you, and would 
 pervert the Gofpel of Chriji, 
 
 TH E Apoftle, as appears from the ar- 
 gument he profecutes throughout this 
 epiftle, had, in the words juft read, an eye 
 to thofe Jewijh converts who were fo zeal- 
 oufly attached to the Mofaic ritual, the law 
 of their fathers, that they could not endure 
 to fee it fuperfeded by the more liberal, 
 the more pure, the more fublime principles of 
 the Gofpel. But I fhall avail myfelf of the 
 latitude my text admits -, not hefitating to 
 regard as pervert ers of the Gofpel, thofe here- 
 tics of different forts, whofe unfairnefs, or 
 
 imbecility 
 
i6o DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 imbecility of allegation, conRru(!^ion, and 
 exception on the part of infidelity, I (land 
 engaged to make appear in the following 
 difcourfe. 
 
 That pride, or prepolleffion (liould be te- 
 nacious of any opinion however ftrange, or 
 however extravagant, will be no matter of 
 furprize to us when we recoiled, that almoffc 
 every thing which we fee not by immediate 
 intuition, or which is not capable of a ftridly 
 mathematical demonftration, may be ftarted, 
 and upheld for a fubjedt of difpute. It is 
 poffible indeed, and it fometimes happens, 
 that men fhall reafon injudicioufly and in- 
 conclufively even in a righteous caufe; and 
 truth may fufter, or rather be fuppofed to 
 fufFer by precipitance of paffion, or inadver- 
 tency of zeal. This before now has been 
 the cafe with the caufe before us. A pious 
 wifh to confirm the doiflrine of the Trinity 
 by producing multifarious evidence, and 
 heaping proof upon proof; {y) or an earneft 
 endeavour to elucidate a point, the knowlege 
 of which is too wonderful and excellent for* 
 
 the 
 
DISCOURSE VI. i6t 
 
 the attainment of human wifdom, by meta-- 
 phyfical nicety, and the fagacity of abflra^ 
 fpeculation -, (z) or by ftudied fimilitudes, 
 and artificial allufions, to bring it nearer to 
 our conceptions; all this has been hurtful to 
 the intereft of religion, and given occafton to 
 the enemy to ridicule, if not to blafpheme. 
 Erroneous conftrudions, and mifapplication 
 of particular paflages, betray too often a want 
 of moderation, or of fkill in interpreters.- 
 But, all this while, a charge of unfkilfulnefs, 
 or of prevarication, or of perverfenefs, or of 
 prefumption, or of infincerity, or of intem- 
 perance, will come with a very ill grace from 
 our adverfaries \ and we are to look on the 
 fide of infidelity for the moft vifible figns of 
 weaknefs, and the fureft tokens of confcious 
 diftrefs. lam apt to believe, you \vill foon 
 be convinced by a few feled particulars that 
 this is not arbitarily, or groundlefsly faid. 
 
 I (hall hardly be called upon to apologize 
 for freedoms I {hall be obliged to take with 
 authors who are no more. It will be ac- 
 knowleged, with refped to every Arian &c. 
 
 M of 
 
i62 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 of note, that, to mifchievous purpofe, he 
 being dead yet fpeakeih. To proceed then. 
 
 That when we are baptized in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghojl, we are baptized in the name of three 
 Perfons, and of three Divine Perfons, and of 
 three equally Divine Perfons,* feems not tCT 
 be more evident from Scripture than from 
 the reafon of the thing. For elfe we are 
 baptized in the name of two Perfons and one 
 virtue or quality, &c. which is a notion pal- 
 pably ridiculous ; or we are baptized in the 
 name of three Peribns, betwixt the frji and 
 two hitter of which there is an infinite dif- 
 parity J (there being no medium between 
 God and a creature j) which is a fuppofition 
 not lefs ridiculous. And, in fadt, the Bap- 
 tifnial Form is fo ftrong, that heretics have 
 found themfelves under a neceflity of chang- 
 ing it 5 or of explaining it away ; fome bap- 
 tizing into the death of Chriji ; fome in the 
 name of the uncreated God, and in the name of 
 the created Son, and in the name of the fanBi- 
 
 * See Lightfoot's Harm, of the N. Tell. Seft. 92. p. 273. 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 163 
 
 fying Spirit i created by the created So?i. Dr. 
 Clarke, to whom Arianijm is under great ob- 
 ligations, writes as follows. We are baptized, 
 fays he, into the profejjion of that belief, and 
 an obligation to the praBice of that religion, 
 which God the Father has revealed and taught 
 by the Son, and confirmed and efiablijhed by the 
 Holy Ghofi, If this is extrication, what is 
 difficulty ? -j* 
 
 The fame learned author paraphrafes the 
 introdudlion to St. Johns Gofpel in the fol- 
 lowing words : " With God the Father, the 
 ** First, the Supreme caufe and original of 
 " all things, there exifted before all ages that 
 ** Divine Perfon whofe name is called the 
 ** Word of God, the only begotten of the Fa^ 
 ** ther, the bright nefs of his glory, and by 
 ** ineffable communication of divine 
 ** power and perfedtions, the exprefs image of 
 ** his Perfon.'' The fine artifice of this para- 
 phrafe will efcape a common, or a curfory 
 reader. I guefs. Dr. C — would never have 
 confented to the leaft alteration in this paf- 
 
 f See a late work entitled An Elucidation of the Unity, 
 &c. p, 59, where this Form is treated with equal freedom. 
 
 M ^ fage, 
 
i64 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 fage, or have permitted us only for ineffable 
 to read eternal. The phrafe — bejore all ages — 
 is defignedly ambiguous ; and imports merely 
 an acknowlegenient of the impoffibility of fix- 
 ing the date of the generation of the Son of God, 
 
 In the beginning was the wordy * fays St. 
 John', i. e. (if we will hearken to the So- 
 ciniansi) Jefus Chriji exifted when the Gof- 
 pel was firft preached by John the Baptiji ; 
 or, if you pleafe, by himfelf. 'The word was 
 with God', i. e. was known to God, and to God 
 only \ or, was with God, by being taken up 
 into heaven to receive his prophetic commijjion, 
 agreeably to a parallel expofition of another 
 paflage, which will be prefently noticed, and 
 both by the fame interpreters. The word was 
 God, viz. in a fecondary or derivative fenfe ; 
 in a fenfe implying Chriffs priority and fupe- 
 riority to all other creatures ; fo that if we 
 take this whole fentence together, the .word 
 was with God, and the word was God, the 
 term God is to be underftood in the proper 
 fenfe in the firft claufe, and in an improper 
 and inferior fenfe in the fecond : as Dr. C. 
 
 John i. 1. 
 
 and 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 165 
 
 and others, according to a judicious writer's 
 remark, ingenioujly expound this pafTage ! 
 
 No man hath afcended into heaven^ but he 
 that came down from heaven^ even the Son of 
 man who is in heaven ; * are the words of our 
 Lord himfelf in the fame Gofpel. Perhaps 
 the Socifiian conftrudion of this text which 
 was j aft now laid before you is little lefs ro- 
 mantic than Grotius's expofition of the words 
 — he that came down from heaven, i. e. fays 
 this famous commentator, he that ** was 
 ** fent, or given to us by the fpecial Grace 
 " of God;" 
 
 As fome interpreters make, or, more pro- 
 perly, invent a diftindion between primary 
 and fecondary worihip, and would fain have 
 us believe in a created creator, or a deity by 
 delegation, fo others of a very different ftamp 
 think of the Saviour of the world as meanly 
 as they can pofTibly think, and diveft him of 
 almoft every ray of glory. 'The word was made 
 fiejh, and dwelt among us, fays St. fohn, -f* 
 
 * John iii. 13. f John i. 14. 
 
 M 3 Chrijl 
 
i66 DISCOURSE VL 
 
 Chrift was born mortali ful^j^Si to infirmities 
 and fufferings; &c. fay fome Socinian expofi- 
 tors : the word WA^ fleffj, fimply and abfo- 
 lutely, fay others : the word Wd^s made, or*- 
 CONVERTED into fleJJj, fays the Flandrian 
 Anahaptiji* 
 
 St. Pau^ afTures the Co/oJ/ians, that in ye/us 
 Chrift dwelleth all the fulnefs * of the Godhead 
 bodily ', viz. all the will of God as we are 
 given to underftand by Socinus. Before Abra- 
 ham was, I AMj-f- fays our Lord exprcfsly 
 to the Jews; by which he means only to 
 affirm, according to fome interpreters, that 
 he was the Mefjiah before Abraham was the 
 father of many nations -y or, as others expound, 
 {hall I fay ? or wreft this fcripture, that he 
 exifted, or was before Abraham in the ^«r- 
 pofe and decree of God. How far the name 
 of Grotius dignifies this expofition, let every 
 intelligent hearer judge. Or, let us fee whe- 
 ther we are like to derive more fatisfadion 
 from the following explanation or rather 
 evacuation of this text by the celebrated 
 
 * Col. ii. 9. •}■ John viii. 58. 
 
 author 
 
DISCOURSE yi. 167 
 
 author of the Scripture doBrine of the T^rinity, 
 " Before Abraham was, and before all gene^ 
 *' rations, I had a being with him of whom 
 *' Mofes told the Ifralites, that his name was 
 
 ** I AM." 
 
 That often juftly cited pafTage in the 9'\ 
 Chapter of the Epiftle to the Romans, of 
 whom as concerning the Jiejh Chrifi came, who 
 is over all, God blejfed for ever, is a rankling 
 thorn in the eyes of unbelievers, which Dr. 
 C. wifhed to extras with the poultice of 
 a devifed ambiguity. He would have us be- 
 lieve that the original Gr^^^ is of a doubtful 
 conftrudlion, and may lignify either, of whom 
 Chrijl came-, God who is over all be blejjed for 
 ever', or, of whom Chrijl came, who is over all-, 
 God be blejfed for ever. To this text we fhall 
 have occafion to turn again. 
 
 - The Arians in general confefs that the Di- 
 vine Perfonage who fo often, and fometimes 
 fo magnificently makes his appearance under 
 the Old Teftament, is fefus Chrijl, the Son 
 of God', yet when this tranfcendent Being 
 M 4 exprefsly 
 
i68 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 exprefsly fays, — / am the God of Bethel, — 
 we are to underftand him as in effed: faying 
 only, my Father, whom I reprefent, is God of 
 Bethel. Such is the fenfe of thefe expofi- 
 tors ; who however kindly and logically 
 grant that the Word was with God, or, in 
 plain terms, exifled from all eternity, tho' 
 not adlually, yet potentially I One is tempted 
 to fpeak ludicroufly by the extravagance of 
 thefe conceits. Is not this making the word 
 of God of none effe5l thro' wantonnefs of 
 interpretation ? Is not this turning holy 
 Scripture, which fhould be therw/? of faith ^ 
 into a mere play-thing of fancy ? 
 
 L€t us take a view of another famous 
 writer's fentiments on this important fub- 
 jeft. — Mr. Whiflon, after acknowleging 
 fefus Chrift, (whom he calls Acyo? B-eavB-pMyro?) 
 to have given the law upon mount Sinai, to 
 have appeared to the Patriarchs, &c. and to 
 have taken *' the peculiar ftyle, titles, attri- 
 ** butes, adoration, and incommunicablename 
 ** of the God of Ifrael," fuppofes him to have 
 l>een ** truly and really concerned in the 
 
 ** creation 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 169 
 
 " creation of the world." But, obferve, he 
 was a Creator merely by commifTion ; &c. 
 ** it being (according to this author) unfit 
 ** and impoffible for the Divine Nature 
 ** ITSELF, or at leafl: that of the Fa- 
 " THER, to be fo much, and in fuch 
 ** a manner concerned with the corporeal 
 ** world, and the linful race of mankind, as 
 ** we every where find this Divine Person, 
 ** our bleffed Mediator, to have been."* And 
 fo we are obliged to this philofopher for his 
 wonderful difcovery, that J ejus Chrifty the' 
 a Divine Person with all the attributes 
 &c. and the ** incommunicable name of the 
 God of Ifraely" was yet without the Di- 
 vine Nature, becaufe it is impoffible for 
 the Divine Nature to ad: in the abftradt; 
 or at leaft for that of the Father to do 
 fo, which, it feems, is fomething diJlinSl 
 from, or fuperidr to the Divifie ! If this is 
 not Chriftianity, it is tolerable Platonifm. 
 
 But the grand expedient to which a late- 
 mentioned Divine, and indeed the Arian 
 
 * Whillon's Solution, &c. p. 254, 
 
 fraternity 
 
170 D I S C O U R S E VI. 
 
 fraternity have ufually recourfe, is yet be- 
 hind. Unable to withftand the united force 
 of the fcveral texts by which the full Divini- 
 ty of our Saviour is evinced, they contrive to 
 refolve the whole of his Deity into that abfo- 
 lute authority which, they fay, he derives 
 from his Father, and exercifes jointly with 
 him in the government of the univerfe. 
 Dr. Clarke not unartfully tells us, that ** the 
 ** reaj07i why the Scripture ^ thd it Jliles the 
 " Father Gody and alfo Jiiles the Son God, yet 
 ** at the fame time always declares that there is 
 *' but one God, is, becaufe in the mojiarchy of 
 ** the univerfe there is but o?ie authority, origin 
 ** nal in the Father, derivative in the Son: 
 '* the power of the Son being not another power 
 ** oppofte to that of the Father, nor another 
 ** power co-ordinate to that of the Father, 
 ** but it [elf the power and authority of the 
 *^ Father, commimicated to, manifefied in, and 
 ** exercifed by the Son." * 
 
 But did not, or v/ould not this able writer 
 recoiled, that fomething befides power was 
 communicated, when the Father gave to the 
 
 * Scrip. Doc. of the Trin. Prop. 39. See Stephens's 
 Sermon on the eternal o-eneration, &c. 
 
 Son 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 171 
 
 Son to have life /// him/elf^ * From which 
 paflage I take occafion to obferve, that when 
 an ambiguous word occurs in any palTage of 
 Scripture ; or a term, which independently 
 confidered, appears to denote communication 
 from the Father, and inferiority in the Son, 
 its fignification is generally qualified and re- 
 trained by the plain tenor and importance of 
 the whole fentence. This is eminently the cafe 
 with the text laft quoted. As the Fat her hath life 
 himfelfy fays our Blefled Lord, fo hath he 
 given to the Son to have life in himfef. In 
 this phrafe — having life in himfelf (which is a 
 periph rails of Jehovah ^ the firfl and moft 
 effential name of the Deity,) the fclf-exif- 
 tence both of Father and Son from all eter- 
 nity is neceffarily implied : becaufe tho' the 
 word given imports communication of an 
 incomprehenfible kind, yet fuch communi- 
 cation muft have been from eternity. To 
 affert, that the Father gave felf-exiftence to 
 the Son from all eternity at any fuppofed 
 period of time, would be neither more nor 
 
 * John 5. V. 26. 
 
 lefs 
 
172 D I S C O U R S E VI. 
 
 lefs than a contradid:ion in terms, -f- It may 
 be worth while to adduce two or three 
 in{lancesmore. By /jim, viz. by Jefus Chriji, 
 fays St. Paul io the Colojjians, were all things 
 created that are in Heaven, and that are in 
 earth t vijible and invijible, &c. all things were 
 created by him and for him, Ch. i. 16. Does 
 not all this imply ufioriginatenefs ? Is not 
 Chriji reprcfented here as abfolutely the 
 Creator ? Yet in this very chapter reference 
 is had to the Gofpel-difpenfation, and in 
 that reference terms mud necelTarily be ufed 
 importing fubordination and inferiority. So 
 in the ift. chap, of the Revelation, where 
 ChriJI is ftykd Alpha and Omega, the begiiining 
 and the ending. Sec, the fame reference is 
 made. / am he that liveth, and was dead. So 
 again, the Word was with God, fays St. fohn ; 
 and this expreffion does not necelTarily im- 
 ply equality, or coexiftence. But what fol- 
 lows ? — T^he Word was God, 
 
 We not unfrequently meet with interpreters 
 who agree in oppofition to the catholic 
 fenfe of a paflage, but differ in the mode of 
 
 f See this text miferably diftorted in Locke's Reafonab. of 
 Chriftian. p. 67, 
 
 it ; 
 
D I S C O U R S E VI. 173 
 
 it; who, like contrary qualities in bodies 
 countera(5ti ng each other, mutually defeat 
 their refpedive ends by repugnancy of con- 
 ftrucflion. We will turn to one or two lin- 
 gular inilances of this. — By whom aljo * he 
 made the worlds, fays the Apoflle to the 
 Hebrews, fpeaking of "Jefus Chriji. One 
 fliould hardly think thefe words liable to be 
 mifunderftood. But Grotius, unwilling, as 
 it fhould feern, that yejus Chriji Ihould be 
 fuppofed to have any concern in the creation, 
 even as an agent or minifter, gives us to 
 know, that the worlds were made not by him, 
 but for him, or for his fake; agreeably 
 enough to part of a text juft now cited, and 
 agreably to the notion of the y^'zf;/)^, Rabbins, 
 that the world was made for the Mejjiah» 
 Now, in the firft place, not to infift with 
 Dr. Whitby, that this conftrudion manifeflly 
 wrefts the prepofition t^^ct, with a genitive cafe 
 annexed to it, from its proper import, I wifh 
 to obferve, that there is no admitting this 
 learned writer's expofition of the place before 
 us, and of that other paflage of the Epiftle 
 
 * Heb. I. 2. 
 
 to 
 
174 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 to the 'Romans, Chrijl was raifed from the 
 dead * by the glory of the Father, (the fingle 
 one with which he fupports his interpreta- 
 tion,) without obfcuring, or confounding 
 our ideas of the divine operations. For, 
 according to our author, God the Father 
 made the worlds for the ^/ory of his Son, but 
 raifed up that Son from the dead for his 
 own glory, — Chrijl was raifed from the dead 
 for the glory of the Father, fays our commen- 
 tator J fo that by this interpretation the 
 Apoftle in efFecft affirms, that Chrijl was raifed 
 from the dead by the Father for the glory of the 
 Father : v/hich at beft is uncouth phrafeolo- 
 gy. But let us fee how the paflage will fare 
 under the management of Socifius and his 
 followers. Thefe gentlemen are fenfible of 
 the powers of the prepofition in queftion, 
 but are equally reluctant to believe J^fus 
 Chrijl to have been the Maker of the Uni- 
 verfe. — By whom he made the Worlds', i. e. 
 fay they, by whofe agency, or miniftry God 
 eftablifhed a Jpir it ual kingdom, and reconciled 
 the world unto himfef by the Gofpel difpenfa- 
 
 * Rom. 6. 4. 
 
 tion. 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 175 
 
 tion. Are not thcfe feveral expolitions as 
 irreconcileable as light and darknefs ? And 
 have we not reafon in abundance rather to 
 reje(St both, than to fubfcribe to either ? I 
 juft obferve farther -, that Grotius had been 
 more coniiftent, had he done no violence to 
 the prepofition aforefaid, and adopted the 
 Socinian interpretation. For he is intirely of 
 one mind with the Sociniatis in his explica- 
 tion of the above-cited parallel in the Jirji 
 Chapter of the Epijile to the ColoJJians. 
 
 But this is not the only inftance of this 
 great writer's inconiiftency with others and 
 with himfelf. Convinced by ocular demon- 
 ftration of the refurreftion of his Mafter, 
 Thomas anfwered and f aid , that is, fay fome 
 very gravely, in effed cried out, or exclaimed. 
 My Lordi and my God. For, it feems, this is 
 not the language of confefiion, but of aflo- 
 nifhment ! Grotius however fees this matter 
 in a very different light. ** Hie prlmum, 
 ** fays he, ea vox in narratione Evangelica 
 ** reperitur ab x-^poftolis Jefu tributa, poft- 
 ** quam fcilicet fua refurredlione probaverat, 
 
 " fe 
 
176 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 ** fe efTe a quo vita et quidem aEterna ex- 
 ** ped:ari deberet. Manfit deinde ille mos ia 
 *' Ecclelia, ut apparet non tantum in fcriptis 
 ** Apollolicis, ut in nono capite Epiftolic ad 
 •* Romanos commate quinto, et veterum 
 ** Chriftianorum, ut videre efl apud Juftinum 
 '* Martyrem contra Tryphonem, fed et in 
 ** Plinii ad Trajanum Epiftola, ubi ait Chrif- 
 ** tianos Chrifto, ut Deo, carminacecinifle."* 
 
 And yet we are not much obliged to this 
 eminent commentator for an acknowlege- 
 ment which appears to have been forced from 
 him. In the firfl place, it is not true that 
 Chrifl is flyled God purely becaufe he is the 
 refurreBion and the Itfey as is here more than 
 intimated. It is not true, that he is io called 
 by the Apoftles and firft Chriftians, merely 
 on the flrength of the pafTage before us. For 
 though the terms in which St. I'homas de- 
 clares his convidion. My Lord, and my God, 
 occur not before, nor poiTibly could, Chrift 
 is not only in effedt in many places, but alfo 
 exprefsly flyled God in this Gofpel. In the 
 next place it is worth remarking, that this 
 
 author 
 
 * See Groiius in loc. 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 177 
 
 author in fome fort at lead aflerts the Divi- 
 nity of Chrifl: from a text, of which, when 
 he takes it feparately in hand, he queftions 
 the authenticity. * 
 
 The truth is, we find too many among us 
 perpetually leaning to the fide of infidelity, 
 by foftening and qualifying as much as pof- 
 fible the fenfe of texts which are quoted 
 every day on the part of the orthodox. An 
 eminent commentator fuppofes the firft prayer 
 of the Apoftles, Thou Lord, who knoweji the 
 hearts of all men, jloew whether of thefe two 
 thou haji chofen, to be addrefs'd not to fefus 
 Chrifl, but fimply to God. JVhofoever Jhall 
 call on the name of the Lord fiall be faved, 
 fays St. Peter in his difcourfe on the day of 
 Pentecojl ; i. e. fays Dr. Pyle, '* Whofoever 
 ** fhall believe and embrace his religion -,'* 
 which paraphrafe plainly reprobates the idea 
 of invocation on Chriji. The reference of 
 the words he is Lord of all, in St. Peter s ad- 
 drefs to Cornelius, either to God the Father, 
 
 * See Grotius on Rom. ix. 5. 
 
 N or 
 
178 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 or to 'Jefus Chriji, is at beft perverfely lin- 
 gular 3 and fijrely neither jufl nor natural, 
 Ti? this end, fays St. Faul to the Romans ^ 
 Chriji both died and rofe. Sec. that he might be 
 Lord both of the dead and living j * i.e. (ac- 
 cording to our author's inadequate illuftra- 
 tion,) that ** he might be the Saviour and 
 ** revvarder of all good Chriftians." St. Faul 
 wifhes grace and peace to the Church at Co- 
 rinth ^ Sec ; to them that are called to be faint s,'^' 
 with all that in every place call upon the name 
 of fefiii Chriji our Lord, &c 3 viz, (as the 
 fame writer interprets the palTage,) ** to all 
 «• who worlhip God through fefus Chrift, 
 ** the Lord and Saviour of all that profefs 
 ** his religion." In the fecond Chapter of 
 this Epiftie, the Apoftle calls our Saviour the 
 Lord of glory 'y meaning, it feems, thereby 
 limply the Mefjiah. God was manifejl in the 
 fejljy fays the fame Apoftle to Timothy ; which, 
 being interpreted by this writer, is only equi- 
 valent to ** the Son of God took upon him 
 «* our nature." In iliort, our author's notion 
 
 Rom. xiv. 9. f I Cor. i. 2. 
 
 of 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 179 
 
 of the whole myjiery of the Gofpel feems to 
 be lamentably infufficient, when he tells, and 
 in more places than one tells us, that it fig- 
 nifies only the admifiion of Gentiles as well 
 as "Jews into the Chriftian covenant. 
 
 But a very recent inftance of perverfe in- 
 terpretation in the work of a fenfible and 
 fpecious author* out of our Church is fit to be 
 taken into particular confideration. In his 
 note on that famous paffage in the Epiftle to 
 the Romans^ (which the Anti-trinitarians are 
 ever attempting to prefs into the fervice of 
 Arianifm, as has already been in effedl feen,) 
 viz, of whom as concerning the fiefi, Chriji 
 camey who is over ally God blejfed for ever ; 
 this author admits the juftnefs of the appli- 
 cation to our bleffed Lord, who, fays he, 
 *' is God over all, as he is by the Father ap- 
 *' POINTED Lord, King, and Governour of 
 ** all." And then he refers to feveral texts 
 as declarative of fuch appointment. 
 
 * M r. Taylor, See his K^ to the ApoftoHcal Writings. 
 N 2 The 
 
i8o DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 T^he Father judgeth no man, but hath com^ 
 mitted all judgment unto the Son ; yohn i;. 22. 
 yefus knowing that the Father had given all 
 things into his hands, and that he was come from 
 God, and went to God; &c. yohn* xiii, 3. 
 
 yf// power is given unto me in heaven and in 
 earth; Matt, xxviii, 18. 
 
 The word which God fent unto the children 
 of Ifrael preaching peace by yefus Chrifi, he is 
 Lord of all; &c. /IBs at. 36. 
 
 God alfo hath highly exalted him, and given 
 him a name which is above every name ; Phil, 
 a. 9 . and fet him at is own right hand, in 
 the heavenly places, far above all principality 
 and power, &c. and every name that is named 
 not only in this world, but alfo in that which 
 is to come, &c. Ephef. i. 21, &c. He hath 
 put all things under his feet, &c. i Cor. xv. 
 27. " This, fays our author, is our Lord's 
 "Supreme Godhead. And that he is 
 ** blejfed for ever, or the objedt of ever- 
 *« lafting bleffing, is evident from Revelation 
 •* V. 12, 13." Worthy is the Lamb, &c. to 
 receive blejing, &c. and every creature, 6cc. 
 
 heard 
 
DISCOURSE VI. i8i 
 
 beard I faying, blejjing, and honour, &c. be 
 unto him that fitteth upon the throne, and to 
 the Lamb for ever, &c. Now it is very 
 obfervable that in fome of the places here 
 referred to there is not any intimation of 
 an appointment. The annotator Teems to 
 
 be aware of this when it is too late -, he 
 grows jealous of the paiTage he had admitted; 
 and, like one confcious of having allowed 
 more than his hypothecs could conveniently 
 afford, to all intents and purpofes revokes 
 his grant by a counter conftrudlion, and fo 
 at one dafli deprives our Lord both of his 
 bleffednefs and fupremacy. For thus he pro- 
 ceeds. ** But what this part of his cha- 
 ** racfler, in which he is more nearly related to 
 ** believing Gentiles, than to infidel Jews, 
 '* has to do with privileges belonging to the 
 ** latter, doth not feem to me very clear ; 
 ** much lefs can I conceive, why the Apoflle 
 *' in this particular enumeration of fewifi 
 ** privileges, fhould not mention their rela- 
 ** tion to God, as their God, in which they 
 **' particularly gloried, (Chapter ii. 17.) and 
 ^* which was indeed the glory of all their 
 N 3 ** glories 
 
i82 D I S C O U R S E VI. 
 
 *' glories, being the firfl: and grand article in 
 «* the covenant with Abraham ; and which 
 ^* he fails not to aflert among the fingular 
 *' privileges oi Chnjiia?is, (Ch. v. ii.) when 
 <* he is {hewing that the fubjedls of their 
 *« glorying were not inferior to thofe of the 
 ** Jews. How could he overlook the main 
 <* article of this lift ? Or what if there 
 ** fhould be a tranfpofition of a fingle letter 
 ** in the text, o odv for uv o. This will remove 
 *' every difficulty. Then the Englifi will be, 
 ** of whom, as concerning the flefi, Chriji came, 
 '* whofe is the God over all, blejfed for ever* 
 *' Thus the grand privilege will be inferted 
 ** to advantage, and ftand at the top of a 
 " lofty climax rifing from the Father, to 
 *• Chrill, and to God. We have indeed no 
 ** copy to jujiify this reading. But the afore-? 
 ** faid confiderations feem to make it pro- 
 f' bable the article ( o ) might be very eafily 
 ** tranfpofed. This is only my conjecture.'* 
 
 Now I beg leave to afk, whether our an- 
 notator was under an abfolute neceffity of 
 conjeduring ? Conjedures, I prefume, are 
 
 never 
 
DISCOURSE VL 183 
 
 never admiffible in criticiitn, but when they 
 clear the fenfe of an author from oblcurity j 
 or when dired: abfurdities, or confiderable 
 difficulties are removed by them. Is either 
 of thefe cafes the cafe at prefent ? So far 
 from it, that unlefs we are to facrifice fenfe 
 to figure, and real truth to ideal climax, I 
 affirm without ceremony the old and uni- 
 verfal reading to be the only right one j and 
 that this pafTage, abundantly plain and con- 
 fident in itfelf, is here obfcured by elucida- 
 tion, and marred by amendment. Mr. T« 
 in fa(fl fmothers himfelf in a duft of his own 
 raifing. For though, in a fpirit of true com- 
 paffion, and in the tendered affection to his 
 brethren, &c. the Apoftle calls to mind their 
 national charader, and many of the privi- 
 leges they had enjoyed, yet at the time of 
 his writing this Epiftle, it ffiould be remem- 
 bered, that their grand privilege of all, as 
 our author juftly terms it, that which the 
 ^^ews conftantly made their boaft of, and 
 ** which was indeed the glory of all their 
 '* glories," was abfolutely loft, and irreco- 
 verably done away for ever. God was no longer 
 
 N 4 tlieir 
 
i84 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 their God in any fenfe favourable to them ; 
 they were difowned -, they were cut off by 
 him, to ufe St. PauPs words in another place ; 
 the believing Gentiles were now ** more nearly 
 f* related to him 3" they were purified to be a 
 peculiar people ; and Jews, as yews, had no 
 manner of interefl: in the new difpenfation : 
 fo that, according to this author's conftruc- 
 tion, the Apoftle falfifies fadt, and infults his 
 kinfmen, by way of commiferation. 
 
 There is another text which the fame au- 
 thor handles not lefs to his own difadvantage. 
 Every houfe is builded by fome mafi, fays the 
 writer of the Epiftle to the Hebrews, Ch. iii, 
 4. but he that built all things is God, Mr. T's. 
 paraphrafe is as follows. *' When he faith, 
 << grij^jry JjQuJe Is buHdcd by fi)me perfon, but he 
 " who built all things is God, he evidently 
 ** diftinguifhes between a fubordinate and 
 ** Supreme builder. But this diftindlion he 
 ** needed not to have mentioned, had he not 
 ** fpoke of a fubordinate builder before. For, 
 <* if in the cafe under confideration, there 
 ^* be no fubordinate builder at all, this dif- 
 
 ** tindion 
 
D I S C O U R S E VI. 185 
 
 '* tindtlon is nothing to his purpofe. Then 
 ** his argument would have been ; Chriji 
 ** muft build the houfe 3 becaufe no one 
 ** could build it but he ; feeing no houfe is 
 ** built by any but God. Whereas, contra- 
 *' riwife, he afferts 2. fubordlnate builder, and 
 ** tells us fuch a one is confident with God's 
 '* being the Supreme original builder." 
 
 Now, I take it, this is a mere fanciful dif- 
 tindiion of Mr. Taylors own brain. The 
 context runs thus. This man was counted 
 worthy of more glory than Mofes^ inafmuch as 
 he who hath builded the houfe ^ hath more honour 
 than the hoife : for every houfe is builded by 
 fome many but he that built all things is God* 
 Surely he that built all things^ he who made 
 the world was the very Perfon or Being that 
 built the houfe, as the Apoftle exprefles it ; 
 i. e. who founded the whole fewifo OEco- 
 nomy, eccleiiaflical and civil ; and confe- 
 quently, though every houfe is builded by fome 
 man, though every inftitution, 6cc. has fome 
 author, and Mofes in particular may be faid 
 to be a founder in a fecondary fenfe, fefus 
 
 ChriJI 
 
i86 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Chriji is ftridly and properly the Supreme 
 Archited:, as we may fay, as well in the one 
 as the other of the above inftances, to the^ 
 total exclufion of every idea oi fub ordination. 
 And fo this very pafTage in efFedl plainly 
 afferts our Saviour's Divinity, and confirms 
 the Supremacy this Gentleman appears to be 
 extremely forward to deftroy by it. It is re- 
 markable enough that the texts under confi- 
 deration have been before now ^.fnare to un- 
 believers. For the Socinian glofs on them is, 
 *' that Chrift is as much more excellent than 
 *' Mofes as God is more excellent than his 
 ** own people ;" and this fuperexcellence is 
 on all hands allowed not to come one jot 
 fhort of abfolute infinity. 
 
 In confequence of the iTilfts to which in- 
 fidelity is reduced, it will add, omit, affirm, 
 and fuggeft, fometlmes arbitrarily, fometimes 
 imprudently, and fometimes on weak and 
 incompetent authority. That pafTage in St. 
 Paul's firft Epiflle to I'imothy, without con- 
 troverfy great is the myjiery of godlinefs -, * God 
 
 * I Tim. iii. i6. 
 
 was 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 187 
 
 nvas manlfefi in thejlefi, &c. makes fo clearly 
 for us, that the SocinianSy and they who pa- 
 tronife them, ftruggle to get rid of it at all 
 events. And that they do fo purely by the 
 help of a fuppofititious reading, which can 
 be fupported only by a ftrained, incoherent, 
 and ridiculous conftrudlion, (according to 
 which the myjiery of godlinefs was manifejl in 
 the JieJJ:, and received up into glory, 6cc. in- 
 ftead of Jefus Chrifl,) hath been abundantly 
 Hiewn by many, and efpecially by the learned 
 Bifliop Pearfon in his Expojition of the Creed. 
 
 With a view to the elufion of certain paf- 
 fages in the Revelation which we have al- 
 ready produced as plainly expreffive of the 
 Sons coequal majefty with the Father, Gro^ 
 tius has moft unwarrantably afligned them 
 their proper and refped:ive thrones in heaven. 
 He that fat on the throne, &c. in primo folio, id 
 ejt Deus, fays he in his paraphrafe of Rev. 
 xxi. 5. 
 
 Suppofmg, for argument's fake, the merit 
 of the trinitarian controverfy to depend chiefly 
 
 on 
 
i88 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 on the authenticity of the feventh verfe in St. 
 Johns V^ Epijile, there are three that hear 
 record In heaven, the Father, the Word, a7id 
 the Holy Ghoji, and thefe three are one, J I 
 would gladly afk, whether it is not, in the 
 nature of things, at lead as reafonable to fup- 
 pofe in general that this text was omitted by 
 the enemies of the dodtrine of the Trinity, 
 as that it was inferted by its friends ? And 
 if fo, infidelity would appear at befl: to ftand 
 upon a precarious foundation, as far as it 
 depends on the fpurioufnefs of this text -, and 
 we ihould furely err with more prudence 
 and modefty on the fide of the Catholic 
 Church, than againft her. But an excellent 
 writer * has, in his Letters to Mr. Gibbon on 
 this fubjedt, evinced the genuinenefs of this 
 text to the intire fatisfad:ion of every candid 
 and impartial inquirer; and particularly makes 
 it appear, that *' the context of the Apoftle 
 *' is fo far from receiving any injury by the 
 ** retention of the verfe in quefiion, that it 
 '* would lofe all its genuine fpirit, would be- 
 *' come unapt and feeble in its application, 
 
 X See Mr. Jones on this verfe. * Mr. Travis. 
 
 " and 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 189 
 
 ** and therefore could hardly be faid to fubfifl 
 ** without it." To this performance I refer 
 you with plcafure. 
 
 It has been urged, and with an air of con- 
 fidence, that Jefus Chriji cannot be an objed: 
 of divine worlhip, becaufe in that excellent 
 form of addrefs to the Deity which he re- 
 commended to his difciples, there is not the 
 leaft mention made of himfelf, nor the moft 
 diftant allufion to his office and charad:er« 
 A circumftance which has been confidered as 
 decifive in favour of Unit art anifm. Some per- 
 fons have as little of knowledge as they have 
 oi faith in thefe matters. At the time of his 
 di(ftating this mode of prayer, our blelTed 
 Lord was not, properly fpeaking, either the 
 mediator between God and man, or a facrifice 
 for the fins of the whole world. Though there- 
 fore this form of devotion is ufed at this day 
 with the greatefl: propriety imaginable, yet 
 it was originally delivered to the difciples for 
 their own more immediate ufe ; as is mani- 
 feft from the nature of the thing, and from 
 St. Lukes account of this matter. // came 
 
 to 
 
I90 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 to pajsy fays that Evangelift, that as he was 
 ■fraying in a certain place ^ when he ceajedy one 
 of his difciples faid unto himy Lord, teach us to 
 praji as 'John alfo taught his difciples ^"^ And 
 be faid unto theniy When ye prayy fayy Our 
 Fat her y &c. It was not till after his Afcen- 
 fion, and return to his Father, that they could 
 properly pray to or through him ; that they 
 were to ajk in his name, and to receive ; it 
 was not till after he had offered one facrifice for 
 fin, "f* and fat down at the right hand of God, 
 that his mediatorial charader commenced, in 
 which he ever liveth to jnake mterceffon for us. 
 
 There are two remarkable pafTages in St. 
 Paul's Epillles, which, as they are claimed 
 by our adverfaries with more appearance of 
 right than the foregoing, it will be proper to 
 take into confideration. Who (i.e. fefus 
 Chrif) being in the form of God, thought it 
 not robbery to be equal with God, but made him' 
 felfofno reputation, 6cc. % This text is often 
 quoted as averting the true Divinity of our 
 Saviour. I am therefore concerned to deliver 
 
 * Luke xi. i. f Heb. x, 12. vii. 25. 
 
 % Phil. ii. 6. &6. 
 
 it 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 191 
 
 it from the conflrud:ion which the Ariam 
 with much afTurance put upon it; and which 
 many amongft ourfelves have, I think,very un- 
 warily admitted; fubjeding themfelves there- 
 by to the neceffity of having recourfe to a hack- 
 neyed, and after all mere verbal diftindiion be- 
 tvjQtvi fdlf- exijience and mcejfary exijlencey in or- 
 der to reconcile their admiffion Vv'ith orthodox 
 principles. 'Thought it not robbery, 6cc. ax c4/3- 
 7rcLyf/.ov vjy^jtrccTo, i. e. (fays No-vatian and many 
 with him,) he never compared himfelf with, 
 God the Father, nunquam fe Deo Patri aut 
 comparavit aut contulit ; the reafon follows, 
 memor fe ejfe ex Juo Pat re. Every Arian will 
 abide by this explication ; and how do the 
 advocates for Novatian get clear of the im- 
 puted confequences ? Why, fays Dr, Water^ 
 land, *' this interpretation of the text (fup- 
 " pofing it juft) implies no more than this, 
 *^ that yefus Chriji never pretended to an 
 " equality with the Father in refpedt of his 
 ** original, knowing himfelf to be fecond only 
 ** in order, not the firft Perfon of the ever- 
 ** blelTed Trinity." Dr. W. obferves, that 
 the whole palTage in Novatian, rightly un- 
 
 derftood. 
 
192 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 derftood, affords a ftrong proof of the co- 
 equality of the two Perfons ; and that it is 
 quoted accordingly by Dr. JVhitby in his trea- 
 tife de vera Chrijli deitate. But as this can 
 only be done by help of the above diftin(fl:ion, 
 I muft afk, why Novatians fenfe of this text 
 mull: be admitted as the true one ? He did 
 not affe^i fay feme, did not claim, did not 
 take upon hirriy dzc, to be honoured as God. 
 Notwithftanding the great authorities of 
 Grotiusy Tiliotfofty and Clarke, &c. *" with 
 which this interpretation is fortified, I can- 
 not help thinking the reading in ufe, thought 
 it not robbery to be equal with God, not barely 
 to be the more eligible, but indeed the pro- 
 per reading. For, not to inlift on one cir- 
 cumftance in its favour, which is the non- 
 agreement of the feveral interpretations of 
 the learned Gentlemen above-mentioned, it 
 deferves to be noted, that though the phrafe 
 \iX AOTTccyf^ov YiyriiTo.ro would admit the conftruc- 
 tion contended for, yet the context will be 
 found abfolutely to revolt againft it. Grant- 
 ing the phrafe bei?jg in the form of God to be 
 
 * See Mr. ParkliDnl's Note at p. 79 of his Treatife on the 
 Djvinity and Pre-exiRence of our Saviour. 
 
 in 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 193 
 
 in itfelf of undeterminate fignlfication, yet 
 when predicated of him who is one with the 
 Father y who was in the beginning with God, 
 and really and truly was God, it certainly is to 
 be regarded as fynonymous with thofe expref- 
 fions 'y and confequently as importing an in- 
 tire equality with God. But herewith the 
 condruclion of Novatian, and of the Avians 
 not to fay of Dr. W. himfelf, is totally in- 
 compatible. The reading in ufe therefore 
 muft be allowed to be not only natural, but 
 necelTary. He thought it not robbery, i. e. to 
 be no violation of right, or juftice. 
 
 The other palTage is the following. T'here 
 is one body, fays the Apoftle to the Ephefians, 
 and one spirit -, one Lord, 07ie Faith, one Bap- 
 tifm J one God, and Father of all, who is above 
 all, and through all, andinyou all. Chap. iv. 4. 
 &c. The Socinian and the Arian inference 
 from thefe texts is obvious ; but in proof 
 that it is an unfair one, I would remark, that 
 had St. Paul intended here to have diftin- 
 guifhed the Father from the Son and the 
 
 O Spirit 
 
194 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Spirit, by this afcription of Supremacy, he 
 would certainly have named the two latter 
 with their feverally difcriminating inferior 
 titles ; and this without a needlefs, and I 
 might fay, impertinent combination of uni- 
 ties, if I may fo call them. Belides, had this 
 been the Apoftle's defign, how comes it to 
 pafs that fupremacy is in almoft the fame 
 terms afcribed in the New T^ejiament to Jefus 
 Chriji ; whofe throne is for ever and ever, who 
 is Lord of all, '^ho is over all, God bleJJ'ed for 
 ever f Or how are we to account for its 
 being fo frequently faid, that both Chriji and 
 the Spirit as well as the Father is in us f If 
 the manifeft attribution of Supremacy in the 
 texts juft now cited does not exclude the Fa^ 
 ther, why mull it be underftood in the place 
 under confideration to exclude the Son ? The 
 fame queftion may be afked with the fame 
 propriety, and with the fame fuccefs, with re- 
 gard to the following well-known paflages in 
 the firft Epiftle to Tijji. which, I believe, the 
 Anti-trinitarians in general fet with much 
 aflurance at the head of their authorities. 
 
 Now 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 195 
 
 Now unto the king eternal, immortal, invifibky 
 the only wife God, be honour and glory for ever 
 and ever : -f- Who is the blefjed and only pot en- 
 tate, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, 
 who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light 
 which no man can approach unto, whom no man 
 hath feen, or can fee : to whom be honour and 
 power everlajling. Surely all this is briefly but 
 fully comprehended in the above defcriptions 
 of Jefus Chrifl ; to whom, by the way, in- 
 dependently on the Father, St. Peter afcribes 
 glory both now and for ever. We fliall now 
 be able to defpatch with no difficulty certain 
 pafTages which at firft fight have an humi- 
 liating tendency, and feem to import the in- 
 feriority of the Son to the Father, and the 
 imperfonality of the Holy Ghofl:. It may be 
 of ufe to expofe pretences. 
 
 With refpe(5t to his human chara<fter, or 
 his legation, Chrifl is confelTedly God's-, and 
 the head of Chrifl is God; and, fays he, my 
 Father is greater than I. We have already 
 feen, that the abfolute Godhead of Jefus 
 
 f I Tim. i. 17. VI. 15, &c. 
 
 O 2 Chnfl 
 
196 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Chrijl, though it had been on certain occa- 
 lions not barely intimated, but in plain terms 
 afferted by him, was not uniformly mani- 
 fefted to his difciples during his refidence 
 upon earth. It was a truth which he was in 
 due time fully to authenticate to them, but 
 which at prefent for obvious reafons they 
 could 7iot bear. * Accordingly, as in many 
 other places, fo in the words iaft quoted, 
 which were calculated to footh them under 
 the lofs they were about to fuftain by his 
 going awayy my Father is greater than I, the 
 blelTed Je/us with particular propriety alludes 
 to the commiffion he had undertaken, and 
 adapts himfelf to their imperfed: and un- 
 fettled conceptions, -f- On pretty much the 
 fame ground he had at another time declared 
 to the ru/er who addrefled him under the 
 character of Good Majier, "^ that there is none 
 good but one, that is God. The full manifef- 
 tation of the great my fiery of the Gofpel was 
 referved for the day of Pentecojl ; before 
 which confideration a thoufand difficulties 
 
 * See Parkhurft's Divin. &c.ofChnft. p. 102. &c. 117.&C. 
 f See Difc. 3 and 7. See John xiv. 26. xv. 26. 
 X See Luke xviii. 18. 
 
 will 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 197 
 
 will crumble into atoms 5 and by which an 
 anfwer is given in full to the fubftance of 
 what Dr. Priejily has advanced in the Jirjl 
 Se5i. of the Introd. to hts Hijlory of Early 
 Opinions, with refpedt to the filence of 
 the 0/d Teftament, and the incompetency of 
 a great part of the New, 
 
 I'his is Ufe eternal, fays our blefled Lord, 
 that they may know thee, the only true God^ and 
 yefus Chriji whom thou hafl fent, * Our Lord, 
 fpeaking here in his human capacity, and 
 with reference to his miffion, very naturally 
 avows his Father to be the only true God, in 
 contradiftindtion to zWfalfe Gods -, but cannot 
 be fuppofed to exclude himfelf and the Holy 
 Ghofi, who are partakers of one effence with 
 the true. 
 
 So again : who is the firfi horn of every 
 creature, and the beginning of the creation of 
 God. -f- As to the latter of thefe expreffions, 
 it implies no more, according to fome inter- 
 pretations, than the Father of the Chriftian 
 
 * John xvii. 3. f Col. i. 15. Rev. iii. 14. 
 
 O 3 Church, 
 
198 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 Church, &c ; or, if the original word had 
 been rendered the caufe, or the origin, inftead 
 of the beginning, as with very fufficient war- 
 rant it might have been, this text is fo far 
 from affirming Chriji to be a creature, that, 
 in effed, it avers him to be the Creator ; or, 
 if it be precifely equivalent to the former ex- 
 preffion, it will in courfe be reducible to the 
 fame fignification. Now literally, and in his 
 human character, ye/iis ChriJI was not the 
 Jirjl-born of every creature ; and in his divine 
 charadter he was not born or begotten at all, 
 except in a tranfcendent and incomprehen- 
 fible fenfe; but he was, and is ftyled in a few 
 verfes below, t\\QjirJi-bornfro?n the dead, and 
 in his own refurredion afcertained ours, &c. 
 And in this juft fenfe he is the Jirji-born of 
 every creature, the beginning of the Creation of 
 God, or of the new creation and conftitution 
 of things, not only without difparagement to 
 his divine nature, but in dired confirmation 
 of it. 
 
 So again : Of that day and hour knoweth no 
 man, no not the angels which are in heaven, 
 
 neither 
 
D I S C O U R S E VI. 199 
 
 neither the Sony but the Father. "* In our Sa- 
 viour's human capacity, or in his mediatorial 
 chara&er, the final and general judgment was 
 a matter that did not concern him -, but in 
 his divine charadler he cannot but know the 
 time of his own vilitations. 
 
 So again : Go to my brethren, and fay unto 
 them, I afcend unto my Father, and your Fa- 
 ther, and to my God, and your God. *f* Thefe 
 words contain a proper and natural commif- 
 iion given to Mary Magdalen by our blefled 
 Lord in confequence of his refurredion, and 
 agreeably to what he had fpoken unto his 
 difciples when he was yet in Galilee. J It was 
 his intention to iignify by her the fpeedy ac- 
 complifhment of what he had frequently 
 foretold and promifed them under the cha- 
 radter of the Mejjiah -, but it was neither ne- 
 celTary nor expedient to difcover to her fingly 
 the Jlilnefs of his Godhead, 
 
 So once more : ^hen all things Jball be 
 fubdued unto him, then Jloall the Son alfo 
 
 * Mark xiii. 32. f John xx. 17. J Luke xxiv. 6. 
 O A himf/'i 
 
200 DISCOURSE VI. 
 
 himfelf be fiibjeB to him that put all things 
 under himt that God may be all in alL § la 
 other words ; when the great Icheme of 
 man's redemption (hall be completed, Chrijl 
 {hall refign his commiffion into his hands 
 from whom he received it, and his media- 
 torial kingdom be fucceeded bv the eternal 
 kingdom of God, the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Glwjl t v/ith whom the Saints, and Spirits of 
 jujl men made perfeB, ihall live in fulnefs of 
 blifs and glory. This is the obvious and in- 
 deed necefl'ary conftru61:ion. For if we attend 
 to the letter of this paffage, and not to the 
 fpirit and fcope of it, when all things Jloall be 
 fubdued, &c. THEN fliall the Son be fubjed:, 
 &c. we Ihall afTert that J ejus Chrijl will be 
 fubjeSi to the Father after the confumma- 
 tion of all things, but was not fo before j 
 or, that he was greater in his human cha- 
 racter than in his divine : which is abfurd. 
 He mufl reign, fays the Apoftle, juft before, 
 till he hath put all things under his feet. Now 
 it is not literally true that he fhall reign fo 
 long, and no longer than this, as the words 
 
 § I Co, XV, 28, 
 
 import, 
 
DISCOURSE VI. 201 
 
 import. For though his reign over the 
 Church militant fliall ceafe, of his reign 
 over the Church triumphant there jhall be no 
 end. The truth is, with the Evangelical 
 plan, v^ith the commiflion of 'Jefus Chriji, 
 the idea of fubordination, or fubjecflion, is 
 connected ; but with regard to abfolute per- 
 fediion of effence and attribute, the comple- 
 ment of the Godhead, the Trinity in Unity, 
 ever was, and for ever will be all in all. 
 
 Laftly : with refped: to fuch expreflions 
 as the following, which appear inconliftent 
 with perfonality, be filled with the Spirit -, * 
 quench not the Spirit ; -f* the Spirit which he 
 hath given us ; if receive ye the Holy Ghofi ; § 
 &c. it is obvious to remark, that, agreeably 
 to a common figure, the caufe and its effects 
 are promifcuoufly ufed -, and accordingly by 
 the Spirit in all thefe places, and in all pa- 
 rallel ones, we are to underfland the gifts 
 and graces of which the Holy Spirit, or Holy 
 Ghofi is the difpenfer. If this interpretation 
 
 * Ephef V. 18. t iTheff. v. 19. 
 
 X I John iii. 24. § John xx. 22. 
 
 be 
 
202 DISCOURSE VL 
 
 be not admitted, we may with equal pro- 
 priety and juflice call in queftion the perfo- 
 nality o^Jefus Cbriji in his human charad:er, 
 and even that of God the Father himfelf. 
 For if Chriji be in tis, the body is dead ; * and 
 God is a confiiming fire ; -f God is love ; J and 
 God is in you of a truth. § 
 
 On the whole then, I may fairly conclude 
 with remarking, that, for the moft part, in 
 the arguments of Socinians we may be faid 
 to have premijjes without conclufionsy and in 
 thofe of Arians conclufions without premijjes ; 
 and that there is nothing in the feeble at- 
 tempts, the bold alTcrtions, or the perverfe 
 difputings of our adverfaries, I do not fay to 
 terrify, but in any degree to difcourage us 
 from firiving together for the faith of the 
 Gofpeiy even that faith which fiandeth not in 
 the wifdom of men , but in the power of God »^^ 
 
 * Rom. viii. lo. -j- Heb. xii. 29. 
 
 X 1 John iv. 8, §1 Cor. xiv. 25. 
 
 ** I Cor. ii. 5. 
 
 D I S- 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 I C o R. Chapter 15. Verfe 12. 
 
 If Cbrijl be preached that he rofe from the 
 dead, how fay fome among you that there 
 is no refurre6tlo7i of the dead ? 
 
 THAT important article of our Creeds, 
 the RefurreSiion of the Body, is the 
 other great myfiery which has all along been 
 foolijhnefs to Infidels, and a fumbling- block to 
 manyChriftians. Under this article then I am 
 to endeavour, agreeably to my engagements, 
 to give all the fatisfadion which the fenfible, 
 the candid, and the well-difpofed can re- 
 quire. 
 
 I might infifl: that the great do«5trine before 
 us is virtually at leaft contained in my text : 
 
 but 
 
204 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 but as there is a ftrong propenfity in human 
 pride to confider what is propounded to our 
 faith as infulting our underflandings, it will 
 be neceffary to enter into a full and even 
 minute difcuffion of the fubjedt. 
 
 A late ingenious author. Dr. Sykes^ very 
 confidently afferts, that this doctrine has no 
 manner of warrant from fcriptural authority. 
 He obferves, as Mr. Locke has done before 
 him, that ** there is not any fuch expreffion 
 ** in the New Tefcament as the RefurreSiion 
 " ofthejlejh', that the Scriptures often fpeak 
 ** of a ReforreBioiiy and of the RefurreBion 
 '* of the dead ', but as to the RefurreBion of 
 *' the bodyy or of the fejhy there is not 
 ** one word. And therefore that fuch an 
 ** article was required at firjl to be profeffed 
 ** in order to Baptifm, can never be proved."* 
 
 I have already apologized for freedoms 
 taken with the dead. The names I juft 
 now mentioned are of the firfl authority 
 with unbelievers at this day; and I take a 
 part in the controverfy with a hope to con- 
 
 * See Enquiry when the Refurreftion of the Body was firft 
 inferted in the Creeds, fub. init, 
 
 dua 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 205 
 
 du(5t it to your content, if not by recency of 
 argument, or reply, at leafl by the mode of 
 their enforcement. 
 
 Now that the above expreflions or phrafes, 
 — the RefurreSiion of the body, or the fiefi^ 
 never occur in the New Teftament -, that this 
 article, together with fome others which Dr. 
 S. mentions, did not make a part of the 
 Baptifmal Creed before the middle of the 
 fourth century, may without difficulty be 
 admitted -, becaufe if it will appear, that 
 the 'ReJurreSlion of the body, or ofthefejhy is 
 mod unqueftionably the dodtrine of Scrip- 
 ture, and of the Apoitolical and primitive 
 Church, we are bound by all means to retain 
 it ', and its infertion into the Creed at any 
 time was both proper and neceiTary ; the 
 original Creed, whatever it precifely was, 
 having been reafonably enlarged, (by Dr. 
 <S"s own confeffion), as circumftances de- 
 manded, and herefies multiplied. 
 
 Let us enquire then, whether the dodrine 
 of the Refurrediion, as it is delivered in our 
 
 Creeds, 
 
2o6 DISCOURSE Vll. 
 
 Creeds, be not founded in evidence rational, 
 fcriptural, and irrefiftible. 
 
 If we confider this dodlrine as a matter of 
 opinion, and not of faith, we fliall find it to 
 have countenance in no contemptible autho- 
 rity. Tho' the heathens faw^/r/Vz^^//i'/;z^ J- 
 in general thro' a dim glafs indeed ; tho' the 
 profpedt of futurity was greatly clouded to a 
 world almofl wholly corrupt in principle, 
 and abandoned in pradice, yet the notion of 
 another ftate, and even of a refiirreBion, or of a 
 renovation of all things, which is a refurreBion 
 in effedl, was far from being univerfally ex- 
 ploded, as abfolutely ridiculous, or chimeri- 
 cal. We are alTured Zoroujires taught the 
 dodrine of the refurreBion among the antient 
 Pe?'Jians, as he himfelf derived it moft pro- 
 bably from the Jews, with whom he had 
 communications. Grotius, who, with ref- 
 pe(5t to this article at leaft, was not of doubt- 
 ful mind ^ in proof of the admiffible poffibi- 
 lity of the thing, cites the authorities both 
 of hiftorians and philofophers, and affirms 
 it to have been the tenet of almoft the 
 whole fed: of the Stoics. * The Grecian 
 
 * See Grotius de vent. 1. 7. and 10. Le-Clerc's Notes. 
 Prideaux Conned, v. i. p. 103. &c. 
 
 cuflom 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 207 
 
 cuftom of burying the dead with their faces 
 upwards, and looking toward the rifingSun, 
 which is exactly the Chriflian mode, has a 
 very ftrong fmatch of this fentiment. [aa) 
 'Tis obfervable, Mahomet fpeaks in his Koran 
 of the refurreBion as of a dod:rine known 
 and received in the world from the beginning, 
 and far antecedently to the Mofaic difpenfa- 
 tion. This appears from the following paf- 
 fage. ** That this, i.e. the dod;rine of the re^ 
 *' furre£lion, is no other than fables of the 
 ** Antients is, fays he, the pretence of 
 ** unbelievers." And indeed his learned 
 tranflator remarks in his Freliminary T)if- 
 courfe, that fome of the Pagan Arabs be- 
 lieved neither a creation, nor refurreBion -, 
 but that others believed both. We are given 
 to underftand by a fenfible writer, that the 
 iirft Europeans who vilited China found many 
 Chriftian truths intermingled with the trafh 
 of fable, and tradition ; that the Gentiles of 
 Indojlan have confufed notions of the Trini- 
 ty 'y and in particular that the people of 
 Ceylon believe the RefurreSlion of the Body, * 
 
 * Jenkins's Reafonab. &c. V. i. p. 103. P. on the Cr, 
 P- 379- 
 
 In 
 
2o8 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 In his note at the 19th verfe of the 26th 
 chapter of Ifaiah, — T^hy dead men jhall live, 
 together with my dead body fiall they arife, &c. 
 the learned Bp. Lowth obferves, that the 
 doctrine of the refurreBion of the dead mufl 
 have been ** a popular and common dodtrine" 
 among the Jews, at the time of the delivery 
 of this prophecy ; and we may reafonably 
 make the fame inference from a parallel 
 paiTage in Dajiiel -, — ma?2y of them that Jleep 
 in the diijl of the earth Jhall awake, &c. 
 many, as I find it noted by the judicious 
 commentator, being here and elfew^here 
 manifeftly equivalent to alL 
 
 That the notion of a RefurreStion, accord- 
 ing to the common acceptation of the term, 
 prevailed among the Jews in our Saviour's 
 time, v\^ill be foon manifeft from certain 
 occurrences and palTages in the evangelical 
 writings. St. Paul, in his apology before 
 King Jgrippay affirms it to have its founda- 
 tion in the hope of the promife made unto the 
 Fathers: tho' when, where, or in what man- 
 ner, he mentions not. And certain it is 
 that the Pharifees, the Jlraitefi and moft 
 
 confiderable 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 209 
 
 confiderable SeSt among them, not only en- 
 tertained this notion with ferioufnefs, but 
 contended for it with vehemency ; as ap- 
 pears from the violence of oppolition be- 
 tween them and the Sadduceesy who as ftre- 
 nuoully denied it. What then did both 
 parties underftand by it ? Let us, for a 
 refolution of this queftion, turn iiril: to the 
 account which the evangelifts give us of a 
 difcourfe held by the Sadducees with our 
 Saviour, on the fubjed: of the Refurredlion, 
 'The fa?ne day, fays St. Matthew^ and much 
 in the fame words, St. Mark, and St. Luke 
 after him, came to hhn the Sadducees, who 
 fay that there is no Refurre£lion, and ajked 
 him, faying, Majier, Mofes faid, if a man die 
 halving no children, his brother Jlo all marry his 
 wife, and raife up feed unto his brother : now 
 there were with us feven brethren -, and the 
 firfl when he had married a wife, deceafed -, 
 and having no ijfue left his wife to his brother ; 
 likewife the fecond alfo, and the third, to the 
 feventh. And lafi of all, the wo77ian died 
 alfo. Therefore in the RefurreBion whofe 
 wife fiall Jhe be of the feven, for they all 
 
 P had 
 
2IO DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 had her, * The argument herein implied is 
 indeed perfecflly ridiculous, and grofily car- 
 nal -y and is expofed accordingly by our 
 bieffed Lord in his reply to it : but it unde- 
 niably fuppofes the reJu^reBion of the bodies 
 of thefe lame brethren and their wifey agre- 
 ably to the Pharijdical hypothecs. Indeed 
 that very reply plainly fuppofes the fame 
 thing. Te do err, not knowing the Scriptures, 
 nor the power of God, For in the reJiirreBion 
 they neither marry, nor are given in marri^ 
 age, but are as the angels of God in heaven. 
 All this is abundantly confirmed by our 
 Saviour's own argument immediately follow- 
 ing. As touching the refurreclion of the dead, 
 have you not read that which was fpoken to you 
 by God, faying, I am the God of Abraham, 
 and the God of Ifaac, and the God of facob f 
 God is not the God of the dead, but of the 
 living. There is neither connection, nor 
 indeed fenfe in this portion of fcripture- 
 hiftory, unlefs v^e fuppofe the re- union of 
 the fouls and bodies of Abraham and Ifaac, 
 dec. in the refurredlion -, and that our Sa- 
 
 * Mate. 22. 23. itc. 
 
 viour 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 211 
 
 vlour meant by implication to affert it. For 
 his argument directly proves nothing more 
 than the immortality of the foul, and its 
 confequentiai exiftence in a future ftate. But 
 had this proof been the fole objed: of his 
 difcourfe, he would moil all u redly have ex- 
 prelTed himfelf in a very dilterent manner 
 upon the occafion. Our Lord's meaning is 
 yet more fully difcovered by St. Lukes ac- 
 count of this matter. Now that the dead are 
 7'aifedi fays he, according to that Evangelift, 
 EVEN Mofes fbewed at the buJJ?, faying, 6cc. 
 
 Again : When our Lord told Martha, 
 that her brother, newly deceafed, fhould rife 
 again, fiefaid unto him, fays the facred text, 
 1 know that he jlo all rife again in the refurrec- 
 tion at the lajl day, * Now that Martha be- 
 lieved her brother jhould rife again at the laji 
 day with that body which was laid in the 
 grave, and had been dead four days, is evi- 
 dent enough from this confideration ; that, 
 though fhe appears to have been doubtful of 
 the poffibility of his refurredtion at that time, 
 
 * John xi. 24. 
 
 P 2 and 
 
212 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 and in fo extraordinary a way. Lord, fays fhe, 
 by this time he Jiinketh, and this notwith- 
 flanding her avowed belief that whatfoever 
 our Saviour would ajk of God, God would give 
 it him, and his declaration that he was him- 
 felf the refurre^iion and the life, yet when 
 Lazarus actually came forth, neither fhe nor 
 the many fews who were prefent fhewed the 
 leaft fign of amazement. It does not appear 
 that they were in any degree afloniflied at 
 this mode of his reftoration to life 3 and there- 
 fore we may juftly prefume they were per- 
 fuaded that in the refurredlion at the lajl day 
 ** all men fhall rife again with their bodies," 
 through the operation of that omnipotent 
 power which, in the twinkling of an eye, is 
 able to infpire life and vigour into duft and 
 afhes, and animate corruption itfelf. 
 
 The fuppofed refiirreBion of fohn the 
 Baptijl may be confidered in the fame point 
 of view. Herod, hearing of xhtfame of fe- 
 fus, faid unto his ferv ants, as the Evangelift 
 acquaints us, this is fohn the Baptijl, he is 
 rifen from the dead, and therefore mighty 
 
 works 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 213 
 
 isorks do fie w forth t he mf elves in him, Herod 
 hardly thought thefe works were done by the 
 ipirit or apparition of the Baptiji -, and if 
 not, we mufl conclude that he believed him 
 to be rifen indeed, according to the notions 
 entertained by the "Jews. The facred hif- 
 tory informs us the Sadducees were grieved 
 that the Apoftles preached through Jefus the 
 refurreSlion from the dead. And is it not as 
 plain as implication can make it, that their 
 doiftrine was, that the followers of Jefus, and 
 indeed all men, fhould be raifed in like 
 manner as he was ? 
 
 The truth is, of this kind of implied evi- 
 dence we have plenty in the facred volume. 
 I will only produce one piece more of Gof- 
 pel-hiftory, in prefumptive proof that Gf«- 
 tiles as well as fews underftood by a refur- 
 reBion what we do at this day. St. Faul 
 concludes his difcourfe to the Athenians with 
 infifting on the certainty of a future judg- 
 ment from the ajj'urance which God had 
 given to all men of it, by his having raifed 
 that man,who7n he had ordained to be their judge, 
 P 3 from 
 
214 DISCOURSE VIL 
 
 from the dead. And when they heard of the re- 
 furreBion of the dead, fays the hi dorian, fme 
 mocked 'y but others faidy we will hear thee 
 again of this matter. * Now St. Paul's audi- 
 ence Goiiiifted chiefly of Stoics and Epicu- 
 reans y and the latter moil undoubtedly were 
 the party/that derided the dodrine which the 
 former did not conceive to be altogether ex- 
 travagant, or ridiculous. But had the Apof- 
 tle meant only to inculcate the general doc- 
 trine of a future ftate, the Stoics in all pro- 
 bability would have been fatisfied as to that 
 point without a farther hearing ; and the 
 Epicurea:2s would have no more mocked, or 
 infulted, than if a Stoic had preached it. 
 
 Indeed there is one circumflance in the 
 evangelical hiftory which at firft glance may 
 be thought to militate againft what has been 
 laid before you. When our Saviour came 
 doivn from the mountain after his 'Uransfgura- 
 tioHy with Peter y fajnes, andfohhy and charged 
 them that they Jhould tell no man what things 
 they had feeuy till the Son of man were rifen 
 
 * Ads xvii. 32. 
 
 from 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 215 
 
 J'rofn the dead^ they kept that faying with them- 
 felves, quejlioning one with another, whitt the 
 ri/ing from the dead fI:)ould mean. -f But that 
 they could not poffibly doubt what was to 
 be underftood by the expreffion, or the thing 
 itfcif, is demonftrable from preceding con- 
 fiderations ; and therefore the cafe muft have 
 been this. They were perplexed with the 
 account our Lord had given of himfelf j they 
 could not conceive how their Mafter, whom 
 they ftill regarded as a temporal deliverer, 
 Ihould fuffer and be put to an ignominious 
 death, (as he had affured them he {hould in 
 the 31" v. of the lad Chapter j) or how the 
 expeded deliverance would be effedied by, 
 or after fuch refurred:ion : this was probably 
 the fubject of their enquiry ; they qiieflioned 
 one with another, not what the, but what 
 HIS rijingfrom the dead JJjouId mean. All this 
 is perfedlly confident with a parallel paffage 
 in St. Luke. He took unto him the twelve, 
 and J aid unto them. Behold, we go up to Je- 
 rujalem, and all things that are written by the 
 prophets concerning the Son of man fid all be ac- 
 
 f Mark ix. 10. 
 
 P 4 complified^ 
 
2i6 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 complified. For he Jhall be delivered unto the 
 Gentiles i and Jloall be mocked, and fpitefully in- 
 treated and /pitted on ; and they Jhall fcourge 
 him, and put him to death : and the third day 
 he Jljall rife again. And they under jlood none of 
 thefe things : and this faying was hid from them, 
 neither knew they the things which were fpoken. 
 Luke xviii. 3 1 . 
 
 What has already been advanced will ob- 
 viate a common alTertion, or infinuation, that 
 there is a very material diiFerence between 
 the cafe of a body which has been dead a 
 few days, or months, or even years, and of 
 one which has been buried in the earth many 
 centuries lince -, and that the fame Power 
 which is able to eifecfb a refurreSlion in the 
 former cafe, cannot be conceived adequate to 
 the like operation in the latter. And indeed 
 it deferves to be remarked, that to maintain, 
 or to intimate this, is at befl to make ex- 
 tremely free with Omnipotence, and in fadt 
 only begs a queftion inftead of fatisfying it. 
 Befides, this expedient will appear to be hea- 
 vily encumbered with flrange inconveni- 
 ences i 
 
DISCOURSE Vll. 217 
 
 cnces ; to fpeak much lefs hardily of it than 
 perhaps in judice I fliould. When a finite 
 underftanding has laid the line which infi- 
 nite power cannot pafs, it will have a fair 
 claim to our attention ; although, even were 
 this done, the number of inftances we meet 
 with in holy writ of the fame identical body's 
 being raifed from the grave, or reftored to 
 life, which had actually deceafed, will how- 
 ever juftify our fuppofition, that the bodies 
 of fuch as (Ijall die within a reafonable time 
 before the laji day fhall be raifed after this 
 modus or manner -, and agreeably to the com- 
 mon and' natural ideas of a refurredlion. It 
 will be hard indeed if our adverfaries will not 
 allow us to take this for granted ; and if 
 they will, the fame underftanding which is 
 able to meafurci^finity can readily inform us 
 how, or whether with a body or without one, 
 the bulk of mankind fliall appear at the great 
 day of final retribution. 
 
 I come now to revelation more clear and 
 explicit j to plain, intelligible Scripture; with 
 refpeft to which, it pains one to fee fo 
 great a man as Mr. Locke taking refuge 
 
 in 
 
2i8 DISCOURSE VIL 
 
 in the above diftindion, and indeed in the 
 moil pitiful evaiions. Obferve then how 
 this juftly celebrated philofopher cxprefTes 
 himfelf in the paiTiige following. "In the 
 *' New Teftament (wherein, I think, are 
 ** contained all the articles of the Chriftian 
 " Faith,) I find our Saviour and his Apof- 
 ** ties to preach the reJurreBion from the 
 ** dead, and the refurreSliQii of the dead in 
 ** many places : but I do not remember any 
 *' place where the refiirreBion of the fame body 
 " is fo much as mentioned. Nay, which is 
 ** very remarkable in the cafe, I do not re- 
 *■* member in any place of the New Tefta- 
 ** ment, (where the general refurredlion at 
 *' the lad day is fpoken of,) any fuch ex- 
 ** preffion as the refurreBion of the body, much 
 " lefs of the fame body. I fay, the general 
 ** refurreBion, &c. becaufe where the refiir- 
 '^ reBion of feme particular per/ons prefently 
 *' upon our Saviour's refurredlion is men- 
 *' tioned, the words are, the graves were 
 '^opened, and many bodies of faints ^ which flept, 
 ** arofe, and came out of the graves, after his 
 ** refurreBion, and went into the holy city, and 
 ** appeared to many : of which peculiar way 
 
 <« of 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 219 
 
 " of fpeaking of /^/Vrefurredion, the paflage 
 " itfelf gives a realbn in thefe words, ap- 
 *' peared to many i i. e. thofe who Jlept, ap- 
 *' peared, fo as to be rifen. But this could 
 ** not be known, unlefs they brought with 
 " them the evidence, that they were thofe 
 ** who had been dead, &c. And it is pro- 
 ** bable they were fuch as were newly dead, 
 ^* whofe bodies were not^y^^ dilTolved, 6cc."* 
 
 There is, I perfuade myfelf, little or no- 
 thing in this paifage but has its anfwer in the 
 foregoing conliderations j unlefs we iLould 
 be kind enough to acknowlege for argument 
 the triumphant fneer of that parenthefis, 
 {^whereint I think, are contained all the Articles 
 of the Chrijiian Faith.) It might therefore 
 be fufficient to remark, that Mr. L. feems to 
 admit myjieries as fome people difpenfe alms, 
 njiz. grudgingly, or of necej/ity ; and at the 
 fame time to exprefs our obligations to him 
 for his indulgent conceffion, that bodies have 
 been raifed from the dead upon particular oc^ 
 cajions. But becaufe this great writer may 
 poffibly be flill thought by fome to have hit 
 
 * See EfTay on the Human Underll. and ch. on Identity. 
 
 upon 
 
220 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 upon an expedient, which happily helps him 
 out of embaralTment, in the ftale diflindlion 
 between a particular and the general Refur- 
 redtion, let us fee whether this diilindion will 
 not vanifh before the enfuing argumentation. 
 
 I venture to aver then that the refurre£lion 
 of the body of Jefus Chrijl is an efpecial 
 earneft, or fure token of the refurredlion of 
 our bodies from the dead. I defire vour im- 
 partial judgment of the texts which follow. 
 Now is Chriji rifen from the dead, and become 
 the Jirji-fruits of thetn that Jlept, * God hath 
 both raifed up the Lord, and will alfo raife up 
 us by his own power. If we have been^ 
 planted together in the likenefs of his death, we 
 fioall be alfo in the likenefs of his refurreBio7j. He 
 who raifed up the Lord Jefus, fiall raife up us 
 alfo by Jefus. % As the Father rafeth up the 
 dead, and quickeneth them, even Jo the Son quick- 
 eneth whom he will. § Thefe texts will be 
 fufficient for my prefent purpofe. Let us 
 confider them feparately a liale. Now is 
 
 * I Cor. XV. 20, 
 
 vi. 
 
 14. 
 
 t Rom. vi. 5. 
 
 I 2 Cor. iv. i<j. 
 
 
 
 ^ John V. 21. 
 
 Chrijl 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 221 
 
 Chriji rifenfrom the dead, and become thefirji^ 
 fruits of them that flept, I need not enlarge 
 upon the Jewifi pradlice alluded to under 
 this figurative expreffion ; and fliall only ob- 
 ferve, that, as the firfi-fruks were offerings 
 of that identical grain of which the harvefl: 
 was to follow, the refurreBion of our bodies, 
 after that of Chrifl, could not have been fig- 
 nified by a finer emblem. God hath both 
 raifed up the Lord, and will alfo raife up us by 
 his own power : i. e. moft undoubtedly, he 
 will raife up us in like manner. If we have 
 been planted together in the likenefs of his deaths 
 we Jhall be alfo in the likenefs of his refurrec^ 
 tion. The former part of this verfe has fome 
 obfcurity in it, which may be liable to va- 
 rious conftrudlion ; but the latter afcertains, 
 almoft as fully as words can do, the great 
 article before us. He who raifed up the Lord 
 fefus, Jhall raife up us alfo by Jefus. This text 
 is exadly parallel with that juft quoted from 
 the other Epiftle to the Corinthians, As the 
 Father raifeth up the dead, and quickeneth them, 
 evenfo the Son quickeneth whom he will. This 
 proof runs rather in another line, but how- 
 ever 
 
222 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 ever will terminate in the fame point. For 
 we may fafely conclude, that the Son will 
 ra'ife the dead, and quicken them hereafter, in 
 the fame manner in which himfelf and many 
 dead perfons have been already raifed. We 
 have by this time, I hope, fufficient grounds 
 for this conclufion. And indeed St. Faul 
 afTures us, that the Lord Jefiis Chriji Jljall 
 change our vile body that l t may be fajhioned 
 like unto his glorious body,^ For how, or when 
 fhall he do this, if not in the general re- 
 furre5iion at the laji day, and by a change of 
 THAT body which was depofited in the 
 ground ? Our vile body is not to be changed 
 for ANOTHER body , but is itself to ht fa- 
 jhioned like unto Chriji' s glorious body. Would 
 it not h^ prima facie ridiculous to attempt tor- 
 turing the pafTage to any other fenfe ? 
 
 Though what has been here offered can, I 
 think, fcarcely fail (hort of bringing convic- 
 tion to a mind open to it, yet it will be 
 greatly corroborated by other pafTages and 
 particulars, and efpecially by the dodlrine 
 
 * Phil. iii. 21. 
 
 contained 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 223 
 
 contained in the fifteenth Chapter of the firfi 
 Epifile to the Corinthians^ which is ahnoft 
 totally fpent upon this fubjed:. In truth, 
 there are more reafons than one for our not 
 paffing by that Chapter. If we read this por- 
 tion of Scripture with due attention, and 
 impartiality, we Hiall be led, I prefume, to 
 this unavoidable conclulion, that the bodies 
 of all men fhall be raifed, if not abfolutely, 
 totally, or numerically, yet really and truly 
 the fame as they died ; or, in other words, 
 that the bodies which (liall be raifed fhall, with 
 their refpedive fouls, conftitute the fame per- 
 fons that lived before in the world : nor can 
 this doctrine be invalidated by metaphyfical 
 fubtilties, and oppofitions of fcience falsly fo 
 called y which are much lefs calculated to 
 fatisfy, than to perplex and confound us. If 
 the import of fuch paiTliges as the following, 
 it isfown tn dipdonour, it is raifed in glory j ^ it 
 is fown in weaknefs, it is raifed in power ; it is 
 fown a natural body, it is raifed a fpiritual 
 body ; behold I jhew you a my fiery ; we fid all not 
 all fieep, but we fioall all be changed in a mo^ 
 
 t V. 43, &c. 51, &c. 
 
 mentf 
 
224 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 ment, in the twlnklmg of an eye, dt the lajl 
 trump ', for the trumpet Jloall found, and the 
 dead jhall be raifed incorruptible, and we jhall 
 be changed ; for this corruptible mujl put on 
 incorruption, and this mortal muji put on im- 
 mortality -, if the manifeft import of thefe 
 texts can be evaded, fo may the mofl ftudied 
 paraphrafe, or the mofl careful illuftration of 
 them. There will be no fuch thing as 
 intelligible language to be found. The cafe 
 is, the human body undergoes many changes 
 in a courfe of years, e. g. from infancy to 
 old age, which, I fuppofe, it will be granted, 
 are the changes of the fame body, properly 
 fpeaking, ftill. For though it may not be 
 eafy to fay precifely in what the ratio of 
 identity confifts, we may fafely fay, than an 
 almoft infinite number of changes and mo- 
 difications, which might be fuppofed, do not 
 afFedl it. There are very few names which 
 have a flronger claim to deference than that 
 of Mr. Boyle ; and it is an obfervation of his, 
 that " there is no faying what the utmoft 
 «* human art or contrivance may be able to 
 " efFed; much lefs what means, even phyfical 
 
 *« ones. 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 225 
 
 ** ones, God is able to ufe for the repro- 
 *« dud:ion of bodies ; of which the necejfary 
 " conjlituent parts may be preferved confif- 
 ** tently with numberlefs changes from the 
 "cradle to the grave, and after death.'* 
 Our great Creator at leaft knows what pro- 
 perly conftitutes identity much better than 
 we can tell him -, and thereiore without en- 
 tering fully into the ftate of the controverfy 
 as maintained long ago by Dr. Stillingjleet 
 and Mr. Locke^ (which would be little bet- 
 ter than continuing a game of words,) I (hall 
 content myfelf with pointing out to you 
 one or two inftances of cavil, and quibble, 
 and captioufnefs in the latter, which plainly 
 enough indicate him to have been galled in 
 many places, and are indeed altogether un- 
 worthy both of himfelf and his argument. 
 
 The Bifhop, in vindication of his own 
 
 and the catholic tenet, cites thefe words of 
 
 our bleffed Saviour, all that are in the graves 
 
 Jhall hear his voice, and Jhall come forth, 
 
 " From hence, fays Mr. L., your Lordlhip 
 
 Q^ " argues 
 
226 DISCOURSE VIL 
 
 ** argues, that thefe words, all that are in the 
 ^^ grave', relate to no other fubftance than 
 •* what was united to the Soul in life ; be- 
 ** caufe a different fubftance cannot be faid 
 ** to be in the graves, and to come out of 
 ** them. Which words of your Lordfliip, 
 ** if they prove any thing, prove that the 
 " Soul too is lodged in the grave, and raifed 
 *' out of it at the laft day. For your Lord- 
 ** fliip fays, can a different fubjlance be faid to 
 '* be in the graves, and come out of them ? So 
 ** that according to this interpretation of 
 ** thefe words of our Saviour, no other fub- 
 ** (lance being raifed but what hears his 
 '* voice, but what, being called, comes out 
 ** of the grave i and no other fubftance com- 
 ** ins out of the grave, but what was in the 
 ** grave; any one mull conclude, that the 
 ** Soul, unlefs it be in the grave, will make 
 ** no part of the perfon that is raifed, unlefs, 
 ** as your Lordiliip argues againft me, you 
 ** can make it out, that a fubftance which 
 *' never was in the grave, may come out of 
 «* it; or that the Soul is no fubliance." *But 
 
 * Ibid. 
 
 will 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 227 
 
 will not this fophiftical bubble burft in an 
 inflant before a moft fimple conlideration, 
 purfued through its necefl'ary conTequences ? 
 By a common figure, and agreeably to the 
 cuftomary licenfe of fpeech, we talk of the 
 ad:s, or operations of one of the two con- 
 flituent parts of man, as of the ad:s or ope- 
 rations of the whole. E. G. No foul fees me', 
 or no body fees me ; every foul heard him ; or 
 no body heard him i are expreflions ufed in- 
 difcriminately, not only in ordinary difcourfe, 
 but in corredt compofition. The foul per- 
 ceives the voice-, the body is raifed by divine 
 power, and reunited to it. {bb) 
 
 Again : The learned prelate quotes the 
 following words of the Apoftle, in fupport 
 of the dodrine of the refurreSlion as it is 
 held in the Church. JVe mufl all appear be- 
 fore the judgmentfeat of Chrifl, that every one 
 may receive the things done in his body, accord^ 
 ing to that he hath done, whether it be good or 
 bad. To which his Lordfliip fubjoins this 
 queftion : cam these words be under- 
 
 0^2 STOOD 
 
228 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 STOOD OF ANY OTHER MATERIAL SUB- 
 STANCE BUT THAT BODY IN WHICH 
 THESE THINGS WERE DONE? ** A man, 
 
 ** Mr. L. anfwers, may fufpend his deter- 
 " mining the meaning of the Apoftle to be, 
 " that a fmner (hall iuiFer for his fins in the 
 " very fame body in which he committed 
 ** them : becaufe St. Faul does not fay he 
 ** fhall have the very fame body when he fuf- 
 '* fers, that he had when he fmned. The 
 ** Apoftle fays indeed, done in his body. The 
 '* body he had, and did things in at five, or 
 ** fifteen, was, no doubt, his body, as much 
 <* as that which he did things in at fifty was 
 ** his bodyi though his body were not the very 
 *^ fame body at thofe different ages : and fo 
 *« will the body, which he fliali have after 
 *' the refurreBioriy be his body, though it be 
 ** not the very Jame with that which he had 
 ** at five, at fifteen, or fifty."* Now agreeing 
 with Mr. L. and the admirers of his dodlrine 
 upon this head, that *' the body which a man 
 ** fiiall have after the refurretftion," according 
 to their fcheme, (for what fhall be done in 
 * Ibid. 
 
 or 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 229 
 
 or at it, we are left to conjecture,) I fay, 
 agreeing with them, that this body will be 
 his bodyy yet we would fain know in what 
 fenfe he could be faid to receive the things 
 done IN IT, or BY it, according to another 
 reading. A man has his body truly, if not 
 numerically the fame through life, under a 
 greater or lefs variety of changes and modi- 
 fications \ but by Mr. L's train of reafoning, 
 it fhould feem that a man may have his body 
 before he is in poffeflion of it. Had the 
 Apoftle faid, as a man fins in a body, fo he 
 fhall fufFer in a body, Mr. L's mode of ar- 
 guing might have been admitted ; but as 
 matters (land at prefent, it has evidently no 
 logic to fupport it. 
 
 Once more. " The next text of Scripture 
 ** you bring for the fame body, fays Mr. L. 
 ** is, if there be no reJurreBion of the dead, 
 ** then is not Chriji raifed. From which your 
 *' Lordfhip argues, it seems then other 
 
 ** BODIES ARE TO BE RAISED AS HIS WAS. 
 
 ** I grant other dead as certainly raifed as 
 0^3 «* Chrift 
 
230 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 " Chrift was ; for elfe his refurreSiion would 
 •* be of no ufe to mankind. But I do not fee 
 *' how it follows, that they fliall be raifed 
 ** with the fa?ne body, as your Lordfhip in- 
 ** fers in thefe words annexed; and can 
 
 " THERE BE ANY DOUBT, WHETHER HIS 
 '* BODY WAS THE SAME MATERIAL SUB- 
 *' STANCE WHICH WAS UNITED TO HIS 
 
 ** SOUL BEFORE ? I anfwer, none at all; 
 ** nor that it had jufl: the fame diftinguifhed 
 ** lineaments and marks, yea and the fame 
 '* wounds that it had at the time of his death. 
 " If therefore your Lordfhip will argue from 
 ** other bodies being raifed as his was, that 
 •* they mufl: have proportion with his in 
 ** SAMENESS, then we muH: believe, that 
 *« every man (hall be raifed with the fame 
 *' lineaments and other notes of diftind:ion 
 ** he had at the time of his death, even with 
 " his wounds yet open, if he had any, be- 
 ** caufe our Saviour was fo raifed -, which 
 ** feems to be fcarce reconcileable with what 
 *' your Lordfliip fays, of a fat man 
 
 ** FALLING INTO A CONSUMPTION, AND 
 " DYING." * 
 
 * Ibid. 
 
 The 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 231 
 
 The wit here is not worih anfvvering ; and 
 the fallacy of the paragraph was obviated in 
 fome of the foregoing obfervations. Suffice 
 it to remark that the addition of one word in 
 its proper place would have demolifhed all 
 this fine fabric of reafoning. Mr. L. fhould 
 have granted, that other dead and buried 
 {hall ** as certainly be raifed as Chrifi: was." 
 In (hort, we affirm, on Scriptural authority, 
 that at the lajl day the bodies of men fliall really 
 be raifed. The article of the refurre5iion in 
 our Creeds requires only this belief. We are 
 neither concerned in niceties of conjedure, 
 nor obliged to adopt Mr. L's. notion of 
 identity, [cc) 
 
 But to return to Dr. S. I admit that this 
 learned writer has fpecioufly enough recon- 
 ciled a text or two * to his favourite tenet, 
 which have been generally referred to the re- 
 ceived dodrine. But fhall plaufibility be ob- 
 truded upon us for demonftration ? Shall it 
 overturn the credit of other interpretations 
 
 * See particularly Rom. viii. 11, 
 
 CL4 of 
 
232 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 of the fame pafTages, more folid perhaps, or 
 at leaft equally ingenious ? Shall it fuperfede 
 the authority of a very great number of texts 
 too clear and explicit to be oppofed by any 
 thing but general aflertions, bold denials, 
 flat contradictions, and the artifice of fubti- 
 ligation ? Shall it fhake the faith of ages, 
 and nullify the dodirine of the catholic 
 Church ? 
 
 And, after all, in this, as in the cafe of 
 the 'Trinity y we are in effed; only called upon 
 to exchange one Creed for another. Thefe 
 fqueami/h Gentlemen who know not how to 
 digeji the wholfome dodlrines of the Gofpel, 
 (^xpe(5t us to fw allow with greedinefs a kind of 
 fpirltual Nojlrum, prepared by human imagi- 
 nation. It is true. Dr. S. with all the ef- 
 frontery of quackery, would make us believe 
 his dofe may be taken without any fort of in- 
 convenience. For he roundly ailerts, that 
 •' the refurre5lion of the dcad\% no ways liable 
 ** to any of the difficulties which the other 
 '* notion may be liable to." Now whatever 
 
 difficulties 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 233 
 
 difficulties our notion jnay be liable to, I afk, 
 whether that of the Dodor has not at firft 
 fight its peculiar difficulties ? Indeed it will 
 ftand clear of all, if we anfwer the following 
 queries fuitably to the confidence with which 
 he propofes them. " May there not be a 
 ** refurre5lton of the dead, fays he, without 
 ** the refurreSiion ofjiefh f May not the dead 
 <* perfon be raifed to life, and have a body 
 " given to him, fuitable to the place he is 
 ** to have ? May not the thinking conjcious 
 " perfon be reftored, though he has not that 
 ** reftored which has no thought, nor confci- 
 '< oufnefs belonging to it ?" To the firft of 
 thefe three queftjons I anfwer abfolutely — 
 No. — A refurredtion of the dead, fuppofes a 
 refurreBion of fleflo. To the fecond and third 
 I make free to reply with a few queftions in 
 my turn ; and defire to afk, whether, when 
 the graves and the fea fl:all give up the dead, 
 they will not give up what was put into them ^ 
 Was this the body, or was it iht foul? Or, 
 if by a refurreBion of the dead we are only to 
 underftand our being inverted with a new 
 
 body. 
 
234 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 ■body, with what fliadow of fenfe is this ftyled 
 a refurrediion ^ Or, if there is i^^ni^ and pro- 
 priety in the term, may we not fairly afk, 
 from whence is this body to come ?(^dd) If 
 thought, or confcioufnejs conftitutes perfon, 
 can thought or confcioufnefs die ? If not, what 
 are we to underftand by ** a thinking con- 
 ** fcious perfon's being reftored ?" Reflored 1 
 From whence ? Or to what ? i^ee) In ihort, 
 whatever becomes of man after death, what- 
 ever may be the nature of the intermediate 
 flate, what notion can we form of thought's 
 rifmg from the dead, or the rejur region of 
 confcioufnefs ? Men will advance inconfif- 
 tences, and affert paradoxes fooner than be- 
 lieve as the Church would have them, {ff) 
 
 This notion of a thinking perfon s being re- 
 flored does indeed correfpond well enough 
 with an opinion maintained with much ear- 
 neftnefs fome years lince by certain Divines,* 
 who held, that during the ftate between 
 death and the laft day, the foul will fleep, as 
 
 * Dr. Law. Mr. Peckard, &c. 
 
 it 
 
DISCOURSE Vir. 235 
 
 k were, and all the rational powers be fuf- 
 pended. I fhall not enter into the merits of 
 their arguments. It will be fufficient to fay, 
 that thefe writers fuppofed the reunion of 
 the Soul to the body at the day of judgment; 
 and confequently, according to their notion, 
 (for argument's fake admitting it,) the rejiora- 
 tion of the Soul to its powers, &c. and the re^ 
 furreolion of the dead, are very different things. 
 
 Again : if we believe the Apoflle's ac- 
 count, the inflantaneous change which is 
 to be effected in us at the refurreSlion will be 
 from natural to fpiritual, from corruptible to 
 incorruptible ; but we ihall look in vain for 
 fuch a change under any oiher hypothefis. 
 They who infift, that our fouls fliall be 
 united to new bodies may be allovi^ed to fup- 
 pofe fuch bodies will h^ fpiritual, as St. Faul 
 fpeaks, and incorruptible ; but will they not 
 be hard put to it to prove that thefe ever were 
 natural^ or corruptible^ Or does this Apof- 
 tle's illuftration of the do6lrine before us by 
 the fimilitude of feed fown, which is not 
 quickened except it die, convey the leaft idea 
 
 of 
 
236 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 of a foul's awaking from fleep, and in a mo- 
 ment as it were recovering the ufe of all its 
 faculties ? Surely this cannot be the myjlery 
 which the infpired writer fiews us in this 
 chapter. But, according to our fenfe, the 
 Apoftolical comparifon is as apt and happy 
 as poffible. The bare grain hfownt diflblves, 
 and appears again under a new modification. 
 So alfo is the refurreSiion of the dead. The body 
 is fown in corruption^ it is raifed in incorrupt 
 tton. It is foivn i?i dijhonoiirf it is raifed in 
 gloTj. It is fown in weaknefs, it is raifed in 
 power. It is fown a natural body^ it is raifed 
 a fpiritual body ; a body fubtilized and puri- 
 fied ; a body difencumbered from that feJJj 
 and blood which cannot inherit the kingdom of 
 God, and, to adopt the high figuring of St. 
 FauU clothed upon with an houfe from heaven, 
 and arrayed with im?nortality. And, all this 
 while, in both cafes, God giveth a body as it 
 pleafeth him, and to every feed, and to every 
 individual, his own body. 
 
 The 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 237 
 
 The learned authors we are concerned 
 with, and their numerous admirers, feem to 
 have forgot, or to wifh us to forget, that 
 they hold opinions declared to be heretical, 
 and condenined as fuch by an infplred Apof^ 
 tie. The author of the Epiftle to the He^ 
 brews numbers the refurreSlion of the dead 
 among the principles of the doBrine of ChriJ}.'^ 
 What was the precife tenet of Hymeneus and 
 Philetus who afTerted that the RefurreBion is 
 paji already i we cannot learn from the Apof- 
 tle who fo feverely cenfures them. But he 
 defcribes them to be perfons who concerning 
 the truth had erredy and overthrown the faith 
 offome. It is reafonably to be prefumed, that 
 they, as well as the old heretics, Bnflides, 
 CarpocrateSf Menander, Valentinus, &c. and 
 the Anabaptifts and Libertines of later ages, 
 (as I find them called,) denied the rejiirredlion 
 of the body on much the fame grounds as 
 their fucceilbrs in this heterodoxy. It has 
 been boldly maintained, that by the refur^ 
 redlion of the dead we are only to underftand 
 
 * Heb. vi. I, 2. 
 
 a refur- 
 
238 DISCOURSE VII. 
 
 a refurrcSlion from fin to a ftate of grace ; or 
 a kind of refurre£iion from ignorance to a 
 knowkge of truth ; or, in general, the im- 
 mortality of the Soul. Libertmi, fays Cahiut 
 as quoted by Arch-bifhop Laudt rident fpem 
 omnem quam de refurreBione habemus, idque jam 
 nobis eveniffe diciint, quod ad hue expeSfamus, 6cc. 
 ut homo fciat animam fuam fpiritum immortalem 
 ejfe 'uiventem in ccelis. And fays Peter Martyr, 
 as cited by the fame prelate, funt etiam hodie 
 Libertini qui earn irrident, et refurreBionem 
 QU(^ traSiatur in Script ur is tantum ad animas 
 referunt. The Gnojlics and Vakntinians af- 
 firmed the fle/h to be incapable of incorrup- 
 tion. Carnis Jalutem negant, fays Iren^us, 
 dicentes non earn eJfe capacem incorriiptibilitatis. 
 Menander had the impudence to annex the 
 privilege of immortality to his Baptifm. And 
 among others, probably the Corinthian con- 
 verts affirmed the RefurreBion of the dead 
 imported no more than a renovation of life 
 and manner Si a. newnefs of life^ as St. Paul 
 expreiTes it 3 and thus they abfurdly con- 
 founded figure with letter, or a type with 
 its antitype. 
 
 We 
 
DISCOURSE VII. 239 
 
 We fliould now fee, for full fatisfadtion's 
 fake, what the fenfe of the primitive Church 
 was with refpedt to the dodrine before us ; 
 but this enquiry affording ample matter for 
 diftind confideration muft be referved ac- 
 cordingly. 
 
 D I S- 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 I C o R. Chapter 15. Verfe 12. 
 
 Jf Chriji be preached that he rofe from the 
 deady how fay fome among you that there 
 is no refurreSiion of the dead f 
 
 THAT the dodrine of the RefurreBion 
 of the body was taught by the Apoflles 
 and by our Lord we have already feen ; and 
 that the Apollolical Fathers maintained it 
 with the fame precilion will prefently ap- 
 pear. 
 
 ** Let us confider, fays St. Clement in his 
 •* firft Epiflle to the Corinthians, how the 
 ** Lord does continually (hew us that there 
 ** £hall be a future refurreSlion , of which he 
 
 R " has 
 
242 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 ** has made our Lord '^Jefus Chrijl the first 
 ** FRUITS, raifing him from the dead. Let 
 ** us contemplate, beloved, the refurredlion 
 ** that is continually made before our eyes. 
 '* Let us behold the fruits of the earth. 
 ** Every one fees how the feed is fown. The 
 ** fower goes forth, and cafts it upon the 
 *« earth ; and the feed which when it was 
 «* fown fell upon the earth dry and naked, in 
 " time diffolvesj and from the dilTolution 
 " the great power of the Providence of the 
 ** Lord raifes it again ; and of one feed many 
 ** arife, and bring forth fruit." 
 
 This pafTage Is almofl a direct comment 
 on the 36th. and two following verfes of the 
 15th. Chapter of St. Paul's firft- Epiftle to 
 the Corinthians, St. Clement , it mufl be con- 
 felTed, is not fo happy in his elucidation of 
 the do(ftrine of the reJiirreSlion of the body 
 from the fuppofed death and revivifcence of. 
 the Phcenix from his own alhes, according to 
 a current opinion in thofe days ; the enlarge- 
 ment on which fabulous wonder has drawn 
 a charge of ungenuinenefs on the Epiftle it- 
 
 felf. 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 243 
 
 felf. But the judicious Editor and Tranflatof 
 in his prehminary difcourfe vindicates the 
 good Father, and refcues the work from this 
 imputation in a moft fatisfadtory manner; 
 fo that ** with ferious and ingenuous minds," 
 (to borrow his own words,) this is a matter 
 which will refledl no difcredit on St. Ckr' 
 merit's dodlrine, or on the pious zeal with 
 which he maintained it. The reality of the 
 dodtrine is in no wife afFedted by the whim- 
 ficalnefs, or the weaknefs of the illuftration. 
 
 " He that raifed up Chriji from the dead, 
 <* fhall alfo raife up us in like manner, if wc 
 " do his will," fays Folycarp to the Philips 
 plans. 
 
 Ignatius aflures the Trallians in the mod 
 politive terms, that " as Jefus Chrijl was truly 
 ** crucified and dead, fo he was alfo truly 
 ** raifed from the dead by his Father, after 
 '* the fame manner as he will alfo raife up us 
 ** who believe in him." i^gg) 
 
 The following extradl from St. Clement's 
 fecond Epiftle to the Corinthians is at leaft as 
 
 R 2 full 
 
244 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 full and exprefs as the paflage a little above 
 quoted from the firft. ** Let not any one 
 ** among you fay, that this very fle(h is not 
 <* judged, neither raifed up. Confider, in 
 ** what were ye faved, in what did ye look 
 ** up, if not whilfl: you were in this fie{h ? 
 *« We muft therefore keep our fiefh as the 
 ** temple of God. Foi* in like manner as ye 
 ** were called in the fle(h, ye fhall alfo come 
 <* to judgment in the flefh." [hh) 
 
 And yet all this evidence fhall fhrink into 
 nothing before a little ready confidence, and 
 unceremonious decifion. For thus fays the 
 Author of the Liqtiiry. *' If we pafs from the 
 ** New Teftament, Barnabas and Clemens of 
 ** Rome mention no more than the refurrec- 
 ** tion '3 and not any particular modus of it, 
 ** or the refur region cf the fiefo : vide Barna- 
 ** bas, ch. XX i. Clemens y ch. xxiv. Clemens 
 <* indeed, in his fecond Epiftle, mentions the 
 ** refurreBion of the Jiefi ; but that is allowed 
 ** not to be genuine. I<^natius too fpeaks as 
 ** the Scriptures do. Ep, ad Thrall. And in 
 *« the larger Epiftle to the Ephefians, he fpeaks 
 
 "of 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 245 
 
 ** of the refurredion ^^ nv.^uv, from the dead; 
 ** but he never mentions any thing of a re- 
 ** furreBion of the fleJJ:)" 
 
 Now if the pafTages I produced from St. 
 Clement\ firft Epiftle, and from Ignatius^ do 
 not to all intents and purpofes aflert the re- 
 furreclion oj the body^ or of the flejJi ; if St. 
 Clemenf^ fecond Epiftle muft abfolutely be 
 pronounced fpurious, becaufe the learned 
 world is divided in its fentiments relative to 
 it ; if the dodrine contained in this Epiftle 
 cannot poflibly be agreeable to that of the 
 other, or to that of Ignatius^ or to that of 
 the Apoftolical and primitive Church, be- 
 caufe it is a matter of fome doubt who the 
 author might be; if thefe reverend fathers 
 fpeak in 7io place of the refurreBion of the 
 body becaufe in fome places they fpeak of the 
 refurre5lton of the dead, or of the refurreSiion 
 in general, as the holy Scripture itfelf occa- 
 lionally does ; if this be the cafe, equivoca- 
 tion {hall hereafter pafs for argument, and 
 dogmaticalnefs for demonftration. 
 
 R 2 One 
 
246 DISCOURSE viir. 
 
 One fhoiild be apt to think, that the 
 nearer the fountain, the clearer the ftream 3 
 or, in plain terms, that the mofl antient 
 Christians are the moft orthodox ; that thofe 
 who lived in, or neareft to the times of the 
 Apoftles, and Apoftolical men, were like to 
 underftand their docflrine with readlnefs, to 
 embrace it with veneration, and to tranfmit 
 it in purity. What can be more clear than 
 the language of Jujiin Martyr, as it is 
 quoted by Dr. S. himfelf ? ** Chriji (hall 
 *' come a fecond time, when roc (rcoy^ctroc oLvct- 
 ** yi^u TTcLVTodv Tcav yivof^iVMv a.vB'pMTrooVf he (hall raife 
 " the bodies of all men that have been V Well ; 
 but fays our author, " this was 'Jufiin\ opi- 
 *' nion, but it was not in any Baptifmal 
 ** Creed ; he takes no notice of any article 
 ** of any Creed as containing the notion of 
 ** the refurreSlion of the fejh, whatfoever his 
 ** own philofophical notion of the refurrec- 
 ** tion might be." 
 
 Will it follow then that the do<5lrine of 
 the refurreSiion of the flejlo was purely the 
 perfonal, or philofophical notion of Juflin 
 
 Martyr, 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 247 
 
 Martyr^ becaufe it was not in his time an 
 article in any Creed? If fo, it will follow, 
 by parity of arguing, that almoft all the 
 other articles of our prefent Creeds were the 
 private tenets or opinions of particular per- 
 fons, and not the common dodrine, or be- 
 lief of the catholic Church. This muft fol- 
 low upon Dr. S's own principles. For he has 
 himfelf remarked in his preface, that ** it 
 *' is highly probable thefe, (referring to doc- 
 ** trines he had been mentioning,) and other 
 ** doctrines were taught, {viz. after baptifm,) 
 •* as circumftances arofe, either to explain 
 ** fome things inculcated in the Gofpels, or 
 ** to avoid fomething erroneous. And hence 
 ** it was that the original Creed was enlarged, 
 ** and more things inferted into it j and in- 
 ** deed all that has been added to it feems to 
 ** have been owing to thefe caufes." The 
 juft now cited declaration of Jujiin Martyr is 
 therefore to be regarded as exactly coincident 
 with a dodtrine publickly received, and not 
 as the bare refult of his own judgment, for 
 any thing Dr. S. has faid, or proved to the 
 contrary. But if fo, the dodrine of the 
 R 4 'Refurre5i^Q^ 
 
248 DISCOURSE Vlli. 
 
 Refurre5llon of the body, or of the jlejh, was 
 911 article of faith from the beginning ; and 
 its fubfequent date as an article of any Creed 
 is a circumilance of very inferior confidera- 
 tion. What matters it to us when it was 
 thought neceffary to be required of the mem- 
 bers of the Church of Chriji openly to pro- 
 fefs they believed as the Apoftles and primi- 
 tive Chriltians did ? 
 
 But let me fliew you how unfairly the 
 author of the Enquiry deals by Folycarp. Of 
 the two places in this father s epiftle to the 
 Philip l^iajis in which mention is made of the 
 refurreBioUy the principal, I think, is that I 
 not long fince quoted, and will here lay 
 again before you. He that raifed up Chriji 
 from the dead, fiall alfo raife up us in like maw 
 ner. The words in like tnamier are by the no 
 lefs faithful than judicious tranflator printed 
 in Italics, as not been literally contained, 
 though neceiTarily implied in the original. 
 This paflage then, like many more parallel 
 ones which I have had occaiion to produce, 
 I mean, from the Scripture itfelf, manifeftly 
 
 imports 
 
DISCOURSE Vlir. 249 
 
 imports the refurreBion of the body y though 
 ihould any perfon affed to doubt what the 
 ^ood father s meaning may be here, they may 
 fpon learn what his idea of the refurreSiioJt. 
 was, from a part of the prayer he preferred to 
 God in the hour of his martyrdom, according 
 to the account we have of it in the circular 
 epiftle of the Church of Smyrna. He there 
 makes mention of the refurreBion both of 
 foul and body. For though the foul cannot, 
 properly fpeaking, be faid to rfe again, yet 
 as the foul and body conftitute the fame man, 
 as thefe conftituent parts are feparated by 
 death, and reunited at the refurreSiion, this 
 reunion is not unfitly expreiTed by a term 
 that may be truly predicated of one of the 
 conilituent parts. 
 
 Dr. S. admits the genuinenefs of the 
 above-mentioned narrative j and yet will not 
 fuiFer us to conlider the letter in one place to 
 be an explanation of the fenfe in the other. 
 There is more of art than honefty in an at- 
 tempt to flip out of this difficulty by faying, 
 as the Enquirer does in the following words, 
 
 that 
 
250 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 that ** by the time this letter was wrote, the 
 ** notion feems to have prevailed among 
 ** Chriflians, that the body was to be raifed, 
 ** though it was not yet got into any of their 
 «* Creeds." This is a fort of fpiritual juggle 
 which inverts truth, and difguifes it in the 
 fame inftant : it metamorphofes the real fen- 
 timent of Folycarp into a whimfical notion 
 which began to gain ground in the Church ! 
 
 But this matter may be viewed in another 
 light. The force of truth has drawn from 
 our author an involuntary ceffion of his own 
 darling point. For immediately after the 
 fentence lafl cited from him, he acquaints us, 
 that ** foon after the middle of the fecond 
 ** century difputes arofe about the refurrec- 
 ** tion ; the heathens objeding to the poflibi- 
 ** llty of it, and the Christians endea- 
 ** vouring to anfwer the obje<5tions they met 
 ** with. The enquiry, fays he, was, whe- 
 ** ther there was to be a refurreBion of the 
 ^^ foul alone, or of the whole man conlifting 
 " of body and foul ? And then a fecond 
 ** queftion was, whether the Jiefl>, the very 
 
 ''fejh 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 251 
 
 ^* fi'--fi which we now bear about us, was to 
 '* be railed up again ? The writers of 
 ** that time dill extant contended for the re- 
 ** furreBio77 ofthejlcjh together with the foul. 
 ** But there does not appear to be any Creed 
 *' which eftabliflied fuch a dodtrine. For 
 ** whatever private persons might ima- 
 ** gine to be true, was not inftantly to be 
 " P^^fiJl^^ ^s an article of faith, nccelTary to 
 ** be believed in order to Baptifm." And af- 
 terwards he tells us, that ** the controverfy 
 ** about the rejurreclion of the Jlefi did not 
 *' begin till the middle, or near the end of 
 ** the fecond century. And then as philo- 
 «* fophers objed:ed to the refurreBion itself, 
 ** from the common topics, how could flesh 
 ** devoured by beajis or Jifljes, and thus become 
 ** PARTS of thofe animals ; or perhaps reduced 
 ** by fire to afies, or dfperji by feas and rivers ^ 
 ^* be rejiored? AthenagoraSi Tbeophilus, and 
 ** 'Tertullian undertook a defence of this no- 
 «* tion ; and taught, that it was no ways be- 
 ** yond the power of Almighty God to 
 ^* reftore to every one the flefh he once 
 ** had." *.(/V) 
 
 * Enquiry &c. p. iS. 
 
 Now 
 
252 DISCOURSE Vlir. 
 
 Now I defire to obferve, in the firft place, 
 that thefe philofophers objed;ed to the refur- 
 re^iion from the common topics jufl men- 
 tioned becaufe they were the flrongeft that 
 occurred to them i and becaufe when they 
 pbjeded to the refiirreBion of the body, they 
 nioft unqueftionably meant to obje<ft to the 
 refiirreBion itself. In the next place, I 
 would remark, that if by the Christians, 
 who endeavoured to anjwer the obje£lions of hea- 
 thens y and by the writers of that time, we 
 are to underfland only a few private per- 
 sons who maintained an extraordinary opi- 
 nion ; if Athenagoras, and 'Theophilus, and 
 ^ertullian did no more than defend their own 
 perfonal tenets -, it is palling ftrange thefe 
 fame heathen philofophers Should fet their 
 wits againft them at all ; and ftranger ftill, 
 that the whole body of Chriflians had not 
 joined the outcry in their own vindication, 
 and in public difavowal of an enthuliaftic 
 and ridiculous principle. Nay this is not all. 
 The dod:rine of the refurreBion of the body, 
 if it was a mere private or perfonal opinion> 
 was in fad contrary to the Gofpel of Chriji, 
 
 and 
 
DISCOURSE Vm. 25J 
 
 and the fenfe of the Church ; and therefore 
 mufl have been regarded as a moil grofs, if 
 not dangerous herefy. But as it mofl: un- 
 doubtedly was never reprefented fo to be, we 
 are to conclude, I prefume, that it w^s true 
 and catholic dodtrine, notwithilanding its 
 non-appearance in any Creed, in the early 
 ages, and though the acknowlegement of it 
 was not a qualification for Baptifm. We 
 therefore infift, that whenever it became an 
 article of a baptifmal Creed, it was inferted 
 with the mofl admiffible pretenfions. 
 
 It is, fiirther, very obfervable, that the 
 dodrine of the rejurredlion of the body is moil 
 expreilly taught in many places of the Koran. 
 of Maho7net. Let us turn to a few. ** Man 
 ^'^ faith y fays Mahomet, after I have been dead, 
 '^ Jhall I really be brought forth alive from the 
 ** grave ? Doth not mail remetnber that we 
 * * created him heretofore when he was nothing f 
 ** T'he unbelievers fay, when we and our fa- 
 *' thers Jhall have been reduced to dufij fiall we 
 ** be taken from the grave f Man faith, who Jhall 
 *' reflore bones to life when they are rotte?i ? An^ 
 fwer, he Jloall rejiore them to life, who produced 
 
 ** them 
 
254 DISCOURSE VIIL 
 
 ** them the Jirji time" {kk^ The whole fyflem 
 of Mahometijm is, you well know, a fuper- 
 ftrudture raifed upon the foundations of Ju- 
 daifm and Chrijliantty . The grand aim of 
 the impoftor feems to have been to concentre 
 both in one faith ) with which view, and 
 that no romantic one, he in part adopted, 
 and partly rejecfted the refped:ive theories. 
 In order to ingratiate himfelf with the yews, 
 he aflerted, as we have feen, even to an ex- 
 tremity of zeal, the unity of the Godhead ; 
 and at the fame time not to put the Chrif- 
 tlans out of all temper, as he frequently 
 takes occafion to fpeak refpectfully of J ejus 
 Chriji, fo he declares probably in the moft 
 explicit terms for the great article we have 
 been difcuffing. (//) We may therefore fairly 
 conclude from this circumftance only, that 
 the dod:rine of the reJiirreBion of the body 
 was not the fentiment of a few individuals, 
 but the profeffion of the univerfal Church 
 at the beginning of the feventh century. 
 And after all, fuppoling it to be queftionable 
 whether this were really the plan of Maho- 
 met, the leafl that can be inferred from the 
 
 perfpicuity 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 255 
 
 perfpicuity with which the dodtrine of the 
 refurreSlion is taught and enforced in the 
 Koran, is that he conceived it to be fuffici- 
 ently reconcileable with the common reafon 
 and apprehenfion of mankind; at the fame 
 time that, from this among other particu- 
 lars, we mufl: fee, and muft deiire its adver- 
 faries to take notice, that it is not a doc- 
 trine peculiar to Chriftianity. 
 
 To come now to the conclufion of the 
 whole matter. If thefe things are Jo, if the 
 great doctrines we have been handling are 
 defenfible upon found principles, and have a 
 mofl: firm foundation in Scripture, and in pri- 
 mitive authority, abundant reafon have we 
 to hold fajl the profejjion of our faith without 
 wavering ; in nothing difmayed by adver- 
 faries who trifle with us upon the moft fe- 
 rious fubjedts; who render the word of God 
 of none effedl, by perverfe interpretation i 
 who cannot, or will not fee the plain fenfe of 
 the plaineft expreffions j who will not ac- 
 knowlege fefiis Chriji to be the Creator of 
 the world though aJl things were made by him-, 
 
 or 
 
256 DISCOURSE viir. 
 
 or that he made fatisfacflion for fin, though he 
 W2iS Jacrificed for iis^ and gave his life a ran- 
 fom for all. I know not any thing that can 
 equal this flubbornnefs and flownefs of heart 
 except the infolence of fuch as gravely tell 
 us, we mufl not hope to propagate the Gof- 
 pel among Jews, Mahometans, or heathens, 
 while the ilrange do(5lrines contained in our 
 Creeds are retained in the Church. Is not 
 this to all intents and purpofes faying, we 
 mud: not hope to eradicate infidelity till we 
 have renounced the capital articles of our be- 
 lief; or, in other words, mufi- not expert 
 to make converts to Chriftianity, till we 
 ccafe to be Chrifi;ians ? And indeed fo in- 
 confidcrable are the impediments to a fpiri- 
 tual coalition between the followers of So- 
 cinus and the difciples of Mahomet, that, ac- 
 cording to information given us by writers 
 of credit, terms of union and amity were ac- 
 tually propofed by the former to the latter 
 in the laft century.* That men fhould admit 
 the myfterious truths of holy Writ upon 
 rational grounds, or that they fhould rejedb 
 them upon what they call rational grounds, 
 
 * See Mr. Jones's Introduc. Difc. p. 4. Note. 
 
 we 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 257 
 
 we may readily enough comprehend ; but 
 there feems to be fomething unaccountably 
 romantic in an attempt to compromife mat- 
 ters as it were with the author of our faith 
 by accommodating thefe truths to the human 
 underftanding. 
 
 But whatever may be the views, or what- 
 ever the claims, or whatever the pretences 
 of Latitudinarians in general, the notion 
 of a Creed, or a fyftem, or an eflablifli- 
 ment refpecling the great dodirines we 
 have been confidering, occurs to us in a 
 manner fpontaneoufly. In the Church of 
 Chriji, the only queftion ought to be, not 
 whether a confejjiony a formulary, or a feries 
 of articles, be long or fhort, iimple or cir- 
 cumftantial, antient or modern, but whether it 
 has its grounds in competent authority. (/;?w) 
 If the dodtrines of the 'Trinity and of the 
 RefurreBion, as they are held in the Church, 
 be fcriptural do(flrines, no more objection 
 can juftly lie againft the Nicene, or the Atha- 
 nafian Creed, than againfl that of Dr. S. 
 This author not only admits but refers to an 
 original Creed, which he obferves has been 
 S enlarged 
 
258 DISCOURSE VIIL 
 
 enlarged *' as circumftances arofe," or oc- 
 cafions called -, though that it has been en- 
 larged in Ibme inflances beyond all reafon he 
 ilrongly infiils, with many others with him. 
 But be this as it may, and even if thefe things 
 were not fo as we have reprefented them, it 
 is abundantly fufficient that they appear to 
 be fo to us. No rule, no fyftem, no efta- 
 blifhment whatfcever can in any tolerable 
 fenfe be faid to invade the right of private 
 judgment in matters of religion ', becaufe 
 Creeds i formularies, inftitutions, and ap- 
 pointments in general mufl be incompatible 
 with the exercife of this right, at all periods 
 of the Chriftian Church, or at none. It is 
 pleafmt enough to remark how zealoufy fome 
 will be affeSfed in a ridiculous things and how 
 vehemently they will beat the air in their 
 contention for that right oi private judgment y 
 which is indeed unalienable ; and in fad: is 
 exercifed by thofe who fubmit to what may 
 be called public -, by men of all perfualions -, 
 by few Si T^urks, Infdels, and Heretics i by 
 the Sectaries of all religions ; and by peo- 
 ple of no religion at z\\,{nn) ** Not Heretics 
 ** only, fays the great Chillingworth, but Ro- 
 
 ** mijh 
 
DISCOURSE Vlir. 259 
 
 ** mijh Catholics alfo, fet up as many judges, 
 ** as there are men and women in the Chril- 
 " tian world. For do not your men and wo- 
 *' men judge your religion to be true before 
 ** they believe it, as well as the men 
 <* and women of other religions ? Oh ! but 
 ** you fay, they receive it, not becaufe they 
 ** think it agreeable to Scripture, but becaufe 
 *' the Church tells themfo. But then, I hope, 
 " they believe the Church, becaufe their own 
 " reafon tells them they are to do fo. So that 
 ** the difference between a Papift and a Pro- 
 *^ teftant is this, not that the one judges, and 
 «' the other does not judge, but that the one 
 "judges his guide to be infallible, the other 
 ** his way to be manifeft." The fad; is, every 
 nian's attachment to any thing, to this or that 
 Church, to this party, or to that principle, 
 &c. is ultimately refolvible into his opinion 
 of its excellence, its truth, its propriety, or 
 its expedience ; or of its conducivenefs on 
 the whole to his welfare, comfort, and fatif- 
 fadtion, &c ; i. e. it is refolvible into his 
 own private judgment. This judgment, it is 
 true, may be warped by paffion, biaffed by 
 prejudice, clouded by ignorance, and blinded 
 
 82 by 
 
26o DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 by perverfenefs -, it may be intoxicated by 
 voluptuoufnefs, enervated by indolence, or 
 inverted by frenzy j or it may be influenced 
 by wifdom, by folly, or by caprice. But, 
 at the fame time, whether we judge well, 
 or ill ; or of whatever differences or degrees 
 human judgment may admit; we fhall fl:rid;ly 
 and properly be found in all cafes and in- 
 llances to judge for ourfelves. {oo) 
 
 It was the concurrence of private judgment 
 which firft formed the Chriftian Church ; it 
 was the fame concurrence which gradually 
 compounded the enormous mafs of popery ; 
 it was the fame that effecfled the Reformation 3 
 and it was the fame that conflituted the nu- 
 merous fedts and parties into which this Re^ 
 formation has been moft deplorably fplit and 
 fubdivided. It is to nothing more or lefs than 
 this that the Church of England owes her 
 exiftence. And upon this ground it is cer- 
 tain, her requifltion of alTent to her public 
 offices, and of fubfcription to her articles, 
 the meafureof juft policy, and common pru- 
 dence for her fecurity, are no more to be re- 
 garded 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 261 
 
 garded as invalions of the right of private 
 judgment^ than the open attempts, or the 
 fecret machinations of her enemies, for her 
 deftrudlion. Upon this ground, in fhort, her 
 declarations of faith in what fhe holds to be 
 evangelical truth ; and indeed the whole 
 fcheme of her doctrine, difcipline, and polity, 
 are perfedly intelligible, and manifeftly con- 
 fiftent. But is not the inference drawn from 
 the acknowleged right of private judgment by 
 a late famous author, and his alTociates, al- 
 together chimerical, and totally incompre- 
 henfible ? Their inference is, that every in- 
 dividual Chriftian may, if he thinks fit, with- 
 draw himfelf from all the Churches upon 
 the face of the earth, ftand abfolutely fingle 
 in the profeffion of his faith, or, as this au- 
 thor expreffes it, be a Church to himfelf.'^ And 
 is not this in effedt to aflert, that a Church 
 may be formed without a communion, with- 
 out government, or miniftry ; without a pof- 
 fibility of being infected with herefy, or di- 
 vided by fchifm ? Is it not to all intents and 
 purpofes to aver, that a fociety may fubfift 
 without members, without eftablifhment, or 
 
 * See Confeflional. Ch. 2. p. 34. Note. 
 
 S 3 conftitution ? 
 
262 DISCOURSE Vlir. 
 
 conftitution ? We deny not that a man may 
 judge he has a claim to this fpiritual inde- 
 pendence ; and indeed our principle fuppofes 
 him fo to judge ; but then we muft beg leave 
 to think in our turn, that he is grofily mif- 
 taken in that judgment. (/>/>) 
 
 I wi{h to remark, that if the capital truths 
 of the Gofpel are difcoverablc any where, 
 they are moft indifputably to be found in the 
 Catholic Church ; the great repofitory of 
 Chriftian doctrine. Our blelTed Lord's alTu- 
 rances of fuperintendency, fupport, and pro- 
 tection are out of all queftion given to his 
 difciples, and to believers in general, as to a 
 body, or fociety. Upon this rock, fays he, / 
 will build my Church , &cc, Lo I 1 am with 
 you always, even unto the end of the world. 
 When he promifed his Apoftles that he 
 would fend the Holy Spirit to them, who 
 fhould guide them into all truth, he muft ne- 
 ceflarily mean that truth which they were to 
 communicate to their fuccelTors, and thefe to 
 others, and fo on, through all generations. 
 When the facred penmen fpeak of the truths 
 
 or 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 263 
 
 or iht faith, &c. they undoubtedly fpeak of 
 the truth embraced, and the faith profefled by 
 all found Chriftians -, and when St. Paul qx- 
 horts the Corinthians to examine themfelves, 
 and to prove themfelves, whether they were 
 in the faith, he moft certainly means the 
 faith of the catholic Church. In a word, 
 we muft look for fpiritual truth in its native 
 limplicity, though we fearch for it as for hid 
 treajures ', we mufl look for it within the pale 
 of fome communion or other : which furely 
 will be acknowleged by every man, who does 
 not, in defiance of Scripture, and in contempt 
 of all the world, fuppofe that the infallibility 
 which he juftly denies to appertain to any 
 Church upon earth, is really and truly lodg- 
 ed in himfelf. 
 
 The principle of the ConfeJJtonal leads, we 
 apprehend, to thefe abfurd confequences -, 
 but at the fame time we alTert no dominion 
 over \hQ faith, or the confciences of others ; 
 we leave every one to Jiand or fall to his own 
 majier -, we conceive, that, by the immutable 
 conftitution of things, every one will think 
 ' and 
 
264 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 and ad for himfelf, though we imagine all 
 men to be accountable to God as well for 
 their opinions as for their practices j we nei- 
 ther do, nor wifli to compel men to come in 
 that our Church may be Jilkd, perfuaded as 
 we are at the fame time that this Church is, 
 in refpe6t of all effentials, an apoftolical one ; 
 that fhe holds f aft the things which become found 
 doBrine, and teaches the words of eternal life. 
 
 It m^y with great truth be affirmed, that 
 the Church of England afferts the right of 
 private judgment in the fame fenfe, and to the 
 fame latitude that every party or body of Pro- 
 teftants does. For how does the management 
 of the feveral leaders and teachers of the 
 Sectaries accord with this univerfally avowed 
 principle ? How do they leave men to their 
 own judgments in matters of religion ? Do 
 they not find v,'ays and means to become maf- 
 ters of the underftandings, and the confci- 
 ences of their followers j and accomplifh that 
 by indire(5l artifice which they load us with 
 obloquy for doing under the fandion of law- 
 ful authority ? The fadl is, in cafe of fupe- 
 
 riority. 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 265 
 
 riorlty, any fed: that you may name would 
 think itielf, not barely empowered, but 
 bound to flrengthen and fecure itfeif by legal 
 fences and eilablifliments, and by authorita- 
 tive conftitutions -, i. e. by thofe very means 
 and methods againft which it now fo vehe- 
 mently exclaims. Experience will juftify 
 our fuppofition that fuch would be the cale ; 
 as we know the moft confiderable branch of 
 the Dijfenters to have changed its language, 
 and its fentiments, with its lituation. The 
 firft article of the memorable y5/^/«« League 
 and Covenant declares the intention of its fra- 
 mers to be, to ** brhjg the Churches of God in 
 ** the three kingdoms to the near eft conjunBion 
 * ' and uniformity in religion ^ Confession of 
 *' FAITH, Form of Church-govern- 
 ** MENT, and Directory for Worship 
 ** and Catechising -, that they and their 
 " pojlerity after them ?night as brethren live in 
 *^ faith and love.'' 
 
 It is pleafant enough to obferve, that, 
 notwithftanding the fine flourifhes and co- 
 lourings of certain authors, who plaufibly 
 
 profefs 
 
266 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 profefs themfelves to be advocates for the 
 common rights and privileges of Chriftlans, 
 we find them fometimes driven out of their 
 track by the irrefiftible force of truth, and 
 infenfibly advancing, or admitting eccle- 
 iiaftical notions : we find them after all their 
 efforts and ftruggles to climb over the pale 
 of the Church, unwarily, or rather unavoid- 
 ably flipping back, as I may fay, into her 
 fold, and undermining their own principles. 
 The words of a late famous prelate* upon this 
 fubje<ft will verify the obfervation. ** As it 
 ** is abfurd, fays he, to fuppofe that any man 
 ** can be faved by the faith of another, or 
 ** by any belief but what is truly his own ; 
 ** fo there is no poflible method of having a 
 ** faith of his own, properly fo called, with- 
 ** out building it entirely upon what appears 
 ** right to his own judgment, fuch as it is, 
 *' after his bed endeavours for Informa- 
 tion." That is to fay, in other words, a 
 man cannot properly be faid to judge for 
 hlmfelf till he has received information, or 
 inftrudiion from others. In Ihort, let privi- 
 leges be as facred, or confciences as tender 
 
 * Bp. Hoadley. 
 
 as 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 267 
 
 as you pleafe, I affirm that the eredion and 
 eftablifhment of a national Church, whether 
 the dodrines fhe teaches are in themfelves 
 orthodox or otherwife, true or falfe, is as 
 fairly defenfible upon rational and proteflant 
 grounds, as the inftitution of any religious 
 fe(5l, or fociety whatfoever. 
 
 True it is that men, inflamed with falfe 
 zeal, or mifled by wrong judgment, may de- 
 part both from proteflant and Chriftian prin- 
 ciples ; and at their peril it will be. The 
 Church of Rome endeavoured to extirpate 
 what (lie called herejy by the very fame means 
 which in early days Paganifm employed for 
 the overthrow of the Chriftian faith itfelf. 
 And what was the confequence ? The inhu- 
 manity of perfecution afforded to every think- 
 ing mind a very ftrong argument of the cor- 
 ruption of that Church in which it was 
 countenanced -, it frightened men into their 
 Se?jfes ; it helped to open their underftand- 
 ings ; and Popery may upon the matter be 
 faid to have been burnt out of the kingdom. 
 I undertake not to prove, that in our own 
 
 Church 
 
268 DISCOURSE VIII. 
 
 Church zeal has always been fufficiently 
 governed by prudence, or tempered with 
 charity. There is no occalion to recur to a few 
 difagreeable inflances, or the tranfadions of 
 untoward times. But, I truft, Illiall be abun- 
 dantly warranted in afferting, that he who at 
 this day (hall charge the Church oi England, 
 or any conliderable number of her members, 
 with a want of due moderation, knows not 
 of what manner of Spirit we are of And yet, 
 if the author of the ConjeJJional is to be cre- 
 dited, we are relapfing gradually into Po- 
 pery, both in our dod:rines and our prac- 
 tices. We are given to underfiand, in the 
 feventh Chap, of that work, that ** Some 
 ** competent obfervers have grounds for 
 *' more than a fufplcion, that the Church of 
 " England has been, and ftill is, though by 
 *' degrees imperceptible to vulgar eyes, edg- 
 " ing back once more towards Popery." Sure 
 thefe obfervers are much more Jharp-fghted 
 than their neighbours ! I do not well know 
 what thefe Gentlemen are afraid of; but I 
 know true Chriftianity to be moil in danger 
 from the diametrically oppofite quarter; not 
 
 fo 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 269 
 
 fo much from men of too great, as from 
 people of too little faith j not fo much from 
 the triple-mitre of the Roman pontiff, as 
 from the many-headed hydra of infidelity. 
 The truth of the matter is, the author before 
 us and his friends do not fpeak out, as our 
 open enemies have done, and as themfelves 
 were called upon to do, by every maxim of 
 juflice, candor, and generofity. They are in 
 no dread oi fire d.nd faggot j they are offend- 
 ed, not by the difcipline^ but by certain doc- 
 trines of the Church of Rome, which we 
 hold in common with her, (even the doc- 
 trines I have been defending,) and which 
 they moft infidioufly and induftrioufly labour 
 to confound with the abfurdities which are 
 juflly had in deriiion, or in abhorrence among 
 us, and of which the credit vifibly diminiilies 
 every day. Errors may be grafted upon the 
 flock of truth ; which in itfelf is not the lefs 
 pure, or the lefs amiable, becaufe it may be 
 holden in folly as well as in unrighteoufnefs , 
 To an ardent longing to fee thefe common 
 dodrines expunged from our Articles and 
 Creeds, we are unqueflionably to afcribe that 
 
 profulion 
 
270 DISCOURSE VII!. 
 
 profufion of Ipleen, malevolence, and ran- 
 cour with which fo many pages, of the Con- 
 JeJjmiaU and of other treatifes are fhamefully 
 defiled. But for thefe dodrines, I am tho- 
 roughly perfuaded, the reafonablenefs, and 
 utility, not to fay neceffity of Church-efta- 
 blifhments, would generally be admitted, and 
 even contended for. That nicety of human 
 wifdom which ftrains at two or three of our 
 Articles could, 1 am apt to think, well 
 enough digefl the remainder of the thirty 
 nine. But as matters are circumftanced, the 
 principle I have been combating is flu* from 
 being an unpopular one. 7 he privilege, or 
 right of private judgment, in the fenfe of our 
 adverfaries, reduces in fome fort all men to 
 an equality, and is extremely foothing to 
 vain and to weak minds. The fad: is, there 
 is no difficulty in declaiming from {landing 
 and fpecious topics either of eulogy, or in- 
 ve(5live. An affeded zeal for reformation, 
 and an avowed anxioufnefs for the revival of 
 gofpel fimplicity, have a verv ingratiating ten- 
 dency with the bulk of mankind. Liberty 
 of confcience^Freedoju of fentimenty {qq) eccle- 
 
 fajiical 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 271 
 
 fiajiical tyranny y 'violence of bigotry^ arbitrary 
 injunSlions, fpiritiial impojitionsy Sec. are, I 
 grant, expreffions fufficiently fonorous and 
 amufing, and may pafs with many for argu- 
 ment i though at the fame time, loofenefs 
 of principle y ftubbornnefs offchifniy ratiknefs of 
 herefy, arrogance of felf-fufficiency, perverfe- 
 nefs of oppoftion, and petulance of te^nper, &c. 
 are phrafes which mufl be allowed by 
 ** competent" judges to found quite as well, 
 and to mean full as much. 
 
 To conclude. That there is nothing in 
 the leafk exceptionable in our whole eccle- 
 fiaftical fyflem ; nothing that might reafon- 
 ably be retrenched.; nothing that could pof- 
 fibly be amended even in our Articles, as 
 well as.worfhip, rites, and ufages, we by no 
 means affirm : but refpedfully leaving thefe 
 things to the confideration of them that are 
 over us in the Lord, we utterly deny that 
 there is any thing fundamentally wrong, or 
 effentially erroneous in our fpiritual conflitu- 
 tion. (rr) Men may be, and we find them 
 to be bigots in the caufe of infidelity ; nor 
 
 can 
 
272 DISCOURSE Vlir. 
 
 can it afford the leafl: matter of wonder, if 
 no regard is paid to the complaints, or rather 
 the railmg accufations of fuch as under fair 
 fhews and pretences have manifeftly evil will 
 at Sion -, and while they profefs themfelves 
 to be actuated by the Spirit of liberty^ appear 
 to be really poiTeffed with the Daemon of li- 
 centioufnefs. I profeis I fee not what we can 
 do for, or with thefe determined enemies of 
 our holy faith except praying, in the fpirit 
 oi fervent charity, that God would be pleafed 
 ** to bring them into the way of truth." 
 T^be Spirit fpeaketb exprefsly, fays St. Faul, 
 that 171 the latter times fotne fiall depart from 
 the faith, giving heed to feducing Spirits, and 
 doSlrines of devils, * This palTage cannot pof- 
 fibly be conlidered as a dead letter; and 
 therefore it infinitely concerns all perfons 
 *' diligently to try and examine themfelves, " 
 in order to their moral affurance that it does 
 not in anyfenfe or degree touch their fpiri- 
 tual ftate. In general however, under a con- 
 viction that we are ourfelves in the good and 
 the right way, it will be our duty, as Mem- 
 
 * I Tim. iv. I . 
 
 bers 
 
DISCOURSE VIII. 273 
 
 bers of the Church to wifh, and as Chrifti- 
 ans to pray, that God would *' have mercy 
 ** upon all Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Here- 
 '* tics ; that he would take from them all 
 ** ignorance, hardnefs of heart, and contempt 
 '* of his word ; and fo fetch them home to 
 ** his flock, that they may be faved among 
 ** the remnant of the true Ifraelites, and be 
 " made one fold under one Shepherd, Jefus 
 « Chrift our Lord.'* 
 
 A N N O- 
 
i 
 
[ 275 ] 
 
 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Page 2. {a) or mijconjirued.'] Controverfy in 
 general may be faid to fubfift in a great meafure 
 by the pliancy of compofition. Chrijiopher Daven- 
 port, a Francifcan, in a paraphrafe, or expofition of 
 the thirty-nine articles, makes them all capable of a 
 Roman-Catholic fenfe; and Raynardus, a Roman 
 likewife, by a perverfe interpretation, converts 
 every article of the Apoftolic Creed into herefy or 
 blafphemy. The defign of the latter is obvious 
 enough. I do not recoiled to whom I am indebted 
 for thefe particulars. In like manner Dr. Wa- 
 terland acquaints us, that Francijcus, abbot of St. 
 Clare, contrived to reconcile our thirty-nine articles 
 to the dodrine of the Council of l^rent, " by 
 " dint of great dexterity, and mod amazing fub- 
 " tilty," as the learned Do6lor expreffes it. 
 
 With refped to religious queftions, the Roman- 
 
 ijls, in derifion of the principles and pretenfions of 
 
 T 2 Protejiants, 
 
276 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Protejiants, and by way of proof of the neceflity of 
 ecclefiaflical interpofition, have all along called the 
 Scriptures mortuum atramentum, " dumb judges,'* 
 &c. and aflimilate the fame to a " nole of wax," 
 to reprefent their fufceptiblenefs of any fenfe it 
 may fuit us to put upon them •, though at the 
 fame time none more than themfelves endeavour to 
 make advantage of their verfatility. This is appa- 
 rent in many inilances ; e.g. in their conftrudtions 
 of thole texts by which they pretend to prove the 
 doctrine of exireme-un5fion^ of a purgatory, &c. 
 
 The applications of Scripture made by the Ro- 
 man Canonijis are ferio-ridiculous, if I may fo fay, 
 beyond all conception. They will prove the two- 
 fold power of the Pope from the two /words which 
 the Apoftles had when " Chrift was feized by 
 " Judas." Chrift faid to Peter, Feed my Jheep in 
 general, not fuch or fuch a flock •, from whence 
 it has been inferred, that the Pope, as fucceflbr to 
 that Apollle, is to be acknowledged the univerfal 
 Pallor, &c, &c. 
 
 Jewel's Defence of the apology of the Church of 
 England, part 4th. p. 473, &c. 1'ranflation of 
 JuRiEu's continuation of the accom. of the Scripture 
 prophecies, p. 52. Dr. Waterland's Importance of 
 the do^rine of the Holy Trin. p. 211, ^^^^ ^^' 
 
 Page 4. (If) Such an authority.] It is much on 
 the fame principle that the Papiits, as Chillingworth 
 remarks, in order to ground the belief of the 
 
 Trinitv 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 277 
 
 Trinity, &c. in the Church's infallibility, roundly 
 deny that this great dodlrine can be proved, either 
 from Scripture, or by " confent of the ancient 
 " fathers." This, as that great author obferves, is 
 ^^ doing the principal and proper work of the Soci- 
 " nians for them." 1 find the following extra6l from 
 the Racovian Catechijm, made by, the anonymous 
 author of Four Treatifes concerning the DoStrtne^ &c. 
 of the Mahometans : — Sententia eorum, qui Chriflo 
 naturam divinam tribuunt, eft repugnans non folum 
 fana rationi^ verum etiam Divinis Literisy &c.'* 
 Hereunto the author fubjoins two other fimilar 
 paffages, the firft from Smalcius, a famous Soci- 
 nian •, and the latter from Socinus himfelf. The 
 words of Socinus are thefe. " Ufque ad tenipora Con- 
 "ciLii Nic^Ni, ^/ aliquant fof^ ut omnium 
 *' qui turn extitere fcriptis liquet, ilk unus verus Deus, 
 '' quern fajfini facra teftimonia pr^edicant, folus Pater 
 *' Jefu Chrijii eft credit us j et qui contrarium fentiunt, 
 *^' «/ Sabelliani ^/ eorum fmiles^ pro h^reticis plane 
 ^'funt hahiti:' 
 
 Let us fee then how Bp. J^w^/ manages this matter 
 againft his antagonift Mr. Hardinge, who, in his 
 pretended confutation of the Apology for the Church 
 of England, confidently aflferts, that " the Divini- 
 " ty of the Holy Gholl cannot be proved by any 
 " exprefs authority from Scripture." We find that 
 illuftrious prelate taking the wifeft method of 
 putting his adverfary to filence and confufion, by 
 producing teftimonies and opinions, and not barely 
 
 T 3 concefiions 
 
278 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 conceffions, but ftrong afleverations of a dire6lly 
 contrary tendency, from the writers of the Roman 
 Church itfelf. One quotation from Nazianzen is 
 extremely remarkable, and runs as follows, " Dicet 
 " aliquis non ejfe Jcri-ptum^ Spiritum San5ium ejfe 
 " Deum. Jtqui proponetur tibi ex a men tejlhnonio- 
 " rum^ ex quibus ojlendetur, Divinitatem S. Spi. tefia- 
 " tarn ejfe in Jacris Uteris^ nifi quis valde injulfus fit, 
 " et alienus.a Spiritu San5lo.'* In fhort, the various 
 methods which have been taken by Papifls to 
 evince the neceffity of admitting the infallibility of 
 the Church, and to difcredit the authority of the 
 evangelical writings, are equally fcandalous and 
 pitiful. You have them particularly enumerated 
 by an author juft now quoted •, and it will be fuf- 
 ficient to feled one of them, as it is a flagrant 
 one •, I mean that of the Cardinal Perron, who, in 
 the lafi: century, in order to render the Scriptures 
 fufpecled and contemptible, afferted, that " fome 
 " things in them found like fables, others are apt 
 ^* to raife in the mind indecent and difhoneft imagi- 
 " nations, as fome expreffions in Solomon's Jong ; 
 " the hiftory of Balaam's Jfs which fpoke; and 
 " the jazv-bcne of an Jfs, with which Samp/on flew 
 " a thoufand Philiftines.'' 
 
 Chilljngworth's Preface. Bp. Jewel*j Defence, 
 part id. p. 90. 'Tranjlation of Jurieu'j Contin. &c. 
 p. 66. Wollebius'j' Compend. Hheol, Chrif. cap. 2. 
 p. \^. T KAV is' s 'Third Letter to Mr.GiBBOtJ . See 
 
 " SOCINUS 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 279 
 
 SociNus de Ecclef. p. 345, Four TreatifeSj &c. 
 p.igi. 
 
 Page 13. (cj Errors of integrity ."] One of Mr. IC/s 
 arguments, or rather one argument urged by him in 
 the name of his Church, is the following. " He- 
 " retics would arife after the Apoflles time, and 
 " after the writing of Scriptures : thefe cannot be 
 *' difcovered, condemned, and avoided, unlefs the 
 " Church be infallible ; therefore there muft be a 
 " Church infallible." To which Mr. ChiUingwortb 
 replies in thefe words. '* I pray tell me why can- 
 " not herefies befufficiently difcovered, condemned, 
 " and avoided by them v/hich believe Scripture to 
 " be the rule of faith ? If Scripture be fufficient to 
 " inform us what is the faith, it muft of necefllty 
 " be alfo fufficient to teach us what is herefy ; 
 " feeing herefy is nothing but a manifeft deviation 
 " from, and an oppofition to the faith. That 
 " which is ftraight will plainly teach us what is 
 " crooked, and one contrary cannot but manifeft 
 " the other. If any one ftiould deny that there is a 
 " God, that this God is omnipotent, omnifcicnt, 
 " good, &c, &c ; that Jefus Chrift is the Saviour 
 " of the world, and the Son of God ; if any man 
 " ftiould deny either his birth, his paffion, or refur- 
 " reftion, &c ; or fitting at the right hand of God ; 
 " his having all power given hinty &c ; that it is he 
 " whom God hath appointed to be Judge of the 
 " quick and the dead\ that all men ftiall rife again at 
 
 T 4 - " the 
 
ii8o ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " the laft day, &c, &c -, if a man fhould hold, 
 " that either the keeping of the Mojaical law is 
 *' neceflary to Salvation, or that good works are 
 *' not neceflary ; in a word, if any man fhould 
 *' obflinately contradid the truth of any thing 
 " plainly delivered in Scripture, who does not fee 
 " that every one which believes the Scripture hath 
 " fufficient means to difcover, and condemn, and 
 " avoid that herefy, without any need of an 
 " infiUlible guide? If you fay, that the obfcure 
 " places of Scripture contain matters of faith^ I an- 
 " fwer, that it is a matter of faith to believe that 
 " the fenfe of them, whatever it is, which was in- 
 ** tended by God, is true \ for he that doth not {o^^ 
 " calls God's truth into queftion. But to believe 
 " this or that to be the true fenfe of them, or to 
 *' believe the true fenfe of them, and to avoid the 
 " falfe, is not neceflary either to faith, or falvation." 
 It may be aflced, however, whether this gives 
 us fatisfadlion to the full ? Do not our Creeds and 
 Articles contain particulars which we fliall look for 
 in vain in M. C.'s lifl: of the objeds of faith ? 
 Are not many whom we conflder as heretics ready 
 to I'ubfcribe to this lifl;? Was Mr. C. inadvertently, 
 or defignedly fllent with regard to thefe particulars ? 
 Or are we to confign them to the clafs of obfcurity ? 
 Whatever might have been his motive to the word- 
 ing of his paragraph in this manner, or whatever 
 was his perfonal perfuafion in refped; to the fun- 
 damental articles of the faith profefl!ed by the 
 
 Church 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 281 
 
 Church of England, the momentous import of the 
 interrogatories I have juft put muft be vifible to 
 every reader. 
 
 When Mr. C, or any body elfe tells us, that 
 *' God does not require any more of any man than 
 " this, to believe the Scripture to be God's word, 
 *' and to endeavour to find the true fenfe of it, and 
 '* to live according to it ;" or, that " he that 
 " believes the Scripture fmcerely, and endeavours 
 " to believe it in the true fenfe, cannot poflibly be 
 ^^ an heretic,"* he muft be underftood with qualifi- 
 cation J as afferting, not abfolutely that an honeft 
 man cannot pofiibly err concerning the faith, but 
 that error, or herefy will not be imputed to invo- 
 luntary ignorance, or to fmcerity of perfuafion. 
 
 " Herefy, fays Bp. 'faylor, is not an error of the 
 " underftanding, but of the will •," and elfewhere, 
 !" it is not the opinon, but the impiety that con- 
 " demns and makes the heretic." On this princi- 
 ple this fagacious and moderate writer condemns 
 the Herefiarch whole error " commences upon 
 ^' pride and ambition, &c. and excufes thofe who 
 '^ follow him in fimplicity of heart.'* 
 
 Agreably to all this. Dr. Potter, (author of the 
 Anfwer to Charity Mijiaken, whofe caufe Chilling-. 
 worth efpoufes,) and after him Dr. Waterland quotes 
 the following remarkable pafTage from Salvian, an 
 antient Bifhop of Marjeilles, refpeding the truly 
 
 *See Relig. of Proteft. p. 335; and end of Preface. 
 
 fincere 
 
282 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 fincere of the Arian perfuafion. They are heretics, 
 hut do not know that they are Jo. In port^ they are 
 heretics in our judgment y not Jo in their own ; for they 
 ejleem themjelves Juch good Catholics^ that they even 
 throw wpon us the infamous charge of herejy. Such 
 therefore as they are to us^ we are to them. We know 
 ajfuredly that they are injurious to the divine generation 
 of the Son of God, in making him inferior to the 
 Father, 'They, on the other hand, think us injurious to 
 the Father, in believing them both equal. How they 
 fjall bepunijhed at the day of judgment for this their 
 error, &c. no one can know except the Judge. 
 
 It may be proper to take Mr. K.'s argument, and 
 Mr. Cs anfwer into re-confideration. " Herefies, 
 *' lays the former, would arife after the Apoftles' 
 " time, and after the writing of Scriptures : thefe 
 " cannot be difcovered, condemned, and avoided, 
 *^ unlefs the Church be infallible •, therefore there 
 " muft be a Church infallible." The fubilance of 
 Mr. C.*s reply is, that •" without any need of an 
 " infallible guide," the great truths of the Gofpel 
 are difcoverable, and confequently herefies avoid- 
 able, by all fuch as " believe Scripture to be the 
 *' rule of faith :" and that with refpeft to thofe 
 *' obfcure places of Scripture," which Mr. K. tells 
 us " contain matters of faith," we have nothing to 
 do but " believe that the fenfe of them, whatfoever it 
 " is, which was intended by God, is true," without 
 being folicitous to avoid millakes concerning 
 
 them. 
 
 By 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 283 
 
 By this anfwer 'tis certain this celebrated difpu- 
 tant feems to lay his own faith rather open to fuf- 
 picion. For does he not admit what he might, and 
 in fa6l ought to have contelled ? Take them in the 
 grofs, the " places of Scripture which contain 
 " matters of faith," are not by any means obfcure^ 
 but altogether plain and intelligible. I /peak con- 
 cerning the faith of the Church. What the fenfe of 
 thefe places is, according to the eftablifhed laws of 
 interpretation, and according to the belief of the 
 Chriftians of the firft ages, is a queftion, to the 
 determination of which we furely need not have 
 recourfe to infallibility. Though therefore, with 
 refped to paffages really ambiguous, or obfcurey 
 it will be a fafe and excellent rule, " to believe that 
 " the fenfe of them, whatfoever it is, which was 
 " intended by God, is true," yet it will be unfair, 
 unreafonable, and unfafe to apply this rule to places 
 which are no otherwife ambiguous, or ohjcure^ than 
 as they " contain matters of faith j" efpecialiy 
 when we remember how frequently, and how ear- 
 neflly we are required to firive for the faith^ to^ 
 contend for the faith, and to examine and prove our 
 own felves whether we be in the faith. Truth is not 
 lefs truth becaufe it is held in a Church that pre- 
 tends not to be infallible. God only knows the 
 hearts of the children of men : but at the fame time 
 it will be no breach of charity to intimate, that 
 every man fhould be fully perfuaded in his own mind, 
 
 that 
 
284 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 that if he errs, his error is an error, not of his willy 
 but of his undefjianding. 
 
 Chillingworth, ^<7r/ I. c.i.p. 90. Taylor'j 
 Difc. on the Lib. of Frophejyingy Se^. 2. p. 23, 42. 
 Potter V Anf. to Char. Mijiaken. Se5l, 4. p. 119. 
 Waterland'j Import, of the Doc. of the 'Trinity. 
 p. 167. Salv. de Guber. 1. 5. 
 
 Page i^.(d) of infanity .1 I cannot bring myfelf to 
 recall thefe words by the high refped; which on 
 many accounts is due to the names of certain 
 perfons, eminent for their ability, and fome of 
 them for their piety too, who have advanced 
 notions not a whit lefs eccentric or extravagant 
 than thefe. The late worthy Bifhop of Cloyne, who 
 denied, or at leaft doubted the exiftence of matter, 
 is not without his numerous admirers. In fa6t, he 
 feems to have confounded all, though he has con- 
 vinced none. But whatever purpofe was intended 
 to be ferved by fuch a doftrine, furely its real con- 
 fequences muft be detrimiental to the caufe of 
 Chriftianity. If all about us is mere mockery and 
 illufion, the very foundations of all evidence, all 
 faith, and all pra6lice are undermined ^ nor will it 
 be poffible to determine which pofition moft con- 
 tradifts my fenfes, or offers moft violence to my 
 conceptions, that which avers the non-exiftence of 
 matter, or that which maintains xkv^tranjubflantiation 
 of it in the holy Sacrament. The followers of Mr. 
 Hobbes will be apt to laugh this notion to fcorn, 
 
 under 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 285 
 
 under a perfuafion that they deny, or doubt the ex- 
 iftence of Spirit, and confequently of God, with a 
 much better grace. It may be obferved, with re- 
 gard to both extremes, that there is no fuch thing 
 as demonftrating beyond a poffibility of doubt, or 
 contradidion. For, to ufe the words of an author 
 of the laft century, " it is polTible that mathematical 
 " evidence itfelf may be but a conftant undifcovera- 
 " ble delufion, which our nature is neceffarily and 
 " perpetually obnoxious unto, and that either 
 " fatally or fortuitoufly there has been in the 
 " world time out of mind fuch a being as we call 
 *' Man, whofe eilential property it is to be then 
 " molt of all miftaken when he conceives a thing 
 " moft evidently true." There is no (hutting the 
 door againft fcepticifm. We meet with doubters and 
 tlifputers of all ages and nations. Marcus Antoni- 
 nus makes mention of one Monimus, a Cynic philo- 
 fopher, who averred that all is fancy, and that there 
 is abfolutely no fuch thing as a criterion of truth. 
 Pyrrho, though not the firft fceptic, was famous 
 enough to give an appellation to fcepticifm. But 
 notwithflanding all this, a man of fenfe and of 
 common prudence will liflen to rational evidence, 
 and yield affent to moral certainty. He will foon 
 be convinced upon enquiry, that both body and 
 fpirit exift, and that mind is neither matter nor 
 motion ; that if chance, or nature, if you pleafe, 
 made the world, it is that which preferves it too ; 
 
 and 
 
286 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 and may difiblve it •, and, after its diffolution, may 
 reftore it to its original itate, or reduce it to one 
 infinitely worfe than the prefent. This fure is at beft 
 but uncomfortable philofophy. Not that I would 
 hereby infmuate immorality to be neceflarily con- 
 nefted with infidelity. Plato diftinguifhed long ago 
 between the " ranting" and fober atheift j and ob- 
 ferved, that a man whofe fentiments are impious may 
 be virtuous from conftitution. Accordingly he 
 very juftly refolves atheifm into not barely depravi- 
 ty of manners, but fometimes into an afFeflation of 
 fmgular wifdom.* One fource of atheifm in his 
 
 opinion IS, AiJLoi^ia. [xnKct p^otMTTM S'onayot. tivai (j.iyi^n (pfovn- 
 
 c-if, which is almoft literally tranQated in the fol- 
 lowing words of the Apoftle, 'profejfing them/elves 
 to he wife, they became fools. 
 
 Dr. Cudworth feems unwarily to give fome ad- 
 vantage to the atheift, where he fays, that " when 
 " we affirm that God is incomprehenfible, we only 
 *' mean, that our imperfed minds cannot have 
 " fuch a conception of his nature as doth perfedtly 
 *' mafter, conquer, and fubdue that vaft objedl 
 *' under it, &c." The cafe is, we comprehend by 
 our reafon that God is, though not what he is, in 
 refpc6t of his effence in the abftrad. But that he 
 is felf-exiftent from all eternity, that he is a Spirit, 
 that he is the Creator and Governor of the Uni- 
 verfe, that he is all-perfe6l, are certain truths, 
 
 * See Letters on Infidelity, p. 35. 
 
 notwithftanding 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 287 
 
 notwithftanding the darknefs which furroundsthem, 
 Sophocles may be imagined to have had thefe truths 
 in his eye, when fpeaking of the divine edifts, and 
 the immutable decrees of heaven, he puts this fine 
 fentimenc in the mouth of Antigoney 
 
 Qv ya.^ Ti vvv yz xct^S^g?, clKX clzi iron 
 Zjj Tctvlcty 'Aovaiig OiOtV g? orov (pctVYi. 
 And yet we have wits and philofophers of great 
 name and recent date, who feem defirous of re- 
 viving the old atomical phyfiology, which, as Dr. 
 Cudworth exprefTes it, " makes all things to be 
 " materially and mechanically neceffary without a 
 " God." Thefe gentlemen are at lead far from 
 pronouncing matter incapable of the privilege of 
 thought. One * in direft terms calls thought the 
 agitation of the brain. Unhappily Mr. Locke fo 
 far fubfcribes to this principle, as to declare his 
 opinion, that " we have not fufficient knowledge to 
 " determine, by the light of reafon, that God 
 *' could not grant the gift of thought and fenfation 
 *' to a being which we call material." Mr. Voltaire 
 eagerly catched at this notion of the ^' fole reafon- 
 " able metaphyfician," as he calls him. 
 
 More'j Antid. againft Atheijm. p. 10. Cud- 
 •woRTu^s Intell. Syjl. ch.^- p. 176. Plato de Leg. 
 I. 10. Clarke'j Dem. of the Beings &c. of God, />. 22, 
 23, &c. Sop HOC Antig. A5t. 3. v. 462. Memoirs 
 o/" Voltaire, p, 61. See Johnson'j note at cap. 4. 
 of Puffendorf'j de officio horn, et civ. See M. An- 
 TONi. lib. 2 — 15. 
 
 * Hume's Dialogues, p. 60. 
 
 % 
 
 Pao;c 10, 
 
288 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Page 19. (e) hundred myfieries as cne.'\ I fhall 
 beg leave to confront the pride of infidels with the 
 joint authorities of Mr. Boyle, and Lord Bacon ; 
 the former of whom in his treatife, entitled Mo- 
 tives to the Love of God, thus exprelTes himfelf. 
 ** If I be not very much miftaken, they are fo, 
 *' who prefume to give us fatisfaclory definitions of 
 *' God's nature, which we may perhaps more fafely 
 *' define by the impoflibility of its being accurately 
 " defined. Nor will an afliduity and conftancy of 
 " our fpeculations herein relieve us: for too fixed 
 " a contemplation of God's effence does but the 
 *' more confound us." And then he refers us to the 
 well-known itory of Simonides. Agreably to thefe 
 fentiments, the great Lord Bacon fays, " If any 
 *' man fhall think by view and enquiry into thefe 
 *' fenfible and material things, to attain that light 
 " whereby he may reveal unto himfelf the nature 
 " and will of God, then is he fpoiled through vain 
 *' philofophy. And hence, continues he, it hath 
 ** proceeded, that fome of the chofen rank of the 
 " more learned have fallen into herefy, whilfl 
 " they have fought to fly up to the fecrets of the 
 *' Deity, by the waxen wings of the fenfes." And 
 *' again. " The prerogative of God comprehends 
 *' the whole man, and is extended as well to 
 " the realbn, as to the will of man -, i. e. that 
 *' man renounce himfelf wholly, and draw near 
 ** unto God i wherefore as we are to obey his law, 
 
 *• though 
 
 # 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 289 
 
 ** though we find a reludation in our will, fo 
 •' we are to believe his word^ though we find a re- 
 " lu<5tation in our reafon j for if we believe only 
 " that which is agreeable to our reafon, we give 
 " aflent to the matter, not to the author, &c. By 
 " how much therefore any divine myftery is more 
 " difcordant and incredible, by fo much the more 
 " honour is given to God in believing, &c. &c/* 
 How do thefe fentiments diifer from thofe of the 
 " philofophic Chriftians" of this enlightened age ! 
 
 Motives, &€. p. 6jy 64. Ba-coj2 on the /Advance- 
 ment of Learning, tranjlated by Watts, B. i. p. 8. 
 ^. p. 468. 
 
 Page 21. (f) ventilation of thefe fuhje5is.'] It is 
 ridiculous, it is ufelefs, it is endlefs to ftart meta- 
 phyfical queilions, which inftead of clearing mat- 
 ters, ferve only to confound them. It has been 
 afked, whether the Deity be naturally or morally 
 good •, or whether he is " ncceffarily good and 
 " juft in the fame fenfe as he is eternal and omnif- 
 " cient ?" All fpeculations on fuch points as thefe 
 are covered by the general idea of abfolute inhe- 
 rent perfedtion. Perhaps Seneca may be allowed to 
 difcharge this difficulty not unhappily, when, fpeak- 
 ing of the Deity, he fays, Ipfe ejl necefpJas Jua. 
 The ingenious editor of Fufjendorfz treatife De 
 officio hcminis et civis fpeaks much the fame lan- 
 guage in the following note : Deus intelligitur ad 
 fuarum perfe^ionum normam a^iones componere. Ipfe 
 
 U fthi 
 
290 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 fihi lex eji. Ens natura perfe5lijjimum cum Deus fit, 
 ideo quodcunque agit vel eligitj non poteji non ejfe ofti- 
 mum. Itaque nugas agunty vel quiddam pejus, qui 
 Deum, ens primum et Jummum^ vtrtutis et obligaiionisj^^ 
 Cdpacem eJfe docent. * But thefe laft words feemWI 
 rather obfcure. 
 
 To avoid making God the author of evil, the 
 doftrine of Zoroafires was, that " God originally 
 '* and direftly created only light, or good ; and that 
 '* darknefs, or evil, followed it by confequence, 
 *' as the (hadow doth the perfon ; that light, or 
 " good, hath only a real produflion from God, 
 " and the other afterward refulted from ir, as the 
 " defed thereof." An ingenious writer gives us 
 the fentiments of Tlato on this perplexing fub- 
 jeft, in the following tranflation. " God is good. 
 " He is not, as many fay, the caufe of every thing, 
 '* The good things we enjoy are to be folely afcribed 
 " to him ; but we are to fearch for another caufe 
 " than God for our evils. Or, if we will fay 
 " they come from God,-|- fome fuch reafonas this is 
 4* to be afligned. We may fay, God does always 
 *' what is juft and good, and the perfons punifhed 
 *' receive benefit by it ; but the poet mud not fay 
 ** the fufFerers are miferable, and God inflids that 
 
 * See Johnfon's Note at Seft. 4. Book 1. 
 
 f Plato quotes here the famous paiTage in Homer, where 
 mention is made of Jupiter^s two VelTels, the one containing 
 good, and the other evil, &c. See Plato deRepub. b. 2, and 
 Pope's Note at v. 527. of 24th. Book of the Iliad. 
 
 " mifery 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 291 
 
 *' mifery on them ; if indeed he fay, the wicked, 
 " as miferable, ftand in need of punilhment, and 
 " when punifhed by God, receive benefit from it, 
 " this may be permitted ; but we are flrcnuoufly 
 " to oppofe any man, who fays God is the author 
 *' of evil to a good man. Such language is at 
 " no rate to be tolerated in a ftate." The judicious 
 reader will fee how little a way this theory goes to- 
 wards clearing the difficulty ; but he will, I pre- 
 fume, acknowlege it goes far enough to convince 
 us, that Plato had, " to fpeak modeftly, as precife 
 " ideas of the Divine nature as any modern philo- 
 " fopher," according to the tranflator's expreflion. 
 But in his 'Timceus, this famous philofopher imputes 
 the origin of evil to the " necelTity of imperfed: 
 " beings," as Dr. Cudworth Gxpre&sk. " Where- 
 " fore, fays he, though, according to Plato, God be 
 *' properly and direftly the caufe of nothing elfe but 
 " good, yet the necejfity of theje lower imperfe^l things 
 *' does unavoidably give birth and being to evils.'* 
 This is conformable enough to modern notions. 
 Ariftotle feems to have thought the Deity to have 
 been the caufe or principle of all things without 
 exception •, tho' in the following fentence he ex- 
 prefTes himfelf in terms general, modeft, and un- 
 
 peremptory ;— S^of ^a^^ to aj-nw mmv eivat ymi a^yrt t/j". 
 
 It is further obfervable, that not only many hea- 
 thens, and among others, Platonijis, but, what is 
 more extraordinary, Chriftians alfo have afferted 
 
 U 2 .the 
 
292 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 the felf-exiftence and eternity of matter, in order 
 to account for the origin of evil, and effeAually 
 falve the honour of the Deity. God would have 
 made nihil non optimum^ fays Hermogenes^ as 'Tertul- 
 lian reprefcnts his and his followers reafonings. 
 Thefe heretics were called Materiarii. It has been 
 the opinion of fome that God permitted the fall of 
 man, purely with a view to his redemption. * 
 
 " The author oiDeiJm Revealed remarks, " that 
 ** there are two oppofite and fupreme principles, 
 " according to the belief of almoft all the Pagans 
 " now in the world." We are further given to iin- 
 derftand by other authors, that God's ahjolute de- 
 crees and "predetermination of good and evil is the 
 do6lrine of the Koran in general -, though the 
 Mahometans are divided in their opinions upon this 
 article. The fe6l of the Uajhemians were, it feems, 
 fo afraid of making God the author of evil, that 
 they would not allow him to have created an infidel ; 
 which was adopting fomething like the old Magian 
 theory, according to which there are two prin- 
 ciples, or a good and evil God, who are in a flate 
 of perpetual enmity and oppofition. On the other 
 hand, the Mozdarians thought it poffible for God 
 to be a liar, unjuft, &c. as the Bajharians taught, 
 that " God is not obliged to do what is bed -, and 
 ** that, had it pleafed him, he might have made all 
 
 * See Catcott's Serm. 2. p. 33. 3. 48. 
 
 " men 
 
ANNOTATIONS, 293 
 
 " men true believers." The EngliJJj tranflation of 
 a Latin verfion of an Arabic manufcripr, which 
 contains a fhort fyftem of Mahometan theology, 
 gives us a diftindtion upon the fubje6l of the 
 divine decrees, as whimfical as it is unfatif- 
 fadory. In the fixth fedion we have the fol- 
 lowing pafTage. — '' God hath fo decreed good, 
 " obedience, and faith, that he ordains and wills 
 " them } and that they may be under his decree, 
 *' his falutary direction, his good pleafure and com- 
 '* mand : on the contrary, God has decreed, does 
 *' ordain, will and determine evil, difobedience, 
 *' and infidelity ; yet without his falutary direftion, 
 *' his good pleafure, or command ; it being only 
 " by way of fedudion, indignation, and prohibi- 
 *' tion. But whofoever fhall fay, that God is not 
 " delighted with good, and faith, or that God hath 
 *' not an indignation againft evil and infidelity ; 
 *' or that good and evil are from God, fo that God 
 " hath decreed and willed both, with complacency 
 " in them, he is certainly an infidel." Then fol- 
 lows in another charafter •, — Dire^ us^ O great God^ 
 into the right way I — A petition exprelTive of the 
 author's perplexity. 
 
 The general way both among Jews and Chrif- 
 tians of accounting for the origin of evil, is to 
 derive it from the abufe of human liberty. Let 
 us turn to the fentiments of the learned Grotius 
 ypon this fubje6l. *' Cum diximus Demn omnium ejfe 
 
 U 3 " caujam^ 
 
294 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 '* caujam^ addidimiis, eorum qua verejubfijinnt ; , nihil 
 '* enim prohibet^ quo minus ipja^ quajubfijiunt^ deinde 
 '^ caufa fint accidentium quorundam y quales Junt 
 " a^iones. Deus hominem et mentes Juhlimiores homi- 
 " ne creavit cum agendi libertate : qua agendi libertas 
 " vitiofa ncn eft^ Jed pot eft Jua vi a liquid vitiofum 
 '■^ producer e."'' Still will not this elallic difficulty 
 return with full force upon us ? For may it not be 
 afked, who created men and angels, and endowed 
 them with this liberty ? Or could either haveabufed 
 a privilege they never enjoyed ? Is there nothing 
 of apparent caufality in all this ? Indeed the learn- 
 ed author feems to me to be fenfible of his diftrefled 
 fituation. He obferves very juftly, in the words 
 immediately fallowing thofe jult cited, that it would 
 be impious to call God the author of evil. " Hujus 
 " quidem generis malis^ qua moraliter mala dicuntur, 
 " omnino Deum adfcribere au^orem nefas efij" But 
 what does he fay in the leading fentence of this 
 ver-y feftion ? " Neque ab eo quod diximuSy dimove- 
 " re nos debet^ quod mala multa evenire cernimuSy 
 *' quorum videtur origo Deo adjcribi non pojfe ; ut qui 
 " perfe£lijime , ficut ante diEium ejl, bonus ftt,'* 
 Surely that fame videtur betrays entanglement. 
 Let us juil fee now in what manner Mr. Le-clerCy 
 the ingenious editor of this work of Grotius^ illuf- 
 trates this delicate pafifage. '* Pr -idit quidem 
 " etiam Deus fere ut natura libera libertate Jua abute^ 
 " rentury indeque multa mala et phyfica et moralia 
 
 " event ur a 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 295 
 
 *' eventura -, nihilofecius abujum illume confeBariaque 
 *' ejus pati maluit^ quam naturas libertate pr^editas 
 « noti creare. ^id ita ? ^ia cum natura libera 
 ^^ fit prafiantijfima creatura^ qu^que fummam opificis 
 *' potentiam quam maxime ojiendit ; Deus noluit incom- 
 " moda ex nature mutab'tlitate promanantia ant evert e- 
 *' re^ quia ea potefi^ cum vijum erit, per totam ater- 
 *' nitatem emendare ; Us modis qui non nifi bonitati ejus 
 *' convenientijfimi ejfe pojfunt, quamvis eos nondum re- 
 *' velar it.'* 
 
 The very learned and equally pious Dr. Barrow 
 expreffes himfelf on this fubjedl in the following 
 words. " As for thofe real imperfedions and evils, 
 ** (moral evils, habitual diftempers, irregular ac- 
 " tionsj &c.) we need nor feek any one eternal 
 " caufe for them •, (though order and uniformity 
 *' do, diforder and confufion do not argue any 
 *' unity of caufe whence they Ihould proceed :) the 
 " true caufes of them are notorious enough : the 
 *' voluntary declining of men, &c, from the way 
 "God doth prefcribe them; their abufing their 
 " own faculties, &c. &c. As for other evils of 
 *' griefs and pains incident to the nature, or confe- 
 " quent upon the adions of any being, they are 
 " fuch as God himfelf, (without any derogation 
 " to his goodnefs,) may in his wifdom, or jufticebe 
 *' author of, for ends fometimes apparent to our 
 " underflanding, fometimes furpaffing its reach. It 
 ** may fuffice, that God cliallengeth to himfelf the 
 U 4 " being 
 
2^6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " being the caufe of them. Shall there he any evil 
 " in the city^ and the Lord hath not done it ? Doth 
 *' not evil and good proceed out of the mouth of the 
 " Mojl High ? 1 am the Lord^ and there is none elje ; 
 " I form the lights and create darknefs ; 7 make peace, 
 ^' and create evil.'" (See Amos. 3. v. 6. Lamen. 3. 
 V. 38. Ifa. 45. V. 7.) We derive rather diftrefs 
 than content from all this -, nor (to go a ftep far- 
 ther) fhall we receive more fatisfa6tion from S>t. 
 Augufiine^ in the following quaint folution, — malt 
 nulla natura efi^ Jed amijfio honi malt nomen accepit; 
 or from PFollehius^ (Divin. ProfefT. at Bafd in the laft 
 century,) in the following diftindlion, non enim eve- 
 niunt (viz. Dei deer eta) necejfitate coaSlionis^ Jed ne- 
 cejfitate tantum immutabilitatis ; or from Mr. WhiJ- 
 ton^ in his obfervation, that " whatever is evil 
 " muft have been the confequence of man's fall, 
 " and not God's introduction." We are reminded 
 by thefe feveral particulars of the herefy of the 
 Marciof'ites, who no lefs abfurdly than wickedly 
 maintained, that the God of Mojes and the God of 
 the Golpel were two different Beings ; the former, 
 rigid in his nature, and vindictive in his proceed- 
 ings i the latter, benign in his difpofition, and 
 gracious in his difpenfations. 
 
 Bp WiLKTNS on the Prin. of Nat. Relig. B. i. 
 p. 116. See Mr. Geddls'j note at p. 129 of Effay on 
 the Ccrnpoji. of the Antients, Bp. Cumberland'^ 
 fjfay on the defect s of Heathen Deijm.^ p. 10. Pri- 
 
 DEAUX'S 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 297 
 
 DEAUxV Connex. V, i. f. 179. Geddes'^ EJfay on 
 Plato, p. 132, &c. ]z\^k\^s'5 Reafon. of Chrijiian. 
 V. I. f. 224. Tertul. adver, Hermog. p. 282. 
 Cudworth'j Intell. Syfi, ch. 4. p. 197. Ibid. 220. 
 Arist. Met. lib. i. 6>/m of Mahom. ^keol. p. S3' 
 Sale'j Dijc. prefixed to the l^ranjla. of the Koran. 
 Barrow'j ExpoJ. of Cr. p. iii, 112. Augus. de 
 civ. Dei. 11. 9. Woll. Comp. ^heo. cap. 3. p. 23. 
 See Stillingfleet'j Orig. Sac. B. 3. ch. 3. Bp. 
 BramhallV Controverfy with Hobbes, onthisfub- 
 j€£f. Mr. Bryant'j- Treati/e., and Dr. Priestly 
 on philojophical necejftty. Humorous Dial, between 
 Philau. and Timoth. dedicated to Abp. Sheldon, 
 p. 87, &c. Whiston'j Dijc. on the Hifi. of the 
 Great. See Bp. Lowth'j note at IJai. ch, 45. v. 7. 
 See Grotius, lib. i. p. 18. de veri. 
 
 Page 30. (g) eternal ejfence itjelf] We cannot 
 poffibly be too cautious, too referved, too general 
 in our doftrines from the pulpit, or the prefs, 
 refpecling the Holy Trinity, or the particular Di- 
 vinity of our Saviour. Infidelity is always on the 
 watch, and will take advantage in a moment of the 
 leaft ambiguous,or inaccurate,or obfcure exprcfiion, 
 which may fall from our lips, or our pens. Some 
 of the Fathers themfelves, and indeed of our own 
 moft able writers, fometimes fpeak unguardedly, 
 ^nd inconfiilently on thefe fubjcds. For the fake of 
 perfpicuity and diftinftion, as it fhould feem, it 
 jias been faid, the Father is Jelf-exifient, and the 
 
 Son, 
 
298 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Son, or Holy Ghojl, neceffarily exijient •, which is in 
 fa6t a diftindtion without a difference. The 'Three 
 Perfons, as conilituting One God, are equally y^^- 
 exifient. The Father^ the 6'<j», and the Ho/y Ghofi 
 are the Deity j and every idea of originality, deri- 
 vation, &c. evaporates in the confideration of a 
 Trinity in Unity. " Though it has pleafed God to 
 *' reprefent the relation which the Second Perfon 
 " in the Trinity bears to the Firft, under the ana- 
 *• logy of that of a Son to a Father, yet we 
 " muft not think that this analogy holds in every 
 *' refpedl, or that every circumftance of human 
 " paternity and filiation is applicable to the Di- 
 '* vine." Thefe are the words of a late worthy and 
 learned writer, who exprelTes himfelf ftill more 
 happily in the following pafTage. " It is impoflible 
 *' for God himfelf to reveal thefe things to fuch 
 *' kind of beings as we are, any other way than by 
 '* accommodating himfelf to our conceptions, and 
 " ufing fuch terms as bear fome analogy to things 
 " known and underftood by us." " The Father, 
 (fays another able advocate for the dodrine of the 
 Trinity,) is firfb in our conception of God •, and 
 " therefore when we fpeak of the Almighty, or 
 " the eternal God, and the reafon is the fame for 
 *' the only God, we primarily and principally 
 " mean the Father, tacitly including the other two 
 *' Perfons. * 
 
 ♦ It is well obfcrved by Mr. Parkhurll, that the f rft, fecond, 
 and third perfons in the Trinity are nierely thcohgkul, not 
 fcriptural tcxviii, Divin. Lc. of Chrilt. p. 35. 
 
 But 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 299 
 
 But is the language of the author laft quoted of 
 a piece with this fentence, when he talks of felf- 
 exiflence, or unoriginatene/s, as the peculiar mode 
 of the exiftence of the Firji Perfon ? Or is the writer 
 firft quoted perfedly confiflent with himfelf, when 
 he concurs in fentiment with thofe whom he calls 
 " the moft zealous defenders of the Nicene faith •,'* 
 and agrees with all the antient writes, who, he 
 tells us, " hold the Son to be in fome fenfe inferior 
 " to the Father, and that even with regard to his 
 ^' divine nature ?" " The Father, fays he, is the 
 " firft Perfon, the Son, the fecond. The Father 
 *' they all reprefent as unbegotten, receiving his 
 " being and attributes from none but himfelf; the 
 " Son they teach to be God of God ; begotten of 
 " the Father, and receiving his nature, &c, from 
 " the Father, but yet coeternal and coequal with 
 " the Father, receiving from him from all eternity 
 " the fame intire and undivided effence." Is not 
 this language inaccurate, incongruous, and felf-con- 
 tradidory ?" Many pafTages both in antient and 
 modern writers are exceptionable on the fame 
 grounds. To fele<5t a few. The learned Bp. Bull 
 gives, in his own words, the following fentiment 
 of Petavius. Nam, ut re£ie Petavius, non fotejl 
 Films a Patre gigni, niji ah eo naturam ac deitatem 
 acclpit^ &c. St. Hillary, as quoted by the fame 
 author, lays in libra de Synodis, Patri Jubje^ius efi 
 Filius, ut auSfori. Rujfmus in his tieatife on the 
 
 CreeJ, 
 
300 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Creed, calls the Father the head of the Son. Cum 
 ipfe Filius fit onmitim caput, ipfius tamen caput eft 
 Tater. And Bama/cenus in his trad dtfide orthodoxa 
 has the following words ; 'xa.vra w oto. iyjt o vto? kai 
 
 TO 'ihvyiCt iX. T« TTrtTpOf «%''^ y-^-t tf^TO TO ilVO-l. A-UQ. ot. 
 
 Auftitiy argute pro more /uoj according to Bp. Bull*s 
 remark, obferves, in a difcourfe on a pafiage in St. 
 Matthew's gofpe), (if I miftake not,) as follows: 
 Jnfinuatur nobis in Patre au^foritas, in Filio nativitaSy 
 in Spirit u San^fo communitas, in tribus ^equalitas. It 
 is Bp. BuWs own remark, unicum eje in 'Trinitate 
 principium, principii expers, nempe Patrem^ dogma 
 fuijje in primava ecclefia tamfixum, — ut in quadrigefi- 
 mo nono Canonum^ qm dicuntur Apoftolorum, damnetur 
 quifquis baptizaverit in tres principii expertes \ us r^m 
 etvctfyjic. Under the fame article the learned Prelate 
 obferves, that the antient Fathers, and thofe of 
 the Nicene Council, and Athanafius himfelf never 
 fcrupled to give the appellation or title of the one 
 only God to the Father. Let the reader take his own 
 words. Denique veteres Deum Patrem, eo quodprin- 
 cipium^ caiija, auBor, et fons Filii fitj unum ilium et 
 Jolum Deum appellare non Jmit veriti. Sic enim ipfi 
 P aires Nic^ni exordiunturjuum fymbolum ; q. v. Et 
 magmis Athanafius^ quo nemo melius intellexit Synodi 
 Nic<£nie mentem^ &c, concedit Patremjure did uavov ^m, 
 
 071 jM0!'5f et.yiii>f7o-r^ y.cti ucvoc 'Tryiyx ^J07«]o>", quodfolus ingeni- 
 
 tusfity &c. Propter Patrem vivit Filius, fays St. 
 Ambrofe, as quoted by Bifhop Pearfon, quod ex 
 Patre Filius eft ; propter Patrem, quod ehuctatum 
 
 eft 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 301 
 
 €ji verhmn ex Patris corde^ quod a. Patre procejjit^ 
 quod ex paterno generatus eji utero, &c. Dr. Fiddes 
 gives us a pafifage from St. Hila^jy in which that 
 Father aflferts, that *' our making the Son God is 
 ^' no objeftion againft the Father's being the one 
 '' God. He is the one God, fays he, becaufe the 
 " only underlved God." Surely Bp. Pearfon hlm- 
 felf, who in the main is wonderfully exad, does 
 not fpeak in the mod proper terms, when he tells 
 us, that " the Father of our Lord Jefus Chriil is 
 *' originally God, as not receiving his eternal 
 ''• being from any other ; that therefore it necefTa- 
 ^^ rily foUoweth, that Jefus Chrift, who is certain- 
 " ly not the Father, cannot be a Perfon fubfifting 
 " in the Divine Nature originally of himfelf ; and 
 " confequently, it having been already proved, 
 " that he is truly and properly the eternal God, 
 " that he muft be underftood to have the Godhead 
 *' communicated to him by the Father, who is not 
 *' only eternally but originally God ; that in him 
 " (Chrift) is the fame fulnefs of the Godhead, 
 *' more than which the Father cannot have, but 
 '^ yet that in that perfe6b and abfolute equality 
 '' there is notwichftanding thisdifparity, &c. &c." 
 To adduce only one example more; even the judi- 
 cious Hooker is off his guard in the following paf- 
 fage. " Seeing therefore the Father alone is origi- 
 " nally that Deity which Chrift originally is not, 
 " (for Chrift is God by being of God, light 
 
 *' by 
 
302 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " by iffuing out of light,) it followeth hereupon, 
 *' that whatfoever Chriil hath common unto him 
 *' with his heavenly Father, the fame of neceflity 
 *' muft be given him, but naturally and eternally 
 *' given him, not bcftowed by way of benevolence 
 "&c. 
 
 The priority implied in the term Father, in 
 its common acceptation, accounts for all this 
 incoherency -, but where, I would glacly know, 
 do the terms auBor, fons^ origo^ principium^ &c. 
 occur in the Scriptures, or in the writings of 
 the apoftolical P'athers, Clemens^ Polycarp^ and Ig- 
 natius ? Or where are any terms to be found 
 importing fubordination and inferiority, except 
 fuch as evidently refer to the humanity of Jefus 
 Chriji ? And after all, and all this put togetlier 
 notwithftanding, the common refemblances by 
 which the great myftery has been faintly illuftrated 
 by the Fathers, efpecially by Jujiin Martyr^ TVr- 
 iulUan, and Origen, as light from the fun, or a 
 ilream from a fountain, are produced to no pur- 
 pofe as proofs of a fubordination, &c. For let 
 light be fuppofed to have ilTued from the fun, or 
 a ftream from a fountain, from all eternity j on 
 this fuppofition it is plain, caufality and originality 
 are merely nominal ; the fountain neceffarily im- 
 plies the ftrcam, and the fun, light : and in like 
 manner, in the cafe before us, the exiftence of the 
 Father neceffarily fuppofes the exiftence of the Son, 
 
 and 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 303 
 
 and of the Holy Ghoft. The Father can no more 
 exifl: without the Son than the Son without the 
 Father. 
 
 The truth is, the Fathers of the Church, whofe 
 fentiments Bp. Bull lays before us, apparently grant 
 much, but really yield nothing. If Athanafius, e. g., 
 aflerting the eternity and Divinity of the Son of 
 God, meant not fuch an abfolute co-equality as en- 
 tirely excludes all dependence and inferiority, he 
 flatly contradids the Creed which goes under his 
 name, in which it is exprefsly faid, that in the 
 Trinity, " none is afore or after other, none is 
 " greater or lefs than another •," and if he did 
 mean this, we cannot argue againfb his faith from 
 the careleflhefs, or the impropriety, or even the 
 abfurdity of his exprellions. Elucidation has before 
 now been the parent of entanglement. The Arians 
 themfelves are fenfible they cannot admit the eter- 
 nity of the Son of God, without acknowleging 
 at the fame time his abfolute co-equality j and 
 therefore affeft to underftand every pafTage or 
 phrafe leemingly derogating from the dignity of 
 Jejus Chriji^ as a diredl aflertion, or tacit concelTion 
 that he is a creature. Through a moft ftranse in- 
 advertence, the writers we have been extrading 
 from appear to have confounded the idea of tempo- 
 ral with that of eternal generation. 
 
 It has been frequently and well ©bferved, that 
 moft of the Fathers, before the Council of Nice, 
 
 fpeak 
 
304 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 fpeak fometimes of a temporal generation of the 
 Son by the operation of the Holy Ghoft on the 
 blefled Virgin •, and fometinies, by a fort of cata- 
 chrefis^ give the name of generation to the milTion 
 of the Son from the Father, for the purpofe of 
 creating the world ; and that, by di reding our 
 whole attention to the pafiages relative to both thefe^ 
 the enemies of our faith have artfully attempted to 
 prevent our notice, or acknowlegment of other 
 numberlefs places in the writings of thefe Fathers, 
 wherein they plainly and unequivocally afferi: the 
 eternal generation of the Son of God. 
 
 By help of thefe confiderations, and fuch as ihefe, 
 we Ihali, for the mod part, be enabled to reconcile 
 exceptionable pafTages in the writings of the Fa-, 
 thers in general with the purert faith, and flridleft 
 orthodoxy ; and fhall have no caufe for refentmenr, 
 or complaint, if in fo large a bulk of human com- 
 pofition, and amidft fuch a multiplicity of fubjeds 
 and circumflances, we are fometimes furprized by 
 inaccurate diction, or unfound fentiment. 
 
 The fuppofed canon referred to by Bp. Bull 
 which forbad the baptizing m i^n? amiy^?^ on pain of 
 damnation, really maintains only the doflrine of 
 the Athana. Cr. viz. that ^' there is one Father, 
 *' not three Fathers." TertuUian fays fomewhere, 
 that there was a time quando Filius Dei non erat -, 
 whcih is tru^ in the fecond or third knfe of 
 Sonfhipj as there was a time when God was not a 
 
 Creator i 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 305 
 
 Creator ; viz. ante mundum conditum. Nay, there 
 is an expreflion in LaSfantius which more than infi- 
 nuates that there was a time, when even God the 
 Father, or God abfolutely confidered, was not -, 
 for, fays he, Deus ifje Je fecit. And, by the way, 
 they who talk of God the Father's " receiving his 
 *' Being from himfelf alone^ " do but paraphrafe 
 the words of La£fantius. I cannot think the Ca- 
 tholic faith can be in the lead affeded by thefe early 
 opinions concerning Jejus Chriji. 
 
 Metaphyfical fubtleties, technical terms, and un- 
 fcriptural definitions and diilindtions have undoubt- 
 edly done no fmall dilTervice to the caufe of Chrifti- 
 anity. But, as Dr. IVaterland repeatedly obferves, 
 let the blame be laid at the right door. Thefe 
 things were artfully and gradually introduced 
 into the Church by heretics, for the purpofe of 
 confounding and perplexing matters. The antient 
 Chriftians refted folely on the authority of Scrip- 
 ture, and the concurrent voice of tradition.* The 
 Church believed in the Trinity, believed in the 
 Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghoft, 
 and worlhipped all Three as One God, before the 
 diftindtion was expreffed by the term Perfons, or the 
 viovdjubjiance was made ufe of. '' It does not ap- 
 pear," fays Dr. ^. *' that the word 'Trinity was yet 
 ** applied to this cale;" viz. in Juftin Martyr\ 
 time, in the middle of the fecond century. The 
 orthodox were necefTitated to contend againft their 
 
 * See Barrow on the Pope's Supremacy, p. 626. 
 
 X • adverfaries 
 
3o6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 adverfarjes with their own weapons. And, what rs 
 worfe, terms of art have been the fuel of ftrife 
 amongft the orthodox themfelves. It was a mere 
 difpute of words which had like to have occafioned 
 an irreparable breach between the Eailern and 
 Weftern Churches. Take the following account of 
 it in the words of Dr. Potter. " The Orientals,'* 
 fays he, " profeffing to believe three Hypofiajes in 
 ** the glorious Trinity would not admit three Per- 
 *' fons, and were therefore thought to be Arians, 
 " On the contrary, the Weftern believing three P<?r- 
 ^^/onsy could not be induced to confefs three Hypo/- 
 " tafeSy and thereupon were taken to be Sahellians. 
 " Here was a great jealoufy grounded upon a great 
 '^ error j which Athanafius ealily difcovered, and 
 " reftored again their good amity and intelligence ; 
 " fhewing that they differed not in judgment, all 
 " meaning the fame thing •, and that Hypojiafts on 
 *' one fide was the very fame in effed: with Perjon 
 " on the other."* 
 
 A writer of the laft century, whofe name does 
 not appear, fpeaking of the controverfies with 
 which the Church of England was agitated in 
 the year 1641, exprefles himfelf in the following 
 manner. " They be not of the higheft nature; 
 " for they are not touching the high myfteries of 
 «' faith ; fuch as detained the Churches after their 
 " firft peace for many years, what time the here- 
 " tics moved curious queftions, and made ftrange 
 
 * Anfwer to Char. Mifta. Seft. 3. p. 90. 
 
 " anatomies 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 307 
 
 *' anatomies of the nature and Perfon of Chrift ; 
 *' and the catholic fathers were compelled to fol- 
 " low them with all fubtlety of difpiitations and 
 *' determinations, to exclude them from their eva- 
 *' fions, and to take them in their own labyrinths : 
 " fo as it is riglitly faid, illis temporibus ingeniofa res 
 ^'- fuit ejfe Chrijiianum" 
 
 Farther -, it is certain the great do6trine of the 
 Trinity hath been fometimes difhonoured, if not 
 weakened, by puerile illuilrations, and playfulnefs 
 of diftindion. According to T. Aquinas, Triniias 
 ejl quaji trium unitas. It is fomewhere obferved 
 likewife by this famous Doftor, that the Father is 
 the beginning, but not the caufe of the Son. And 
 iays a learned fyfbematical writer, I think, with a 
 levity one fhould notexpe6t in him, aliud eji Trinus, 
 aliud eji triplex. 'Trinum eft quod ejjentia unum, tres 
 habet Jubfiftendi modos : triplex, quod ex tribus rebus 
 eft compofttum. Deum trinum dicimus, non triplicem ; 
 et 'Trinitatem non ^riplicitatem. To which is very 
 fenfibly fubjoined the following caution ; cum ju- 
 dicio legendi Junt T aires, qui non raro Jententiis diffi- 
 dent in uju vocum, Subilantise, Hypoftafew?, ho-j*?, 
 &c. The fame author cites, and at the fame time 
 juftlycenfures a chimerical diflinftion of the School- 
 men htiWwt generation and procejfion. Differunt Ge- 
 ncratio et ProcefTio •, fed quodnam eft difcrimen, tu- 
 tius ignoratur quam quaritur. Sholaftici dicunt Gene- 
 Y^tionem Filii fteri per modum Intellectus, unde 
 X 2 dicitur 
 
308 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 dicitur "Dei fapientia ; Proceffionem per modum Vo- 
 Tu NT AT IS, unde Spirit us dicitur amor et charitas. 
 Ifou have Mr. Boyle's fentiments on this fubjed in 
 his Conftdera. on the fiyle of Scripture^ p- 4i« 
 
 Bp. Bull de Jubord. Fil. Se5t. 4. p. 225. Defen. 
 Fid. Nide.'cap. 10. Self. 3. p. 206, &c. Pearson 
 on the Creed., ^, 34, 134. Fiddes^ vol. i. 384. Hook- 
 er's EccleJ. Pol. p. 296, &c. Stephens's Ser7n. on 
 the eternal Gen. p- S'^' Waterland's Defence of 
 his i^ejl.p. 134. Fogg's Theol. Spec, p, 89, 109. 
 Waterland's Sermons. p. 141. Randolph's Vin- 
 dica. of the Doffrine of the 'Trinity. Part 1. p. 10. 
 
 Page ^2. (h) the everlajiing Father. 1 Whatever 
 we are precifely to imderftand by this expreflion, 
 it is certain the proper title of Jefus Chrift, confi- 
 dered as the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, is that 
 of Son of God 5 Son in a tranfcendent and incom- 
 prehenfible fenfe. We are informed by St. John, 
 that the Jews fought the more to kill our Savi- 
 our, not only hecaufe he had broken the Sabbath.^ but 
 Jaid alfo that God -was his Father^ thereby making 
 him/elf equal with God, It is worth obferving, that 
 this tranilation by no means does juftice to the ori- 
 ginal ; or any thing like fo forcibly imports the 
 equality in queilion : ^nn^a iS'iov iMyi tov ^m ; he 
 called God his own Father^ as Dr. Whitby and Dr. 
 Hammond render it, his proper Father .^ his Father 
 a-xoovcosy (as Nonnus explains the words in the begin- 
 ning., John i. J.) bis Father in a peculiar fenfc, in 
 
 a fenfe 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 309 
 
 a fenfe neceffarily implying the fame nature in both. 
 The omiffion here is the more remarkable, as our 
 tranflators attended to the fame emphatical word in 
 the only place befides where it occurs, and where 
 its fignificance is not fo obvious : He that /pared not 
 his own San, hut delivered him up for us ally how 
 pall he not with him alfo freely give us all things ? 
 (Rom. viii. 32.) The Socinian evafion of the paf- 
 fage in St. John is inexpreflibly ridiculous, and re- 
 duces it almoft to nonfenfe. He madehimjef equal 
 with God, by afferting, that he did the works of 
 his Father ! 
 
 See Webster on John. i. 2. See Whitby and 
 Hammond on John v. 18. See Dr. JV. Lowth's 
 Commen. on Ifai. 9. 6. 
 
 Page 46. (i) of Divine Providence. "^ The notion 
 that by ih&Jeven Spirits here mentioned are to be 
 underftood Jeven angels, who are the principal mi- 
 nijiring Spirits of the Deity, is countenanced by a 
 no lefs refpedable authority than that of Dr. Ham- 
 mond and Mr. Mede. But this is rejeded by Gro- 
 tius, and by the anonymous writer whom I follow, 
 though under a different idea, and purely from a 
 general furvey of the matter. The writer I mean 
 lays much ftrefs on the numhtv feven^ which in 
 Hebrew denotes perfedion ; * but his reafonings 
 from this circumftance appear to me too weak a 
 foundation for the fupport of a theory. 
 
 * See Catcott's Serm. I. p. 1 4. 
 
 X 3 Dr. 
 
3IO ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Dr. Gill without the leaft hefitarion underftands 
 by x.h& /even /pirits the third Perfon in the blefled 
 Trinity. He has adopted the above idea, and en- 
 larged upon it. " By thek /i^ven Spirits," fays this 
 very fenfible writer, " are intended the Holy Spirit 
 " of God, who is one in his Perfon, but his gifts 
 " and graces are various ; and therefore he is fig- 
 " nified by this number becaufe of the fulnefs and 
 " perfeftion of them ; and with refpedt to iht/even 
 " Churches, over whom he prefided, whom he in- 
 " fluenced and fanflified, &c." 
 
 The Ethiopic verfion, this author obferves, reads 
 from the /even Spirits which are before the throne of 
 Jejtis Chrijt. 
 
 It is farther a remark of the fame author, that 
 the fecond Perfon is laft mentioned in the benedic- 
 tion before us, " becaufe many things were to be 
 " faid of him •, he is defcribed in all his offices, &c." 
 
 Bp. Newton fays, in effeft, the very fame thing. 
 According to him, Jefus Chrift is mentioned laft 
 " becaufe the fubfequent difcourfc more immedi- 
 " ately relates to him." 
 
 Mede Dijc. lo, B. I. p. 42. See Hammond 
 and Gill in loc. Newton on Prophecy. Vol. 3. ^. 12. 
 
 Page 60. {k) when St. John wrote.] Some have 
 fuppofed, a? an ingenious writer obferves, that de- 
 tached pieces of the hiftory of Chrift, written by 
 Apoftles, or under their infpeftion, were extant in 
 the Church before any Gofpel was publiftied. 
 
 Opinions 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 311 
 
 Opinions are far from being concurrent with re- 
 fpedl to the publication of the Gofpels in general ; 
 but this is a diverfity which does not in the leaft 
 affcdl our argument, f 
 
 Cojmas of Alexandria^ it feems, dates St. Mat- 
 thew^ s Gofpcl from tli€ martyrdom of St. Stephen ; 
 and is generally thought to be as wide of the mark 
 as Iftdore of Seville ^ according to whom, it was not 
 written before the reign of Caligula. Perhaps the 
 common opinion is the trueft, that it was wrote 
 about eight years after our Lord's Afcenfion. 
 
 It appears from the teflimony of feveral old 
 ecclefiaftical writers, that St. John wrote his Gofpel 
 by the defire of the Bifhops of JJia. Is cum ejfet 
 in Afta^ fays St. Jerome^ et jam tunc hareticorum fe- 
 mina -pullularent^ Cerinihi-y Ebionis^ et c^terorum^ qui 
 negant Chriftum in came venijfe^ coa^us efi ab omnibus 
 pene turn Afia epijcopis^ et multarum eceleftarum lega- 
 tionibus, de divinitate Sahatoris alt \vs /crib ere » 
 
 How far the notion of T!heophyla6i^ and, I be- 
 lieve, of fome others, that St. John was particularly 
 qualified to conceive, and to teach evangelical myf- 
 teries, by his perfonal purity, &c j how far fuch a 
 notion was well-grounded, or ought to be regarded 
 as a mere fantafy, I undertake not to determine. 
 
 In Hermannus Frank's treatife entitled, Chriji the 
 Sum, i^c, of all the Scriptures, &c. there is an anec- 
 dote concerning a Francijcus Junius, who was con- 
 
 f See Bp. Percy's Key to the New Teft. p. 47, &c. 
 
 X 4 verted 
 
312 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 verted from Atheifm by accidentally dipping into 
 the New Tejiament^ and reading the firft chapter of 
 St. John's Gofpel. This, fays the author, is re- 
 corded by 'Theophilus Spizelius in his Jcrutiny of 
 Atheifm. He tells the ftory himfelf in his Life pre- 
 fixed to his works, printed at Geneva 1705. 
 
 Mr. Boyle in his Confiderations^ Szc. makes men- 
 tion of the above circumflance, as related fome- 
 where by Junius himfelf; and at the fame time re- 
 fers us to the hiftory of a certain Rahbi who was 
 converted to Chriftianity by reading the 53d. Ch, 
 of Ifaiah ; and to the converfion of St. Aujiin, who 
 was " chaiiged from a debauchee into a Saint," by 
 a paflage in the 13th. Ch. of St. Paul's Epift. to 
 the Romans. 
 
 Town SON on the Go/pels. p. 25, 6^' See Lard- 
 NER •, and tejiimonies prefixed to St. MatthewV 
 Go/pel /« MiLLs'j Gr. 'Tejt. Prolegomena ad Commen. 
 in Mat. Randolph 'j Vindica. pt. 2. ^. 20, 21, 25. 
 Boyle'j Co'/ifid. p. incert. See Waterland'j Im- 
 port, of the do^rine of the 'J!rin. 
 
 Page 67. (/) the Son of God,] It is excellently 
 obferved by the incomparable Dr. Barrow, that 
 " the firft Adam derived his being immediately 
 " from God's power and divine infpiration ; that 
 " Ifaac, Samuel, and John the Baptiji had a gene- 
 " ration extraordinary and miraculous, as being 
 " of aged fathers, or barren mothers, by the in- 
 " terpofition of Divine Power j and that we can- 
 
 «< not 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 313 
 
 *' not eafily conceive how the produdtion of angels 
 *^ fhould be fo much inferior to our Saviour's 
 " temporal generation, fuppofing he had no 
 " other." 
 
 It will corroborate what has already been ad- 
 vanced, to remark farther, that if Jefus Chrift be 
 any thing lefs than very God by eternal genera- 
 tion, he was abundantly over paid for all he did and 
 fuxTered for our fakes ; he was recompenfed be- 
 yond all meafure by his exaltation to the right 
 hand of the majejiy on high^ and by the divine 
 honour and worfhip which has been univerfally 
 afcribed and paid to him. Under this view of the 
 matter, the aflumption of humanity deferves not 
 the name of a condefcenHon. In his human capa- 
 city indeed, Jefus Chrift for the joy that zuas fet 
 before him endured the Crofs, and defpifed the fhame \ 
 but in his divine, he could have no refpe5i to the 
 recompenfe of a reward. This is a thought which 
 has been darted and purfued by feveral writers, 
 Equidem rem attentius perpendenti, fays Bp. Bull, 
 liquehity ex hypothefi five Sociniana five Jriana^ Leum 
 in hoc negotio amorem^ &c, fuum potius in ilium ipfum 
 Filium quam erga nos homines ofiendiffe. 
 
 Bull'j fudic, Ecclef. Cath. cap. 5. p. 313. 
 Waterland'j Import, of the Do5f. of the Trin. p. 
 47, 48, 49. Barrow on the Cr.p. 136. 
 
 Page 72. {m) Baptized for the remijfwn of Sins. "] 
 Ferfons baptized were in the primitive Church 
 
 dipped 
 
314 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 dipped three times ; and this immerfion at the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghoft repeftively, let us, I think, fufEci- 
 ently into the fenfe of the Chriftian Church, with 
 regard to the equality of the Perfons in the bleffed 
 Trinity. It affords at leaft a moft ftrong prefump- 
 tion ; which is greatly confirmed by the flriftnefs 
 of the Apojlolical Canons^ which, as Dr. Cave ac- 
 quaints us, order hiin, Bifhop, or Prieft, that 
 negledls the trine immerfion, to be depofed. 
 Afterwards, fays the fame learned Author, to ob- 
 viate the pretences of the Jrians, who ufed the 
 trine immerfion to denote the Verjons in the Trinity 
 to he three dijiin£f Jnhjlances^ the fourth Council of 
 Tcledo in their fifth Canon decreed, that a fingle 
 immerfion would be fufficient ; that the dipping 
 under water would exprefs Chrift's death and bu- 
 rial, or defcent into hell, and the coming out, his 
 refurre61:ion ; the fingle immerfion exprefling the 
 JJyiity^ while the Trinity of Perfons would be fuf- 
 ficientiy noted by the Form of words in Baptifm, 
 To this eiteft Dr. Cave. 
 
 It is but reafonable to make allowances for the 
 zeal, or, if you will, the fimplicity of the devout 
 Chriftians of the firft ages. In procefs of time, 
 and as the Chrifcian world grew darker -and more 
 corrupt, many ceremonies and cuftoms became 
 ii£fs of piety, which were originally but its appen- 
 dages. I fhall only mention one, for example's 
 
 fake, 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 315 
 
 fake, I mean that of praying with uplifted and 
 expanded hands, in reprefentation of the figure of 
 the Crofs : a pradice which has given fanftion to 
 much folly and fuperftition. 
 
 Gave'j Prim. Chrijiian. p. 205, 183. See 
 HooKER^s Ecclef. Pol, B. 4. p. 154. 
 
 Page 1 20. {ri) Jefus Chrifi our Lord.] The nume- 
 rows pafTages we meet with, both in the writings 
 of the Apoftles, and of thefe Apoftolical fathers, 
 * which ftrongly mark the human nature of Je/us 
 Chrifiy might, one Ihould think, dire6l us to the 
 fenfe we are to put upon fuch as are relative to 
 his divine. The perfe6t Godhead and perfeft man- 
 hood of our Saviour feem to me to be forcibly 
 contrafted in this difcrimination. It had been bet- 
 ter perhaps if Divines had refted wholly in this 
 one general diftinftion. We can hardly be copi- 
 ous without being obfcure at beft on the fubje6t 
 of the hypoftatic union. But we mull not yet dif- 
 mifs the palTage before us. 
 
 In the firft dialogue of Theodoret, which VoJJius 
 refers to in his note at this place, there is a re- 
 markable variation of reading. Inftead of made 
 and not made^ or born and unborn y yivurof mi ayivnroi ; 
 J it there runs yiv>)TOi i^ ti.ycvy\T6. It feems, Atha- 
 nafiusy and Gelaftus, in his treatife de duabus naturis, 
 
 * For proof of the genuinenefs of St. Ignatius's feven 
 fhort Epi'ft. &c. See p. 131, &c. of Parkhurft's Divin. of 
 J, Chrift. and Arch. Bp. Wake on the Epift. 0/ Ignatius. 
 
 X See Note at p. 136. of Parkhurft's Divin. of Jefus Chrift. 
 
 defend 
 
3i6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 defend the firft reading. But both come to the 
 fame point. Jefus Chrifi was made and not made^ 
 born and unborrij except in a myfterious and tran- 
 fcendent fenfe ; he was the eternal Son of God. 
 Or, he was made, or born of a woman, through the 
 operation of the Holy Ghoft, who came upon her, 
 who was unmade and unborn j he was " both of 
 ^^ Mary and of God;" the latter claufe being a 
 kind of paraphrafe on the former ; and fo in effedt 
 Ignatius afierts here both the perfonality and the 
 eternal exiftence of the Sprit, 
 
 There is another paragraph in this Epiftle to 
 the Ephefians, wherein omnifcience, an eflfential 
 property of the Godhead, appears to be attributed 
 in the fullefl terms to Jefus Chrift, — ahv huv^avu top 
 
 JivjW)', a,K\ct HSU T£t •/.^vyfja. nfxav iy/vs Avrco ig-i. YlavTot. ki/ 
 Ton^ixiy coi «yT« iv miv KaTo/)t«VTor, ivoi ay.iv ctvxa vaoiy Kcu 
 tiVTQi iv »uiv 5sof }f(xav, as-TT't^ Kai i^lV, KUt (pouvHO-iTiti -srgo -arfo- 
 G-a-^ra H^Ucyj', f| av hAcuas tuyttirccixv/ tt-nov, Jejus Corifi IS 
 
 fignified by the word xt/j/or, wherever it occurs in 
 the Epiflles of this Father, I believe, without ex- 
 ception ; and the context evidently patronifes this 
 application. Arch. Bp. Wake feems to have over- 
 looked the plain fcope of this paiTage. His tranf- 
 lation runs, " there is nothing hid from God, &c." 
 I had the fatisfaclion to find my fentiments ex- 
 actly coinciding with thofe of Bp. Bull upon this 
 very paragraph. His words are thefe, De Chrift o 
 loqui IgnatiujUj indubium eft, non modo ex voce Kyj/sj, 
 
 qua 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 317 
 
 qua Chriftmn ubique deftgnat, fed etiam ex toto Senno- 
 ms contextu, de Jefu Servatore duntaxat agente. 
 
 And it is yet farther obfervable, that the intro- 
 duflory part of thisEpiftle (as Vojfms has remark- 
 ed) is rather obfcure ; and that (however it hap- 
 pened) the Moft Rev. Tranflator has not done 
 full juftice to the plainell expreffion in it. The 
 blood of Chriji in the tranflation is in the orio-inai 
 fimply the blood of God\ iv aiimTi t« ^5«. 
 
 Bull's Defen. Fid. Nic^e. cap. 2. Se^. 2. Igna. 
 Epif. to the Ephef. Se5l. i. 6f 15. Barrow on the 
 Cr.p. 156. See John. i. v. 14. 
 
 Page 123. (c) in it proper place."] In matters not 
 of faith, but merely of opinion, thefe venerable 
 fathers in general are not altogether without pecu- 
 liarities which are tinftured a little with the pious 
 fancifulnefs of fuperftition. This is more efpecialiy 
 apparent in their notion of fpiritual references, and 
 emblematical reprefentations. 
 
 The Jcarlet-line which the fpies direfted Rahab 
 to fix to her window, &c. is fpecined by St. Cle- 
 ?w^»/ himfelf, *and by fome others, as typical of the 
 redemption of mankind by the blood of Jefus 
 Chrift. But of all of them, except St. BarnahaSy 
 Origen is perhaps the largefl: dealer in fymbol and 
 allegory, as has often been pointed out in nume- 
 rous inftances ; although it would be as unreafon- 
 able to obje6l this in order to difparage the 
 errounds of our common faith, as it would be to 
 
 except 
 * Epift. to the Corin. Seft. 12. 
 
3i8 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 except, with the fame view, againfl the eccentricity 
 of fome of this Father's tenets, or thofe of any 
 others in any other refpecls j as, e. g. that hell- 
 torments will not be eternal, for which aflertion he 
 had certainly no Scriptural warrant j or that the 
 angel with whom Jacob wrejted was an evil one, 
 which was likewife a notion oi Qrigen\:, or that 
 fouls after their feparation from bodies retain 
 many corporeal properties, as Irenaus and 1'ertul- 
 lian imagin'd, &c, &fc. In truth, orthodoxy may 
 be faid to be built upon the foundation of the /^pojiles 
 and ProphetSy Jefiis Chriji himfelf being the chief 
 corner-Jione^ and has no concern with thefe parti- 
 cularities ; and much lefs with the conceits which 
 the luxuriance of piety itfelf has fometimes given 
 birth to. The Father I laft named whimficaily af- 
 ferted, that the devil invented bujkinsj that a man 
 might ADD TO HIS STATURE, notwithftanding what 
 our Saviour fays to the contrary s and gravely in- 
 forms us in another place, that this prince of dark- 
 nefs, or one of his infernal minifters, upon being 
 exorcifed out of a certain woman, who was a fre- 
 quenter of ftage-entertainments, complained loud- 
 ly that he was difpofieffed of his property j the 
 theatre being his own ground! Clemens o^ Alex- 
 andria advifes us to lay our heads upon Ji one , as Jacob 
 did, in order to our having vifions, &c. &c. But 
 of fuch harmlefs extravagance infidelity ftrives in 
 vain to avail itfelf. 
 
 Whether 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 319 
 
 Whether St. Barnabas y who was St. PauVs com- 
 panion and fellow-labourer, was the author of the 
 catholic Eplftle to which his name is prefixed, is 
 a quellion undecided at this day. Much has been 
 urged on this fubjeft^ro and con by learned men; 
 nor am I concerned to inquire, on which fide the 
 arguments preponderate. It will fuffice to fay, 
 that many have thought the allegorical interpre- 
 tation of Scripture with which the performance 
 abounds, by far too imaginary, or indeed too tri- 
 fling for the pen of one of the Minor Apoilles, as 
 Vojfius calls him. This able critic is however a 
 ftrong advocate for him, and the primitive fathers 
 in general -, and gives it as his clear opinion, that 
 nothing of this kind in him, or in St. Clement, 
 (from whom he extrafls the particulars above no- 
 ticed,) ought in reafon to be alledged to the dif- 
 credit of their writings. His words are thefe. ^is 
 a primis illis Chrijlianis omnigenam Jcientianij et doc^ 
 trinam expojlulet ? ^is illos non aque hallucinates 
 exijiimet atque eorum nepotes ; presjertim in rebus nihil 
 ad fidem pertinentibus i^ Nunquid et in Epifiola de- 
 mentis fimilia occurrunt ? ^lis enim bono anijno conco- 
 quere pojfit fabellam illam quam de Phmiice narrate 
 ^c? Non puto etiam quemquam velle admittere expofi- 
 tionem ijlamy ut linteum coccineum Rahab meretricis * 
 fignum fuerit Janguinis Chrifti^ ^c. At qui tamen ijie 
 
 * N.B. Many are of opinion that Rahab was no harlot. 
 
 Clemens 
 
310 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Chnens pari jure atque Barnabas diSius eji Apfiolus, 
 Non deheyit itaque in hoc reprehendere^ quod in altera 
 excufant. j-But it ihould be remembered all this 
 while, that Vojftus vindicates the authenticity of 
 St. Barnabas's Epiftle, fo called, by a very un- 
 equal comparifon. The Epiftle of St. Clement ^ and 
 thofe of other fathers are inte;-iperfed more or lefs 
 with typical application, but they are not diftin- 
 guifhed by it. (See St. Barnabas's Epifi . particu- 
 larly SeSi. 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, \\.) 
 
 I would take this opportunity, to obferve, that 
 the do6trine of types and fymbols, as it has been 
 revived by many moderns, fo has it by fome been 
 upheld with a zeal which, in going beyond the 
 bounds of judgment, has, it may be, done difler- 
 vice to Chriftianity. Let me alk the moft fanguin 
 advocates for fymbols and prefigu rations, how they 
 relifh this mode of fpeculation in the Romanijls^ 
 when, among the arguments which theyadduce in 
 pretended proof of St. Peter's, primacy, they tell 
 us his Ship, out of which the Lord taught the peo- 
 ple, was an emblem or type of the Chriftian 
 Church ? In Ihort, the do6lrine of types in gene- 
 ral is, in my opinion, too often at beft more inge- 
 nious than folid, and has a ftronger foundation in 
 fancy than in fa6l Perhaps the reader may be en- 
 tertained as well as convinced by two or three fe- 
 le6t inftances. The coat of iht Jewijh High-prieft, 
 fays Dr. Lightfooty " fitly refembled Chrift's hu- 
 
 " man 
 f Voflii Notas ad Barnabae Epift. Cathol. 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 321 
 
 *' man nature : firft, as this was of one fluff with- 
 *' out mixture, fo that without fin, &c. fecondly, 
 " as this was put on after an extraordinary manner, 
 " fo Chrifl put on humanity by an extraordinary 
 " conception ; thirdly, as was the edge about the 
 "hole to keep it from rending, fuch was the 
 " unfeparable union of Chrifl's two natures ; 
 " fourthly as were the bells and pomegranates, 
 " fuch were his life and dodrine." Another learn- 
 ed writer, Mr. Mede, fpeaking of the manna and 
 the rock in the wildernejsy which are mentioned 
 by St. Taul as types of Chrifl, i. Cor. 10. v. 3, 4. 
 expatiates in the following words. ** As Manna 
 " came from heaven befide the ordinary courfe 
 " of nature, fo Chrifl's birth was wonderful, &c. 
 " As -Manna was of a mofl fweet tafle, fo is Chrifl 
 " unto the foul, &c. As Manna was of a white co- 
 " lour, fo our Saviour was white and pure. As 
 " Manna before it was eaten was brayed in a mor- 
 " tar, &c. fo was Chrifl our heavenly manna bro- 
 *' ken upon the Crofs, &c. As the rock gave no 
 *' water before it was fmitten with the rod of Mo- 
 *-^ Jes^ fo was Chrifl fmitten upon the Crofs, that 
 " out of him might flow that fovereign flream, 
 " which he who drinketh fhall never th'irft. As the 
 " rock was fmitten with the rod of Mofes, fo was 
 " Chrifl our redeemer with the rod of the Law, 
 " &c. With much more to this effed." Accord- 
 ing to a modern author, Mr. Calcott, the Jewip 
 jjabernacle or temple was a type of the body 
 
 Y of 
 
322 ANNOTATION S. 
 
 of Chrift. The table^ the Jhew-bread, Sec. were 
 all emblematical, and fignificative of the pro- 
 perties, &c. of Je/us Chrijl^ dwelling in a ta^ 
 lernacle offleJJj. The table e. g. was compounded 
 of two forts of materials, wood and gold^ and it 
 was a piece of furniture which exhibited a com- 
 pound perfon, &c -, it was a type of that perfon 
 who fhould be compounded of Jehovah a.nd yidam, 
 God and Man. In Mr. Bates's Faith of the antient 
 yewSy the right ear is made to (land for obedience •, the 
 thumb of the right hand for anions j the great toe of 
 the right foot for ways -, Jhoulder for conjenty &c. For 
 farther fatisfadion the reader may confult, if he 
 pleafes, Lesley^s 'Truth of Chrijiian. Se^. 13. 
 Potter on Ch. Gov. p. 50. Allix's Refe^.p. 232, 
 c?!d vol. 2. p. 182. Pearson on the Cr. p. j6. Bar- 
 row on the Cr. p. 107. 205. See Mede. B. 1. Difc. 
 44. p. 249. LiGHTFOOT. See LANGHORti's Let. be- 
 tween 'Theo. and Conjl, p. 93. Tertul. de Spectal, 
 (. 26. &€. £ffr. 
 
 Page 124. (p) minor authority.] The Epillles 
 from which the extracts are made, (if we except 
 the lad,) have ever been held by the Church in 
 general in the higheft eftimation. They were writ- 
 ten by men who, it is well known, were intimate- 
 ly acquainted with the Apoftles, Polycarp was a 
 difciple of St. John ; and his Epiftle to the Philip- 
 piansj with the firfl: of St. Clement to the Corinthians^ 
 
 were for feveral centuries publickly read in the 
 
 Churches 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 323 
 
 Churches of JJia. * Their authority therefore is 
 little inferior to Apoftolical. 
 
 I will tranfcribe a paffage or two from the 
 ante-nicene fathers, and leave the weight of the 
 whole with the reader. Ekhvov^ kch tov tvo.^ «ut» qov, 
 
 zrv£vf/.a rt ro -nr^o^viTwoi/ o-fCojociS-a, &C, fays 'Jufiin 
 Martyr: Apol. I. C. 6. n^o? aura, x.ai ^»'a'JT« -n-avTa 
 £y£V£TO, fays Atbenagoras, ivoq ovro; m zyxroot; Koci ra 
 q8. ovroq qa iv -nraT^J , xai tiraT^oj iv qw, iuornri xat 
 
 ^uva^tACi 73-v£UjtxaTo?. Legaiio pro Chrif. p. 10. Nothing 
 can be more exprefs, fimple, and unequivocal than 
 thefe declarations. 
 
 And again, in contempt of, or rather in aftonifh- 
 ment at the charge of Atheifm, which the heathens 
 brought againft the firft Chriftians, the fame father 
 
 afks, TJf «v 3>c oiv «7ro^ii(rai, Xsyovrocg Qsov Ylxripa,, xat 
 
 xaA8|!x£va? ; /<^?V. p. 1 1 . 
 
 'Tertullian calls the Holy Ghofl tertium numen 
 
 Divimtaiis, and tertium gradum majejiatis. Irenaus 
 
 calls the Word Dei seternum verbum, -|- and, 
 
 according to him, Jefus Chrift is Filius Dei exijlens 
 
 Jemper apud Pair em. 
 
 It may be proper to take notice in this place, 
 
 that the equality we are contending for is not in 
 
 * See Ch. io. of Wake's Discourse prefixed to his 
 Tranflation of thefe Epiftles. 
 
 f See Stephens's Ser. on the Eter. Genera, who illuf- 
 trates this doftrine by a multitude of teftimonies from p. 
 44. to p. 50. 
 
 Y 2 the 
 
J24 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 the left difturbed by the difagreement betwixt the 
 Greek and Latin Church, with refpedl to the^ro- 
 cejjion of the Holy Ghoft. The do6lrine of the 
 former was, that the Holy Ghoft -proceeds from the 
 Father by the Son, and is the Spirit of the Son ; non 
 ex Filio, fed fpiritum Filii ejfe dicimus, et Patris per 
 Filiura. This dodrine is erroneous indeed, but in- 
 nocently fo. For, as Archbp. Laud^ * and many 
 others have obferved, the queftion, whether the 
 Holy Ghoft proceeds a Filio, or per Filium, is but 
 a queftion in modo loquendi ; a mere diff'erence in 
 words, and affedls not the faith. And therefore I 
 cannot think Bp. 'Taylor argues candidly, or logi- 
 cally, in the following paffage. " The procefllon 
 " of the Holy Ghoft from the Son, which is an ar- 
 ** tide the Greek Church difavows, derives from 
 " the Tradition Apoftolical, as it is pretended ; and 
 " yet before St. Auftin we hear nothing of it very 
 *' clearly or certainly, forafmuch as that whole myf- 
 ** tery concerning the bleffed Spirit was fo little 
 " explicated in Scripture, and fo little derived to 
 *' them by tradition, that till the Council of Nice, 
 " you ftiall hardly find any form of worftiip, or 
 '* perfonal addrefs of devotion to the Holy Spirit, 
 ** as Erafmus obferves, and I think the contrary 
 " will very hardly be verified." J The Holy Ghoft 
 
 * See Laud againft Fifher. p. 24. 
 
 X Bp. Taylor on Lib. of Pro. Sefl. 5. p. go. 
 
 is 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 32$ 
 
 is exprefsly ftyled by St. Peter the Spirit of Chriji 
 which, in the next fentence, is faid to have been/^«/ 
 down from heaven ^ i Pet. i. v. 10, 12. and I take 
 it to be fully as prefumeable that the article of 
 the procejfion in queftion was grounded in the 
 conftrudtion which this pafTage naturally admits, 
 as that it " derived from tradition Apoftoli- 
 cal;" notwithftanding the immaterial difagree- 
 ment above-mentioned. But whether this differ- 
 ence with refped to the mode of procejfton took 
 its rife from different conftrudtion, or from dif- 
 erent tradition, the faith both of the Greek and 
 Latin Church in the third Perfon of the Trinity 
 was flill built on a fure foundation. Eternity 
 of generation, and procefTion, and exiftence, is 
 equally inexplicable ; and though nothing was, or, 
 in the nature of things, could be " explicated in 
 " Scripture" in refped of the whole myftery, yet, 
 I apprehend, enough was revealed. Even if the 
 firft Chriftians had not addreffed the blefled Spirit 
 in any form of devotion at all, this could not have 
 been owing to their want of comprehenfion of the 
 mode oi procejfion, but to their difbelief of his per- 
 fonality, and eternal exiftence. But that the pri- 
 mitive Chriftians, and the ante-nicene fathers be- 
 lieved the perfonality and eternal exiftence of the 
 Spirit^ and confequently his coequality with the 
 Father and the Son^ fufficiently, I truft, appears 
 from the teftimonies produced ; and therefore ad- 
 
 Y 3 mitting 
 
Sz6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 mitting that moft of the prayers of the Church 
 were addreffed to the Father^ and few only to the 
 Son, and fewer to the Holy Ghoji, (which is far from 
 being a matter unaccountable,) we have ample 
 proofs that Chriftians worlhipped " one God in 
 " Trinity, and Trinity in Unity." Erafmus does 
 not venture to affert, that no addreffes were made 
 to the Holy Ghoft ; and, if he had, we might con- 
 front him with the above cited declaration of Jujiin 
 Martyr -, which at leafl fuppofes this Divine Perfon 
 to have been included, and frequently named in the 
 fupplications of the firft Chriftians. Ek^w, vmi tov 
 
 <Ertfp eii/T« q/oj', itrvivixa rt, &C. 
 
 But we are by no means deftitute of antient tef- 
 ti monies to the fame effed. The accounts of the 
 martyrdom of Ignatius and Polycarp conclude with 
 afcriptions of glory, &c. to the Father^ and the 
 Son, and the Holy Ghoji. J The relation of the fuf- 
 ferings of the former clofes with thefe words ; 
 " who trod under foot the Devil, and perfefted 
 *' the courfe he had pioully defined, in Chrift Jefus 
 " our Lord ; by whom, and with whom, all glory 
 " and power be to the Father, with the bleffed Spirit, 
 " for ever and ever." The Epiftle of the Church 
 of Smyrna to the Church of Philadelphia, concern- 
 ing the Martyrdom of Polycarp, concludes as fol- 
 lows : " We wilh you, brethren, all happinefs by 
 
 l See Wake'j Relation of thefe Martyrdoms, p. I37> ^52r 
 
 " livins: 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 327 
 
 ** living according to the rule of the Gofpel of 
 *' Jefus Chrifti with whom glory be to God the 
 " Father, ,and the Holy Spirit, &c." In Clemens 
 of Alexandria there is a prayer and doxology to 
 the Trinity in thefe words : " Be merciful unto thy 
 ** children, O Mailer, O Father, &c ; O Son and 
 " Father, both one; O Lord, grant that we may 
 " pafs the waves of this troublefome world, con- 
 *' tinually praifing and giving thanks to the only 
 ** Father and Son, to the Son and Father, to the 
 " Son our Mailer and Teacher, together with the 
 *' Holy Gboil, altogether one, in whom are all 
 *' things, &c. &c." Add to this, that the doxo- 
 logies in the antient Liturgies were fome of them 
 •expreifed in fuller and ilronger terms than that ufed 
 jn our daily ferviccs. 
 
 It is affirmed by Mr. Lindfey in his Apology^ that 
 the Fathers of the three firil centuries were all 
 what we now call Artans or Sodnians. We might 
 aik this Gentleman in the words of Datban^ &c, 
 jbut on much better grounds, wUt thou put out the 
 eyes of Chriilians ? The afTertion has hardly its 
 fellow in the whole circle of polemical divinity. 
 Let thefe venerable Fathers fpeak for themfelves. 
 I take this opportunity to put the reader in mind 
 of the fame Gentleman's very difingenuous tranfla- 
 tion of that palTage in Jujiin Martyr's dialogue 
 with Trypho, where he tells him, that there were 
 thofe who admitted Chriit to be the MelTiah, tho* 
 
 y 4 the/ 
 
^28 ANNOTATIONS, 
 
 they believed him to be mere man. The whole 
 paffage is perfeftly fcrutinized, and a fhameful 
 bmiflion of Mr. Lind/ey taken notice of in Mr. 
 Bingham'j- Vindication of the Doctrine, &c. of the 
 Church of England^ P- 23, 24, 25. See alfo Dr. 
 Randolph'j- Vindicat. of the 'T'rinity^ part 3, p. 40. 
 and Bp. Bull'j Judic. Ecclef. Cathol. cap. 7mo, 
 where he charges the Remonfirants with mutilating 
 and curtailing ihis very pafiage. With what face 
 will Mr. L. lay Socinianijm^ or Arianijm at the door 
 of Juftin Martyr ? 
 
 The paifage quoted from this father in th6 
 former part of this note is fo ftrong and explicit^ 
 that it probably gave occafion to fome Socinians 
 to aver, that he was the hrll who taught the 
 do6lrine of the Trinity. I laid, Jome Socinians^ be- 
 taufe, as we have already noted, moft Socinians and 
 Socinus himfelf fathers this dodrine upon the Coun- 
 cil of Nice^ with an abfurdity which is expofed at 
 large by Bp. Bull in his Defence of that Council. 
 This duplicity is no fmall argument of Socinian 
 diftrefs. 
 
 Dr. Middleton, in refentment, I prefume, of that 
 cxplicitncfs with which Juflin Martyr in the place 
 referred to, and in many other, afferts the do6lrine 
 of the Trinity, and with a view to counteract it, 
 takes much pains to reprefent his interpretation of 
 Scripture as frequently abfurd, and his dodrine as 
 neither more nor lefs than refined Platonifm. But 
 
 the 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 329 
 
 the unfairnefs, or rather the falfity of both impu- 
 tations has often been fhewn. The triad of Plato^ 
 (whofe admirer, &c. this holy father, it is well 
 known, before his converfion was,) the mundane^ 
 animative, and intelligent nature of God, although 
 it has been mentioned by fome, improperly but hoi- 
 neitly enough, to illuftrate the dodlrine in queftion, 
 with an intention to adapt it in fome degree to our 
 apprehenfions, could not poffibly give rife to it. 
 It is as clear as words can make it, that Jujiin the 
 Martyr was a Trinitarian on principles very dif- 
 ferent from thofe of Jujiin the philojopher. Dr. M. 
 mod uncandidly vilifies the typical and allegorical 
 reprelentations, which occur often in this primitive 
 writer, and in which probably he gratified not fo 
 much his own tafte as that of thofe early ages. 
 
 Dr. JVhitby, in his treatife entitled, An Endea- 
 vour to evince the certainty of Chrifiian faith, 8rc, 
 cites hiftorians of credit, who acquaint us, that 
 when Julianas, defign of falfifying the predictions of 
 our Saviour, by rebuilding the Temple of Jeriifa- 
 km, was defeated by miraculous eruptions of balls 
 of fire, &c, (as the ftory is told by Ammianus Mar- 
 cellinus^ and many others,) almoft all the Jews, who 
 were eye-witneffes of this wonderful fcene, were 
 converted to the Chrifiian Faith, and acknowleged 
 Chrifl to be God. The writers referred to are So- 
 zomen, Nazianzen, and Socrates, and the following 
 pafTage feems to be as plain and decifive as can be 
 
 wifhed. 
 
330 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 wifhed. Ejt rovrtcv ToaroiVTYi ruv opw^i^tcn y(.XTccir}.%^i^y uii 
 
 ^wi/>]?, rov ^^irov oovaaaXu^txi S'foi/, fu^ii^ia.*? tz ■sroXXat? 
 x«j mscTiXi? s^iXxryns^cci. 
 
 It feems evident enough from thefe words, that 
 the Jews who were converted on this occafion, and 
 confequently Chriftians in general, at that time 
 acknowledged Jefus Chrift to be abfolutely God. 
 
 Indeed the truth of this great dodrine is in fome 
 meafure inferrible from the incredibility formerly 
 objedled to it by its adverfaries. KaTaSajvav uq thi/ 
 ynv T»va ^iov, n Qiov q'ov, tout' aip^^irovj fays Celfus ; and 
 J'rypho fpeaks rather refentingly in the following 
 
 words to Jujiin •, ocn-ig-ov ya^ xoci aSvvxrov (ry^iSov -nr^ocy^oc 
 av^puTToq yivear^cci. 
 
 Agreably to this, the fame Trypbo declares, that 
 to aflert Chrift to have been born of a virgin is 
 n^xToT^oynv. Now I defire to afk, whether the doc - 
 trine of a miraculous birth, and bodily appearance 
 of an inferior Deity for any fuppofable purpolie 
 whatever, be not fufficiently reconcileable both 
 with Jewijh and Pagan principles, and with what 
 we know to have been the fentiments of Julian 
 himfelf ? Or, whether we are not in all realbn to 
 look for the chief ground of difference between 
 Jujiin and Trypho in the coequality we are aflert- 
 ing ? This will appear yet more clearly in a fub- 
 fequent note. It is, in Ihort, this equality whic]> 
 
 conftitute4 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 331 
 
 conftituted Juperjiitionis nova genus, as Chriftianity 
 is called by Suetonius in the life of Nero. 
 
 Dr. Willes, in his firft difcourfe, prefixed to Sir 
 Rog. UEJirange's tranflation of Jo/ephus, fays that 
 Pilate wrote to 'Ttberius de Chrifto Deo. But where 
 does he find this } The Ads of Pilate, fo called, 
 are confefTedly fpurious. 
 
 Celsus apud Grig. 1. 4. Justin'j Dial. p. 292. 
 Lactantius. 1. 4. c. 12 and 22. 
 
 Page 125. (q) the Jtheijm.'] The venom of this 
 calumny foon fpent itfelf ; and the honourable and 
 often-noted teftimony of Pliny in his letter to Tra- 
 jan, that the Chriftians were a ftmple and innocent 
 people who worfhipped Chriil as God, at once 
 vindicates their morals, and declares their faith. 
 
 The faft was, the primitive Chriftians, like 
 tiieir immediate predeceffors the Apoftles, were 
 reviled, defamed, and made as the Jilth of the world, 
 and the off-Jcouring of all things \ they were charged 
 with the moft deteftable vices-, with rebellion, mur- 
 der, inceft, &c ; and to free them from thefe in- 
 famous reproaches, was one main bufmefs of the 
 fathers in general, and efpecially of Juflin Martyr^ 
 Athenagoras., and 'Tertullian. 
 
 WhitbyV Endeavour, &c. ch. 8. p. 243. 
 
 Page 126. (rj principles of polytheifm.'\ Hejiod 
 
 makes mention of many thoufand Deities, and 
 
 Varro of three hundred Jupiter S', but both with a 
 
 fefervation of the properties and prerogatives of 
 
 the 
 
33^ ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 the Supreme God. Thefe fubaltern Deities were- 
 fuppofed to adl as his inftruments, and under his 
 drredion. Some of the wifer heathens however 
 were alhamed of this latitudinarian fyftem ; and 
 pretended to refolve their theology into allegory, 
 &c, as Zeno^ Chryftppiis^ and other Stoics ; and phi- 
 lofophers of later date found it neceffary to have 
 recourfe to the fame expedient to elude the charge 
 brought againft the multitude of the heathen Gods 
 by Chriftians. With refped to the Pagan notion of 
 a fubordination of Deities, we may affirm in the 
 words of Dr. Heylin^ that God is not only unusy 
 but unicus, or in the phrafe of Mr. Hooker, that 
 '* our God is one, or rather very onene/sj in which 
 *' eflential unity, fays he, a Trinity perfonal fub- 
 « fifteth." 
 
 It will be well worth remarking, that the doc- 
 trine of the Trinity has often been reprefented as 
 having no little colour or countenance both from 
 Jeivi/h and Pagan principles. iV. Ro/s* in his View 
 of all religioyis, &c. undertakes to {hew, that " the 
 " dodtrjne of the Trinity was not unknown even 
 *' by the light of nature to the Gentile philofo- 
 " phers, poets, &c. Zoroajires, fays he, fpeaks 
 *' of the Father, who, having perfected all things, 
 *' hath delivered them to the fecond Mind, which 
 *' Mind hath received from the Father knowlege 
 
 * See Note at No. 38. 
 
 *' and 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 333 
 
 " and power. Here is a plain tefcimony of the firfl 
 *' and fecond Perfon. Concerning the third, Zoroaf- 
 " tres faith, that the Divine Love proceeded from 
 " the Mind or Intelled ; and what elfe is this Di- 
 *' vine Love but the Holy Ghoft ?" He then pro- 
 ceeds to lay before the reader the principles of the 
 Chaldean Magi, who " acknowleged three begin- 
 " nings, to wit, Ormajes, MitriSi and Ariminisy 
 " i. e. God, the Mind, and Soul." He obferves that 
 ** Pythagoras was not ignorant of this myftery, 
 " when he placed all perfedion in the number 
 "Three, and made Love the original of all 
 " things." He gives us the fentiments of Zeno^ 
 Socrates, Numenius^ Plotinus, and many others, 
 " who write very plainly of the Hypofiafes, &c, fo 
 " that no Chrijlian can write more fully ^'' 
 
 Let us hear now what a much better known, 
 and an univerfally admired author has to offer upon 
 the fame argument. From the three divine attri- 
 butes of infinite Goodnefs, Wifdom, and Power, 
 the Pythagoreans and Platonifis feem to have framed 
 their 'Trinity of what Dr. Cudworth calls Archichal 
 Hypojiajes : to which he fuppofes Arijiotle may be 
 thought to allude in the following paffage in his 
 book de calo. 1. i. c. i. xcc^aTTB^ yx^ (pcca-i (the Py- 
 thagoreans) to ttccv yicci TO. 'stocvto, toi? T^itrt cJ'iw^tat. 
 
 In another place, this learned author gives us to 
 underlland, that Zoroajlres, and the ancient Magi 
 acknowleged the Supreme Deity under the different 
 
 names 
 
334 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 names of Mithras and Oromafius j which Mithras 
 was commonly called T^r/rXao-io? or three-fold. This, 
 it feems, J. Vojfms would refer to the three hypoj- 
 tajes in the Deity, agreeably to the Chriftian theo- 
 ry : but Cudworth thinks it to be more conform- 
 able to the Pythagoric or Platonic hypothefis of 
 three diftindt fubftances fubordinate to each other. 
 This writer obferves elfewhere, that Pagan theo- 
 logy in general maintained a trinity of univerfal 
 principles, or Divine hypojiajes fubordinate -, the to 
 aya^ov^ or TO EN called o tt^otoc-^s o? •, and NOT2 or 
 intelle6t, o Ss-jts^oc, the fecond God ; and the mun- 
 dane Soul, or animated world, t^itoc 3-£o?, the third 
 God. According to the fame author, the Crocodile 
 was a fymbol of the firfl God of the iEgyp- 
 tians ; " an animal which when in the water fees 
 " without being feen : ** and among the fame 
 people a winged globe with a ferpent springing out 
 of it^ was the Hieroglyphic of a triform Deity, 
 or Trinity of Divine Hypojiafes. By the globe 
 was fignified the firll incomprehenfible Deity, 
 without beginning or end, felf-exiftent, Src; by 
 the Serpent y the Divine wifdom and creative vir- 
 tue ; and by the wings^ that adive Spirit which 
 quickens, enlivens, and cherijQies all things. 
 
 Let us fee now what was the theology oi Julian, 
 and the htter Plato?iiJls. This famous Apoftate main- 
 tained, that the inferior Gods were minifters of a 
 fupreme God. He afferted, that this Supreme God, 
 or firft Deity, and fountain of all things, produced 
 
 from 
 
ANNOTATrONS. 335 
 
 from himfelf, an eternal mind, and a corporeal, or > 
 ''^ fenfible animated Sun," as a great God in the 
 vifible world. The latter Platonijisy in oppoficion 
 to Chriftianity, held, that before the Trinity there 
 was another fupreme and higheft Hypojlafts^ exifl- 
 ing and remaining in the JoUtude of his own unity ^ 
 as Dr. Cudworth literally tranflates the words of 
 Jamhlicus. This muft at lead be allowed to be 
 language fomewhat more intelligible than that of 
 thofe old Platonijis who taught, that there is a 
 fubftance, a principle " in the order of nature fu- 
 perior to intelle6l." They fuppofe this firft and 
 higheft principle of all, to be, by reafon of its 
 abfolute and tranfcendent perfedlion, not only 
 above underftanding, knowlege, and reafon, but 
 above efience itfelf j which, by the way, was the 
 herefy of yf, Joachim^ condemned by the fourth 
 Lateran Council. Our Author very juftly calls this 
 vifionary doctrine myjierious Atheijm -, and it feems 
 to have been adopted by that fantaftic heretic Va- 
 lentinus^ whofe thirty Gods, ox JEons^ were the pro- 
 duction or offspring of a felf-originated Deity, 
 whom he calls Bythus, or Bu3-o?, i. e. unfathomable 
 profundity ; or, according to fome, of profundity 
 andfilence. Even the theory of //^<?^, whether li- 
 terally, or phyfiologically underftood, is much 
 more agreeable to truth, and the Mo/aic hiftory. 
 This old bard makes Chaos, and Earth, and Tar- 
 taruSf ind Love, the principles of all things. {Theo^ 
 
 gon 
 
336 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 gon. V. ii6. and/eq.) In fhort, the philofophy we 
 have been juft fpeaking of abfolutely refines away- 
 all religion, and the very belief of a God •, becaufc 
 Divinity in the abftradt can no more be faid to 
 produce, to adl, or to govern, &c. than wijdom 
 can be faid to be wijey or motion to tnove. 
 
 At beft, little folid or confiftent can be extradbed 
 from this medley of principles ; and if we iinder- 
 ftand by a 'Trinity ^ what in reafon we ought to un- 
 derftand by it, viz. a 'Trinity of three efficient, livings 
 intelligent Perjons, the Jovereign caufes and rulers of 
 all things y (to ufe the words of a learned J writer,) 
 we fliall look in vain for fuch a doftrine properly 
 and precifely taught before the epoch of Chrifti- 
 anity. It is certain, the antient Pagan Theology 
 derived partly from tradition, and partly from Ju- 
 daijm. In the doftrines of the latter we are to look 
 for the rife and foundation of the principal tenets 
 of the Philofophers whofe names have been men- 
 tioned •, of whom fome are known to have had 
 communications with the Jezvs, What then were 
 the fentiments of thefe defcendants of Abraham 
 heretofore with refpedt to the great dodrine before 
 us ? The quellion is a material one ; and, unlefs 
 I greatly miftake, the folution of it will terminate 
 in a very fatisfadlory conclufion. 
 
 Chriftian writers differ but little in what they 
 
 X See Extraft from an anonymous Author quoted by Dr. 
 Randolph in his Vindica. p^ 51. &c. 
 
 have 
 
ANNOTATIONS. ^37 
 
 have advanced upon this head. To take a few of 
 them as they fall in our way. Wollehius lays down 
 the following principle as an indubitable one. Etfi 
 Veteris T^eftamenti tempore doSlrina S. S. 1'rinitatis 
 obfcurior fueritt non t amen plane ignota fuit. He then 
 quotes the firfl: Chap, of Genefts, and other paf- 
 fages in the Old Teftament, in common with other 
 authors, in fupport of his pofition, or his Canon, 
 as he calls it, and finifhes the paragraph in the fol- 
 lowing words ; qu<£ tejiimonia tametft pertinaces Ju- 
 dai eludere Jatagimty Chriftiana tamen menti fatisfa- 
 ciunt. The learned Dr. Lightfoofs, fentiments on 
 this fubjed, which Mr. Parkhurji has adopted, 
 or rather with particular warmth efpoufed, are as 
 follows. 
 
 " The very firfl: thing, fays he, that is taught 
 " in all the Bible * is this very myftery.'* God 
 created; God, i. e. the Word /aid ; and the Spirit, 
 i. e. the Holy Ghofl: moved. " So Mofes alfo when 
 " he is to teach concerning the creation of man, he 
 " firfl: teacheth that it was the Trinity that created 
 " him. And God Jaid^ Let us make man after our 
 " image. He faith Let us, to fhew the Trinity of 
 " Perfons j and he faith in our image, not in our 
 *' itnages, to lliew the unity of eflence." The Tri- 
 nity is fuppofed by Dr. L. to be declared in many 
 places ; even at v. 4. of Deut. 6. Hear, O IJrael, 
 the Lord, our God, the Lord is one. Dr. L. gives 
 
 * See Genefis i. i, 2, 3, &c. 
 
 Z this 
 
338 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 this as the true reading, which, fays he, " teaches 
 *' the Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity* 
 " Three words anfwer the three Perfons, and the 
 " middle word our God, deciphering fitly the Se- 
 " cond, who aflumed our nature." This learned 
 writer fuppofes the fame myllery to be imported 
 in the following among many other texts. Exo. 24- 
 V. 6. I/a. 6. V. 3. Pfalms 50. v. i. 136. v. i, 2, 3. 
 Indeed, Jefus Chrift is by the almoft unanimous 
 fuffrage of writers the Jehovah of the Old Tefta- 
 ment. The Jngel of the Covenant, the Angel who 
 appeared to Mojes at the bujh, the chief of the 
 Angels who were entertained by Abraham, &c, is 
 o-enerally fuppofed to have been the Second Perfon 
 in the f Trinity. A fenfible writer endeavours to 
 prove, that the do6trine of the Trinity is contained 
 in the Law^ and that it is in fad acknowleged and 
 afierted by the Jewifto Rabbies, by Fhilo and Mai^ 
 monides, &c. The Jewijh Cabalifis, fays he, " dif- 
 " tinguifh God into three Lights; and fomeof them 
 " call them by the fame names, as the Chriftians, 
 « of the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ; 
 *' and yet fay that this does not at all break the 
 " Unity of God. Your famous Fhilo, fays he, ex- 
 " preffes the fame in many places." And he produ- 
 ces a confiderable number of inftances, by which it 
 appears that this celebrated Rabbin at leaft lays 
 
 f See particularly Allix. Bull, Justin Martyr. 
 Iren^us, and Tertullian. 
 
 himfelf 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 339 
 
 himfelf open to the attacks of every Chriftian 
 adverfary. 
 
 To the fame eflfed Dr. Randolph quotes a re- 
 markable palTage from Eiijeh'ms^ in which it is ob- 
 ferved, that, according to the dodlrine of the Jews^ 
 *' there is, after the Effence of God, &c, a prin- 
 " ciple begotten of no other but the Father, beino- 
 *^ firfb- begotten, &c, being the image of God, the 
 " power of God, the wifdom of God, and the word 
 " of God ; the true light, the Sun of right eQiifnefs^ 
 
 There are two ftriking pafiages, the one in the 
 book of Proverbs^ and the other in the apocryphal 
 book entitled the Wifdom of Solomon, which have 
 been pretty generally confidered as delignative of 
 the Second Perfon in the Chriftian Trinity. 7 was 
 Jet up from everlafling, or ever the earth was. When 
 he prepared the heavens, I was there ; when he ap- . 
 pointed the foundations of the earth, then was I by 
 him, as one brought up with him, t^c. (Pro v. ?. v. 
 2,2. &c.) When all things were in quiet filence, thine 
 Almighty Word leapt down from heaven out of thy 
 royal throne, &c, &c. (Wifd. 18. v. 15. &c.) 
 
 The anonymous Author of the teftaments of 
 the tv/elve Patriarchs, (who, as Dr. Grabe fuppofes, 
 wrote at the latter end of the fecond century,) 
 makes every one of them foretell the coming of 
 the Mcfliah, and moft of them, in the plaineft 
 terms, the incarnation of the Son of God, or ra- 
 ther fimply of God. 
 
 Z 2 All 
 
340 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 All this put together, intricate or incoherent as 
 it may appear, will be thought moft clearly to im- 
 port a Trinity of fome kind in the Godhead ; and 
 we may accordingly difcern in a moment wherein 
 lies the precife difference between the Pagan^ the 
 Jewijh^ the Arian, and the true Chrillian theory. 
 By the hypothefis of each of the three former, the 
 Supreme God neither is nor can be more than One 
 Ferfon -, by that of the latter, the Deity confifts of 
 three Perfons and one undivided effence. This as 
 manifeftly refills the idea of dependence and infe- 
 riority, as the other is compatible with it, or ra- 
 ther, under the notion of a Trinity, fuppofes it. 
 In Ihort, it will, I prefume, be no eafy matter to 
 fay what objeftion of weight Jews, and Gentiks, 
 Pythagoreans i and Platonifts, could have made to 
 the Gofpel, what obftacle there was to their be- 
 coming obedient to the faith without delay ^ except that 
 the univerfally adopted principle of Subordina- 
 tion was fuperfeded, and effedtually deflroyed by 
 the peculiarly Chrillian dotlrine of Equality. 
 
 Perhaps I Ihall be thought to take upon me 
 here the charader of Moderator in the difpute be- 
 tween Mr. Parkhurji and Dr. Priefily. I had no 
 fuch intention. But if what has been offered does 
 not exadlly coincide with the notions of the for- 
 mer, it will at lead in the refuit be fubverfive of 
 the principles of tiie latter. The Chrillian doflrine 
 of an equal Trinity will be eltablifhed by the ac- 
 
 knowlegement 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 341 
 
 knowlegement of a plurality of any kind, refpeding 
 the Godhead, by Jews, antient, or modern, or both. 
 With regard to the notions of Philo, &c, fee 
 Howes' J Remarks in Vindication of the antient Fa- 
 thers &c. p. 41, 42, and feq. 
 
 It is obfervable, in conformity herewith, that 
 the Fathers in general confider the do6trine of the 
 Trinity, in the fenfe of the Catholic Church, as 
 that which charadleriftically difcriminates Chrifti- 
 anity both from Judaifm and Heathenifm. With 
 refped to the former, 'Tertullian has thefc remark- 
 able words j Judaic ,£ fidei efi res^fic unum Deum cre- 
 dere, ut Filium adnumera re ei nolis, et poji Filium^ 
 Spiritum. ^nd enim erit inter nos et illos niji differentia 
 ijia ? ^od opus Evangelii ? ^i^e ejijubjlantia Novi 
 Tejiamenti, Jiatuens Legem et Prophetas ujque ad 
 Johannem, fi non exinde Pater, Filius, et Spiritus, 
 tres creditij unum Deum ftfiunt ? 
 
 Hooker'j Ecclef. Pol. p. A. RossV View of all 
 Ret. Se5f. -j.p. 1S5. C UDWORT H* s Intell. Syf.p. 206. 
 WoLLEBius'j Compen. 1'heol. I. i. c. 1. p. 15. 
 LiGHTFOOT on Gen. i. Stackhouse'j Hifi. of Bib, 
 Ch. I. p. 223. Bp. Andrews'j Le^. p. 552. 
 Lowth'^ Dire5f. for reading S. S. p. 68, 69. See 
 Patrick^ Notes at Exod. 3. v. 14. 6. v. 3. 
 18. V. 2. Tertull. adv. Prax. c. 31. See -Mr. 
 ParkhurstV 'Tra^t on the Divinity, ^c. of our 
 Lord from p. i. top. 46. See^oHES. Chap. 3. Se5l. 
 I, 2, 3. See Patrick on Gen. i. v. 26. Leslie'/ 
 
 Z 3 Short 
 
342 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Short Method with the Jews .^.88. Randolph*/ Vin- 
 dica. of the 'DoBrine of the Trinity, pt. i. p. 2i. 
 Grabe'j Note at Se5l. 2, c. 3. o/Bull'j Defenfe. 
 
 Page 129. (s) Son of Mary. ^ Nothing can be 
 more ridiculous than the Mahometan notions re- 
 fpefting tlie birth of our Saviour. Mary is fup- 
 pofed to have conceived by the breath of Gabriel. 
 Yet in the nineteenth Chapter of the Koran, the 
 following inconfiftent and impious expreflions are 
 put into the mouth of the Deity himfelf. We Jent 
 our Spirit Gabriel to Mary in the fhape of a perfe^ 
 man. 
 
 Mr. Sale obferves, that Mahomet\ account of 
 the delivery of Mary is like the fabulous one of 
 Latona. Both, it feems, were delivered by z. palm- 
 tree ; and in the womb of the latter Apollo fpoke, 
 as in that of the former, fay fome, did Jefus. Pof- 
 fibly this may be a refinement upon the Koratp 
 itfelf ; or upon the circumftance of the babels leap- 
 ing in the womb of Elifabeth. Luke i. 41. 
 
 See Sale's Note at Ch. 19, of the Koran. 
 
 Page 131. (t) God is one God.] It is the tenet of 
 all true Muffulmenj fays the author of Mahometi/m 
 explained, that the moit abandoned fmners that 
 ever exifted fhall be faved, " provided they fhall 
 " once during their lives have teftified the Unity 
 " of God, by pronouncing that fundamental ar- 
 " tide of the MuJJulman belief, there is no God but 
 f' Allah, and Mahomet is his JpoJileJ' This, 
 
 I con- 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 343 
 
 I conceive, muft be underftood with lome reftric- 
 tion, and fuppoles no apoftacy fubfequent to the 
 atteftation in queftion. For the famous Mahometan 
 Do<5lor, Algazali^ in his comment on thefe two 
 capital articles of their faith, delivers himfelf in 
 the following words. He /hall alfo believe that they 
 that confejs dne God Jhall at length go out of the fire ^ 
 after they have underwent the punifhment due to their 
 fins ; Jo that by the favourable mercy of God-, no per- 
 Jon fhall remain in hell who acknowleged the Unity of 
 the Godhead. 
 
 The firft Mujfulmen gloried in the title of Unita- 
 rians upon every occafion. Some of them carried 
 their zeal for the grand article of their religion to 
 a degree of favage ferocity. We have a notable 
 example of this in the hiftory of the Saracens. At 
 the fiege of Damafcus^ in the reign of Omar^ the 
 fecond Caliph after Mahomet, Ahu-Obeidah^ the com- 
 mander of the Saracen army, had granted quarter 
 to certain citizens •, which was a piece of lenity fo 
 exafperating to Derar^ an officer of very high 
 rank, as to draw from him a declaration, fecpnded 
 by the folemnity of an oath, that, for his part, he 
 would never have mercy upon any that Jaid that God 
 had ajony and joined a partner with God. 
 
 We learn from the anonymous author of Four 
 T'reatijes, &c, (who allures us he derives his au- 
 thorities from writers of the firft clafs,) that the 
 Mahometans carry this unitarian principle with them 
 
 Z 4 literally 
 
344 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 literally to their graves. His account of their fu- 
 neral folemnities is entertaining enough ; but the 
 following are the only particulars with which we 
 are at all concerned. At the interment of a Muf- 
 Julman the Muezzin, or Cryer, mufl go before the 
 corps, reciting with a loud voice, there is no God 
 hui very God. At the clofe of the whole ceremony, 
 the defunft is addreficd by the prieft in thefe words. 
 Be mindful of the covenant with which thou haji gone 
 out of this world ; bearing witnejs that there is no God 
 hut very God alone, and that Mahomet is his prophet, 
 and that Paradife is for certain, and fire for certain, 
 and the reJurreSlion for certain -, &c, &c. 
 
 How fhail we reconcile all this with Mr. Lockers 
 aflertion, that " to the light which the Meffiah 
 " brought into the world with him, we muft afcribe 
 *' the owning and profeflion of one God, which 
 " the Mahometan religion hath derived and bor- 
 " rowed from it." Strange afTertion ! The Ma- 
 hometan faith is this, that there is one Perfon in 
 the Godhead -, the Catholic faith is this, that there 
 are three Perfons in one Godhead. Remove this 
 difference -, and you will make a confiderable breach 
 in the middle wall of partition between the two re- 
 ligions. {See Difc. Ath. /ub fin.) 
 
 Reajonab. of Chrifiianity. ^.86. Comment prefixed 
 to the id. Vol. of Ockley'j Hifiory of the Saracens. 
 OokleyV Hift. of the Saracens, Vol. i.^. 227, 134- 
 
 ^reati/e 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 345 
 
 ^reatije concerning the 'furktjh Liturgy, p. 139, 142. 
 
 Page 132. (v) Papal innovation.'] The Arians 
 in Polandy loon after the Reformation., moft: ridicu- 
 loufly attempted to reprefent the doftrine of the 
 Trinity as the moft anti-chriftian of all corruptions 
 in the Church of Rome -, and would have fain had 
 it believed, that Providence permitted the Pope to 
 wear a triple crown, as a mark denoting him to be 
 a maintainer of that doctrine. 
 
 See Hooker'j Ecclef. Pol. B.^.p. 142. 
 
 Page 144. (u) tables of man's heart,] Burla^ 
 maque^ in his book entitled Principles of natural and 
 politic Law ^ obferves fomewhere, that " moral 
 " maxims or aftions are as certain, as much dic- 
 " tated by pure reafon, as phyfical, or mathema- 
 " tical ones." That the Creator, e. g., fays he, is 
 to be worlhipped &c, by the creature, is as felf- 
 evident as that the whole is greater than its parts. 
 Bp. Cumberland calls the Law of nature immutable, 
 eternal, and univerfal. J I cannot think Bp. 'Taylor 
 expreffes himfelf with accuracy, and much lefs 
 with true cafuiftical precifion, in the following 
 paffage extraded by Dr. W. Lowth from the Du5for 
 Dubitantium. '* If we be fent to read the laws of 
 " nature in the tables of our own hearts, where 
 " fome things are difordered by pafllon, many more 
 
 X DifTertation on the Law of Nature, p. 8g. 
 
 " are 
 
3^6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " are written by intereft ; fome are indited by 
 " cuftom, and others imprinted by education ; and 
 *' amongil feveral men thele are the authors of con- 
 " trary infcriptions •, I fay, if we have no better 
 '* director than this, whereby to fquare our actions, 
 " we fhall find ourfelves at a lofs for the managino^ 
 " our behaviour in fome of the weightieft concerns 
 " of life." The infcriptions of paflion, intereft, 
 and cuftom, &c, are not thofe original impreffions 
 which are ftill legible, and fufficiently diftinguifli- 
 able by a candid and inquifitive mind. The law of 
 nature, abftradedly confidered, is ftill what Bp. 
 Cumberland calls it. 
 
 That obnoxioufnefs to error from which men of 
 the brighteft parts, and the greateft profefTional 
 abilities, are not exempt, is to writers in general 
 at once an encouraging and an humbling circum- 
 ftance. 
 
 The corruption of human reafon, and the igno^ 
 ranee and error incident to our underftandings, 
 " has, fays a moft excellent author, given manifold 
 " occafion for the benign interpofition of Divine 
 " Providence, which in compaflion to the frailty, 
 " the imperfeftion, and the blindnefs of human 
 " reafon, hath been pleafed at fundry times, and in 
 " divers manners, to difcover and enforce its laws 
 " by an immediate and dire6l Revelation. The 
 *' dodrines thus delivered we call the revealed or 
 ** Divine law, and they are to be found only in the 
 
 *' Scriptures, 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 347 
 
 Scriptures. Thefe precepts when revealed are 
 found upon companion to be really a part of 
 the original law of nature, as they tend in all 
 their confequences to man's felicity. But we are 
 not from hence to conclude, that the knowlege 
 of thefe truths was attainable by reafon in its 
 prefent corrupted flate ; fmce we find that, until 
 they were revealed, they were hid from the wif- 
 dom of ages. As then the moral precepts of 
 this law are indeed of the fame original with 
 thofe of the law of nature, fo their intrinfic ob- 
 ligation is of equal ftrength and perpetuity. Yet 
 undoubtedly the revealed law is of infinitely 
 more authenticity than that moral fyftem which 
 is framed by ethical writers^ and denominated 
 the natural law. Becaufe one is the law of na- 
 ture, exprefsly declared fo to be by God him- 
 felf ; the other is only what, by the affiftance of 
 human reafon, we imagine to be that law. If 
 we could be as certain of the latter as we are of 
 the former, both would have an equal authority; 
 but till then they can never be put in any com- 
 petition. Municipal law is a rule of civil con- 
 du6V. This diftinguifhes municipal law from 
 the natural, or revealed ; the former of which is 
 the rule of moral condu6t, and the latter not 
 only the rule of moral condudt, but alfo the 
 rule of faith."* 
 * See Commen. on the Laws of England. Sed. 2. p. 42. 
 
 Thefe 
 
348 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Thefe periods feem to have flipped from the 
 pen. The Scriptures are the Revelation of divine 
 or fupernatural truths, but of the " original law of 
 *' nature" they are only the revival, or republica- 
 tion. They plainly declare that to be the will of 
 God which, in the times of ignorance and corrup- 
 tion, might rather be faid to have been obtruded 
 upon the world, than recommended to it, as the 
 will of God, by the philofophers •, they teach that 
 by authority which, before, reafon only diftated, 
 or opinion efpoufed ; fo that now every fpecies of 
 immorality is totally without excufe. Properly 
 fpeaking, it is not the Divine Will, but the Divine 
 Nature, *' which was *' hid from the wifdom of 
 " ages." For though we have in Scripture only 
 the Jure word of morality, yet Socrates y PlatOy and 
 Tully, as far as they taught truly, taught the mora- 
 lity of Scripture. In a word. Revelation is necef- 
 arily the rule of conduft, but direftly and imme- 
 diately the rule of faith. 
 
 The pafTagcs juft cited interfered with the argu- 
 ment before me •, and I am happy in the opportu- 
 nity hereby given me to acknowlege my obligations 
 to a learned and fincere friend, and to teftify my 
 high refpeft for the name and memory of Sir W, 
 Blackstone. 
 
 Page 144. (w) earnejily inculcated.'] See Grot. 
 /. 4. 12. TuLL. de Nat. Deo, I. 2 — 25. De Leg. I. 1. 
 II. Be Off. I. 1 — 3. FzviS.Sat. 2. v. 6g. Xeno. 
 ]\/Icmo. I. i._p. 571. Potter V Greek Jntiq. VoL i. 
 
 B, 2. 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 349 
 
 B. 2. ch,$. Plato V ^Ici. and Plvtakch*s Injii. La- 
 con. CiC'E'SiO fro domo fua^ apud Pontif. TuLL.de 
 Leg. 1.2 — 7. DeDivinat. i — 51 — 57. Fragmen. Vet, 
 Poet. p. 60. TuLL. de Nat. Deo. I. 3 — ;^5. i^scHY- 
 Lus'j Perjtf. V, 293. EuRiPiDEsV Hecuba, v. 954, 
 Baccha. v. 70. SophoclesV^'^a:. 1;. i 18 et/eq. ^s- 
 CHYLv s,^s Prom. Vine. v. 1073. EuRip.Or^. 1;. 821, 
 Ph^nijf. V. 1206. Androm. 851. Tufc. ^ajl. I. 2. 
 -y. 21. Fragmen. Vet. Poet. p. 24,96. &c, &c, &c* 
 See particularly the works of Epitletiis and M, 
 Antoninus. It has been indeed, and is often alledeed, 
 
 CD ' 
 
 that both thefe authors borrowed, or rather ftole 
 the beft of their philofophy from the documents of 
 Chriflianity. But, admitting the truth of the al- 
 legation, they adopted thefe principles as fit and 
 right, and as perfeftly agreable to human reafon ; 
 which is quite enough for our purpofe. It is not 
 at all material to knov/, whether, or how far, thefe, 
 or any other philofophers, were really indebted to 
 Revelation. 
 
 Many writers, with a laudable defire to extol 
 Chriftianity, have reprefented in a very itrong light 
 the imperfeftion and infufficiency of heathen 
 Morals, and drawn at full length, and in the 
 moft lively colours, the errors and impurities of 
 Paganifm -, but all this in manifeft confiflence 
 with what has been advanced. 
 
 See particularly Lowth'j Dire^. for reading the 
 
 Scrip. 
 
350 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Scrip,Cb.B.p. 129. 10. p. 183, &c. andWHiTSY'j 
 Endeavour, p. 10. 
 
 Page 155. C^'J ^^^ Greek Drantatijis. The true 
 God mufl ultimately be underftood by the ■srarr)^ 
 oA/^w T£ 0£wv Tf &c. oi Homer y the Divum Pater j &c. 
 of Virgil; the Siimmus Deoriim o^ Ovid; the rc/;?- 
 »^«;zzV conditor of 'Juvenal; and by him, as //o- 
 
 t/w^^- »// »z<3;«j generatur ipfo \ 
 
 Nee viget quicquam ftmile aut Jecundum. 
 
 N^evius^ according to Varro, calls Jupiter Patrem 
 
 Optimum^ Supremum, et Summum. 'O i-m. ztxcti be 
 
 alove all, is Porphyry's defcription of the Deity. 
 Prometheus, in MJchylus, calls Jupiter, though in- 
 folcntly and in defianccj tov x^aravr ««. v. ^'i,^. And 
 in the Supplices of the fame author he is llyled 
 aiwvo? y-^tm dTrx-jfH ; which are almoft Ifaiah\ own 
 words according to Bp. Lowth^ tranflation. q. v. 
 V. 584. See Ifaiah 9. 6. There is a fine paffage in 
 the Antigone of Sophocles which reprefcnts Jupiter 
 as neither Jlumhering nor jleeping, * and as fubjedt 
 to no infirmity, or decay. See v. 612. etfeq. The 
 fovereign independence of the Deity, the unfearch- 
 ablenefs of his counfels, and the {lability of his de- 
 crees, are ftrongly expreffed in the following places. 
 See Homer. II. I. i. v. 5. JEJchylus'^ Supplices. v. 
 1056. 600. Prome. Vinci, v. 50. Agamem. v. 1496. 
 
 * Pialm 121. V. 3, 4. 
 
 The 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 351 
 
 The Chain m Homer, II. 8. v. 19. &c, has been 
 remarked on by many writers ; and the fubfervi- 
 ency of all things, pafl, prefent, and to come, to 
 the Divine will and pleafure, is exprefsly declared 
 in the continuation of the pafTage above referred 
 to in Sophocles : 
 
 To, r iTTBirocj >tat to [j.iXXov, 
 
 Kai TO TT^lV (.TTXPVACTH. Vtd.jwpr. 
 
 The fpirituality of the Divine Being is exprefled 
 by Plato^ Anaxagoras, Ariftotle^ and others, under 
 the term ^a? •, by Cicero^ and the Latin writers, by 
 that of Mens, The divina ■particula aura of Horace^ 
 x\\e cetherius Jenfus of Virgil, the animus as contra- 
 diftinguifhed from the anima of Juvenal, &c, &c, 
 unqueftionably refer us to the fpiritual creator. 
 'Tully, we know, delights in this argument, and 
 handles it In a thoufand places. In one particu- 
 larly, he afferts, " Nihil ab optimo et pr^eftan- 
 tifTimo genitore, animo melius procreatum ;" and 
 in another, he fpeaks the very language of Re- 
 velation itfelf. " Dei, fays he, Imago qusdam 
 " ANIMUS eft; ex ipfoDEodelibata ac profe6i:a."J: 
 
 The omnifcience, the omniprefence, i' the invifi- 
 bility, and the incomprehenfible nature of the 
 Deity, are fet in a very ftrong light by Pagan 
 writers. Ta/Zy, in his book de natura Deorum, cites 
 Pythagoras affirming, Beum ejfe animum per naturam 
 
 X Timxus. Fragmen. Sec. 8. Confola. Tub fin. 
 f See Virgil, ^n. 1. 6. v. 724. Geor. 4. v. 221. 
 
 rerum 
 
352 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 rerum omnium commeantem. I. i. lO. Seneca^ (-^takAng 
 of God, fays, ^locunque te flexeris^ ibi ilium videbis 
 cccurrentem tibi ; and Plautus fays finely, EJiprofe£fo 
 DeuSi qui qu^e nos gerimus audit que et videt. The 
 Greek Dramatifls are very clear and explicit under 
 thefe articles. In a fragment of Euripides one fays, 
 
 O^vg ^iw o(p^o<.X^oi; ra, ts-ocvt i§nv ; which, as Mr. 
 
 Barnes obferves, is exadly parallel with Hejiod's, 
 
 UtxvTot, i^(t)v Aiog oipS'aAju.of, xoci -urocvTa vo-ncrag.* Of all 
 
 the heathens Plato perhaps had the moft exalted 
 fentiments, and, as a learned author exprefles it, 
 *' came nearefl; to the truth," He was indeed con- 
 verfant in the Jewijh Law to fuch a degree as to be 
 defcribed under the char after of Mo/es fpeaking 
 Greeky according to the fame author's obfervation 
 from Eujebius and others. He calls God Ayiju-ia^-yo?, 
 and emphatically the ro ov. Origen cites this remark- 
 able exprefTion from him, which is produced by 
 
 Grotius i yiira, y.sv Ajo? iijW.a?, «AAo» ^£ ustoc oiXXuv 
 
 But, it may be, this eulogy is premature. " In 
 " the facred commjcntary of the Perfian rites, the 
 " following words, fays Sir Ifaac Newton^ are af- 
 " cribed to Zoroajlres .'^ O 0£o? sn x^^aAnv i-)(j^v is^cc- 
 ycog. srog e^iv o zspwroq^ cc(p3'a.^Togy cciSiog, ayivmogy afAisvigj 
 avoiJi,oioroi,Togy rivio^og Tj^avrog xaAa, at5'wooJ'i3>:»TO?, ccya^uv 
 ayaS'WTaTOf, (pPovifAUV (ppovifj^ocrxrog. £r* ^^ >t«t Trotrvp 
 
 * See Traga^d. Incer. v. 8. and Barnes's Note. See Ibid. 
 V. 335- 
 
 * ' Bvvo(ji.iot.g 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 3^3 
 
 X«o?, &C. 
 
 " This, fays he, was the antient God of the 
 *« Per/tan Magi.'' The fame great author acquaints 
 us, thati^7?^^i, father of Darius, was co-founder 
 of the religion of the Pe?'Jian empire with ZoroaJ- 
 tres J which religion, fays he, " was compofed 
 *' partly of the inflitutions of the Chaldaansy in 
 *' which Zoroajires was well flcilled •, and partly 
 " of the inftitutio.is of the antient BrachmanSy who 
 " are fuppofed to derive even their name from the 
 " Abrahamansy or fons of Abraham, born of his fe- 
 " cond wife Keturah, and inftru6ted by their father 
 '* in the worfhip of One God, without images, 
 &c.'* (See l>i EWT on' s Cbronol. Cb. 6- p' 350,2^1.) 
 
 One is almoft afraid to fay, this confummate 
 Philofopher could himfelf be miftaken in this or in 
 any matter 5 could pofTibly be liable to the weak- 
 nefs of inadvertence, or the littlenefs of prepoflef- 
 fion. Yet the author of the Effay on Spirit 
 makes ufe of Sir. If, Newton's words when he de- 
 clares, that God is a relative term, which has re- 
 ference tojubje^ls. Surely it has been obferved with 
 great truth, that of all terms the term God is per- 
 haps the moft abfolute. It is the name of the Su- 
 preme, felf-exiftent Being, independently on ten 
 thoufand creations. We know not wherein the 
 eflential happinefs of the Deity confifts j but we 
 know that the mere produdion of worlds contri- 
 A a butes 
 
354 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 butes nothing to it. It is true, God is our Crea- 
 tor, our King, our Father, &c; but does he ftand 
 related to us under thefe charafters by necefTity, or 
 by bounty of grace ? We worfliip him as our 
 Maker, we honour him as our Sovereign, we fear 
 him as our Judge, we love him as our Father, &c, 
 Sec ; but before the great day of univerfal manifef- 
 tation we fhall not Jee him., and even then moft 
 probably fhall but imperfectly y^^ him as he is. 
 
 Page 1 60. (y) proof upon proof. 1 The refine- 
 ments of learned men have differved the caufe they 
 wifhed ^promote. According to the traditions of 
 the Chinefej as European mifTionaries have repre- 
 fented them, Confucius^ their great philofopher, 
 who lived above five hundred years before Chrifl, 
 ufed often to fay, // is in the Wefi that the true 
 Saint is to be founds and even before him it was 
 a faying of Laokun, that eternal reafon produced^ 
 ONE ; ONE produced TWO ; TWO produced three ; 
 and THREE produced all things. How far the con- 
 clufion oiSimplicius's comment upon EpiBetus may 
 deferve more attention, I will not determine. It 
 is to be found in Dr. Cave's Prim. Chrijlian. being 
 a prayer " in which mention is made of three Per- 
 " fops, the Lord, (or Father j) the Saviour, (or 
 " Chrifl;) and the Itgbt of truth;" which even in 
 Scripture, f^iys Dr. C, is " a common periphrafis 
 of the Holy Spirit." If we may believe Socrates 
 in his Eccleiiaflical Hiilory, (as the fame author 
 
 refers 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 355 
 
 refers to him,) Ignatius heard the angels in a vi- 
 fion praifmg the Trinity in alternate hymns, &c ; 
 which introduced alternate hymns into the Church. 
 Mr. Hooker feems inclined to fufpedl the authority 
 of this ftory ; and it is certain nothing is faid rela- 
 tive to fuch a vifion in all the genuine epiftles 
 of this antient Father, which are feven-, though in 
 one of them, viz. that to the Ephejians, he talks of 
 Je/us Chriji's being Jung^ and of finging to the Father 
 by Jejus Chriji : * which makes the omiflion more 
 extraordinary. 
 
 The abfolute Divinity of Je/us Chriji^ h^s, with 
 more hafte than judgment, been aflerted by fome 
 from our Saviour's words to the leper j I will ; be 
 thou dean: and by others from his power to forgive 
 fins ; nothing in all this implying a felf-inherent au- 
 thority. Dr. Whitby quotes the following paffage 
 from a no lefs illuftrious Father than Irenaus^ with 
 refpc6t to the remitting power. '* By remittino- the 
 " fin, &c, he fhewed who he was ; for if none 
 " can remit fins but God, and yet our Lord did 
 " remit them, &c, it is manifefl; that he was both 
 ** the Word of God ^ and the Son of man ^ receiving 
 *^ the power of remiffion from his Father, as God 
 " and Man." Surely he could receive this power as 
 man only. 
 
 It is not my intention to derogate in the leafl 
 from the merit of Mr. Jones\ performance, (the 
 
 * Seft. 4. 
 A a 2 Catholic 
 
3^6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Catholic Do^rine of a 'Trinity,) which upon the 
 whole is admirable and fatisfa6lory. His fcrip- 
 tural parallels are for the moft part happy ; and his 
 mode of reafoning is always ingenious, and gene- 
 rally conclufive. Perhaps it rather fails in the 
 application of the following text-, God was in 
 Christ, reconciling the world to Himself. 2 Cor. 
 5. 19. 
 
 " It is allowed on all hands, fays Mr. Jones, that 
 " the world was reconciled by Chrift Jefus to the 
 ** one, only, great andjupreme God. But, this very 
 ^^ Jame God (for the word is but once ufed in the 
 *' whole fentence) was in Chrift ; manifeft in the 
 " flefh, and reconciling the world to himfelf. And 
 " were there no other pafTage of Scripture to be 
 " found, this alone is fufficient to overthrow the 
 " whole doftrine o{ Arianifm ; which, as far as the 
 " Scripture is concerned, depends upon this oneaf- 
 " fertion, that the word God, in Scripture, never 
 ^^ Signifies a complex notion of more perjons than one ; 
 " hut ALWAYS means one p erf on only, viz. either the 
 *' p erf on of the Father ftngly, or the p erf on of the Son 
 *-'• fingly. Which is abfolutely falfe : for here it fig- 
 " nifies hoth. The text confiders God as agent and 
 " patient at the fame time, and upon the fame oc- 
 " cafion; as the reconciler of the world, in the^(?r- 
 ^^ fon of the Sow •, and the obje(5l to whom the re- 
 " conciliation was made, in the perfon of the Father ^ 
 " yet there is but one word (God) to exprefs them 
 
 " both 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 357 
 
 *' both. So that the word God, though of the 
 *''■ fmgular number, is of a -plural comprehenfion. 
 *' And thus I find it to have been taken by fome 
 *' of the moft eminent writers before the council 
 " of Nice ; Plajmatus in initio homo per manus Dei, id 
 ** eft, FiLii et Spiritus, fays Iren^eus ; putting 
 " the fingular name of God for the p-wo perjons of 
 " the Son and Spirit. And the fame word, in the 
 '^ language of Origen^ (if we are allowed to take 
 *' the verfion oi Ruffinus as genuine,) includes the 
 " whole three perfons : igitur de Deo, id eji, de 
 " Patre, et FiLio, et Spiritu Sancto. And our 
 " excellent church has ufed the word God in the 
 " fame comprehenfive fenfe ; as in the Blejfmg 
 " after the communion fervice, God Almighty, 
 *' the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoji.'' 
 
 I am afraid this is not fo full an anfwer to the 
 above affertion as was to be wifhed ; and that it is 
 not abfolutely fufficient for the " overthrow of the 
 whole doS^nne. o{ Arianijm,'' In the firft place. Dr. 
 Clarke's profelytes will be apt to infift, that the 
 whole dodtrine of Arianijm does not depend upon 
 this one affertion ; and in the next place, that, if 
 it did, Mr. 'Jones has advanced nothing here forci- 
 ble enough to overthrow it. It is true, they will 
 fay, God was in Chriji j but in what fenfe ? why, 
 by his grace, his influence, and fpiritual commu- 
 nications •, as he is likewife faid to be in us ; and 
 as Chrift is faid to be in us j and as we are faid to 
 
 A a 3 be 
 
358 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 be in God, and to be in Chrift, by the purity of 
 our hearts and affe6tions. This, they will tell us, 
 is plain fimple theory, without any wanton refine- 
 ment, or imaginary diftindion of " agent and pa- 
 tient, &c." And with regard to the authorities 
 of Irenaus^ Origen, and the BleJJing in the Com- 
 munion fervice, they will add, that they cannot 
 admit either a private fentiment, or a public doc- 
 trine to be the flandard of true Chiftianity. 
 
 As this is fpecious enough, it may be proper to 
 difencumber ourfelves from the weight of this fame 
 Arian affertion, by other confiderations. Hac non 
 Juccejfity alia p'ogrediamur via, 
 
 Firft then let it be obferved, that though the ' 
 Evglijh word God be " of the fingular number,'* 
 yet the Hebrezv word Eiohim, of which it is the 
 tranflation, is confeffedly " of a ;plural compre- 
 henfion." Accordingly it has been demonftrated 
 over and over again, that the ancient Jews held a 
 plurality of fome kind in the Deity. (Fid. Supr.) 
 
 But, fecondly, we may recur to confiderations 
 frill more internal, and indifputable. If it has been 
 abundantly made to appear, that the Son is God, 
 and the Holy Ghoft is God, as properly and truly 
 as the Father is God, the term God muft unavoid- 
 ably be acknowleged to include, or to " fignify 
 a complex notion of more perfons than one" in 
 many places of holy writ. It will fuffice to pro- 
 
 duc^L 
 
A N N O T /V T I O N S. 2S9 
 
 ducQ a few inftances. The Father is faid to be in 
 lis, I John. 4. 13. or to dwell in us, or abide with 
 us, and the Son is faid to be in us, &c, Rom. 8. 
 V. 10. and the Holy Ghoft is faid to be in us i and, 
 in a cafe which he mentions, Sr. Paul tells the Co- 
 rintbians, it would be reported, that God was in 
 them cf a truth, i Cor. 14. 25. Now can any man 
 affign a tolerable reafon why the word God in this 
 pafTage fhould not be regarded as inclufive of the 
 whole blelTed Trinity ? Another Scripture Jaithy 
 every one of us ftiall give account of hiynjelf to God ; 
 Rom. 14. 12. but if in the term, God, Jefus Chrift 
 is not comprehended, what will become of the 
 text which alTures us we muji all appear before his 
 judgment feat ? 2 Cor. 5. 10. The great Apoftle of 
 the Gentiles puts the Elders of the Church of Ephe- 
 Jus in mind, that he had not Jhunned to declare unto 
 them all the counfel of God : and if he who purchajed 
 this Church with his own Hood, and he who ap- 
 pointed overfeers over it, are to be confidered as 
 parties in this counfel, (and furely they are to be fo 
 confidered,) the word, God, has manifeftly a complex 
 fignification here, and means more than one perfon 
 only. Ads 20. 27, 28. The Kingdom of God is a 
 phrafe which, in moil places where it occurs, will, 
 I prefume, not barely admit but require the fame 
 latitude of application. The Word of God may be 
 regarded in the fame light. Laftly I fhall clofe 
 thefe examples with one which is the more eligible, 
 A a 4 becaufc 
 
360 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 becaufc it is contained in a text which has already- 
 undergone examination, and to which our adver- 
 faries are for ever putting in their claim. I mean 
 V. 28th. of the 15th. Chapter of St. Paul's firft 
 Epiit. to the Cor. * IVhen all things Jhall he Juh- 
 dued unto him, then pall the Son aljo himfelf he Juhje5i 
 unto him that -put all things under him, that God, 
 i. e. the complement of the Deity, the Trinity in 
 Unity, may he all in all. Every critical eye fees 
 clearly that, in this pafTage, for the complex word 
 — God — we mull read the fingle term Father, 
 before we can with any fort of propriety accom- 
 modate it to the purpofe of the anti-trinitarians. 
 In this cafe indeed, there would be an obvious 
 {cn^c, and a natural antithefis, and both in their 
 favour. 
 
 The other text — / am in the Father, and the Fa- 
 ther in me, John 14. 11., which Mr. J. produces 
 as fynonomiiing with the preceding, may be ex- 
 plained away by fimilar means. The Ariayi has the 
 following paffages to oppofe to them, '^hat they 
 all may he one, as thou. Father, art in me, and I in 
 thee ; that they alfo may he one in us ; that they may he 
 one^ even as we are one. I in them, and thou in me^ 
 &c. John 17. 21, 22, 23. 1 am far from faying, 
 or even infmuating, that there is any real difficulty 
 in all this ; or that the orthodox conftru(5tion of 
 
 * See Difc. 6. fub fin. 
 
 the 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 361 
 
 the pafTages adduced by Mr. J. does not fairly 
 and properly belong to them. I only take leave to 
 obferve, and have an obvious view in obferving, 
 that, with regard to the defence of Chriflian doc- 
 trine in general, and particularly to the confuta- 
 tion of the allertion above-mentioned, this truly 
 refpedlable author might have feledted texts lefs 
 equivocal, lefs liable to prevarication. 
 
 It is obfervable. Dr. /. Watts makes the texts 
 I am in the Father and the Father in me, &c, 
 fubfervient to his doftrine of the inherency, or 
 indwelling of the Father, i. e. of the godhead in 
 the MAN Chrijl Jefus.. 
 
 It has been remarked, that by a fmall alteration 
 in the punctuation, the 3d. v. of the 17th. Chap, 
 of St. John J that they might know thee the only true 
 God J &c, may be thus rendered, /^(2/ they might know 
 thee^ and Jefus Chrijl^ whom thou hafi Jent^ to he the 
 only true God. This reading is fupported by the 
 authorities of Novatian^ St. Aufiin^ and St. Ambroje, 
 But it will be prudent, I believe, to wave thefe 
 authorities. Thefe Fathers feem to have been in 
 great fear., where no fear was. We may fafely 
 abide by the fenfe of the text before us in its pre- 
 fent ftate. Were vv^e really in diftrefs, it might be 
 worth our while to appeal to thefe early opinions 
 in our favour. 
 
 See Difcourje ^6th Jub, fin. Dr* WattsV Lafi 
 Sentiments, p. 1^)1 J' See the pajfage in Iren^us 
 
 cited 
 
362 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 cited at large, end illufirated by Dr. Water land 
 in his id Defence of his ^ej'ies. p. 90. See Mat. 
 ^. 6. Dei/m Revealed. Vol. 2. p. 192. Cave'j Prim, 
 Chrifiian. p. 40, 177. See Wheatly'j MoyerV 
 Le^ure Sermons. Sermon 5. p. 250. Note B. 
 
 Page. 161. (z) ahjtra^t /peculation.'] Among the 
 
 many tripartite reprefentations of the Trinity, 
 
 material and intelle6lual, ejjencey intelligence^ and 
 
 w///, have been regarded by fome as fignificant of 
 
 that great myftery j which feems to be much about 
 
 as wife a fymbolization as that of thofe who 
 
 gravely affirm the moon to be an emblem of the 
 
 Churchy birds emblems of heretics, and ffh of anti- 
 
 chrifi. " We find in our nature, fays a celebrated 
 
 ' writer, which is faid to be made after the image 
 
 ' of God, a very near refemblance of the Holy 
 
 ' Trinity, and of the different operations of each 
 
 ' of the Divine Perfons. For example ; to know a 
 
 ' thing prefent, and to remember v/hat is pall, and 
 
 ' to love or hate, are different operations of our 
 
 ' mind, and performed by different faculties of 
 
 ' it. Of thefe, the underilanding is the Father 
 
 ' faculty, and gives being to things, as to us ; for 
 
 ' what we know not, is to us as if it were not : 
 
 ' this anfwers to creation. From this faculty pro^ 
 
 ' ceeds xhtfecond^ that of memory, which is a pre- 
 
 ' ferving of that the underilanding has created to 
 
 ' us. Then the third faculty, that of the will, 
 
 ' which loves or hates, proceeds from both the 
 
 " other i 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 363 
 
 *' other ; for we cannot love or hate what is not 
 " firft created by the underllanding, and preferved 
 *' to us by the memory." 
 
 The plaftic power of a warm imagination, or a 
 fanguine zeal, will form emblems and adumbra- 
 tions of the Trinity in all countries, and in all ages 
 of the world. We are told the old yEgyptianSy and 
 modern Americans^ worfliipped the Deity under the 
 pifture of a fun with three heads. 
 
 As infidelity will take all advantages of pious 
 whim, and indifcreet attachment, fo will it as 
 furely avail itfelf to its utmoft of certain ftrange 
 notions, which have been advanced, in diredl va- 
 riation from the received dodrine of the primitive 
 Church. It is not eafy to fay with what propriety, 
 or in what fenfe, Papifts have called the Virgin the 
 complement of the Trinity. Mr. Sale tells us, fome 
 of the Chriflian Arabs affociate with a Se6t that 
 worfhipped the Virgin as a God. We learn from 
 the fame author, and others, that fome of the Ni- 
 cene Council maintained there were two Gods be- 
 fides God the Father, viz. Chrijl and the Virgin, 
 Others have affirmed, that the Spirit was the crea- 
 ture of the Son. The Bp. of Agen wrote an expof- 
 tulatory letter to Father Gabriel^ who had roundly 
 alferted, that Mary was the fourth Perfon in the 
 Godhead. 
 
 ]\jK\Y.\j's Accom, 5.3.^.163, &c. Stackh. 
 ^ody of Div. p. 1 83. SaleV Prelim, Di/courfe, p. 35. 
 
 PRID* 
 
364 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 Prid. hife of Mahomet. />. 2^. Leslie'j Sh. Meth. 
 with De, p. 61 J &c. 
 
 Page 207. (aa J /match of this fentiment.l We 
 are told that Diogenes^ upon being aiked, how he 
 would be buried, anfwered, in cynical contempt, 
 as it fhould feem, of this cuftom of his country, 
 nq zr^oc-uTTovj with my face downwards. 
 
 Potter'j Gr. Antiq. V. 2. B, 4. Ch. 6. 
 
 Page 227. (bb) reunited to it.'] There is no guard- 
 ing againft the impertinence of captioufnefs, or 
 the prevarications of infidelity. Many queftions 
 may be afked upon fubjeds of this kind, which 
 may perplex our judgments, without diflurbing 
 our faith. It will be fufficient to infill, that, even 
 fetting afide the authority of Scripture, or grant- 
 ing it to be undecifive, our theory is at lead as 
 free from difficulties as that of our opponents. 
 
 Page 231. (cc) Us. notion of identity.] In con- 
 troverfy it is neither unufual, nor is it bad policy 
 to cry f— 1 firft. Both Mr. L. and Dr. .S". have 
 recourfe to fomething like this artifice, when they 
 apply to believers St. FaiiVs fevere reprimand to 
 fuch enquirers as ihould afl<, how are the dead 
 j'aifed upy and with what body do they come? Thou 
 fool^ the Apoftle replies ; and proceeds to illultrate 
 the doftrine of the rcfurre£iion of the body, through 
 the remaining part of the Chapter, and particu- 
 larly in the verfes fome time fmce quoted. If this 
 plainly appears from the faireft and moft natural 
 
 conftruftion 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 365 
 
 conftrudion of thefe paflages, we ftand clear of 
 the aforefaid mortifying imputation, and may juftly 
 return the compliment. And, in fa6t, we are en- 
 couraged to riik our reputation for wifdom on our 
 interpretation, by that fort of half-concelTion which 
 truth feems to have extorted from Mr. L. him- 
 felf, when he tells us, that the words — that which 
 thou fowefi^ &c. might be " fufficient to deter us 
 *' from determining any thing for or againft the 
 '* fame body's being raifed at the laft day." For 
 thefe are not St. Paurs ftrongeft, or mod une- 
 quivocal expreiTions. 
 
 Page 234. (dd) this body to come.'] One would 
 almoft imagine Dr. .S". had efpoufed fomewhat like 
 the antient heathen notion, that the " fhades of 
 " departed perfons retained a kind of fubtile ve- 
 " hide, in all particulars exactly refembling the 
 " body of the deceafed." The notion of fuch a 
 fubtile vehicle^ which is not a whit more compre- 
 henfible than the Chriftian theory of the refurrec- 
 tion, is at leaft fo far confonant to the fame, as it 
 implies a natural wilh of reunion, and a fort of 
 hankering of the foul after its old companion. 
 
 Geddes's EJfay on Compof. p. 212. 
 
 Page 234. (eej or to what.] Dr. S. muft have 
 known what has been faid by our mod eminent 
 Divines upon the fubjed before us. This Church 
 never produced a founder Divine, or this nation a 
 clofer reafoneer than Dr. Barrow. His fentiments 
 
 are 
 
366 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 are as clear and determinate as pofTible on the 
 orthodox fide of the queflion. Could the Inquirer 
 perfuade hi'ifelf that he has confuted them by 
 the confcioufncfs of filence, the affeftation of con- 
 tempt, or the peremptorinefs of oppofition ? 
 
 See Barrow'j Expof. of the Cr. under the Article 
 of the Refurrec. of the Body. p. 30^. 
 
 Page 234. (ffj would have them.'] The com- 
 mon arguments which are adduced in proof of the 
 identity in queftion have, I prefume, much more 
 weight than fome are willing to allow. The effedts 
 of chymical operations have been obferved to be 
 analogous to the refurreftion. It has been remark- 
 ed that ^'- from the afbes of a plant fairer plants have 
 - Jprungr 
 
 Grotius purfues much the fame courfe of argu- 
 ments as others, but is unhandfomely defcrted by 
 his Editor. For Mr. Le-clerc is for adjufting matters 
 nearly on the fame ground, and in the fame lan- 
 guage v/ith Dr. S. and Mr. L. Resurgere corpus 
 did optime pot eft ^ cum simile ^a: terra a Deo forma- 
 tur, conjwigiturque menti. Itaque non opus eft ut in 
 iiimias angnflias nos redigamus dum rccvTOT-nTo, materi<£ 
 vimis rigide defendimus. 
 
 jENKiNsVi^iif^. of Chrifl. V. i.p. 447. 5^^ Beat- 
 tie on the immutab. of 'Truth y Cb. 4. p, 86, ^c. 
 Gro. de ver, l. 2. c. 10. 
 
 Page 243. (gg) believe in him.'] Some have erred 
 concerning this matter. Dr. Cudworth fuppofes 
 Chrift's body to have been changed into a fpiritual 
 
 or 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 367 
 
 or heavenly body immediately after his refurrec- 
 tion ; the fubtilty and tenuity of which was fhewn 
 by his entering into the place where his difciples 
 were alTembled when the doors were shut, &c ; 
 " however its glory were for the time fufpended, 
 " partly for the better convincing them of the 
 *' truth of his refurre6lion, and partly becaufe they 
 '^ were not then able to bear the fplendor of it." 
 
 But there are many reafons why we fhould not 
 humour this child of a fruitful imagination. When 
 our Lord, after his converfation, &c, with the two 
 difciples at EmmauSj vaniflied out of their fight ^ had 
 he not that body with which he was crucified ? 
 Had he not that body when ]\Q.fhewed his difciples 
 his hands and \nsfeet y whe^n he called upon them 
 to handle him, &c, and affured them that it was he 
 himfelf \vho addreffed them ? The truth is, he 
 could appear or difappear at pleafure, by virtue of 
 his divine power ; and therefore it was by no 
 means neceffary he fliould be invefted with ^fp- 
 ritual or heavenly body for that purpofe. The re- 
 furrciftion o^ that body which was crucified, which 
 roje from the dead, and with which Jefus Chrift con- 
 verfed upon earth forty days, is the proper pledge 
 and earneft of our refurre6tion ; his glorious bodyy 
 ftriftly fo called, being probably aiTumed at his 
 Afcenfion. 
 
 St. Ignatius^ in his epiftle to the Smyrnaans, ex- 
 preiTes himfelf very emphatically upon this fubjed. 
 
 In 
 
368 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 In his note on the paflage I allude to, the learned 
 Vojfius fays as follows. Refurre5Honem Chrijli vocat 
 (Ignatius ) (ruajvijw,oi/ quia nobis hccc data commune re- 
 Jurre5iionis future fignum. The Mofl Rev. Tranf- 
 lator, I obferve by the way, renders o-u^n/^oi/ by 
 the word token^ which I need not inform the criti- 
 cal reader is not fully adequate to the original : 
 the Greek term denoting a token^ or fign given in 
 confequence of an agreement between party and 
 party. Our Saviour had pledged himfelf, both to 
 his difciples, and to the Jews^ to rife again ; and 
 by fo doing at once fulfilled his engagements, and 
 gave ample fecurity for the general refurreftion. 
 
 From that pafTage in St. PWs ^d. Epjt. to the 
 Cor. Ch. 5. which fpeaks of our being clothed upon 
 with our houje which is from heaven^ &c, fome have 
 inferred, fays Dr. Cudworth, that " bodies come 
 " not out of graves :" but as this matter is cleared 
 by comimentators, and Dr. 6". lays no ftrefs on the 
 place, I fhall wafte no time upon it. 
 
 Jenkins'^ Reajon. of Chrijlian. v 2. p. 447, ^c. 
 Grot, de Verit. I. 2. c. 10. Icna. to the Smyrn. Se5t. 
 I. 6'd'^ Vossius'j note p. 257. Cudworth'j IntelL 
 SyJ. ch. 5. ^.796, 799. Seey^niT'&Y's Note at John 
 2Q. V. 19. 
 
 Page 244. (hh) in the flefh.'] This paffage in 
 St. Clement is not to be over ftriftly, or literally un- 
 derftood. The Apoftle exprefsly declares, that flefh 
 and blood fhall not inherit the kingdom of God, That 
 
 body 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 369 
 
 body which (hall be raifcd up at the lafi day, that 
 material fubftance which, when re-united to the 
 foul, will conftitute the identical perfon who died, 
 and was buried, Ihall be changed, fhall even be 
 fajhioned like unto the glorious body of Chrift^ pre- 
 vioufly, as it fliould feem, to its appearance be- ^ 
 fore his judgment -feat. For we jhall all be changed 
 in a moment ^f, at the lajh trump, when the dead 
 jhall be raijed incorruptible, and this mortal Jhall put 
 on immortality. 
 
 It has been obferved by many, that the good 
 fathers from whom paflages are extrafbed on this 
 fubjedt, together with St. Paul before them, in 
 his i^th. Chap, of the \ft. Epif. to the Cor., fpeak 
 only of the reJurre5lion of thejuji : but it is at the 
 fame time to be noted, that, with refpe6t to this 
 principle of incorruption, the change in the gene- 
 ral refurreSllon will undoubtedly be the fame both 
 of xh<t juji and the unjuft. 
 
 Weak reafoning, like a weapon which falls fhort 
 of its aim, will be returned upon us by our ad- 
 verfiry. St. Chryfojlom's argument, and that of 
 fome other fathers, and of many modern Divines, 
 for the refurre^ion of the fame body, drawn from 
 the fuppofed abfurdity of one body's finning and 
 another's fuiTcring, is obvioufly a futile one, and 
 may be rendered ferviceable to the intereft of the 
 nsin/. The body undergoes a great variety of 
 changes in the courfe of lifej and, it might be 
 afked, would not every imaginable purpofe of 
 B b retri- 
 
370 Annotations. 
 
 retribution be fully anfwered by a future (late of 
 happinefsj or mifery, to foul and body, whence- 
 foever that body might be fuppofed to come ? Ut 
 jujium eji^ fays Wollebius^ ut qUiedam peccata pofi 
 banc vitam puniantur -y it a eft quoque^ ut quod Jocium 
 fuit peccatorum fit quoque pcenarum. 
 
 Compend. ChriJ. 'Theol. p. 193, 
 
 Page 251. (ii) he once had,] " How far, fays 
 " Dr. ^S"., they (Athenag. &c.) fucceeded is not the 
 " point at prefent -, they might have fhewn that the 
 " refurre£lion of the flefh is no where taught in Scrip- 
 " ture." But what if this was left to be fhewn by 
 T^x.Sykes^ What, if their defign was to prove 
 the refurre£fion of the flejh to be a Scripture 
 dodrine, and that upon rational grounds ? I 
 venture to think this is put out of doubt by what 
 has been fubmitted to the reader ; though luckily 
 Dr. S. himfelf will help us out if we have any how 
 failed in our argumentation upon this fubje6t. For 
 in his account of 'Tertullian's third form ^ or rule of 
 faith, in his book De Prafcriptione VLereticorum^ the 
 Dr. thus exprelTes himfelf. " Nor is his third Form 
 " or Rule^ &c, any Creed of any Church, but only 
 *' a fummary ©f the dofbrines of the Gofpel." This 
 father then intended his Form or Rule^ as a fum- 
 mary of Chriftian dodrine, even according to Dr. 
 iS's account of the matter; and in //, as it is 
 quoted by himfelf, we have mention in plain terms 
 of the refurreSlion of the flejh. The words of Ter- 
 
 tullian 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 371 
 
 tullian are thefe: that Chrill fhall come in glory to 
 judge the world, fa^a utriufqiie partis rejujcita- 
 tione^ cum carnis rejiiiutione. * 
 
 Page 254. (kk) the jirfi tinie.] Notwithftandino- 
 the explicitnefs of thefe pafTages, Mahomefs theory 
 of the refurre^ion is fometimes not a little whimfi- 
 cal, according to what we learn from Mr. Sale of 
 it. He acquaints us, that this falfe prophet fup- 
 pofed the whole human body would be corrupted, 
 except the rump-bone, which is firlt formed, (the os 
 coccygis, as he terms it ;) and that this is to be a fort of 
 feed from whence the whole will be renewed at the 
 laft day, after a rain of forty days, (viz. a great 
 dew, according to the Jews, from whom Mahomet 
 took this hint,) which will impregnate the earth, 
 and " caufe the bodies to fprout like plants." The 
 Jews, it feems, call this bone Luz. Cudworth ap- 
 pears to have an eye to this particular in his 5th 
 Chapter, p. 799. 
 
 SaleV Prelim. Difc, p. 81. 
 
 Page 254. (U) been di/cujfmg,'] The ftory which 
 Mahomet introduces into the fecond book of the 
 Koran of the miracle God was pleafed to work, for 
 the confirmation of Abrahamh faith in the article 
 before us, is extraordinary indeed, and well worth 
 tranfcribing. God /aid to Abraham, take four birds, 
 cut them in pieces, and dijperje them in four different 
 mountains 'y and then call them, and you fhall fee all 
 
 * Enquiry, p. 17. 
 
 B b 2 thoje 
 
372 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 thoje four birds will immediately come to you. This 
 ftory is told by Mahometan writers ftill more cir- 
 cufnftantially. " Thefe four birds, they fay, were 
 " a pigeon, a cock, a crow, and a peacock •, and 
 " that when Abraham had cut them in pieces, he 
 " made a perfe6l anatomy of them, and minced 
 *' them all together. Some add, that he pounded 
 " them in a mortar, and reduced them all to one 
 " mafs, which he divided into four parts, and car- 
 *' ried them to the top of four feveral mountains ; 
 " and that then, holding up their heads, which he 
 *' retained in his hands, he called them feverally 
 " by their names \ and that each came accordingly 
 *' for his head, and flew away with it." * 
 
 It is certain Mahomet refined much upon the 
 hiftory of Mojes in general -, and my author ob- 
 ferves, that probably this wild ftory has its foun- 
 dation in God's command to Abraham to offer a 
 facrifice of a turtle-dove^ and di. pigeon, among other 
 animals, as we read in the ic^th Chapter of Gen, 
 V. 9. etfeq. 
 
 Page 257. (mm) in competent authority.'] The 
 fenfe of the Apoftolical and primitive Church may 
 be coUeded from the Form of the firft Baptijmal 
 Creed, which ran in the following terms, I believe 
 in God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghofi. J That 
 
 * Morgan'/ Mahom. explained. Vol. 1. p. 156. See Mr. 
 Whites's Note at 1. 14. p. 274. of his learned B. Leftures. 
 X See Cyprian. Epift. 73. 
 
 this 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 373 
 
 this Creed, which implicitly declares tlie Three 
 Perfons to be One God, was fimply the Confellion 
 ufed in the earlieil times, is the opinion of many 
 learned men, and particularly of EfiJcopiiSj (the 
 mofl: eminent of the Remonfirants in Holland^) who, 
 as Dr. Waterland obferves, was not aware of its 
 deflru(5tive confequence to his own Hypothefis, 
 viz. " that the divine eternal generation of the 
 " Son was not inferred in the Creeds from the be- 
 " .ginning." The words of Epifcopius, as quoted 
 by Bp. Bull, are thefe. AntiquiJJimum (Jymholiim)^ 
 quodque in prima Baptifmi adminijiratione jam inde 
 ah ipfis Apojlolorum temporibus ufitahatur^ hoc erat ; 
 Credo in Deum Patrem, Filium, et Spiri- 
 TUM Sanctum: nempe ad prajcriptam ah ipjo Jefn 
 formulam. On which occafion the learned prelate 
 makes the following obfervations. Ferjpicuum eji 
 in hac formula vocem Deum a-Tro )toi^a ad omnes Tres, 
 nempe Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum San5fum referri, 
 ^uod Gr^eci adhuc clarius exprimunt, ritrfuw £i? rov 
 
 B'iov, Tov TTOcrepoiy rov qov, xat to ayiov •nrj/EUjixa. It a Jane 
 
 hanc brevem Confejfwnem veteres intellexere . Him 
 Tertullianus (adv. Prax. c. xiii.) communem Chrifiia- 
 norum de Patre, Filio, et Spiritu San^q Fidem expo- 
 nens, ait, et Pater Deus, et Filius Deus, et Spiritus 
 SanSlus Deus, et Deus unufquijque. Mihi Jane vi- 
 detur in his paucis verhis. Credo in Deum, &c, mag- 
 nam illam veritatem, nempe Filium et Spiritum Sanc- 
 tum UNUM e£e cum Patre Deum, aliquatenus clarius 
 B b 3 exprimi 
 
274 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 exprimi quam in fuftorihus quihufdam Jymholis qua 
 Jtihjecuta Junt. Nam -per additamenta ilia pojl verba 
 Credo in Detim Patrem^ &:c, et adje^iones poji men- 
 tionem Filii, non repetita voce Deum in articulis de 
 Filio et Spiritu San^fo^ videri potuit, et nonnuUis vija 
 eJlYihi appellatio ad folum Pair em pertinere-, plane 
 contra mentem ac Jententiam eorum qui latiora ilia 
 Jymhola condidideruyit . 
 
 Bull'j Judic. Ecclef. Cath. Chap. 4. p. 308,309. 
 Wall'j Hiji. of Inf. Bap. Part 2. Ch. 9. ^.491. 
 Bingham'j y^;^//^. B.I. Waterland'j- Import, 
 of the Doc. of the I'rin. Ch. 6. p. 223. and Serm. 8. 
 Randolph'j' Vindica. Part 1. p.^i. 
 
 Page 258. (nn) no religion at all.] As nothing 
 differs more than judgment, fo by confequence no- 
 thing multiplies more than error. The number of 
 herefies and heretics, according to Prateolus, was 
 in his time no lefs than 520, as Bp. Taylor informs 
 us, in his difcourfe on the Liberty of Prophejying. 
 But he takes no fmall pains at the fame time to 
 leflen their number, and extenuate their malignity, 
 and, it muft be granted, not without fuccefs. It 
 concerns not me to enter into particulars, or to 
 examine the grounds of this learned prelate's mo- 
 deration. The lift of heretics, including thofe of 
 a modern date, as it is given us by A. Rojs, in his 
 View of all the Religions in the World, is almoft as 
 numerous as the abovementioned. The very names 
 of the greateft part of them muft be to the gene- 
 rality 
 
ANNOTATIONS. ^y^ 
 
 raVity of readers unknown. He gives us an ac- 
 count of the Secundians, PtolomaanSy Colarhafiiy 
 Heracleonites, Opbiies, Cainites, CataphrygianSj 'TheO' 
 docians^ SemiarianSy Aquarii, Floriani^ Mternales^ 
 Luciferians, Htimiliarii, Cruciferij Hqfpitalarii, Beth- 
 lemitesy &c, &c, &c.* 
 
 Of a few of the old herefies, which were to a 
 remarkable degree extravagant, it may not be 
 amifs to mention the tenets. Irenaus in cap. 28. 
 /. 2. adv. Hare, cenfures fuch heretics, quicunque 
 inerrahilem ra Xoy-d generationem enarrare aufi fint ex 
 trivio pe litis comparationibuSj dicentes Jcilicet^ Ver- 
 BUM Dei ex Patre generari^ ad infiar Verbi homi- 
 Nis per linguam prolati\ which are Bp. BuW^ words. 
 
 The Valentinians taught, that Chrift's body was 
 in a manner purely fpiritual, and paffed through 
 the Virgin as through a pipe, or conduit. 
 
 The Cainites worfhipped Cain as the author of 
 much good to mankind ; as alfo EJau^ Cor ah ^ Da- 
 than^ &c, Sec ; and Judas^ aflerting that he fore- 
 knew what happinefs fliould accrue to mankind by 
 Chrift's death, and therefore betrayed him. 
 
 It was the doflrine of Apelles^ that there was but 
 one chief God, to whom was fubordinate a fiery 
 
 * A. Ross was a Scotchman, and Chaplain to Charles I. He 
 was the author, or compiler of near thirty treatifes, the fub- 
 jefts of fome of which are not uninierefting. His Vie^ of all 
 Religions paft feveral editions ; the laft of which appeared in 
 1696. it is referred to by Mr. Boyle in his Difcourfe on the 
 ufefulnefs of Natural and Experimental Philofophy. 
 
 See GnEv's Hudibras. Canto, z, v. 2. 
 
 B b 4 God, 
 
376 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 God, who appeared to Mqfes in the bujh^ who made 
 the world, gave the law, and was the God of If- 
 rael. He gave to Chrift a body compared of the 
 ftarry and elementary fubftance, which appeared in 
 the Ihape only of man. This body, when he af- 
 cended, he left behind him, every part thereof re- 
 turning to their former principles : Chrift's fpirit 
 only being in heaven. This heretic lived, fays A, 
 Rqfs, about 150 years after Chrift, in the reign of 
 the Emperor Commodus. 
 
 We have already exhibited to the reader many 
 ftrange Pagan notions relative to the nature, &c, 
 of the Deity ; but perhaps the moft extraordinary, 
 the moft eccentric of them all, has not yet been 
 remembered. It is not properly a herefy indeed, 
 but it is an error which may fitly occupy this place. 
 The heathen myftical theologifts often call God 
 cco^ivo^nXvv — male and female^ fignifying thereby, 
 though grofsly, yet not unemphatically, the creative 
 power of the Supreme Being. Dr. Cudworth cites 
 a pafiage from a hymn of SynefiuSj (whom he calls 
 a learned znd pous Bifhop,) wherein the Almighty 
 • is addrefled under expreffions precifely equiva- 
 lent :— 
 
 Agreeably hereunto, Varro quotes from Sorams, 
 
 an eminent poet, (according to our author,) the 
 
 verfes following : 
 
 Jupiter 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 377 
 
 Jupiter omnipotens, regum rex ipfe Deumque. 
 Progenitor genitrixque Deum ; Deus unus et omnis, 
 
 Methinks this fentiment becomes the heathen 
 theologiit, or poet, much better than the Chriftian 
 Divine. 
 
 Far from meaning to rank a late very eminent 
 writer. Dr. /. Watts^ in the number of notorious 
 heretics, or in the leaft to detract from the excel- 
 lence of his chara6ter, I think myfelf bound in 
 duty to my fubje6t to take notice here of the An- 
 gularity of his fentiments. " His idea of the Di- 
 " vinity of Chrift was, that the Godhead^ the Deity 
 *' itjelf^ perjonally diftinguijhed as the Father, was 
 *' united to the man Chriji J ejus ^ in conjequence of 
 " which union, or indwelling of the Godhead^ he be- 
 *' came properly God. * He conceived this union 
 " to have fubfifted before the Saviour's appearance 
 'Mn the flelh, and that the human foul of Chrift ex- 
 " ifted with the Father from before the foundation of 
 ^^ the world', on v/hich ground he maintains the 
 " real defcent of Chrift from heaven to earth, &c.'» 
 In thefe fcnciments there is not fo much as a re- 
 ference to the Holy Ghoft. But v/e are not to 
 confider them as final. We fhall find the Dr. to 
 have had more enlarged notions refpedting the doc- 
 trine of the Trinity. 
 
 * It feems thefe were likewife Dr. Dodderidge's fenti- 
 ments. 
 
 In 
 
378 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 In his Solemn Address to the great and 
 EVER-BLESSED GoD, OR 3, rcvicw of what he had 
 writ I en in the 'Trinitarian Controverjy ^ he puts the 
 following qiieftions with all that humble reverence^ 
 (his own words,) and that holy awe which becomes 
 a creature in the ■prejence of his God. 
 
 " Haft thou not, O Lord God Almighty, haft 
 *' thou not tranfafled thy divine and important af- 
 *' fairs among men by thy Son Jejus Chriji, and by 
 *' thy holy Spirit ? And haft thou not ordained 
 " that men fliould tranfatl their higheft and moft 
 '' momentous concerns with thee, by thy Son, and 
 " and by thy Spirit ? Haft thou not, by the mouth 
 " of thy Son JeJus, required all that profefs his 
 *' religion to be waftied with water in the name of 
 " the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghoft ? Is 
 " it not my duty then to enquire, who or what 
 *' are thefe facred names, and what they fignify ? 
 
 " Haft thou not afcribed divine names, and 
 *' titles, and chara6lers to thy Son and thy holy 
 " Spirit in thy word, as well as afiumed them to 
 " thyfelf ? And haft thou not appointed to them 
 " fuch glorious oiBces as cannot be executed with- 
 *' out Ibmething of divinity or true Godhead in 
 " them ? And yet art not thou, and thou alone the 
 *' true God ? How ftiall a poor weak creature be 
 *' able to adjuft and reconcile thefe clafliing ideas, 
 " and to underftand this myftery P Or muft 1 be- 
 " lieve and ad: blindfold, without underftanding ? 
 
 « Holy 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 379 
 
 " Holy Father, (he proceeds,) thou knoweft, 
 "how firmly I believe with all my foul, whatfo- 
 " ever thou haft plainly written and revealed in 
 ** thy word. I believe Thee to be the only true 
 " God, the fupreme of beings, felf-fufficient for 
 <* thine own exiftence, and for all thy infinite af- 
 *' fairs and tranladions among creatures. I believe 
 " thy only Son Jejus Chrift to be all-fufficient for 
 " the glorious work of mediation between God 
 " and man, to which thou haft appointed him. I 
 " believe he is a man, in whom dwells all the ful- 
 " nefs of the Godhead bodily. I believe he is one 
 *' with God-, he is God manifefted in the flefh; 
 " and that the man Jejiis is fo clofely and infepa- 
 " rably united with the true and eternal Godhead, 
 " as to become one perfon, even as the foul and 
 " body make one man. 
 
 " I believe alfo thy bleffed Spirit hath almighty 
 " power and influence to do all thy will, to inftrudt 
 *' men effedually in divine truths, &"c. I yield up 
 " myfelf joyfully and thankfully to this method of 
 " thy falvation, as it is revealed in thy gofpel. But 
 " I acknowlege my darknefs ftill. I want to have 
 '' this wonderful doftrine of the all-fufficience of 
 " thy Son and Spirit for thefe divine works made 
 " a little plainer. 
 
 " Hadft thou informed me, gracious Father, in 
 " any place of thy word, that this divine doftrine 
 ** is not to be underftood by men, and yet they 
 
 " were 
 
38o ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " were required to believe it, 1 would have fub- 
 ** dued all my curiofity to faith, &c. But I can- 
 " not find thou haft any where forbid me to under- 
 *' ftand it, or to make thefe enquiries. My con- 
 " fcience is the beft natural light thou haft put 
 " within me, and fmce thou haft given me the 
 " Scriptures, my own confcience bids me fearch the 
 " Scriptures to find out truth, &c. I have, tiiere- 
 *' fore, been long fearching into this divine doc- 
 " trine, that I may pay thee due honour with un- 
 " derftanding. Surely I ought to know the God 
 " whom I worftiip, whether he be one pure and 
 *' fimple being, or whether thou art a threefold 
 " deity, confifting of the Father, the Son, and 
 " the Holy Spirit. 
 
 " Dear and blefled God, hadft thou been pleafed, 
 " in any one plain Scripture, to have informed me 
 " which of the diff'erent opinions about the Holy 
 ** Trinity, among the contending parties of Chrif- 
 *' tians, had been true, thou knoweft with how 
 *' much zeal, fatisfa6lion, and joy, my unbiafled 
 " heart would have opened itfelf to receive and 
 " embrace the dilcovery. Hadft thou told me 
 " plainly in any fingle text, that the Father, Son, 
 " and Holy Spirit are three real diftindl perfons in 
 *' thy divine nature, I had never lufFered myfelf to 
 *' be bewildered in fo many doubts, nor embar- 
 *' raffed with fo many ftrong fears of affenting to 
 ** the mere inventions of men, inftead of divine 
 
 " doftrine 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 381 
 
 " doflrine ; but I fliould have humbly and imme- 
 " diately accepted thy words, lb far as it was pof- 
 " fible for me to underiland them, as the only rule 
 ** of my faith. Or hadft thou been pleafed fo to 
 ** exprefs and include this propofition in the feveral 
 " fcattered parts of thy book, from whence my 
 " reafon and confcience migh: with eafe find out, 
 " and with certainty infer this doftrine, I fhould 
 " have joyfully employed all my reafoning powers, 
 " with their utmoft flciil and activity, to have found 
 " out this inference, and ingrafted it into my foul. 
 
 " Thou haft called the poor and the ignorant, 
 " the mean and foolifh things of this world, to the 
 " knowlege of thyfelf and thy Son, and taught 
 " them to receive and partake of the Salvation 
 " which thou haft provided. But how can fuch 
 " weak creatures ever take in fo ftrange, fo diffi- 
 " cult, and fo abftrufe a dodtrine as this ; in the 
 " explication and defence whereof, multitudes of 
 " men, even men of learning and piety, have loft 
 '^ themfelves in infinite fubtilties of difpute, and 
 ** endlefs mazes of darknefs ? And can this ftrange 
 " and perplexing notion of three real perfons going 
 " to mal<;e up one true God, be fo neceffary and 
 '* fo important a part of that Chriftian dodrine, 
 " which, in the old Teftament and the new, is 
 " reprefented as fo plain and fo eafy, even to the 
 " meaneft underftandinsfs ? 
 
 " O thou fearcher of hearts who knoweft all 
 
 " things; 
 
382 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " things, I appeal to thee concerning the fincerity 
 *' of my enquiries into thefe difcoveries of thy 
 *' word. 
 
 *' I humbly call thee to witnefs, O my God, 
 " what a holy jealoufy I ever wear about my heart, 
 " left I Ihould do the Qighteft difhonour to thy 
 *' fupreme Majefty in any of my enquiries or de- 
 *' terminations. Thou feeft what a religious fear, 
 *' and what a tender folicitude I maintain on my 
 *' foul, left I ftiouid think or fpeak any thing to di- 
 " minilh the grandeurs and honours of thy Son 
 *' J^j, my dear Mediator, &c. Thou knoweft 
 *' how much I am afraid of fpeaking one word 
 " which may be confirued into a negled: of thy 
 " bklTed Spirit, from whom I hope I am daily 
 " receiving happy influences of light and ftrength. 
 " Guard all the motions of my mind, O Almighty 
 '* God, againft every thing that borders upon thefe 
 " dangers. Forbid my thoughts to indulge, and 
 *' forbid my pen to write one word, that ftiould 
 '* link thofe grand ideas which belong to thyfelf, 
 " or thy Son, or thy Holy Spirit. Forbid it, O my 
 *' God, that ever I lliould be fo unhappy as to un- 
 *' glorify my Father, my Saviour, or my Sandifier, 
 *' in any of my fcntiments or expreflions concern- 
 '* ing them. 
 
 *' Blefied and faithful God, haft thou not pro- 
 *' mifed that the meek thou wilt guide in judgment, 
 " the meek thou wilt teach thy way ? Hath not 
 
 " thy 
 
ANNOTATIONS. ^Ss 
 
 ** thy Son, our Saviour, aflured us, that our hea- 
 ** venly Father will give his holy Spirit to them 
 " who aik him ? And is he not appointed to guide 
 " us into all truth ? Have I not fought the gracious 
 *' guidance of thy good Spirit continually ? Am I 
 *' not truly fenfible of my own darknefs and weak- 
 " nefs, my dangerous prejudices on every fide, and 
 *' my utter infufficiency for my own condudl ? Wilt 
 *' thou leave fuch a poor creature bewildered 
 " among a thoufand perplexities, which are raifed 
 *' by the various opinions and contrivances of men 
 " to explain thy divine truth ? 
 
 " Help me, heavenly Father, for I am quite 
 *' tired and weary of thefe human explainings fo 
 " various and uncertain. When wilt thou explain 
 " it to me thyfelf, O my God, by the fecret and 
 *' certain didates of thy Spirit, according to the 
 *' intimations of thy word ?'* 
 
 Now, for truth's fake, I defire to afk any in- 
 telligent, impartial, and candid reader, whether 
 we have not in thefe pafTages ftrong indications of 
 a wavering, though pious mind ? Whether fuch 
 language as this does not rather tend to encourage 
 fpecious fcepticifm, than found faith ? Whether it is 
 not chargeable with inconfiftency between reverence 
 and remonftrance, between declarations of acqui- 
 efcence and expoftulations of difcontent? Whether, 
 according to Dr. PF — 's ideas, all ecclefiaflical au- 
 thority is not as fuch altogether odious, or contemp- 
 tible ; 
 
384 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 tible; and whether, for what appears to the con- 
 trary from thefe periods, Chriftianity might not 
 fiourilh without the exiftence of Church, paftor, or 
 teacher? Whether we have not in this illuflrious 
 Difienter an extraordinary inftance of the compati- 
 bility of radical and invincible prejudice with an^<7- 
 neji and good hearty and a folid underftanding ? 
 Whether Dr. IV, had any thing like fufficient 
 grounds for his fufpicion that the orthodox received 
 do6lrines are refolvible into mere " explainings, 
 " inventions, or contrivances of men ?" Whether 
 he does not appear to be unreafonably, though fm- 
 cerely anxious to underjland all myjleries, while at 
 the fame time he could not but know, that the 
 capital doctrines of the Gofpel are delivered as 
 myflerious, and that Chriftians are fuppofed and 
 required to walk i^y faith, and not hy fight? Whe- 
 ther he does not moll erroneoully coi\y en 2. particu- 
 lar promife into 2i general one; not recollecting that, 
 though, for obvious and very important purpofes, 
 our heavenly Father will give his Holy Spirit to them 
 that a[k him, yet that Spirit was by no means " ap- 
 ** pointed" to guide every individual Chriftian into 
 all fpiritual truth ? Whether, had we been told 
 " plainly •," in fo many words, " in any fingle text, 
 '* that the Father, Son, and holy Spirit are three 
 " real and diftindl perfons in the divine nature," it 
 had been poUible for D. IV. to have mifunderflood 
 it 5 or whether he, or any body elfe, could have 
 
 been 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 385 
 
 been " bewildered in any doubts," with refpecl to 
 this dodrine ? Whether fuch a " difcovery" of it 
 would not have been received every where with 
 " unbiafled hearts," and with univerfal " zeal, fa- 
 *' fadlion and joy," a few inilances perhaps of ob- 
 duracy, &c, excepted ? Whether, had it been " fo 
 " exprefled and included in the feveral fcattered 
 " parts" of Scripture, that the Dodlor's " reafon 
 " and confcience could with eafe have found it out, 
 *' and with certainty inferred it," there would have 
 been the leaft occafion for the " {kn\ and adlivity 
 of his rational powers ?" Whether, after all, 
 the dodlrine in queftion be not exprefled, or in- 
 cluded in the facred pages fufficiently to warrant any 
 man's firm aflent to it-, efpecially when we take 
 into the account the whole weight of that evidence 
 by which we prove its correfpondency with the 
 lenfe of antiquity, and the belief of the primitive 
 Church ? Whether the wifeft and the weakell are 
 not equally incapable of " taking in fo difficult, 
 and fo abftrufe a dodtrine" as that of the Trinity ? 
 Whether the Chriftian dodlrine concerning things 
 fpiritual and myfterious is really " reprefented," 
 either in the Old Teftament or the New, as " plain 
 " and eafy even to the meaneft underltanding ?" 
 Whether, granting that *' multitudes even of men 
 " of learning and piety have loft themfelves in in- 
 " finite fubtilties of difpute, &c, in the explica- 
 *' tion and defence" of the dodlrine before us, all 
 C c this 
 
386 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 this fhould not be principally attributed to anti- 
 trinitarian artifice, and to a gradual departure from 
 that fimplicity in which it was originally taught and 
 received in the world? Whether, if this " perplex- 
 " ing notion of three real pcrfons going to make 
 " up one true God" be a part of Chriftian doclrine, 
 it is not prima facie the moft " necefiary and the 
 moft important?" Finally, whether the docftrine 
 of the Trinity, as held in the Church, has not at 
 leaft as much countenance from Scripture, and even 
 from reafon, as Dr. IV — *s notion of the indwelling 
 of the Deity in the Man Chrift Jefus ; and whether 
 this is not in effect acknowleged by himfelf ? 
 
 As to the notion itfelf, it is, I trull, to all in- 
 tents and purpoles refuted in the foregoing pages ; 
 and I fhall content myielf with exprefllng my 
 aftonifhment at the force of prejudice in one who fo 
 llrongly recommends, or more properly inculcates 
 an " indifference for every thing but truth," *" and 
 cenfures fo leverely all domeftic, national, or party 
 attachments. For with all his gentlenefs, benevo- 
 lence, charity, and love of truth, Dr. JV. appears 
 to me to have been biafled by more than ordinary 
 prepoffeflions. He who has exprefled himfelf in the 
 manner we have fcen; he who has occafionaliy de^ 
 clared, that he " allowed the greateft diftinftion pof- 
 " fible between the facred three in the divine nature, 
 " which does not arife to three diftindl confcious 
 
 * See Improvement of the Mind. p. 285. 
 
 " minds 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 387 
 
 *' minds or fpiritSi" and that he was fully " ef- 
 " tablilhed in the belief of the Deity of the hlejj'ed 
 " Three^ though he knew not the manner cf explica- 
 " //■(?«," muft, to my apprehenfion, be confidered 
 as protefting againft the dodlrine of a Trinity of 
 Perfons^ chiefly becaufe it was an eftablifhed one j 
 becaufe it was the dodrine of the Church. 
 
 I have dwelt the longer on this cafe as it is un- 
 common J as it is the cafe of a great and good 
 man, whom (to borrow Dr. Johnfonh words) 
 " every Chriftian Church would rejoice to have 
 " adopted." 
 
 I)r. WattV lajl Sentiments on the 'Trinity, p. 62, 
 Solemn Addrefs. p. ioi, ^c. See Johnson'j Life of 
 Dr. Watts with notes, i^c. CudworthV IntelL 
 Syji. Ch. 4. p. 304. A. Ross'j View of all Religions. 
 Sea. 7. 
 
 P. 260. (00) to judge for ourfehes.'] It abundantly 
 appears by a confiderable number of extrads made 
 by Bp. Jewel from many fathers and doctors of the 
 Church of Rome, that antiently in that communion 
 the Holy Scriptures were not barely indulged, but 
 recommended to every hand. By what means the 
 Romanijls have fince qualified the fenfe of thefe paf- 
 fages, or reconciled the fame with principles of 
 a later date, I have no occafion to inquire. But in 
 one of them there is a fingularity which, I believe, 
 will pay any man for his trouble in the reading. It 
 is to be found in Theodoret; and is tranflated by the 
 C c 2 great 
 
388 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 great prelate as follows. " Ye may commonly fee, 
 " that OLir doclrine is known, not only of them 
 " that are the doflors of the Church, and the maf- 
 " ters of the people, but alfo even of the tailors, 
 *' and fmiths, and weavers, and of all artificers : 
 " yea, and farther alfo of women -, and that not 
 *' only of them that be learned, but alfo of labour- 
 « ing women, and fempjlers, and fervants, and hand- 
 " maids. Neither only the citizens, but alfo the 
 " country-folks do very well underftand the fame. 
 " Ye may find, yea, even the very ditchers, and 
 " delvers, and cow-herds, and gardiners difputing of 
 '^ the Holy-Trinity, and of the Creation of 
 
 " ALL THINGS." 
 
 The fame pafl^age is referred to by Dr. Potter 
 in his Anfwer to Charity Mijlaken. p. 205, 
 
 Jewel'j Defence, ^c. part. 5. p. 507. 
 
 Page 262. (pp) mijlaken in that judgment.'] An 
 eminent and learned writer of the lad century, 
 whom I have quoted before, obferves, (and the 
 obfervation has been alfo cited,) that " herefy is not 
 " an error of the underftanding, but of the will •,'* 
 and to this do£lrine, properly ftated, we can readily 
 fubfcribe. But in the excefs of his moderation, 
 this Right Rev, author fometimes queftions, in 
 effeft at lead, the authority, not only of all eccle- 
 fiaftical traditions, and councils, but of the Scrip- 
 ture itfelf ; giving us fentiments wholly incongru- 
 ous with every idea of faith, fyftem, or eftablifh- 
 
 menr. 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 389 
 
 ment. Witnefs thofe contained in the following 
 extract, which, to my imagination, nothing but 
 the zeal of adherency to a favourite principle could 
 have drawn from the pen of fo able a writer, and 
 fo profefTed a cafuift. 
 
 " Since, fays he, holy Scripture is the repolltory 
 '* of divine truths, and the great rule of faith, to 
 " which all fedls of Chriftians do appeal for pro- 
 " bation of their feveral opinions, and fince all 
 " agree in the articles of the Creed as things clearly 
 " and plainly fet down, and as containing all that 
 '* which is offimple and prime neceflity; and fince 
 " on the other fide there are in Scripture many 
 *' other myfteries, and matters of queftion upon 
 " which there is a vail ; fince there are fo many 
 ** copies with infinite varieties of reading ; fince a 
 " various interpundlion, a parenthefis, a letter, an 
 " accent may much alter the fenfe ; fince fome 
 *' places have divers literal fenfes, many have fpi- 
 " ritual, myftical, and allegorical meanings; fince 
 " there are fo many tropes, metonymies, ironies, 
 *' hyperboles, proprieties and improprieties of lan- 
 " guage, whofe underftanding depends upon fuch 
 " circumftances that it is almoftimpoflible to know 
 " its proper interpretation, now that the know- 
 " lege of fuch circumft:ances and particular ftories is 
 " irrecoverably loft ; fince there are fome myfteries 
 *' which, at the beft advantage of exprefliion, are not 
 *'• eafy to be apprehended, and whofe explication, 
 C c 3 " by 
 
390 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 " by reafon of our impeifedions, muft needs be 
 '* dark, fometimes weak, rometimes unintelligible; 
 " and laftly, fince thofe ordinary means of ex- 
 *' pounding Scripture, as fearching the originals, 
 *' conference of places, parity of reafon, and ana- 
 " logy of faith, are all dubious, uncertain, and 
 " very fallible, he that is the wifeft and by confe- 
 *' quence the likeliefl: to expound trueft in all pro- 
 " bability of reafon, will be very far from confi- 
 " dence, becaufe every one of thefe and many 
 *' more are like fo many degrees of improbability 
 " and incertainty, all depreffing our certainty of 
 " finding out truth in fuch myfteries, and amidft 
 " fo many difficulties. And therefore a wife man 
 " that confiders this, would not willingly be pre- 
 " fcribed to by others ; and therefore if he alfo be 
 " a jufl man, he will not impofe upon others -, for 
 " it is beft every man fhould be left in that Hberty 
 *' from which no man can juftly take him, unlefs 
 " he could fecure him from error. So that here 
 *' alfo there is a necefiity to conferve the liberty of 
 " prophefying, and interpreting Scripture ; a ne- 
 " cefiity derived from the confideration of the dif- 
 " ficuky of Scripture in queftions controverted, 
 " and the uncertainty of any internal medium of 
 " interpretation." 
 
 Now if this be the cafe, we are but mocked, 
 when we are told the Scriptures are the " repofitory 
 of divine truths ;'* or that any articles of faith 
 
 can 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 391 
 
 can be " clearly and plainly fet down" in any Creed 
 whatfoever. Under the above circumftances, in 
 what formulary, or fyftem, fball we look for " all 
 " that v/hich is of fimple and prime neccflity ?'* 
 Is it not ftrange too, that there Ihould be many 
 other myjieries in Scripture diflindt from thofe divine 
 truths of which it is the repoficory ; and ftranger 
 ftiij, that matters of qiiefiion fhould be put under a 
 mail? Upon all matters oi faith there is indeed 
 a vail •, I mean, upon all myfterious matters, which 
 cannot poffibly be " apprehended at the beft ad- 
 vantage of cxpreflion.'* The exphcation of theje 
 is abfolutely impracticable ; and every attempt for 
 that purpofe, " by reafon of our imperfeftions, 
 " muft needs be dark, fometimes weak, fometimes 
 " unintelligible." Perhaps he will bid as fair as 
 any man to be an expounder of myfteries who 
 fhall difentangle the feveral claufes of this paragraph. 
 I know not whether any thing can be found fur- 
 pafTing this, either in the ftyle, or in the fpirit of 
 prefent moderation,* 
 
 The truth of the matter is, that very fenfible and 
 very good men, are apt to run into inconfiftencies 
 upon this fubjed. " It is very meet, fays Dr. Potter 
 " in his anfwer to Char. Miftaken, that the igno- 
 *' rant people fhould obey their overfeers in the Lord^ 
 
 * See a curious vindication of this author, (Bp, Talyor,) 
 in Wood's Ath. Oxoni. p. 402. Vol. 2. 
 
 C c 4 " and 
 
392 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 ** and fubmit themf elves to the minijiry and direSlion of 
 ** the Church in many ■profound doSirines above their 
 " reach. But it behoves them, (fays he, in the im- 
 " mediately following fentence,) to have a diftindl 
 " and comfortable knowlege of the effential points 
 " of faith; and not fecurely to reft in a babidi fim- 
 " plicity, but (fo far as God hath enabled them) 
 " to be led on to perfedlion. To which purpofe 
 " they are commanded tofearch the Scriptures, that 
 " they may grew and increafe in knowlege, &c, and 
 " that they may be able both xo believe with the hearty 
 " and confefs with their r;:outh, and render a reafon 
 " of that hope that is in them." 
 
 Bp. Taylor 'j Bifc. on the Lib. of Pro. Se£i. 2. 
 No. 6. Char. Mijiaken anfwered, Se£l. 6. p. 203. 
 
 Page 270. (qq) freedom of fentiment.'] The hu- 
 mour of raifing doubts and diiputes, oppofing 
 eftablifhments, and difdaining to think or a6l in 
 the common way is, as Bp. Gibfon obferves, well 
 expreffed by one of the advocates for infidelity, in 
 words to the following effed: -, that if the opinions 
 of a certain friend of his were efiablijhed to day, he 
 would oppcfe them to morrow. This, the Bp. informs 
 us, is reported to have been laid by a perfon (I 
 luppofe) of fome confequence, whofe name he men- 
 tions not. 
 
 Bp. Gibson'j Paji. Let. p. 7, 8. 
 
 Page 271. (rr) fpiritual ConJUtution.l The au- 
 thor of a work publifhed fome years fince under 
 
 the 
 
ANNOTATIONS. ^gj 
 
 the title of Free Thoughts on the fubje£i of a farther 
 Reformation^ fpeaks of our Reformers in the fol- 
 lowing terms. " One no fmali difadvantage which 
 *' they unhappily laboured under, and which from 
 " their time to this has been matter of juft regret 
 *' to true friends of Divine Revelation, was their 
 " defe£i of knowlege in facred matters, above all 
 " in the true fenfe of Scripture, &c. If (fays he 
 " in another place) we would form our judgments 
 " of the abilities of our Reformers to frame for us 
 " a fyftem of dodlrines which (hould remain a per- 
 " petual flandard of belief and profefllon in the 
 " Englifh Church, and by which all our Clergy in 
 " all future ages fhould be fummarily concluded, 
 " we ihall, I fuppofe, fee juft reafon to wifli that 
 " they had been more equal than they appear to be, 
 " to fo weighty an undertaking. Thofe who are 
 ** well acquainted with their writings will fee, in a 
 " variety of inftances, evident m.arks of their infuf- 
 *' ficiency for fuch a tafk -, and be fully convinced 
 " of the truth of that obfervation of a learned and 
 " worthy Do6lor of our Church, that they were but 
 " had interpreters of the Scriptures." 
 
 In fupport of all this derogation, which is oblig- 
 ingly qualified with a few introductory common- 
 place compliments, our author has given us a 
 number of extra6ls, relative to certain religious 
 topics, from Arch-Bifhop Cranmef^ Catechifm, pub- 
 lifhed in 1543, and dedicated to King Edward VI. 
 
 We 
 
394 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 We may fee, it feems, from thefe extrads, how 
 greatly difproportioned the abilities of this famous 
 Prelate and his colleagues were to the work of Re- 
 formation, &c. To what conclufions this will lead, 
 I need not inform the reader. But I take leave 
 to offer a remark or two upon the occafion. In the 
 firft place, if the intelleclual weaknefs of our Re- 
 formers was really fo great as is here reprelented, 
 ProteRants to a man have reafon enough to be 
 alhamed of themfelves. What anfwer lliall they 
 make to any lenfible Roman-Catholic who fiiould 
 teaze them with thefe mortifying truths ? To my 
 thinking, as none of the exceptionable contents of 
 the paifages cited from the Arch-Bilhop's Cate- 
 chifm make a part of the docflrine of our Church, 
 they might, in reverence to bis memory, and for 
 her credit, have much better been fupprelTed. Had 
 this Gentleman contented himfelf with obferving, 
 that the Reformers of the Church were fallible men; 
 and confequentjy, that the Forms and Offices they 
 have delivered down to us may be capable, in 
 fome inftances, of alteration and improvement, 
 he had fpoken more agreeably to truth, though 
 lefs adequately to his purpofe. For what he has 
 alledged has a plain tendency to Ihew the necefllty 
 rather of pulling doivn than repairing our fpiritual 
 building. On the whole, as he has conduded mat- 
 ters, I know not any one perfon upon earth under 
 fo many obligations to him as the Pope of Rome. 
 
 llliall 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 395 
 
 I fhall take this opportunity to animadvert on 
 certain dirty afperfions in a late performance from 
 the hand of a rigid non-conformift, and perhaps 
 an avowed unbeliever, and perhaps both. 
 
 The anonymous editor of Dr. Johnfon''^ Life of 
 Dr. I. Watts with Notes, facrifices to the virulence 
 of his dipofjtion every regard to decency, charity, 
 and truth. It will be proper to trace this calumny 
 to it's iburce. " Happy, fays the celebrated Biogra- 
 " pher, will be that reader (viz. of the works of 
 " Dr. IV.) whofe mind is difpofed by his verfes or 
 *' his profe, to imitate him in all but his Non-con- 
 " formity, to copy his benevolence to man, and 
 " his reverence to God." Is there any thing in this 
 to put a man of candour, or a man of fenfe out of 
 humour ? Yet our Editor afks, " is not this ex- 
 " ception, and even the mention of this circum- 
 " ftance, a ftriking proof of Dr. Johnfon's bigotted 
 " attachment to the national eftablifhed mode of 
 " worlhip ?'* It is really no proof at all. How far 
 Dr. J. was in fad a bigot to eftablifhments, I un- 
 dertake nor to determine -, but the period juft quoted 
 by no means proves him to have been fo. The 
 moft moderate Chnrchman breathing has not the 
 better opinion of Dr. W, for his Non-conformity. 
 I cannot think fuch an one could have " mentioned 
 this circumilance" more tenderly, had he mentioned 
 it at all ; and with what propriety Dr. fV — 's Bio- 
 grapher could have left it unmentioned, I muft 
 
 leave 
 
396 ANNOTATIONS, 
 
 leave It to this Gentleman to explain to us. " Re- 
 " verence to God, he proceeds, and benevolence 
 '• to man, are the two grand elTentials of religion. 
 " He that pofleiTes thefe is a true Chriftian, what- 
 *' ever be the external mode of worfhip which he 
 " adopts. Neither his Conformity nor his Non- 
 ** conformity will exclude him from the divine fa- 
 " vour, nor ought it to be matter of cenfure to 
 ** his fellow-creatures. If a man in uniting with 
 '' any Chriftian community, appears to follow the 
 " dictates of his own confcience, &:c, he deferves 
 ** the efteem of all parties, and to object to his 
 *' peculiarity of religious profeflion is the mark of 
 *' a little mind." 
 
 Now this is partly true, partly falfe, but, you 
 fee, as far as Dr. John/on is concerned, wholly im- 
 pertinent. There is as little as poflible of cenfure, 
 or of objedlion in the fentence above quoted from 
 him. As to fincerity of perfuafion, no body de- 
 nies the validity of it's pretenfions j but at the fame 
 time what will make an honeft man will by no 
 means conftitute a " true Chriftian." " Reverence 
 " to God and benevolence to man are indeed the 
 " two grand elTentials of all religion j" and, to bor- 
 row our author's term, they may be poffeji by 
 Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Heretics. 
 
 " That Dr. IV. was confcientious in his Non- con- 
 formity," will be readily admitted •, but furely 
 this will not juftify the unfairnefs, or the duplicity, 
 
 or 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 397 
 
 or the malignity, or the falfhood of the following 
 paragraph. " Confidering what the terms of mi- 
 " nifterial conformity are, fays our annotator, it 
 " may be juftly queilioned, whether if all the clergy 
 " were equally confcientious, one half of them 
 " would not be Diffenters. To declare an ajjent and 
 *' conjent to all and evkry thing contained in the 
 *' 'Thirty -?iine Articles, the book of Common Prayery 
 " ^c, (which comprehend fuch a prodigious num- 
 " ber of particulars-, many of them very difputable, 
 " fome of them unintelligible, and others exploded 
 " by the wifeft and beft of men •,) is fuch a requi- 
 *' fition as it is hard to be conceived the generality 
 ** of the clergy can bona fide approve. It is indeed 
 " WELL KNOWN that MOST of them, and even of 
 " the Bishops themfelves, dilbelieve fome of the 
 " doftrinal articles of the Church, as appears from 
 " the general ftrain of their preaching and of their 
 " writings, and that they profefs to fubfcribe 
 " them only as articles of peace. If the terms of 
 " conformity were a declaration that they did not 
 *' believe '' all and every thing, &c," it is unde- 
 *' niable that many (not to fay the moft) of thofe 
 " that conform might very confcientioufly make it. 
 *' Whether therefore their fubfcription to the pre- 
 " fent terms be confiftent with fimplicity and godly 
 '• fincerity, it behoves them feriouQy to enquire. 
 " If others think that fuch a fubfcription would, 
 '^ in them, be a grofs prevarication, and rather than 
 
 « be 
 
398 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 *' be chargeable with it, willingly forego the ad- 
 " vantages of being in the Church, they ought at 
 " leail to be refpefted as honed men. And if Dr. 
 " John/on had ftudied the grounds of Non-con- 
 ** formity (which he appears not to have done) he 
 *' might have entertained a better opinion of the 
 ** iinderflandings of Proteftant Diflenters as well 
 ** as their integrity. But this is not the place for 
 '* entering into that controverfy." 
 
 If thefe reprefentations are juft, and thefe aller- 
 tions true, the controverfy is abfolutely decided 
 with a vengeance •, and the bulk of the clergy of 
 of the Church of England are as great a fet of 
 fc — ndr — Is as can be produced in the annals of 
 the human race. I fhall not wafte a moment in 
 vindicating them from imputations fo palpably 
 fcandalous •, but content myfelf with declaring my 
 firm belief, that Dr John/on would not " have en- 
 " tertained a better opinion either of the under- 
 " {landings or integrity of Proteftant Diflenters'* 
 from thefe famples of both -, and that were Dr. JV, 
 reftored to life, he would, for vifible reafons, think 
 himfelf under much greater obligations to the Bio- 
 grapher than to the Annotator. 
 
 In fhort, we are not to wonder at any thing 
 which is advanced by one who maintains, as this 
 writer does in another page of this very perform- 
 ance, that " in the Scripture-plan no traces of a 
 " national Church, or ecclefiaftical authority, are 
 " to be found." 
 
 Ic 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 399 
 
 It may be pertinent to remark farther, that ex- 
 ceedingly mad as the Puritans and their friends in 
 the laft century were againft the governors of the 
 Church, and our whole ecclefiaftical polity, they 
 appear to have been more than ordinarily felicitous 
 to exprefs their full ajfent and conjent to the moft 
 material articles of our faith. Their quarrel was 
 not (igainji our do6lrine but our difcipline. I have 
 by me ajuft and literal tranflation of the ConfeJJion 
 of Faith ^ together with two Catechifms, a larger 
 and a lefs, drawn up by the AJembly of Divines at 
 Wefimlnfter^ in 1651, under the authority, and with 
 the concurrence and approbation of Parliament, (fo 
 called,) and of the Yax^q^ Scotland. The 3d claufe in 
 the ch. deDeo et Sacrofan5fa Trinitate runs verbatim as 
 follows. *'In Deitatis unitate perfonae tres funt unius 
 " ejufdemque eflentiae, potentias, ac aternitatis; 
 " Deus Pater, Deus Filius, ac Deus Spiritus Sanc- 
 ** tus. Pater quidem a nuUo eft, nee genitus 
 " nempe nee procedens : Filius autem a Patre eft 
 " JEterne genitus : Spiritus autem Sandus aeterne 
 " procedens a Patre Filioque." In the 23d ch. de 
 flatii hominum pojl mortem^ deque refurre^ione mor- 
 tuorum^ we find this claufe : " Noviffimo illo die, 
 " qui comperientur in vivis non morientur quidem 
 ** fed mutabuntur \ qui mortui fuerint refufcita- 
 " buntur omnes, ipfifTimis iis corporibus quibus 
 " viventes aliquando fungebantur, ac non aliis, ut 
 
 " ut 
 
40O ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 /' ut qiialitate differeiitibus ; qus denuo animabus 
 " qua^que fuis jcterno conjiigio unientur." 
 
 Thefe dotStrines are held out almoll in the fame 
 words in both Catechifms. 
 
 From which circumftances I take occafion to 
 afk, whether, as far as we may reaibnably colleft 
 from the ftyle and the fentiments of the Editor of 
 Dr. Jchnfon's Life of Dr. /. JVatts with Notes, the 
 views and the difpofitions of the Proteftant Dif- 
 fenters of this age have not a tendency more ini- 
 mical and deftruftive, than were thofe of thefe 
 fame Anceftors of theirs who " triumphed in the 
 ruin" both of Church and State } 
 
 But is there not after all an inveterate difficulty, 
 which we have rather met than encountered, and 
 much lefs overcome, and which furnifhes Popery 
 with its flirewdell argument, and Infidelity with its 
 flrongeft handle ? The proteilant principle afferts 
 the right of private judgment in matters of reli- 
 gion. And yet precepts relative to obedience to 
 fpiritual authority, &c, are as plain as thofe direc- 
 tions which require us to prove all things, and to 
 hold f aft that which is good, &c. How fhall we 
 reconcile thefe things ? In confequence of the ex- 
 ertion of this perfonai right, differences arife in 
 the world, and controverfies, the natural iffue of 
 them. How are theie to be decided ? Is it not a 
 folecifm in religion to fuppofe a controverfy with- 
 out a judge? Neverthelels we fay, and demon- 
 
 ftrate 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 401 
 
 ftrate too, that the Church of RomCy the only 
 Church which pretends to infallibility, has erred, 
 and that even in fundamentals. Accordingly we 
 refer to no arbitration y we acknowlege no rule of 
 faith, no judge of controverfy but Holy Scripture. 
 Supremus judex (fay the Weftminfier Divines above- 
 mentioned) a quo omnes de religiom controverfi^g Junt 
 determinanday omnia conciliorum decreta, opiniones^ 
 &c, nullus alius ejfe pot eft prater Spirit um Sari^um 
 in Scrip tura pronunciantem. -j- 
 
 But are not thefe vain words ? Doth any many or 
 any body of men pretend to the gift of dijcerning of 
 Spirits at this day ? Or if they do, are their pre- 
 tcnfions admiflibie ? Or can Scripture, with any 
 propriety, be faid to be the judge of controverfy, 
 when it is the whole and fole ground of it ? Do 
 not all parties find means to wrench the authority 
 of the facrcd pages to their fide ? Every Anti-tri- 
 nitarian will fay, in the words of Chillingworth^ 
 (whatever the real fentiments of the latter mis-ht 
 be,) *' Propofc me any thing out of this Book, 
 " and require whether I believe or no, and feem 
 " it never fo incomprehenfible to human reafon, I 
 *' will fubfcribe it with hand and heart, as know- 
 " ing no Demonftration can be ftronger than this, 
 "God hath faid fo, therefore it is true." J But 
 then to the proofs you have to offer, and the texts 
 
 f ConfefT Fid. Cap. i. lo. 
 
 % Religion of Proteftants &c. p. 335. 
 
 D d vou 
 
402 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 you have to produce, he oppofes his texts, and his 
 proofs, fuch as they are •, or perhaps one general 
 aflerrion, which no body can deny, viz. that there 
 is but " one living and true God." Where now is 
 the judge of controverfy ? What is become of ec- 
 clefiaftical authority ? Or what have we to fay to 
 thofe who caj} it in our teeth^ that the Church of 
 England hath erred as well as the Church of Rome ? 
 In fliort, where is herefy ? And what is fchifm ? 
 
 With a view to the folution of this difficulty, 
 and by way of Supplement to the contents of the 
 foregoing iheets, let us fee whether a little enquiry 
 will not enable us fufficiently to afcertain what he- 
 refy of the word fort was in the days of the Apoftles 
 themfelves, and according to the conception they 
 mufl by fair conftruftion be underftood to have 
 entertained of it. 
 
 In his 2d general Epiftle St. Peter foretells that 
 there would hQfalfe teachers among Chriftians, who 
 fliould privily bring in damnable hereftes^ even de- 
 nying the Lord that bought them. (ch. 2. v. i.) From 
 which paflage we can do no lefs than infer, that 
 the denial of the Lord that bought us is of all he- 
 refies the mod damnable. 
 
 Now whether we do, or do not abide by Dr. 
 Whitby's interpretation, who apprehends we are to 
 underftand God the Father by the word Lord in this 
 paflage, " Chrift being never Ityled Sirriromc; (the 
 " original word) in the New Teilament," the in- 
 ference 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 403 
 
 ference will inevitably be one a.\id the fame. Je/us 
 Chrift was confeffedly the purchafer of the Church 
 with his own blood. In point of nature, or attribute, 
 there can therefore be no difference betwixt thefe 
 two Perfons ; the herefy which denies either will 
 be equally damnable, according to Dr. /iF's fenti- 
 ment. But if we reje6l it, the Divinity of our Sa- 
 viour is not lefs implied in the text before us. For 
 in moil evident allufion to this very purchafe, Te 
 are bought with a -price, fays St. Paul to the Corin- 
 thians -, therefore^ continues he, glorify God, i. e., 
 out of all queftion, Jejus Chrift who bought you, in 
 your body and in your Spirit, which are God's ; i. e., 
 which are Chrift's. (i Cor. 6. 20.) It may be a 
 fatisfa6lion to the reader to compare this palTage 
 with the following in the next Chapter. He that is 
 called being free, is Chrift'* s Jervant. Ye are bought 
 with a price -, be not ye the Jervant s of men. {y.ii^ 
 &c.) 
 
 In his lad and farewell addrefs to the Children of 
 Ifraely which is called his Song, their great Legi- 
 flator puts this queftion to them, is not he thy 
 father that hath bought thee ? * God is faid to have 
 bought his people by his deliverance of them from 
 the bondage of Mgypt -, which was only a type, but 
 indifputably a type of the eternal redemption obtained 
 for us by the precious blood of Chrift. And is it 
 
 * Deutero. Ch. 32, 6. 
 
 D d 2 not 
 
404 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 not jult to infer the equality of thefe Divine pur- 
 chafers from the nature and value of their refpec- 
 tive purchafes ? The denial of the Lord that bought 
 us is therefore in effeft the denial of the Divinity 
 of our Saviour. 
 
 There is a paflage in St. Jude^ parallel to this 
 which we have had in con fi deration, that will not 
 be found confiflent with it, or with its context, 
 without fappormg the fame equality. This Apoftle 
 complains of certain ungodly men^ who denied the 
 only Lord God, and our Lord Jejus Chrijl. They 
 denied our Lord Jefus Chriji^ as one with the Father, 
 not as in effence diftind: from him. I fay, the affi- 
 nity of this pafTage to the other, and its own con- 
 text, not barely warrant, but demand this fenfe. 
 Jude the Servant of JeJus Chrijl^ ^c, to them that 
 are Jan^ified by God the Father^ and prejerved by 
 Jefus Chrijiy and called. We are very fufficiently 
 authorifed to read by for /«,* in this paiTage ; and 
 if fo, it is molt undoubtedly as much the attribute, 
 or property of the Supreme God to prejerve^ and 
 to call^ as it is tofan^lify ; which indeed is the dif- 
 criminative office of the Holy Ghoft : whofe Divi- 
 nity, by the way ;, is here plainly afferted by implica- 
 tion. But we are under no neceffity of difturbing 
 the prefent verfion. In the 3d verfe, the Apoftle 
 exhorts Chriiiians to contend earnefily for the faith 
 which was once delivered unto the Saints, That from 
 the beginning fome fhould depart from the faith, or 
 
 * See Hammond, &c, &c. 
 
 a belief 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 405 
 
 a belief in Jejus Chrijl^ as the Son of God by eternal 
 generation, on principles, and for reafons, by which 
 infidels and fceptics are influenced at this day, is 
 by no means matter of aftonifhment. But fuppoling 
 the faith of the primitiye Chfiftians, ih^ faith which 
 was once delivered unto the Saints^ to have been 
 merely a faith in Jefus Chrifi as a prophet, or as the 
 MeJJiah, or as a creature of a more or lefs excellent 
 name^ there would, I prefume, have been little 
 room for contention about it, or danger of its being 
 denied. 
 
 \i we take into examination that impious and 
 ftrange dodlrine of which St. John fpeaks in terms 
 of ftrong cenfure and refentment, in his firji and 
 Jecond general Epiftle, this refearch will likewife ter- 
 minate in an unqueftionablc proof of our Lord's 
 Divinity ; and convince us, that in the denial of 
 it the error confided. Every Spirit that confejfeth 
 not that Jefus Chrifi is come in the flefh, is not of God: 
 and this is that Spirit of anti-chriji^ whereof ye have 
 heard^ ^c. Many deceivers are entered into the worlds 
 who coifefs not that Jefus Chrifi is cotne in the flefh» 
 *This is a deceiver and an anti-chrifi. (i John. 4. v. 3. 
 2 John, V. 7.) Or, as fome read thefe palTages, that 
 confefs not Jefus Chrifi which is come in the fief h. The 
 import of thefe texts will not be in the ieaft affeded 
 by this variation. That the man Chrifi Jefus, the 
 perfon who was known by the name of Jefus Chrifi, 
 lived and converfed in the world, did many won- 
 D d 3 derful 
 
4o6 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 derful works^ was contumeiioufly treated, and at 
 length put to a painful and ignominious death, 
 were fafts too recent, and too generally known, to 
 be difputed by any at the time when our Apoflle 
 wrote thefe Epiftles. That the Jejus Chriji of thefe 
 Epiftles was the very identical perfon whom the 
 Apofde ftyles in his Gofpel the Son of God, the 
 Word that was in the beginning with God^ and really 
 and truly was God, cannot with the leaft appear- 
 ance of reafon be queftioned. But that God was 
 indeed manifeft in the flejh-^ took our nature upon 
 him, and hare our fins in his own body on the tree, 
 this was a faying too hard for the acceptation of 
 -thofe deceivers^ falfe prophets , and anti-chrijls^ as St. 
 fohn calls them, and whom, at the 6th v. of Chap. 
 4. he reprefents as poITeft with the fpirit of e^Tor. 
 Accordingly they were weak, and at the fame time 
 bold enough to refolve this great truth into mere 
 femblance and deception ; and to affirm that the hu- 
 man perfon of Jefus Chriji was a phantom, and lived, 
 and fuffered, and died, not really, but in appear- 
 ance only : which abominably ridiculous notion 
 was, as has been obferved, in a great meafure 
 adopted afterwards by Mahomet^ who was offended 
 at thofe indignities and fufFerings which he confi- 
 dered as altogether unworthy cf that prophetic 
 charadler which he acknowleged Jefus Chriji^ as his 
 predecexTor, to have been veiled with. This dodtrine 
 is delivered in the Koran in general terms; but the 
 
 followers 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 407 
 
 followers of Mahomet differ in their fentiments re- 
 fpeding it. According to fome, Jefus Chriji was 
 not nailed to the Crofs, but a malefador who in 
 perfon much refembled him. The perfon crucified, 
 fay, others, was " a fpy that was fent to intrap our 
 " Saviour j" and others affert him to have been 
 Judas ', and others, Simon the Cyrmian. 
 
 Or if we fuppofe St. John to have had in his eye 
 another heretical tenet of a funilar nature and ten- 
 dency, which was very early difleminated in the 
 Church, vi%. that of the Carfocratians, &c, who 
 made a diftinftion betwixt Jejus and Chriji ; and 
 maintained, that the former fuffered, and rofe 
 again, but that the latter was impaflible, as being 
 purely of a fpi ritual nature ; (agreeably to the idea 
 fuggefted by Webjler^s tranflation of Father Simon, 
 which for every Spirit which confejfeth not, &c, reads 
 which feparateth JeJus ;) the refult will neceffarily 
 be found to be one and the fame. For to what can 
 we reafonably attribute the denial of our Lord's 
 humanity, or its reparation from the divinity, but 
 to an averfenefs to acknowlege the union of God 
 and Man in the perfon of Jefus Chriji? And if 
 fo, it will naturally follow that this union was the 
 do6lrine of the Apojiles^ and the belief of the pri- 
 mitive Church. 
 
 It is well worth obferving, that Polycarp^ in his 
 
 Epiftle to the Philippians^ quotes word for word 
 
 the 3d V. of the 4th Ch. of St. Johnh firft Epiftle, 
 
 D d 4 Whofoever 
 
4o8 ANNOTATIONS, 
 
 PFhofoever does not confejs i^c ; and that Ignatius^ 
 who convcrfed with the Apoftles, and, upon the 
 death oi Evodius was appointed Bifhop of Antioch 
 b as many of the facred College as were then 
 living, not barely mentions, but moft exprefsly 
 cenfures and condemns this whimfical opinion of 
 the Phantomijisy if I may take liberty fo to call, 
 them. " Stop your ears, fays he, in his Epiille to 
 " the l^raUians^ as often as any one fhall fpeak con- 
 " trary to Jejus Chrift -, who was of the race of 
 " David, &c ; who was truly born, and did eat 
 " and drink ; was truly perfecuted under Pontius 
 ^^ Pilate -i was truly crucified, and dead." And a 
 little after, if, fays he, " fome v/ho are Atheifts, 
 " that is to fay Infidels, pretend that he only seemed 
 " to fuffer, (they themfelves only feeming to exift,) 
 " why then am I bound .'' Why do I delire to fight 
 " with beads ?" In the Epiftle of the fame Father 
 to the Smyrn^ans^ we have the following paflage. 
 *' And he fuffered truly, as he alfo truly raifed up 
 '' himfelf •, and not, as fome unbelievers fay, that 
 *' he only seemed to fuffer." 
 
 Though therefore neither the Apoftles, nor the 
 Apoftolical Fathers particularly fpecify what he- 
 refy is, it appears by juft and natural inference 
 from many paffages in their writings originally to 
 have confifted in denying the perfed Godhead, and 
 perfeft manhood of our Saviour j and that herefics 
 in general deferve to be confidered as fo many eva- 
 
 fions 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 409 
 
 fions of thefe fundamental truths. There 4s another 
 paiTage in the Epiftle to the I'rallians which, fimply 
 afferting the Divinity oijejus Chrift, puts this ouf 
 of all reafonable doubt. *' I exhort you, fays the 
 " venerable Author, or rather not I, but the love 
 '' of Je/us Chrift^ that you ufe none but Chriftian 
 " nourifhment ; abftaining from pafture which is 
 " of another kind, I mean herefy. For \ they that 
 " are heretics confound together the do^rine of Jefus 
 " Chriji with their own poifon, &c. Wherefore 
 *' guard yourfelves againft fuch perfons. And that 
 " you will do if you are not puffed up, but con- 
 " tinue infeparable from Jefus Chriji our God, and 
 " from your Bifhop, and from the commands of 
 *' the Apoftles," In fhort, all thefe circumftances 
 concur to the eftablifhment of our firft Hypothefis. 
 If the Catholic faith of the primitive Chriftians 
 was the fame which is held in the Church of Eng- 
 land at this day, at and before the publication of the 
 Holy Scriptures of the New Tedament, as well as 
 the writings of the Apoftolical Fathers, their doc- 
 trine on the fubjefts we have been handling is fuffi- 
 ciently uniform and explicit ; if otherwife, it is by 
 far too confident, and too perfpicuous. 
 
 Agreeably to what has been advanced, we may 
 farther obferve the facred authors frequently refer- 
 ring to fome (landing do6trines, fome capital arti- 
 
 X Sec the references in the Margin. 
 
 cles 
 
4IO ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 cles of belief, which had been by them taught, 
 and were by the Church univerfally received. It 
 will be a hard matter to comprehend the meaning 
 of many paflages in the Scriptures, without fup- 
 poling them to import, or to allude to fome fuch 
 dodrines or principles. The firft converts to Chrif- 
 tianity are faid to have continued fiedfaftly in the 
 Apojiles, do5irine and fellowfiip ^ '^' and whatfoever 
 that do<5lrine might be, it v/as then no written 
 do6trine. St. Paul thanks God, that the Roman con- 
 verts had obeyed from the heart that form of doc- 
 trine which was delivered to them, f Pie exhorts 
 the Thejfalonians to Jland fafi^ and hold /Z^d' Tradi- 
 tions which they had been taught, whether by wordy 
 or by his Epfile ; J and recommends it to 'Timothy, 
 to keep that which was committed to his trujl ; and 
 to hold faji the form of found words which he had 
 beard of him. § He injoins 'Titus to reje£f a man 
 that is an heretic ^ after the firfi and fecond admoni- 
 tion. ** It will be fufficient to add to this the ad- 
 vice of St. fude to Chriftians in general, which 
 juft above fell under notice, viz. that they Hiould 
 earneftly contend for the faith which was once delivered 
 unto the Saints. 
 
 It was doubtlefs with an eye to xKisfaith, to the 
 prefervation of the fame in purity, and to the fu- 
 ture peace and profperity of the Church, that Jefus 
 
 * A^s ii 42. f Rom. vi. 17. 
 
 X 2Thefrii. 15. § 2 Tim. i. 13. ** Titus iii. 10. 
 
 Chrift 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 411 
 
 Chrifi gave Jome^ A-poftles ; as St. Paul informs us ; 
 and fame y Evangelijis •, and Jome^ Prophets •, andjome^ 
 PafioYs and 'Teachers : f nor could the purpofe of 
 fuch appointments have been anfwered but by a 
 regular fucceffion of fome of thefe charadters 
 through all ages. 
 
 For the fame purpofe moft unqueftionably, God 
 hath Jet in the Church, helps, and governments, &c, 
 as the fame Apoftle declares to his Corinthian con- 
 verts in the i2th Chapter of his firft Epiftle to 
 them. 
 
 Now how all this could be done ; or how either 
 Evangeliji, Prophet, or Teacher^ or Governor could 
 at any time, or in any manner, exercife his fun6lion, 
 without invading the right of private judgment, 
 as it has of late days been contended for -, or with- 
 out departing from the fimplicity of the Gofpel in 
 its original ftate, I pretend not to have fufficient 
 penetration todifcover. 
 
 Matters appear then to fland thus. — That Jejus 
 Chrijl conftituted no arbitrator, no infallible judge, 
 or decider of controverfy, &c, in his Church, 
 is demonftrable from the differences, the difputes, 
 and diffentions, relative to circumcifion, &c, which 
 fubfifted in its very infancy. At the fame time 
 it is certain the Holy Scriptures fpeak of a common 
 faith, and of the common Jalvation* You have feen 
 
 I Ephef. iv. II. * Titus i. 4, Jude v. 3. 
 
 what 
 
412 ANNOTATIONS. 
 
 what grounds we have for our perfuafion that fuch 
 common faith was nothing more or lefs than a be- 
 lief in the dodrine of the Holy Trinity, and the 
 other articles contained in our Creeds. Under this 
 perfuafion, the Church of England, as a national 
 Church, as a Church reformed from the grofs 
 errors, corruptions, and fuperftitions of Rome^ has 
 not only " power to decree rites, or ceremonies, 
 but authority in controverfies of faith ;" viz. au- 
 thority, not to determine, but to declare. Accord- 
 ingly we do not anathematife, or molefc them that 
 renounce our Do6lrine, or feparate from our Dif- 
 cipline, upon principles avowed by ourfelves. We 
 maintain our own rights without encroaching upon 
 the privileges of others. We " difcover, condemn^ 
 and avoid" what we call and believe to be herefies, 
 without aiming, or wiihing to prevent them by 
 Coercion. We conceive fpiritual government to be 
 as compatible with religious liberty, as temporal 
 jurifdiciion is with civil •, and that when the Re- 
 formers aflerted the right of private judgment in 
 matters of religion, the natural right of all men 
 to make ufe of their own faculties, they could not 
 poflibly mean to inveil every individual with the 
 *' privilege of working out his own falvation by 
 '^ his own underflanding and endeavours,'* inde- 
 pendently on any extraneous affiftance, or infbruc- 
 tion whatever ; and much lefs to intimate, that he 
 
 is 
 
ANNOTATIONS. 413 
 
 is under an indifpenfable obligation fo to do. 
 Were this the cafe, the Apoftle's queftion, are 
 all T^eachers mud be anfwered in the affirma- 
 tive •, and the neceffary conlequence would be, 
 that EVERY BODY, and yet no body would be a 
 'Treacher. Which is abfurd. Neither the jufleft 
 claim, nor the mod reafonable exemption can alter 
 the nature of things. If it be true, that this 
 Church derives her exiflence from the exertions of 
 human reafon, emancipating itfelf from fpiritual 
 flavery ; it is as true, that fhe owes her preferva- 
 tion to decent order, and legal eftablifhmenr. If 
 it be true, that the bulk of the people naturally 
 wifh to ad, to think, and to judge for themfelves; 
 it is as true, that they naturally take advice or in- 
 ftrudion from others, fubmit to controul, and re- 
 verence authority. In fhort, to whatever caufes we 
 are to afcribe that diverfity of opinion which dif- 
 tra6ls the world •, how perplexing fo ever the pre- 
 fent conftitution of things may be ; or for what- 
 ever reafons it has pleafed infinite wifdom to place 
 us in a Itate of trial, infirmity, and imperfeftion ; 
 one general truth muft univerfaliy be fubfcribed 
 to \ viz. that, with refped both to faith and prac- 
 tice, the Lord knoweth them that are his., \ and will 
 hereafter acknowlege them accordingly. 
 
 \ 2 Tim. li. 19. 
 
 P. ?. 
 
414 A N N O T A T I O N S. 
 
 P.^S. It is needlefs to tell the fenfible reader, 
 that I have not been profefTedly contending with 
 any of the latitudinarian writers whofe works are 
 incidentally quoted, or referred to, in the progrefs 
 of thefe Difcourfes and Annotations. If w^hat 
 has herein been offered be fufEcicintly folid and fa- 
 tisfaftory, they are feveraily replied to, though not 
 in form, y^t in effedt. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 N. B. The reader is defired to correfl a few errors of the 
 Prefs with his pen; efpecially ia p. 84. 1. 15. — 109. 1. i. — 
 147. 1. 16.— 333. 1. 26.-334. 1. II. 
 
r III I III I [iJ^Ii'i'mV .^.^.'"'"^^-Speer Librar, 
 
 1 1012 01130 9335 
 
*.»-;■■■