Authorized to Write in Defence of the Doctrine of the â—rinity It seems very hard that we may not Vindicate the Fundamentals of our Religion from Absurdities Contradictions and Falshoods impâ—ted to them till a Convocation can be called to do it Which in my apprehension is not easily practicable unless we could have a Convocation always fitting which he cannot think either feasible or convenient according to our Constitution And yet if they are not always sitting it will be very difficult and troublesome immediately to call them to Confute every Heretical Doctrine that in times of Liberty may be broach'd by Bold and Daring men When it may be fit to do thus I leave those to whom it belongs to judge but I am sure 't is neither reasonable nor practicable every time Hereticks oppose the Truth Now by this method he says All Sons of the Church would and must be concluded And are they not already concluded by the Articles Liturgy Homilies c. which he says our Adversaries cannot alter I suppose he would not have us obliged to Subscribe every Line and Tittle in such a Book revised and approved by a Convocation as a Fundamental of Christianity but only the Doctrines there defined as Fundamental And thus I think in the present Point All Sons of the Church are already concluded by Subscribing the Articles and Creeds and if this would do it as our Author imagines there would already be a due end put to these Controversies But according to his Peaceable Notion of Subscription by his proposed method All Sons of the Church would not be concluded any farther then to hold their Tongues for they might still believe and inwardly approve the Socinian Doctrines or any other which thouâ—â—â— he may think a due end of these Controversies yet few others will But after all How would this put an End to these Controversies If a Convocation should meet and determine on the side of our Articles and Write a Book to justifie the truth will this put an End to these Controversies Will the Socinians be generally Converted any more than they are by Learned mens Writings now I doubt they would hardly acquiesce in such a Book though drawn up by our Author who though he would be favourable enough to them yet I hardly believe would be able to satisfy them Which he thinks will not be till we can make things plain which are confessedly unsearchable if not as some pretend unintelligible The plain English of which I take to be That it is impossible to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity so as to satisfy even rational and sober men And then I cannot apprehend how his Method would put an End to these Controversies any other ways than by a Negative Belief though I very much question whether even upon such terms he could persuade the Socinians to be silent But still he cannot see any readier Expedient than this towards such an Vnion as in the present state of things may be adjudged possible Indeed I cannot tell whether a real Christian Union in the present state of things will be adjudg'd possible or no nor whether such an Vnion as our Author pleads for be necessary for our Affairs and would be effectual to keep out Popery and beat the King of â—rance but I hope both may be done without it But if such an Union as is indeed desirable and such as there ought to be in the Church of Christ be not possible I know the fault is not in the Church nor only in her professed Enemies who will not comply but in such pretended Friends as under the colour of Peace do openly affront and condemn the Faith of the Church and vilify her Constitutions thereby hardening and encouraging her Adversaries in their Obstinacy and giving them hopes that by their means they shall at length obtain the Terms they desire But of this Negative Belief enough has been said only I cannot but take notice of one thing here desired by our Author That no Praâ—tice be imposed upon any contrary to their Consciences The meaning of which I take to be as is plain from several other places of his Book and particularly from p. 10 of the Earn Suit That no Expressions should be allowed in the Liturgy which any one professes are against his Conscience nor any Rite or Ceremony required which all men are not satisfied in and so we must part with Episcopacy and all Order and Decency to satisfy mens pretences to Conscience This is a brave Protestant Reconciler and this is admirable arguing for a Church-of England-man and one who has read Fathers and Schoolmen This is such a loose and wild Principle as if duly adhered to we must tolerate most if not all Errors Schisms and Vices that were ever heard of in the world The next thing we are to answer is a Captious Question with which he pretends to answer the Dean who as he imagines had put such an one to him The Dean had ask'd him Whether he would allow us who as he grants are in possession of this Faith of the Trinity and Incarnation to keep possession of it and teach explain and confirm it to our people Now because he is resolved to be as captious as the Dean he asks him Whether he never saw certain Royal Injunctions assigning fit Subjects for Sermons No doubt but he has What then Why then Must they not be obeyed Yes But what of all this To discourse concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity is not there prohibited But is there not the same reason of it as of those things that are I believe not For as I take it the Trinity and Incarnation are more Fundamental Points than the Disputes about Predestination and more necessary to be believed by Christian People Besides the Controversy then was not only with such as wholly denied the Article but among those who differed in the sense of the Article while there was something contained plainly in the Article to which both sides agreed tho some would have more included in it than others could find or would allow to be there asserted Which Controversy Authority saw fit to silence at that time since both sides owned the Truth of the Article which asserted a Divine Predestination and would not let every one in their Pulpits run into nice useless and hurtful questions nor do we desire this should be allowed in the Doctrine of the Trinity And when he has Interest enough at Court to procure a Royal Injunction that no man shall write or speak concerning the Trinity we know what we have to do but till then his Royal Injunctions are no more to the purpose than his own Arguments But however he will not stand with us for this Point for notwithstanding this he yields that Ministers should at due season preach to their people the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation only let them do it plainly easily purely and sincerely according to
A DEFENCE OF THE Dean of St. Paul's APOLOGY FOR Writing against the SOCINIANS A DEFENCE OF THE Dean of St. Paul's APOLOGY FOR Writing against the SOCINIANS IN ANSWER TO THE ANTAPOLOGIST LICENS'D LONDON Printed for William Rogers at the San over-against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet MDCXCIV A DEFENCE OF THE Dean of St. Paul's APOLOGY FOR Writing against the SOCINIANS ONE would have thought that when the Ancient Doctrine of a Trinity in Unity had not only been contradicted but openly scorn'd and ridicul'd with as little Modesty as Sense it had been no unpardonable Crime to undertake the Defence thereof But it seems a certain Stander-by being a little touch'd with Melancholy could not bear such an Attempt for this is to litigate touching a Fundamental and that is to turn it into a Controversy that is to unsettle at least endanger the unsettling the whole Superstructure So that when some Learned Writers took upon them to chastise the Insolence of these Busy and Factious Underminers of Christianity who in the opinion of any one that is not overrun with Melancholy must be thought by their bold Attempts upon the Fundamentals of our Faith to have endeavour'd the unsettling the whole Superstructure this Stander-by was put into a sudden Fright to see men so unreasonable as to write in Vindication of a Fundamental Article of the Christian Faith which it becomes Peaceable men rather tamely and silently to give up than to litigate concerning it And therefore he addresses in An Earnest and Compassionate Suit to the Learned Writers in Defence of the Churches Doctrine to hold their hands and forbear at least till a fit time But it seems All men had not the same Sentiments of this Peaceable Design as the Melancholy Author of it had nor could the Compassionaâ—e Suit work its hop'd-for effects on the minds of All Learned Writers 'T is no wonder therefore that the Dean of St. Pauls was not thereby discouraged from resuming the Defence of the Catholick Faith but only thought it necessary before he ventured to dispute these matters any farther to make some Apology for Disputing and to show that notwithstanding what this Author endeavours to persuade the world it is neither Vnchristian nor Vncharitable nor of Dangerous Consequence But this Apology of the Dean's did it seems stir the Spleen of our Stander-by and move the Choler of this Peaceable and Modest Person who would but it seems he could not especially towards the Church of England observe the common Rules of Good Manners And therefore we must not blame him if in his Reply to the Dean we do notwithstanding his designing the contrary and composing his Mind as far as he was able meet with Bitterness Passion Cavilling Insolence and Ill Language for tho he will not pardon such things in himself and therefore 't is to be hop'd will do private Penance for them yet it may become us to pardon them and let it pass as he says too many do for a Point of Justice in such case calcare fastum majori fastu And besides since he owns that 't is not without difficulty that Human Nature forbears rendring an Angry and Disdainful Reply to Haughty and Ill-natur'd Answers or those which are fancied to be such if he does now and then do so himself we may suppose it was because he could not help it and therefore it is excusable for I hope the Plea which he makes for Hereticks may serve also for himself and if a man must Conceive as he can and Judge as he can and Believe as he can so he must also Write as he can And this I think will also be a sufficient Apology to our Author for my not being of his mind for since I must conceive as I can and judge as I can I find that for my life I cannot judge his Discourse to be either rational or well design'd but rather as he would fain have the world think of the Endeavours of other Learned Writers Vnreasonable Vnseasonable and of Dangerous Consequence And therefore without any farther Compliment I shall venture to bestow some short Remarks upon it in which I shall also confine my self to the main Design of the Book which is as we shall hear him confessing himself anon To dissuade men from Writing in Defence of the Doctrine of the Trinity and therefore I shall not think my self concerned to enlarge in the Confutation of those Arguments against the Dean's Hypothesis which ever and anon he gives us into the bargain for my business is only to consider what he says in Defence of his Peaceable Design of persuading All men as well as the Dean not to write in Defence of the Truth if he thinks it so But I must desire one thing of Our Author That because he falls foul on the Dean for pretending to know his Intent when he wanted the Gift of discerning Spirits to capacitate him for being a Judge of it he would take notice That I do not pretend to know his inward Intentions any more than his Name And therefore whatever I shall say in my Reflections let him not pretend that I do it to calumniate and inodiate him since all I have to do with is his Book But now let us come closer to the purpose and be plain and succinct as far as our Author 's intricate way of Writing will permit who begins as he also goes on with heavy Accusations against the Dean for his Bitterness Insolence Ill Language Indignities False Imputations and at least seemingly malicious insinuations against himself Whether all this be true and whether the Dean in any place treats him with greater Sharpness than such a Writer deserves must be left to the Impartial Reader to judge One of the False Imputations with which he charges the Dean is That he says He called the Socinians learned Writers of Controversy whom he now protests he did not mean by that Character And tho his Title-Page be so ambiguous that it might easily be mistaken either for a Suit to Learned Writers or for Forbearance to Learned Writers yet I am apt to believe him because he has not dissuaded the Socinians from Writing against the Trinity but other Learned Writers from Writing for it A good Orthodox Excuse But waving this and many Instances of the like Disingenuity he will present here the main State of the Cause betwixt the Dean and himself which in short is this That the Disputes touching the Controversies of the Holy Trinity might be at present let alone till fit time and place I suppose he means only by the Orthodox Writers who defend that Doctrine for he himself protests that by Learned Writers to whom he addressed his Suit he did not mean Socinians And to persuade to this he had said This particular Controversy is of all others at present most unreasonable most dangerous and most unseasonable This may pass for a state of the Question and I will leave it to the
and what none would contend for but he that either knows not what he asks or has a mind to overthrow the true Faith The next thing as near as I can guess that he endeavours to shew from Fathers Schoolmen and Protestant Divines is That the word Person is equivocal and uncertain in its signification I hope then his Clients may like it the better as being able to make use of it in a sense agreeable to their own Doctrines But after all this Vncertainty of the word Person about which he has shown so much Learning as far as I can find there is so much of its Signification agreed to on all hands that the Antitrinitarians are unwilling to use it as evidently including something that will not go down with them and I fear that this is the true reason of our Author's Quarrel against it But now our Author has shown himself such a Master of Books he can't forbear stepping a little out of the way again to show himself as great a Master of Reason and therefore falls foul upon the Dean for contradicting himself for making Three Minds and One Mind and making the Persons Distinct and not Separate which is to him an unavoidable Contradiction And who can help it if it be What the Dean maintains is not so to every body's apprehension especially if it be considered in his own words without our Author's Comment on them for it may be understood how Three Minds are One tho it be something difficult to apprehend that they are three sames and not three sames And I can no more understand our Author's arguing That if they are Distinct they are Separate also than he can the Dean's when he says they are Distinct and yet not Separate which I believe will not sound like an Absurdity to any but a Socinian Vnderstanding But if the Dean has been mistaken and has fallen short in his Arguing and has also set up an Hypothesis full of Contradictions which yet there are a great many Wiser men than our Author do not believe what would all this be to the Design of our Author's Book If Dr. Sherlock does not argue well must no body therefore write that can argue better If his Hypothesis be unreasonable is it therefore unreasonable to write in Defence of the Doctrine of the Trinity Or is the Doctrine it self unreasonable Some men we know think so and this may be several strokes in his Book be suspected to be the Opinion of our Author However he is so great a Lover of Peace why then does he quarrel so much with the Orthodox Writers and the Church of England that he is willing to admit the old way of speaking and the Ancient Notion of a Divine Person as being more consistent and less obnoxious Which if it had been kept to he had fâ—rborn his Suit 'T is the New Notion then that he quarrels at but why then must all men be desired not to write in Defence of the Doctrine of the Trinity even tho they do hold to the old Notion But hâ—re that is in the Ancient Notion of a Person or rather in that Word since it has been a long time in use without ever defending or explaining the thing he would have our Divines stop for Peace sake And I believe they will gratify him so far as not to enter into any farther Disputes about it if he will secure that the Socinians shall not oppose this but subscribe to it and not write against it Now he would persuade us and so it may be he might if we had never seen his Melancholy â—uit or did not understand English That all he desired was that men would stop at the Ancient Notion c. when 't is plain to any English understanding that he desired a great deal more viz. That no body would write at all in Defence of the Ancient Faith or Ancient Notion â—f a Person though our Adversaries do daily affront and ridicule the Doctrine of the Church and the Ancient Notion too For I only desire to know Whether the ridiculing the Athanasian Creed which was the occasion of Dr. Sherlock's Vindication be not ridiculing the Ancient Notion This being all his harmless Design he is very angry at the Imputation of Disguised Heretick c. What he is I determine not but I am sure he writes just as if he were such an one and since he has not set his Name I can't apprehend it any ways uncharitable to suspect so much of an unknown Author of whom we have nothing else to judge by but his Book which I am sure will never prove that he is any thing better and does well deserve to have a Brand set upon it that unwary Readers may not be deceived by it And this I believe whatever he doth very few Orthodox Hearty Asserters of the Catholick Faith will think a Calumny Now for the Dean's New Hypothesis again who did not keep within bounds and stop where he ought to have done but must needs be rambling and therefore he must have a lash or two for that And for the Reader 's great Edification our kind Author will give an account how far he had read of the Dean's Book when he writ which and several other as weighty Accounts of himself and his private Concerns I leave to the Reader that has Curiosity enough to peruse them But the Dean holds that which necessarily infers Three Gods and in his Apology goes beyond himself as in his Vindication he went plainly beyond and contrary to the Doctrine of the Fathers Schools and Protestant Divines Pray what 's the matter now Why he calls the Son a God Incarnate and the Holy Ghost a God and therefore infallibly by vertue of this little Particle a there must be Three Gods all the world can't help it For tho he expresly says These Three are but One God and proves it too yet as long as he says the Son is a God Incarnate there is nothing can vindicate him from the Imputation of Tritheism and therefore he must according to his Promise thankfully correct this Absurdity now it is so plainly shown him But does a God Incarnate signify any more but that he who is Incarnate is God Which if we were always to deal with such Criticks is a much safer way of speaking than to say he is God Incarnate for among those who own a Trinity of Divine Persons in the Godhead a God Incarnate can signify no more than that One of the Divine Persons who is really and truly God is Incarnate but to say God Incarnaâ—e might be abused by such perverse Criticks to signify That the whole Trinity which is the One God is Incarnate The next Complaint of our Author is That the Dean charges him with desiring that no body would write agaâ—nst the Socinians And pray is not that the design of his Melancholy Suit To most mens apprehensions I dare say it is nor do I find that he himself makes any exception
allow his Latitude of Faith and from hence to prove that the Scripture words have no determineâ— sense and are not to be believed in one determined sense is to prove that the multitude of Heresies destroys the certain and determined sense of Scripture and I wonder what he means who pretends to own One Faith to object against this One Faith the various and contrary Systems of Opinions in Religion unless he thinks all these contrary Systems are within the Latitude of the Vnit or of the One Faith And now that this Latitude may not pass for his own invention he tells us That God is doubly the Author of a Latitude in Faith 1. In revealing his Truth in such terms as admit of a Latitude of conception that is in not revealing it at all for if the terms admit of a Latitude of conception i. e. two contrary senses which is the truth Both cannot be and if both are equally the sense of the words then the Truth is not revealed but as far to seek as ever Now for my life cannot I imagine what else this Latitude of conception should be unless he means that God has revealed his Truths and those too the most Fundamental Articles of Christian Faith for concerning such our present Controversy is in such dubious and ambiguous Phrases that we cannot understand the true sense of them or at least that very few can and that even they few cannot be certain that they understand them in the right sense that is in that sense which God meant them tho that is improperly said for it seems God meant them in none but intended that every man should believe them in what sense he pleases This he may call a Latitude of Faith but it is such a Latitude that if I should tell any Infidels of it whom I would convert to Christianity they would presently laugh at me and my Faith too But in the second place God is the Author of a Latitude in Faith in giving to men as he sees fit such measures of knowledge and persuasion as leaves them in a higher or lower degree of Faith and even of Holiness This is impious for in the true consequence of it he charges not only all the Heresies but all the Infidelity in the world on God Almighty and justifies both their Heresies and their Infidelity by the different degrees and measures of Faith or by the No-Faith which God gives them but I am not at leisure to dispute this now for it does not concern our present purpose But if our Author would say any thing either in defence of what he pleads for or against what the Dean maintains he must show that Christians are not obliged to profess and believe one and the same Truth that agreeing in Scripture-words tho understanding them in contrary Senses is sufficient to make Orthodox Christians that we must not defend the true Faith against such as oppose it especially if they or any Peaceable men for them pretend that they believe as they can and as by Grace they are able and that the Church must not require an open and undisguised Profession of the True Faith Now all this he says is far from thinking it indifferent what men believe but very far I am sure from being any Proof of what he pleads for for there is nothing that can uphold his Cause but such an Indifferency as will not allow the Church to concern her sâ—lf what men believe nor her Members to defend the True Faith But I must conceive as I can and judge as I can and believe as I can too I must not believe what I cannot believe Very well And I need not believe any more than I can and this is true too if it be not my own fault that I can believe no more but if it be I shall hardly be excusable before God or Man I cannot it may be believe the true Faith of the Holy Trinity or it may be I cannot believe the Truth of the Christian Religion as I fear too many now-a-days will be ready to tell you some Luâ—ts and Prejudices hinder me from discerning the clear evidence of it and so long I cannot believe and therefore I hope I shall be excused and no body will be so quarrelsome as to litigate with me about it nor go about to confute me for I believe as by Grace I am able for though the Gospel be never so true if God has not given me Grace to understand so much how can I believe it For neither I nor any man alive who believes any thing can believe all that Dictating men will impose upon them But can't he believe what Reason and Divine Revelation Diâ—tate And who desires him to do more If the Doctrine of the Trinity be the Imposition only of Dictating men let him prove that and we will no longer desire him or any man to believe it But if it be the plain truth of the Gospel we will desire him to believe it and think the Church has Authority enough to require him to do it though the Church can't make that an Article of Faith which God has not made so For I hope she can require the profession of that which God has made so and that is all we desire But in Controversies the Church may declare her Sense and we are bound so far peaceably to submit and accept it as not to contradict it or teach contrary under Penalty of her Censures A very bountiful Concession for which he deserves her publick Thanks if he will but stay for them till a fit Time and Place And this he would be content I doubt it not to conceive the whole of what our Church requires as to these things which are merely her Determinations Now who can tell what he means by merely her Determinations for I never heard that the Church delivered any Doctrines especially the Creeds as merely her Determinations which would be indeed with a bare face to impose upon the Faith of Christians but she never pretended to make a Faith but to teach that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints But does he really think the Church desires no man to believe the Creeds and particularly the Doctrine of the Trinity but only not to oppose them Doth she indeed hand them to us merely as her own Determinations Can any thinking man say so But if this were all Do our Socinians observe this Why does not he first persuade them to comply thus far before he desires us not to defend the Church's Doctrine But let us hear his profound Reason For in truth it is to no purpose for her to require such Approbation and Consent which whether paid or no she can never come to have knowledge of which sort is Belief and inward Approbation Is it then to no purpose to teach men the Truth because they may put upon us and say they believe it when they do not Is it to no purpose to require