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
against the Truth of the Charge he does not say it was not his design tho it is very iniquitous in the Dean to charge him with it because whatever his Intent was he has given us two admirable Reasons why it cannot be concluded from his Book The first is That others as well as Socinians are Heterodox in this Point But the Dean and Dr. Wallis writ only against Socinians and he owns his Suit was chiefly to them and no body else is particularly named in his Suit and therefore the Dean guessed pretty right and had some reason for his guess 2dly These are not the only Points in which they are Heterodox and therefore the Doctor had liberty to write against them in other Points But still was not he and every body else desired to forbear them in these their principal Errors And did the Dean charge him with any thing more For in this present Controversy what had he to do with their other Errors And yet I believe many at least of his Reasons for not writing will hold as well in other Points as in this of the Trinity In the next place he gives an account why he stiles himself a Stander by which does not become any Divine of the Church of England in such a Fundamental Article of the Christian Faith The first Reason he gives is his mean opinion of his own Skill in the Controversy but it is modestly express'd with a perhaps and therefore perhaps it was his ill opinion of the Controversy it self His next Reason is That every one who is skill'd at his Weapon must not draw upon every one he meets begirt with a Sword but if they draw upon him or to take it out of the Metaphor assault the Catholick Faith which every Christian is concerned in and every Divine concern'd to defend it does not become him to be a Stander by but to use his Skill to defend himself and his Faith for to be a Stander-by in such cases in plain English is to be a Neuter and when there is a dispute of Faith if a Neuter be not a Heretick he cannot be Orthodox for he is on neither side if we can suppose a Medium between these two In the next place he does not like to be thought tender on the wrong side but certainly he is so if he means any thing that he speaks He readily owns what I believe no body will lay to his charge That he has shown a Tenderness to the Church of England and the Nicene Faith I suppose by those severe Reflections which he makes upon both and his Burlesque of the Athanasian Creed and the Litany which as yet stand in our Liturgy and are like to do so till it fall into the hands of such Melancholy Reformers as out of pure Tenderness for the Credit of the Old Reformation are for changing the Frame of our most Fundamental Articles or resolving them all into a mere Negative Belief which is to leave no positive Faith in the Church And here our Author would know how he is Tender on the Wrong side when he has only express'd a tenderness for the Church of England the Credit of the Reformation and for Peace and Holiness and I 'le warrant you has not said one word in favour of the Socinian Heresy and therefore the Dean may keep his profound politick Notes of mens tenderness being due to their Inclinations for better purposes What these purposes are I know not but certainly 't is no improbable conjecture that men have some Inclinations to that for which they express a great tenderness though t is possible this Rule may sometimes fail and that tenderness which our Author saith he has expressed for the Church of England may not be due to his Inclinations But now let us go forward to the next Paragraph and we shall meet with some farther instances of the Dean's disingenuous arts who perverts our Author's Peaceable Assertions and makes what he pleases of them by odious that is's which the Reader must know is his common way of dealing A short but heavy Charge this if it be true but the comfort is that he who reads the Dean's Book with his own Eyes rather than the Antapologists will find no ground for such an Accusation for he does no where pervert his Peaceable assertions nor do his that is's Misrepresent the consequences of our Author's Assertions And I take it for no disingenuous art to expose any Assertion by shewing its true mâ—â—ning and laying open the just consequences of it Aâ—â— as to that publick hate which he saith the Dean endeavouâ—s to cast on him I don't see how that can be since 〈◊〉 Dean has never mentioned his Name and therefâ—â—◠〈◊〉 did not know him or had no mind to expose him In the next Section he confesses himself an 〈◊〉 â—o such open Disputes between Protestants as only Puâ—liâ—â—â—o the common Enemies the Divisions of the Protestants And so I believe is the Dean too as also to all such open Disputes among Christians as have the same ill consequences with respect to the common Enemies of Christianity and yet I believe neither he nor our Author would from hence conclude That we must not dispute against any Popish Errors because this publiâ—hes to the common Enemies of Christianity the Divisions of the Christians or that if there be any such open Disputes those who defend the Truth when openly contradicted must bear the blame of them As to what he says That Voluntary Disputings have never suppressed but rather revived old Heresies If he means by Voluntary Disputing a necessary Defence as he must mean if it be any thing to the present purpose 't is very wisely thought of that disputing against those who revive and propagate old Heresies is the thing which revives them How this Projector for the Churches peace would have those who should Write in this Controversy authorized he will set down anon and then 't will be time enough to admire the wisdom of his Contrivance Let us in the mean time come to his Latitude of Faith which is another branch of his notable project for Peace which he still adheres to though I think he has given little or no answer to what the Dean urged against it so that the Dean's Arguments hold good still notwithstanding his Exceptions against them Nor are we one dram the wiser for all that fine Lecture which he here reads concerning Latitude as a Metaphorical term derived from Astronomy Geography Triple Dimensions or what else you please nor yet for his citation from one who I believe was far enough from his Latitude of Faith For I can't yet find what he would be at in the present point unless it be what he has been already charged with That every man should be let alone to believe what he pleases so he doth but profess to believe the Words of Scripture though in never so perverse a sense This I can't believe is that Latitude in
owns there is but One Christian Faith he qualifies it very notably with And every Truth which Christ and his Apostles taught ought if it can be without scruple understood without scruple to be Believed Now I would here ask him if he will not be offended at my presumption whether there be not some Christian Truths which ought to be expresly believed by all Christians this I believe he will grant because he afterwards says that what is Necessary to the Salvation of all is plain This is all we desire and then let Protestant Divines be as tender as they will in defining the number of Fundamentals The only question to our present purpose will be Whether the Doctrine of the Trinity is not one of these few Fundamentals which are necessary to Salvation And if it be certainly we may be allowed to Write in the Defence of it and to require the Profession of it from the Members of our Church and surely what is Fundamental in this Point is but One and that wherein all ought to agree and then the Faith will be but One and no such Fallacy in the Deans questions as he complains of If he will not allow the Doctrine of the Trinity to be a Fundamental I think'tis no hard matter to prove it but that is not my business nor according to the design of his Book is it his 'T is upon this supposition we argue and upon this supposition I would fain see him prove that the Church ought not to require an express belief of this Article but to leave it in such a Latitude as that every one may be Socinian Arian Sabellian or what else he please and yet pass for a very Orthodox Christian. This I take to be the Latitude he pleads for and which though in his dialect it be stiled Believing as by Grace we are able is really Believing only what we please The rest of this Paragraph concerning different measures of Faith as to the present purpose is no more than mere harangue ad populum phalerae for I cannot possibly understand that it concerns the present Controversy how God will hereafter deal with men by reason of their different Capacities and Opportunities of Knowledg and what excuses â—here may be for some mens Ignorance of the most important Truths c. And I dare affirm that all he urges here mutatis mutandis will be of as great force out of the mouth of a Turk or Deist to prove that we urge too strict an Vnity when we desire them expresly to believe the truth of the Christian Religion Suppose though there is no reason for it that we should grant him his negative Belief even for the whole Creed Will that serve his and his Clients turn Will his Socinian Friends submit to it Will they then not say a word against the Doctrine of the Trinity nor endeavour to spread their Errors any farther or if they do will he give us leave to Oppose them and Defend the Truth But now let us see in the next Section where he thinks tho upon very unjust grounds as will appear presently he has caught the Dean â—â—ipping how â—itifully to use his own Phrase and pedantically as well as unreasonably he triumphs and exults over him and endeavours to expose his Subtilty as he calls it in saying That if the Faith be One there can be nâ— more Latitude in the Faith than there is in an Vnit. Now sure this is no such Metaphysical Subtilty for if the Faith be One 't is plain there can be no more Latitude in it than in an Unit. But now for our Author 's great Discovery without any Subtilty in it There are says he as many sorts of Vnits as there are of Vnities and then he reminds the Dean of Philosophical and Arithmetical Vnits or Vnities which you please and what Latitude there may be in an Vnit. Suppose all this the Dean doth not as I can find say there is no kind of Latitude in an Vnit but only that there can be no more Latitude in the Faith than there is in an Vnit which if it be One must be so But then I pray what is the Latitude in an Vnit considered as an Unit None I think for in whatever respect 't is One 't is no more than One and has no Latitude A Compositum which is a thing he imagines the Dean may have heard of in Philosophy tho as he says it has Parts yet is but One Totum and in that respect has no Latitude and an Hundâ—ed is but One hundred and no more and therefore as an Vnit it is but an Vnit and has no Latitude And if the Faith be One as One it can have no Latitude If the Vnity of the One Fâ—ith be only an Vnity of Words then there is no Latituâ—â— â—f Words and we must comply with our Author's Fancy and never profess it in any other words than the words of Scripture But if it be an Vnity of Sense as one would think'tis most reasonable and most proper it should be among intelligent Creatures then we must agree in the same Sense and if we do not agree in some One Sense we do not agree in the same â—aith tho we do use the same Words and if we do agree in the same sense 't is no harm tho we happen not to use exactly the same words and then there may be very good reason sometimes to make use of other than Scripture words I believe then there is no Latitude in an Vnit. Yes but there is and 〈◊〉 the One Faith too especially as by the One Faith we understand what Churches and Doctors have now made it What Churches and Doctors have made the One Faith if any of them have made it more than our Saviour made it concerns not us we justify no such things But what is this to our purpose Sure these Churches and these Doctors do still require an Vnity of Faith and allow no such Latitude as our Author contends for nay I fancy he really thinks they urge too strict an Vnion and yet this for want of a better must be made an Argument to prove That there is a Latitude in the One Faith and is it not a stabbing one Some Doctors require more things as Articles of Faith than really are so ergo there is a Latitude in the One Faith But sure this is no sign that these Churches and these Doctors allow a Latitude in the One Faith if they make it stricter than Christ or his Apostles made it much less that Christ and his Apostles allow of any such Latitude of Faith But have we not whole Systems of Opinions now a-days made up into Confessions of Faith Yes we have several Systems of Arian Socinian Pelagian Calvinistical Opinions and all of them require a Subscription at least from their Divines to these several Systems without allowing his Negative Belief which is a certain proof that they do not
Controversy But the Doctrine of the Trinity as duly stated is a Fundamental Ergo 'T is dangerous to litigate touching the Doctrine of the Trinity as duly stated Now if he will not allow the Major Proposition his Argument is nothing and if he will then the Force of his Argument consists in the danger of disputing Fundamentals and iâ— seems the Dean placed the Force of his Argument right and if that Argument be good it is as good against disputing for the Being of a God against Atheists for the Being of a God is as Fundamental as the Doctrine of the Trinity So that this limitation of duly stated does not at all concern this Argument of disputing about the Trinity but the Argument only provâ—s that we must not dispute about the Doctrine of the Trinity as duly stated because it is a Fundamental and I suppose whenever we talk of defending the Trinity we mean it as duly stated But tho the Stander-by would not allow any man to defend Fundamentals yet our worthy Primate being not under his Jurisdiction has ventured to do it This was then News to him and welcome Tidings too if we may believe him and he pretends also to pay great Deference to his Authority tho one would hardly guess so by the Lash he gives him for Licensing by his Chaplain the Dean's Apology But what has he to answer this Authority Why he hopes in that Piece to find as I hope too by this time he has plain and perspicuous Scripture-Notions clear Reason and genuine Antiquity Will this justify the writing of that Piece If so then 't is not unreasonable nor unseasonable nor dangerous to write in defence of Fundamentals and even of the Doctrine of the Trinity but farther he was capacitated by his Publick Station c. Very well And if that will justify him why will not his approving the Apology justify the Dean at least in writing that Book And why may not his Vindicacion be as well justified by the Approbation of another who was also capacitated by his Publick Station either to write or to License other men to write on this Subject His last Argument is the Vnseasonableness of this Controversy he says All Controversies among Protestants are now unseasonable the Dean adds somewhat more that they are always so for there is no Juncture seasonable to broach Heresies and oppose the Truth To this he answers That there may be Controversies among Protestants without Heresy but it is not easy to conceive any Controversy but that one side or other must oppose the Truth and this I believe the Dean thinks always Vnseasonable but the present Dispute was about Fundamental Articles and therefore he had very good reason to mention only the Vnseasonableness of broaching Heresies And he seems to me to urge a very good Argument why no Juncture can be unseasonable to defend the Truth when 't is oppos'd For if Hereticks will dispute against the Truth unseasonably there is no time unseasonable to defend Fundamental Truths But can any thing be more pleasant than his Proof of the Seasonableness of some Controversies he might have said of all even of Socinianism it self in all Junctures from the University-Exercises in the Divinity-Schools where men who are all of a mind dispute with one another not to oppose the Truth but to learn how to defend it against the common Enemy when occasion serves He might as well have proved that Civil Wars are not always unseasonable because 't is never unseasonable for Fellow-Citizens to learn the use of their Arms in a Martial Scene without Bloodshed But his Argument why it is so unseasonable in this Juncture is this Because under God nothing but an Vnion of Counsels and joining of hands and hearts can preserve the Reformation and scarce any thing more credit and justify it than an Vnion in Doctrinals Here he complains that the Dean left out somewhat at the latter end and therefore I will add it and it is this so above all other Controversies none can be well thought of worse timed than this let the Reader judge whether this injured the Force of his Argument especially since it was afterwards particularly considered In answer to this in the first place the Dean asks Is the Vnion in Doctrinals ever the greater that Socinians boldly and publickly affront the Faith of the Church and no body appears to defend it All that he answers to this is that he does not love Affronts especially to the Faith of the Church and don 't know that the Socinians affront it and is sorry for it if they do it may be he will not allow writing against the Faith and endeavouring to ridicule it to be an Affront which he knew very well the Sociniâ—ns did if he knew that ever the Dean writ against the Socinians which was in Answer to as Prophane and as Scurrilous a Libel as ever was writ But whether he will allow this to be affronting of the Faith or no I suppose he will allow that it is opposing it which argues no great Vnion in Doctrinals tho no body should defend it unless as the Dean adds the world should think we are all of a mind because there is disputing only on one side and then they will think us all Socinians as some Foreigners begin alreaâ—y to suspect which will be a very scandalous Vnion and divide us from all other Reform'd Churches His Answer to this and a very Politick and Grave one it is as far as I can guess amounts to this That if we live good lives and let our Adversaries alone the world will credit our Practice Articlâ—s Homilies c. and therefore think us no Socinians Now if subscribing the Articles be no more than he makes it to be they cannot conclude us to be no Socinians from our Articles because a man may subscribe them and yet believe never a word of them in which case the only way to show that we do believe them is to defend and vindicate them and then I believe the world will think us no Socinians but otherwise I fear they will as the Dean says think us all Socinians which will be a very scandalous Vnion indeed As to what he says of Pamphlets dying away if they were not opposed I am not in all cases of his mind and see no present prospect of it especially in this Controversy which so much gratifies Atheists and Infidels But if these Heresies would in time dye away of themselves which yet I much question as not finding that false Opinions always lose ground by not being opposed what must be done in the mean time must we all pass contentedly for Socinians in the eye of the world and be afraid to say we are none I believe all men would not think this much for the Glory of the Reformation nor would the Cause of Religion be much beholding to us for it But his great Argument to prove this Juncture unseasonable to defend the Doctrine of