THE ANTAPOLOGY OF THE Melancholy Stander-by In Answer To the DEAN of St. Paul's late Book falsly stiled An Apology for Writing against the Socinians c. Disputandi Pruritus est Scabies Ecclesiae Errare possum Haereticus esse nolo Printed in the Year MDCXCIII ADVERTISEMENT THE following Answer was writ for the main Body of it some time ago at the Author's Home in great Disadvantage as will appear by divers Passages in it Since he wrote it he has had Occasion to come abroad and though in his way he has met with divers Books which at home he wanted yet some very needful ones he could not come by or in travelling had not leisure to search If therefore in certain Instances Authorities be wanting and in others not particularly or exactly enough cited he hopes the Reader will pardon what is more his present Infelicity than Fault Had not the Usage he has found with the pretended Apologist been unsufferably bad he had born it in Silence And he hopes he has here vindicated himself without Gall though with much Imperfection CONTENTS of the several Sections § 1. THE Dean of St. Paul ' s calumnious Way of apologizing no Argument of his Skill in School-Divinity 2. The true State of the Matter of Fact between Dr. Sherlock and the melancholy Stander-by 3. A further Explication of the same together with some Account of the Doctrine of the Trinity and where the melancholy Stander-by would have Divines stop both as to Faith and as to Peace Dr. Sherlock stopped not here 4. A Descent to Particulars injuriously charged on me by the Dean of St. Paul ' s and an Account of his Arts in perverting my Sense 5. What I meant by the Latitude wherein I would have Faith left and what by Simplicity 6. A Defence of the Reflection I made on the Master of the Sentences and the School-Doctors as to their Disputes and Decisions in the Doctrine of the Trinity 7. My Apology as to the Idleness and Unskilfulness in the School-Doctors charged upon me by Mr. Dean 8. A Vindication of what I avouched touching the Judgment of the first Reformers as to the School-Divinity and School-terms in our Prayers The Judgment of later Divines as to this second Point 9. An Answer to Mr. Dean's Objection touching my Plea for sticking to Scripture-Language 10. It seems not possible by any Words so to fix the Sense of all controverted Places of Scripture but that Hereticks may have Evasions Yet this is no Prejudice to the Vse of Scripture-Terms and Language 11. A Defence of the Latitude I plead for and by the by of the Negative Belief 12. An Answer to Mr. Dean's Objection of one Faith 13. A Reassertion of my Reasons for forbearing new Discourses on this Subject by some Account of the Advantage Dr. Sherlock ' s Book of the Trinity has given the Socinians and Papists 14. A Reassertion of my other Reason by the late Writings that the Improvements pretended to be made in Explication of this Doctrine have only imbroiled and exposed it Of Geometrical Attempts this way 15. My Defence for settling the usual Doctrine of the Trinity upon the Decrees of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Councils Of some Niceties in the Athanasian Creed 16. An Answer to the Imputation of Hobbeism and Mr. Dean proved to contradict himself 17. An Answer to a Particular or two forcibly brought in by the Apologist and as would seem merely to inodiate me 18. My Assertion that some present Writings in this Controversy have given Advantages to Atheists vindicated 19. A Vindication of my self from Theism A Profession of my Belief of the Trinity and Incarnation and of the whole revealed Christian Religion My Sense of Scorners 20. A Reassertion of the Danger of disputing Fundamentals The Dean changes them instead of defending them which the Author hopes other present Writers will not 21. A Vindication of my last Argument touching the present Unseasonableness of publick disputing this Controversy 22. An Answer to the Dean's Objection that if we dispute not the World will think us all Socinians and to an Insinuation of his for rendring me obnoxious to the Government 23. An Account of what I meant by fiâ— Time and Place for taking the Socinian Controversies into Consideration and a Vindication of what I proposed in the mean time 24. An Answer to some Questions which Mr. Dean puts to me and particularly as to admitting Socinians to some kind of Communion Some Points by him unduly stated and imputed to the Socinians 25. A Reassertion of my Sense touching the Acts of Parliament in Favour of Dissenters and an Answer to some Reproaches 26. A Reassertion of what I asserted done as to Reformation in King Edward the VIth's Time without a Convocation 27. An Answer to his good Will for reforming me out of the Church His false Charge on me touching Dr. Wallis noted and his Discession from the Doctrine of the Church râ—asserted His Hypothesis justifies Nestorianism 28. An Answer to his conclusory Aspersions and an Animadversion upon his Promise of desending his Vindication of the Trinity The ANTAPOLOGY of the Melancholy Stander-by In Answer to the Dean of St. Paul ' s late Book falsly stiled An Apology for writing against the Socinians SOME Men have such a peculiar Talent at Insolence and ill §. 1. Language that it is difficult for a modest Person or one who would observe the common Rules of good Manners to give them a meet Answer In the Rank of such Writers I am sorry I must place the late Apologist I could have wished upon many Accounts that in the Reflections he has been pleased to make on my Paper he had for his own sake as well as mine used more Temper Reproach and Scorn is an easy way of confuting And 't is not without Difficulty that humane Nature forbears rendring an angry or disdainful Reply to haughty and ill-natur'd Answers In such case Calcare fastum majori fastu seems to too many a Point of Justice but I shall not esteem it so desiring to pardon such Practice in others rather than in my self Composing therefore my Mind and quitting as near as I am able all Passion and Self-love over-looking the Contempt and many of the Indignities and false Imputations yea and some at least seemingly malicious Insinuations to those in Authority which he has thought fit to print against me I shall return nothing but the Words of Truth and Soberness without Cavil or even Contradiction any further than Justice requires Only because an accused Person cannot ordinarily make his Defence unless he be admitted as well to discover and complain of the Wrong done him as to deny and disprove and being that the fairest Laws of Dispute allow as occasion offers to retort upon the Adversary his own Objections these things I must demand to be lawful for me which Liberty being granted me I shall endeavour without warm Water to wipe off the Dirt that Mr. Dean has cast upon me
I find done was that at some Distance of time several Attempts and Proceedings pass'd in order to it and Extracted out of Dr. Burnet at length the Work was finish'd by divers Committees successively but those neither of the Convocation nor named by the Convocation Indeed Cranmer was the principal Person and who else were imployed therein may be seen in Dr. Burnet's 2d Part p. 196 197. But before it received the Royal Confirmation the King died and the Work fell with him says my Author As to the second I do not observe any Notice was taken of it either by the Bishops then in Power or by the Parliament And I conjecture the Reason to be for that it was known full well to the Reformers that the Generality of the Clergy were at that time Papists in See Dr. Burnet Part 2. p. 96. their Hearts which hindred the Church of many Powers and Privileges that otherwise might have been granted to her And however many of them for that time complied yet in Q. Mary's Days when Popery came to be resettled by Parliament all of them save 177 if we may believe See his Journal pag. 23. Part 2. p. 50. Sir Simon D' Ewes turned about again or became I apists As to the third It was resolved saith Dr. Burnet that many Bishops and Divines should be sent the same who afterwards compiled the Liturgy saith Dr. Heylin were sent to Windsor to labour in the Matter of the Communion-Service but that required so much Consideration that they would not enter into it during a Session of Parliament However it was finish'd and publish'd with the King's Proclamation March 8 1547 8 as Dr. Heylin tells us And for the fourth what Answer was given to it doth not appear Thus the Reverend Doctor However most certain it is that neither were these Bishops and Divines named by the lower House of Convocation but by the King and Council as will by and by appear nor the Alterations by them made ever brought before that House What further Dr. Burnet records done by this Convocation upon the Bishops sending down to the lower House a Declaration concerning the Sacrament to be received in both kinds and the Marriage of the Clergy to the former of which all consented and to the latter most I need not report What I have faithfully thus represented from him is the Sum of that Account which he says is all he could recover of that Convocation Pag. 50. And what shall the Man do that comes after him Despairing therefore of more touching this Convocation we will go on with Fox and others in the Proceedings of the Reformation made without them Not only the Communion was enjoyned by Act of Parliament to be ministred in both kinds to which it may be said the Convocation consented but by the same Parliament solitary Communion of the Priest or private Masses were put down of which that we find the Convocation had never been consulted and to which that lower House for many Reasons would never have consented and the Curates required at least one Day before the Communion to exhort all Persons that should be present to prepare themselves for receiving Fifthly After this most godly Consent of the Parliament continues my Author making no mention of a Convocation for that now was broke up with the Parliament The King being no less desirous to have Fox p. 1183. the Form of the Administration of the Sacrament truly reduced to the right Rule of the Scripture and first Use of the Primitive Church than he was to establish the same by his own Regal Laws appointed certain of the most grave and learned Bishops and others of his Realm to assemble together at his Castle at Windsor and there to argue and intreat upon this Matter and conclude upon and set forth one perfect and uniform Order according to the Rule and Use aforesaid Here was made the then new English uniform Order of the Communion Sixthly In the mean while that these learned Persons were thus occupied about their Conferences the Lord Protector and the rest of the King's Council farther remembring that the time of the Year approaching wherein were practised many superstitious Abuses and blasphemous Ceremonies against the Glory of God and Truth of his Word and determining the utter abolishing thereof directed their Letters unto the Godly and Reverend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury requiring him that upon the Receipt thereof he should will every Bishop within his Province forthwith to give in Charge to all the Curates of their Diocesses that neither Candles should be any more born upon Candlemas-day neither yet Ashes used in Lent nor Palms upon Palm-Sunday which was done accordingly And one of the Letters may be seen in my Author expresly saying All this was done by my Lord Protector 's Grace with the Advice of other the King's Majesty's most honourable Council dated Jan. 28 1547 8 at which time the King had reigned one Year compleat Seventhly Contention and Strife arising amongst the common People in divers Places of the Realm about Images what of these had been idolatrously abused and what not and consequently what should be pulled down and destroyed what left the Lords of the Council by one Advice thinking it best of good Experience for the avoiding all Discord and Tumult that all manner of Images should be clean taken out of Churches and none suffered to remain did thereupon again write their Letters unto the Archbishop of Canterbury to that Effect The Copy of the Letters bearing Date Feb. 11 1547 8 with Boner's Letters in Obedience to the Archbishop's Mandate thereupon may be seen at large in Fox Eighthly By this time the uniform Order for the Communion in English being finished Letters missive from the Council are issued forth to the Bishops of the Realm concerning the Communion to be administred according to the Tenour of the said Book Which Letters also may be read in the same Author p. 1184. bearing Date at Westminster March 13 1548. Ninthly Notwithstanding all these Orders to proceed through the perverse Obstinacy and dissembling Frowardness of many of the Priests who therefore never consented hereto in Convocation there arising a marvellous Schism and Variety of Fashions in celebrating the Common Service and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church the King's Council having good Intelligence hereof did by their prudent Advices again appoint the Archbishop of Canterbury with certain of the best learned and discreet Bishops and other learned Men to draw and make one convenient and meet Order Rite and Fashion of Common-Prayer and Administration of the Sacrament to be had and used within the Realm which was accordingly done and the Book which was the first of the two in his Reign was by the King exhibited to the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament about Nov. 4 1548. in the second Year of his Reign in which Parliament it pass'd with the Assent
be a just and modest Reprehension of him and what I am sure the Man will meekly take But to make him black and odious by all Arts and to talk of reforming him out of the Church for his peaceable Desires and Well-meaning is imperious beyond Measure and what another would call Tyrannical nor will he name what Spirit it bespeaks especially when the great Argument or Foundation of all against what he has said is no better than a Petitio Principii or taking for granted the prime Matter in question namely that the Doctrine of the Trinity as Dr. Sherlock has stated and does defend it is a Fundamental of the Christian Faith This the Dean in his Apology has not offered one Word to prove but quitting his Adversaries and shutting both Eyes and Ears against all that has been said against his Novelties on this Subject violently falls upon exposing the peaceable Man which was indeed much the easier Project but whether either Christian or Honourable the World will judg The melancholy Stander-by had asserted in his 7th Page the Doctrine of the Trinity as duly stated to be one of the Fundamentals of Christian Religion And it is most plain by what he propounds as the Medium of Peace that the stating it according to Scripture and in Scripture-Language he esteems the most due stating it the Dean likes not this says it is a Proposal of old Hereticks and not only would have the Philosophical Terms now a long time usual in this Point received for Peace-sake but as Fundamental in Faith Nay and not content herewith he gives new Definitions of or affixes new Notions to these Terms and would have all pass upon us still under the Colour of Fundamentals The melancholy Stander-by to speak the whole Truth neither could nor can admit either of these namely either that Philosophical Terms never used by Scripture and besides of various Use or uncertain Signification should be made Fundamentals of Faith or that the Doctor 's new Explication of them should pass at all and his Reasons may perhaps appear anon But in what he writ he express'd not this his Dissent so as to contest either of these Points Only as he would not enter into the Controversy himself so he desired chiefly by reason of the Mischief he thought he saw arising from thence it might be at present forborn by all and he is still as willing as ever to decline engaging on either Point only in his own Defence against what the Dean has endeavoured to load him with he must now say that if any should join Issue with the Dean upon the first Article of the Nicene Creed I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD c. which is a Fundamental and the true Catholick and Apostolick Faith It will soon appear that Dr. Sherlock has in his Book contradicted and to his Power overthrown that Faith as much as ever Johannes Philoponus or Joachim the * So the Text of the Decretal stiles him Florentine Abbot or as others the Abbot of Floria or Flency the two greatest and most antient Leaders of the Tritheists ordinarily assigned ever did for according to the best Accounts of them neither of these expresly maintained more Gods than one nay they expresly disclaimed such Assertion only they so taught the Nature and Distinction of three Persons as that their Doctrine inferred three Gods from which Charge the Invention of mutual Consciousness will never clear Dr. Sherlock ' s Definition of a Person in the Godhead for such Consciousness whatever he says to the contrary can infer only an Vnity of Accord not of Substance and Nature whereas it is an Unity of Substance and Nature that the Council and Fathers have held but these things require more Words than the present Design admits To make the Sum of my Sentiments or what I would be at plainer §. 3. The holy Scripture states the Trinity under the Notion of Three bearing witness in Heaven for I have much more to say for that exagitated Text than to allow it wanting in any Copies on any other Reason but their Imperfection and affirms these three one but how they are one it determines not And Faith being a Belief of the Witness of God and Baptism a Seal or Badg of Faith when we are baptized we are baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost as owning and assenting to or professing and vowing to acquiesce in their Witness touching all the whole Will of God and Method of Salvation published in the Gospel This is Scripture and here the melancholy Stander-by would stop as to Faith in this Point of the Trinity To the Incarnation there is yet no occasion to speak The Fathers in the Council of Nice did not as far as ever I could perceive by any genuine Monuments of theirs vote the Term three Persons the Incarnation of the Son of God or his Divinity though made Man was the Controversy before them rather than the Trinity and the great Product of that Council was the word Homoousion in Assertion of the Son 's being of the same Substance with the Father But the Greek Fathers of that Age did soon use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in this Case is most aptly rendred Subsistence and contend for three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Subsistences Now as to the common Definition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in divinis that is to my best Memory pretended to be taken out of Justin Martyr by Damascen a Father of much latter Age I said to my best Memory for my Condition is such at present and has been such upward of four Years that I am without the Use of the best part of my Books and now near 150 English Miles distant from a Library Yet I thank God I am Master of Justin and Damascen more ways than one be it spoken without Affront to Dr. Sherlock in case of my having read other Books I had read them near two and thirty Years ago But to return to the Definition spoken of as now I take it out of my old perhaps too imperfect Notes runs thus In the Holy Trinity an Hypostasis is an unbegun or if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasâ—en Dialectic cap. ult Word may be pardoned a beginningless manner of the eternal Existence of each that is of Father Son and Holy Ghost So that according to this Author it superadds nothing to the Divine Essence which is one and common to all the three save a bare manner of Existence or Subsistence Only by the way I must note as to the Authority of that Piece in the Works of Justin Martyr whence this Definition comes namely the Expositio rectae fidei it is sufficiently proved by Scultetus Rivet and others to be none of Justin's genuine Works The Latin Fathers which came soon upon the Heels of the Council and of the Greek Fathers above spoken of suspected this Word Hypostasis and St. Jerome particularly contended there
recommend his Judgment as more sincere and competent Now these three of the first Reformers I shall abide by at present as having censured the Divinity of the Schools much more severely than I did after them But these were not our English Reformers and I censured even them for retaining Scholastick Cramping Terms in their publick Prayers By Mr. Dean's Favour I censured them not only I modestly wished they had used the same Temper as did the foreign Reformers in banishing hard or Scholastick Terms out of our Prayers By these Terms he says I mean the Beginning of the Litany And how came he to know my Thoughts I will assure him I meant not that alone I will not touch upon divers Collects But what does he think of that Preface in the Communion Service ordered to be used before the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on Trinity Sunday Has not that School-Divinity enough in it all address'd to God by way of direct Adoration However because he has pitch'd upon the other I am content to stick by it and shall only give him touching it the Sense of two of the first Reformers I confess not ours in England for I express my Sorrow that they observed not such Caution but two the most eminent who led the way to them Luther lest that Petition O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity c. out of the Liturgy as not only his Enemies Bellarmine and others accuse him to have done but the German Office to this Day evidenceth And Gerard Brochmand and other learned Lutherans not only confess but defend him for it saying the German Word which they use for the Trinity signifies Triplicity rather than Trinity But if that had been all why could not Trinity have been adopted into High Dutch as well as into English There was another Reason for it which I am loth to speak Calvin not only omits it but thus censures it It is good says he to forbear such Forms of speaking which are either too rough or remote from the Vse of the Holy Scripture The Prayer so Utile est supersedere à formulis loquendi nimiùm asperis vel à Scripturae usu remotis Precatio vulgo trita sancta Trinitas unus Deus miserere nostri mihi non placet ac omnino Barbariem sapit Epist quâ fidem admonitionis confirmat ad Polonos Tom. ult p. 687. common with the People O Holy Trinity one God have Mercy upon us does not please me and altogether savours of Barbarity Had the Socinians been the only Persons who except against it more might be said for the retaining it But as to its Original it was certainly never in the publick Prayers till introduced by Pope Gregory the Great the Compiler of the Litany for the main part or the Body of it though not perfectly in the Form it now stands in and Ethnici in summâ rerum ignorantiâ quem potissimum Deûm aut Dearū orarent nesciebant omnes igitur precabantur c. Casaub what other Innovations came in with it is sufficiently known No less a Man than Casaubon will tell us whom the Church imitated or what Precedents she had in such accumulate repeated Invocations Exercitat p. 327. Edit Londin A. D. 1614. Or Ad An. D. XXXII N. 14. And not only in a manner all our Nonconformist Countrymen elder or later but Foreigners of great Learning have strong Exceptions against this Part of the Litany If any will answer those which amongst others the learned Johannes Forbesius in his Instructiones Historico-Theologicae Part. 1. Qu. 31. a. 1. brings I will acknowledg to owe great Satisfaction to such a Person For however Hâc formulâ periculosè disperguntur cogitationes conceptiones precantis veluti ad diversa objecta quas recolligere conatur collectione objectorum in unum Nullo nititur praecepto vel exemplo sacrae Scripturae vel catholicae antiquitatis imo ab eisdem à doctrinâ saniorum Scholasticorum ab ipsâ ratione Theologicâ Discrepat c. Forbes I acknowledg some Men may use the prescribed Form without Sin yet I cannot but judg it much safer not to go so near dividing the Deity and so far to distract Devotion Much more than this could I say which I cannot answer so well as I would on this Subject but this may suffice to shew the Glance I gave was not without Cause And the reducing divers of our Prayers to more Scriptural Forms would much recommend our Reformation to foreign Divines as well as to those of our own Country whom we ought if possible to bring in and unite to us But this is only a plausible Project much talked of of late and such §. 9. Pag. 6. which Hereticks in former Days were the first Proposers of The Arians objected this against the Homoousions that it was an unscriptural Word By Mr. Dean's Favour he herein contradicts St. Athanasius himself who accuses the Arians that they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first began to fight against God from unwritten Terms or Arguments and particularly objects against them using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or unbegotten pleading that it was an unscriptural Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Athanas in Epist de Synod Nic. contra Haeresin Arian decretis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lb. p. 282. and therefore suspitious having also various Significations but that the simple written and truest Terms which had but one Signification were those in Scripture the Father and the Son that unbegotten was used by the Heathens who knew not the Father nor the Son but that of the Father was known to be from our Lord 's own Mouth And doth he not at the same time apologize from the Necessity that lay upon the Council for the Use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though not in Scripture and together confess that the most accurate Expressions or Notions of the Truth are rather to be taken from the Scriptures than other Books It were to be wished this Father had been more constant to this his ingenuous Acknowledgment Again did not St. Ambrose also in the like Case disputing against the Arians say as much of Ingenitus in Latin that it was no Scripture-term and therefore refuse it I am under great Infelicity that I am without so many of my Books and so being oftentimes to trust Memory or old Notes cannot make my Answers so close and pertinent as otherwise I might But I am sure St. Ambrose and I think in his Book of our Lord's Incarnation answering the Arians Argument for proving the Father and the Son not to be of the same Nature and Substance namely that one was ingenitus unbegotten the other genitus begotten now said they the same Nature and Substance cannot be begotten and unbegotten returns roundly In sanctâ Scripturâ nusquam invenio non legi or to that purpose Unbegotten is no where in Scripture I am not I am sure far from his very Words Now was this
to imitate §. 24. my Saviour and answer one captious Question with another 1st He asks Whether I will allow them whom I grant to be in Possession of the Faith of the Trinity and Incarnation to keep Possession of it to teach explain and confirm it to their People And I will ask him Whether he never saw certain Royal Injunctions assigning fit Subjects for Sermons Some in Queen Elizabeth's Time and others since ordinarily transmitted to the Clergy by the Primate of the Kingdom that Preachers shall in their Sermons purely and sincerely declare unto their Hearers the Word of God and in the same exhort them to good Works to Works of Faith as Mercy and Charity that they shall forbear difficult and controversial Points Now although this of the Trinity be not that I remember mentioned yet I am sure there is the same Reason of it as of those that are And by his Favour I will ask him further whether it be not fit to obey such Injunctions or whether the Doctrine of the Trinity be not as difficult and remote from the common Peoples Understanding as is the Doctrine of Predestination and God's Decrees Notwithstanding this I yield In the Name of God let Ministers at due Season as on Trinity-Sunday and the Feast of the Nativity of our Lord preach to their People as they judg it most edifying the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation only let them do it plainly easily purely and sincerely according to Scripture and not with Innovations of their own His 2d Particular I expected would have been a Question also as he promised but he had either forgot his Promise or changed his Mind and so he puts the Case categorically thus I hope says Mr. Dean he that is the melancholy Stander-by does not propose this Negative Belief as he calls it as a Term of Communion that though we know them to deny the Trinity and Incarnation yet if they will agree not publickly to oppose and contradict this Faith we shall receive them to our Communion Now though he has not proposed this in form of a Question yet I will answer it with a very short one Why not At least as far forth as we know that is as they profess they can in Conscience join with us Nay has not Mr. Dean done it or would he not in the Case I shall now put namely Suppose him or me to be in the Pulpit beginning our Prayer before Sermon either as some do with the Collect Prevent us O Lord c. or with some Form or Conceptions of our own in which notwithstanding is nothing of Controversy intermix'd and to subjoin to our own Prayer that of our Lord's Suppose in like manner after Sermon we should use either that Collect Grant we beseech thee c. or some Prayer of our own and then give the Blessing to the whole Congregation promiscuously Admit now that in the Beginning of our very first Prayer we should have seen a Person whom we know to be a good Liver and professing the common Christianity in other Points but so unhappy as that he cannot be convinced of the Doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead as it is ordinarily taught or of the Incarnation of the second Person though he does from his Heart believe and confess Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and hold all other the Articles of the Apostles Creed would or should either Mr. Dean or I in such case stop as soon as we saw that Person in the Congregation and bid him go out refusing he should join with us in those Prayers or receive his Share in that Blessing to both which he heartily says Amen that is Shall I not admit him to Communion as far as I know he does consent and desire to communicate with me and other Orthodox Christian People I know the Story of St. John the Evangelist and Cerinthus but Cerinthus was anotherguise Heretick than such Person as in the Character supposed I might animadvert as I pass that in pag. 27. Mr. Dean imputes sundry Points very iniquitously stated to the Socinians which yet they hold not as he states them I am not concerned to defend the Socinian Errors but as I love Truth and Peace I cannot forbear observing that he here wrongs them First as to what he speaks of the Object of Christian Worship if he as some in the World had had personal dealing with the Generality of his Parishioners as to Matters of Conscience he would say that the Ignorance of many Church-People and so the Errors of their Conceptions both touching God and touching the three Persons in the Godhead much more alter as to them the Object of the Christian Worship than do the Errors of the Socinians Again whereas he says the Socinians deny that the Son of God offered himself a Sacrifice to expiate our Sins I do so far depend upon my Memory as to avow they affirm our Lord Jesus to have been Victimam verè expiatoriam a Sacrifice truly expiatory they are the Words of the Author of the short Exposition of the Apostles Creed whether Slicktingius as I rather think or Crellius I cannot now tell having not seen my Book divers Years Nor do they deny the Love of God to Mankind in giving his only Son to be our Prophet and Saviour and Redeemer too nor his Intercession as their High Priest in virtue of his Blood shed as an Atonement for our Sins They differ from us perhaps in explaining the Nature of Expiation and Satisfaction but both an Expiation and a Satisfaction they allow Some Men write against them without understanding them But I forbear further intermeddling in these kinds of Injuries though to use Mr. Dean's Words it were easy to enlarge on this Argument I am not writing a Defence Pag. 28. of the Socinians only I am vindicating a peaceable Design in a Man that is none but loves Godliness Vertue and good Works where-ever he meets with them and who may chance sooner to perswade many Socinians to be silent by making it apparent he would not wrong them however odious others make them by unjust Charges than will those be able who try their Skill and strain their Veracity in fierce and haughty Disputes against them Men may have Wit enough if they have Justice done them to understand when it is fit to be quiet who will scarce sit down silent under publick Calumnies In the next Place Mr. Dean falls upon me for saying very much is done §. 25. namely for present Union by the late Act in Favour of Dissenters and taxes me here again according to his wonted Civility with pretending to give Account of Acts of Parliament as I do of other Books without seeing them A strange kind of Incredulity touching my Reading has possess'd this Gentleman Must I not be believed to have read Books except I produce Witnesses that heard or saw me read them I can produce Witnesses now in London where I bought this