Fellow heirs with the believing Jews then it ceased to be a Mystery and surely there is another Mystery in v. 9. of that 3d Chapter which our Doctor cannot yet apprehend thô plainly revealed viz. That God created all things by Jesus Christ See Crellius Heb. 1. v. 10. which though frequently asserted in the Scripture as Col. 1. Heb. 1. c. yet the Socinians utterly deny nor can they apprehend what is that Righteousness which is by Faith as opposed to that which is by the Law or to our Doctor 's Natural Faith but the Doctor tells us of another Mystery little less than a Contradiction as p. 1. c. 2. viz. The Patriarchs knew only the Fathers yet Abraham had the knowledge of Christ and our Saviour says that Moses spake of him and the Doctor affirms the same That Moses spake of Christ Deut. 30.12 for the Doctor saith p. 41. c. 1. that the Apostle applied that place to Christ If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved It was not so much in dislike of the Popish Mysteries that the Doctor so often rejects whatever is above human Reason under that Notion as in dislike of the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Eternal Generation of our Saviour of which he speaking p. 34. c. 1. says If you understand not this you must not wonder at least not gain-say it for it is a Mystery which Reason cannot fathom and therefore must be rejected as one of the Packs of Impertinent Mysteries p. 58. c. 2. The Doctor that writes so mystically himself should not be so much displeased if he meet with some Mysteries in other Writings especially in the Scripture wherein as St. Peter observes of St. Paul's Epistles There are some things hard to be understood and will not be fully explained till Elias come And indeed as Naked as his Gospel is it is darkned with so many obscure mists and subtle insinuations that it will appear to some of his most diligent Readers to be one continued Mystery of Iniquity It is a sorry shift which Sandius and others that write against the Trinity make to excuse themselves for thus Sandius pleads see his Appendix p. 107. That he wrote his Book on behalf of the Protestants against the Papists to convince them that the Scripture is the only Rule of Faith because they could not prove the chiefest Articles of their Faith viz. the Trinity Consubstantiality and Coequality from the Tradition of the Fathers of the three first Ages In this our Doctor follows Sandius and would perswade us to renounce the Doctrine of the Trinity because it is a Popish Doctrine See more of this in another Epistle of Sandius p. 261. I have proved saith he that the whole World in the fourth Age was Arian and the Arians enjoyed Temporal Felicity and wrought Miracles to shew against the Papists that these are not marks of the true Church I reckoned diverse Councils of the Arians who condemned the Catholick Faith to shew that we ought not to depend on their Determinations in Matters of Faith but on Scripture only I have shewn that the Church of Rome hath honoured many Arians that were of very evil lives as Saints to shew you what manner of Saints the Papists do Invocate by the Authority of the Infallible Church of Rome c. All this is right but when the whole design of his Book is to shew that the Doctrine of Arius denying the Godhead of Christ and making him a Creature is more consonant to Scripture and Antiquity than that of the Trinity in the Church of Rome is to condemn all other Churches that maintain the same Doctrine for to this purpose tends that which remains in the Third Enquiry concerning the Papists who do impose new Articles of Faith and set their Traditions and Decrees in an equal rank with the Scriptures and sometimes above them with a Nonobstante to Christ's own Institutions as the Socinians do by their Reason let them therefore dispute the Case with each other and let Baal plead for himself He cannot wound the Church of England through their sides unless he can prove the Doctrine of the Trinity to be a Popish Tradition which he doth more than intimate and herein he would do them more service than any of their Champions by proving Popery to be more ancient than the Council of Nice I am now come to the Conclusion of the Author who shuts up his Naked Gospel as generally the Socinians do with a Plea for Toleration to all that confess the Lord Jesus and believe that God raised him from the Dead though they leave him as Naked a Lord as the Doctor hath left the Gospel robbing him of his Eternity and Deity and that Honour and Worship which on those considerations are due to him our Faith in his Name Obedience to his Commands a devout use of his Holy Sacraments and so turn Turks Jews o◠as some English Socinians have done Quakers and live above Ordinances satisfying themselves with a Christ within them and a Natural or Naked Gospel as Mr. Pen in a Socinian Tract hath done This he calls giving Faith its due Bounds by imprisoning it and dismembring it separating Obedience and Love which are inseparable from Evangelical Faith And as for Love saith he we must give it its due boundlesness even to them that love not but deny and bid open defiance to the Godhead of Christ to whom the Apostle denounceth Anathema I wish heartily the Doctor had shewn more Charity to the Church of Christ in general than to think and speak of them as guilty of Idolatry in all Ages for so are they that give Divine Worship to a Creature and that he who stiles himself a Son of the Church of England would not defame her as tainted with Popish because she holds the Athanasian Doctrine for he calls that and the Nicene their Creeds and our Litany their Litany and so becoming a Papist to the Papists and it 's much better to be an Athanasian Papist than an Arian or Socinian Heretick The Doctor tells us in the Vindication p. 7. of his intention to have presented his Naked Gospel to the Convocation that they might be induced to enlarge their Charity at a time when all the Christian World expected it from them And was all the Christian World once more become Arians that they should become Disciples to his Naked Gospel I cannot conceive what compliance the Doctor could presume of from that Convocation he well knows their Prolocutor was the same that agreed shortly after to the burning of it in the Convocation at Oxford and doubtless both he and the several Members would have had the same Resentment of it at Westminster as the Oxford Convocation had When therefore we see a Viper rising out of the Fires of Oxford and hissing p. 5. That the Heresie lay not in the Book but in the
answered Our Doctor mentions it for another reason viz. how any Church dare challenge or any Man dares pay that Faith to any yea all the Creatures in Heaven and Earth which is due to God only And on the Socinian and Arian supposition that Christ is a Creature there is no more Faith or Obedience due to him than to other Messengers of God but we must seek for Salvation by a Natural Religion and then blind as we are by Nature and having but blind Guides we may soon fall into the Ditch For the natural man perceiveth not the things of the spirit flesh and bloud cannot reveal them nor can any man say that Jesus is the Christ but by the Holy Ghost That this seems to be the Socinian sence of the Author is probable from the following words Those who require implicit Faith on any other authority so as to contradict reason give God the lye making him contradict himself for Reason is no less the word of God than is the Scripture So that if the Doctrines of the Gospel contradict the Reason of Arians and Socinians they are not to be received for therefore only are we to believe the Scripture because we are by plain Reason convinced that it is the Word of God But what if some Socinians be tainted with Quakerism and their Reason tells them the Gospel is not the Word of God but that Word is written in their Hearts and the Light within them is the only Word of God and not the Word incarnate or that which is written with Pen and Inke that is in our Doctor 's Opinion the Natural Religion for though the evidence we have that what is offered us for the Word of God is really such to this we must pay neither more nor less belief than Reason will prove due p. 18. col 2. P. 19. c. 2. The Doctor speaking of Belief says thus The same Natural Religion which claimed it as due to God forbad to pay it to any Creature upon the former account there was no need of an express Precept and upon the later there was the greatest need not only of an express Command but such repeated Importunities as might out voice both Reason when it should decry such a Command and Interest when it should rebel against convinced Reason both whereof concurred against the belief which our Lord required The sence of this Paragraph seems to be this That as the Faith which Natural Religion claims as due to God needed no express Precept so Natural Religion forbidding to pay Faith to any Creature there was the greatest need not only of an express Command but repeated Importunities to pay it to Christ such as might out-voice both Reason and Interest seeing they both concurred against the belief which our Lord required I wish the Doctor would give a more rational inference from these words then this that both Natural Religion Reason and Interest do forbid to pay Faith to Christ as forbidding to pay it to a Creature for he saith they concur against the belief which our Lord required If the Doctor by implicit Faith means more particularly a readiness to believe as Articles of Faith and as necessary to Salvation whatever Propositions are imposed on him by his Superiors he well knows we have no such Custom in the Church of England we call no Man on Earth our Master or Law-giver in Matters of Faith He that advanceth his own Reason which is often against and then it must be above Scripture he is in as bad a condition as the most bigotted Papist for he makes himself and all his Faculties and Reasonings as Infallible as they believe the Pope to be Chap. 5. The Contents of this Chapter is thus express'd Why Faith under the Gospel maketh a greater figure than under the Law This state of the Question he presently alters and makes it his business to shew That when our Saviour first claimed the publick profession of Faith in him there were extraordinary reasons for his Importunity and Promises some whereof in these days when the Christian Religion hath been long established have lost their influence and by consequence the importunity of those Precepts and the influence of those Promises do now cease These extraordinary Reasons viz. for professing Faith in Christ he draws from 1. The Difficulty and 2. the Danger of professing Faith in Christ and 3. the Necessity of it All which are readily granted viz. That though it were both difficult and dangerous yet it was necessary that the Disciples of Christ should publickly own Faith in him but then the Inference which he makes is not conclusive p. 23. col 1. viz. Now that our Education makes it as difficult and our Laws as dangerous to deny Christ as it was then to confess him and consequently what extraordinary merit Faith might draw from those Topicks must now be lowered and so Faith will appear a common Grace worthy of no greater than common rewards Is false for as he confesseth though in extraordinary respects that necessity be now abated yet there is a permament necessity from the influence which Faith alway hath on the action of Believers because as he says The Christian is alway a Souldier and must fight against all kinds of Enemies to Christ's Kingdom not only Flesh and Bloud but spiritual Wickedness and whatever would not have the Lord rule over them He must follow the Captain of his Salvation who was made perfect by Sufferings and when tempted he must walk in the steps of his Father Abraham sacrifice his Lusts though no less dear than was his Isaac So that Faith must be habitually the same and therefore needs the same encouragements now as it did when it was first required And I see no great need of that which he so carefully requires that we must distinguish the times for we are still under those later times which St. Paul calls perillous wherein we shall meet with divers Tryals and Temptation and therefore need the whole Armor of God c. And we still need the same degrees of Faith to overcome the World i. e. The lust of the Flesh the lust of the Eyes and the pride of Life To this great Work he says Christ came furnished with no other power but of working Miracles but the Scripture tells us of other powers for St. John says Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ He had the power to confer Grace to give Repentance and Remission of Sins to give Faith and to increase it to open the eyes of their Understandings and turn them from Darkness unto Light and from the power of Satan to God without which powers that of working Miracles was insufficient for we read of many that wrought Miracles in Christ's name and yet had no saving Faith and a Heathen may have a Natural Faith and Moral Vertues and yet come short of Salvation He adds in the conclusion of this Chapter That if we believe him i. e. Christ to require Faith for any other
one Substance the one as a Fountain the other as a Stream flowing from him or as the Beams from the Sun which are not separated These many and plain Evidences of the Belief of the Ancient Fathers before the Council of Nice do evidently declare what sure footing they had for their Faith viz. the unanimous Consent of Apostolical Men Martyrs and Confessors who maintained that the Son of God was of the same Divine Nature and Substance with his Father consonant to the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture and consequently they also shew how rashly and inconsiderately the Doctor says p. 37. c. 1. That we have no firm ground to go upon that this Doctrine was first advanced by a Novice Emperor upon implicite Faith in two Bishops P. 38. c. 2. That it hath no foundation in Scripture Antiquity or Councils and that the Athanasian may be numbred among the Popish and Arian Doctrines which we know to be contradictory in the case of the Trinity And if in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every truth should be established how much more should this Truth be received as unquestionable being confirmed by the Harmony of the Old and New Testament by the Notions of the Apostolical Writers in the Primitive Times and by their Successors home to the Nicene Council who all delivered it not as their own Faith but as the Faith of their Predecessors home to the Apostles days And as for Councils the Synods that were before the Council of Nice and all since except a few under some Emperors deluded by the Sophistry of the Arians and circumvented by their Hypocrisie and Falshood have been constantly of the same Judgment with that of Nice Concerning the Eternal Generation of Christ there is a plain sence of the Anti-Nicene Fathers that will answer all the Objections made by the Arians against that Eternal Generation of Christ and their Opinions that he was only the first begotten of the Creatures being himself made in order to the making of the World for they assert That the Word did alway exist with his Father but there was a prolation emission or application of the Son ad exteriora the Father in order to the Creation and this is by some metaphorically called a Generation not as if he then had a beginning for God as Athenagoras says who is an Eternal Mind had in himself his Eternal Word from Eternity though the Energy or Operation of that Word appeard first in the Creation in which sence be calls the Word the first begotten But such says he as was not made but by whom all things were made This one Distinction of the Word or Son of God being Co-eternal with the Father and his Emission 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Progression for the manifestation of his Father and himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Creation of the World if duly considered as delivered by the Fathers before the Nicene Council will confute all the Councils of the Arians and Socinians against those parallel places of Scripture and particularly against such as speak of the Primogeniture of our Saviour as if he were a Deus Factus or a Creature Having shewed the Authority of Scripture and the Fathers to be against the Arian and Socinian Doctrines there is no necessity of urging that of Councils which they peremptorily decline so Sandius in his Preface to the Reader Ask for the old Paths saith he not of Synods nor of Councils nor the Books of Creeds which later Ages have set forth He was conscious that these would be generally against him except a few that were manged by Arian Emperors so that we have their consent to let these be silent for fear of their Anathema's It is observed that in all Lands where any venemous Creatures are bred there may be found some others that serve as an Antidote to that Venome and sometimes in that very Creature where the Poyson is lodged there is a Medicine to expel it as in the Viper the same Divine Providence hath in all Ages so ordered it that whatever Heresies have been conceived by erroneous Persons have been stifled in their birth by such as God hath raised up for the suppression of them An instance whereof we have in this Heretical Treatise which as it was brought to light by a Rector of Exeter-Colledge so by another Rector of the same Colledge it was provided long before to condemn it to perpetual Darkness and I may truly say it was Damnata prius quam nata condemned to dye before it was born And if the Antidote prepared by the One be duly applied the Dose of Poyson is not of so quick an operation but by the Blessing of God the ill effects of it may be prevented I have therefore for the benefit of ignorant and wavering Persons translated that Learned Lecture of the Reverend Dr. Prideaux the King's Professor of Divinity in Oxford and Rector of Exeter Colledge in the Year 1633. which begins p. 276. of his Lectures in Folio the Text which he chose to insist on is Matth. xvi v. 16. Simon Peter answered and said Thou art Christ the Son of the living GOD. THis celebrated Testimony concerning our Saviour is recommended to us by these four Particulars First That it was not Sudden but Deliberate Secondly It was not Private but spoken in the Name of all the Apostles Thirdly That it was not casually uttered but after a double Demand of Christ To which add Fourthly The Approbation of Christ and the Reward of St. Peter that published this Testimony Now the Scripture is not wont to propose trivial things with so great solemnity there is therefore something more in the matter than at first appears in the words of this Answer from whence both the Ancient and Moderns with clear and often confirmed assent have believed and asserted not only the Humanity of Christ which he took of the Seed of Abraham but also the Divinity of the Son of the Living God by ineffable Generation communicated to him by the Father from Eternity But that which St. Peter foretold That false Teachers shall be among you which will bring in damnable Heresies denying the Lord that bought them 1 Pet. 2.8 Rom. 9.17 Rom. 9.22 to which they were afore ordain'd saith St. Peter raised up saith St. Paul fitted and prepared that same the nauseousness of these times have vomited into the bosom of the Church Faction doth cherish Industry defends Sagacity promotes Wit urgeth Hypocrisie publisheth under the Veil of Sincerity So that unless such as Timothy carefully take heed to themselves and their depositum and such as St. Jude contend for the Faith once delivered there is great danger lest the Unclean Spirit that was cast forth by the Reformation return to the House that is swept and cleansed with a more numerous Train and the last State of the Church become worse than the former 2 S. Now among those Seven unclean Spirits that create trouble to the Church swept and garnished
their Authority I have but briefly toucht them As to my Method having first considered his Preface in the next place I have considered his Apology 3. I have made some general Reflections on the Book and lastly I have discovered what Socinian Doctrines are covertly delivered in each Chapter for I find his Oracles like those of old to carry a doubtful or double Sence to be as a Reserve and Refuge that being driven from the one he might flye to the other and indeed it is more difficult to discover and draw him forth from those Ambushes wherein he lies in wait to deceive than to baffle his greatest Strength in a plain and open Field the first is my chief endeavour though I have not on occasion declined the other what I have attempted was not in confidence of my own Abilities having never been exercised in this spiny Controversie and being now by Age Miles emeritus but only to excite and provoke others to contend for the common Salvation in the Faith once delivered to the Saints and whatever the success be I hope I shall obtain the Pardon of all good Men seeing I have according to my power cast in my Mite into the Church's Treasury AN ANSWER To a Late TREATISE ENTITULED The Naked Gospel THE Author of the Naked Gospel calls himself a true Son of the Church of England now the Doctrine of the Church of England is declared in her Liturgy her Articles and Homilies in her Liturgy she hath inserted the Three Creeds viz. that called the Apostles the Nicene and the Athanasian these two last our Author would have to be restrained to the Letter of the former because that only is used in the Offices for Administration of Baptism and Visitation of the Sick but if he be a true Son of the Church he hath or should ex animo have given his Assent and Consent to all the Doctrines avowed by the Church However it is well that the Doctor seems to approve of the Apostles Creed because I find the Socinians deny the Godhead of the Son and Holy Ghost being it is not expresly affirmed in that Creed yet certainly they had not been made Objects of our Faith if they were not of the Godhead This Creed is but a larger Profession of our Christian Faith which we made at our Baptism where we dedicate ourselves to the Service of that one God who is Father Son and Holy Ghost The Right Reverend Bishop of Chester hath sufficiently proved the Deity of the Son and Holy Ghost in his learned Exposition of that Creed Nor have we ever heard of any of the Fathers that have interpreted it otherwise than as the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds have done yet I have been credibly informed that a Doctor who stiles himself of the Church of England gravely declared That this Creed also might be reformed But in the Church of England we find the reiterated Acknowledgment of the Blessed Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost so in the Doxology in the Form used in Baptism and in the Litany O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God c And in that very ancient Hymn after the Communion it is said of our Saviour Thou only art Holy thou only art the Lord thou only O Christ with the Holy Ghost art most high in the Glory of God the Father In the Te Deum Thou art the King of Glory O Christ thou art the Everlasting Son of the Father In the first Article concerning the Trinity the Church of England says That in the Unity of the Divine Nature there are three Persons of the same Essence Power and Eternity Father Son and Holy Ghost In the Homely for Whitsunday she says The Holy Ghost is a Spiritual and Divine Substance the third Person in the Deity distinct from the Father and the Son Which thing may most easily be proved by most plain Testimonies of God's Holy Word Canon 〈◊〉 1640. And in the Canons it is forbidden to read Socinian Books And in the former Book of Canons we are forbid to teach any thing but what is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the ancient Fathers and Bishops have collected out of them It was therefore a Protestatio contra factum to stile himself a true Son c. and under that Title to publish to the World what is so opposite to her Doctrine May not the Church complain of such Sons in the words of the Prophet Isaiah c. 1. I have nourished and brought up children and they have rebelled against me But God be thanked the Church of England doth not want more dutiful Sons such as on all occasions are ready and able to vindicate her Doctrines and assert her Discipline That famous University whereof the Author was a Member seasonably manifested her Detestation of his Heretical Opinions by condemning them to the Flames that there might not be a Spark left to kindle such dangerous Fires in the Church which Decree for the Reader 's satisfaction is here inserted The Judgment and Decree of the Vniversity of Oxford delivered in a Convocation held August 19th 1690. against some Impious and Heretical Propositions transcribed and quoted out of an Infamous Libel of late perfidiously printed within the said Vniversity and published with this Title The Naked Gospel which do Impugne and Assault the principal Mysteries of our Faith alway retained and preserved in the Catholick Church and especially in the Church of England IMPRIMATUR Jonathan Edwards Vice-Can Oxon. WHereas there is lately published an Infamous Libel entituled The Naked Gospel which under that specious Title destroys the Foundation of the Primitive Faith once delivered to the Saints assaults the chief Mysteries of our Religion and not only denies but reproacheth him that bought us the Lord Jesus Christ who is God blessed for ever And whereas it appears that this Libel deserving to be condemned to eternal Flames hath been by an unheard of Persideousness printed and published within this University therefore for the Honour of the Holy and Individual Trinity for Preservation of the Catholick Doctrine in the Church and moreover for the Defence as much as in us lieth of the Reputation and Esteem of this University which with all care we desire to preserve intire and inviolable We the Vice-Chancellor Doctors Proctors the Regent and Non-Regent Masters convocated in a full Senate of Convocation on the 19th of August 1690 in manner and place accustomed certain Propositions in the said Libel contained which we have caused to be transcribed and hereafter recited being first Read have by our Common Suffrages and the Unanimous Consent and Assent of Us all Decreed in manner following I. We do Condemn all and every of these Propositions and others to them belonging which for Brevity's sake are pretermitted as False Impious and Contumelious to the Christian Religion and especially to the Church of England And we Decree and Declare most of them to be Heretical as contrary
which from such a Possession would prescribe to our Belief Pag. 57. of the Interpolated Edition What more ridiculously silly than to build so weighty a Doctrine upon Implicit Faith in two Bishops partial to their own Sees whereof the one gave it Birth and the other Maintenance And what more odious than to persecute as Hereticks and Malefactors all such as should refuse to be so grosly imposed upon Pag. 57. of the first Edition Certainly whoever shall carefully observe how the now established Doctrine was from first to last advanced by gross Partiality of the most guilty kind and at last imposed by a Novice Emperor upon Implicit Faith of two Bishops of whose Sees the one brought it into the World and the other maintain'd it and a new coin'd Tradition lately obtruded by the guiltier of those Sees but unpleaded because unheard of in those former long and miserable Times which it might and ought to have delivered from the Convulsions they suffered Whoever I say shall carefully observe this and withal what foul Tricks the Church of Rome used in the West and with what ill Success in the East whose Churches did at last more Universally embrace Arrius 's Opinion than at first they condemned it may be tempted to number the Athanasian among the Roman Doctrines and cannot but think it fairly dealt with if its boasted Possession pardoned it be left upon the same level with the Arrian equally unworthy not only of our Faith but of our Study Pag. 57. If further we consider what the Historian expresly declareth that at the rise of this Controversie most of the Bishops understood not it's meaning we cannot think it necessary to Salvation that every private Christian should believe that as an Article of Faith which the best Ages of the Church thought not worth knowing This upon second thoughts is thus express'd in a 2d Edition An Opinion which so many wise and good Men as lived within 300 Years after Christ were so far from believing Matter of Faith that they did not receive it as Matter of Certainty nor perhaps of Credibility Pag. 59 Pag. 58. The Athanasians abhor Polytheism no less than do the Arrians If their Positions seem to infer it they deny the consequence if this contradict the Rules of reasoning they avow it for they allow Reason no hearing in Mysteries of Faith if this make them Hereticks it is not in Religion but in Logick On the other side the Arrians profess to believe of Christ whatever himself or his Apostles have spoken and where one expression in Scripture seemeth to contradict another they take such a Course to reconcile them as the Laws and Customs of all the World direct It is very frequent for Rhetorick to exceed but never to diminish the Grammatical Character of a Person whose honour the Writer professeth to advance and upon this account they think it more reasonable that those Expressions which exalt our Saviour's Person to an Equality with the Father should stoop to those which speak him Inferior than that those which speak him Inferior should be strained up to those which speak him Equal And however this is the safer Way since it will lead us to such a Belief as will suffice for that end for whose sake alone Belief itself is required Pag. 70. To this Question Whether any Promise of God does necessarily import a Restitution of the same Numerical Matter He answers That the Words of St. Paul Thou fool that which thou sowest c. plainly deny the Resurrection of the same Numerical Particles P. 70. To another Question Whether it be more honourable to God and more serviceable to the design of the Gospel that we believe the Contrary He answers That it is the same as to ask Whether it be more honourable to salve all his Perfections or to robb one that we may cloath the other The very mentioning of these Opinions is a sufficient Confutation to all such as have heartily imbraced the Doctrine of the Church of England But the Author in his Vindication pretends that what he hath written was only to enlarge Charity i. e. to procure a Toleration of such Opinions as he hath published I shall only discover that Line of Socinianism much blacker than his Ink which runs through his whole Book and then the Reader may judge to what his inlarged Charity doth tend The Design of the Preface is to shew saith the Doctor that the Success of the Gospel which made such great Conquests at first hath been hindred by the difference of the Modern Gospel from the Primitive in its Doctrine which difference he says is so great that if an Apostle should return into the World he would be so far from owning it that he would not be able to understand it Answ If the Gospel which we receive be so intirely corrupted he doth utterly overthrow that Providence of God which he admires in giving it so great a success whereas all good Christians believe the Gospel to be the same and bless the Providence of Almighty God in preserving it pure and uncorrupt to this present time and we still say if an Apostle or an Angel from Heaven shall preach any other Gospel contrary to or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides what we have received let him be accursed I hope therefore the Doctor doth not think of setting up any other Judge of Controversies than what the Church whereof he calls himself a True Son doth own and profess if the Success of it hath been hindred in any Age it may not be imputed to the Doctrine therein delivered nor to the Providence of God in preserving it intire but to those false and contrary Doctrines which by the Instruments of Satan transforming themselves into Angels of Light endeavoured to destroy in its infancy such as St. Peter calls damnable errors denying the Lord that bought them and teaching that Jesus Christ was no◠come in the flesh i. e. that God the Word was not made flesh but the flesh was made God Such were Ebion a Jew Cerinthus and Marcion who spread their Errors against the Deity of Christ while St. John was living with which Errors the Church of Ephesus was so infested that she besought St. John to write in confutation of them as he did both in his Gospel and Epistles The other Apostles were diligent in confuting the Errors of the Gnosticks who would have brought in the worshipping of Saints and Angels as inferior Gods These generally condemned St. Paul's Epistles and kept to the Jewish Observations which the Apostles wrote against the Nicolaitans also mentioned Rev. 2.6 were of the like Opinion with the Gnosticks and Cerinthus For hating of whose Deeds the Church of Ephesus is commended Ireneus l. 3. c. 11. says that St. John wrote his Gospel to destroy that Error which had been sown by Cerinthus and before him by the Nicolaitans So that the Success of the Gospel was hindred by not only those false Doctrines but the impure Lives of
entred into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh This is a deceiver and an Antichrist And 1 Job 5.7 he plainly asserts the Doctrine of the Trinity There are three that bear witness in heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these Three are One. It is very observable what Grotius says in the Preface of his Annotations on St. John The Ancients among other causes of St. John 's Writing this Gospel do generally assign this as the chief that he might apply a Remedy to that Poyson which at that time was dispersed in the Church among all that professed the Name of Christ which could be no other than the denying of the Eternal Deity of the Son of God which that Evangelist asserted Now tho' it may seem a superfluous work to enquire into the Opinions of the Author of the Naked Gospel after the Censure of the University the reading whereof may satisfie any Judicious and Impartial Reader yet least I should seem to make an Adversary where I find none and to fight against my own Shadow as against some formidable Monster I shall 1. Consider what the Author hath said to clear himself from the Reasons of that Decree 2. Make some few general Remarks on the design of the Naked Gospel And 3ly More particularly Examine the Opinions asserted or insinuated by the Author In his Vindication p. 4. he declares his Faith to be no other than that of the Church of England and renounceth any word which in that or any other Book may seem to contradict it The Contradiction is not seeming but real and differs as much as Time doth from Eternity or the Doctrine of the Church of England of which I have given an account from the Arrian and Socinian Heresies if he renounceth any thing he must renounce almost all but how he will do it so as to remove the Scandal from the Church of England which as Monsieur Jeru observes is now conceived to be tainted with Socinian Doctrines from such Writings as this of the Naked Gospel I cannot well conceive unless he disclaim his being a true Son of the Church of England He says The Author of that Book is so far from denying the Divinity of Christ that he plainly asserts it But what Divinity is that is it the Eternal Godhead and Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father This is not to be found yea it is the whole design of the Author to impugne it he grants him no other Divinity than the Arrians did of a created God nor indeed so much for he speaks of our Saviour under the same Notions and Expressions as Socinus and Smalâ—ius did granting him a Divinity but not a Deity of which more hereafter But he would prove his Assertion from these words of his That the Author of our Gospel was not only great but infinite But the Question is whom he means by our Author whether God the Father the prime or God the Son as the immediate Author for thus the Moral Law was given by Moses yet God was the prime Author and in this sence an Arrian may and the Socinians do say Christ waâ— the Messenger of God and received all his Commands from God and so the Author of the Gospel in the Socinians sence is infinite for thâ—s Crellius on Heb. 2. v. 3. says Christ was not the first Author of the Gospel as neither were the Angels of the Law but God was the prime Author of both the Law and Gospel though the Law was published by Angels and the Gospel by Christ so that Christ was no otherwise a Law-giver in publishing the Gospel than Moses was in proclaiming the Law which Crellius in his Book de Uno Deo endeavours to maintain at large and in the same sence I fear the Doctor calls the Author of our Gospel infinite viz. that God the Father is the Author of the Gospel But being conscious that some Expressions unsuitable to so plain an Assertion as that of the Infinity of the Author of the Gospel might drop from his hasty Pen he says p. 5. that such hasty Expressions ought to be thereby i. e. by the word Infinity to be interpreted Answ And so it might if he had applied it to the Person of Christ but he tells us the occasion of that Expression was Ch. 11. from the assurance of a Christian grounded on the Resurrection beyond the hopes of a Heathen and the Persons in whom the one and the other believed Now whom do the Arrians believe to be the Author of that Resurrection but God the Father whom they often affirm to have raised our Saviour from the Dead and it s no wonder if they own his Infinity this being the substance of what they say is necessary to be believed viz. That God raised Jesus from the Dead and to confess him our Lord denying that Christ arose by any power of his own Therefore he would not have his Expressions imputed to his setled Opinion but his too great hast and heat in a Question which did nor concern the Divinity of Christ but the manner of his Generation the former as he adds was on both sides acknowledged the latter was the whole subject of the Dispute which Constantines Letter so often calleth Silly Answ If the Divinity of Christ in its proper sence i. e. his Deity had been acknowlegded I believe there had been no dispute concerning the manner of his Generation the Question was Whether he were Consubstantial with the Father or not not concerning the manner or modus but whether he were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same Substance with the Father If the Dispute in Constantine's time had been only about the manner of Christ's Generation the Doctor might have taken in the Parenthesis of Dr. Wallis that it is not distinctly declared by God nor are we able fully to comprehend it nor is it necessary for us to know but it is necessary to know that this Generation was from Eternity that we may ground our Faith and Hope in him that is God and so is able to save to the utmost all that come to God by him he being the Lord i. e. Jehovah our Righteousness What the Controversy in the Nicene Council against Arrius was and how it was decided shall appear anon 2ly He says the design of his Book was only to disable Humane Authority from imposing on our Belief more Doctrines than Christ and his Apostles declared to be necessary Here are two bold Strokes first the Doctor will determine what those necessary Doctrines are and then he will disable Magistrates from imposing any other and so we shall lose the great Fundamental the Eternal Godhead of Christ which his Naked Gospel doth impugne 3ly Another design of this Author he says is By a due confinement of Faith to enlarge Charity Ans The Apostles method to enlarge Charity was not to confine but propagate the Faith once delivered to the Saints as the best motive
to Charity we have one Lord one Faith one Baptism but such as the Author is the Socinians deny the Lord that bought them destroy the Foundation of Faith in the Godhead and satisfaction of Christ and wholly disannul Baptism and so cut asunder this triple Cord that obligeth Christians to Charity and indeed as they acknowledge not the one Lord so they nullify the one Faith in him and make the one Baptism of no effect and therefore have utterly destroyed Charity The next charge of exposing the Divinity of Christ he says p. 5. hath no other evidence but this That he is sometimes stiled a crucified Vagabond and this he says is but once viz. in the Introduction But was it not said with as little modesty p. 21. c. 2. That he was a Vagabond Galilean which expressions by the Rule of Fortiter calumniare aliquod adherebit will not excuse him by saying he personated an Infidel such playing with Holy Things is much worse than his play at push Pin. P. 6. he protesteth That in his whole life he never spent so much time in reading Socinian Books as put altogether would amount to one whole day By spending so much time I suppose he means he did not lose or mispend it but it was well bestowed or perhaps he made the Arrian Controversy his chief Study which is as contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as the Socinian So Socinus protested he never read Arrius Credat Judaeus I would here remind the Doctor of the excellent Advice of the incomparable King Charles the First mentioned by himself in his Preface I would have you as I hope you are already well grounded and setled in your Religion the best Profession whereof I have ever esteemed that of the Church of England in which you have been Educated c. It is well known that the Doctor was not only educated in the Church of England but to that very time when he wrote his Naked Gospel that is till he was sixty five Years old as he computes his Age he hath lived in the Communion of that Church we may therefore marvel how he was so soon removed from him that called him to the Grace of Christ unto another Gospel as St. Paul expresseth it Gal. 1.6 which would pervert the Gospel of Christ Did he not judiciously make the Doctrine of the Church of England his own as that Blessed King advised Did he not by his own judgment and reason but by his hand only seal to the Bond which Education had written or take it up only on Mens Customs or Traditions as that good King speaks if so he was guilty of great Oscitancy in the matter of Religion on which Salvation depends or if after so long Profession of the Doctrine of the Church he began to entertain some doubts of the truth of it he was guilty of great Levity in so weighty a Matter not to bestow many Years in the Examination of the Errors of that Doctrine which he forsook and imbracing another vastly and dangerously differing from it without bestowing so much as one Day 's reading the Grounds and Reasons of it On supposition therefore that the Doctor hath embraced either the Arrian or Socinian Doctrines he was unaccountably rash there being so many Books written by learned Men of both Parties to leave a Religion which he had so long profest and had time to enquire into and without more than one Days study in a Case of such consequence to fall off to a contrary Opinion This may tempt Men to think it was done in a Pet some may think because he was not removed to a higher Station as he intimates somewhere the Archbishop promised he should in some short time but being not done he thought to remind him of his Promise by Dedicating that Book of a Constant Communicant to his Grace yet after all he was left in that Place where he spent three Pence of his own to every Penny of his Preferment For my part I have a better opinion of the Doctor and that he had long studied and often discoursed with learned Men concerning the Socinian Controversy and that the Naked Gospel was the product of many Years spent in Reading Conference and Meditation on those Points before he came to a Resolution For I have heard of a Doctor of his Age who often discoursed with his Father a Reverend Divine concerning some Arminian Pelagian and Socinian Points and in heat of disputation did tell his Father That it would not be well till we came up to the Socinian Doctrine this was many years since And what means his sitting down when the Athanasian Creed was said but his contempt of it The next Charge is That the Godhead of our Saviour is declared to be an impertinent and dangerous Speculation This he thinks is discharged by the former distinction of the manner of the Generation c. and adds That those Fathers who were the most earnest Assertors of the Doctrine of Christ's Divinity he doth not say of his Eternal Deity were also the most severe Censurers of Curiosity concerning the manner of his Generation And our Author is a Son of those Fathers who granted a Created Deity to our Saviour and most severely censured those that held his Eternal Generation as being guilty of Polytheism which is often intimated by him This is the sum of the Author's Defence I would willingly know of what sort of Divinity it is that he ascribes to our Saviour because I find that the Arrians acknowledge that he is a Created God and the Socinians grant a Divinity but not so much as a Created Deity I see no more granted him as to his Person by the Socinians than by the Turks which acknowledge he was a Divine Man and a true Prophet or Messenger of God This Divinity he learnt of Smalcius as I shall shew hereafter or of Crellius as is already shewn whose words as well as sence he so often repeats as will give great cause to the Reader to conclude that he spent more than one whole Day in reading the Socinian Controversies The general Remarks which I shall make on the Naked Gospel are as follow 1. That whereas the Author pretends the special Design of it is to enlarge Charity yet that Charity is only designed for a Toleration of the Arrian and Socinian Doctrines and he sharply reflects on all such as he perceived to be averse from such his enlarged Charity p. 39. Col. 1. If Bishop Alexander the first Author of the Nicety thought fit to tolerate the Arrians we can ill prentend to Charity if we allow them no title to God's Pardon or his Church's Communion P. 57. of his interpolated Edition he pleads That nothing can be more odious than to persecute as Hereticks and Malefactors all such as should refuse to be imposed on viz. by the Bishops that asserted the Trinity P. 11. of his Vindication he recommends the charitable Heresie of the Latitudinarians under